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

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Wait. One and the same person doing modern Star Trek and Star Wars?!

Cool.

Star Trek was fucking great.

... What's that? We're all complaining? Oh, OK then.

2fish:

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.

Thats a scripting issue not a directorial one.

Remember how Light Saber fights were actually about something?
Remember how Jedi and Sith pulling out their swords to fight actually meant that shit just got serious?
Remember how suddenly everyone drew their effing light saber at the slightest inconvenience?
Remember how that trend got carried on into every other Star Wars-product since then?
Remember how that was bloody stupid?

Yeah, I see more of that in your future, Star Wars.

amaranth_dru:
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.

Good to find another one who doesn't piss and moan about this. That there are idiots who wants Zack fucking Snyder for this just prove how dumb some people are. The reboot of Star Trek was good! If you piss and moan about that it doesn't follow the lore, look at the word REBOOT! It doesn't has to follow every fucking thing that was in the films and series before. Also the fucking Lens flare joke sucks balls! You are not smart of snarky if you make that joke.

Owyn_Merrilin:
On the one hand, Trek '09 was more Star Wars than Star Trek, and Abrams is an admitted fan of Star Wars who doesn't give a crap about Star Trek. On the other hand, his Wars-ified Trek managed to be less Star Wars like and more The Fifth Element/Stargate/insertother90'sscififilmthatplayedsecondbananatotheclassicsofthe70'sand80'shere than even the Star Wars prequels. And at least TPM was Star Wars through and through -- I still think the only real reason people hated that one was it couldn't possibly stand up to 20 years of hype. The actual movies, sure, but not their reputation. 2 and 3 may as well have been one of those 90's sci fi films, but not 1.

And I /like/ the Sci Fi films of the 90's. The two I listed by name are two of my favorites, regardless of decade. But they're no Star Wars.

People hated it because it was a bad story, poorly acted, and every scene was shot/reverse-shot while sitting down. Also, midichlorians.

Did SW fans really think Disney was going to take chances after John Carter? No, they were going to clone Lucas circa 1970 and hire him.

So we'll have effeminate boys getting into fist fights? No thanks. There is still only three Star Wars movies.

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

My thoughts exactly.
I have yet to see Star Trek, but Super 8 had it's moments of greatness.
It could have been Uwe Boll or Brett Ratner... or Michael Bay. So let's count our blessings.

Also, lightsaber lens flare could be cool. I'm not even being sarcastic.

You know what, I grew up with Star Wars, I loved Star Wars and it was a part of my identity throughout my young life. But now the IP means shit to me, the EU has gotten stale (and what they did to Jacen was stupid), George's constant tinkering with the original films and the awful cash grab games all mean whenever I hear a Lightsaber I react with dread rather than excitement.

JJ can have Star Wars, I'm done with it.

invadergir:

People hated it because it was a bad story, poorly acted, and every scene was shot/reverse-shot while sitting down. Also, midichlorians.

Except it really wasn't. Granted, Natalie Portman was working from the Kristen Stewart school of acting, but otherwise TPM was spot on. And midichlorians? I have never understood why people got so pissed off about that. The force has never been purely mystical, there's always been a biological component. Why else do you think it's passed down through bloodlines?

Edit: Not to mention, why do you think only certain people can use it? If it were completely and totally mystical, you'd think anyone with the proper training could learn to touch it.

Deathninja19:
You know what, I grew up with Star Wars, I loved Star Wars and it was a part of my identity throughout my young life. But now the IP means shit to me, the EE has gotten stale (and what they did to Jacen was stupid), George's constant tinkering with the original films and the awful cash grab games all mean whenever I hear a Lightsaber I react with dread rather than excitement.

JJ can have Star Wars, I'm done with it.

I thought it was termed EU?

Anyway, the Yuuzhan Vong plot pretty much killed the literary SW franchise. Until EU, I didn't know you could jump the shark in sci-fi. Land a planetoid on Chewie? Yeeeeeah F you JA Salvatore.

Owyn_Merrilin:

invadergir:

People hated it because it was a bad story, poorly acted, and every scene was shot/reverse-shot while sitting down. Also, midichlorians.

