If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Coming Soon)   Can the Force repel Lens flare?   (comingsoon.net) divider line 242
    More: Amusing, Episode VII, J.J. Abrams, Star Wars, Walt Disney Pictures, lens flares, Michael Arndt, Ben Affleck, moviegoers  
•       •       •

5569 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 24 Jan 2013 at 7:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



242 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-24 06:05:11 PM
That's our headline? Come on now.
 
2013-01-24 06:07:03 PM
Will the jump to hyperspace now sound like a shotgun blast?
 
2013-01-24 06:17:58 PM
Modmins, think about it.  If people have already posted comments in other threads on this subject, what are the chances they are going to want to come here and duplicate their efforts?

Farking waste of time.
 
2013-01-24 06:18:20 PM
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-01-24 06:22:51 PM
Abrams did great with the 2009 Star Trek (suck it trekkies), and he'll do fine with this.
 
2013-01-24 06:26:59 PM
Can the Force repel Lens flare?


img72.imageshack.us


Nope.
 
2013-01-24 06:39:19 PM
Well, the deflectors sure as hell didn't work
 
2013-01-24 06:40:47 PM
If there's a crap load of LENS FLARE in Into Darkness, be afraid.
 
2013-01-24 06:45:48 PM
While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.
 
2013-01-24 06:55:41 PM

Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.


Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)
 
2013-01-24 07:01:45 PM

Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)


  We could have seen the funerals for all the contractors from the second Death Star :)
 
2013-01-24 07:02:56 PM

Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)


I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.
 
2013-01-24 07:07:59 PM

Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.


Ben Afleck was in the running, and I assume that if he had been selected Kevin Smith would have been brought in to consult on the project.
 
2013-01-24 07:09:28 PM

scottydoesntknow: Abrams did great with the 2009 Star Trek (suck it trekkies), and he'll do fine with this.


This, plus there's nothing I enjoy more than the sad, pathetic wailing of a bunch of middle-aged fanboys and J.J. Abrams has an uncanny knack for causing that.
 
2013-01-24 07:09:58 PM

Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.


Kevin Smith wrote a glowing review of Ep. III. Link
 
2013-01-24 07:11:57 PM
So I assume the plot of the story is to create a wormhole so that they can go back in time and get Carrie Fischer when she was hot and not snorting lines of coke around the clock?
 
2013-01-24 07:12:15 PM
I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.
 
2013-01-24 07:12:15 PM
I was hoping for Brad Bird, but I don't think Abrams is a bad choice. It can't be worse than the prequels.
 
2013-01-24 07:12:51 PM
nooooooooooooooo.com
 
2013-01-24 07:16:20 PM
I can't decide what will be the best part of the new movies. Watching them, or watching the nerds flip out on every development that leads up to them waiting in line at midnight to see them?
 
2013-01-24 07:16:51 PM

NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.


So it's like every other Star Trek movie? Remind me, how often have they gone back in time now in the movies, using different methods every single farking time?
 
2013-01-24 07:17:13 PM
It would be leaning on style more than substance, but it would be way more interesting than 1-3. Plus, lots of eye candy. Bonus if Rebecca Mader. Or the Deschenel sisters.
 
2013-01-24 07:17:27 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-24 07:18:07 PM
Wasn't there an interview not a month ago with him saying he didn't want to do it?
 
2013-01-24 07:18:21 PM

Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.


Kevin Smith? He's funny and everything, but I have to think even he, with his self admitted sub-middling skills as a filmmaker, would laugh at that notion.
 
2013-01-24 07:18:46 PM
God. I had TF for a few months. There's no way this is the best submitted headline.
 
2013-01-24 07:18:58 PM

Caeldan: Wasn't there an interview not a month ago with him saying he didn't want to do it?


I thought so too, but Disney altered the deal.
 
2013-01-24 07:20:33 PM

Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.


Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.
 
2013-01-24 07:21:07 PM
Oh, I get it, his movie had a couple lens flares in it.

Frickin' comediotic geniuses, all of ya.
 
2013-01-24 07:21:21 PM

Caeldan: Wasn't there an interview not a month ago with him saying he didn't want to do it?


Probably

/but then he saw a check that said he really did
 
2013-01-24 07:24:13 PM
Abrams knows how to get good production value and how to get good performances out of people. The problem with Star Trek is that there is just really nothing there. Its just the characters running around for a while through the greatest hits of Star Trek sub plots. It looked great and sounded great, and it felt great while watching it. There's really nothing more you can ask for from a director.

The script for Star Wars is in the hands of a genuine talent. This could work. This could easily work. As long as Tyler Perry doesn't show up as a Bothan or something.

I'd still have preferred Brad Bird if I had my druthers.
 
2013-01-24 07:26:46 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: Modmins, think about it.  If people have already posted comments in other threads on this subject, what are the chances they are going to want to come here and duplicate their efforts?

Farking waste of time.


I know you're not new here
 
2013-01-24 07:30:21 PM
Our firepower can't repel lens flare of that magnitude.
 
2013-01-24 07:30:28 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.

Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.


The timeless story of a dull child standing in front of different groups of people seated in circles over a number of years.
 
2013-01-24 07:33:33 PM

Ebenator: Kevin Smith wrote a glowing review of Ep. III. Link


That was pretty much the end of Smith for me.  It was already grating on my nerves by biatching about his lame ass life all the time (married to a hot girl while throwing parties every week - yea - lame) and then he went ahead and wrote that piece of shiat.

/glad he's not involved
//Abrams will do fine
 
2013-01-24 07:33:55 PM

havocmike: Oh, I get it, his movie had a couple lens flares in it.

Frickin' comediotic geniuses, all of ya.


img853.imageshack.us
 
2013-01-24 07:34:36 PM

salvador.hardin: Abrams knows how to get good production value and how to get good performances out of people. The problem with Star Trek is that there is just really nothing there. Its just the characters running around for a while through the greatest hits of Star Trek sub plots. It looked great and sounded great, and it felt great while watching it. There's really nothing more you can ask for from a director.

The script for Star Wars is in the hands of a genuine talent. This could work. This could easily work. As long as Tyler Perry doesn't show up as a Bothan or something.

I'd still have preferred Brad Bird if I had my druthers.


When I watched Reboot Trek, I saw a lot of Star Wars influence. I figure he'd be a good Star Wars director: taking a operatic script, adding the human element to it.
 
2013-01-24 07:35:22 PM
hmmm no quoted source, no Lucasfilm or Disney source and no official press release anywhere of any kind....

debunked in 10 9 8 7........
 
2013-01-24 07:36:58 PM

Oakenshield: God. I had TF for a few months. There's no way this is the best submitted headline.


Not, even, remotely.

J.J. Abrams now directing Star Wars, Star Trek, Star Search, Star Jones, and starfishes

/Also Star Fox, Star Man, Dancing with the Stars, and The Last Starfighter.
 
2013-01-24 07:37:13 PM

Oakenshield: God. I had TF for a few months. There's no way this is the best submitted headline.


You would be correct!
 
2013-01-24 07:38:22 PM

NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.


You must realize of course that J J Abrams did not write that movie.
 
2013-01-24 07:38:38 PM
"an individual with knowledge of the production told TheWrap."

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
2013-01-24 07:39:49 PM

salvador.hardin: Darth_Lukecash: Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.

Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.

The timeless story of a dull child standing in front of different groups of people seated in circles over a number of years.


If that's what you chose to see. I saw an epic tale of innocent sloly corrupted by doing the right thing, a republic willingly turn to tyranny, and a group of porotectors brought down by their own Hurbis.
 
2013-01-24 07:40:34 PM
HA HA! Lens flare! That's funny!
 
2013-01-24 07:41:14 PM

DoblerMeyer: I was hoping for Brad Bird, but I don't think Abrams is a bad choice. It can't be worse than the prequels.


You beat me to it.
 
2013-01-24 07:41:52 PM

Haliburton Cummings: hmmm no quoted source, no Lucasfilm or Disney source and no official press release anywhere of any kind....

debunked in 10 9 8 7........


Yeah, I'll wait until this is confirmed before I start my outrage/enthusiasm.
 
2013-01-24 07:42:09 PM
Damn. I was hoping that Lucas would diect more Star Wars movies, because the series definitely needs more Stepin Fetchit and Jewish caricatures.

Star Wars is dead.
 
2013-01-24 07:42:24 PM
He's competent, I'll give him that. Everything is shaping up for this to be slightly above mediocre
 
2013-01-24 07:42:31 PM

Darth_Lukecash: salvador.hardin: Darth_Lukecash: Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.

Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.

The timeless story of a dull child standing in front of different groups of people seated in circles over a number of years.

If that's what you chose to see. I saw an epic tale of innocent sloly corrupted by doing the right thing, a republic willingly turn to tyranny, and a group of porotectors brought down by their own Hurbis.


I was brought down by Hurbis once. He was a big bastard.
 
2013-01-24 07:43:10 PM
 
2013-01-24 07:45:01 PM
This is not good news. Star Trek was just okay. Slick, pretty, ridiculous (Spock just happens to be on that ice planet?!?), and bland. Everything he does is just okay (although never saw Alias). I don't get the geek adoration. And the pretentious, smug, aren't-I-so-farking-clever secrecy/hints around his projects is just annoying. Remember the buildup to Cloverfield, and then we got Cloverfield? I was hoping for Brad Bird or Joss Whedon, someone with as much soul and heart as brain.
 
2013-01-24 07:45:33 PM

skinink: Damn. I was hoping that Lucas would diect more Star Wars movies, because the series definitely needs more Stepin Fetchit and Jewish caricatures.

Star Wars is dead.


Fun fact: If not for Star Wars, no one under 40 would ever have heard of Stepin Fetchit.
 
2013-01-24 07:49:51 PM

dajoro: This is not good news. Star Trek was just okay. Slick, pretty, ridiculous (Spock just happens to be on that ice planet?!?), and bland. Everything he does is just okay (although never saw Alias). I don't get the geek adoration. And the pretentious, smug, aren't-I-so-farking-clever secrecy/hints around his projects is just annoying. Remember the buildup to Cloverfield, and then we got Cloverfield? I was hoping for Brad Bird or Joss Whedon, someone with as much soul and heart as brain.


I don't know if the Force can repel lens flare, but it sure as hell can't repel butthurt.
 
2013-01-24 07:52:16 PM
the most important part of that article was where it mentioned that george lucas would not be writing the script.
 
2013-01-24 07:54:09 PM

NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.


No one cares about your opinion. No one. On the planet. At all.
 
2013-01-24 07:54:58 PM
fark, this means Damon Lindelof is directing Star Trek 3
 
2013-01-24 07:59:14 PM

moothemagiccow: fark, this means Damon Lindelof is directing Star Trek 3


Well, he's promised there won't be any time travel.
 
2013-01-24 07:59:38 PM

Mazzic518: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

  We could have seen the funerals for all the contractors from the second Death Star :)


Heh! Yep
 
2013-01-24 07:59:45 PM

scottydoesntknow: Abrams did great with the 2009 Star Trek (suck it trekkies), and he'll do fine with this.


I'd consider myself a huge fan of both franchises, so I have no problem saying YOU PEOPLE biatchING ABOUT LENS FLARE CAN JUST SFTU, STAR TREK (2009) WAS A GREAT MOVIE.

