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  
•       •       •

5568 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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
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.
 
Displayed 50 of 242 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report