Except it really wasn't. Granted, Natalie Portman was working from the Kristen Stewart school of acting, but otherwise TPM was spot on. And midichlorians? I have never understood why people got so pissed off about that. The force has never been purely mystical, there's always been a biological component. Why else do you think it's passed down through bloodlines?

Edit: Not to mention, why do you think only certain people can use it? If it were completely and totally mystical, you'd think anyone with the proper training could learn to touch it.

Saying TPM mirrors the OT isn't going to win you anything other than hipster cred. And, no, you are wrong wrong wrong.

I honestly liked Star Trek reboot, but then again I wasn't a huge fan to begin with so take my opinion for what it is.

As for the Star Wars ep.VII well...imho It can only be better than the last three.

Rogue 09:
Snip snip snippity, until:

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...)

I don't think you can ever quite understand how much I appreciate this. This is simply sublime.

Never let the fear of nerdiness stop you from posting awesomeness. *salutes*

Abrams is a good choice, the Star Trek reboot was excellent, everything a fan would expect to see in a Star Trek movie. Those people here whining about it's plot making no sense, being completely full of plot holes, having highly unlikely coincidences constantly, making up technology on the fly... I have to ask, what Star Trek francise have you people been watching the past several decades? It's obviously not the Star Trek francise that most people watch, that's for sure. The plots of Star Trek, whether it be the movies or the shows have NEVER made sense, they're just full of made up technobabble, tech pulled out of the cast's asses as the plot demands, people doing mind-numbingly stupid things constantly in order for the plot to work, plot holes galore...

Really, I could go on for ages, but my point is that the kinds of things that people are cursing the 09 movie for having are the EXACT SAME THINGS that have been par for the course the ENTIRE FRANCISE, much of it being the very same things that we fans love Star Trek for!

I thought he said he wasn't touching it cause he wanted to concentrate on Star Trek?

invadergir:

Deathninja19:
You know what, I grew up with Star Wars, I loved Star Wars and it was a part of my identity throughout my young life. But now the IP means shit to me, the EE has gotten stale (and what they did to Jacen was stupid), George's constant tinkering with the original films and the awful cash grab games all mean whenever I hear a Lightsaber I react with dread rather than excitement.

JJ can have Star Wars, I'm done with it.

I thought it was termed EU?

Anyway, the Yuuzhan Vong plot pretty much killed the literary SW franchise. Until EU, I didn't know you could jump the shark in sci-fi. Land a planetoid on Chewie? Yeeeeeah F you JA Salvatore.

Ha, yeah fixed I must have been thinking of my new mobile network of something. I suppose I would agree with the Yuuzhan Vong and Chewie thing but at least they tried to do something different within the universe and to be honest killing Chewie made sense as he was pretty hard character to write and develop and it felt like an event (although they should have done it better it also makes sense that the only thing that could kill Chewie was a small planet). My problem with Jacen was that the reasoning made as little sense (and now that I think of it almost the exact same reason) as Anakin in the prequel films and felt like a cop-out.

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?

image

What do you think?

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

You know what? I...honestly wouldn't mind that.

By the way, guys, thanks for taking a huge decision in the field of cinema and turning it into HURR DURR LENS FLARE HURR DURR.

I, as a Star Wars fan, am honestly OK with this choice. Not my number 1 choice, of course, but not by any means a bad one, he himself is a competent action director, and as long as he doesn't go overboard with the lens flare, it should be OK.
I wouldn't be worried about Damon Lindehof either, we've already got a writer for VII.
And everyone who says that Lost is JJ's fault, remember that he was only the producer.
And also, saying that Star Trek was realistically rooted is laughable. And realism isn't automatically a good thing, some franchises call for a bit of silliness and impossibility.

Now, if you excuse me, I have to check on Bob.

Its as if a million voices cried out in terror...

No.

NO!

BAD JJ!

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

Apparently it's just you and me. Wow.

Deathninja19:

invadergir:

Deathninja19:
You know what, I grew up with Star Wars, I loved Star Wars and it was a part of my identity throughout my young life. But now the IP means shit to me, the EE has gotten stale (and what they did to Jacen was stupid), George's constant tinkering with the original films and the awful cash grab games all mean whenever I hear a Lightsaber I react with dread rather than excitement.

