Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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
    More: Amusing, Episode VII, J.J. Abrams, Star Wars, Walt Disney Pictures, lens flares, Michael Arndt, Ben Affleck, moviegoers  
•       •       •

5582 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 24 Jan 2013 at 7:06 PM (3 years 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 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.

I live with my mom00
 
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 42 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 »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report