Slashdot Mirror
J.J. Abrams To Direct Star Wars VII
azzkicker writes "It looks like J.J. Abrams will direct Star Wars VII. From the article: 'Sources have confirmed the Star Trek Into Darkness filmmaker will helm the next Star Wars movie, the highly anticipated installment in the landmark franchise scheduled to reach theaters in 2015."
Time travel is the weakest of all SciFi plot devices, reserved for authors who are completely out of ideas.
Please, Mr. Abrams, don't do that again.
Luke, Leia and Han are supercool heroes from a galaxy far, far away. And boy are they full of angst.
... is going to be killer.
"KAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHNNNN!"
(and this text goes in here because slashdot hates 1 word answers, even when they're totally awesome.)
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Not too surprising I guess, but if he puts his finger anywhere NEAR the "Reboot" button, I'll show George Lucas right up his ass.
It makes sense, as he already did a Star Wars movie in 2009. The descent of both franchises to the dark side will be complete.
The mouse better not mess this up
So the same person is now in charge of both the Star Wars movies and the Star Trek movies?
I think i just felt a disturbance in the force, as if millions of fans involved in the never ending "which is better, Star Wars or Star Trek?" debates suddenly cried out in bewilderment and then their heads asploded.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
This is not going to help explaining the differences to the Girlfriend when she says "Star Wars, Star Trek same thing..."
"The Star Wars franchise had a series of movies starting a bit over 30 years ago. They are about to make some new ones. The guy who did Lost is going to direct them. . Where as Star Trek had a series of movies starting circa 30 years ago. They are now making new ones. The guy who did Lost directs them...""
. .
If Abrams is running the show, they are going to have to rename it to Lens-Flare Wars!
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Next he needs to do a reboot of Stargate, then he would have worked on all of the Star+* franchises.
Please not him ...
StarTrek 2009 is not bad, but not good as well... (and I am a trek fan, so I love anything trekky)
But, I can't stand Lost, and Fringe which had a good start has gone down and down.. to a meaningless end... So disappointed..
Just my point of view but I think this guy is overrated where he should only get a 5/10 score.
I don't really care who directs it. I'm more interested in finding out if Ford, Hamill and Fisher are going to be in it. I know they're old fogies now, but frankly after the horrors that were the prequels, I'd like nothing more than Han Solo with a blaster.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
And turn Star Wars 7 into Star Wars 7, 8, and 9?
I apologize to the 'recent' fans, I really *really* wanted to like the 'new' episodes but they sucked. Horribly. I mean terrible horrible waste of all that ILM CPU cycles on digital effects and acting crap.
The reboot of Star Trek was awesome even die-hard trekkies I know who hated it on first viewing got to love it. Well that's all of them except the TNG kids who well let's face it - they just aren't cool and are namby-pamby overly politically correct crap.
So yeah, maybe he can fix it because pretty much after Empire Lucas clearly lost the plot entirely - I mean Ewoks and Jar Jar sucked so badly it was sad.
Star Wars is lost
I wonder what Joss Whedon would do with it? He did a smash-up job on firefly.
Interesting
3
Two words Doll House
i have to say that something has been 'lost' in the new age.
the best original trek were about the human condition... I'm sure you can name some of your favorite episodes that leap to mind... but for me it is TOS like the Menagerie, or TNG like "The Inner Light" (where he plays the flute on) or the one about Enkidu and Gilgamesh.
When Spock dies in Wrath of Khan, tell me you didn't cry ... now tell me even one memorably emotional scene from anything after Generations
The new stuff is fine.. but its ... where is the heart? Maybe I'm just old but...
And have the new series of Star Wars movies cancelled after Episode VII?
The Jedi pulls out his trusty phaser and vaporizes the Sith. A lot less fun to watch, well, funny maybe.
(just learn that you can't post a "less than" sign into comment, the alone 3 was suppose to be "less than" 3 ^^)
Doll House was good imo
Patrick Stewart v. James Earl Jones would be one wicked match up. Still..... who would be evil and who would be good?
Lost was a piece of shit. Fuck everyone who liked it. I'm going drinking.
The Ewoks were tolerable, but Jar Jar was way, way over the line.
Here's a though experiment: imagine how Episodes 6, 1, 2, and 3 would have been if they had been done by the same writer and director who did Empire Strikes Back.
I don't really care who directs it, I just hope they base 7, 8 and 9 on the Timothy Zahn books. I read them long ago and have been waiting for them to be movies for something like 20 years.
