J.J. Abrams Signs Up To Direct Star Wars VII

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

It's good that they found a competent director who knows what they're doing. It's certain now, at least, that the movie will be much better than the last three.

ZippyDSMlee:
After the last 3 it can't get much worse....

So then the squadron of gungans (all jar jars kids so they have the same mental issues) dash into the time machine to save Luke and Leia from the Sith assassins after they start to rebuild the galaxy. Then we will make a comedy scene where they stumble into Leia/Han's first night together for an awkward rom-com moment.

I hope this movie at least feels like a star wars film.

Movie Bob I expect you to be reviewing for all types of star wars fans on this movie. The obsessed, the casual, the original trilogy diehards, the new trilogy was better wrong people, and the other factions that exist.

So much lens fare :D whatever probally going to cool.

I don't think there will be as much of a "battle" as there will be wailing.
He already managed to destroy the legacy of Star Trek in one fell swoop turning it from one of the only series with some thought and care put into them for a certain subset of people into shooty things and lens-flare like every other 3rd rate "Sci-Fi" out there.

Now he's apparently gunning for Star Wars, I don't want to imagine the levels of horror...

I mean, he turned the Enterprise's engineering deck into a fucking brewery with running fluids and painted nuclear signs on the fermenters cause "it would look cool": http://brookstonbeerbulletin.com/star-treks-engineering-deck-brewery/

image

gah...

Scarim Coral:
Ok, now I really want to know what made him changed his mind? Seriosuly what made him to decide to go back against his words and sign up to it?

money.

Not a fan of Abrams' work so my cautious excitement has been replaced with cautious pleading with the gods that he doesn't mess this up.

Well only time will tell how much lens flare he thinks is appropriate.

Rogue 09:

Devoneaux:

Rogue 09:

The Star Trek "Reboot" was bad for the exact same reasons including the story and execution of the story. The plot of Star Trek '09: A Star is going Nova and destroying the entire galaxy (that's from the movie), so the only way to stop if from destroying everyone on Romulus (an empire with the ships and resources to evacuate completely or even solve the problem themselves) so the only way to stop it is with a Black Hole (which will also destroy Romulus). Because they built a special ship for this black hole creating material (which creates a black hole with a single drop... and they provided him 100+ Gallons) it takes too long to reach Romulus and everyone dies. A Romulan with his own ship who could have saved his own family, attacks Spock, they both fall into the black hole which (despite physics) sends them back in time. JUST THE SETUP OF THE MOVIE IS THAT STUPID! From digging a hole in Vulcan to create a black hole when he can just drop it into the atmosphere, to using the black hole stuff at all when he has the power to destroy an entire fleet of ships with just his technology, to Spock dropping Kirk onto an ice planet / moon with deadly monsters to die only to have him happen to meet Spock (somehow) and the both happen to meet Scottie (somehow) who just happens to have developed a formula to transport onto a Starship traveling at speeds faster than light away from them (somehow) the whole movie is made up of bad story writing and nonsense just as bad as the prequels.

I would also compare Abrams use of Lens flare and graphics in Star Trek to be as much of a distraction as the constant green screens and CG "funny characters" Lucas used. Apples and Apples.

Okay one little thing you need to be made aware of so you can calm down:

J.J. Abrams had nothing to do with the script of Star Trek '09. He wasn't the screen writer, he was the director. Okay? If Star Wars has a shit script, it won't be because J.J. was involved.

Yeah, that would be all well and good, except he did have a lot to do with the script of '09. Not only did he direct the movie, but he also was the Producer of the film and it was written by his good buddies Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci, with whom he wrote Mission Impossible 3 (Another terribly written and directed movie). He was directly involved in the crafting of that of that awful story.

So whether or not Abrams is directly responsible for a shitty Star Wars script, he will certainly be heavily involved in the process. He has already shown that he is not capable of the role, which is why I have such a problem "calming down".

image

*chuckles*

Okay...so let's look at if from the Original Trilogy's POV. And I'm not even going to bother going into a full movie run down.