It was way more faithful to its IP than the vast majority of nostalgia porn movies (looking at you, Transformers and G.I. Joe). I never noticed the lens flares until you assholes started biatching about it, and even now it's not distracting at all. If this is true, fine. I'll see the product in theaters and make my decision. I have a feeling Abrams will be more sensitive to the EU than most other directors. There's just as much of a chance that it's an unfounded rumor - in which case, oh well, another round of gnashing and wailing of teeth.

And for the record:

Before 2009, the last Star Trek movie that didn't suck ass was Generations. No, First Contact was terrible. It ruined the Borg, and it was clear Spiner was out to lunch during filming. Frakes did a decent job directing, but he's a much better television director.

There was nothing wrong with Cloverfield that couldn't have been fixed by buying a goddamn tripod. No, it's not cool and edgy to make it look like "authentic camcorder footage". If your movie makes me sick to my stomach when a pint of whiskey and six straight hours of Descent II can not, then you've farked up in cinematography.

The discussion of Star Wars will inevitably lead to mentioning Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy. These books are good; biatching about the Chiss, ysalmiri, or "LOL EXTRA VOWELS" is idiotic, and you should feel bad.

/UNC_Samurai signing off and headed for the tub.
 
2013-01-24 08:00:08 PM
Well, you KNOW this guy will be in it.

www.tvedge.net
 
2013-01-24 08:00:31 PM

LDM90: skinink: Damn. I was hoping that Lucas would diect more Star Wars movies, because the series definitely needs more Stepin Fetchit and Jewish caricatures.

Star Wars is dead.

Fun fact: If not for Star Wars, no one under 40 would ever have heard of Stepin Fetchit.


How aboit Élan Sleazebaggano?

In all seriousness, Star Trek was a great space action popcorn flick. It sucked as a Star Trek movie. The good news is that Star Wars is a space action popcorn flick. Imokaywiththis.jpg
 
2013-01-24 08:01:04 PM

WTF Indeed: I can't decide what will be the best part of the new movies. Watching them, or watching the nerds flip out on every development that leads up to them waiting in line at midnight to see them?


Then pouring over every rumor, script leak and behind the scenes photos. Then debating 18 hours a day about plot development then after watching it say that it sucked cause it was predictible and had no surprises.

And damnit poonesfarm, that pic got a laugh out of me.
 
2013-01-24 08:03:18 PM

Shadowtag: NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one cares about your opinion. No one. On the planet. At all.


It was a crappy Star Trek movie. Lots of plot holes and bad science and stuff that just didn't make any sense. It was fun, but Star Trek is supposed to be more cerebral than that. Star Wars, on the other hand...
 
2013-01-24 08:03:30 PM
Star Trek (2009) was pretty much on par with the prequels. Look at the fight above Vulcan and the fight above Coruscant, you could've spliced scenes from the two movies together and no one would be able to tell. Did love the way Enterprise moved though
 
2013-01-24 08:07:34 PM
can we get Cumberbatch as a dark Jedi/Sith lord?
 
2013-01-24 08:08:30 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.

Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.


Oh yeah? Well, you and Kevin Smith are both idiots.
 
2013-01-24 08:09:32 PM
Did anyone mention that J.J. Abrams uses too much lens flare yet?
 
2013-01-24 08:13:45 PM
As one of the few people on the site who A: doesn't hate the prequel trilogy and feel like it raped their childhood and B: didn't give a good goddamn about the lens flare in Star Trek, I'm ok with this.
 
2013-01-24 08:15:19 PM
Has anyone posted any Star Wars lens-flare pics?

\absolutely on board for a J.J. Abrams Star Wars flick....
 
2013-01-24 08:19:55 PM
home.comcast.net
 
2013-01-24 08:22:03 PM
I saw the story and thought to myself, "The Fark headline will say something 'lens flare' something. It'll probably be a good one despite the overused meme."

I came home and checked Fark just to see this headline.

/leaving disappointed
 
2013-01-24 08:24:11 PM
Thrawn's trilogy would make a terrible set of movies because NOTHING HAPPENS.
 
2013-01-24 08:30:49 PM
 
2013-01-24 08:37:54 PM
Ambiguous sources = bullshiat.
 
2013-01-24 08:41:28 PM
From a very old Fark photoshop contest (March 2002)

writersgallery.com

Seems appropriate.
 
2013-01-24 08:49:44 PM

knoxvelour: can we get Cumberbatch as a dark Jedi/Sith lord?


I'd also accept Anna Torv as Mara Jade.
 
2013-01-24 08:52:23 PM

knoxvelour: can we get Cumberbatch as a dark Jedi/Sith lord?


Maybe even a Sith Lord who can summon the ghosts of the dead, a necromancer, if you will.
 
2013-01-24 09:12:39 PM

dajoro: This is not good news. Star Trek was just okay. Slick, pretty, ridiculous (Spock just happens to be on that ice planet?!?), and bland. Everything he does is just okay (although never saw Alias). I don't get the geek adoration. And the pretentious, smug, aren't-I-so-farking-clever secrecy/hints around his projects is just annoying. Remember the buildup to Cloverfield, and then we got Cloverfield? I was hoping for Brad Bird or Joss Whedon, someone with as much soul and heart as brain.


Really? You never tumbled to the plot point that Nero dumped old Spock on that moon so he could watch? He only said "I won't kill him, I'll make him watch" when old Spock arrived in his spinny-top-thing ship.

Brad Bird can remake the prequels. And Joss Whedon should direct every super hero movie (at least every Marvel team) for the rest of his life.

Abrams is a better choice than Peter Jackson, too.
 
2013-01-24 09:13:21 PM
At least it isn't M. Night Shymalnainan.

/ASK ME WHAT IT MEANS! ASK ME WHAT IT MEANS!
 
2013-01-24 09:13:24 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.

Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.


Even Jar Jar? You actually liked Jar Jar!?
 
2013-01-24 09:15:29 PM
God, I hope this is wrong.
 
2013-01-24 09:18:08 PM
MY headline was better: "From the director of Star Trek... STAR WARS!"
 
2013-01-24 09:18:10 PM

sleeper2995: Darth_Lukecash: Bathia_Mapes: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

I feel he has a lot of love for the original trilogy and would try to undo the damage that Lucas did with 1-3.

Kevin actually loved the prequels.

He firmly believed it was George Lucas toy box, and enjoyed the story Lucas wanted to tell.

So did I. And I was a fan from 1st run of Star Wars- before any chapter added to the crawl.

Even Jar Jar? You actually liked Jar Jar!?


Lucas originally had no plans to include Jar Jar in the subsequent prequels; he had written that one-off character completely out.

It was constant and impassioned letters from Darth_lukecash that led Lucas to rewrite him back in.
 
2013-01-24 09:24:39 PM

Shadowtag: but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.


No one complained about that with Lord of the Rings.
 
2013-01-24 09:32:42 PM
I like JJ, but I don't like the fact he is now at the helm of both of the biggest sci fi space franchises. Some variety there would be nice.

Mugato: Shadowtag: but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one complained about that with Lord of the Rings.


Very true.
 
2013-01-24 09:32:56 PM

Mugato: Shadowtag: but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one complained about that with Lord of the Rings.


I did. Lord of the Rings was pretty terrible. It really should have been split into six or seven movies.
 
2013-01-24 09:33:04 PM
Great_Milenko:
Abrams is a better choice than Peter Jackson, too.

Oh definitely. Otherwise we'd have each of the sequels split into 3 different movies. We'd be at Star Wars XV by the end of it.
 
2013-01-24 09:33:19 PM
www.upl.co

fark that no talent hack. Get an original idea.
// hates shaky screen.
 
2013-01-24 09:34:19 PM

sleeper2995: Even Jar Jar? You actually liked Jar Jar!?


As a character I had no problem with him.  My only complaint was the actor used a voice that was hard to understand, especially with the strange dialect the Gundians had

LDM90: skinink: Damn. I was hoping that Lucas would diect more Star Wars movies, because the series definitely needs more Stepin Fetchit and Jewish caricatures.

Star Wars is dead.

Fun fact: If not for Star Wars, no one under 40 would ever have heard of Stepin Fetchit.


The prequels are exactly like the Tree in Empire Strikes Back

Luke: "What's in there?"
Yoda: "Only what you take with you."

Aliens are not even human, or even the color of any human. Jar Jar and Watto were archetypes, butt they sure in the hell weren't any racial stereo  types. The fact you bring that up means you are bringing your own baggage with you.

Jar Jar was played by Ahmed Best, a black man.  You tell HIM he was a racist. Lucas allowed all the actors to portray the character as they wished-he's not known for being very hands on as a director.

The prequel also had Samuel Jackson as the baddest mother farkin' Jedi ever.
 
2013-01-24 09:37:31 PM

Mugato: Shadowtag: but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one complained about that with Lord of the Rings.


Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally?  Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.
 
2013-01-24 09:38:37 PM
I love Brad Bird's animated work, but Ghost Protocol was at best a meh movie. The final fight scene in the garage just went on way too long, I didn't need to see 20 minutes of Cruise's saggy bare chest at the beginning, and in real life the movie would have ended this way: Russian sub launches nuke at San Fran, the Sea Wolf or Los Angeles sub shadowing immediately sinks the Russian boomer, and the combination of the two gets all the Russian and American birds flying as the First Strike retaliation protocols go into effect in a matter of minutes as both sides react before they can figure out who fired the first shot of WW3. There's realistically no way the US is going to let a nuke bounce off the Transamerica Pyramid like that.
 
2013-01-24 09:39:46 PM
Darth_Lukecash

Jar Jar was played by Ahmed Best, a black man. You tell HIM he was a racist.

Your point is that blacks can't play racist sterio types? *scoff*


Lucas allowed all the actors to portray the character as they wished-he's not known for being very hands on as a director.

That line might almost work if the DVD extras didn't show g.l telling best how to walk and talk.
 
2013-01-24 09:41:16 PM

moothemagiccow: fark, this means Damon Lindelof is directing Star Trek 3


That means we'll get a 4th, because the man doesn't know how to write a proper
 
2013-01-24 09:43:08 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Mugato: Shadowtag: but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one complained about that with Lord of the Rings.

Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally?  Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.


Name one instance of deus ex machina from the books not involving Tom Bombadil. You can't because that's the only one. The movies on the other hand had plenty of DEM because they couldn't take the time to flesh out minor characters and other background.
 
2013-01-24 09:43:17 PM
Look. THIS SHOW had f**king lens flare:

nerdsoftheroundtable.files.wordpress.com

They practically invented lens flare. They had lens flare on their title sequence. If it was in space and a star was involved, then it's going to have lens flare.

Was it still an awesome series? Yes.
 
2013-01-24 09:43:18 PM
www.upl.co
 
2013-01-24 09:44:49 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Mugato: Shadowtag: but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one complained about that with Lord of the Rings.

Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally?  Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.


You guys contractually required to circle jerk in every Star Wars thread ever or something?

/Only trolls and water heads say they like the prequels
 
2013-01-24 09:46:36 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally? Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.


I never read the books, I'm talking about the movies. "Hey, we're in a big battle and we're all going to die. Wait, here comes some elves around the hill to save the day! Here's another battle and we're all going to die but wait, there's some ghost army that  Aragorn forgot he had up his ass. The Hobbits are dying in the volcano but wait, here are some eagles that could have done something all along to save them....and so on.
 
2013-01-24 09:49:29 PM

blue_2501: Look. THIS SHOW had f**king lens flare:



They practically invented lens flare. They had lens flare on their title sequence. If it was in space and a star was involved, then it's going to have lens flare.

Was it still an awesome series? Yes.