JJ can have Star Wars, I'm done with it.

I thought it was termed EU?

Anyway, the Yuuzhan Vong plot pretty much killed the literary SW franchise. Until EU, I didn't know you could jump the shark in sci-fi. Land a planetoid on Chewie? Yeeeeeah F you JA Salvatore.

Ha, yeah fixed I must have been thinking of my new mobile network of something. I suppose I would agree with the Yuuzhan Vong and Chewie thing but at least they tried to do something different within the universe and to be honest killing Chewie made sense as he was pretty character to write and develop and it felt like an event (although they should have done it better it also makes sense that the only thing that could kill Chewie was a small planet). My problem with Jacen was that the reasoning made as little sense (and now that I think of it almost the exact same reason) as Anakin in the prequel films and felt like a cop-out.

Killing Anakin for little reason after making him a god made sense, but killing Jacen did not?

At least killing Anakin for learning the deep dark secret, that the force is karma-neutral, made sense. The EU was dead to me a decade ago. Jacen filling the role of darth vader for his daughter was forced and stupid.

Owyn_Merrilin:

invadergir:

People hated it because it was a bad story, poorly acted, and every scene was shot/reverse-shot while sitting down. Also, midichlorians.

Except it really wasn't. Granted, Natalie Portman was working from the Kristen Stewart school of acting, but otherwise TPM was spot on. And midichlorians? I have never understood why people got so pissed off about that. The force has never been purely mystical, there's always been a biological component. Why else do you think it's passed down through bloodlines?

Edit: Not to mention, why do you think only certain people can use it? If it were completely and totally mystical, you'd think anyone with the proper training could learn to touch it.

Agree to disagree, man. I feel it had absolutely nothing to do with hype. They were reviled because they were terrible movies. Jar-Jar and midichlorians are only surface issues. They're prime examples of poor direction and poor writing. Even talented actors can't do much when they have a bad script and a director who has no idea what he's doing. They had good soundtracks?

I don't see the problem with J.J Abrams directing this one, seems one of the only problems people are bringing up is the Lens glare which J.J openly admitted to using too much of so what's the problem there? A director made a mistake and admitted to making the mistake. Feel free to continue making fun of something bad even when the person who went wrong openly admits it was bad, I can't see the Lens Flare jokes EVER getting old.

Personally I think J.J is a good fit, he's best when directing shows that have a science-fiction element with the relationships between the characters being the most important part, Lost didn't exactly explain a lot of what was going on and Fringe whilst it was about Pseudo-Science relayed heavily on the relationships between Peter and Olivia. To me that was a big part of Star Wars. Whether it was the Luke and Obi-Won, Han and Leila and so on. Or if you want they could get Tim Kring to direct this and Episode 7 can just be a giant plagiarizer of popular Sci-fi.

Also on the subject of Star Trek, it must have been difficult making a film that pleased both the mass audience and Trekkies at the same time. I liked the idea of Spock's actions causing this alternate timeline, what was great was the way Leonard Nimoy pulled off that role you could tell it was like Old Spock saw a little of he's version of Kirk in Chris Pine's version. But just to conclude this long speech, I'd say just wait and see what Star Wars Episode 7 and just don't expect the world from J.J Abrams and Disney. I still say that's part of what made people hate The Phantom Menace so much, it's not right to say it's a Star Wars film so enjoy what your given but still a person can do only so much to capture the magic of the first three (4-6 NOT 1-3)

P.S - The acting in the original three sucked. I say this as an ENORMOUS Star Wars fan

immortalfrieza:
-snip-

I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken... about a great many things...

Did Star Trek have techobabble? Of course they did, and they admit to it. However, that was always just a way to frame a philosophical quandary and showcase character reactions to it. Star Trek was never a bright action show, it was a show about morals, about characters. Every once in a while a fun adventure or a mystery.

More than the bad story, the 1 dimensional characters, the complete lapses is logical progression, or the incredibly terrible villain... this is how Abrams betrayed us.