Return of the Jedi: In order to save Han Solo Luke (who can see the future through the Force) deliberately arranges to have all the main characters captured and imprisoned by Jabba the Hutt when...

Ach! You know what? I'll let HISHE take it from here:

And the illogical Plot Holes didn't start out with RotJ, but in New Hope ie Stormtrooper firing accuracy, Leia leading the Imperials directly to the Rebels' hidden base when she knew they were being followed

Have another taste of HISHE:

And here's Empire:

You're inconsolable because of what Abrams did to Star Trek and are condemning Star Wars VII because he'll do the same thing there?

What you're condemning him for George Lucas did first. 1977---Star Wars: A New Hope.

Hate if you want...but I FORSEE that you and all the others who proclaim that Star Wars VII is dead to them because of Abrams will find yourselves standing in line buying tickets to see it in a couple of years.

Quaxar:
First Star Trek, now Star Wars. What's next? J.J. Abrams directs... Doctor Who!

OT:
I'm sure he's a fine director, and I've enjoyed his work (except, ya know, lens flares) But this just sounds like a random rumor that will most likely be untrue.

Woohoo!!!!!! J.J. won't be doing the next Star Trek!!!!

Episode 7 was gonna suck anyway, so this is the biggest win possible.

I imagine he won't repeat the errors he made in Star Trek. What he did do well in Star Trek was bringing action to sci-fi, such as the drop down the... I don't know what it was, when they were free-falling to get on top of a sensor or beacon or something. THAT type of thing is perfect for the Star Wars-esque sci-fi combat, not so much for Star Trek's pointing garage door remotes at each other.

I just hope he fixes his shakey camera for combat crap, Star Wars needs people to be able to see what is going on in a large scale as combat is fought in a more 1700s style - line up and shoot each other.

So long as he cuts down on the lense flare, I think there's a good chance that the sequel trilogy would turn out well. I actually loved a lot of his work.

Meh. It suits Abrams way more than Star Trek does.

My only worry is that Star Trek was a complete reboot, and I'm naively hoping for an adaptation of the Thrawn trilogy rather than something that'll muck up canon. The new Trek was reasonably close to the original, and most of the departures were cribbed from Star Wars, so there we go.

Considering the fact that Capt. Kirk was the Captain I hated the most in the Star Trek TV shows (I didn't bother watching Enterprise btw), I actually liked the Kirk in his movie, and the change from bed-hopping 'douch-hero' to a guy out for revenge on the ship that killed his father, I acutally liked 'Star Trek'.

I'm not concerned for Star Wars... I mean look at the mess George made. Things can only go up from here... Unless they get M Night 'the twister' Shyamalan...

Meh. Can't be any worse than Lucas.

SkarKrow:

valium:
Am I the only person on this site who likes Abrams movies?

I really enjoyed the star trek reboot, sat down my my good friend with a beer and watched it. Was a damn fine movie.

And Zachary Quinto was in it.

What, do you have a crush on him? That's no reason to like a bland action movie masquerading as sci-fi.

StashAugustine:
My only worry is that Star Trek was a complete reboot, and I'm naively hoping for an adaptation of the Thrawn trilogy rather than something that'll muck up canon. The new Trek was reasonably close to the original, and most of the departures were cribbed from Star Wars, so there we go.

I think it's best you just forget about any adaptation of any existing EU story. Which is fine for me, I mean the EU is crazy anyway (especialy when you realize that it's basically professional fanfiction), and it'd be weird to see whoever they get to play Luke, Leia, and Han instead of Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, and Harrison Ford (cause you know, they're all pretty old now and the Thrawn trilogy is only supposed to be like 5 years after RotJ).

Copper Zen:

Rogue 09:

Yeah, that would be all well and good, except he did have a lot to do with the script of '09. Not only did he direct the movie, but he also was the Producer of the film and it was written by his good buddies Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci, with whom he wrote Mission Impossible 3 (Another terribly written and directed movie). He was directly involved in the crafting of that of that awful story.