To be fair, it was the 90s, and all that CGI stuff was new and shiny, and Photoshop had not yet run lens flare into the ground.

/Still a great show, though
//It even had Bryan Cranston as a Ranger
 
2013-01-24 09:50:32 PM
i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-01-24 09:53:49 PM
Cymbal:

Name one instance of deus ex machina from the books not involving Tom Bombadil. You can't because that's the only one. The movies on the other hand had plenty of DEM because they couldn't take the time to flesh out minor characters and other background.

Gollum biting Frodo's finger and then falling into the pit of Mount Doom. "He will play a role in events"  Tolkien acknowledge that Frodo had failed but Sam didn't.

Gandalf, who technically is an angel, pushing and prodding events to the right conclusion.
 
2013-01-24 09:58:12 PM

Mugato: Darth_Lukecash: Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally? Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.

I never read the books, I'm talking about the movies. "Hey, we're in a big battle and we're all going to die. Wait, here comes some elves around the hill to save the day! Here's another battle and we're all going to die but wait, there's some ghost army that  Aragorn forgot he had up his ass. The Hobbits are dying in the volcano but wait, here are some eagles that could have done something all along to save them....and so on.


The eleves showing up to save their ass wasn't part of the book. That was added by Jackson.

The Ghost army was in the book, but if I recall correctly, Aragorn talked about it long before that event happened.

The Eagles were part of the book, but because Gandalf had summoned them.  And they were used before in the Hobbit and LOTR.
 
2013-01-24 10:10:16 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Cymbal:

Name one instance of deus ex machina from the books not involving Tom Bombadil. You can't because that's the only one. The movies on the other hand had plenty of DEM because they couldn't take the time to flesh out minor characters and other background.

Gollum biting Frodo's finger and then falling into the pit of Mount Doom. "He will play a role in events"  Tolkien acknowledge that Frodo had failed but Sam didn't.

Gandalf, who technically is an angel, pushing and prodding events to the right conclusion.


The Gollum one yeah. But the Gandalf one I disagree. In the books a lot more explanation went into Gandalf's powers. It is a fantasy book after all, where magic does exist.
 
2013-01-24 10:12:31 PM

Champion of the Sun: You guys contractually required to circle jerk in every Star Wars thread ever or something?


Not trolling. I enjoyed the hell out of the prequels.

They aren't great cinema by any means, but they are great Star Wars movies.  Other films I consider far greater than Star Wars series.
Hell, the originals weren't that "great" film wise, but my 9 year old heart loves em to death.
 
2013-01-24 10:13:24 PM
I hope he writes it as they're filming it like with Lost...

Polar Bear!

Foreshadowing

The others!

Foreshadowing......fark it how am I going to explain all this in the finale?

It was all a dream, JR's alive!
 
2013-01-24 10:16:52 PM

blue_2501: Look. THIS SHOW had f**king lens flare:

[nerdsoftheroundtable.files.wordpress.com image 800x450]

They practically invented lens flare. They had lens flare on their title sequence. If it was in space and a star was involved, then it's going to have lens flare.

Was it still an awesome series? Yes.


The issue is not lens flare, really

/lens flare in the excellent, and when not overused, is acceptable
//lens flare in the mediocre, and used to disguise shoddy direction, maybe not so much
///boy, am I gonna get flamed
 
2013-01-24 10:23:03 PM
I can tolerate lens flare, but the way he builds suspense and misses a lot reminds me of M Knight Shamalaladingdong.
 
2013-01-24 10:25:07 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Mugato: Darth_Lukecash: Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally? Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.

I never read the books, I'm talking about the movies. "Hey, we're in a big battle and we're all going to die. Wait, here comes some elves around the hill to save the day! Here's another battle and we're all going to die but wait, there's some ghost army that  Aragorn forgot he had up his ass. The Hobbits are dying in the volcano but wait, here are some eagles that could have done something all along to save them....and so on.

The eleves showing up to save their ass wasn't part of the book. That was added by Jackson.

The Ghost army was in the book, but if I recall correctly, Aragorn talked about it long before that event happened.

The Eagles were part of the book, but because Gandalf had summoned them.  And they were used before in the Hobbit and LOTR.


I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.

Yes, I've spent time- precious hours of my life that I can never get back again- researching this difficulty.
 
2013-01-24 10:30:17 PM

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: Darth_Lukecash: Mugato: Darth_Lukecash: Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally? Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.

I never read the books, I'm talking about the movies. "Hey, we're in a big battle and we're all going to die. Wait, here comes some elves around the hill to save the day! Here's another battle and we're all going to die but wait, there's some ghost army that  Aragorn forgot he had up his ass. The Hobbits are dying in the volcano but wait, here are some eagles that could have done something all along to save them....and so on.

The eleves showing up to save their ass wasn't part of the book. That was added by Jackson.

The Ghost army was in the book, but if I recall correctly, Aragorn talked about it long before that event happened.

The Eagles were part of the book, but because Gandalf had summoned them.  And they were used before in the Hobbit and LOTR.

I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.

Yes, I've spent time- precious hours of my life that I can never get back again- researching this difficulty.


GO OUTSIDE
 
2013-01-24 10:49:16 PM
FTFA: "Look, Star Wars is one of my favorite movies of all time. I frankly feel that - I almost feel that, in a weird way, the opportunity for whomever it is to direct that movie, it comes with the burden of being that kind of iconic movie and series. I was never a big Star Trek fan growing up, so for me, working on Star Trek didn't have any of that, you know, almost fatal sacrilege, and so, I am looking forward more then anyone to the next iterations of Star Wars, but I believe I will be going as a paying moviegoer!"

What an asshole. Seriously. So he's saying he's going to show respect for the established Star Wars legend, as opposed to the way he treated Star Trek. I guess this means he won't be trying to pass off a brewery as the interior of a destroyer or a death star. Wonderful.

My guess is that Disney picked Abrams for this gig because he directed the Star Trek movie. They probably thought, "Gee, he did a successful space movie, and Star Wars is about space, so... how can we go wrong?"
 
2013-01-24 10:54:19 PM

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.


Yeah, there's no way those dragon things could have circled around Mount Doom and spotted two assholes scrambling around heading toward that volcano. Look, I don't give a shiat, I just find people who find LOTR somehow more intellectual than Star Wars a bit obnoxious.
 
2013-01-24 10:58:40 PM

scotchcrotch: GO OUTSIDE


I just laughed my ass off! I tell my 11 year old and his buddies the same thing ABOUT the same thing!!!
 
2013-01-24 10:59:15 PM
Fark should change it's name to biatch after this thread.
 
2013-01-24 11:07:37 PM

Mugato: Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.

Yeah, there's no way those dragon things could have circled around Mount Doom and spotted two assholes scrambling around heading toward that volcano. Look, I don't give a shiat, I just find people who find LOTR somehow more intellectual than Star Wars a bit obnoxious.

it's the same thing: Tolkien was a fan of fairy tales and epic poems mythology. Lucas loved Science-fiction serials. Both wrote what they loved to see.
 
2013-01-24 11:10:39 PM

Mugato: Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.

Yeah, there's no way those dragon things could have circled around Mount Doom and spotted two assholes scrambling around heading toward that volcano. Look, I don't give a shiat, I just find people who find LOTR somehow more intellectual than Star Wars a bit obnoxious.


Philistine.
 
2013-01-24 11:12:11 PM

scottydoesntknow: Abrams did great with the 2009 Star Trek (suck it trekkies), and he'll do fine with this.


GREAT? really? You think that was a "great" movie? Come on.

It was a totally passable, but mostly bland and instantly forgettable movie. Abrams is not a great director. he is a passable director.

On the plus side, the script writer to this IS good, and much better than the Star Trek writers (who'd previously written shiat like transformers) so my guess is that it will work out to be a totally decent, though not great, film.

Wish the studios would take a risk and hire a genuinely original and talented director, but I understand when you pay that much money for a franchise you want to play it as safe as possible. Abrams is a bland but safe choice.
 
2013-01-24 11:19:25 PM

Darth_Lukecash: The Ghost army was in the book, but if I recall correctly, Aragorn talked about it long before that event happened.

The Eagles were part of the book, but because Gandalf had summoned them.  And they were used before in the Hobbit and LOTR.


lol, dude, things can still function as deus ex machinas even if there is some passing mention of them at a point in the book.
 
2013-01-24 11:22:04 PM
NM i mixed up who was saying what in that convo, Darth_Lukecash
 
2013-01-24 11:36:27 PM
dl.dropbox.com
 
2013-01-24 11:36:40 PM
How is JJ Abrams going to work time travel into star wars storyline?

All of his stuff has time travel in it.
 
2013-01-24 11:43:00 PM

Mazzic518: Osomatic: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Yeah, but then it just would have been a bunch of Stormtroopers sitting around talking.  (I kid because I love.)

  We could have seen the funerals for all the contractors from the second Death Star :)


If you think that's offensive, check this out:

i1282.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-24 11:43:54 PM

MayoSlather: I like JJ, but I don't like the fact he is now at the helm of both of the biggest sci fi space franchises


I couldn't agree with this more. Wars and Trek are perhaps best known for the vastly different ways that they approach the genre, and have become short hand for breaking works into ones that deal more with the human existential element and ones that focus on the aesthetics and sweeping events.

What do you think of when you hear Star Wars? Lightsabers, cantinas, exploding space stations.
What do you think of when you hear Star Trek? Patrick Stewart having a soliloquy about the nature of honor, or Spock's alien logic clashing with Kirk's fiery humanity.

Both series are very good, but they are just about as far apart stylistically as sci-fi can be. Hiring the same guy to direct both is a bit worrying.
 
2013-01-24 11:43:56 PM
Maybe he'll cast Jennifer Garner in some role that involves a great deal of ass kicking.
 
2013-01-25 12:01:07 AM

Mike Chewbacca: Shadowtag: NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one cares about your opinion. No one. On the planet. At all.

It was a crappy Star Trek movie. Lots of plot holes and bad science and stuff that just didn't make any sense. It was fun, but Star Trek is supposed to be more cerebral than that. Star Wars, on the other hand...


The part where Spock tells Scotty the formula for "trans-warp beaming" makes me wanna strangle Abrams, since the correct term is "trans-warp transporting."  Other than a bit of overkill on the LENZ FLAIR it was good.  It got my wife to watch and enjoy, and she's not a sci-fi fan.
 
2013-01-25 12:10:44 AM

cgraves67: Ambiguous sources = bullshiat.


I thought so, too, but they had this story on the ABC Evening News earlier tonight. They're usually pretty good about fact checking.
 
2013-01-25 12:11:10 AM

vwarb: MayoSlather: I like JJ, but I don't like the fact he is now at the helm of both of the biggest sci fi space franchises

I couldn't agree with this more. Wars and Trek are perhaps best known for the vastly different ways that they approach the genre, and have become short hand for breaking works into ones that deal more with the human existential element and ones that focus on the aesthetics and sweeping events.

What do you think of when you hear Star Wars? Lightsabers, cantinas, exploding space stations.
What do you think of when you hear Star Trek? Patrick Stewart having a soliloquy about the nature of honor, or Spock's alien logic clashing with Kirk's fiery humanity.

Both series are very good, but they are just about as far apart stylistically as sci-fi can be. Hiring the same guy to direct both is a bit worrying.


Ah, but they've both been made into generic crap, so Abrams is the perfect hack to direct both.
 
