J.J. Abrams to Direct Star Wars Episode VII

[Sawyer]

Is there a time and place for Parker to shamelessly flirt to get my attention? Yes, there is.

Is it here and now? No, it is not.

[Parker Wayne]

Are both Darth and Sawyer mad? Yes they are.
Should I back away from this thread? Yes, I should.
Am I going to? Nope.

EDIT: Did I run this joke to the ground? Yes, I did. Mission acomplished.

[regwec]

Stop talking to yourself, red triangle man!

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by Parker Wayne

EDIT: Did I run this joke to the ground? Yes, I did. Mission acomplished.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[Doc Ock]

So uhh..yeah...Abrams....Star Wars....directing.

[Harry_Lime02]

Originally Posted by Kane52630

Disney snubbed a great director.

Almost makes up for the slew of bad opinions on the last page.

[Octoberist]

He would of been grate for the star war.

[Boom]

"You are tearing me apart, Leia!"

[CConn]

They should let him direct a new Christmas Special.

I'm not even joking.

[craigdbfan]

Originally Posted by CConn

They should let him direct a new Christmas Special.

I'm not even joking.

That would be so incredible. Every actor from the new trilogy would have to be on some sort of psychotropic while filming it too. Mandatory use, no objections.

[CConn]

Someone start a petition.

[titansupes]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango

I'm sorry you lack the ability to distinguish between objective (aka fact) and subjective (aka opinion). Perhaps you should go away and hit up wikipedia for some desperately needed illumination.

.

Oh, jesus. That (the bolded) is not an argument. People need to stop saying "in YOUR opinion" Surely the fact that two individuals are having a disagreement helps solidify that these are opinions? It's just that some have more going for them than others (in this case...mine).

Half j/k

Originally Posted by 747

Garbage is way too harsh of a word to be put across all those films and be taken seriously.

85% of the melodramatic, poorly executed RotK. The other 15 is good.

King Kong and The Lovely Bones were all terrible (except for the Kong effects, man those were good)

The Hobbit. My god. Everything that's wrong with cinema in one Transformers-like hit. Absolute garbage.

EDIT: Just so I'm partially on topic:

I liked the lense flairs. But leave that as an ST thing, along with the constantly swiveling camera. Just to delineate a specific visual language for each series. Basically, try to look like a modern day Empire Strikes Back, which looked gorgeous. I may only like one of Abrams movies (Trek was really good, hopefully STID surpasses it) but I have faith in him to know to separate them.

[CConn]

Yup.

[Marvolo]

I may not be overly fond of the Hobbit, but saying it is like Transformers is hyperbole. And ROTK has a very positive critical rating. Right now it holds 94% in positive reviews. Thats damn near perfect.

[CConn]

I do like ROTK, but The Hobbit was pretty terrible. The strength of the story itself saves it from being a legitimately bad movie, but its direction - from the pacing, to the in-screen acting decisions, to the large scale scope of the project was pretty awful; pretty much a mirror image of what went wrong with King Kong in many ways.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by CConn

I do like ROTK, but The Hobbit was pretty terrible. The strength of the story itself saves it from being a legitimately bad movie, but its direction - from the pacing, to the in-screen acting decisions, to the large scale scope of the project was pretty awful; pretty much a mirror image of what went wrong with King Kong in many ways.

I agree with this.

[Doc Ock]

I don't agree.


*hides in the corner*

[Whiskey Tango]

Originally Posted by Doc Ock

I don't agree.


*hides in the corner*

Careful, someone might type angrily at you over the internet.

[titansupes]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

I may not be overly fond of the Hobbit, but saying it is like Transformers is hyperbole. And ROTK has a very positive critical rating. Right now it holds 94% in positive reviews. Thats damn near perfect.

Again, though...so? I know people loved it, I accept that, but so what? I loved TDKR,but go tell all the people that hated it that it has 87% on RT and 8.7 on IMDB, and they won't care about that either. Rightfully.