-SM
Abrams is going to take Star Wars, remove all of the substance, and turn it into a bright-colored, flashy, plotless action movie devoid of all substance.
So basically Lucas' legacy is alive and well.
This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.
I am not saying it would be a good idea. But just think of the money they could make.
A long time ago in a Galaxy far far away
where no man has gone before...
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
I'm guessing it's because the really excellent directors, like Christopher Nolan, Clint Eastwood, James Cameron, Jon Favreau, or Bryan Singer, are either not interested in sci-fi at all (Eastwood), not interested in Star Wars specifically, not interested in picking up someone else's series and running with it, or perhaps not interested in working with George Lucas even if he restricts himself to effects and visuals. Or perhaps it's because the previous Star Wars movies (mainly the prequels) have been such horrors of filmmaking that no "true expert of film" would want to touch that turkey. Honestly, they're lucky they got someone as good as Abrams to take this thing over, after the mess that Lucas has made of it. And I'm truly shocked actually that Lucas is even letting someone else take over. He's had nothing good to say about ESB, it being the SW movie he had the least to do with. The man is an egomaniac, and I'm wondering how they managed to wrestle control away from him.
... it couldn't get any fucking worse than Jar Jar Binks.
Well there goes my hope of finding out what Quentin Tarantino would have done with an army of Uma Thurman clones.......
These movies are rueened.
As an actor (and so distantly connected to the entertainment industry), what makes me cranky about this is Hollywood's affinity for known quantities. I like Abrams' work; I'm sure it'll be a fine movie.
But there are hundreds of lesser-known directors who might have done something. What would Kevin Smith have done? Or Alfonso Cuaron, who made the third Harry Potter movie so much more interesting than any of the others? Or somebody I've never heard of?
They're going with a known quantity, and maybe it's the right business decision. It means it probably won't be terrible, and will probably be pretty good. But no matter how good it is, it's still going to be more of Abrams, who we've already got plenty of.
They're going with a known quantity to eliminate the risks. And all you get from safe choices is safe movies. And "safe" is exactly what Star Wars wasn't, at least not the first time, the thing that made it great.
Lucas should have sold BEFORE the prequels. Hard to believe he made those classics. Some mentor must have helped Lucas in the past and died a few decades ago...
If you liked Star Trek reboot you'll like this because you've already seen his kind of Star Wars: it was NOT Star Trek no matter how many geek references he put in; Abrams wanted to do Star WARS but was stuck with Star TREK... He completely missed the point and spirit of the Treks. If you summarized something into mere factoids and considered that a valid representation then you'd not take issue with the Trek reboot.
The Abrams Star Wars warmup:
Planet destroyer with a SLOW trigger. check.
Sword fighting. check.
Flawed "gritty" side of humanity; society hasn't really progressed... check.
Logic? none. check.
Way more action than talking. check.
The Idiotic Nonsense storyline was Abrams homage to Star Wars prequels (and about half the Trek films too.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Who ever does continuity and science consistency checks for Abrams should be banned from all future creative work. I think he should be voted most likely to reboot the script and not reshoot what is already in the can.
I can see it now: people dying after getting sucked into the vacuum of space but others without spacesuits saving them by doing mouth to mouth while waiting for the airlock to cycle.
Now that Abrams is going to direct episode 7 my first take was these several idea's.... it's going to be a prequel of prequels before even episode 1 where
- We see how Amidala was born and how her parents somehow have magical adventures with Gungans and Disney like characters on Naboo
- We see how Shmi Skywalker ended up getting a bunch of medichloreans up her snatch and how Ani was born... Medichlorean sex anyone but without a lightsaber rod just the force???
- Somehow Obi wans and Qui gons parents are involved also in this story again with Disney like characters
- A character similiar to nero but in a star wars universe goes back in time from somewhere just after episode six to exact revenge and we have an alternate star wars universe with all the same characters but... oh my god.. suddenly they all look different and much younger and they have even crappier technology then the same ships in the original movie did. I mean cmon on 2009 Star trek had what looked like nuclear technology to power a warp drive? o_O
- In short it'll be a reboot of star wars just like the horrible reboot of star trek with a storyline that will make you cringe...
You must master your joystick like a fisherman masters bait! - Gimpy
I always though that Star Wars did not have enough lens flares...
Why cant they have Michael Bay do it? We would have Ewoks exploding all over the place, and everyone's wish comes true... Exploding Jar Jar...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
the new Trek movie wasn't made for us Trek fans.
Indeed, it seems to have been made against us Trek fans.