2013-01-25 12:23:10 AM
Wonder if Abrams will stick a Star Trek Easter egg in the new Star Wars movie.

img.trekmovie.com

And is anyone else thinking about crossover potential now?
 
2013-01-25 12:24:52 AM
JJ is going to give Star Wars the ending it deserved. Like a big hug party in heaven. We need closure people.
 
2013-01-25 12:28:50 AM

Haliburton Cummings: hmmm no quoted source, no Lucasfilm or Disney source and no official press release anywhere of any kind....

debunked in 10 9 8 7........


That's referred to as a scoop, in news parlance, Generally, the official sources won't confirm anything on the record until they're given the nod from their corporate overlords.
 
2013-01-25 12:34:50 AM
Just put Cumberbatch in the movie
 
2013-01-25 12:52:03 AM
I haven't heard of a better choice put forth than this guy in any of the comments...he can be guaranteed of doing the series some sort of justice
 
2013-01-25 01:04:03 AM

Fark Me To Tears: FTFA: "Look, Star Wars is one of my favorite movies of all time. I frankly feel that - I almost feel that, in a weird way, the opportunity for whomever it is to direct that movie, it comes with the burden of being that kind of iconic movie and series. I was never a big Star Trek fan growing up, so for me, working on Star Trek didn't have any of that, you know, almost fatal sacrilege, and so, I am looking forward more then anyone to the next iterations of Star Wars, but I believe I will be going as a paying moviegoer!"

What an asshole. Seriously. So he's saying he's going to show respect for the established Star Wars legend, as opposed to the way he treated Star Trek. I guess this means he won't be trying to pass off a brewery as the interior of a destroyer or a death star. Wonderful.

My guess is that Disney picked Abrams for this gig because he directed the Star Trek movie. They probably thought, "Gee, he did a successful space movie, and Star Wars is about space, so... how can we go wrong?"


Did you like Superman Returns? Because Bryan Singer, who directed it, absolutely revered Superman and the Richard Donner movies. He was a total fan, and it showed. It also made the movie really, really mediocre at best.

Sometimes having a fanboy in charge isn't the best idea. I don't care whether or not the director had Star Trek or Star Wars bedsheets growing up. I care if he/she knows how to tell the story. I'm a huge trekkie and I loved the new Star Trek. Abrams knows how to tell a great story in a sci-fi setting, and just because he didn't revere the material before the project doesn't mean he doesn't know how to do it justice. If he's the one tapped to direct the new Star Wars, and if the people writing it know what they are doing, then it's going to be a great movie.

But just to be on the safe side, let the people who directed the opening movie from the Bioware Star Wars MMO be involved.
 
2013-01-25 01:24:26 AM

Already Disturbed: moothemagiccow: fark, this means Damon Lindelof is directing Star Trek 3

That means we'll get a 4th, because the man doesn't know how to write a proper


iseewhatyoudidthere.jpg
 
2013-01-25 01:28:05 AM
cdnl.complex.com

Will this show up and eat a Rancor?
 
2013-01-25 01:33:01 AM
I think it's a bad idea to have the same director doing Star Trek movies and Star Wars movies.

There's enough homogeneity out there.
 
2013-01-25 01:48:10 AM
The prequels were bad movies.

Can't believe I'm the Weeners that in this thread.
/Fark, I am disappoint
 
2013-01-25 01:49:21 AM
http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episode-1-the-p hantom-menace/

HTML fail :-(
 
2013-01-25 02:05:00 AM

bluorangefyre: Mike Chewbacca: Shadowtag: NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.

No one cares about your opinion. No one. On the planet. At all.

It was a crappy Star Trek movie. Lots of plot holes and bad science and stuff that just didn't make any sense. It was fun, but Star Trek is supposed to be more cerebral than that. Star Wars, on the other hand...

The part where Spock tells Scotty the formula for "trans-warp beaming" makes me wanna strangle Abrams, since the correct term is "trans-warp transporting."  Other than a bit of overkill on the LENZ FLAIR it was good.  It got my wife to watch and enjoy, and she's not a sci-fi fan.


No, it was really, really bad. Which means this wi'll still be better than the SW prequels.
 
2013-01-25 02:13:32 AM
I can see it now. JJ directs the new Star Wars. Joss Whdeon takes over the helm of Star Trek XII.

We get a crossover and the universe implodes. Forever.
 
2013-01-25 03:59:59 AM

whippersnapper: http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episode-1-the-p hantom-menace/

HTML fail :-(


Old and tired attempt at comedy fail, also. RLM was funny for about 5 minutes.
 
2013-01-25 04:44:39 AM
pikigeek.com
 
2013-01-25 05:20:48 AM
Very sad that Brad Bird wasn't called, he would have done miracles. But that said, Abrams is an extremely talented film maker, and he will do something great and unexpected I'm sure. He got me to care about a Star Trek film after Nemesis, a feat all by itself.
 
2013-01-25 05:24:31 AM

Darth_Lukecash: Champion of the Sun: You guys contractually required to circle jerk in every Star Wars thread ever or something?

Not trolling. I enjoyed the hell out of the prequels.

They aren't great cinema by any means, but they are great Star Wars movies.  Other films I consider far greater than Star Wars series.
Hell, the originals weren't that "great" film wise, but my 9 year old heart loves em to death.


And that is where you are completely and utterly wrong. You can love those movies on their own merits if you want, but Red Letter Media clearly demonstrated how the prequel movies didn't even seem to understand the meaning behind the original movies, especially when it came to the Force and Yoda. Even if I would grant you that they're not terrible movies (which I don't - they are in fact terrible movies), they are definitely not great Star Wars movies.

Love them if you want, but quit trying to rationalize how they fit in just fine with the first 3 movies, because they simply do not.
 
2013-01-25 06:40:46 AM
What was there that should have been there that I'm not seeing?

And what is it with J.J. Abrams and lensflares anyway?
 
2013-01-25 06:48:31 AM
I guess I could live with Abrams. For one thing Star Wars is a property where he would probably take more of the approach he did with Super 8 where he aped a better director, rather than what he did with Trek which was forcing his ascetic on an established property that he clearly wasn't fond of. The guy's not exactly an auteur.

The bigger worries in the that this signifies Michael Giacchino might take over from John Williams. Giacchino stands above his peers when it comes to composing but only because there isn't much competition. He's scored some lovely scenes - the first 10 minutes of UP, the scene in Star Trek where the Enterprise is introduced - but he's no John Williams. Not even close.

I can sit here and think of E.T., Jaws, Star Wars, Close Encounters, Raiders of the Lost Ark and instantly hum Williams' title score. I can't do the same thing with Giacchino's Star Trek, Ratatouille, or Cloverfield. More often than not the guy writes music that blends into the background rather than support and elevating the film's score.

If they replace Williams with Giacchino there needs to be a clear directive that he write very little original music, something like 90/10. Williams' Star Wars score is as much a part of Star Wars as lightsabers and droids.
 
2013-01-25 07:37:03 AM
He made Star Trek actually enjoyable, I think he'll do a good job
 
2013-01-25 07:51:40 AM
I was hoping for Joss Whedon, since he has worked with Disney before on the Avengers movie...
 
2013-01-25 07:52:40 AM

dajoro: This is not good news. Star Trek was just okay. Slick, pretty, ridiculous (Spock just happens to be on that ice planet?!?), and bland. Everything he does is just okay (although never saw Alias). I don't get the geek adoration. And the pretentious, smug, aren't-I-so-farking-clever secrecy/hints around his projects is just annoying. Remember the buildup to Cloverfield, and then we got Cloverfield? I was hoping for Brad Bird or Joss Whedon, someone with as much soul and heart as brain.


BWHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
2013-01-25 07:56:03 AM

Blathering Idjut: I guess I could live with Abrams. For one thing Star Wars is a property where he would probably take more of the approach he did with Super 8 where he aped a better director, rather than what he did with Trek which was forcing his ascetic on an established property that he clearly wasn't fond of. The guy's not exactly an auteur.

The bigger worries in the that this signifies Michael Giacchino might take over from John Williams. Giacchino stands above his peers when it comes to composing but only because there isn't much competition. He's scored some lovely scenes - the first 10 minutes of UP, the scene in Star Trek where the Enterprise is introduced - but he's no John Williams. Not even close.

I can sit here and think of E.T., Jaws, Star Wars, Close Encounters, Raiders of the Lost Ark and instantly hum Williams' title score. I can't do the same thing with Giacchino's Star Trek, Ratatouille, or Cloverfield. More often than not the guy writes music that blends into the background rather than support and elevating the film's score.

If they replace Williams with Giacchino there needs to be a clear directive that he write very little original music, something like 90/10. Williams' Star Wars score is as much a part of Star Wars as lightsabers and droids.


My fantasy composer is Bear McCreary. The dude really needs a promotion from tv shows. There's probably not a chance in hell though.
 
2013-01-25 08:03:05 AM

Tat'dGreaser: dajoro: This is not good news. Star Trek was just okay. Slick, pretty, ridiculous (Spock just happens to be on that ice planet?!?), and bland. Everything he does is just okay (although never saw Alias). I don't get the geek adoration. And the pretentious, smug, aren't-I-so-farking-clever secrecy/hints around his projects is just annoying. Remember the buildup to Cloverfield, and then we got Cloverfield? I was hoping for Brad Bird or Joss Whedon, someone with as much soul and heart as brain.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA


I didn't like Firefly. Does that help?
 
2013-01-25 08:05:09 AM

Great_Milenko: You never tumbled to the plot point that Nero dumped old Spock on that moon so he could watch? He only said "I won't kill him, I'll make him watch" when old Spock arrived in his spinny-top-thing ship.


If I wasn't paying attention to the plot, it's a plot hole
 
2013-01-25 08:06:29 AM

Tarl3k: I was hoping for Joss Whedon, since he has worked with Disney before on the Avengers movie...


Star Wars: Girls in Short Skirts
 
2013-01-25 08:12:53 AM

moothemagiccow: Tarl3k: I was hoping for Joss Whedon, since he has worked with Disney before on the Avengers movie...

Star Wars: Girls in Short Skirts


and bare feet.
 
2013-01-25 08:21:31 AM

dajoro: I didn't like Firefly. Does that help?


Hmmmm ok, yes
 
2013-01-25 08:24:44 AM
Plot twist: C3PO turns evil.

/bad robot
//you're welcome
///5l45h135!
 
2013-01-25 08:29:41 AM
I am NOT excited in the least about the possibility of a new Star Wars trilogy, just because the original 3 were all I ever needed/ever will need. That said, I think this is about the best possible news. Abrams is a solid director - all he needs here is a good script to work with, and since Lucas won't be writing this time there may be some potential. Either way, I am sure he will be able to do something with the new ones that the prequels could not do: entertain.
 
2013-01-25 08:29:44 AM
When I read this my heart sank.

All hope is lost.
 
2013-01-25 09:07:15 AM

karmachameleon: And that is where you are completely and utterly wrong. You can love those movies on their own merits if you want, but Red Letter Media clearly demonstrated how the prequel movies didn't even seem to understand the meaning behind the original movies, especially when it came to the Force and Yoda.


It took a lot of posts before you people started sucking Red Letter Media's cock. Y'all are slipping.

JJ Abrams already did a Star Wars movie anyway. It was called Star Trek.
 
2013-01-25 09:08:25 AM

AdolfOliverPanties: Haliburton Cummings: hmmm no quoted source, no Lucasfilm or Disney source and no official press release anywhere of any kind....

debunked in 10 9 8 7........

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni45651448/?ref_=hm_nw_tp_t1
http://www.deadline.com/2013/01/j-j-abrams-to-direct-new-star-wars-m ov ie-for-disney/#utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
http://twitter.com/Borys_Kit


"another individual with knowledge of the talks told TheWrap"

unless it comes out of Kathleen Kennedy, I'll wait.

so your links? they are fail. your rebut? fail.

100/100
 
2013-01-25 09:09:22 AM

fustanella: Plot twist: C3PO turns evil straight.

ftfy

 
2013-01-25 09:16:22 AM

CaptainFatass: Haliburton Cummings: hmmm no quoted source, no Lucasfilm or Disney source and no official press release anywhere of any kind....

debunked in 10 9 8 7........

That's referred to as a scoop, in news parlance, Generally, the official sources won't confirm anything on the record until they're given the nod from their corporate overlords.


thanks Romero.

so please, spare me your genius.
stop eating the kitty litter.
 
2013-01-25 09:20:12 AM

Darth_Lukecash: If that's what you chose to see. I saw an epic tale of innocent sloly corrupted by doing the right thing, a republic willingly turn to tyranny, and a group of porotectors brought down by their own Hurbis.


please. stop typing right now and read a book with more than four pages in it.
HURBIS SLOLY POROTECTORS... jesus
 
2013-01-25 09:20:35 AM
I don't get the lens flare thing either.
Are all you complainers watching the movie 1 single frame at a time through a View Master?
 
2013-01-25 09:23:34 AM

Grand PBUH: I don't get the lens flare thing either.
Are all you complainers watching the movie 1 single frame at a time through a View Master?


To be honest I never noticed the lens flare the first time round. On second viewing I couldn't stop noticing it. And it felt like it was there in every single scene even though it wasn't. I don't mind the occasional lens flare but when it shows up like 15-20 times it's overused.
 
2013-01-25 09:24:29 AM
KEVIN SMITH FOR THE FAIL

because
-he has directed massive epics with huge budgets before
-his films make money
-he's fat and who doesn't think fat, out of work directors are cute
-he saw a Star Wars movie...in a theatre
-because who doesn't equate Kevin Smith with anything but success.

/fat
//enough of this thread already
 
2013-01-25 09:25:46 AM
Star Trek 2009 was awesome, he'll do just fine with Star Wars.

JUST AS LONG AS: minimize the use of CG. Make everything looks used and real like in the original. CG is only good to enhance the film, not be based in it. Without this, this movie will suck giant cow ass. Mark my words. Make everything look real, and it'll be amazing.

Just look at the movie Moon. Good models and good camera work made it look about 50 times the budget of the biggest budget film.
 
2013-01-25 09:28:47 AM
Well, at least the Star Wars movie franchise is consistently moving in the same direction, even if it is downhill.
 
2013-01-25 09:41:55 AM

scottydoesntknow: Abrams did great with the 2009 Star Trek (suck it trekkies), and he'll do fine with this.


Puh-leaze. While his cinematography might be flashy (overly-lens-flare-flashy in fact,) his actual delivery of storyline falls far short of even the most halting, inept fan-fic. At least their regard for the canon would have been of primary importance to them. For him, it is merely a "starting point", to be cast aside at will. Face it- STINO (Star Trek In Name Only) is, at best, just a thin fabric of an action movie, carelessly draped over eight letters associated with one of the top five science fiction universes of all time.

Anybody who has actually read The Inheritance Cycle books and watched the movie Eragon knows exactly what I mean.
 
2013-01-25 09:43:10 AM

havocmike: Oh, I get it, his movie had a couple lens flares in it.

Frickin' comediotic geniuses, all of ya.


I know, right? Way to beat a joke to a bloody, pulpy death, guys.

Anyway, J.J. Abrams doesn't have a PRAYER. Don't get me wrong; with him in charge, I think Star Wars actually has a chance at a movie with competent storytelling and much less dependency on CGI for ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING.

But if anyone thinks that Star Trek fans are the worst fans to deal with when it comes to who handles their franchise, they've got a revelation coming. Star Wars fans are much worse. For all they bellyaching and biatching and whining they do about how the prequels ruined Star Wars, they'll be even more critical of anyone who dares to invade on their sacred territory. Expect an incredible amount of butthurt between now and when this movie premieres.
 
2013-01-25 09:54:32 AM
If you can watch the Kobayashi Maru scene and still think Abrams gets Trek or the characters...yeesh.
 
2013-01-25 09:55:57 AM

AgtSmithReloaded: Expect an incredible amount of butthurt between now and when this movie premieres.


Ha. Wait until after it premiers. They'll pick it apart so mercilessly, it'll look worse than C3P0 on the conveyor belt scene in the belly of the Jawa sand-crawler. I wouldn't give it a "Bantha-spit on the sands of Tattooine"- chance of surviving their onslaught. And if his treatment of Star Trek canon is any indication, any second effort is sure to bomb badly.
 
2013-01-25 10:02:36 AM

Tat'dGreaser: dajoro: This is not good news. Star Trek was just okay. Slick, pretty, ridiculous (Spock just happens to be on that ice planet?!?), and bland. Everything he does is just okay (although never saw Alias). I don't get the geek adoration. And the pretentious, smug, aren't-I-so-farking-clever secrecy/hints around his projects is just annoying. Remember the buildup to Cloverfield, and then we got Cloverfield? I was hoping for Brad Bird or Joss Whedon, someone with as much soul and heart as brain.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA


Seriously, Whedon is a straight up BAD director. I know geeks love him cause he wrote some comics and had a funny podcast and, hell, may be even a good writer. But he is a shiatty director. There was NOTHING memorable about the Avengers. And of all the Whedon films and TV I've seen, he never seems to get any good performances out of his actors (unless its like Robert Downey Jr. reprising a role he already honed elsewhere.).

JJ Abrams is a totally bland director too, but he at least gets good performances out of his actors and is good at aping talented directors.
 
2013-01-25 10:05:32 AM

Blathering Idjut:
If they replace Williams with Giacchino there needs to be a clear directive that he write very little original music, something like 90/10. Williams' Star Wars score is as much a part of Star Wars as lightsabers and droids.


This. One could convincingly argue that the success of Star Wars was due in no small part to the brilliant score by John Williams.
 
2013-01-25 10:10:33 AM

Champion of the Sun: If you can watch the Kobayashi Maru scene and still think Abrams gets Trek or the characters...yeesh.


Hair piece, big ears, hot black chick, hot green chick, spaceship, phasers, explosions, live long and prosper. Not that complicated.

Star Trek ain't as deep as lots of people like to pretend.
 
2013-01-25 10:16:09 AM

stoli n coke: Star Trek ain't as deep as lots of people like to pretend.


It's true that a lot of the depth of the original Star Trek is hamfisted, but they dedicate whole movies to philosophical concepts of life and death, and the meaning of life. Assholes in space is about a micron deep.
 
2013-01-25 10:44:55 AM

Haliburton Cummings: KEVIN SMITH FOR THE FAIL

because
-he has directed massive epics with huge budgets before
-his films make money
-he's fat and who doesn't think fat, out of work directors are cute
-he saw a Star Wars movie...in a theatre
-because who doesn't equate Kevin Smith with anything but success.

/fat
//enough of this thread already



- He made a movie about Bruce Willis as a cop fail. I'll repeat that. He made a movie about Bruce Willis as a cop fail. Then blamed it on Bruce Willis.

/actually likes Kevin Smith's Jersey Trilogy and his pod casts a lot but not everyone is suited for everything

As for the lens flair thing, it has been beaten to death, true but there were shots where you couldn't see the damn set. The Apple Store bridge is a beautiful design but you couldn't make it out through much of the film. So yeah, people need to shut up about the lens flair thing unless it returns in ST2 because it's all been said but it's a legitimate criticism. That and the immense plot holes and ridiculous coincidences in the story.
 
2013-01-25 11:16:47 AM

Champion of the Sun: stoli n coke: Star Trek ain't as deep as lots of people like to pretend.

It's true that a lot of the depth of the original Star Trek is hamfisted, but they dedicate whole movies to philosophical concepts of life and death, and the meaning of life. Assholes in space is about a micron deep.


When Star Trek tries to get deep its as painful as the freshman stoner at the party trying to recite ideas he half-overheard in philosophy 101. Totally agree that the "deep"ness of star trek is incredibly overrated by trekkies.
 
2013-01-25 11:18:29 AM

NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.


YOU are why nerds get a bad wrap.
It's a farking movie and unless JJ came into your house and raped you, you don't have to watch anything he does.
Go flush your head in the toilet and then slap your parents, telling them they did a bad job raising you.
 
2013-01-25 11:22:48 AM

Mugato: That and the immense plot holes and ridiculous coincidences in the story.


lol

How many "coincidences" are there in the story, except for the fact that it "coincidentally" happens to be titled Star Trek and contain characters with the same names as the franchise?

As for the "depth" of the Original being "ham-fisted", that's possible, but Star Trek was the First series of *any kind* that dared to show an interracial kiss on screen. And this, after they nearly cut Spock from the cast "because southerners weren't ready to accept the equality or even superiority of a non-earthling."
 
2013-01-25 11:25:28 AM

Bill Frist: When Star Trek tries to get deep its as painful as the freshman stoner at the party trying to recite ideas he half-overheard in philosophy 101. Totally agree that the "deep"ness of star trek is incredibly overrated by trekkies.


I think the ending of TMP, the entirety of Wrath of Khan, and the realization by Kirk that he didn't even think to take Gorkon at his word in Undiscovered Country are all pretty good. I guess the first aired interracial kiss and commentary on race relations isn't good enough for you? Yeah, 90% of it is kinda hammy, but the 10% that isn't is pretty well done. And at least the 90% that failed was at least an attempt. Bringing me to my first point, watching the Kobyashi Maru scene, and thinking that Abrams understood Trek or its characters...yeesh
 
2013-01-25 11:39:33 AM

HAMMERTOE: How many "coincidences" are there in the story, except for the fact that it "coincidentally" happens to be titled Star Trek and contain characters with the same names as the franchise?


I'm not going to get into a whole treatise here but off the top of my head, Spock 2.0 throws Kirk off the ship (apparently they don't have brigs in this alternate universe) onto Hoth, where in the entire planet he just happens to run into Spock 1.0, where in the entire planet, they jog for a half hour or so and run into Scotty. The plot holes are too lengthy to get into.
 
2013-01-25 11:40:32 AM

Champion of the Sun: watching the Kobyashi Maru scene, and thinking that Abrams understood Trek or its characters...yeesh


Not trying to be an asshole, but at this point it seems like the options are new Trek movies with comfortable big-Hollywood directors doing some "re-imagining" or just not having any new movies. IIRC Nemesis and the one before didn't do so hot at the box office, and whatever bigwigs at the studio weren't willing to accept a script from any Trekkie script writers who might've "understood" it better, because they don't feel that would get a new audience in the seats.

Not saying you should be happy about it by any means (or that new ST is superior) but the people who DO understand Trek and it's characters apparently couldn't swing that enough to get a deal. I am of the mind with ST and SW that I'd rather see new/different products that aren't quite what I used to love, than for the franchise to be ended and closed off. I know many (most?) in this thread would disagree.
 
