Oscar-nominated filmmaker Stephen Daldry is in early talks for the film, which would center on the Jedi master who has been played by both Alec Guinness and Ewan McGregor.
Stephen Daldry is Star Wars’ newest hope.
The Oscar-nominated director behind Billy Elliot and The Hours is in early talks to direct a Star Wars stand-alone movie centering on Obi-Wan Kenobi, The Hollywood Reporter has learned. Sources say talks are at the earliest of stages and that the project has no script. If a deal makes, Daldry would oversee the development and writing with Lucasfilm brass. It's not known at this stage if Ewan McGregor will reprise his role. The Obi-Wan Kenobi stand-alone is one of several projects being developed by Lucasfilm and Disney that fall outside the trilogies telling the saga of the Skywalker family. A Han Solo movie is now in the final stages of shooting under new director Ron Howard and Lucasfilm is also looking at movies featuring Yoda and bounty hunter Boba Fett, among others.
In the original Star Wars trilogy, Kenobi was at first a desert-dwelling and war-weary hermit who later proved to be a wise and powerful warrior, brandishing a light saber. He was briefly a mentor to a young Luke before being cut down by Darth Vader, his former pupil. Alec Guinness played Kenobi, garnering him an Oscar nomination to boot. The character got star treatment in the George Lucas-directed prequels which told the origin of Vader and his betrayal of Kenobi and the Jedis. McGregor has said he would be open to playing the character again. Sources stress, however, that since there is no script, no actor is attached.
“Rogue One” was the first of the standalones, and Disney is currently shooting an untitled origin tale of beloved smuggler Han Solo. Some of the other standalones in development include a Jabba the Hutt story and a Boba Fett movie.
Daldry hails from the theater world and made his feature debut with Billy Elliot, which netted him his first directing Oscar nomination. He followed that up with searing dramas The Hours and The Reader, which also netted him directing nominations.
He most recently directed episodes of Netflix’s period drama The Crown, which put him into play in this Emmy season.
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Obi Wan is a fantastic character and maybe the most important character in the Star Wars universe, as he not only fails to keep his apprentice from the Dark Side of the Force, he's tasked with watching over and training Luke, Anakin's son, and keeping him from falling to the Dark Side and bring Balance to the Force.
It's also quite possible that Rey is a Kenobi, which would bring even more significance to the character.
Right, he's important, we've seen the story. What more is there to say?
The great thing about Star Wars is it's like a cartoon, anything can happen in this time and space - ANYTHING. That's why kids love playing Star Wars. Their imagination can take them anywhere.
Why rehash old characters, send them on an adventure and link it to the series when you can create anything you want.
Rogue One was a great idea as a one-off. Oddly every one of the main characters died.
With a Hans Solo, Obi Wan or Yoda movie, we already know their fate. It takes the audience out of the action. We know they're at no risk during their adventure and assume any other character we don't recognize dies or we don't care if they live because we know they're not important to the original plot.
This seems lazy to me. Boba Fett coming out of the Saralac pit and doing a job with a bunch or other bounty Hunters seems like a better premise because we would know he's not dead and there's the ability to develop new characters to spin off with.
I guess I'm just disappointed that KK and Co. are taking the safe road rather than being more creative. But, I get it from their perspective. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
Right, he's important, we've seen the story. What more is there to say?
The great thing about Star Wars is it's like a cartoon, anything can happen in this time and space - ANYTHING. That's why kids love playing Star Wars. Their imagination can take them anywhere.
Why rehash old characters, send them on an adventure and link it to the series when you can create anything you want.
Rogue One was a great idea as a one-off. Oddly every one of the main characters died.
With a Hans Solo, Obi Wan or Yoda movie, we already know their fate. It takes the audience out of the action. We know they're at no risk during their adventure and assume any other character we don't recognize dies or we don't care if they live because we know they're not important to the original plot.
This seems lazy to me. Boba Fett coming out of the Saralac pit and doing a job with a bunch or other bounty Hunters seems like a better premise because we would know he's not dead and there's the ability to develop new characters to spin off with.
I guess I'm just disappointed that KK and Co. are taking the safe road rather than being more creative. But, I get it from their perspective.