Originally Posted by CConn

I do like ROTK, but The Hobbit was pretty terrible. The strength of the story itself saves it from being a legitimately bad movie, but its direction - from the pacing, to the in-screen acting decisions, to the large scale scope of the project was pretty awful; pretty much a mirror image of what went wrong with King Kong in many ways.

I loved the first two. The second even more. Couldn't get enough.

Then the third one comes an it's excessively melodramatic. I mean, every scene was just almost every scene was just overwrough with slow-motion, whispery voices, CGI sunsets. And the effects weren't good for a lot of it. Frodo... Got to Jar Jar level annoying for in this one.
I know I'm being very general, but I've been arguing about it on and off for about 10 years, so I'm kind of over it.

(I'm just going to paste what I said in another forum after I saw it here, so I don't have to go through it all again... I'll let it go after this)

It's a movie that shouldn't exist. That's the biggest problem, because it creates all the worst of the others.

It feels like the entire movie is padding. The whole thing. Scene after boring scene of CGI people running and screaming while the camera swirls around them, all for nothing. The scenes with the trolls, the wargs, the Goblins at the end...not a lot or nothing at all about the characters, their relationships or their mission changes. All the characters were somehow invincible, falling off cliffs and whatnot unscathed. It was like Aragorn's sudden super-strength fighting the troll in RotK. Way to build tension. At the end, Thorin doesn't think Bilbo's a ***** anymore and they're slightly closer to Erebor. 3 hours for that. It's just there because they want three movies. When did it become okay to rob people? Make us spend $17 and 3 hours of there lives just to say "Don't worry, things will happen in the NEXT one (that you pay for)".

I can understand why full-fledged fans would like it, because the entire thing is fanservice from beginning to end...but everyone ELSE, what is it? Its association with LotR? Just eye candy? Which, by the way...Even at 24frames, the whole thing looked fake. LotR had a certain earthiness to it, this had high-gloss CG enhancements everywhere. Even real people and locations looked like it'd been touched up way too much. My favourite shot, I kid you not, and I'm not saying this to be malicious, was a close-up of the horses feet in the mud. After all the CG-laminated people, it was like being able to take a fresh breath.
A friend who was trying to defend the 'film' to me last night said "Well, they need three movies to develop the characters and get everything in..." What? Was it LotR that originated this horrible concept of needing multiple movies to tell single stories? Because people had been doing just fine with ONE movie for the prior roughly 100 years or however long. Not to mention apart from establishing the major players and everyone's paper thin goals, nothing else of importance happened, so they clearly didn't need the time.
All the appendices scenes? Tolkien started to rewrite the Hobbit after the success of LotR to bring them more in line tonally, to put some of those plots in. He stopped less than halfway in. "It just wasn't The Hobbit" he said. Why did Jackson think he knew better? Fanboy-ism? Ego? The almighty dollar? All three, probably.

The best thing about this movie was Thorin and Azog. I liked them and their stories, individually and together. But even they were barely there and went nowhere. They were used as a 'Wait 'til next time!' It should have been 2 movies. Jackson should re-learn his low-budget movie making lessons about shooting economically, so that he doesn't wind up with SO much footage that they end up making another unnecessary plotless movie...that will still somehow have Extended Editions. More is not always better. Surely King King and RotK were enough with the "CGI-painterly sunsets...and overacting with melodramatic single tears running down peoples faces...and breathy dialogue delievery...AND slowmotion...AND wailing woman choir music...AND let the shots and scenes run forever with little point" was enough in theatrical form? Peter Jackson. The King of Excess.

EDIT: Oh, and umm... Star Wars is awesome...Yaayyy.....

[CConn]

Or condescendingly explain the difference between objectivity and subjectivity to you.

[Whiskey Tango]

You had it coming.

[CConn]

True.

[Whiskey Tango]

I...

... I got nothing. That's a surprisingly effective tactic!

[Darthphere]

I think we all agree, I'm better than all of you.

[Sawyer]

Sure you are, dear... sure you are.