"the original trilogy was essentially a reboot of Kurosawa's Seven Samurai"
I always thought Dune was the main 'inspiration' for Lucas...IIRC there is evidence such as early NH drafts having the same name as Dune characters?
Sorry I don't have the links...I do know that I probably originally saw the links here on slashdot.
Thank you Dave Raggett
...but nobody suspected that meant only one director.
In the end, it will come down to a fight between JJ Abrams and Peter Jackson?
Here's a though experiment: imagine how Episodes 6, 1, 2, and 3 would have been if they had been done by the same writer and director who did Empire Strikes Back.
From the writing side, that would have been kind of difficult since Leigh Brackett died in 1978.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Is it me or Star Wars is sounding more and more like Windows?
The Ewoks were tolerable, but Jar Jar was way, way over the line.
You didn't like JJ?
Scrolling upwards and out into space away from the bottom of the screen:
In A.D. 2101
War was beginning.
Captain: What happen ? ....
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.
Operator: We get lens flare.
Captain: What !
Operator: We get lens flare.
Operator: Main screen turn on.
Captain: It's You !!
Cats: How are you gentlemen !!
Cats: All your base are belong to us.
Cats: You are on the way to destruction.
Operator: We get lens flare.
Captain: What you say !!
Operator: We get lens flare.
Captain: No. I say to Cats. What you say !!
Cats: You have no chance to survive make your time.
Cats: HA HA HA HA
Captain: Take off every 'zig' !!
Captain: You know what you doing.
Captain: Move 'zig'.
Captain: For great justice.
Operator: We get lens flare.
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
And hire the original actors as VA's. It'd be far preferable to recasting the characters that we know, or advancing the timeline so far that we can't identify with the characters like we did.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Obviously Patrick Stewart would be good, and Vader voiced by James Earl Jones would be evil. The question is whose reflective head would cause the most lens flare.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
I find it interesting that here and on other websites, fans express interest in bringing back actors from the original trilogy, but nobody has expressed any interest in seeing actors from the prequels reprise their roles.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I guess it was too much to hope for
<3 :)
Red 5 standing by... Red Matter standing by.
I'm basically the Trekkie the Onion lampoons: "Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film as 'Fun, Watchable.'"
It was a really fun film to watch, with action and adventure and cute one-liners. A fun, summer action movie. But it was not Star Trek.
Star Trek is not about good versus evil. Star Trek is about Better versus Base. There is no 'evil' in the Star Trek universe, there's just other intelligent life who are different or frightened or struggling and the easy response is "blow 'em up!" but Star Trek asks its characters to be better than that and find another option. Yes, defend yourself, but always look for the other, peaceful solution to a problem. And the best part about Star Trek is that the heroes are...us. Us as we could be through science and reason and strength of character.
The 2009 JJ Abrams movie threw all that out the window and gave us a spectacle about a genocidal bad guy with a scary looking ship who must be stopped by punching. Fun movie, but it's not Star Trek, as it doesn't ask its characters or the audience to rise above being a base reactionary.
Star Wars, which I also very much enjoy, is a mystical fantasy of good "Chosen One" characters versus Evil so evil they call themselves "The Dark Side." And the moral choice presented is about the stupidest philosophy imaginable, that if you care about people, you will come to hate the people who want to hurt the people you care about, which will make you "fall" and then join up with the people you hate to kill the people you cared about. I get the idea that blind hatred can make you "no better than" your enemies, but it doesn't turn you into your enemies. Just to godwin's law this, yes, it's possible to hate Hitler SO MUCH for killing all those Jews that you start a genocidal campaign against Germans, putting them in concentration camps and gas chambers, and wind up no better than Hitler. You become what you hated. But in the Star Wars universe, if you love the Jews and hate Hitler, you wind up joining Hitler to kill more Jews, thereby become THE SAME AS Hitler. This is stupid and makes no sense.
So, JJ Abrams abandoned the fundamental premise of Star Trek (that we can rise above our base instincts to find peaceful solutions to our problems) and ruined Star Trek in a bad way. Maybe, in charge of the next Star Wars movie, he'll abandon the fundamental premise of Star Wars (that you have to be a dispassionate mystical robot to avoid killing your friends) and make the franchise much better and more interesting.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
These are not the hell the whales you are looking for.
Learn to love Alaska
Enough said...
All the worlds indeed a
More importantly Firefly felt like Star Wars should feel. People farm crops, and then sell them to passing spaceships... totally how the SW universe is. I'd even nix the laser blasters and go back to corded lightswords... To keep the old-time feel.
My main complaint is that SW was all about myth-building.... Right up until GL decides to throw the carefully managed collective myth out the window. I suppose hiring JJ Abrams is a great idea because he never FINISHED one single mythology in a satisfying manner.
We need to push for Lauren Faust! She has a pretty good track record rebooting 1980's franchises! She made PONIES cool!!!
I think, all the slapstick stuff with Han Solo (which was great stuff, BTW) aside, the Star Wars universe has a sense of gravity and realism that the Star Trek universe has always lacked. I think this has a lot to do with the differences between the cinema and television media, and the associated differences between the two cultures. Abrams is definitely a television person, and there will always be that "campy" element to his work (inside jokes, flashy camera effects, etc), regardless of how entertaining it might be to watch. His take on Star Trek was a lot of fun, and visually, it was really great, but you never forget that you are in a theatre, watching a movie. Star Wars, on the other hand, (at least the original ones) transported me into their world in a way that few films have done for me since then. There is a term: "willing suspension of disbelief", which applies here. I have that for Abrams' Star Trek, but I didn't need it for Star Wars or Empire; it was almost unconscious there. I got a similar feeling of that gravity with Dark Horse's original "Tales of the Jedi" series, but things that work in one medium don't always translate to another medium. I guess what I'm saying is that atmosphere is a hard thing to get right, and I don't think Abrams is going to be able to capture it properly. I'm sure it'll be entertaining, but it won't have the depth we all want it to have.
A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
Jabba the Hut is really Jar Jar Binks in a fat suit.
Han Solo starts smuggling fish to an ice planet inhabited by singing penguins.
The Phantom Menace is remade as The Phantom Tollbooth. But with Jedi.
Darth Vader stars in a sequel to Treasure Planet.
Snow White and the Seven Jedi.
Boba Fett. 101 Dalmatians. Need I say more?
Is there some way I can be encased in Carbonite for the duration?
Red Fox standing by.
And please stop to take a breath. OK. We all feel better? Good. Now, my 2 cents...
First off, it's so stinking early in the procedure that lots of things are bound to change. Just because Abrams was announced now doesn't mean either he or someone else won't change their mind.
Second, currently the release date is planned for 2015. That's a long way off in itself, let alone any delays that come along. Lots of time to go through a couple dozen writers, numerous re-writes, and even director changes.
Third, yes, I too have some reservation about Disney running this show. But it won't be "Disney" releasing the films, they'll still be Lucasfilm. And yes, while Disney and their brands have released stinkers, these aren't dumb people. They won't release a total bomb. Now I do see it likely that they'll do something on the dumb, cute side to appeal to marketing. But we'll see.
The important part is to keep our minds open. This is a beloved franchise with countless stories that have been told ever the decades, greatly expanding on the original adventures. I can only think of 2 other franchises that touch on that: Star Trek and Dr. Who. I'd guess those are the three biggest franchises ever made. Everyone has their favorite piece that they hold sacred. But no movie could possibly fill everyone's "want". This is a marketing game though. They can't make a movie that only appeals to the hard core uber-fans. Nor can they make a movie that only appeals to only new fans.
We'll see. 2015 is a long way off and lots can happen in the meantime. And for every true rumor, there will be 100 false ones.
The man is an egomaniac, and I'm wondering how they managed to wrestle control away from him.
I guess he wanted the $ 4 billion more.
Bad Robot!!!
I wonder what Joss Whedon would do with it? He did a smash-up job on firefly.
At the very least, I would love to see Whedon in charge of casting. At least all the ladies would be attractive with quite feminine figures (not these manly marginally female things that seem to typically get the key roles).
This space unintentionally left blank.
How about Leonard Nimoy directing a Star Wars film? He's done pretty decently with the Trek films he directed. Or would the very idea cause the universe as we know it to implode?
This space unintentionally left blank.
It's "Redd Foxx." Assuming you mean the comedian. "Stay in attack formation, dummy!"
Wil Wheaton as he is today would be pretty kickass I think. Imagine a grown up Wesley Crusher with the personality of the grown up Wheaton in command of the Enterprise.
This space unintentionally left blank.
It's time to retire both frachises. I'm sick of both of them. Let's have something new.
Copy Gold Leader
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
The problem with time travel is that there is no analytical method to say what would happen, since we have absolutely no clue how or if time travel would work in any way shape or form. Or in other words you are wrong because you assume a faulty ability to analyze time-travel, when in fact the utter lack of any basis or knowledge of such a phenomenon would prevent any such analysis.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
"Take care,young ladies,and value yousa wine. be watchful of young men in thesa velvet prime. deep thesa ll swallow from yousa finest kegs, then swift be gone,leav bitter dregs. ahh-ah-ah-ah,bitter dregs."
.......I have a very bad feeling about this.
Anything is possible given time and money.
and I have high hopes for Star Wars. Almost a guarantee to be better than episodes 1,2,3...
I'd be more worried if it hadn't already been added in remastering the original Star Wars. Now it's just canonical.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Red October Shtanding by
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Will we get Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy on screen, complete with new faces on existing roles? Or something else entirely?
Is it true that J.J. Abrams real name is Jar Jar?
Simply Red standing by.
Luke, I am your father,
Luke: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
Yeah, I'd pick Timothy Zahn's Thrawn books if Episode VII was to be an adaptation of existing Expanded Universe material.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
Time travel can be a great thing if done well, or a crutch if not. It depends on the skill and the thoughtfulness of the author.
Yesterday's Enterprise? Fantastic. One of the best episodes of the series, easy. A great story that meshes in beautifully with the established episodes. It's a brilliant bit of writing. Another good example is DS9, Trials and Tribbleations. Also brilliantly written time travel. The look, the details, the writing - it's a joy to watch.
The Star Trek reboot? A crutch. That is a seriously lazy script. A big gigantic do-over. They couldn't be bothered with continuity, so they just held the entire franchise up like an etch-a-sketch and gave it a shake. Bleah. And for what? The story is useless, angry, and illogical. It's really nothing more than a palette to display sound bites and chase scenes. It's basically Lethal Weapon 2 in space.
We were all hoping we would get a Joss Whedon / Avengers style treatment from Disney. Instead we're going to get JJ Abrams and Star Trek. Oh well, Star Wars has been dead to me since the prequels anyway.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Ah, I see you missed the greatest gift of the prequels. The prequels are really one giant koan. Yoda's wisdom shows through them, for those who have eyes to see and hearts to break.
Seeing the horrors of Yoda bouncing about with a lightsaber like an overcaffeinated chipmunk, you're to realize the futility of taking delight in copywritten fantasy worlds. By experiencing the acting prowess not of Shaw, Jones and Prowse but of Christiansen, you're to understand that it is your attachment to Star Wars that produces your disappointment, your pain.
Unlearn what you have learned. Adventure, excitement, characters you care about and can grow attached to: a jedi craves not these things. If you can find peace and joy in the new Star Wars films, then you can find it anywhere in life. Confront your expectations. Lower them. Then, only then, a jedi will you be.
When I left the theater after seeing Star Trek Nemesis, I thought "I'll never see that $11 ever again....", and a tear ran down my cheek.
The first season was good. The second season was crap. I don't think it was fully Joss Whedon's fault, I think he just rushed to conclude the story in the face of impending cancellation. Though, upon forcing myself to watch almost all of Buffy, this was probably for the best. It started as strong as Firefly or Dollhouse, and then tumbled into a boring, directionless, 90201-with-vampires-and-lesbians, crapper. Which is the exact problem Abrams' has. Lost started strong, but there was a point where it should have ended, and didn't. Fringe was the same... It was an awesome show, but it should have ended at the end of the 3rd or 4th season, but instead it lurched on, directionlessly, like a zombie cash-cow.
Joss Whedon is much more solid though. And this is probably the absolute height of his ability. Cabin in the Woods was absolutely brilliant. Avengers was the first superhero movie that I felt was written by someone who actually LIKED the source material.
JJ Abrams has Cloverfield, and thats it. And I'm still not sure if I like it for reasons that were intentional (it is to 9-11 what Godzilla was to Hiroshima and Nagasaki). The Star Trek reboot was... okay. The plot sucked, and it pretty much covered every trope I hate in modern "big" movies (which is why I don't watch any blockbusters now, unless 10 people I know fully recommend them, minus everyone I know who hated them). The characters were pretty awful. The casting was absolutely brilliant though.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
Red Dwarf smegging off.
My friend always wanted to see Joss Whedon, Kevin Smith, and JJ Abrams collectively direct a Star Wars movie. Joss Whedon can do sci-fi and characters, but would end up making Leia where latex and kill people with her mind, Kevin Smith would be highly respectful of the source material, but would end having everyone sitting around the Death Star food-court talking about nothing, and JJ Abrams can do effects, and battles, but would end up trying to make a very thinly veiled allegory for God, which he would have Darth Vader state at the end ("Luke, I am your Heavenly Father")
I personally want Lars Von Trier, Michael Haneke, or Warner Herzog to direct it... It would be as respectful as the prequels (not at all), but at least it would be intentionally miserable and depressing. And to see Jar Jar slowly go insane, and finally passionless slaughter Obi-wan while drinking apple juice, would be priceless.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
and refreshing the "product" with new characters to make toys of..
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
If JJ Abrams were a chef then I say I hate his cooking. Not that he couldn't cook but his taste and mine are quite different.
He all but ruined Star Trek for me. The story was complete crap. Red matter? He skipped the story and went directly to action.
The actors, sets, and special effects were wonderful but the story was worse than reading the Cliff Notes of a great novel. And he took so many short cuts with the story that much of it just didn't make sense. And this is coming from a sci-fi fan that easily accepts unbelievable things. He decided on visual scenes he wanted to shoot and show and then the wrote a story full of holes around that.
Now he will ruin Star Wars just like he did Star Trek. The money people obviously don't care what they produce they only care about money. Money people love JJ because he produces spectacular train wrecks that people will pay to see.
Noooooooooooo!
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Abrams to direct next SW? Fuck. What's next, another hack to direct Interstellar? Oh wait ...
TNG always sucked, always will, so it was okay to suck because it sucked. We are talking about the destruction of the original series not that yuppie whank-fest of a TNG that was the prelude for making Star Trek lighter and lighter and lighter. You would think that you couldn't get more lightweight then Voyager but they found a way.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Join the dark-side Jedi, we got the original laser disc where Han Solo shoots first, Sith style! Watch the raping of your childhood, let the hatred flow through you and set you free!
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Simply Red holding back (the years), surely.
George Lucas did NOT make the original Star Wars alone, not The Empire Strikes Back. But "A New Hope" especially was made by a team including his wife. That you don't know about this says a LOT about human beings but it isn't hard to research.
Basically, when Lucas made a New Hope, nobody thought he was to big to contradict and he listened to advice/opinions then put it together. By the time the new episodes came around, he didn't listen and nobody dared to tell him he was wrong anyway. It is the perfect example of a benevolent dictator turning into an evil one because he has been surrounded by yes-men.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Lost is not exactly Sci-Fi proper - at least not in the traditional sense. Those who watch the series loosing for clear and definitive science-based (or anything-based) answers, are disappointed. If anything the series is more about the Philosophy of Science than Science.
IMO the series is about how human act under uncertainty, opacity and incomplete information. The wealth of Non-Dual and Mythological symbolism, as well as several characters named after famous Skeptics, seems to point this way. This is just about one of the most important lessons we need in society today - modernity is fraught with Scientism, Naive Rationalism and Naive Mechanistic perspectives.
Ang Lee would probably give some SF a go. He seems to be trying to do one of everything and usually pulls it off spectacularly.
There are two kinds of Star Wars fans, those who were adults when EPIV came out, and those who saw it as kids. I was 25 when Star Wars came out, and I liked the prequels as much as the earlier three.
The only raping was Lucas changing EPIV dor the digital version, IMO.
Free Martian Whores!
It is not about particular technology having X buttons instead of Y buttons or having it work in a very specific imaginary way.
It is about bad and lazy writing, which has ALWAYS been a characteristic of Jar Jar and his cohorts - Kurtzman, Orcish and Lilliput.
They don't write - they hype.
Unfortunately, a story does not run on hype alone. Which is where they employ Deus ex Machinae and handwaves.
Like transwarp beaming - which basically eliminated the need for ships and the Starfleet.
Who needs them when you can beam anywhere? Like Stargate, only you don't need a Stargate at the other end.
Or "red matter" - a lazy name for a lazy device, a drop of which can create a black hole. So Spock hauls around a metric ton of it. Why? Because it looks cool.
Also, it will create black holes out of planets, but first you must drill a huge hole in the planet to drop it inside.
Why? So that we could have a skydiving sequence followed by a fight sequence on the giant drill.
Or building a starship on the ground - literally just so we could have that one shot of Kirk looking at it. Because that would be cool.
Spock Jr. literally ejects Kirk out of the ship, just so Kirk could meet up with Spock Sr. and Scotty. Why? Because it's their DESTINY!
Which may be the biggest fuckup of all.
Destiny is just another way of saying absence of choice. Everything is predestined. They are all just puppets of destiny. Kirk WILL be captain of the Enterprise whether he likes it or not. Future is fucking set in stone!
That is, disregarding all the little differences caused by FUCKING TIME TRAVEL!
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Sorry, but that movie completely redeemed itself with that "What does God need with a starship? scene.
Unlike Star Trek: Nemesis.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Red Green standing by.
I am officially gone from
Seriously, I think JJ Abrams is a decent enough director, can't be any worse the George Lucas, but he has to end his obsession with the lens flare. Been watching Fringe from Season 1 again and there is lens flare in almost every shot. Its one thing to have a trademark, but its another to not understand it being overused and becoming a meme joke.
As for Star Trek, come on, that shit was ruined before he got to it. I value him bringing action and darkness back to the Star Trek franchise instead of overly contrived morality plays and endless yapping of people in pajamas that plagued the numerous TV series and the complete lack of focus in the TNG movies. Getting rid of Bermen and Ronald D Moore from anything to do with Star Trek is the first good thing that franchise has done since TNG. I'll reserve judgement on Abrams until I see Into Darkness, although it can't be all that dark with all the lens flare.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
The only raping was Lucas changing EPIV dor the digital version, IMO.
Even that is forgivable. It's destroying prints of the original version that is truly bad.
No.
I'm not sure about both, but I would probably give one of them for Joss Whedon to write and direct a screenplay based on the Thrawn trilogy. Not sure what Joss Whedon would do with a giant pile of balls, but I'm sure he could think of something. He's pretty creative.
Wrecking Star Trek and Star Wars in one fail swoop.
Ordinarily, for the past several hundred years, the phrase is "one fell* swoop", but in this case you may have the right of it.
Indeed, we may well see epic turned into epic fail.
_______________________________________________
*(see definition 2 http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fell )
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
He did not adhere to the cannon. He used cheesy special effects.
My eyes! Ze goggles do nusing!
Simply Red October Surprise standing by
There are multiple galaxies and you could indeed find one farther away.
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
The problem with time travel is that there is no analytical method to say what would happen, since we have absolutely no clue how or if time travel would work in any way shape or form.
Stephen Hawking says you're wrong.
Free Martian Whores!
There are two kinds of Star Wars fans, those who were adults when EPIV came out, and those who saw it as kids.
Age is not the relevant difference.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I think the argument can be made that contrary to "assassinate the director", "not watch it" is a practical alternative. Life is too short for bad cinema. Or even for mediocre cinema. It is not necessary to watch every sequel and spin-off of a film no matter how successful. For instance, Lilo & Stitch was a great film. The rest of the franchise is not therefore worth watching, merely because they have the same characters and some of the same actors.
It's the mouse's money, and the mouse's properties, and they have a perfect right to do whatever they want with them. And we have a perfect right to say "that's crap, and they'd have to duct tape me to the chair to get me to watch it" if appropriate.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I've always wondered if that Jedi problem the Empire was so worried about could have just been solved via judicial application of power anti-biotics.
It's actually the reason why we have full-body scanners in al the airports now, they are like kemo to the midicholridians.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't know your Family Guy reference, but how about you watch Seasons 3 and 4 of The Guild instead, so you will have a clue what is being talked about here, which will give you some perspective on my previous post?
This space unintentionally left blank.
... So JJ certainly can't make it much worse. Not to say I don't have faith in him. Star Wars may be at rock bottom, but if he puts his mind to it, JJ can always find a lower place.
This is the best restaurant I ever eat in
just learn that you can't post a "less than" sign into comment
Yes you can, just use a little html. < becomes <.
Free Martian Whores!
I thought it was a very clever pun.
Free Martian Whores!
Either that or it was a normal typo and you're an ass.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
I think Joss Whedon would do great in the Star Wars universe. But I am very attached to my nuts.
-IOVAR Web Dev Platform
Just as long as he doesn't get his hands on Galaxy Quest. Some things are sacred!
It would be all like "Give up! Surrender!"
And like one of his cohorts said in The Guild... "We don't do anything half assed. We use both cheeks."
This space unintentionally left blank.
What's going to become of Star Wars now that Disney and Abrams have gotten their hands on it?
I originally liked the Star Trek reboot but when I watched it a few times after it came out on DVD I really had to wonder about who wrote the script and didn't anyone actually review it because it seemed to me that it had some very big problems:
First, Spock acted out of character in a number of instances and as far as I can tell it was mainly a plot device to achieve a particular goal i.e. Spock would have never broken regulations to eject Kirk in a life pod, the only purpose for that was so that Kirk could meet old Spock and Scotty on the planet.