Obi Wan interests me as a character and I enjoyed his role in the prequels. In fact, that was almost the only thing I consistently enjoyed in the prequels, seeing more Obi Wan. There is a huge chunk missing from his story. I want to see it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by listopencil:
Obi Wan interests me as a character and I enjoyed his role in the prequels. In fact, that was almost the only thing I consistently enjoyed in the prequels, seeing more Obi Wan. There is a huge chunk missing from his story. I want to see it.
This. Obi-Wan is one of my favorite characters, and Ewan is a fantastic actor.
Obi-Wan is a more complicated, tortured soul version of Gandolf. Imagine Gandolf's angst if Frodo not only failed, but turned into Sauron's puppet....
Obi-Wan is an incredibly complex character and further stories exploring that are a great thing. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
Right, he's important, we've seen the story. What more is there to say?
There's a 20 year gap between the end of Episode III and the beginning of Episode IV (or the end of Rogue One).
There's plenty of territory to mine. There's no way he just sat there, in the desert of Tatooine, waiting for the "right time" to train Luke.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
The great thing about Star Wars is it's like a cartoon, anything can happen in this time and space - ANYTHING. That's why kids love playing Star Wars. Their imagination can take them anywhere.
Star War Rebels is the first, true, standalone Star Wars property and Season One is pretty much a mess. It wasn't until Season 2, with Vader and Tarkin, that it really began to blossom and Season 3, with Maul and Obi Wan was awesome.
Why was it awesome? Because they tied previously seen characters into the timeline. If you want original adventure, watch Star Wars The Freemakers.
I think it'll make you pine for known characters.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
Why rehash old characters, send them on an adventure and link it to the series when you can create anything you want.
Why? Because it's poor story telling. The Force Awakens, for all its faults, brought us new characters in Rey, Finn, Poe, Phasma, Hux, Snoke and Ren via Han, Leia, Chewbacca and Luke. If the OT characters weren't part of the film or the sequel trilogy, people wouldn't have been nearly as interested.
Lucasfilm will begin exploring new areas of the Star Wars Galaxy as fans embrace the new characters are being introduced.
There needs to be a common thread for the feature films to work.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
Rogue One was a great idea as a one-off. Oddly every one of the main characters died.
Rogue One was a phenomenal film but going in, most people figured that all of the characters would die. That didn't affect the box office or the final result, which was spectacular.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
With a Hans Solo, Obi Wan or Yoda movie, we already know their fate. It takes the audience out of the action. We know they're at no risk during their adventure and assume any other character we don't recognize dies or we don't care if they live because we know they're not important to the original plot.
This is complete nonsense. As previously mentioned, most people figured that the cast of Rogue One would die, because they're not in the OT, yet it didn't take way from the experience.
I'd say most people assume the same for the cast of Star Wars Rebels but that hasn't taken away a damn thing from the series. As mentioned earlier, Season Two and Three were awesome.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
This seems lazy to me.
It's not "lazy" at all. As a matter of fact, it's a MUCH bigger gamble to create the backstory for a beloved character like Han Solo or explore 20 years of Obi Wan's life during the period between III & IV. As a matter of fact, it's such a risk that it could turn the entire saga on its ear.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
Boba Fett coming out of the Saralac pit and doing a job with a bunch or other bounty Hunters seems like a better premise because we would know he's not dead and there's the ability to develop new characters to spin off with.
What? Talk about LAZY. Who is Boba Fett going to hunt? What's so exciting about his story that he needs an entire 2 hour film? By the time he's out of the pit, the Empire has been defeated.
Who's putting a bounty of any characters of interest? The New Republic? Why would that be worth a 2 hour film?
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
I guess I'm just disappointed that KK and Co. are taking the safe road rather than being more creative. But, I get it from their perspective.
Again, they can't just create all new characters without having ties to the OT. Who wants to see a Jedi-less film set after the events of ROTJ without knowing the fate of Luke & Leia? [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
1. Rogue One was a phenomenal film but going in, most people figured that all of the characters would die. That didn't affect the box office or the final result, which was spectacular.
2. It's not "lazy" at all. As a matter of fact, it's a MUCH bigger gamble to create the backstory for a beloved character like Han Solo or explore 20 years of Obi Wan's life during the period between III & IV. As a matter of fact, it's such a risk that it could turn the entire saga on its ear.
