Author Topic: It's 20XX and people are mad online about Star War! (Read 640925 times)

Mr. Gundam · « **Reply #420 on:** October 20, 2015, 12:46:18 PM »

Quote from: Tasty Meat on October 20, 2015, 09:37:40 AM

Guys, Luke isn't the bad guy.

This is the truth.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

He's not really any guy seeing how he's in the movie for a few minutes at the very end.

[close]

studyguy · « **Reply #421 on:** October 20, 2015, 01:48:12 PM »

I'm honestly not too interested in seeing a flabby Mark Hamill or Harrison Ford.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #422 on:** October 20, 2015, 02:03:52 PM »

Watched the trailer and thought it was an okay trailer but I'm not part of the modern culture that sort of fetishizes trailers. Making a good trailer isn't really comparable to making a good movie so other than seeing it and saying yep that's Star Wars, there's not much really to say.

ToxicAdam · « **Reply #423 on:** October 20, 2015, 02:19:11 PM »

Star Wars is so ubiquitous that I don't see how you can do anything "new" that will seem fresh and exciting. It still has to hit all those same beats that Star Wars fans will expect and it will still have to pay homage to a certain type of storytelling. It's that same kind of rut that Superman movies get mired in, no matter how they try to dress it up (or dress it down).

I'm sure people will be fine with a competent Star Wars movie, since we haven't seen one in three decades now. But I don't think that will get me in the theaters on day one.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #424 on:** October 20, 2015, 02:40:25 PM »

Quote from: ToxicAdam on October 20, 2015, 02:19:11 PM

Star Wars is so ubiquitous that I don't see how you can do anything "new" that will seem fresh and exciting. It still has to hit all those same beats that Star Wars fans will expect and it will still have to pay homage to a certain type of storytelling. It's that same kind of rut that Superman movies get mired in, no matter how they try to dress it up (or dress it down).

I'm sure people will be fine with a competent Star Wars movie, since we haven't seen one in three decades now. But I don't think that will get me in the theaters on day one.

We've talked about it before but I think people are willing to accept adequate or "good" at this point after the prequels. It's almost like a no lose for abrams.

Joe Molotov · « **Reply #425 on:** October 20, 2015, 03:55:49 PM »

Quote from: The Walrus on October 20, 2015, 02:42:43 PM

The X-Wing vs TIE Fighter dogfight scenes look absolutely incredible. I've been dreaming of seeing something like that for 20 years now.

You mean the Naboo Starfighters attacking the Trade Federation Control Ship didn't get your blood pumping?

Rahxephon91 · « **Reply #426 on:** October 20, 2015, 04:05:16 PM »

Yeah it's honestly the Falcon and the X-Wings that make me want to see this more than anything.

Mr. Gundam · « **Reply #427 on:** October 20, 2015, 04:08:02 PM »

It's the whole "embracing the Original Trilogy and what made people love it" that got me pulled back in. That's not to say I need only OT stuff, but the prequels lost a lot of that magic. It feels like Disney doesn't want a repeat of that.

These new characters actually seem interesting to me. Young Obi-Wan was the only one in the prequels who was even remotely appealing.

CatsCatsCats · « **Reply #428 on:** October 20, 2015, 04:13:58 PM »

K fine. He's Luke son and badassdom skips a generation

Steve Contra · « **Reply #429 on:** October 20, 2015, 04:45:03 PM »

Yet somehow that movie was the best prequel.

Cerveza mas fina · « **Reply #430 on:** October 20, 2015, 04:54:29 PM »

Least crap would be a better description

toku · « **Reply #431 on:** October 20, 2015, 05:48:56 PM »

Quote from: The Walrus on October 20, 2015, 05:01:19 PM

I still say ROTS was by far the best prequel. The first two are both crap.

I agree

VomKriege · « **Reply #432 on:** October 20, 2015, 05:59:37 PM »

ROTS has a nice space battle in intro and I liked Grievious (that did nothing beyond that). Still pretty bad.

