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

Oafley Jones

Adamantium wrote: »

Super 8 is a great piece of work that Abrams wrote by himself, now he has the addition of Kasdan on this. He didn't write any of his Star Trek films at all.

I loved that opening shot of Boyega popping up in a panic, it's like something Speilberg would have done, really endearing kinda cheesy (which I love) and pulls you right in. I love the mixture of tones and how the cuts to black and music actually built a tension that had me leaning forward until the french organ slams in. John Williams specially composed new music for this trailer.

I'd still rate super 8 as his worst movie. It superficially apes Spielberg but its just a bag of Pavlovian tricks that manipulate the audience rather than having any honestly earned beats. It doesn't make sense. None. It's a confused mess. Even the title ****ing annoys me.

edit: My favourite dissection of Super 8.

salmocab

Bit off topic but why in sci-fi movies do space ships meeting in deep space always seem to be traveling on the same plane, they only seem to use the x and y plane.

Iranoutofideas

salmocab wrote: »

Bit off topic but why in sci-fi movies do space ships meeting in deep space always seem to be traveling on the same plane, they only seem to use the x and y plane.

Probably because of the science-fiction nature of the film and it not being science fact

Pity though, wouldn't we all love a lightsaber lying around the house

Bacchus

salmocab wrote: »

Bit off topic but why in sci-fi movies do space ships meeting in deep space always seem to be traveling on the same plane, they only seem to use the x and y plane.

A constraint of visual effects at the time? Lack of creativity from the director/cinematographer? JJ's Star Trek movies used the 3 dimensions of space quite effectively IIRC. Battlestar Gallactica managed to create a sense of 3 dimensions in space too. I think even Episode III did it well in the opening battle.

Bacchus

Blazer wrote: »

nope not at all...I'm not holding out too much expectation for it though....I'd really love a dark version of Star Wars..none of this jar jar bollix etc..

Well there was no Jar Jar in that trailer or anything of the sort. Since all we have to go on is the trailer I think there is plenty to be optimistic about. As for wanting a "dark" Star Wars. How dark? Empire was about as dark as it ever got. At it's heart Star Wars is an space opera, action, adventure ride. It sometimes has dark themes but I think going "dark" is just following the trend that movies have to be dark to be good. And to be fair, from the trailer it does look to be quite a grounded, visceral production as opposed to a shiny CGI explosion fest.

Remember too, these are family movies. Us grown ups may want gritty dark grown up themes but there is a whole new generation of kids who'll get to see Star Wars in the cinema next year.

Varik

salmocab wrote: »

Bit off topic but why in sci-fi movies do space ships meeting in deep space always seem to be traveling on the same plane, they only seem to use the x and y plane.

It's all perspective, pull a barrel roll and what was on your right is now on your left, or below or above.

if you were fly towards an enemy and them towards you and you'd be on the same line, if you thought better of it and pitched "down" the enemy is no "above" you.

DoYouEvenLift

The camera work in the scene following the falcon is unreal, and I only watched it on a 7" tablet. Can only imagine how good the flying scenes will be in the cinema.

.ak

I'm pretty convinced it's Andy serkis doing the voice over. If you go to the trailer page on Apple TV it lists the cast of the trailer, the trio of actors seen in the trailer plus Adam driver and any serkis. Adam driver is apparently the dude in the cloak so that leaves serkis as the voice over?

xper

david75 wrote: »

see? looks more like flame than light

__________________
Help save Irelands Forests! http://www.woodlandleague.org/

Interesting juxtaposition of image and signature!

Adamantium

Abrams went to Matt Reeves (who he is a close friend of, he directed Cloverfield) on set who was directing Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and after he saw Serkis acting, J.J turned to Matt Reeves in amazement saying "that is literally some some of the best acting I have ever witnessed, ever"

Bad Robot released a demo reel today of all the Abrams productions of the last 14 years (though he did not direct all the material on it) and it ends with The Force Awakens trailer.

http://vimeo.com/113105222

xper

Cantstandsya wrote: »

I don't get people complaining that part of this might be set on Tattooine, others complaining about tone and I've also seen people bothered that the original characters are returning.

If you want an all original movie then why even bother with Star Wars? Let's just say that they made the new Star Wars already, it was directed by Michael Bay and it was called "Star Wars: Pain and Gain"... go watch that version of "Star Wars" and be happy - it's nothing like the original and absolutely none of it is set on Tattooine (although there might have been sand in one scene).

"Oh I want a Star Wars movie but it should feature none of the original characters, involve no planets that have already been in Star Wars, the tone should be completely different and they should use special effects in a way that none of the other Star Wars movies have."

Eemmmmmm... maybe you don't really like Star Wars?

I can understand fans of the wider SW universe wanting to see more new locations, vehicles, species,etc but I would think they should look to the spin off movies that Disney is planning for that. The films continuing the central storyline are bound to have deep connections to the preceding films.

Holsten

Who has awakened?

In my view at the moment - Darth Revan played by Adam Driver. Max Von Sydow as an older Sith, Luke and new characters have to team up to kill him.

fryup

i take it its being filmed in pinewood studios London, like the original?