Thanks for taking the time to engage in a discussion Dane. You make some valid points and we could probably spend a lot of time debating this topic.
I've pointed out 2 comments above to rebut.
For the first point - The fact that most people figured that most or all of the characters would die in Rogue One made it exciting. They didn't know what would happen. Going into a prequel knowing that any character you recognize from previous films won't die takes away energy from the story.
For the second point - I would argue that character based prequels are the path of least resistance for KK and crew, (hence a lazy approach). They know audiences love the characters and will pay to see them. However, I also agree with you that they're a huge gamble. If audiences don't like the Han Solo standalone it will turn them off to a Obi Wan standalone, (especially since people associate Ewan to the prequels/ midichlorians).
A big uncreative gamble... [Reply]
Obi Wan killed Maul on Tatooine in the last episode of Season 3 of Star Wars Rebels, so I think it'll be something far different.
I'd rather they not, but if they try to tie it back in with the new trilogy like RO did, is there a chance they try to set up who Snoke was before he became... Snoke? [Reply]
I guess we will figure out who he screwed that eventually turned into Rey Kenobi (His granddaughter or other descendant. It's just a theory, which I happen to agree with) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
For the second point - I would argue that character based prequels are the path of least resistance for KK and crew, (hence a lazy approach). They know audiences love the characters and will pay to see them. However, I also agree with you that they're a huge gamble. If audiences don't like the Han Solo standalone it will turn them off to a Obi Wan standalone, (especially since people associate Ewan to the prequels/ midichlorians).
A big uncreative gamble...
Instead of seeing it as lazy you could see it as a slow introduction with an established audience to a bigger universe with stories that won't tie back in with what we have seen and know. It isn't the same, but the early Marvel films primed the casual audience for the more "out there" Guardians of the Galaxy. Before it debuted there were a lot of people unsure about a fucking talking space raccoon that is besties with a sentient tree-being.
Look at the upcoming Thor film (looks fucking amazing and beautiful). If they had come out of the gate with a Thor film similar in style and setting it may have turned off a lot of the casual fans with how nuts/different it looks in comparison to the hugely popular, and much more grounded, Iron Man. Obviously, that is my opinion and Dane would know far better than I about any of this, but this is something that makes sense to me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Predarat:
I guess we will figure out who he screwed that eventually turned into Rey Kenobi (His granddaughter or other descendant. It's just a theory, which I happen to agree with)
Ah, shit. I forgot about that. We know of a 20-year gap in his life, and we know Rey is 19 in TFA. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
For the first point - The fact that most people figured that most or all of the characters would die in Rogue One made it exciting. They didn't know what would happen. Going into a prequel knowing that any character you recognize from previous films won't die takes away energy from the story.
I disagree. It had been discussed in the Rogue One thread that the characters were most likely going to die, as they weren't in the OT. That was discussed on various Star Wars forums as well, so I think most people had a feeling that it could happen. It certainly didn't take anything away from the first viewing and actually made it a more intense experience.
I don't think that filling in the gaps with origin stories, if they're done well, takes away anything from the movie going experience. If done well, it actually enhances the movies that came before it.
Originally Posted by Gadzooks:
For the second point - I would argue that character based prequels are the path of least resistance for KK and crew, (hence a lazy approach). They know audiences love the characters and will pay to see them. However, I also agree with you that they're a huge gamble. If audiences don't like the Han Solo standalone it will turn them off to a Obi Wan standalone, (especially since people associate Ewan to the prequels/ midichlorians).
A big uncreative gamble...
Lucasfilm is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to create these films. While I think that re-writing and re-shooting 40% of Rogue One was a calculated decision made by Bob Iger, due to the success of TFA, KK owned up to the mistake of hiring Lord & Miller and promptly replaced them with a "Director's Director" in Ron Howard.
There's no "Road Map" for what Lucasfilm is trying to accomplish. Unlike Marvel, there aren't existing back stories that have been around and re-written for 60+ years. KK decided to throw out 30 years of novels and comics and start fresh with the Star Wars Universe. That's HUGE challenge to get it right and producing new Star Wars films in which the audience has no connection to the characters would have been a massive mistake. [Reply]