The new trailer has Tatooine, Hoth and Endor like settings. I understand the whole story seems to be taking a trip down memory lane with Han Solo ( $:-\$ ) but like said by ToxicAdam, I have a hard time believing this will be able to break away from overbearing homage and be something of its own.

chronovore · « **Reply #433 on:** October 20, 2015, 07:22:02 PM »

Quote from: Tasty Meat on October 20, 2015, 09:27:28 AM

You already posted this

Ah, oops. I thought so, but when I peeked at the "outside links" and "star wars" threads, I didn't see it.

Quote from: WRATH VICE™ on October 20, 2015, 05:54:28 PM

ROTS is the best prequel, still a crappy movie regardless. Attack of the Clones is by far the worst of the worst.

Yeah, this. There's so much stuff that doesn't make any sense in RotS, but AotC is the only one in which the entire movie unravels itself into complete meaninglessness, erasing its own raison d'être before our eyes. The idea that the ENTIRE CLONE ARMY, which was ordered by A FORGOTTEN JEDI, from a planet OF WHICH THERE IS NO RECORD, is the object of Obi-Wan's search and yet, when it is found, no-one has a single question about why it even exists, ready to mobilize. It's like realizing that Indiana Jones doesn't actually do anything in Raiders of the Lost Arc. And then the only other element running through AotC is Anakin/Padme's arc, an entirely tone-deaf love story. It really is just inexplicably bad.

RotS is mainly interesting in that it makes "saving" Darth Vader in Return of the Jedi more palatable.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #434 on:** October 20, 2015, 07:47:22 PM »

Gundam brings up a good point. Really there are no interesting new characters in the prequels who I think about when I think about Star Wars. It seems like they're at least trying to create memorable characters that stand on their own in this new trilogy. We'll see.

Black Guy could be cool, but I'm more interested in Engineer Girl. She seems cool. And the rollie bot is dope.

Steve Contra · « **Reply #435 on:** October 20, 2015, 07:57:27 PM »

I expect very little out of this except pure nostalgia. We are talking JJ Abrams here, the genius director of .

toku · « **Reply #436 on:** October 20, 2015, 07:59:03 PM »

She's not a pawg though

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #437 on:** October 20, 2015, 09:19:37 PM »

Quote from: Steve Contra on October 20, 2015, 07:57:27 PM

I expect very little out of this except pure nostalgia. We are talking JJ Abrams here, the genius director of .

We've talked about this before too but pretty much yeah. The best predictor of quality tends to be the director, followed by the writers.

When you think Abrams you don't think all time classics. You think good solid execution on a formula. Which after years of complete incompetence for that franchise should be fine.

I think people are over-hyping themselves like they always tend to do where as I think the more proper level of expectation is "solid film" in the vein of those star trek films.

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #438 on:** October 20, 2015, 09:23:42 PM »

She's seems like she's going to be really plucky

I'm in.

mormapope · « **Reply #439 on:** October 20, 2015, 09:41:10 PM »

I'd be a lot more excited if the basic lore was explored in a new time period, no returning characters, absolutely no nostalgia grabbing whatsoever.

But those things would probably deter a huge chunk of the intended audience.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #440 on:** October 20, 2015, 09:43:19 PM »

Quote from: mormapope on October 20, 2015, 09:41:10 PM

I'd be a lot more excited if the basic lore was explored in a new time period, no returning characters, absolutely no nostalgia grabbing whatsoever.

But those things would probably deter a huge chunk of the intended audience.

Agreed but I can understand why a corporation (And let's be real here Star Wars is a corporation now. Not some pure artistic labor of love) would be like nah, we need to bank on all the nostalgia we can. Especially after those prequels.

Rahxephon91 · « **Reply #441 on:** October 20, 2015, 09:57:40 PM »

ROTS is probably the first time I realized I had outgrown Star Wars. I've probably never been as disapointed with a movie. I saw Episode 1 when I was a kid so of course I liked it and while I haven't seen it in a while, I think it may hold up the best because it's a simple adventure movie introducing characters that could have been fun.

