• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Star Wars: The Force Awakens Discussion (HERE THERE BE SPOILERS)

So....?


  • Total voters
    303
Zuvio didn't even really have a scene that was cut - he was always a background character. Now he's not even that.

The Zuvio creature was not even articulated, according to Pablo Hidalgo on twitter.
 
Even with good, solid movies, there are always those vocal critics with nothing better to do than whine. But it's like listening to snobby food critics. They can't actually make a better meal themselves, nor even be bothered to try... all they know how to do is criticize and complain. :rolleyes:

Kor
 
Saying that a new Star Wars movie has peed on your childhood and destroyed the franchise has been a profitable industry since May of 1999. It won't go away anytime soon with two more Episodes in the Saga and who knows how many standalone films being made and released in the coming years.

To some fans if a new Star Wars film doesn't match or somehow surpass A New Hope or The Empire Strikes Back it's a sign that the director was a poor choice, the script wasn't written well and the whole thing was a mistake. Fanboys and critics will be what they are, and in any era.
 
He said "traitor!" That makes sense.

Somehow I kept mis-hearing it as "raider!" and wondering what on earth that was supposed to mean. :wtf:

Kor
 
Not sure if this has already been mentioned somewhere, but Abrams just gave an interview where he addresses some of the criticisms, and the idea of TFA being just a "ripoff" of ANH.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/awards-chatter-podcast-jj-abrams-853171


I can certainly appreciate his arguments (that he thought it was important to stay true to the basic themes of the OT, and to use a familiar structure as a way to ground the newer story and characters, etc)... but at the same time I can't help but wish the movie had tried to be at least a bit more daring and original with it's underlying story, and that it didn't feel SO much like it was retreading the same ground as before.

But the encouraging thing is he alludes to how the next two films won't be doing nearly as much of that kind of thing, and will have some more original structures and storytelling in them.
 
I feel TFA affirms that Abrams is checklist and "greatest hits" director. Look at his films

TFA: Riffs ANH and parts of TESB for large portions of it's story and events. A third Death Star... Really?

STID: Riffs TWOK, but no one really knows what this film is about, and the people making STB have said they are ignoring what happened in STID.

Super 8: Close Encounters with a dash of E.T., add some shoot'em up action and lensflares and the monster from Cloverfield (which Abrams produced) and you have Super 8.

ST09: Riffed TWOK for Nero parts and SW ANH for Kirk and company's parts.

It's been awhile since I watched MI 3, but I don't recall it riffing any previous movie. It was put together very well, but I don't find it as memorable.


Abrams should be proud of himself though. He's done something that other directors failed to do. Make a remake/reboot that was super successful and will endure with the public.

The hall of remake losers is occupied by STID (TWOK), Prometheus (Alien 1979), and Superman Returns (Superman TM).
 
I'm watching ROTS right now. I think it's still my favorite Star Wars movie... but man, after seeing TFA, it looks so fake and video game-y. Just imagine how incredible the same movie would have been if it was shot more "realistically" like TFA...
 
I read what JJ Abrams said about the film at IO9. He seemed to be repeating himself several times during the interview. I was not convinced by his arguments.

Though not mentioned, I think that JJ Abrams stretched himself thin during the making of this film. While he was involved with this film, he was a producer on Infinitely Polar Bear and Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation, and an executive producer on Revolution, Almost Human, Believe, and Dead People. He does not seem to be capable of focusing on one project, like James Cameron, for example. Although James Cameron's Avatar was derivative, the film had a better structure and well-defined character arcs. If JJ Abrams had focused on this film, I believe that this film would not have been as rushed feeling as it does. I sometimes wonder if JJ Abrams has ADHD.

The Vatican City newspaper was harsh in its views about the villains in this film.

The new director’s set-up fails most spectacularly in its representation of evil, meaning the negative characters. Darth Vader and above all the Emperor Palpatine were two of the most efficient villains in that genre of American cinema.

The counterpart of Darth Vader, Kylo Ren, wears a mask merely to emulate his predecessor, while the character who needs to substitute the Emperor Palpatine as the incarnation of supreme evil represents the most serious defect of the film. Without revealing anything about the character, all we will say is that it is the clumsiest and tackiest result you can obtain from computer graphics.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/201...ars-the-force-awakens-villains-kylo-ren-snoke

There is a general consensus about the flaws of this film. These flaws were fixable.
 
While he was involved with this film, he was a producer on Infinitely Polar Bear and Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation, and an executive producer on Revolution, Almost Human, Believe, and Dead People
I don't know anything about Infinitely Polar Bear, but I don't think he really had much to do with the rest of that stuff, other than put some money towards it and let them use his name for promotion. I know he didn't really have anything to do with the day to day work on Revolution or Almost Human. Alot of producers like him seem to just put their names on a lot of stuff without really being that actively involved with it. You hear about Lost a lot when it comes to Abrams, but other than directing one episode in a later season, he pretty much had nothing to do with it after the first season.
 
I don't know if this theory about Rey has been brought up yet. I watched a video on Youtube recently where the person speaking thinks that rather than Rey being Luke's child or Leia's child, she is the reincarnation of Anakin.

Thoughts, anyone?
 
I don't know if this theory about Rey has been brought up yet. I watched a video on Youtube recently where the person speaking thinks that rather than Rey being Luke's child or Leia's child, she is the reincarnation of Anakin.

Thoughts, anyone?

Rey has an English accent, so I wondered if she was a Kenobi. Unless they're going for the Alice Eve/Peter Weller thing in STID; relatives who have different accents.
 
I don't know if this theory about Rey has been brought up yet. I watched a video on Youtube recently where the person speaking thinks that rather than Rey being Luke's child or Leia's child, she is the reincarnation of Anakin.

Thoughts, anyone?
Or she's a descendant of Anakin, but not Padme. After all, it gets lonely on the front lines...
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top