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
Shove even
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.
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...""
. .
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?
Star Wars is lost
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...
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.
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.
... 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.......
We could always.... not watch it.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Sure you arent mixing up Seven Samurai and The Hidden Fortress?
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
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
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
Actually, I don't blame Joss for those cancellations. I think it has more to do with Summer Glau. I like her, but every sci-fi show she gets on seems to cancel within a season or two. Not her fault, she just seems to bring bad luck.
Firefly, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Dollhouse, The Cape, and Alphas. She was on The 4400 as well, but I think that show might have just lost its point.
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.
Filming the execution of Jar Jar as a main side-plot and zapping to scenes of his slow disembowelment every so often could make the movie a smashing success on its own.
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.
My fear is that you have about the median level of Star Wars knowledge, and that you're the audience he'll make it for.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Nooooooooooo! That's impossible!
Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
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.
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 guess it was too much to hope for
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.
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.
It's "Redd Foxx." Assuming you mean the comedian. "Stay in attack formation, dummy!"
Yes, present it in glorious magenta, cyan, black and white!
It's time to retire both frachises. I'm sick of both of them. Let's have something new.
Red October Shtanding by
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Is it true that J.J. Abrams real name is Jar Jar?
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.
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.
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.
Aye, we could do that.
But we won't. We'd rather go see it, and then spend years bitching about it if it sucks.
Simply Red holding back (the years), surely.
Make all the ewoks talk like Seth McFarland's "Ted" and you've got something.
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