​Could The Star Wars Sequels Be Worse Than The Prequels? Absolutely.

Illustration for article titled ​Could The Star Wars Sequels Be Worse Than The Prequels? Absolutely.

Did I tell you guys that after the apocalypse happened, magic returned to Earth? Yeah, it's pretty wild! One day I was stopping in a town on my mail route and then this guy told me to pick a card and put it back in the deck without him seeing. And he still knew what it was! It was crazy! Also, I'm pretty sure there are dragons now.


Circus of the Star(War)s

Will S.:

Greetings from the pre-apocalyptic era!

I've been thinking a lot about the upcoming star wars movies and I can't help but be worried. obviously we can all agree that they couldn't be worse than the prequels but with the idea that the original actors being the focus of the 7th episode, I can't help but feel a disturbance in the force. like a repeat of Indiana jones 4. plus the possibility of the extended book stories not being 100% canon is ridiculously frustrating.

My question is what type of films would you like to see them make for the new trilogy and stand alone movies in between? like a seven samurai with jedi. or an ocean's eleven but with smugglers. or a revenge story with boba fett against mace windu (because we all know mace windu survived getting his hand cut off, electrocution and a 1000 story fall. we've seen characters come back from each of those) or even a crappy young adult story about growing up in the jedi academy? sounds awful but it would at least be popular if done in a style like hunger games, twilight, divergent, or whatever....

First of all, the sequels can ABSOLUTELY be worse than the prequels. Do not kid yourself. Yes, the prequels had horrible dialogue, beyond lowbrow humor, bad acting and needlessly forced-in references to the original trilogy in order to trick us into enjoying it based on nostalgia instead of substance, but still, the biggest problem with the sequels was the crushing weight of our expectations. We still got a story we wanted to see — the fall of Anakin Skywalker and the rise of the Empire.

Now, it's unlikely that the sequels will be worse than the prequels, but by no means is it impossible. I think J.J. Abrams has a much better grasp of dialogue and directing actors so they seem like actual human beings than Lucas does, so that's good, and I think he's better suited to the more action-packed, scifi-fantasy of Star Wars than Star Trek.

But there are so many ways this could go wrong. First of all, by hiring Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford, we have two major problems immediately: 1) there's more potentially unnecessary linking to the original trilogy, but moreover 2) as much as we want to see Luke, Leia and Han Solo back on-screen, we really don't want to see them old, and the proof of which is in Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull. Now, this can be circumvented if Abrams makes them more side characters instead of main characters, but if they're the main characters, it's really just going to make us all sad (especially if they have a lot of action scenes).

And lastly, there's still the fact that this is a Star Wars movie that Disney is involved in, and George Lucas isn't. I can complain about Lucas' dialogue and directing of actors, but he's also the guy that created this universe and had a hand in every aspect of it — it's very possible that what we'll get without him is a good movie that feels nothing like Star Wars. Or Disney could interfere with it somehow, and somehow prioritize merchandising over artistic bwahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I couldn't even finish that sentence. Oh, it feels good to laugh, doesn't it?


As for movies I would like, you're actually pretty close. I'd like a random assortment of stand-alone movies, set before, during, and after the original trilogy — give 'em a little note about where on the timeline they take place at the beginning, like Dark Horse's Star Wars comics, and then go to town. Literally all the movies you mentioned sound good to me, including a YA Jedi Academy movie. What I don't need is to revist old Luke, Han and Leia and their potentially shitty kids — not just because of the reasons I mentioned above, but because if the sequels pull some shizz like Han and Leia's kid turning evil as per the books, then everything that happened in the original six movies is rendered meaningless. The story of Luke, Leia and Han is told, and I'd prefer to just ignore them all together. But, alas, that seems to be what we're getting.

Illustration for article titled ​Could The Star Wars Sequels Be Worse Than The Prequels? Absolutely.

Warner Bros. Before Hos

Mak Bruno:

Hi Mr. Postman,As you are in the future, hence, privy to lot more secret that eventually came out, like who killed JFK, who was behind 9/11, etc. But the only question that I want the answer to is,

Q - What does WB has on DC, that DC has not sold\lend some of their characters to other studios. Anyone, even Sony will do a better job, than what WB had done up till now. (Before ppl start scremaing about Nolan's Batman movies, I like them, but again, one trilogy does not make a life long studio partners. They are the same studio, who has made Super Girl, Superman IV - Quest for Peace, Batman Forever, Batman and Robin, Catwoman, Steel, Jonah Hex, Constantine, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Green Lantern, Man of steel, etc.). Which if one think about it, does not give confidence in their capabilities of producing decent comic based movies. So why the hell DC is adamant to continue this relationship with them?