I don't even remember Attack of the Clones.

But I think ROTS is easily the worst.

It dosen't even start off good. The strange humor from the droids is tiring in the first 5 mins. So cringe worthy and it never recovers because it's so jarring in contrast with whats going on.

Then you get a plot where characters that never became anything but stuffy assholes act incredibly stupid. Jedi were cool before the prequels. Obi Won was the wise mentor with a tinge of being a rogue. Yoda the quirky but extremely smart teacher. The Jedi in the prequels are so emotionally sterile and stuffy that they are so un boring to watch. So un fun that I really hate anything with the Jedi. Watching a whole movie of them acting like idiots was shit. Watching Yoda jumping around was distinguished mentally-challenged in Clones. It's painful in ROTS.

The entire Padme and Anakin stuff is so painful to watch. She's a pos character. I don't care that she dies and all it lead to was Darth Vader being whinny. Jesus Christ, I remember seeing episode 1 and coming up with her dieing in the Clone Wars as the motivation for him going dark. Not him being an emo baby because he saw a dream and had to keep their romance a secret.

ROTS was just a unfun movie to watch. Every moment was me just thinking like I got a punch to the groin. I had to deal with the Jedi being morons. I had to deal with Anakin being an idiot and being "tempted" by the darkside. By tempted I mean an obvious evil guy said obviously evil lies to convince you of obviously turning evil. I never thought the birth of Vader would be so stupid, but here was ROTS. All surronded by a story that I care little about because it's shitty and I hate the characters because they are the most un fun characters ever in a damn Sci fi fantasy movie about lazer swords. You can't have a movie like Star Wars where the characters are so uninteresting to watch and interact with. I feel like the only morons who like the prequels and think they are good are those morons who love something because it adds to a cannon.

I never thought I'd be so bored of an epic sword fight that dragged and dragged.

I never thought I'd dislike Star Wars, but ROTS happen.

It was just a shit movie and made me realize that I really dislike the prequels.

CatsCatsCats · « **Reply #442 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:06:18 PM »

Big surprise you didn't care when a woman died

Rahxephon91 · « **Reply #443 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:09:48 PM »

I don't know what that means.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #444 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:16:06 PM »

All the prequels are bad so its hard to split hairs.

I think Phantom Menace is the worst. Lots of Jar Jar. Lots of the kid. Long stretches of boring. Yeah it has Darth Maul and that fight but that and some podracing are literally the only redeeming things.

I can't honestly say which is "best". Attack of the Clones had the only suspenseful part of any of the movies for me when Obi Wan goes to Kamino but it also has those incredible lows of the love story and nothing else I can really remember. ROTS basically has the only scenes that I remember when I think of the prequels, but its still not good and its been built on a such a boring mountain of shit that I think everybody just wanted the whole thing to be over by that point. Same as whatever was that third matrix movie.

chronovore · « **Reply #445 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:17:23 PM »

Quote from: Rahxephon91 on October 20, 2015, 09:57:40 PM

It dosen't even start off good. The strange humor from the droids is tiring in the first 5 mins. So cringe worthy and it never recovers because it's so jarring in contrast with whats going on.

By the way, the canon usage for things George introduced in the Prequels which are entirely out of alignment with what the original trilogy established, is to say "it's so jar-jarring."

chronovore · « **Reply #446 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:19:52 PM »

Quote from: mormapope on October 20, 2015, 09:41:10 PM

I'd be a lot more excited if the basic lore was explored in a new time period, no returning characters, absolutely no nostalgia grabbing whatsoever.

But those things would probably deter a huge chunk of the intended audience.

You can probably look forward to the Rogue Squadron movie. In line with Disney's success in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I'd be surprised if it's not part of some larger, intertwined story arc, but you won't have The Olds onscreen and messing with your bliss.

Tasty · « **Reply #447 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:21:39 PM »

Quote from: Stoney Mason on October 20, 2015, 09:19:37 PM

Quote from: Steve Contra on October 20, 2015, 07:57:27 PM
I expect very little out of this except pure nostalgia. We are talking JJ Abrams here, the genius director of .

