Star Wars: The Force Awakens [** SPOILERS FROM POST 4472 ONWARD **]

GhostInTheRuins

This is bad news lads, everyone knows that JJ stands for JarJar...

yogi beer

Speaking from somebody in the Visual Effects industry, I really don't think it's going to be as bad as people think
When Disney bought Lucasfilm, they also bought with it ILM (Industrial Light and Magic), The VFX division of lucasfilm.
ILM did the origional Star Wars and they will be doing the new Star Wars too.
Also JJ Abrams is not a terrible pick. The new Star Trek I thought was pretty damn good!
Not to mention, George Lucas butchered the last 3 Star Wars. They were an insult to the origionals.
Now George Lucas has proven he'll do anything for a bit of cash, so It was only a matter of time before he himself reignited the star wars films.
Personally, I'm happy it's out of his hands. He lost the plot the moment he invented Jar Jar Binks.

Sad Professor

indough wrote: »

lens flare is caused by the lens rather than the camera itself, if he shoots with anamorphic glass (which he will) there is bound to be some degree of it.

I didn't realise anamorphic lenses could now be used with digital cameras. Interesting... Can they be used on a 3D film as well? I assume not since the lens distortion would cause problems.

bruce wayne

It will be interesting to watch how JJ works time travel into the script to save his ass when he runs out of ideas half way through the story

pixelburp

bruce wayne wrote: »

It will be interesting to watch how JJ works time travel into the script to save his ass when he runs out of ideas half way through the story

uhm, JJ Abrahms didn't write the script for Trek

Otacon

bruce wayne wrote: »

It will be interesting to watch how JJ works time travel into the script to save his ass when he runs out of ideas half way through the story

pixelburp wrote: »

uhm, JJ Abrahms didn't write the script for Trek

Or for this new movie. Thankfully, that goes to Michael Arndt, the guy behind Little Miss Sunshine and the screenplay for Toy Story 3.

bruce wayne

Otacon wrote: »

Or for this new movie. Thankfully, that goes to Michael Arndt, the guy behind Little Miss Sunshine and the screenplay for Toy Story 3.

that I did not know....that could be a good thing ;0)

I'm aware he didn't write Star Trek, but as director I'm sure he had some creative input......the time travel aspect of that movie just pissed me off

krudler

bruce wayne wrote: »

that I did not know....that could be a good thing ;0)

I'm aware he didn't write Star Trek, but as director I'm sure he had some creative input......the time travel aspect of that movie just pissed me off

isnt time travel the go to plot device for Star Trek movies? there's four or five of them that use it

Sad Professor

The time travel was also necessary to create a new continuity without being encumbered by the previous 600 hours of Trek.

Kinski

Time travel could excise the prequels from the canon. I live in hope (if not expectation).

Gbear

Sad Professor wrote: »

The time travel was also necessary to create a new continuity without being encumbered by the previous 600 hours of Trek.

Not really. They could've just done a standard reboot.

Sad Professor

Gbear wrote: »

Not really. They could've just done a standard reboot.

Yeah and there would have murder over it. Many of the die hards would have considered a reboot an erasure of the existing continuity. So it wasn't a serious option.

Penn

Sad Professor wrote: »

Yeah and there would have murder over it. Many of the die hards would have considered a reboot an erasure of the existing continuity. So it wasn't a serious option.

Exactly. The time-travel story they came up with means they can reboot everything but it's a good reason why events and personalities of the characters are going to be different to the originals

Reebrock

Otacon wrote: »

Or for this new movie. Thankfully, that goes to Michael Arndt, the guy behind Little Miss Sunshine and the screenplay for Toy Story 3.

If he handled Toy Story 3, he used to living up to high pressure.

Time Travel should be used in the new Star Wars. Just so they can go back in time and kill JarJar Binks.

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

Time Travel should be used in the new Star Wars. Just so they can go back in time and kill JarJar Binks.

Maybe he could Boba's first hit in the Boba Fett origin movie.

don ramo

with Abrams now turning his back on Star Trek i wonder who will take over, this has the X-Men 3/Superman Returns scenario written all over it,

i think its a bad move on Abrams behalf, hes walking into a world where he has rules to follow, the story is a continuation of the previous 6 films, and he will have all the Disney execs watching his every move for the next 2 and half years, and probably longer if he stick around for the trilogy they have planned,

i thought they would get Zack Snyder in for this, give him the script and he can shoot from that, im not his biggest fan but the man undoubtedly has talents behind the camera, and the fact that he didn't write it im more inclined to watch it,

it would be great if they got Guillermo del Toro (another director that would have been great for Star Wars, but i would want him to have a lot more say in it) or Chris Nolan in for Trek 3, there has to be a part 3 at least to it, after all the hard work put into making it so good again,

Gbear

Sad Professor wrote: »

Yeah and there would have murder over it. Many of the die hards would have considered a reboot an erasure of the existing continuity. So it wasn't a serious option.