Now, I'm sure it was fun for people who just wanted to go and see fireworks, and I'm really glad people had a great time. Please don't give us the "You should be happy they revived Star Trek" or "People now actually want to watch Star Trek movies now" though. What you've been watching... it wasn't Star Trek. It had all the names and the places, but not the spirit or the story.

Imagine if George Lucas had made a movie after Return of the Jedi, and he had set it before the first movie. Now imagine if, instead of a sprawling story about the fight between an Empire and a Rebellion the story was about something incredibly stupid like... I don't know... taxation on trade routes. And the Jedi, these mystical warriors who spend their life meditating and pondering philosophy and know nothing about trade or taxes... imagine that they were sent to mediate for no reason. And then a war breaks out because these merchants also happen to have a giant droid army, they take over the planet they're blockading (who also doesn't seem to have anything to do with the taxes and has no army), and then they deny the fact that anything happened at all...

I know that this is a stretch of the imagination, please bear with me.

Now imagine something annoying kept happening throughout the entire movie... (what would be a good replacement for lens flare)... like a giant cartoon rabbit kept jumping in front of the screen and stepping in poop or something.

But we'll keep some amazing visuals. A decent lightsaber fight or two... just so we can say it's Star Wars. Now, imagine something like this actually happened? How terrible would that be? That's what I'm worried about with JJ Abrams, because Star Trek '09 would be no different than this... this 'phantom menace' that I've described. Thank God we'll never have to deal with that!

kajinking:
I'm not really into Star Wars or Trek so I wouldn't really know...is this going to be an issue for the fans?

Probably.

It's a case where he's all wrong for the source material. He has a very distinctive style of direction, sort of like Michael Bay does (and JJ isn't anywhere near as reviled). His style of doing things is pretty much the anti-thesis of what you'd expect from a Star Wars movie.

JJ is the kind of guy that likes to try and re-imagine everything he works on, and make things as "hip" and "current" as possible, which is fine when he's doing things like "Lost" or "Alias" or even "Cloverfield" but not so much when he's dealing with high fantasy, and playing with other people's worlds and universes that are closely defined. I like a LOT of JJ's work (unlike some other people) but don't think he works here.

Of course a lot of it comes down to how much creative input he's actually going to have, he has been tagged as a director, but apparently not as the writer as far as I can see. A lot of this is going to come down to the writing, and assuming it's decent (which is itself touchy) keeping JJ on a leash, and having him make someone else's vision as opposed to heavily personalizing it.

To put things into perspective, and explain them a bit since you don't know "Star Trek" very well, Trek is a series that was originally about this trio of main characters, a doctor "Bones" Mccoy, Captain James T. Kirk (the protaganist), and an Alien first officer named Spock who was driven almost entirely by logic. In a general sense they represent a triumverate of human nature with "Bones" being emotion and humanity, Spock representing logic and rationality, and Kirk being the middle ground between them. Kirk was your basic vintage, two-fisted action hero, who was also more than a bit arrogant and in command of a space ship. Most episodes revolved around some incredible problem he could only resolve with the help of the other two characters, with the debate revolving around logic vs. emotion in many cases and the end result being weighted in one side or another. It's a bit more involved than that, but that's the extreme basics of your "Star Trek" set up. While not without it's cotridictions (and lots of them) it was a carefully built and enduring universe and mythology which spawned numerous TV series sequels, movies, video games, and continued to this day.

[Spoilers Below]

When JJ got a hold of this the first thing he did was decide it would be fun to start Kirk out as a cadet. Focusing on a minor aspect of the lore where he said he got in trouble in the academy, JJ spins it out into this huge thing where Kirk is in the process of being expelled from the academy when "Bones" helps him sneak on board with one of the most ridiculously contrived routines ever. Basically a dumb, over the top, situation compounded by an even dumber solution to just get it going. Then, despite basically being barely in Star Fleet on a bureaucratic technicality, namely having bordeline stowed away on a ship before they could officially expel him, The Captain decides that this is the guy that he wants to send on a special mission. The captain dies, Spock (one of the academy instructors serving as first officer) takes over, he hates Kirk to begin with and Kirk being a complete moron makes a huge scene on the bridge of all places (on a military ship, under his circumstances), instead of simply phasing the jackarse and calling it a day for whatever reason, they load Kirk into a shuttle pod and launch him out of the ship, where he lands on a planet where... well let's just say the less we say about the time travel dynamics from that point on the better.

