The plot was moronic (as I outlined above) and it turned one of the most thoughtful sci fi series ever filmed into 'Transformers in Space.'
It was a prequel and a reboot. The original TV show, the spinoff TV shows and all the Star Trek sequel films manufactured so much cannonic, technological and scientific detritus, it was impossible to create anything new in continuity that would engage a new audience. The best decision they made was to say "Screw the Trekkies!" I thought it was a hoot. Started following Star Trek since the first episode aired. They lost me a long time ago. Only way they could get me back was to make a big, fun and slightly dumb movie. Seemed to work for a lot of people.
__________________
I wish that for just one time you could stand inside my shoes
and for that one moment I could be you.
Yes, I wish that for just one time you could stand inside my shoes.
You'd know what a drag it is to see you.
-Bob Dylan
That's all well and good, I am not a fan of the decisions to scrap everything and start over but I can understand some people might find it engaging.
So many plot holes that others have brought up ruined any chance of me liking it, and I am the type of person that can handle a few plot holes if the movie is good enough. I went in with an open mind and nearly walked out before it was over.
Back on Star Wars topic, I wanted Joss Whedon to have a crack at directing.
__________________
Not only would Danny not cuss, but he would go out of his way to let you know he didn't "awwww doohickey" -James Bates
Back to Episode VII, Kathleen Kennedy is the executive producer, so not much can go wrong. She has one of the most impressive pedigrees and filmographies in history; 60 films earning over $11 billion and 120 Academy Award nominations. Her very first full producer credit was for E.T. IMHO, it hardly matters who is directing when she is producing.
The lead writer for Episode VII is Michael Arndt. He's a little on the green side, with only three finished films to his credit; Little Miss Sunshine, Toy Story III and Brave. When it comes to dialogue and character building, there is not a better screenwriter in the business.
Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Anthony Daniels are all currently listed as likely cast members. That will help anchor the film to the original franchise. Daniels is probably the only one who will remain throughout the final trilogy.
Is Abrams the best director in the world? No. He has some shortcomings and annoying visual habits, but he may be one of the best action and sci-fi directors. Given the team assembled around him, I expect this to be a home run.
It was a prequel and a reboot. The original TV show, the spinoff TV shows and all the Star Trek sequel films manufactured so much cannonic, technological and scientific detritus, it was impossible to create anything new in continuity that would engage a new audience. The best decision they made was to say "Screw the Trekkies!" I thought it was a hoot. Started following Star Trek since the first episode aired. They lost me a long time ago. Only way they could get me back was to make a big, fun and slightly dumb movie. Seemed to work for a lot of people.
There's nothing wrong with big, fun, and slightly dumb movies. Just don't call it Star Trek and poop on everything that is the genius of Gene Rodenberry. Rodenberry made great morality plays and masked them in phasers, photons, and weird aliens. Compare that to other sci-fi of the same era like Lost in Space, which was big, fun, and more often than not, dumb. Again, nothing wrong with that, but that's not what Star Trek was about. I understand that had Paramount not done an Abrams' style reboot, Star Trek might have died and we wouldn't have had anything new in a long, long time. To me, that sort of digified death is much preferable over the crap Abrams gave us.
Now, as for Abrams doing Star Wars, maybe that will work. Star Wars was always intended for a much younger audience than Star Trek, and never had the depth of Trek. Big, fun, and slightly dumb Star Wars wouldn't offend me at all, and I'd certainly enjoying seeing those movies.
Star Wars was always intended for a much younger audience than Star Trek, and never had the depth of Trek. Big, fun, and slightly dumb Star Wars wouldn't offend me at all, and I'd certainly enjoying seeing those movies.
Ugh, that's why we got stuff like this...
__________________
Not only would Danny not cuss, but he would go out of his way to let you know he didn't "awwww doohickey" -James Bates
I'm actually pretty comfortable with JJ Abrams doing this, just didn't see him jumping franchises. I think he's a great storyteller. He knows where people's emotional buttons are. Whatever you think of reboot/relaunch, the cold open to his "Star Trek" with the epic Hemsworth and Morrison work is some of the best storytelling/filmmaking done under the "Star Trek" banner. If he can bring that kind of resonance to "Star Wars" again it will be a good thing.