Were the secret photos ever came out? Did WB sued DC for ending their relationship, and we get to read all the juicy details of their pre-nup agreement.


Well, first of all, I'd like to congratulate you for guessing that the U.S. government did indeed put out a memo two days before the apocalypse hit, revealing all the juicy secrets of the world. As all my fellow wanderers of the post-apocalypse know, the answer for all these mysteries was, obviously, aliens.

But let me correct you for a second: DC isn't leaving Warner Bros., because they can't. WB owns them, lock, stock and Superman. Interestingly, WB never actually bought DC; a company called Kinney National Services (which itself was a combination of a parking lot company and a large cleaning company) bought DC Comics owner National Periodical Publications in 1967. Kinney National then bought Warner Bros. in 1969 (along with a bunch of other companies) and then spun-off all their entertainment businesses into a separate company named Warner Communications, which included DC Comics. Warner Communications evolved into the WB we all know and love today, and DC Comics has been part of it ever since.


So DC will never leave and can never unless WB sells them, and since DC superhero movies are still reliably profitable summer blockbusters for them (and they see the potential for more if they manage to copy what the Marvel movies are doing), they will never, ever sell them. Actually, I take that back — if Warner Bros. as a company gets in big financial trouble, so big they need a massive influx of cash quickly, there's a chance they might sell DC and its roster of characters to somebody just to remain afloat. But at that point, it'd be just as likely someone else would buy the entirety of WB cheap, and this new company would own the DC rights. But whatever the new name is, the WB movie-making apparatus would likely still be the ones making the movies, so there's no real benefit there.

Also, one more thing: If any of this ever happens, the chances of Disney being the ones to buy DC/WB is pretty high. And who knows what would happen then? (I have a hunch, but I'll wait until someone asks me).



Johdar Qwed:

Mr. Postman,
Since you live in the post-apocalyptic era I'm sure you've had to deal with a zombie or three so I am curious: just how difficult is it really to stab a zombie in the skull with a knife and then retrieve it again with one ready pull?
Watching The Walking Dead I'd assume that zombie skulls have become as mushy as their brains, but bone does not rot that way, unless the virus that has infected the zombies eats away at their bone density as well.
And this obviously doesn't apply to just stabbing. In recent episodes of TWD we saw the butts of M16s being used to batter a zombie's head into pulp and the but of the rifle was unscathed where it should have been splintered after such abuse. What gives?

Continue delivering mail and may you stay warm and dry and zombie free.


It's a less-recognized side effects of the zombie virus that it does make bones softer — not so soft zombies can't shamble about, obviously, but enough so that they can be crushed rather easily with blunt force trauma or sharp implements. It's how you get all those really gooey explosions of gore, whether you're hitting their heads with a hammer or stomping on them with your shoe. Indeed, the only real danger of your weapon getting stuck is when narrative convenience needs it, because your story is done and your character no longer serves a purpose, or because you're too shitty to people and need to die for your trespasses, or because you're too nice to people and need to die to make the audience sad. Your best bet for keeping your weapons from sticking in zombie skulls is to be mysterious and moody so that no one can really get a handle on your character.

Illustration for article titled ​Could The Star Wars Sequels Be Worse Than The Prequels? Absolutely.

Dare to Love

Cale DeM.:

Hello Mr. Postman,

Not to get too risque, but would Daredevil be the best lover in the Marvel Universe? (I mean in the actual act, since you always have people like Emma Frost who could convince you that you just had the best sex of your life even though she never touched you.)

With his enhanced senses, he can pick up all of the little cues that would let him know how into it his partner is. Increased heartbeat, goosebumps, he'd know if they were telling the truth when they said something felt good, etc.... At the same time, he could tell if what he was doing wasn't working and switch it up.

On the other hand, sex can be nasty business. There's a lot of smells and noises that normal people can tolerate, but could be anywhere from distracting to downright revolting to someone with super senses.


Yes, let's not get too risqué in Postal Apocalypse, where I regularly talk about superheroes' dicks. That would just be crude.