The bottom line is that while Kirk was arrogant, they kind of turned him into a jerk, JJ figuring this would relate better to today's trouble youth. In the process creating a character who probably should have been breaking rocks in a military prison planet due to his behavior during the first part of the movie before. Add to it that despite being a badarse fighter as one of his defining traits, he manages to get his butt kicked pretty much every time he tries to do anything through the whole movie. Spock, one of the most popular characters in science fiction, is turned into a complete douchbag (except when Leonard Nimoy is playing Old Spock)... and well, let's just say that while I can see how this might appeal to a younger audience, it's not really Captain Kirk who has had hours, and hours, and hours of development behind him up until this point.... and it also doesn't make any logical sense, in the attempt to make him such a "maverick problem child", they removed every military aspect from the character, and created a situation where it defies belief that anyone would have tolerated him doing half the crap he pulled in that movie. No military organiztion would, the proper solution would have been to dump him out an airlock.

At any rate the point of this is that if JJ gets to turn Star Wars into his own little hip playpen, what is he going to do? Take our humble farmboy from Tatooine and re-envision him as an urban grav car thief? Turn Han Solo into an Emo, cutting himself over his past as a spicer runner? Shave Chewbacca to be bare except for a furry mohawk and have him play in an alternative punk band? :)

I guess unlike Star Trek this isn't supposed to be a total reboot attempt, but still they are supposed to be casting new actors and such, and I almost fear what they are going to do with the franchise with JJ at the helm.

In my mind an existing franchise is something you need to approach with constant respect, and prioritize consistincy even when you move it forward. People that show up to see something with a "name" attached do it because they want to see more of the same, not something only vaguely similar using some of the conventions.

JJ Abrams works best when he's doing his own stuff, in his own universes, of his own creation. I liked Alias, I liked Lost (in spite of the ending, but the less said about that the better), as well as other projects he's worked on. Cloverfield was just passable though. He's just the wrong guy for this material.

Who knows, maybe he'll prove me wrong. Personally I suspect they just want to plaster "JJ Abrams" on it since his name has draw.

To be, Abrams is good at new and shiny, but Star Wars is best when grotty and run down. Case in point - Millennium Falcon

drummond13:

Owyn_Merrilin:

invadergir:

People hated it because it was a bad story, poorly acted, and every scene was shot/reverse-shot while sitting down. Also, midichlorians.

Except it really wasn't. Granted, Natalie Portman was working from the Kristen Stewart school of acting, but otherwise TPM was spot on. And midichlorians? I have never understood why people got so pissed off about that. The force has never been purely mystical, there's always been a biological component. Why else do you think it's passed down through bloodlines?

Edit: Not to mention, why do you think only certain people can use it? If it were completely and totally mystical, you'd think anyone with the proper training could learn to touch it.

Agree to disagree, man. I feel it had absolutely nothing to do with hype. They were reviled because they were terrible movies. Jar-Jar and midichlorians are only surface issues. They're prime examples of poor direction and poor writing. Even talented actors can't do much when they have a bad script and a director who has no idea what he's doing. They had good soundtracks?

I actually agree with you on all of those points... when looking at episode 2 and 3. /Especially/ 2, which has pretty much nothing going for it aside from the pretty colors and the awesome sound mix. Where I disagree with most people is that I think TPM was not only a good movie (you could argue that Episode 3, at least, would have been well received if it were called anything but Star Wars), but a good Star Wars movie. I like it more and dislike the other two more every time I re-watch the series, which is about once or twice a year.

But yeah, I don't really expect to convince anyone. This is the internet, after all.

invadergir:

Saying TPM mirrors the OT isn't going to win you anything other than hipster cred. And, no, you are wrong wrong wrong.

Hipster cred? Seriously? How recently have you sat down and watched all six movies? Because I did it just this Summer, and I'll be doing it again at some point in the near future. Episode I holds up, the actual movie is almost definitely better than your memories of it.