So whether or not Abrams is directly responsible for a shitty Star Wars script, he will certainly be heavily involved in the process. He has already shown that he is not capable of the role, which is why I have such a problem "calming down".

image

*chuckles*

Okay...so let's look at if from the Original Trilogy's POV. And I'm not even going to bother going into a full movie run down.

Return of the Jedi: In order to save Han Solo Luke (who can see the future through the Force) deliberately arranges to have all the main characters captured and imprisoned by Jabba the Hutt when...

Ach! You know what? I'll let HISHE take it from here:

And the illogical Plot Holes didn't start out with RotJ, but in New Hope ie Stormtrooper firing accuracy, Leia leading the Imperials directly to the Rebels' hidden base when she knew they were being followed

Have another taste of HISHE:

And here's Empire:

You're inconsolable because of what Abrams did to Star Trek and are condemning Star Wars VII because he'll do the same thing there?

What you're condemning him for George Lucas did first. 1977---Star Wars: A New Hope.

Hate if you want...but I FORSEE that you and all the others who proclaim that Star Wars VII is dead to them because of Abrams will find yourselves standing in line buying tickets to see it in a couple of years.

First off: Thanks for posting HISHE. Love those things... though they're not always accurate.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that some of the problems with Lucas started with ROTJ, but if you watch the HISHE video again (except for the Ewok v. Stormtrooper stuff), a lot of the problems come up after the prequels come in and mess with the storyline. Concerning Jabba's palace, you've got to get intel and the thermal detonators probably would have killed Han too. He's frozen in cabonite, not adamantium. (<- Maybe the nerdiest sentence I've ever written...)

A New Hope: Can't have the Empire continuing to blow up planets, and it would probably be best to draw them to you and your forces instead of attacking them when they might have some additional TIE fighters, Star Destroyers, etc. with them. Also... Yavin is a gas giant. Probably wouldn't have blown up with a laser blast. And you can't have Stormtroopers murdering your main characters, so I accept this one for the sake of story.

Empire: Near perfect movie, except for how Luke conveniently went into the venting tube.

Don't conclude that I'm 'inconsolable' because of some poor story elements or a few plot holes. Let's be honest: Star Trek Insurrection was a TERRIBLE movie. Nemesis was also TERRIBLE. The thing that they did though, was stick with the elements that made Trek Trek. While I'm sure that there will be a great many who still go and see these things, I have already come to the decision that I will take a much harder path.

This life long Star Trek fan will not see the new Star Trek movie... Ever.

This life long Star Wars fan will not see the new Star Wars movie (if it is directed by Lucas or Abrams)... Ever.

Internet posts are fine, but money is what matters. I speak with my wallet. I'm probably only going to be one of a dozen. It will probably make no difference whatsoever. But to pseudo-quote a famous captain:

I will not sacrifice Star Wars. We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. The modify our movies, and we fall back. Create entire new movies of crap, and we fall back. Not again... the line must be drawn HERE. This far, no farther...

And I... will make them pay for what they've done...

(Second nerdiest thing I've ever written...)

Diddy_Mao:
While I would have preferred Zack Snyder I think Abrams is a safe bet for this project. The guy knows how to do big set piece action shots while not assuming special effects can replace plot and story.

As long as he can let go of his "Mystery box" storytelling technique I don't see this as a bad thing.

This perfectly sums up my concerns. If he turns Star Wars into a mystery thriller, things could get weird. Then again, being the first in a new trilogy, this could actually surprise us all and work too.

you know what? I like it. I liked Star Trek's reboot.
You know what else? the lens flare jokes were funny a few posts in, sad after that... like a monkey learning to read from cracked.com.

Wow, looking around at these responses it appears I'm one of a very few here that likes Abrams.

I thought he was pretty well thought of in the nerd community?

Anyways, I think this is a good choice. Can't wait for 2015!

StashAugustine:
My only worry is that Star Trek was a complete reboot, and I'm naively hoping for an adaptation of the Thrawn trilogy rather than something that'll muck up canon. The new Trek was reasonably close to the original, and most of the departures were cribbed from Star Wars, so there we go.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure they're dumping most of the Star Wars canon outside of the films.

Probably a good idea, so as not to restrict the new filmmakers' creative process. The EU has gotten pretty unwieldy.

cigar falls out of mouth
So now one guy is going to be directing both the Star Trek AND Star Wars movies? Dear Lord. That's too much power for any one nerd. This effectively makes him Gene Roddenberry and George Lucas rolled into one.

Though I guess I'd rather it be him than most people. Not sure what all the Abrams hate around here is for.

Grey Carter:

Scarim Coral:
Ok, now I really want to know what made him changed his mind? Seriosuly what made him to decide to go back against his words and sign up to it?

Rhymes with "honey."

Honey, it's a condiment. Spread it thickly on toast and you have breakfast. I think the guy needs to proove that he can do the series justice.

Well, if anything, this particular thread is a prime example of how quickly a joke gets old on the internet. Honestly, Abrams is called director, and within ten minutes, 75% of the replies have something to do with lens flare? There were lots of other gripes to grab onto with his work, people. Something about dense, nearly unintelligible story-lines would have worked just fine. Or something about a keyboard solo...

OT: I'm a casual Star Wars fan at best, and an even more passive observer of Star Trek. I've seen all the movies in the first canon, and all the 'Original Series' films in the latter, as well as a large chunk of Abrams work, so I can see where the good and the bad in his direction could lie. But I also rather liked the 2009 Star Trek, so I'd be interested to see where he goes with this.

However, given that he is directing the Star Trek reboots, I'm not entirely sure just how accurate this info is. In Hollywood, 'word on the street' is wrong just as often as it's right. I'll wait and see what happens before I pass any judgement.

Although I will say that I agree with an earlier sentiment stating that Joss Whedon should have directed. I think that would have been really cool.

I was going to disparage people joking about the lens flare,

But,

Lens share is totally the force.

valium:
Am I the only person on this site who likes Abrams movies?

No. I enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Although Lost does have a special place in my heart reserved for pure hatred and Super 8 was really lame.

Still, after what Lucas gave us with the prequels, I'm pretty confident that Abrams can do better.

Also, I had no idea just how much people hate Abrams around here until this thread.

WE GET IT!!! ABRAMS USED A LENS FLARE EFFECT IN STAR TREK.

Jesus, do you guys genuinely not have anything constructive to say or are you just too cowardly to voice an opinion that wasn't handed to you?

OT: I liked the Star Trek film. I hardly watched the original Star Trek series though, so my opinion is invalid. Oh well. I'm sure Abrams will produce something decent.

Shit, an Affleck directed Star Wars could have been neat.

Huh. You know, I enjoyed the Star Trek reboot, but its tone is very different. Much more action, bright colours etc.. Kind of like what Lucas tried to do with Attack of the Clones, I think. Pew pew. I'm not too sure about this. Abrams will probably create an entertaining flick, but I somewhat doubt he will return Star Wars to the original trilogy style, unfortunately. I think he'll keep the tone of the prequels, except make them not suck. For bright action movies, they'll probably be fast and enjoyable. But what if that's not that you're looking for in Star Wars?

Wow, I thought that the Star Trek reboot was actually pretty good. When I saw this I knew there would be some butthurt but my word people, at least give him a chance!

So Star Wars fans are pissy about something to do with an upcoming movie?

Mr Abrams, you have my attention.

Well since there's already enough Abrams hate in this thread, I'll just say that for some reason I found it very funny to imagine Ben Affleck directing a Star Wars movie.

MmmFiber:

canadamus_prime:
Star Wars Episode 7: Revenge of the Lens Flare.

Star Wars Episode 7: A New Lens Flare
Star Wars Episode 7: The Lens Flare Strikes Back
Star Wars Episode 7: Return of the Lens Flare
Star Wars Episode 7: The Phantom Lens Flare
Star Wars Episode 7: Attack of the Lens Flare

What's funny is that every one of those makes absolute perfect sense.

valium:
Am I the only person on this site who like Abrams movies?

