Riding on the coattails of the announcement of a new Star Wars film and Disney’s buyout of Lucasfilm, Axel Braun and Vivid Entertainment have announced pre-production on a brand new Star Wars XXX porn parody.

I’ll be honest, I had very mixed feelings about the first one. It’s hard to describe what it was like, but it felt…  weird.

But I suppose there’s a thirst for stuff like this.

Here’s their first press release:

AS DISNEY BUYS LUCASFILM, NEW ‘STAR WARS XXX’ PORN PARODY MOVIE IS ALREADY IN THE WORKS FROM AXEL BRAUN AND VIVID ENTERTAINMENT

Parody of Episode VII to Be Added to Adult Franchise. 

LOS ANGELES – (November 1, 2012) – Within 24 hours of the announcement that Disney will buy Lucasfilm Ltd., adult movie director Axel Braun and leading adult studio Vivid Entertainment (www.vivid.com) stepped up pre-production for the sequels to their blockbuster film ‘Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody.’  Released in early 2012, the parody shattered all sales records for adult spoofs, and became the highest selling adult DVD ever.

“We expect adult movie fans will continue to have an interest in our adult ‘Star Wars’ parody movies, so we’ve decided to add a third parody film to the two we already have in pre-production,” says Braun. “This will make a total of four parodies that take place in the ‘Star Wars’ universe, with the next one to be released in September 2013.”

‘Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody,’ believed to be the biggest-budget production in the history of the adult industry, also became its biggest seller. Starring Allie Haze as Princess Leia and Seth Gamble as Luke Skywalker, it was praised for its sensational costumes, sets, elaborate production values and hot erotic scenes, and it recently took home the Best Parody-Comedy trophy at the Nightmoves Awards.

Pop culture site Die-Screaming.com said of “Star Wars XXX , “Axel Braun has really put together something special with this porn parody… injecting a healthy amount of tongue-in-cheek humor. The graphics look amazing…the casting is dead on and it confirms Axel Braun’s reputation for creating highly entertaining porn parodies.”

Braun recently earned his fourth consecutive 5-A critical rating within the year from AVN.com for The Dark Knight XXX: A Porn Parody. His earlier films with Vivid to receive the highest rating were Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody; Avengers XXX: A Porn Parody and Spider-Man XXX: A Porn Parody, which won 2012 AVN Awards in the Best Parody-Drama, and Best Cinematography categories. Braun also won the Director of the Year-Body of Work award for the second year in a row.

I wonder if Disney’s lawyers are going to try cracking down on these harder than Lucasfilm has.

There are many, many unknowns regarding the new Star Wars films. One thing we do know is that George Lucas will not be directing, something that hasn’t happened since The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Since we’re all fans of movies and of Star Wars here at Big Shiny Robot!, we thought we’d put together a list of 5 directors that would be perfect for the job.

So, in no particular order:

1. Brad Bird – Brad Bird might be one of the most gifted visual storytellers of the last generation. Cutting his teeth on The Simpsons, Bird had one of the most significant feature film debuts with The Iron Giant, a classic animated film that ranks better than most of Disney’s entire animated repertoire. Then, he stepped in at Pixar and delivered The Incredibles, a smart and stylish take on superheroes, Ratatouille, which he directed from someone elses story and made uniquely his own and caused tears for something as innocuous as a food critic tasting a dish. He’s proven himself in the live action world as well with someone elses franchise, making what might have been the best of the Mission: Impossible movies. He has experience in animation (essential for any Star Wars film), live action (and we do mean action), and the heartfelt under currents required to tell an engaging story.

2. Alfonso Cuaron – Cuaron directed what many believe to be the perfect Harry Potter film. It was a dark, atmospheric film whose structure was a well-oiled machine. He took child actors capable of only the most wooden acting and brought them to life and set them down the path that would carry them through the rest of the Harry Potter films. As a visual stylist, his work on films like Children of Men and Great Expectations proves that he can shoot drama and action with equal aplomb. But the relationships between his characters are just as important, take Y tu Mama Tambien as an example. Cuaron could bring a unique vision and style to the Star Wars universe and it would be well crafted and the actors would have an excellent resource to rely on.

3. Edgar Wright – Edgar Wright is a director who, try as he might, just can’t get the notice he deserves for the movies he is making. He’s crafted some of the finest films of his generation, well executed and planned, and inherently re-watchable. From his collaborations with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, all the way to his work on Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World, he is a deft hand at taking the given genre and using all of its conventions to defy expectations. And he’s already in the Marvel stable, working diligently on Ant-Man. Which, to be honest, is probably the only reason he’s completely out of the running for Episode VII. But there are still two more films. It would be an out of the box choice, for sure, and get Edgar Wright working on something perhaps right out of his comfort zone.

4. Steven Spielberg – Thanks to his impressive list of movies still deemed as classics and his long relationship with George Lucas, Spielberg seems an obvious choice to turn to. Many might balk at their last collaboration, but Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was pitch perfect for the sort of movie it was emulating, full of tried and true moments of adventure that could have only happened in an Indiana Jones film. The imagined thought of Spielberg doing full blown Space Opera in the Star Wars universe has all of us very excited.

5. Joss Whedon – Again, with Joss being busy elsewhere for Disney, working on Avengers 2 set to release the same year as Episode VII, it’s hard to see how he could do this film, but he could certainly be eyed for Episodes VIII and IX. For many, the problem with the Star Wars prequels was the lack of a smart mouthed Han Solo character, and what better director could there be to bring that verbal sparring back to the saga? With Whedon’s ability to give us the heartfelt deaths of characters, he’d be perfect for the middle chapter of the new Star Wars trilogy. And The Avengers proved he knows how to deal with a massive cast and keep a balanced film in the context of a massive action adventure/science fiction epic. That and everyone feels the same way about him as they did about George Lucas in 1980.

But there’s another option….  NONE OF THE ABOVE:

There are just as many compelling reasons why we should be looking to “none of the above.” Most of these directors are too busy or too expensive. Some of the best Science-fiction franchises have a long history of bringing in capable directors with something to prove (case in point – Irvin Kershner for Empire, the entire Alien franchise is basically new directors. And we’ve seen with The Clone Wars show that new blood is good for Star Wars. In that spirit, we’ve put together this list of directors that might not be thought of as highly as the above directors, but we think they are no less capable.

So, here are five directors no one else will suggest but we think could be perfect:

1. Rian Johnson – The director of Looper and Brick should be at the forefront of everyone’s mind for a new Star Wars film. Given the creative consultation of George Lucas and a strong guiding hand, Johnson could create a wonderfully complex Star Wars film, dark, heady, and moody, but with a strong grounding of fine cinematic structure and excellent acting. And it would almost certainly bring us Joseph Gordon-Levitt into the Star Wars universe.

2. Neil Blomkamp – Did someone say District 9? And Elysium has many of us all sorts of excited. He’s obviously good with sci-fi and action, tells a hell of a story, and can do things on a low budget that look like they’re much more expensive. He also seems incredibly adept at doing what science fiction does best: tell us stories about current social problems without beating us over the head with meaning. While we never want Star Wars to lose that sense of the universal heroic journey, adding in some social commentary beyond the mention of a cantina patron selling “death sticks” could be interesting.

3. Dave Filoni – Though he’s never proven himself with a live action feature, as the supervising director of The Clone Wars, Dave Filoni has shepherded in a new era of Star Wars that even the most ardent of prequel haters love. He’s been apprenticing under Lucas for the duration of the series and at Celebration VI, Lucas made mention of the fact that he was training the new generation. We might see it with Filoni. Under his guidance, The Clone Wars has proven he has the chops to take the more serious side of Star Wars with things like The Umbaran Arc, the lighter side with episodes like Bombad Jedi and anything starring the Droids, and the mythological side, with the Mortis trilogy. I don’t think it would be any trick for him to transition to live action… And if he’s not in the running for the movie, he should be in the running for the live action TV Show.

4. Duncan Jones – Moon might be one of the great underrated science fiction films of the last ten years. It was small and visually stylish, just like Lucas’ fantastic THX-1138. His handling of Sam Rockwell proves he’s got what it takes to pull a performance and that movie is just dripping with style. It also proved he can work with special effects, with all of the Rockwell clones in single shots. His next project, an untitled bio-pic of Ian Fleming sounds as though it could be fantastic (especially reading stuff like this) , but wouldn’t you rather see him doing a Star Wars film with the ingenuity he brought to Moon?

5. Joe Cornish – “Attack the Block” might be much darker than any theatrical Star Wars release, but captures the spirit perfectly. Kids are present but are never precious, great action, cast of unknowns (mostly), and his CG team was brilliant and understated. Even on its low budget, this film was hailed as a kick in the pants to its genre.

Tell us what you think. Are our picks way off base? Did we miss someone you’d really want to see on there? Does Swank-mo-tron need to write an entire post about why Christopher Nolan would be the worst choice ever?

I was summoned to office of my C.F.O. today. I made my way to his hallway and pondered what I might have done to deserve said summoning, but as it turns out, everyone is catching the Merger bug. Symptoms include wild eyed discussion of possibilities, and plans to really get that fan fic you wrote last year on the table of someone important.

As it turns out, The Big Guy is brilliant, and made an extremely valid point; in the eye of the general public, Star Wars has a very black eye right now. I’m not speaking of those of that know about all the amazing things happening right now in the ‘verse formally known as Lucasville, I’m talking about the average person who loved the Star Wars trilogy and took their kid to see the prequels, hoping it would create the same nostalgia in a new generation. I’m talking about the people who like popcorn flicks and knew of the reputation of the films among their more “quirky” friends. Because let’s face it – those people go to see Star Wars movies, too. And what do they think of when they think of Star Wars? Jar Jar. Christian Haydensen. A 15 minute pod race. Wildly ambitious (in the bad way) CG. They don’t think of Yoda’s death or Luke’s “NOOOOOOOOOO!” or “I know” or any of the goosebump moments that we love. They are the people that will roll their eyes come 2015 and say “ech, they’re trying this again?” And if tickets are stock, these folks are the majority shareholders.

So why not a 3.5? III.V, if you will. Order 66 did not happen instantaneously. What we saw onscreen was a well coordinated effort to take out the most pressing Jedi problems the Sith had, but it could have taken years to hunt and find all remaining Jedi in the galaxy. So why don’t we get to see Vader’s story? His real story. He rises from the ranks of hunter  and eventually becomes Grand Moff Tarkin’s main squeeze. He searches for that twitch in the force that lets him know something is still out there (spoiler – it’s Luke and Leia), has premonitions of his inevitable fall . . . this could be amazing storytelling! Proof that all canon Star Wars doesn’t have to be child friendly, tailor made for a director who is making some bold choices, and my choice would be Nicolas Winding Refn.

Let the Star Wars universe heal. Put a steak on that black eye and let Joe Q public buy an untouched blu ray release of the original trilogy. Make a grown-up movie in the interim, then release the final chapters.

And the hits keep on coming. As though today’s Star Wars announcement wasn’t enough, the universe has decided to make geeks everywhere have to call the hotline because their erections are lasting longer than 4 hours.

You read that right, Bryan Singer will be returning to direct in the X-Men franchise. His last turn in the director’s seat in the franchise was 2003’s X2: X-Men United, which remains one of my top 5 comic-based movies of all time. The sequel to last year’s excellent X-Men: First Class, which Singer helped produce, has been long-rumored to be based on the Days of Future Past storyline written by Chris Claremont in the 80s as a way to synthesize the First Class actors into the world made by previous X-Men movies. This would ostensibly allow both James McAvoy and Patrick Stewart, Michael Fassbender and Ian McKellen to appear in a storyline involving time travel and an apocalyptic future where mutants are put into camps and hunted as enemies of humanity.

Singer fell back into the director’s chair after it was announced that Matthew Vaughn, who directed First Class, would not return for the sequel. He will, however, serve as a producer and I’m sure his fingerprints will be all over the film, much as Singer’s were in the last film.

To me, this is perfect. I’ll get all of my favorite things: McKellen AND Fassbender, Singer directing, and one of my all-time favorite comic book storylines. I’m sure there are people less enthused. Sound off your opinion in the comments below.

Days of Future Past hits theaters July 18, 2014.

The Living Daylights might have one of the worst reputations of any Bond film. Timothy Dalton is looked down upon for his portrayal of 007, the cast is entirely new and different (save for Q) and we’re treated to what is essentially a reboot. But, let’s be honest, after the last few Roger Moore films, a palate cleanser was sorely needed.

This is a darker, grittier Bond than any since, perhaps, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, and sees 007 working to aid in the defection of a Russian General. There’s a larger plot going on, full of nuance and interesting twists and turns, where the defecting Russian general is working for an arms dealer and trying to play the Americans and the Russians against each other. Caught in the middle is an adorable young cellist, in love with the General, but falling for a caring Bond, posing as the General’s friend.

I think this movie has a bad rap, and the more I see it, the more I love it. Hell, just watching that trailer linked above again has me wanting to watch it all over again. The other robots wanted to have a say on this one, so we’re once again opening the floor:

Swank-Mo-Tron: I think the first thing to talk about is Dalton. He’s the polar opposite of Roger Moore. He’s cold and lethal, but caring. He delivers to the part an edge that had been missing since Lazenby and was far ahead of its time. He really does balance the tough and tender elements of Bond in a way the franchise had lost for almost 20 years. And there’s that anger to him we hadn’t seen in quite a while either.

Shaz-Bot: There are two things I dislike about Dalton as Bond, and neither of them actually have to do with Dalton himself. The first is my own perceptions. I’ve seen Dalton in a ton of movies before his turn as 007, and it was difficult for me to accept him as Bond… at first. This movie really won me over. This brings me to my only other complaint about Dalton as Bond: He only got two films before the longest gap in the film series’ history.

Citizen-Bot: It’s no wonder Dalton was on the short list of people to play Bond when they were looking to cast someone after Connery. Dalton turned it down because he didn’t think he was old enough? No offense to Lazenby, but what if we’d had Dalton in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and the films never took their campy turn as Dalton’s Dark Bond kept them more grounded? No lie: all of my favorite Dalton roles, he has been the villain.(Toy Story 3, The Rocketeer, Chuck) Dalton plays Bond in the same way, which is why I call him Dark Bond. I’m sure there’s an alternate telling of The Living Daylights where Bond is the villain, a la Charlie Wilson’s War, helping Mujahadeen soldiers who would eventually become the Taliban and al Qaeda. . . tsk tsk.

Swank-Mo-Tron: One thing I love in this film is Bond’s professionalism. He doesn’t kill the girl because she’s clearly not a professional and that’s really the key to unravelling the plot. When he’s scolded for it, he has one of my favorite lines in the film:

“Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That girl didn’t know one end of her rifle from the other. Go ahead. Tell M what you want. If he fires me, I’ll thank him for it. “

Shaz-Bot: Bond’s professionalism actually put me off at first. Sure, he kept the girl alive, but only because he could pump her for information… or so I thought, again. Even then, aside from a few tender moments, Bond is almost all business in this movie.

Citizen-Bot: I disagree. It was refreshing to see someone who wasn’t always thinking with his penis or his ego. Later on when he tells Moneypenny his interest in the cellist is purely professional, there might have been some irony intended, but I could actually take it seriously. This guy’s duty is to Queen and Country, and he can get laid off the clock. He knows there’s a Russian spy killer program out there offing MI-6 agents, and he’s going to stop it. And the way he shows up Saunders in the operation helping Koskov defect, but then still says it’s his operation and he can take the credit for it– no politics, all business. All that being said, when he parachutes onto the boat in the opening sequence and the woman is complaining about not being able to find a real man. . .well, it’s a great opportunity for the rakish Bond to come out, and he does that well.

Swank-Mo-Tron: I also think the supporting cast in this film is great. John Rhys Davies as Pushkin, playing both sides. You’ve got Joe Don Baker as the eccentric arms dealer Whitaker who keeps the story entertaining. Jereon Krabbe is brilliant as the double-sided Koskov. And the girl, Maryam d’Abo, is soft and wonderful, stronger than most Bond girls, more vulnerable, and less likely to fall for Bond’s usual routine.

Shaz-Bot: I’ll give anything with Joe Don Baker a chance. He really puts the ‘fun’ in “fundamentally over-the top”. I have to agree with your praise of Krabbe, too. He played his character very well. At first, I thought he was a great guy, and then of course when he turned out to be a sleaze, I believed that as well. When it comes to d’Abo’s Kara Milovy. I like that she deviated from other Bond girls. She’s beautiful, but not in so much of a traditional sense. She is absolutely more naive, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t smart and resourceful. I’m glad her character wasn’t just window dressing to further the plot.

Citizen-Bot: And she doesn’t just immediately fall into bed with Bond, either. She actually drugs him and turns him over to her boyfriend, Koskov. And it’s good we get more of Joe Don Baker in later movies, too. But John Rhys Davies just steals the movie. And I loved how the henchman Necros was both over the top awesome and deadly, but also grounded more in reality. He’s as deadly as Odd Job, but uses a deadly walkman and molotov milk bottles, but has the Nordic/Teutonic features of Grant in From Russia With Love. It’s great, and completely fun while being completely believeable.

Swank-Mo-Tron: This film also has one of my favorite action set pieces: After taking off in a massive cargo jet from an airfield in Afghanistan, with a bomb in tow hidden in a Red Cross sack. If that wasn’t enough, one of the film’s principal assassins is also on board ready to kill Bond. They open the back of the plane and have a daring fight at 10,000 feet on this cargo net full of supplies, any one of which might be a bomb. It might be one of the best, most realistic stunt sequences in a Bond film and it often goes ignored in favor of flashier set-pieces in other Bond films.

Shaz-Bot: This film really hit the ground running with great action. The opening sequence with the 00-agents skydiving and the subsequent war games/jeep chase is great. The way Koskov is smuggled out of the country is really fun as well. The icing is of course the aforementioned mid-air fight. I liked that one because it didn’t seem manufactured, like a lot of latter day Bond scrapes tend to be. The main draw for me is that Dalton did do a lot of his own stunts. It’s a risk for an actor to do such a thing, but when it pays off, like here, it pays off beautifully.

Swank-Mo-Tron: Overall, this film balances all the elements that make a good Bond film far better than any had since On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Timothy Dalton is an incredibly capable, underrated lead and the story is actually of consequence. This film tried to do what the Daniel Craig films did, but it did so 20 years too early, and so faded into obscurity. Rewatch this film. This film is an oasis after the desert of Roger Moore. I give it 4 Martinis.

Shaz-Bot: I very much enjoyed The Living Daylights, but I can’t give it the full 4 martinis. On one hand, this is a spy movie in every sense of the word. You have plot twists and turns, meaty amounts of intrigue and romance, and plenty of two-fisted action. On the other hand, the movie tends to be a little obtuse at first. Everything ends up making sense in short order, but the opening sequence is just kind of there until you see the attacker there shows up later tying things together. I’m not saying I need my hand held, but I don’t need to feel my way in the dark, either. Regardless, the strengths of this film highly outweigh the faults, so I give it 3.5 Martinis.

Citizen-Bot: It’s a huge palate cleanser after slogging through Moore and two sub-par Connery outings. It’s the first legitimately good Bond film since On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. But compared to those real bars of the great Bond films like that and Goldfinger it’s close, but not quite. Bottom line: people need to give more respect to the Dalton Bond movies, but I’m more inclined to agree with Shaz here, so I’m going to go with 3 ¼ Martinis.

Released in 1987, Lost Boys is the crossbreed of a teen flick and horror film that reveals a bloodsucking biker gang and their rampage of Santa Clara – a city filled with gothic teens, mullets and missing person’s fliers. Single-mom Lucy (Dianne Wiest) and her two sons Sam (Corey Haim) and Michael (Jason Patric) move to the city to live with their grandfather (Barnard Hughes): The Old Fart who uses Windex as an aftershave.

Lucy gets a job from video-store owner Max (Edward Herrmann) and starts to date him while her boys learn more about he vampire-infested city. Sam meets Edward & Allan Frog (Corey Feldman & Jamison Newlander) who are, “Fighters for truth, justice and the American way.” The two boys are obsessed with vampire hunting, a trait that turns out to be very useful.

While Sam learns basic defenses against vampires, Michael becomes the local vampire biker gang pet by falling for one of their victims: Star (Jami Gertz). Vampire leader David (Kiefer Sutherland) tries to seduce Star as he uses peer pressure to trick Michael into becoming a vampire. Soon it’s up to Sam and the Frog brothers to save Michael and destroy the vampires.

Lost Boys features a healthy dose of gore from the slaughtering of vamps while boasting a hip attitude; the tagline to the film says it all, “Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. It’s fun to be a vampire.” These vampires sleep upside down like a bat in a cave, light on fire when introduced to the sun, have no reflection and have their flesh burned with holy water. Some of the gory ends to vampires come with stakes through the heart while more comedic ends see death by stereo. The ‘80s teenage vamp flick is far from frightening but it is a classic and entertaining movie.

There’s a significant amount of disrespect to the memory of the Contessa to have started this failure of a Bond film with Roger Moore visiting her grave. He looks over her headstone with all the morose nature of a man waiting for a cue for his next line instead of a mourning husband. The moment itself could have been touching if it hadn’t descended into a Wile E. Coyote cartoon.

Seriously, things start strong and forty seconds later descend into lunacy.

Blofeld, in a wheelchair and neck brace, tries to kill Bond with a remote controlled helicopter. Bond quickly turns the trap around and drops a pleading Blofeld into a smokestack.

It was the least befitting ending for such a formidable foe that one could imagine.

The story then revolves around another code machine from a British submarine. The Russians are sort of after it, but it’s Greek figure skating enthusiast Kristatos after the code machine so he can sell it to the Russians. Kristatos is played quite capably by Julian Glover, who seems to be the only actor in this film trying. He channels a quite convincing Claude Raines, but it’s like using a 21-year-old Scotch to kill infections on a wound. It’s simply a waste.

This film is populated by a cast of cartoon characters beyond belief. First there’s Bibi Dahl, a barely legal figure skater who tries to sleep with the geriatric Bond at every turn. Topol’s Columbo gnaws through the scenery, making you wish he was singing. And there’s Melina, the Bond girl who seems more bored than any other Bond girl ever.

The stakes in the story are so low, you’re wondering why you should even care. There’s really not even a reason to be bothering to try to kill Bond. It makes little sense.

And the Guns of Navarone business at the end was preposterous, climbing a Greek mountain face to attack an enemy of superior force. Except there’s way less at stake.

Seriously, this entire film had no reason for existing. Nothing I cared about mattered. Even the Russians at the end of the film just shrug with a smile on their face when everything turns out to be a draw.

This might be the stupidest and most pointless of the James Bond films. I wonder if the next Bond film will up the stakes in anything but absurdity… What’s next? Octopussy?

Fucking hell.

This film had a plot that didn’t even rate the use of Bond’s time. Moore was showing his age and nothing mattered. They shouldn’t have shit on the memory of Diana Rigg and Telly Savalas (and Donald Pleasance) in this film. This film gets 1 martini out of 4.

The release of the full trailer leads me to ponder three things. Thing the first – why was this done? Thing the second – why do horror movies get released in the spring? And thing the third – crap. I think I’m interested in seeing it now. Most of the awesomeness of the original Evil Dead was in the fun-of-it-all, and this trailer certainly implies that there is ZERO fun going on up in that cabin. So maybe we will just be left with a great, old school horror movie?

The remake opens in the US on April 12, 2013, and stars Jane Levy and Shiloh Fernandez.

No offense to Jon Favreau, I think he’s great, but this looks as though it’ll be the best Iron Man film yet. The stakes don’t look like they’ve ever been higher for Tony, which is exactly the right way to follow up the spectacle of The Avengers. Bring him to his lowest point and show how he does.

This film hits in April and it’s already too far away.

At last, a glimpse of the new Iron Man Big Bad! Kevin Feige revealed that the ethnicity and back story of this Mandarin has been purposefully muddled, as “it’s less about his specific ethnicity than the symbolism of various cultures and iconography that he perverts for his own end,” but one has to wonder if any real world politics have been an influence on that decision. Astute viewers will have caught the influence of the Ten Fingers in the first two films, but Tony Stark will finally meet the man pulling the strings. You can read the full article at EW.