While Daredevil does have super-human senses, that doesn't mean he has the skills to pay the bills, know what I'm saying? You make sex seem the same as finding quarters on the beach for Daredevil — he wanders around randomly with a metal detector, hoping he finds something that makes a beep. What if he never finds it? I.e., what if he's really shitty at oral sex? I'm not saying he is, I'm just saying it's certainly a possibility.


Also, doesn't Daredevil have super-touch along with all his other super-senses? If smells are magnified, then any physical sensation should be magnified as well, and chances are his li'l Devil wouldn't last very long in the throes of passion. All the metal detectors in the world don't matter if you don't have batteries for them (cough).

Illustration for article titled ​Could The Star Wars Sequels Be Worse Than The Prequels? Absolutely.

Lost and Found


hello and good day. are the mutated hordes docile today?

I am sure you have heard of the star wars machete order- i have and it has changed my life. such a beautiful solution to such a complicated problem. with a story that has great parts and terrible parts, someone found a solution that makes a wonderful and cohesive story. im sure the machete order has its detractors but, eh, whatever.

my question is this:

should someone develop a machete order for LOST? few can deny that the early seasons were great, and they later seasons were painfully bad. but the later seasons definitely had episodes that explained the technicalities of the island that were super satisfying and needed to be shown. unfortunately they were mixed in with all of the later season terrible-ness.

what i would love is if someone created a machete order, not by re-ordering the seasons, but by re-ordering all of the episodes, to make it as beautiful as it deserves to be (and the lazy writers were incapable of making it). i think lost deserves it. thoughts?


Here's what I think about Lost: I think Lost wasn't about the ending, it was about the story as it was told. Obviously, the resolutions to some of the mysteries of the island were less than satisfying at the end, but I don't care, because I had such a great time watching the show until then. So what it the show didn't entirely hang together, I can't forget all those jaw-dropping shocks along the way.

Does the make sense? I don't think a show necessarily has to have a good ending to be good. For instance, take a look at Syfy's Helix. This is a show that you know has no idea what the hell is happening, and absolutely nothing makes any sense at all, even from episode to episode, but it keeps giving me crazier and crazier twists along the way, and I love it. There's no way it's going to pay off at the end, but until then I'm having a great time.


And thus, no, I don't need a machete order for Lost. For me, Lost was about the journey, not the destination, and for good or ill I don't think editing the show down to its "good bits" would necessarily improve the overall story.

Illustration for article titled ​Could The Star Wars Sequels Be Worse Than The Prequels? Absolutely.

Assembly Whine


So, now that season one is almost over, what is your opinion of the new Avengers Assemble animated TV series? or should I say, how bad is it? I have seen quite a few gifs on the internet that seem to suggest some lack of quality in the animation department, like the Avengers are made of cardboard some of the time.


It's pretty bad. The animation is fine, it's the stories that are killing me. Avengers: Earth Mightiest Heroes were smart, modern updates of classic and modern Marvel events, that made sense, were accessible to new viewers, and, in my opinion, wildly entertaining.

Meanwhile, Avengers Assemble literally had an episode which was a Hangover rip-off where the Avengers had to lead Hulk around trying to remember what he did earlier that day, all of which turned out to be exceedingly goofy (he went bowling with The Thing!). At the end, it turns out some sort of Shuma-Gorath creature kidnapped one of Hulk's crystal figurines (yes, Hulk keeps a collection of crystal figurines on this show) and then went to the moon and punched Hulk off it. Then there was an episode where Hulk and Hawkeye fought the entire time because Hulk ate Hawkeye's pickles from the communal Avengers fridge in Stark Tower. It's terrible.


And here's the official synopsis of a real upcoming episode: "While Iron Man and Ant Man are trying to stabilize particles that can shrink or grow matter, Falcon gives them terrible news - his mom is coming to visit, and she has no idea he's an Avenger!" WAH WAAAAH. This makes me want to die.

Although I should say that I believe the show is doing pretty well with kids, which Avengers: EMH wasn't. It has the movie heroes, it looks like the movies, it's super-simple and easier to understand, and it's certainly more young kid-friendly. This also makes me want to die.


Do you have questions about anything scifi, fantasy, superhero, or nerd-related? Email the postman@io9.com! No question too difficult, no question too dumb! Obviously!



Now we ask the important question: Which superhero do you think would be the best lover? Superman would have to be the most careful, as Larry Niven established with Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex.