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.

(The Hollywood Reporter)   JJ Abrams says he will "honor, but not revere" the past Star Wars films. Translation: lots of lensflares, the dropping of canon he finds to be too complicated, and terrible casting choices. But hey, it starts production next year   (hollywoodreporter.com) divider line 269
    More: Fail, J.J. Abrams, Star Wars, Episode VII, Michael Arndt, experimental film, Bad Robot, 2013 and beyond in film, George Lucas  
•       •       •

2059 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 09 Jun 2013 at 1:16 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-09 01:55:36 PM

AppleOptionEsc: Mentat: The problem is that they have so far failed to elicit the same sense of wonder that the best Trek accomplishes. Whether you're talking about "The City on the Edge of Forever", "The Best of Both Worlds", "The Visitor" or "The Wrath of Khan", Trek at its best forces you out of your comfort zone and allows you to view humanity's role in the wider universe.

1) Why are you comparing a T.V. series to a movie
2) If only 1 movie out of 5 makes you think, you could say that Old Trek is still in a majority of "Only Treekies like this movie."
3) Either accept it is a new timeline, or stop caring so much.

The majority of...(Farkers/Trekkies/People/people out of my ass) seem to enjoy DS9. That doesn't mean people won't hate it, but they can go hipster themselves with their comparisons of how Call of Duty/Transformers was popular too. They can go eff themselves, because they don't know how Pop-culture works. DS9's theme was war/action/conflict. It also had the benefit of having personal relationships/theological questions because it was a TV SERIES, but the main premise after season 1.5 was ACTION WAR DEATH.

DS9 is my proof that Trek can be successful if it is actiony. The Old Trek movies were a mediocre blend of Sci-fi action and theological questioning that blended terribly, and got lucky, maybe in one movie. Why? Because 2 hours is a really hard time to make people care about someone. Only some directors and writers can do it.


1)  You're taken a relatively tame comment far too seriously.  Calm down and realize you're raging over a sci-fi franchise.
2)  One of the episodes I mentioned was from DS9 and it was largely free of action scenes.
3)  You completely missed the point of my post.
4)  You're argument is the equivalent of Abrams Trek: full of action and effects but lacking depth
5)  You completely missed the point of DS9
 
2013-06-09 01:58:14 PM

Into the blue again: To all who are (or will be) butthurt, please suck it.


So, you're butthurt about people being butthurt?

/We have to go derper.
 
2013-06-09 01:58:36 PM

Bslim: Say good bye another favorite franchise.


Why did you say goodbye to the old Star Trek?

Did his new movies somehow erase the previous series and films for you?

Wow, you must deem him mighty important, huh?
 
2013-06-09 01:59:11 PM

frepnog: ///one request - NO farkING YODA. he died in Return of the Ewok. Let him be dead.


Too late  Force Ghosts are canon.

Obiwan re-appeared in Empire Strikes Back even though he died back in A New Hope as one example.
 
2013-06-09 01:59:28 PM

quizzical: I like Abrams.  I'm enjoying the new Trek movies, and I've enjoyed his other movies.  The reason I don't want him on Star Wars is because he's already doing Star Trek, and I want the two franchises to feel distinctly different.  Now, Super 8 showed that he can do a slower paced film - I feel like that movie is a perfect balance of action sequences and smaller moments that build character and tension.  But Super 8 is a small scale story.  I feel like the bigger the scope of the world Abrams is working in, the more action packed he feels it needs to be.  I'm afraid that the new Star Wars is going to rush from action sequence to action sequence like the new Trek does, and the franchises are going to feel like clones.

/Looking his IMDB page, I see Abrams has been announced as the producer for both a Half-Life project and a Portal project.  Anyone have more info on those?


more info?  "hopeless" and "doomed" come to mind.

/video games make terrible film fodder.
//even Half-Life's story is seriously just old-hat alien invasion crap, and I LOVE me some Half-Life.
 
2013-06-09 02:00:25 PM

Summer Glau's Love Slave: Into the blue again: To all who are (or will be) butthurt, please suck it.

So, you're butthurt about people being butthurt?

/We have to go derper.


userserve-ak.last.fm

I heard you like butthurt in your butthurt so I put some herp in your derp so you can derp while you herp.
 
2013-06-09 02:01:20 PM

VvonderJesus: Was it "A New Hope" or "Wrath of Khan" that had Jar Jar Binks in it? I really liked him, hope JJ incorporates him somehow.


I'd love to see JJ take someone from Jar Jar's race and make them a bad-ass bounty hunter.

Just to make all the fan-boys hate themselves for loving him.
 
2013-06-09 02:02:48 PM
Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.
 
2013-06-09 02:03:15 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: cameroncrazy1984: I don't get why people have so much of a problem with lens flare. But then again I am a person who hated the Chris Nolan Batman movies.

I didn't get it at first, but then I went back and watched Star Trek again

/Every. Freaking. Scene.
//it becomes just clutter after a while


It's like Baysplosions.  Hey let's put explosions in every scene.  But but, this is a shower scene... Baysplosion!
 
2013-06-09 02:05:54 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: frepnog: ///one request - NO farkING YODA. he died in Return of the Ewok. Let him be dead.

Too late  Force Ghosts are canon.

Obiwan re-appeared in Empire Strikes Back even though he died back in A New Hope as one example.


do you REALLY want to see Hayden show up as Ghost Anakin?

/fark the ghosts.  leave them in the graveyard.  canon they may be, but they are a cheat and JJ should not need them.  If any ghosts ARE used, I say let it be an appearance from a ghostly aged Luke Skywalker explaining how the other ghosts have "moved on".  Let the only ghost shown be an "old Spock" type fan service thing.  We really don't need a CGI ghost Yoda.

//yes, I vote to keep the old cast the fark away from JJ Star Wars IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.
 
2013-06-09 02:06:54 PM
Anyone who goes to see a bit of lightweight, pop-corn entertainment -- originally based on a pastiche of Flash Gordon / Buck Rodgers serials and a slice of The Hidden Fortress -- and comes out whinging about what is and isn't "canon" is a dick.

Especially while simultaneously defending schlocky genre fiction about clones called Luuke Skywalker and Mara Jade (nice porn name, Mara!)
 
2013-06-09 02:07:38 PM

gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.


well, he certainly couldn't chew the scenery like Ol Corinthian Leather.

/Cumberbatch was GREAT.
 
2013-06-09 02:07:42 PM

gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.


Actually, it's weird.  On one hand, I found the new Khan to be quite sinister and hard to empathize.  I thought Cumberbatch did a good job, if that was what he was going after.  Montalban's Khan was someone that I can empathize with and the way that he talked to Kirk was more like a respectful rivalry as oppose to Cumberbatch's high and mighty superiority complex.
 
2013-06-09 02:07:46 PM
We all know that about 20% of the hardcore Star Wars fans are already practicing their table flipping skills for when the new movie actually comes out.

The butthurt and tears of nerdrage will be a thing of legend.

I can't wait.

=]
 
2013-06-09 02:07:47 PM

Mentat: AppleOptionEsc: Mentat: The problem is that they have so far failed to elicit the same sense of wonder that the best Trek accomplishes. Whether you're talking about "The City on the Edge of Forever", "The Best of Both Worlds", "The Visitor" or "The Wrath of Khan", Trek at its best forces you out of your comfort zone and allows you to view humanity's role in the wider universe.

1) Why are you comparing a T.V. series to a movie
2) If only 1 movie out of 5 makes you think, you could say that Old Trek is still in a majority of "Only Treekies like this movie."
3) Either accept it is a new timeline, or stop caring so much.

The majority of...(Farkers/Trekkies/People/people out of my ass) seem to enjoy DS9. That doesn't mean people won't hate it, but they can go hipster themselves with their comparisons of how Call of Duty/Transformers was popular too. They can go eff themselves, because they don't know how Pop-culture works. DS9's theme was war/action/conflict. It also had the benefit of having personal relationships/theological questions because it was a TV SERIES, but the main premise after season 1.5 was ACTION WAR DEATH.

DS9 is my proof that Trek can be successful if it is actiony. The Old Trek movies were a mediocre blend of Sci-fi action and theological questioning that blended terribly, and got lucky, maybe in one movie. Why? Because 2 hours is a really hard time to make people care about someone. Only some directors and writers can do it.

1)  You're taken a relatively tame comment far too seriously.  Calm down and realize you're raging over a sci-fi franchise.
2)  One of the episodes I mentioned was from DS9 and it was largely free of action scenes.
3)  You completely missed the point of my post.
4)  You're argument is the equivalent of Abrams Trek: full of action and effects but lacking depth
5)  You completely missed the point of DS9


1) Rants are only rants if I was full of insults. I only insulted hipsters. No one likes a hipster
2) OK, you compared DS9. It is still not a good idea to compare TV to a movie. Movies have to draw in cash, unless you release your film at Sundance. A T.V. series has to run for 9 months. Episodes don't exist in a vacuum.
3) I don't think I did
4) Yeah. I never claimed he was the greatest director ever. I was trying (badly) to convey that most of the Trek movies have a mediocre story at best.
5) Nope. My point was Trek can be actiony. I don't think I hallucinated the war of the Dominion. If I enjoy watching DS9 on netflix, I don't think I missed the point at all. I just don't feel like summerizing 7 seasons in one sentence, because DS9 has no one point.
 
2013-06-09 02:08:13 PM
Canon, shmanon. That shiat's for nerds. Just make an entertaining story, and go ahead and throw in a gratuitous bra and panty scene if the spirit moves you, I won't complain.

/and in my opinion lens flare isn't even 1/100th as annoying as those stupid 1990s cinematography cliches like 'bullet time' or that 360° pan thing everyone did.
 
2013-06-09 02:09:09 PM
Is this the film where Shia LaBeouf is going to play C-3PO?
 
2013-06-09 02:10:59 PM

PsyLord: gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.

Actually, it's weird.  On one hand, I found the new Khan to be quite sinister and hard to empathize.  I thought Cumberbatch did a good job, if that was what he was going after.  Montalban's Khan was someone that I can empathize with and the way that he talked to Kirk was more like a respectful rivalry as oppose to Cumberbatch's high and mighty superiority complex.


I see what you mean.  But you can't fault Cumberbatch's delivery of the role as written.  His "I surrender" is the scariest surrender I've ever seen.
 
2013-06-09 02:11:49 PM

Soulcatcher: As long as there are no farking little kids in it and no Jar-Jar, I think we're good to go.


Jar Jar will be involved. What do you think "JJ" stands for?
 
2013-06-09 02:11:55 PM

Walter Paisley: Is this the film where Shia LaBeouf is going to play C-3PO?


Okay, well, that's pretty funny.  Jaden Smith will be the Jedi son of Han Solo and Princess Leia.  Demi Lovato will play his love interest, which will help them shoehorn a pop song onto the soundtrack.
 
2013-06-09 02:12:22 PM

gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.


I know, right?

Freaking Ricardo "Fantasy Island" Montalban and they all act like he was the second coming of Laurence Olivier. Montalban was a farking ham sandwich of an actor and anyone who says differently is an idiot.

Cumberbatch is a better actor in his sleep than Mr "Corinthian Leather" ever was.

/Deal
 
2013-06-09 02:12:28 PM

Walter Paisley: Is this the film where Shia LaBeouf is going to play C-3PO?


After seeing This Is The End, I think Channing Tatum would make a good slave Princess Leia, if they decide to redo the Jabba scene.
 
2013-06-09 02:12:39 PM
Abrams should rein himself in a bit and pretend he's doing work-for-hire like Richard Marquand and Irvin Kershner on their Star Wars films, or like Tobe Hooper on Poltergeist.  A Star Wars film director is not the guy with ultimate creative control but more akin to someone brought in to direct episodes of a TV series. We want a Star Wars film made by someone who gets Star Wars and can make more of it, not "a J.J. Abrams film" based on Star Wars.
 
2013-06-09 02:12:40 PM

PsyLord: Montalban's Khan was someone that I can empathize with and the way that he talked to Kirk was more like a respectful rivalry as oppose to Cumberbatch's high and mighty superiority complex.


remember - in Wrath of Khan, Khan was quite aged and very much insane.  Cumberbatch's Khan was freshly woken and just "better than you all".
 
2013-06-09 02:12:46 PM
When is he going to do Cloverfield 2?
 
2013-06-09 02:14:19 PM

AppleOptionEsc: Mentat: The problem is that they have so far failed to elicit the same sense of wonder that the best Trek accomplishes. Whether you're talking about "The City on the Edge of Forever", "The Best of Both Worlds", "The Visitor" or "The Wrath of Khan", Trek at its best forces you out of your comfort zone and allows you to view humanity's role in the wider universe.

1) Why are you comparing a T.V. series to a movie
2) If only 1 movie out of 5 makes you think, you could say that Old Trek is still in a majority of "Only Treekies like this movie."
3) Either accept it is a new timeline, or stop caring so much.