Second, at the end what purpose did it serve for Kirk to fire weapon's at the Romulan ship when it was being consumed by the black hole (it couldn't possibly escape) other than to delay their departure long enough so that they could have that whole "trying to escape the black hole" sequence.
These are just the most glaring errors (to my mind) but I'm sure that I could find more if I thought about it.
So I have to wonder what's going to become of Star Wars with the kind of director who would make massive plot mistakes like this.
I think J. J. Abrams writes boilerplate characters and contrived drama. Star Trek demonstrated this to a tee. The entire premise of the villain was about as simple as it gets. They destroyed his planet and now he's out for revenge. Lame. Kirk and Spock's conflict is equally boring and was not explored enough. Kirk doesn't respect authority. He follows his hunches. Spock is the opposite. That simple premise just gives way to lots of yelling and screaming and punching. I thought it was obnoxious. The original show explored interesting ethical conflicts through creative and fantastical plot devices. I only hope his Star Wars movie doesn't devolve into an episode of 90210.
Did anyone else see Wheaton on The Big Bang Theory? I swear to God, he looked like a young version of Riker, complete with facial expressions. Makes me think there is a new Star Trek coming...
Having met Will Wheaton when he spoke at our SF club, and damnear split a gut laughing at his humor... I agree. That would be interesting. The Wesley Crusher we loved to hate (but who was showing signs of becoming something special toward the end), grown into maturity as has the actor... works for me.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Will Ahsoka Tano be alive?
That was hilarious.
Free Martian Whores!
And we have a perfect right to say "that's crap, and they'd have to duct tape me to the chair to get me to watch it" if appropriate.
Roger Ebert once thought as you do.
J. J. will show you the true meaning of the final episode of Lost. He is your master now.
It is pointless to resist, my son.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
And we have a perfect right to say "that's crap, and they'd have to duct tape me to the chair to get me to watch it" if appropriate.
Roger Ebert once thought as you do.
J. J. will show you the true meaning of the final episode of Lost. He is your master now.
It is pointless to resist, my son.
Well, Ebert makes a living critiquing films. It would be difficult for him to simply decline to see them. I wouldn't want his job.
You know, I never saw the end of Lost. It got stupid, so I stopped watching it. I have no idea how it turned out, and I really really don't care. It seemed like they were just changing up things just for the hell of it. When it became clear that there was no master story arc, that they were going nowhere in particular, I abandoned the series. Life, as I said, is too short.
And that, I think, is my point. Just because the first one or two installments of a franchise is worth watching doesn't mean they can now put any damned thing on the screen that squirts out of their collective ass, and expect us to face it.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
"Destroyed utterly. No survivors."
With that in the trailer, I'd be more interested in buying a ticket.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Sorry for the delay. Was either rather busy or AFK these last days.
It's the mouse's money, and the mouse's properties, and they have a perfect right to do whatever they want with them. And we have a perfect right to say "that's crap, and they'd have to duct tape me to the chair to get me to watch it" if appropriate.
See, there's a problem with that. And not just of the "permanent copyright" kind which always lurks in the background of everything related to Disney or the kind related to hoarding global culture in order to maximize profit.
The real problem regarding Jar Jar Abrams and the House of Mouse is the same one people had with Lucas.
Colloquially known as "raping our childhood", or more accurately - distortion and butchering of the global mythology and culture.
And it's not just that, either.
Sure, Star Wars and Star Trek are a part of popular culture and mythology (i.e. stories we tell ourselves to describe our vision of the world and our place in it) BUT being science fiction they are also representations of what we expect of the future - our very own self-fulfilling prophecy.
Or a blueprint if you like that more.
And here's the problem with Jar Jar.
Underneath all the effects and starships and action and whatnot - those stories have ideas.
Ideas like "an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us; it binds the galaxy together." or "The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force of our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity."
It is not what those movies are about but without those (and other) ideas Star Wars and Star Trek would be just another cheap SciFi popcorn flick - and not a global cultural phenomenon that they are.
Whether Lucas and Roddenberry meant to include every single one of those ideas or whether they got included by accident doesn't really matter - they work, the stories work, the movies work.
Jar Jar and friends on the other hand only seen the shallow parts (action, effects, costumes...) and they are trying to replicate that. They are copying the cover of the book - not it's contents.
And then there's the "mystery box" issue - Jar Jar (with his friends) "creates stories" by constantly piling on "mysteries".
Until they write themselves in the corner.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Great points. I don't have the time to dive into them now, but will soon.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.