2013-01-25 11:46:51 AM

HAMMERTOE: As for the "depth" of the Original being "ham-fisted", that's possible, but Star Trek was the First series of *any kind* that dared to show an interracial kiss on screen. And this, after they nearly cut Spock from the cast "because southerners weren't ready to accept the equality or even superiority of a non-earthling."


The early TNG episodes were just as, if not more ham-fisted with their "messages" as TOS. The after school special with Tasha lecturing Wesley about drug abuse comes to mind. At least TOS had the excuse that there was very little if anything in sci-fi TV with any social or political messages at all at the time. Twilight Zone comes to mind I suppose but there was some goofy shiat in that too.
 
2013-01-25 11:47:13 AM

Electromax: Not trying to be an asshole, but at this point it seems like the options are new Trek movies with comfortable big-Hollywood directors doing some "re-imagining" or just not having any new movies.


I'm cool with that to a point. Completely changing the basis of the original material in a reboot is kinda pointless. Take out the philosophical stuff and the character studies, might as well take out space all together. Which they're apparently doing now.

If you want to do transformers without the robots, call it something else. That's why people call it generic space adventure movie.

/Kirk had a reason to be different from the original timeline. Did they ever explain Spock's totally different personality? I can't remember, not saying it didn't happen.
 
2013-01-25 11:54:10 AM

Champion of the Sun: watching the Kobyashi Maru scene, and thinking that Abrams understood Trek or its characters...yeesh


While it's true that JJ didn't "get" what the Kobyashi Maru test was about or we could say he "changed" what it was about in his "new timeline", I didn't really dig the Kobyashi Maru test in Wrath of Khan either. Kirk's pussy son was right. Kirk cheated. He wouldn't have gotten a "commendation for original thinking", he would have been put in a court martial. That part JJ did better, IMO. Then he made up for that burst of logic by giving a cadet command of the Federation flagship (it actually might not have been the flagship until TNG but it was still a nice ride).
 
2013-01-25 11:57:02 AM

Champion of the Sun: Electromax: Not trying to be an asshole, but at this point it seems like the options are new Trek movies with comfortable big-Hollywood directors doing some "re-imagining" or just not having any new movies.

I'm cool with that to a point. Completely changing the basis of the original material in a reboot is kinda pointless. Take out the philosophical stuff and the character studies, might as well take out space all together. Which they're apparently doing now.

If you want to do transformers without the robots, call it something else. That's why people call it generic space adventure movie.


That is completely how I feel. I have no problem with making new movies on old plots/characters. But please, if you re-imagine, then don't pretend it is related to the original stuff. It drives me crazy, which is why I often hate movies based on books that go out of their way to not follow the book. However, movies that rename characters and do not name themselves after the books but may look like a loose idea of a plot of some sort of book, I may actually enjoy.
 
2013-01-25 12:00:21 PM

Mugato: Champion of the Sun: watching the Kobyashi Maru scene, and thinking that Abrams understood Trek or its characters...yeesh

While it's true that JJ didn't "get" what the Kobyashi Maru test was about or we could say he "changed" what it was about in his "new timeline", I didn't really dig the Kobyashi Maru test in Wrath of Khan either. Kirk's pussy son was right. Kirk cheated. He wouldn't have gotten a "commendation for original thinking", he would have been put in a court martial. That part JJ did better, IMO. Then he made up for that burst of logic by giving a cadet command of the Federation flagship (it actually might not have been the flagship until TNG but it was still a nice ride).


You're probably right, but if the original timeline federation was run by people with the mentality of Pike, he might've been given the commendation anyways. The purpose of the test is to see what happens when you're put in a life and death situation. Doing anything possible, even cheating, might be seen as a reasonable response to the test. Hell, Kirk routinely gets awarded for breaking the prime directive and direct orders anyways. So while it's inconsistent with our view of military order, it fits pretty well into the established world in which these characters reside. And I doubt original timeline Kirk would've been so damn smarmy about it.
 
2013-01-25 12:06:28 PM

Champion of the Sun: I'm cool with that to a point. Completely changing the basis of the original material in a reboot is kinda pointless. Take out the philosophical stuff and the character studies, might as well take out space all together. Which they're apparently doing now.

If you want to do transformers without the robots, call it something else. That's why people call it generic space adventure movie.


You don't have to be a studio suit to answer that one, name recognition. Old Trekkies are going to see anything with Trek in the title anyway so the real target audience are kids and teens, most of which were either infants or not born yet when TNG and DS9 went off the air (not to mention the fact that every TNG movie that didn't have the Borg in them were duds).

They weren't alive in the TOS show and movie years either but Kirk and Spock are icons. As is the Enterprise. Put the icons in, make it look as much like Star Wars as you can (sorry nerds all of the SW films were hits, yes even those) and you have asses in seats in a Trek film for the first time in 15 years
 
2013-01-25 12:11:34 PM
I don't hate JJ Abrams... probably because I have yet to see Lost... But I liked the Star Trek movie (granted, I was never a huge Trek fan), Cloverfield and Super 8, so I really don't think is that a bad choice...

Would rather have Guillermo del Toro or Brad Bird? Sure... but I don't think that Abrams is the worst choice possible.

Now, I will admit, my feelings towards the Star Wars prequels are more towards the disappointment than towards the hatred (except for Jar Jar Binks).

I thought that overall, the prequels had the POTENTIAL to be as good as the originals. It certainly had a great cast (minus Anakin), they looked good visually, the character designs where awesome, the music was superb and even had some really great characters (some hamminess aside, Palpatine was a great villain, in my opinion, and I really liked Count Dooku and Mace Windu), and I think that there are some really enjoyable moments on those movies.

Hell, Tartakovsky's take on the Clone Wars was amazing in my opinion, and he took what already was established by the movies, so I really think that some rewritings and someone else as director could have made the prequels really great.

Guess that's what infuriates me the most... the wasted potential.
 
2013-01-25 12:34:26 PM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: What was there that should have been there that I'm not seeing?

And what is it with J.J. Abrams and lensflares anyway?


In Star Trek I gave it a pass because "the future is all sleek and cool and shiny and stuff" But in Super 8, there's numerous moments where I was thinking "What is this shiat doing mucking up the screen? The camera isn't even aimed at any bright lights." I know that film was a homage to '80s style movies which used a lot of lens flare (the first Die Hard actually has a bunch), but don't just slap it on there when it doesn't make sense.
 
2013-01-25 12:54:41 PM
If Kevin Smith isn't directing, maybe he can get a cameo as a Hutt, no CGI needed!
 
2013-01-25 12:57:23 PM
Who gives a fark? Just get them made already. We need new movies to get people to forget the prequels. In another 10 years they will be in the same category of the Christmas special.
 
2013-01-25 01:07:46 PM

DarkPascual: I don't hate JJ Abrams... probably because I have yet to see Lost... But I liked the Star Trek movie (granted, I was never a huge Trek fan), Cloverfield and Super 8, so I really don't think is that a bad choice...


I just think his Star Trek is already too much like Star Wars. Space battles 10x bigger than any in Trek (except maybe some DS9 episodes but still bigger than even them), monsters on ice planets, comic relief aliens, Scotty Binks, lots more gun battles, Sulu even had a retractable sword and did impossible Jedi back flips. Kirk 2.0 was more Han Solo than Kirk. Uhura's sort of a stuck up biatch like Leia, not just one but two planets getting blown the fark up, dead mother....etc. Admittedly calling the villain similar to Vader just because he wanted revenge is stretching it. He was more like Khan and the guy from Trek: Nemesis.

I read that JJ's a bigger SW fan than ST so I don't know if all of that was his doing or if some suit said, "We haven't had anything successful since Voyager limped its way to its required 7 seasons a decade ago. We haven't had a decent Trek movie since 1996. Just make it as much like Star Wars  as you can". So if he does both franchises he might as well cross them over like comic books.
 
2013-01-25 01:10:17 PM

Mugato: Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.

Yeah, there's no way those dragon things could have circled around Mount Doom and spotted two assholes scrambling around heading toward that volcano. Look, I don't give a shiat, I just find people who find LOTR somehow more intellectual than Star Wars a bit obnoxious.


Riding forth on Eagles may have worked, but then you would have to get the Eagles to agree to what was essentially a suicide mission. Keep in mind the Eagles were not allied with any one in particular, they only tolerated Gandalf because he had shown kindness to their king.

The Nazgul and their Fell Beasts were well aware that Frodo and Sam were in Mordor. They had been spotted, and Frodo was evenly briefly captured at Cirith Ungol. The problem was Hobbits are naturally stealthy, and had magical elven cloaks to help them blend into any surrounding. On top of all of that, when they approached their ultimate goal of Mt. Doom, the Nazgul were distracted by the battle at the Black Gate. Sauron began to falsley believe that Aragorn had the ring and was leading an army to Mordor to either destroy the ring or to become the new dark lord. This allowed Frodo and Sam to gain access to Mt. Doom, harried only by Gollum. It's all in the books, which are better than the movies, although I do like the movies.
 
2013-01-25 01:12:11 PM

scotchcrotch: Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: Darth_Lukecash: Mugato: Darth_Lukecash: Are we talking about the movie added or what was in the plot originally? Since Tolkien was trying to copy the epic poems stories, he also copied the elements of them, including dues ex mahina.

I never read the books, I'm talking about the movies. "Hey, we're in a big battle and we're all going to die. Wait, here comes some elves around the hill to save the day! Here's another battle and we're all going to die but wait, there's some ghost army that  Aragorn forgot he had up his ass. The Hobbits are dying in the volcano but wait, here are some eagles that could have done something all along to save them....and so on.

The eleves showing up to save their ass wasn't part of the book. That was added by Jackson.

The Ghost army was in the book, but if I recall correctly, Aragorn talked about it long before that event happened.

The Eagles were part of the book, but because Gandalf had summoned them.  And they were used before in the Hobbit and LOTR.

I believe the standard answer to the oft-asked question: "why didn't Gandalf & Friends just fly the ring to Mount Doom right off the bat?" is because the Nazgul would have eaten them alive. Frodo and Sam had to go in all stealthy-like; they couldn't parade in on the backs of giant eagles.

Yes, I've spent time- precious hours of my life that I can never get back again- researching this difficulty.

GO OUTSIDE


Outside is overrated. Humans have spent thousands of years perfecting "Inside."
 
2013-01-25 01:20:42 PM
May the lens flare be with you.
 
2013-01-25 01:26:26 PM

Mugato: karmachameleon: And that is where you are completely and utterly wrong. You can love those movies on their own merits if you want, but Red Letter Media clearly demonstrated how the prequel movies didn't even seem to understand the meaning behind the original movies, especially when it came to the Force and Yoda.

It took a lot of posts before you people started sucking Red Letter Media's cock. Y'all are slipping.

JJ Abrams already did a Star Wars movie anyway. It was called Star Trek.


I've seen you post on Fark for a long time now.

Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.
 
2013-01-25 01:30:51 PM

Mugato: I read that JJ's a bigger SW fan than ST so I don't know if all of that was his doing or if some suit said, "We haven't had anything successful since Voyager limped its way to its required 7 seasons a decade ago. We haven't had a decent Trek movie since 1996. Just make it as much like Star Wars  as you can". So if he does both franchises he might as well cross them over like comic books.


If anyone ever actually did a cross-over SW/ST movie, the nerd rage from both sides would be epic. I would love to read those blogs.
 
2013-01-25 01:32:16 PM

Maestro1701: Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.


Maybe you should save your stomach lining and just put me on ignore.
 
2013-01-25 01:40:09 PM

Mugato: Maestro1701: Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.