I HATE J.J. Abrams. He RUNIED Star trek by thinking " lens flare " was " story telling ". NO it's only story telling if the audience is higher than a damn kite. Hell I'm a gamer and I'll admit that movie hurt my damn eyes. It was like staring into the sun for two hours straight with science fiction sound effects. I"m surprised the " movie " didn't blind me. The funny thing is that the trailer had little to no lens flare check it out.

Yet if you see the real one you'd need sunglasses to watch the rest of it. If you didn't bring sunglasses for the " movie " you might need them plus a seeing eye dog after. Just for a little revenge I want every interview of him to look like this.

image

Geez, you guys, you act as if they said they're giving Star Wars over to M. Night Shyamalan. Whatever, I for one really liked the new Star Trek (my dad who's a big Trekkie did as well) and think Mr. Abrams is perfectly capable of producing a perfectly adequate Star Wars movie. Nothing can be worse than Attack of the Clones, guys. He's competent enough to spare us from that.

[

Rogue 09:

Devoneaux:

Rogue 09:

Apples and Apples, friend. The problem with the Star Wars Prequels (and even the "Special Editions") is that they completely disregard the source material and go big, bright, and dumb. Abrams did the exact thing to Star Trek in '09 that Lucas did with The Phantom Menace. I physically cannot take any more of people just completely trashing these series.

He will have Greedo shoot first and kill Han. Then Greedo has to take Luke to the Death Star, and everything get's F-ed up.

That's quite a hyperbolic leap in logic. The Star Wars Prequels were bad for a number of reasons mostly related to the story and the execution of said story, it had far less to do with "Going big bright and dumb." If everything being "Big and epic" is the only criticism you can come up with then I don't really see what your problem is. Again, Star Trek is an entirely different beast, an entirely different setting. They are NOT comparable. Apples and Oranges.

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.

except even Abrams said he used too much lens flare. Hence why super 8 only used it when it realistically could have happened. Plus all of the lens flare was done naturally, not in post.
Furthermore, you are literally in the minority when you say star trek 09 was stupid. 95% (literally) of professional critics liked it.
Was the plot perfect? nah, but it also isnt nearly as dumb or simple as you wrote out.
Super 8 was a dope movie. I just rewatched it and was struck by how well directed it is (in terms of camera placements used to update Spielberg's style from the 1980s and the performances of his actors and the alien attacks). We have nothing to worry about. Lucasfilm will keep him on a short leash

eljawa:
[

Rogue 09:

Devoneaux:
That's quite a hyperbolic leap in logic. The Star Wars Prequels were bad for a number of reasons mostly related to the story and the execution of said story, it had far less to do with "Going big bright and dumb." If everything being "Big and epic" is the only criticism you can come up with then I don't really see what your problem is. Again, Star Trek is an entirely different beast, an entirely different setting. They are NOT comparable. Apples and Oranges.

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.

except even Abrams said he used too much lens flare. Hence why super 8 only used it when it realistically could have happened. Plus all of the lens flare was done naturally, not in post.
Furthermore, you are literally in the minority when you say star trek 09 was stupid. 95% (literally) of professional critics liked it.
Was the plot perfect? nah, but it also isnt nearly as dumb or simple as you wrote out.
Super 8 was a dope movie. I just rewatched it and was struck by how well directed it is (in terms of camera placements used to update Spielberg's style from the 1980s and the performances of his actors and the alien attacks). We have nothing to worry about. Lucasfilm will keep him on a short leash

For the real problem with ST '09, I direct you to the following post:

It was a truly enjoyable popcorn flick. It just managed to completely miss the point of Star Trek.

Wow. Just.. wow.

Five pages in, and you people took a relatively funny joke and drove it so far into the ground it went right through the center of the earth, was launched out the other side, and is now speeding at warp 10 to a galaxy far, far away.

YEEAAAHHHH BRING ON THE LENS FLARE MOTHERFUCKER

NEW SCREENSHOT OF THE DEATHSTAR BETCH

Personally, I would like to see someone who actually cares more about the story aspect of films rather than the visuals and tension.

 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
Registered for a free account here