I want to see an R-rated Star Wars. There is so much potential there.
I want to see an R-rated Star Wars. There is so much potential there.
He captures genres well. Super 8 may just not have been what you wee expecting, but he was aiming for an early Spielberg style and nailed it IMO. It was more like a Goonies style movie than anything.
MI3 was good, especially given how terrible 2 was. He brought it back, and I am hopeful he can do same with Star Wars. I'm not a Trek fan, but I enjoyed his Star Trek film. He knows what he is doing, and is a name I trust to turn out a good Star Wars movie.
No Pressure No Diamonds
Originally Posted by skinsfan913
I love JJ Abrams. There will be people that think he bastardized Star Trek and will complain about any updated or new thoughts to the franchise. I am very excited to see what he will do with this universe...
thanks to County1883 for the signature
Last edited by SkinsGuy; January-25th-2013 at 03:27 PM.
HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!!!!
I'm a big Star Wars fan and I approve of this director.
The writer is the guy who wrote Toy Story 3.
If Lucas just sticks to writing the general story arc and helping with the FX I think the franchise is in good hands.
Last edited by Henry; January-25th-2013 at 03:29 PM.
This forum requires that you wait 60 seconds between searches. Please try again in 62 seconds.
This forum requires that you wait 60 seconds between sending private messages. Please try again in 127 seconds.
Considering Lost, Star Trek, and Fringe, if there is anything involving an alternate timeline/alternate universe in an attempt to recreate any of the original characters I am going throw up.
I really, really hope they use more practical effects. But that's doubtful. As long as they stay away from the fake-looking shine everything had in the prequels. I want grunge, and wear and tear, and dirt. Not perfection and blurred CGI animations.
This was another big thing that got my attention. He is a really great writer so that is good. That means no more wooden, expository dialogue and stories driven by the SFX, not vice versa.
As far as Abrams, I think he is a good director. Not my favorite, but certainly not bad. Every once in a while I used to think about what a Star Wars movie would look like directed by various people with different, but great, styles; from Francis Ford Coppola to Guillermo del Toro, to Michel Gondry (yes I know that is a really weird pairing but the guy is just so damn creative). Or even Kubrick.
Who cares as long as George Lucas doesn't have a damn thing to so with directing?
You have utterly destroyed what was once a proud franchise, Jerry. You suck!
GO COWBOYS!
The big news with this is that Lawrence Kasdan will be attached to the project as a consultant. Hopefully he writes the screenplay too.
"Watching RG3 today is like watching Jordan vs. the Blazers years ago. Waiting for him to shrug his shoulders as he runs by cameras." - John Keim, November 22, 2012. Thanksgiving at Dallas
Just to say, the original trilogy was supposed to be grungy, dirty, dark...because the galaxy was in a dark ages of sorts. The Prequels were set in a different time. It was the height of the republic. There are interviews out there before the prequels came out laying these facts out. We never went to Coruscant (Rome) in the OT. The OT mostly takes place in the outer rim where there's less money and there's also no Jedi Order, which is a stiff organization compared to the band of pirates in the OT. The Prequels are different. It's not the same story. IMO, its apples and oranges.
Another post down the drain...
The stylistic choice is understandable, even if I don't like it. The thing is that they didn't pull it off. I have a problem with the stylistic choice because we're talking about a couple of decades. That's it. In a galaxy that's been around much longer, that's a drop in the ocean of time. The whole universe went to ****? Fighters and capital ships went from gleaming to grungy, and not just the rebel ships?
No. I understand WHY you can rationalize the stylistic choice of going to shiny and gleaming in the prequels. But I think it was mostly the result of it being way harder to CGI something into looking old and worn, but in a unique, believable way. Much easier to render a clean, shiny model. And that's what they did.
All that aside, it doesn't matter why. It looked like ****. The visuals changed too much to simply be a 20-30 year time difference anyways, I don't care how chaotic the galaxy got when the Republic fell. The only exception is Tattioone because they recreated it. This goes along with everyone in the originals talking about the clone wars like they were this mysterious, ancient war. It happened less than 3 decades earlier. Tattioone is a backwater planet, but Han Solo had been around the block as a smuggler. Yet it was this crazy mysterious era.
The reality is that when it came time to portray the time period of the prequels, they fell completely short of what anyone would expect from watching the originals. The visuals are just a part of that.
Last edited by ConnSKINS26; January-26th-2013 at 05:39 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)