Iranoutofideas

Yep

OldeCinemaSoz

SEXTRAvision has the BLU goin' for FORTY DOLLAR or so. PIck it up now. Just say Billybob told ya. He
sure fix their ass. Yeah, tell 'em he sent ya.

pixelburp

Thinking on the trailer a little more, because if I'm honest it has been jumping around my head all day, one thing I took away from it was just how much more vibrant it made the Star Wars universe appear in those scant few seconds. This thread has been a bit of a dumping ground for just how cinematically turgid the prequels were, and by god it can't be emphasised enough just how inert and flaccid Lucas' latter trilogy was - but beyond every other facet of ineptitude, in essence the prequel films rendered the Star Wars universe dull. Lifeless. Devoid of wonder. In 80-90 seconds, Abrams has shown glimpses of the exciting, thrilling universe many of us here first engorged as kids; that emotional imprint that shaped our imaginations of what could be. I'll be frank: the sole reason I'm an unapologetic geek is because I spent my youth watching rental VHS copies of the Star Wars trilogy (that and my diet of Ray Harryhausen movies of course).

I'm being a bit excitable, for sure, probably reading wayyyy too much into things: yes, the actual film may yet be underwhelming, and honestly? I think mostly that's how it'll pan out, given Star Wars is the closest thing to an actual pop culture religion and ultimately it can only hope to underwhelm, but if Abrams' film rekindles that sense of grand wonder of a cosmic adventure that the original trilogy managed, that'll be success enough.

I didn't think much of his Star Trek reboot, in fact I believe it sundered much of what made Trek unique and memorable, replacing its ideals and notions with hollow thrills that barely made the simplest narrative sense; but in a world more fantasy than Sci-Fi, a universe more disposed to emotions and actions painted on a bigger scale, Abrams might find his comfort zone in Star Wars. Plus, the guy knows how to coax a good, impactful performance from his cast - something his predecessor certainly had no notion of.

I was burned by the prequels, but f*ck it. Bring it on. I'm ready to believe in the wonder of cinematic space opera again. At least until December 2015, haha

fryup

so whats it going to be??

a prequel of the prequel??

.ak

No it's a sequel trilogy.

fryup

a sequel of the original??

continuing from return of the jedi??

BopNiblets

I'm disappointed by the lack of Republic Senate hearings and trade federation negotiations... :pac:

Stormtroopers and X-Wings, hooo yes.

Bacchus

fryup wrote: »

a sequel of the original??

continuing from return of the jedi??

Yup.... a good while after Jedi. 30 years I'd guess.

RoadhouseBlues

You know the way people say that as you get older, the years just fly by. Well I'm 36 and I'm thinking that 2015 is going to be the longest feckin' year of my life:-). I can't wait to see it. I grew up on Star Wars. Watched the movies and read the books. I used to dream that I was in the MF going on adventures:-). And then trying to repair it when it broke down:-). I really hope that this brings the same wonder and amazement to a new generation. Just like the originals did for me as a child. All hail the memories. Long long ago...........:-):-):-)

Iranoutofideas

Bacchus wrote: »

Yup.... a good while after Jedi. 30 years I'd guess.

Looking forward to seeing Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, R2 and 3PO again.

faceman

I've watched the teaser a couple of times now and I'm really feeling like the jury is out. I guess the prequels have left a nasty memory.

It seems the teaser has ticked the boxes for the fanboys. After all why would anyone else be getting excited for it.

It certainly has a Star Wars feel to it. But there was no shots in space in the trailer. And I didn't like the new lightsaber. Looked more like flames. But it's probably me being pedantic.

I guess we'll find out in 12 months anyway.

Don't fcuk it up Abrams. You didn't do Star Trek justice. Just saying.

Tony EH

Bacchus wrote: »

Agreed. Moaning about the saber reeks of someone desperate to have a shot at the movie no matter what.

I think the point is that it looks silly and impractical and more dangerous to the user than the intended target.

Tony EH

brianregan09 wrote: »

Just so we're clear the prequel trilogy was a dream right ?

Mickeroo wrote: »

No...a nightmare,

Like a snail...crawling along a straight razor.

Mickeroo

Tony EH wrote: »

Like a snail...crawling along a straight razor.

The.....Horror.....The......Horror.....

Tony EH

paulieeye wrote: »

I swore star wars was dead to me..but all she had to to was flutter her eye lashes and she has me worse than ever..

She's a dangerous, treacherous, bitch though.

Deisler

Stormtroopers! X-Wings!! Millennium Falcon!!! The horror that was Interstellar wiped away in an instant!!!!

Tony EH

youreadthat wrote: »

Not a lot to go on so hard to judge. I'm just a bit apprehensive as I thought Abrams' Star Trek films were terrible.

Yeh, I have to agree.

It's my biggest Mmmmmmmmmm with these new films.

Frankly, Abrams back catalogue is nothing to write home about.

Hopefully, he's enough of a student of the original trilogy to know where the beats should go.

In saying that, I got a bit of a nerdy chubby looking at the X Wings on teh water and the MillenniumFalcon scene.

It looked very Ralph McQuarrie (ish)...no?