Maybe you should save your stomach lining and just put me on ignore.


Aaaaaaaaand still waiting.

As for putting you on Ignore, not a chance. You are a perfect example of the entertainment potential of raw, weapons grade stupidity.
 
2013-01-25 01:45:15 PM

Maestro1701: Mugato: Maestro1701: Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.

Maybe you should save your stomach lining and just put me on ignore.

Aaaaaaaaand still waiting.

As for putting you on Ignore, not a chance. You are a perfect example of the entertainment potential of raw, weapons grade stupidity.


Who the hell are you and why are you writing to me?
 
2013-01-25 01:51:44 PM

Mugato: Maestro1701: Mugato: Maestro1701: Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.

Maybe you should save your stomach lining and just put me on ignore.

Aaaaaaaaand still waiting.

As for putting you on Ignore, not a chance. You are a perfect example of the entertainment potential of raw, weapons grade stupidity.

Who the hell are you and why are you writing to me?


Man... internet arguing is both hilarious and sad.

I posted early, people were craking jokes about lens flare, I made a post about how I think it'll be good, etc. No big deal.

And now we've got people trading pretty mean insults.

I would say 'unbelievable', but sadly it's not only believable, it's routine.
 
2013-01-25 01:56:07 PM

DamnYankees: That's our headline? Come on now.


I tried to submit it with a headline about the director of Star Trek picking up Star Wars and a rip appearing in the space time continuum, but I was too late...
 
2013-01-25 01:56:26 PM
I would like to formally request that Disney get Lawrence Kasdan to write Star Wars Episode 7. That dude knows how to write a screenplay.
 
2013-01-25 01:58:12 PM

poonesfarm: Bathia_Mapes: While I know he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the gig, I dearly would have loved seeing Kevin Smith as the director.

Kevin Smith? He's funny and everything, but I have to think even he, with his self admitted sub-middling skills as a filmmaker, would laugh at that notion.


He couldn't fark it up any worse than Lucas has already, and he has a serious, deep passion for the original trilogy. Smith would be my first pick for someone who could respect the source material. Besides, it's all CG now anyway, what's left to direct in a Star Wars movie anyway?
 
2013-01-25 02:09:39 PM

vwarb: MayoSlather: I like JJ, but I don't like the fact he is now at the helm of both of the biggest sci fi space franchises

I couldn't agree with this more. Wars and Trek are perhaps best known for the vastly different ways that they approach the genre, and have become short hand for breaking works into ones that deal more with the human existential element and ones that focus on the aesthetics and sweeping events.

What do you think of when you hear Star Wars? Lightsabers, cantinas, exploding space stations.
What do you think of when you hear Star Trek? Patrick Stewart having a soliloquy about the nature of honor, or Spock's alien logic clashing with Kirk's fiery humanity.

Both series are very good, but they are just about as far apart stylistically as sci-fi can be. Hiring the same guy to direct both is a bit worrying.


It would be if all movie weren't made by grinding demographics and plot points through a sausage grinder to make a boloney like product.
 
2013-01-25 02:12:59 PM

Mugato: Maestro1701: Mugato: Maestro1701: Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.

Maybe you should save your stomach lining and just put me on ignore.

Aaaaaaaaand still waiting.

As for putting you on Ignore, not a chance. You are a perfect example of the entertainment potential of raw, weapons grade stupidity.

Who the hell are you and why are you writing to me?


You do realize that the purpose of a discussion board is to express thoughts and feelings on a particular topic, while others RESPOND? Others are doing it all around you as we speak. Why does this need to be explained to you?
 
2013-01-25 02:14:05 PM

Maestro1701: As for putting you on Ignore, not a chance. You are a perfect example of the entertainment potential of raw, weapons grade stupidity.


Troll, troll, troll your boat
gently down the thread...
 
2013-01-25 02:18:07 PM

Mikey1969: Besides, it's all CG now anyway, what's left to direct in a Star Wars movie anyway?


You still have to line up the shots, plan out the action, set the overall tone of the film and direct the actors just like a fully live action film. If Smith had a second unit director who did everything but direct the actors then maybe. I don't know if he's pissed off anyone at Disney yet though. He's pissed off everyone else.
 
2013-01-25 02:25:59 PM
First National Bastard suicide level: Orange.
 
2013-01-25 02:47:41 PM

Maestro1701: Mugato: karmachameleon: And that is where you are completely and utterly wrong. You can love those movies on their own merits if you want, but Red Letter Media clearly demonstrated how the prequel movies didn't even seem to understand the meaning behind the original movies, especially when it came to the Force and Yoda.

It took a lot of posts before you people started sucking Red Letter Media's cock. Y'all are slipping.

JJ Abrams already did a Star Wars movie anyway. It was called Star Trek.

I've seen you post on Fark for a long time now.

Still waiting for you to say something intelligent.


Mugato has said one or two things that were bright.

/one or two
//white knights for the win!
 
2013-01-25 02:52:55 PM
wow.. a Star Nerd thread about JJ Lamebramz maybe directing another colossal failure in the franchise that digresses to Gandalf, Fatty Smithbuckle and Michael Giacchino...

classic nerdfark

I'm still waiting for the official retraction from the Mr. Lensflare people.
 
2013-01-25 03:37:54 PM

Haliburton Cummings: wow.. a Star Nerd thread about JJ Lamebramz maybe directing another colossal failure in the franchise that digresses to Gandalf, Fatty Smithbuckle and Michael Giacchino...

classic nerdfark

I'm still waiting for the official retraction from the Mr. Lensflare people.


Wow. Sorry about your tiny penis, Haliburton Cummings.
 
2013-01-25 03:41:46 PM

sure haven't:
Man... internet arguing is both hilarious and sad.

I posted early, people were craking jokes about lens flare, I made a post about how I think it'll be good, etc. No big deal.

And now we've got people trading pretty mean insults.

I would say 'unbelievable', but sadly it's not only believable, it's routine.


winning an argument on the internet is like winning gold in the Special Olympics. No matter the outcome, you are still retarded.


Back to the thread.

I gotta say that the choice of Abrams doesn't really suprise me.. Dude is a sci-fi summer action movie director, and by many, considered to be the current master of his chosen medium.

my personal theory about the lens flare debacle? it's a cliche' and he does it on purpose now just to rile people up.

He put the effect in a couple of flicks to achieve some cinematic effect, people complained about it and said fark y'all! we're gonna flare up this hizzy!

kinda like how all the sound and Foley guys are always sticking the Wilhelm scream in everything. He's just playing with expectations at that point, and it's become his signature.

Like, more often than not, in a Kubrick film... you'll see a following shot of people walking down a hallway.


there, are you people happy now? you made me white knight for JJ Abrams.
I hope you are all quite satisfied with yourselves

/the Wilhem scream is the alert tone on my cell phone, and teacher says, every time a I get a txt, a storm trooper dies..
 
2013-01-25 03:43:13 PM

AgtSmithReloaded: havocmike: Oh, I get it, his movie had a couple lens flares in it.

Frickin' comediotic geniuses, all of ya.

I know, right? Way to beat a joke to a bloody, pulpy death, guys.

Anyway, J.J. Abrams doesn't have a PRAYER. Don't get me wrong; with him in charge, I think Star Wars actually has a chance at a movie with competent storytelling and much less dependency on CGI for ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING.

But if anyone thinks that Star Trek fans are the worst fans to deal with when it comes to who handles their franchise, they've got a revelation coming. Star Wars fans are much worse. For all they bellyaching and biatching and whining they do about how the prequels ruined Star Wars, they'll be even more critical of anyone who dares to invade on their sacred territory. Expect an incredible amount of butthurt between now and when this movie premieres.


To be fair, Star Trek fans have had to put up with more stinkers at the box office than Star Wars fans, it was like 15 years without a movie, then 3 sub par ones in a row. They didn't learn about the ups and downs of fandom.
 
2013-01-25 03:57:44 PM

Fano:

To be fair, Star Trek fans have had to put up with more stinkers at the box office than Star Wars fans, it was like 15 years without a movie, then 3 sub par ones in a row. They didn't learn about the ups and downs of fandom.


for star trek, I enjoy TOS. and the first three movies.. all the rest was pretty much crap. While I enjoyed the 2009 reboot for what it was, I had to let out a giant GROOOOOOOAAAAAAAAN when they dragged out Nimoy as time traveling Spock again to fix shiat.

Really.. Dude is old.. what the hell are they going to do when Nimoy gets around to kicking the bucket?
 
2013-01-25 04:21:17 PM

HAMMERTOE: scottydoesntknow: Abrams did great with the 2009 Star Trek (suck it trekkies), and he'll do fine with this.

Puh-leaze. While his cinematography might be flashy (overly-lens-flare-flashy in fact,) his actual delivery of storyline falls far short of even the most halting, inept fan-fic. At least their regard for the canon would have been of primary importance to them. For him, it is merely a "starting point", to be cast aside at will. Face it- STINO (Star Trek In Name Only) is, at best, just a thin fabric of an action movie, carelessly draped over eight letters associated with one of the top five science fiction universes of all time.

Anybody who has actually read The Inheritance Cycle books and watched the movie Eragon knows exactly what I mean.


Did you ever watch the original Star Trek series? It's not as good as we like to remember. For every "City on the Edge of Forever" and "Trouble with Tribbles" there's a "Spock's Brain" and the one with the space hippies. I thought the movie captured the series perfectly, and I enjoyed it. I've seen STINO, and those movies were called 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis'

I love Star Trek, but let's not pretend it's something that it's not. It was a space western that sometimes explored the deeper issues facing humanity while engaging in barroom brawls. And space hippies. It was revolutionary and changed the world, but there were tons of episodes with gangsters and space Nazis because they simply raided the surplus costumes at the studio.

Star Trek is beloved for the characters, for the family that formed on the bridge of the Enterprise. We loved Kirk's swagger, Spock's logic, Scotty trying to hold it together, and McCoy griping that he's a doctor and not everything else. That's what we love, and the movie nailed it. I'm sorry you couldn't get more out of the new Star Trek than I could, but make no mistake, for better or worse, that movie WAS Star Trek.

Which is why so many Trekkies hated it. The image they have in their heads about what Star Trek is doesn't match the reality. Every flaw in this movie was present in the television show and some of the movies. The truth hurts. Star Trek isn't perfect, and we never loved it because it was perfect. Yes, there were times it transcended its medium and became something greater, but the rest of the time it was pretty much what you didn't like about the new movie.
 
2013-01-25 04:45:45 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: First National Bastard suicide level: Orange.


Actually, I never was much of a Star Wars fan. Didn't see the "original" trilogy for the first time until after the Special Editions were out.

Saw the first two prequels in theaters, didn't go back for #3.

And while I think Abrams is going to completely ruin Star Wars, I'm glad he's directing, because the Star Wars fans are 10 times crazier than real Star Trek fans and are going to rip his hack shiat work to shreds and hopefully start the Abrams backlash so Mr. Lens Flare will no longer be smearing his feces onto screens everywhere.

/Just keep America and its shiat directors and producers away from Doctor Who and I'm happy. Star Trek has been dead since 2005 and Star Wars hasn't had a new film since 1983.
 
2013-01-25 04:53:14 PM

soporific: Did you ever watch the original Star Trek series? It's not as good as we like to remember. For every "City on the Edge of Forever" and "Trouble with Tribbles" there's a "Spock's Brain" and the one with the space hippies. I thought the movie captured the series perfectly, and I enjoyed it. I've seen STINO, and those movies were called 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis'


Interesting that your examples of bad Trek episodes are both from the 3rd season which NBC was forced into by fans but not before cutting the budget and sticking the show in a death slot. Even then there were more good eps than the clunkers you mentioned.
 