Here's what I am hoping -- SW:TOR may be, barring some book, the last Lucasfilm licensed product while it was still George Lucas' company. As a game, pretty meh. Set long before the films, it wouldn't have any characters movie fans would recognize, but I invite every Star Wars fan ever to watch called "Return", which is one of the opening cinematics setting up the game. It is everything "Star Wars" should be like, and I would love to get some sense that JJ Abrams had seen it and enjoyed it to convince me he's the guy for this job. Bioware may not have made a classic game, but holy crap did they make an epic little mini-movie (the other two trailers are also great).
Location: Wherever I am I doing fine. I am here for a good not a long time.
Posts: 12,558
TOR was actually well reviewed but the mmorpg market is a tough one. I never got into that but I loved KOTOR 1and 2. I think the next series of films though will take place in the years following Jedi as opposed to going back even earlier. And there are a lot of licensed source material to choose from. The stuff by Timothy Zahn would be a great place to start.
Think it's been all but stated that they are going to be "Jossing" (only word I know for taking stuff and making it non-canon) pretty much the entire post-"Jedi" EU. It bugs me to think that not only might I not get to see a movie with Thrawn and Mara Jade in it, but that their entire existence is likely to get retconned out. But "Return" was, in six minutes, more "Star Wars" than Episode I and II both for me.
TOR isn't terrible, it's just not a good MMO. It's 8 bundled single player RPGs.
Location: Wherever I am I doing fine. I am here for a good not a long time.
Posts: 12,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichiGator2002
Think it's been all but stated that they are going to be "Jossing" (only word I know for taking stuff and making it non-canon) pretty much the entire post-"Jedi" EU. It bugs me to think that not only might I not get to see a movie with Thrawn and Mara Jade in it, but that their entire existence is likely to get retconned out. But "Return" was, in six minutes, more "Star Wars" than Episode I and II both for me.
TOR isn't terrible, it's just not a good MMO. It's 8 bundled single player RPGs.
Gotcha. I really hope we get to see Thrawn and Jade as they were written. Jade especially is one of the most popular characters.
There was a rumor a while back that we might see an old republic tv show. Wonder whatever happened to that.
I'm actually pretty comfortable with JJ Abrams doing this, just didn't see him jumping franchises. I think he's a great storyteller. He knows where people's emotional buttons are. Whatever you think of reboot/relaunch, the cold open to his "Star Trek" with the epic Hemsworth and Morrison work is some of the best storytelling/filmmaking done under the "Star Trek" banner. If he can bring that kind of resonance to "Star Wars" again it will be a good thing.
Completely agree, and that's why he's right for this. He has some of the same humanity and emotional intuitiveness that Spielberg has. He probably had too long a leash with Star Trek. He's got no leash at all with this project. He gets to interpret an existing script, but not change it. He gets to create a visual world with the camera and effects and direct great actors. If that's all they let him do, I don't see how this can go off the tracks.
Whedon wouldn't have been right and wouldn't have done it to begin with. With complete creative control, he would put too much of his stamp on it. There's no way Kennedy would have given him that long a leash. I don't think he's as good at the visual side of things as Abrams. Down the line, Joss will be better creating completely original material and directing it himself. I don't think we'll be seeing him doing so many "franchises."
I wouldn't mind seeing the two of them working together on something, with Joss writing and producing and Abrams directing.
Sorry, I fall in the category that loved the Abrams Star Trek movie. It also has a 95% with critics and 91% with audience on Rotten Tomatoes so obviously I'm in the vast majority.
It was a phenomenal action movie with a great cast (Quinto was enjoyable as Spock and Pine had that ruggish charm of Kirk). I understand being butt hurt because it didn't follow the original story but sometimes you have to just enjoy a movie for being a movie rather than trying to fall in the 9% who thought it stunk.
Linear Mode