A pretty ham-fisted way to go about doing it.

I think the die-hards would've had a moan and then went to see it anyway.
If anything, the controversy would've helped the movie at the box office.

Ultimately the film was going to live and die by it's quality and the time travel element took away from that.

Gbear

Given how little of a back catalogue there is in Star Wars, particularly in terms of how short a space of time it takes place over, rebooting was never really going to be necessary anyway.

I do wonder what sort of story they will go for. Given the size of the universe they needn't even directly connect with the other films - they could be set a thousand years in the past or future.

If they're doing a sequel, as they appear to be doing, the unofficial fan fictiony stories made, mostly involving, as far as I can tell, building badly named uber-Death Stars and cloning the Emperor, will not be up to scratch.

I guess it'll involve some new baddy appearing from the ether. For the sake of lots of lightsaber battles he'll probably have to be a Sith.

johnny_ultimate

Gbear wrote: »

Ultimately the film was going to live and die by it's quality and the time travel element took away from that.

Given that it has 95% approval on rotten tomatoes, a box office gross of $400,000,000 (impressive for a franchise that was in many respects box office poison), and a predominantly positive reception from viewers and fans, I think its safe to say the film's quality level was sufficiently high. Sure there were issues - script, mostly - but I think time travel was an elegant way of making Star Trek's labyrinthine lore accessible again, and I think it was a huge success.

Its probably safe to presume the likes of Midichlorians and Jar Jar Binks will be struck from the record in Episode VII, even if there may not be as literal a plot justification for it as Star Trek offered.

Mickeroo

Imagine if they used the time travel as a means to make a broad fish out of water comedy about saving the whales. Thankfully Star Trek is much too sophisticated for that sort of thing. :pac:

Mr Freeze

Mickeroo wrote: »

Imagine if they used the time travel as a means to make a broad fish out of water comedy about saving the whales. Thankfully Star Trek is much too sophisticated for that sort of thing. :pac:

Was that received well at the time?

Mickeroo

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Was that received well at the time?

Don't know about critically, but it had the second highest US gross behind the Abrams one.

roanoke

Mickeroo wrote: »

Imagine if they used the time travel as a means to make a broad fish out of water comedy about saving the whales.

In fairness, the Star Wars have long been happy to include broad comedy and farce.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi5jjXTPtyY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQAq28lPjhk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pV3Z8-q3gU

Mickeroo

roanoke wrote: »

In fairness, the Star Wars have never been afraid to include broad comedy and farce.

Yep, was talking about Star Trek.

krudler

Gbear wrote: »

A pretty ham-fisted way to go about doing it.

I think the die-hards would've had a moan and then went to see it anyway.
If anything, the controversy would've helped the movie at the box office.

Ultimately the film was going to live and die by it's quality and the time travel element took away from that.

Abram's Trek is one of the best blockbusters in years.

Gbear

krudler wrote: »

Abram's Trek is one of the best blockbusters in years.

Doesn't mean it couldn't have been better.

My point was rather that there was no need for the time travel and it wouldn't have negatively impacted on how well the film did.
The need to placate nerds was overestimated in my view.

Mitch Connor

Gbear wrote: »

Doesn't mean it couldn't have been better.

My point was rather that there was no need for the time travel and it wouldn't have negatively impacted on how well the film did.
The need to placate nerds was overestimated in my view.

maybe.

But it also seems like you are projecting your dislike of the time travel aspect to the rest of the audience. It is more likely that others either didn't really think about it, didn't mind it, or liked it.

I, for example, would say that the time travel aspect didn't negatively affect the movie, and in fact the Spock talking to Spock moment was a very nice one.

I don't think the lack of a time travel component would have positively affected the movie (in box office terms as I assume that is what you are talking about) in any way, so I don't see that your dislike of it and rounding on it holds much weight.

Technocentral

Too predictable and boring a choice, would be much more interesting to see what someone like Ken Loach or Tomas Alfredson could do with material like that.

roanoke

Technocentral wrote: »

would be much more interesting to see what someone like Ken Loach

Finally we could find out what happened to those builders on the second death star.