The majority of...(Farkers/Trekkies/People/people out of my ass) seem to enjoy DS9. That doesn't mean people won't hate it, but they can go hipster themselves with their comparisons of how Call of Duty/Transformers was popular too. They can go eff themselves, because they don't know how Pop-culture works. DS9's theme was war/action/conflict. It also had the benefit of having personal relationships/theological questions because it was a TV SERIES, but the main premise after season 1.5 was ACTION WAR DEATH.

DS9 is my proof that Trek can be successful if it is actiony. The Old Trek movies were a mediocre blend of Sci-fi action and theological questioning that blended terribly, and got lucky, maybe in one movie. Why? Because 2 hours is a really hard time to make people care about someone. Only some directors and writers can do it.


See: Capt. Borodin (Sam Neill's character) in Hunt for Red October.  Ancillary character, not germane to the overall plot, but you feel bad when he dies, because he just seemed like a dude who wanted to have a nice simple life after all this chaos was over.  In fact if I remember correctly in the book, he dies "offscreen" and as a complete afterthought.
 
2013-06-09 02:15:00 PM

cameroncrazy1984: I don't get why people have so much of a problem with lens flare. But then again I am a person who hated the Chris Nolan Batman movies.



I don't necessarily have a problem with it, but once it's pointed out, you can't unnotice how frequently it's used. I didn't really mind until he used it in a farking pitch-black scene in Super 8; I can only assume he was doing that to fark with us.

as an aside to the Nolan Batman movies: I think they're good, but nowhere near as intelligent or deep as its fans really like to think it is. I also think the defenders of the last film were only doing so out of brand loyalty as it was a pretty boring movie with some very obvious flaws.

Shostie: To be completely honest, anything that wasn't in the movies should be excised from the canon.

No need to complicate matters with hundreds of sh*tty novels, comic books and early 80's television specials.


this. I've never really understood why a story told outside of the original medium is somehow canon.
 
2013-06-09 02:15:54 PM

Nem Wan: We want a Star Wars film made by someone who gets Star Wars and can make more of it, not "a J.J. Abrams film" based on Star Wars.


No one wants more Lucas type Star Wars.  We have seen what kind of crap he gives us.
 
2013-06-09 02:17:05 PM
The only canon that is important to me:

www.televisionwithoutpity.com
 
2013-06-09 02:17:07 PM

Soulcatcher: gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.

I know, right?

Freaking Ricardo "Fantasy Island" Montalban and they all act like he was the second coming of Laurence Olivier. Montalban was a farking ham sandwich of an actor and anyone who says differently is an idiot.

Cumberbatch is a better actor in his sleep than Mr "Corinthian Leather" ever was.

/Deal


Awwwwww look how precious you are. I don't think he's gonna let you ride his cock though. You can take it down a notch.
 
2013-06-09 02:17:41 PM
The worst thing that could possibly happen to the series has already happened. I don't know why fans can't grasp this. The series is already ruined. McG and Michael Bay could have done a better job than Lucas.
 
2013-06-09 02:18:04 PM

born_yesterday: I'm in the opposite camp. I want an all-child cast, ala Bugsy Malone, and JEDI WARRIOR Jar Jar Binks to be the main protagonist. To each his own.


Deal. The movie will also feature off-screen narration by the trade federation guys from Phantom Menace, who will be required to say "ah-so" at least once per scene. I'll let Mr. Abrams know.
 
2013-06-09 02:18:20 PM

Confabulat: Go on, subby, I'll call you. What's your problem, exactly, with the casting choices?


I am shocked that this isn't a FNB Weeners. He's usually posts any J.J. Abrams article he can find just to start this fight again.
 
2013-06-09 02:20:19 PM

Nem Wan: Abrams should rein himself in a bit and pretend he's doing work-for-hire like Richard Marquand and Irvin Kershner on their Star Wars films, or like Tobe Hooper on Poltergeist.  A Star Wars film director is not the guy with ultimate creative control but more akin to someone brought in to direct episodes of a TV series. We want a Star Wars film made by someone who gets Star Wars and can make more of it, not "a J.J. Abrams film" based on Star Wars.


Yeah, cause the guy who gets SW the most is the guy who created it and look at the pile of steaming shiat that he gave us in the prequels.

I think after seeing 'that', one would hope that they'd pick someone who had ZERO CLUE when it comes to SW and maybe they'd make a good movie by accident.
 
2013-06-09 02:20:31 PM

Shostie: To be completely honest, anything that wasn't in the movies should be excised from the canon.

No need to complicate matters with hundreds of sh*tty novels, comic books and early 80's television specials.


Not even the Holiday Special??
 
2013-06-09 02:21:00 PM

ongbok: When is he going to do Cloverfield 2?


you shut your whore mouth.

/liked Cloverfield ok, but no sequel is needed unless it explores nuking New York and the consequences of that action.

//apparently not much when a video camera could survive a nuke
 
2013-06-09 02:21:10 PM

frepnog: PsyLord: Montalban's Khan was someone that I can empathize with and the way that he talked to Kirk was more like a respectful rivalry as oppose to Cumberbatch's high and mighty superiority complex.

remember - in Wrath of Khan, Khan was quite aged and very much insane.  Cumberbatch's Khan was freshly woken and just "better than you all".


"quite aged"?

Khan in TOS was about 30. STII was around 15 years later.

Now, granted, life on Ceti Alpha V was harsh, but he was still only around 50, and being genetically enhanced, probably in better shape and with a longer life expectancy than most humans in Kirk's era.
 
2013-06-09 02:23:29 PM
I watched an interview with JJ Abrams on Jon Stewart. He actually understands the core concepts and themes of Star Trek and Star Wars.

He's just pretty Ann..erm bland at making movies
 
2013-06-09 02:24:32 PM

Bslim: Soulcatcher: gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.

I know, right?

Freaking Ricardo "Fantasy Island" Montalban and they all act like he was the second coming of Laurence Olivier. Montalban was a farking ham sandwich of an actor and anyone who says differently is an idiot.

Cumberbatch is a better actor in his sleep than Mr "Corinthian Leather" ever was.

/Deal

Awwwwww look how precious you are. I don't think he's gonna let you ride his cock though. You can take it down a notch.


Wrath of Khan is a goofy movie. The costumes are ridiculous. Khan's marooned followers know how to effectively pilot a spaceship.. in  a battle? Kirk's son is cheesy. And there's a last minute excuse contrived for Spock to die so he can get out of the series forever. He saved them all. Of course he did. Now they can all appear in Star Trek 3.
 
2013-06-09 02:25:23 PM

Bslim: Soulcatcher: gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.

I know, right?

Freaking Ricardo "Fantasy Island" Montalban and they all act like he was the second coming of Laurence Olivier. Montalban was a farking ham sandwich of an actor and anyone who says differently is an idiot.

Cumberbatch is a better actor in his sleep than Mr "Corinthian Leather" ever was.

/Deal

Awwwwww look how precious you are. I don't think he's gonna let you ride his cock though. You can take it down a notch.


O_o

That 's kind of a creepy conclusion to jump to.

Only very rarely do I judge someone's acting ability by how much I want to ride their cock.

/sarcasm
//It's in the dictionary, or should I say Dicktionary
 
2013-06-09 02:25:44 PM
I was under the impression that George Lucas had accepted as 'canon' a whole slew of plot details about the future series? Leia and solo get married, have boy/girl twins, Luke re-founds the Jedi temple...
 
2013-06-09 02:26:15 PM

moothemagiccow: Bslim: Soulcatcher: gwowen: Bad casting choices? Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch can't approach the emotional range of Ricardo Montalban.

I know, right?

Freaking Ricardo "Fantasy Island" Montalban and they all act like he was the second coming of Laurence Olivier. Montalban was a farking ham sandwich of an actor and anyone who says differently is an idiot.

Cumberbatch is a better actor in his sleep than Mr "Corinthian Leather" ever was.

/Deal

Awwwwww look how precious you are. I don't think he's gonna let you ride his cock though. You can take it down a notch.

Wrath of Khan is a goofy movie. The costumes are ridiculous. Khan's marooned followers know how to effectively pilot a spaceship.. in  a battle? Kirk's son is cheesy. And there's a last minute excuse contrived for Spock to die so he can get out of the series forever. He saved them all. Of course he did. Now they can all appear in Star Trek 3.


WoK was good for what it was.  Cheesy action flick, with hammy actors chewing the scenery.

It wasn't Masterpiece Theater.
 
2013-06-09 02:27:36 PM

quizzical: I like Abrams.  I'm enjoying the new Trek movies, and I've enjoyed his other movies.  The reason I don't want him on Star Wars is because he's already doing Star Trek, and I want the two franchises to feel distinctly different.  Now, Super 8 showed that he can do a slower paced film - I feel like that movie is a perfect balance of action sequences and smaller moments that build character and tension.  But Super 8 is a small scale story.  I feel like the bigger the scope of the world Abrams is working in, the more action packed he feels it needs to be.  I'm afraid that the new Star Wars is going to rush from action sequence to action sequence like the new Trek does, and the franchises are going to feel like clones.

/Looking his IMDB page, I see Abrams has been announced as the producer for both a Half-Life project and a Portal project.  Anyone have more info on those?


The original Star Wars films pretty well moved from action sequence to action sequence. JJ should be making Star Wars, except he will have to drop some of the lens flare, SW is grimy and earthy.

If anything now that the new ST universe has been established hand that off to a director who will bring back more Sci-Fi to the series. Kinda ridiculous to not want him to do Star Wars because he's making ST more like SW
 
2013-06-09 02:29:15 PM
I don't really understand the hate for JJ Abrams. I'm not saying his work doesn't warrant criticism, I'm not saying he's at the level of Spielberg or Brad Bird, but he makes reasonably good films.

And anyone saying he just made a generic action movie should go and watch Plinkett's review of First Contact. If anything, Abrams retained the personalities of those characters better than anyone on the big screen.
 
2013-06-09 02:29:28 PM
If he eliminates Episodes I-III (The story of how the big bad menace was a whiny biatch) then I have no problems.
 
2013-06-09 02:32:29 PM
My friend interns at Bad Robot and says the plan is for Luke to have turned to the dark side since ROTJ and is basically the new Vader. His son and han/leia's daughter are the main antagonists. Yoda/obi wan and Vader (an older actor, not Hayden c) will be featured as jedi-ghosts throughout and will be in on the action, not just observer/advice-givers. Oh, and that blue elephant that played piano in ROTJ? His son is the new Chewbacca/jar jar.
 
2013-06-09 02:33:05 PM

farkeruk: I don't really understand the hate for JJ Abrams. I'm not saying his work doesn't warrant criticism, I'm not saying he's at the level of Spielberg or Brad Bird, but he makes reasonably good films.

And anyone saying he just made a generic action movie should go and watch Plinkett's review of First Contact. If anything, Abrams retained the personalities of those characters better than anyone on the big screen.


It is just to be contrary. His movies are popular so there are some people that will say that he is horrible to prove to other people that they are edgier, smarter and more cultured than the sheeple that like his movies. It's a mental disease.
 
2013-06-09 02:33:24 PM

FirstNationalBastard: frepnog: PsyLord: Montalban's Khan was someone that I can empathize with and the way that he talked to Kirk was more like a respectful rivalry as oppose to Cumberbatch's high and mighty superiority complex.

remember - in Wrath of Khan, Khan was quite aged and very much insane.  Cumberbatch's Khan was freshly woken and just "better than you all".

"quite aged"?

Khan in TOS was about 30. STII was around 15 years later.

Now, granted, life on Ceti Alpha V was harsh, but he was still only around 50, and being genetically enhanced, probably in better shape and with a longer life expectancy than most humans in Kirk's era.


Look at pictures of George Bush Jr before he became president and then look at some after he left office.  That sucker aged like 15 years in the 4 years he was in office.  Hell,  Obama looks like he has put on about 20 years.

Now let's say you are a person that considers yourself superior to everyone.  Imagine you get stranded on a planet that suddenly turns to wasteland and you get to watch a good portion of your family including your beloved wife die due to starvation, exposure and crazy ass brain bugs.  Imagine that party takes 15 actual years.

Yeah....  Khan may have supposed to have been physically around 50ish but that sucker aged around 100 years and went nuttier than squirrel shiat.
 
2013-06-09 02:34:31 PM

ongbok: farkeruk: I don't really understand the hate for JJ Abrams. I'm not saying his work doesn't warrant criticism, I'm not saying he's at the level of Spielberg or Brad Bird, but he makes reasonably good films.

And anyone saying he just made a generic action movie should go and watch Plinkett's review of First Contact. If anything, Abrams retained the personalities of those characters better than anyone on the big screen.

It is just to be contrary. His movies are popular so there are some people that will say that he is horrible to prove to other people that they are edgier, smarter and more cultured than the sheeple that like his movies. It's a mental disease.


Does everyone who dislikes something you like have to be doing it for hipster cred, or can people just not like something?
 
2013-06-09 02:34:48 PM
Oops, I meant "protagonists"
 
Displayed 50 of 269 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report