Yeah I've got no problem with this news. I wouldn't say I'm an Abrams fan, but having not seen a single episode of any series of Star Trek, I found myself quite enjoying the movie. And, I didn't see any of the Star Wars movies until I was 18, so I've got no nostalgia blinders on. Given those two factors, I've no reason to believe that Abrams is going to do anything horrendous.

AlexWinter:
WE GET IT!!! ABRAMS USED A LENS FLARE EFFECT IN STAR TREK.

Jesus, do you guys genuinely not have anything constructive to say or are you just too cowardly to voice an opinion that wasn't handed to you?

OT: I liked the Star Trek film. I hardly watched the original Star Trek series though, so my opinion is invalid. Oh well. I'm sure Abrams will produce something decent.

Here's another opinion on why Abrams' Star Trek was bad:
It failed in nearly every attempt it made to be a coherent movie.

The plot was bananas. Nothing about it made sense and it was dumb. And stupid. Certainly there have been more nonsensical and more stupid plots in a few episodes of Star Trek, but not in any of the movies (yes, even ST:V made more sense than XI).

The breaches of canon are inexcusable. I get that this is a reboot of sorts, and tried to connect the new timeline to the old one to appease the trekkies like me, but this just made it worse. What the hell is "Red Matter" and why was it invented for this movie? Why the fuck is Spock taking this mission with the """Red Matter""" alone? How the bloody shit does Romulus' star suddenly go supernova in the 7 years between ST:X and Spock's continuity of ST:XI? Why in God's sweet name do the Romulans barely even look like Romulans anymore? Why in bleeding Christ does a black hole suddenly send you back in time instead of shredding you into molecules like every other black hole we've ever seen in Trek? How the fulminating fustigating flatulence does Scotty transport three people outside of a star system, light years across empty space, onto a ship traveling away from him at high warp, when the limitations of transporter technology even 80 YEARS LATER does not in any way come remotely close to allowing any of those things to be done? NONE OF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE REGARDING TREK LOGIC OR ANY OTHER KIND OF LOGIC YOU CAN NAME.

How about the redesigned look of Trek? Again, I get it, reboot, but why does the 23rd century make the 24th century ships look like a bunch of leaky wooden tugboats? How the fuck does the sudden death of Kirk's father cause Starfleet to redesign everything to look like the Apple Store? Why do phasers look and act like every other laser pistol ever seen on film, instead of the perhaps silly but at least distinctive flashing rainbow beam?

And how about the simple errors in basic storytelling that any competent writer in any genre should have been able to avoid? Where did Nero and his crew go for 25 years between blowing up Kirk's dad and trying to blow up the Enterprise? Dairy Queen? How about why in the bloody fuck-crumpets was Spock waiting on the very same planet Kirk got stranded on? Looking for the Dairy Queen? How about Spock turning on Kirk like that when the entire structure of The Original Series was predicated on their unshakeable friendship. That was a spit in the eye of any classic Trek fan, and certainly did not help sell the story to them, i.e., me. And what the bloody bouncing bajeezus are they gonna do about the MOTHERFUCKING BLACK HOLE that ate Nero's ship, RIGHT THERE IN ORBIT AROUND THE PLANET EARTH. Good God, that is ludicrously stupid. Also, why in the Cavernous Burning Hells of Diablo's Endless Terror Reign was Kirk being promoted from CADET to CAPTAIN OF THE FUCKMOTHERING FLAGSHIP at the end of the movie? TELL ME HOW THIS MAKES SENSE! DO IT, I DARE YOU!!

Jesus. I have never really managed to purge these feelings, excuse me. I understand that not all this was Abrams' fault or even his problem. But he really did nothing to address the vast, gaping holes in the plot that turned it into more blank staring space than actual continuity. So I don't trust him to give a fracking fuck about the Star Wars universe or the millions of fans that give it meaning.

And yeah, the lens flare was stupid too.

I wonder how big the money bag was that Disney offered him this time to make him change his mind.
Anyway, better bring some sunglasses to the movie theater when watching this, five minutes with Lightsabers made by J.J. Abrams and everyone will go blind.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here