2013-01-25 04:57:37 PM
Just don't let Robert Orci write it.
 
2013-01-25 06:33:02 PM

soporific: Star Trek is beloved for the characters, for the family that formed on the bridge of the Enterprise. We loved Kirk's swagger, Spock's logic, Scotty trying to hold it together, and McCoy griping that he's a doctor and not everything else. That's what we love, and the movie nailed it. I'm sorry you couldn't get more out of the new Star Trek than I could, but make no mistake, for better or worse, that movie WAS Star Trek.


I get what you're saying, but I didn't feel that way at all. The original Kirk was someone I wanted to be, while the original Spock and McCoy were people I'd like to be friends with. The new characters reminded me of people I'd prefer to avoid. Basically Abrams turned "nerds in space" into "frat boys in space", and while I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with that, I can see why so many fans of the original characters are disappointed. I think people can forgive a lot when the characters are compelling, but to me (and to a lot of other people, apparently) the characters in Star Trek '09 just weren't all that likeable.
 
2013-01-25 06:49:16 PM

because I care: I get what you're saying, but I didn't feel that way at all. The original Kirk was someone I wanted to be, while the original Spock and McCoy were people I'd like to be friends with. The new characters reminded me of people I'd prefer to avoid. Basically Abrams turned "nerds in space" into "frat boys in space"


Yeah, Kirk was the frat boy, Spock was a psychopath, Scotty was the Jar Jar of the crew, Uhura was a stuck up biatch, Chekov was even more of a cartoon than Scotty, Sulu was ok I guess but they turned him into a Jedi for some reason. The only real likeable character was Bones and that's because he just wasn't into the whole space thing and just wasn't invested in it so we related.
 
2013-01-25 07:18:04 PM

Fano: AgtSmithReloaded: havocmike: Oh, I get it, his movie had a couple lens flares in it.

Frickin' comediotic geniuses, all of ya.

I know, right? Way to beat a joke to a bloody, pulpy death, guys.

Anyway, J.J. Abrams doesn't have a PRAYER. Don't get me wrong; with him in charge, I think Star Wars actually has a chance at a movie with competent storytelling and much less dependency on CGI for ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING.

But if anyone thinks that Star Trek fans are the worst fans to deal with when it comes to who handles their franchise, they've got a revelation coming. Star Wars fans are much worse. For all they bellyaching and biatching and whining they do about how the prequels ruined Star Wars, they'll be even more critical of anyone who dares to invade on their sacred territory. Expect an incredible amount of butthurt between now and when this movie premieres.

To be fair, Star Trek fans have had to put up with more stinkers at the box office than Star Wars fans, it was like 15 years without a movie, then 3 sub par ones in a row. They didn't learn about the ups and downs of fandom.


Mugato: because I care: I get what you're saying, but I didn't feel that way at all. The original Kirk was someone I wanted to be, while the original Spock and McCoy were people I'd like to be friends with. The new characters reminded me of people I'd prefer to avoid. Basically Abrams turned "nerds in space" into "frat boys in space"

Yeah, Kirk was the frat boy, Spock was a psychopath, Scotty was the Jar Jar of the crew, Uhura was a stuck up biatch, Chekov was even more of a cartoon than Scotty, Sulu was ok I guess but they turned him into a Jedi for some reason. The only real likeable character was Bones and that's because he just wasn't into the whole space thing and just wasn't invested in it so we related.


So, um, what Star Trek movie did YOU see in 2009? Because it sure wasn't the one directed by J.J. Abrams. I'm glad I didn't see the one you saw; it really does sound like it sucked. Sorry for your misfortune, friend.
 
2013-01-25 07:19:06 PM

AgtSmithReloaded: So, um, what Star Trek movie did YOU see in 2009? Because it sure wasn't the one directed by J.J. Abrams. I'm glad I didn't see the one you saw; it really does sound like it sucked. Sorry for your misfortune, friend.


What was incorrect?
 
2013-01-25 07:20:40 PM

Mugato: because I care: I get what you're saying, but I didn't feel that way at all. The original Kirk was someone I wanted to be, while the original Spock and McCoy were people I'd like to be friends with. The new characters reminded me of people I'd prefer to avoid. Basically Abrams turned "nerds in space" into "frat boys in space"

Yeah, Kirk was the frat boy, Spock was a psychopath, Scotty was the Jar Jar of the crew, Uhura was a stuck up biatch, Chekov was even more of a cartoon than Scotty, Sulu was ok I guess but they turned him into a Jedi for some reason. The only real likeable character was Bones and that's because he just wasn't into the whole space thing and just wasn't invested in it so we related.


Yeah, Sulu engaging in swordplay was a bit of a stretch.

startrekquest.com
 
2013-01-25 07:23:41 PM

Mad_Radhu: Yeah, Sulu engaging in swordplay was a bit of a stretch.


You didn't notice the retractable sword and Jedi backflip?
 
2013-01-25 07:44:25 PM

Mugato: Mad_Radhu: Yeah, Sulu engaging in swordplay was a bit of a stretch.

You didn't notice the retractable sword and Jedi backflip?


I'll have to rewatch the scene, but I saw it more as them wanting to give Sulu a shining moment of badassery and going back to the fencing thing in TOS. I chalked the backflip up to putting some Errol Flynn type flourish to the fight, and the retractable sword was a high tech detail. It never screamed "Jedi" to me the way it did to you.
 
2013-01-25 07:50:25 PM

Mugato: karmachameleon: And that is where you are completely and utterly wrong. You can love those movies on their own merits if you want, but Red Letter Media clearly demonstrated how the prequel movies didn't even seem to understand the meaning behind the original movies, especially when it came to the Force and Yoda.

It took a lot of posts before you people started sucking Red Letter Media's cock. Y'all are slipping.


And your rebuttal of his excellent, insightful reviews is...?
 
2013-01-25 08:07:12 PM

NegativeChirality: I hate hate hate hate JJ Abrams.

Star Trek was a farking shiat movie. Yes, it had the characters right, but literally every major plot event occurred with the help of some kind of deus ex machina.


Sounds like how over half the Star Trek television episodes played out. Why are we getting mad because JJ stuck to how the franchise works?

/Kirk finds paradise planet
//Kirk discovers paradise is run by a supercomputer
///Kirk destroys supercomputer, lectures aliens about how to live and behave like humans
////lather, rinse, repeat next week
 
2013-01-25 08:13:34 PM

Mugato: AgtSmithReloaded: So, um, what Star Trek movie did YOU see in 2009? Because it sure wasn't the one directed by J.J. Abrams. I'm glad I didn't see the one you saw; it really does sound like it sucked. Sorry for your misfortune, friend.

What was incorrect?


All of it, basically.
 
2013-01-25 08:14:29 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: /Kirk finds paradise planet
//Kirk discovers paradise is run by a supercomputer
///Kirk destroys supercomputer, lectures aliens about how to live and behave like humans
////lather, rinse, repeat next week


That's not really what "deus ex machina" means.
 
2013-01-25 08:16:01 PM

karmachameleon: Mugato: karmachameleon: And that is where you are completely and utterly wrong. You can love those movies on their own merits if you want, but Red Letter Media clearly demonstrated how the prequel movies didn't even seem to understand the meaning behind the original movies, especially when it came to the Force and Yoda.

It took a lot of posts before you people started sucking Red Letter Media's cock. Y'all are slipping.

And your rebuttal of his excellent, insightful reviews is...?


"I hate it because it's not exactly like the original series. Star Trek can't have action because that turns it into Star Wars. Nothing different should ever be done because it hurts me inside."
 
2013-01-25 08:19:40 PM

Mugato: Keizer_Ghidorah: /Kirk finds paradise planet
//Kirk discovers paradise is run by a supercomputer
///Kirk destroys supercomputer, lectures aliens about how to live and behave like humans
////lather, rinse, repeat next week

That's not really what "deus ex machina" means.


Okay, so "machina ex deux". Still a hell of a lot of hokey stories in Trek's history that require a tolerance of nonsensoleum to withstand. Why single out Trek 2009?

And Trek 2009 is still better than Motion Picture, Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis.
 
2013-01-25 09:26:49 PM
media.aintitcool.com
 
2013-01-25 09:27:09 PM

Hugh2d2: Haliburton Cummings: wow.. a Star Nerd thread about JJ Lamebramz maybe directing another colossal failure in the franchise that digresses to Gandalf, Fatty Smithbuckle and Michael Giacchino...

classic nerdfark

I'm still waiting for the official retraction from the Mr. Lensflare people.

Wow. Sorry about your tiny penis, Haliburton Cummings.


i'd make a "your wife" joke but that would be pushing the bounds of reality.
you sure aren't very funny.

0/1000
 
2013-01-25 09:37:14 PM

Mugato: Yeah, Kirk was the frat boy, Spock was a psychopath, Scotty was the Jar Jar of the crew, Uhura was a stuck up biatch, Chekov was even more of a cartoon than Scotty, Sulu was ok I guess but they turned him into a Jedi for some reason. The only real likeable character was Bones and that's because he just wasn't into the whole space thing and just wasn't invested in it so we related.


Yep. That's pretty much how I felt too. Kirk and Spock could've been killed on Nero's ship and I would've been pretty indifferent. In fact, that might've been an improvement. McKoy could've taken over as captain and we'd have Star Trek: the Adventures of McKoy and the Enterprise.

At least that would've been something fun and original.
 
2013-01-25 09:44:15 PM
Heh heh, look at these nerds. Fighting over crap.

Best Star Trek movie was the one with the whales.
 
2013-01-25 09:57:51 PM

ELF Radio: Heh heh, look at these nerds. Fighting over crap.

Best Star Trek movie was the one with the whales.


They all gained weight over the years (except maybe Sulu and Bones) but everyone gets older.
 
2013-01-26 03:29:28 AM
ok nerds, dream come true

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni45742499/?ref_=hm_nw_tp_t1

i will say it right now:

it's gonna suck more than ROTJ but not as badly as the prequels...
 
2013-01-26 05:27:50 AM

WTF Indeed: So I assume the plot of the story is to create a wormhole so that they can go back in time and get Carrie Fischer when she was hot and not snorting lines of coke around the clock?


So, when she was 15?
 
2013-01-26 06:15:13 AM

Bill Frist: Seriously, Whedon is a straight up BAD director. I know geeks love him cause he wrote some comics and had a funny podcast and, hell, may be even a good writer. But he is a shiatty director. There was NOTHING memorable about the Avengers.


Troll much?
 
2013-01-26 08:48:40 AM

Alphax: WTF Indeed: So I assume the plot of the story is to create a wormhole so that they can go back in time and get Carrie Fischer when she was hot and not snorting lines of coke around the clock?

So, when she was 15?


Snorting coke around the clock did not preclude her from being hot. She may have peaked in the first film when she was 19 but her famous slave girl scenes were at the height of her cokery. And we all know what happened to her figure when she got off the stuff.

See also Kirsty Alley. Saavik was Tony farking Montana during Wrath of Khan. Which is odd because she couldn't have had a lot of money like Carrie did, being Hollywood royalty and all. But as Ian Malcom said, "Cokeheads, uh, find a way".
 
Displayed 242 of 242 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report