We've talked about this before too but pretty much yeah. The best predictor of quality tends to be the director, followed by the writers.

When you think Abrams you don't think all time classics. You think good solid execution on a formula. Which after years of complete incompetence for that franchise should be fine.

I think people are over-hyping themselves like they always tend to do where as I think the more proper level of expectation is "solid film" in the vein of those star trek films.

Better than Trevorrow

Episode IX

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #448 on:** October 20, 2015, 10:32:35 PM »

Quote from: toku on October 20, 2015, 07:59:03 PM

She's not a pawg though

Nah I mean story wise. She seems like some type of scavenger/engineer longing to escape her dust toilet planet. I wonder if she build BB-8?

thisismyusername · « **Reply #449 on:** October 21, 2015, 01:22:01 AM »

Quote from: Stoney Mason on October 20, 2015, 10:16:06 PM

All the prequels are bad so its hard to split hairs.

I think Phantom Menace is the worst. Lots of Jar Jar. Lots of the kid. Long stretches of boring. Yeah it has Darth Maul and that fight but that and some podracing are literally the only redeeming things.

I can't honestly say which is "best". Attack of the Clones had the only suspenseful part of any of the movies for me when Obi Wan goes to Kamino but it also has those incredible lows of the love story and nothing else I can really remember. ROTS basically has the only scenes that I remember when I think of the prequels, but its still not good and its been built on a such a boring mountain of shit that I think everybody just wanted the whole thing to be over by that point. Same as whatever was that third matrix movie.

Darth Maul was underused. Let's be fair. He could've been the antagonist along with the Senator but noooo, killed off after one film with barely any backstory (that was thrown into the expanded universe which then was jettisoned out the window for NuExpanded Universe).

And I know it's an unpopular opinion, but JarJar as a character wasn't that bad. Cartoonish and for kids, sure. But I never got really annoyed with him outside of the "comedy" bits that were clearly trying to aim for kids but falling flat. Same with Jake Lloyd or Christian as Anakin. A lot of the problems with Anakin came sorely down to George Lucas not being a good writer/script writer/dialogue. This is apparent when you know that the original trilogy later got a few collaborators for Lucas to bounce the ideas off of and they improved those.

Really though, Star Wars has a huge issue with introducing characters into stories/games and then never fully fleshing them out because they're a one-and-done character plot-point and thats it. Like the Darth Sidieious(?) character in KotOR2 who apparently eats worlds but is only explored in that game and barely. Never fleshed out in the expanded universe or anything.

chronovore · « **Reply #450 on:** October 21, 2015, 02:36:10 AM »

Agreed on all points, AND it felt like George had a story he wanted to tell, and if the fans clamored for more of something which was different from what he wanted, ZAP he sends that fan-favorite to The Cornfields like a surly brat. Darth Maul's early hype may have driven that first-episode dismissal. Mace Windu went out oh-so-cheaply compared to his supposed "Jedi Master" status. Everyone loved Boba Fett, he was sent off to die in a vagina dentata.

Cerveza mas fina · « **Reply #451 on:** October 21, 2015, 03:42:15 AM »

I really like the new Star Treks and Super 8, so I have a lot of faith in JJ delivering a solid movie. Sprinkle in a bit of childhood nostalgia and this def could be a 8/10 or a 9/10

I cant think of anyone else better suited to make Star Wars really

toku · « **Reply #452 on:** October 21, 2015, 04:03:23 AM »

Quote from: thisismyusername on October 21, 2015, 01:22:01 AM

Quote from: Stoney Mason on October 20, 2015, 10:16:06 PM
All the prequels are bad so its hard to split hairs.

I think Phantom Menace is the worst. Lots of Jar Jar. Lots of the kid. Long stretches of boring. Yeah it has Darth Maul and that fight but that and some podracing are literally the only redeeming things.

I can't honestly say which is "best". Attack of the Clones had the only suspenseful part of any of the movies for me when Obi Wan goes to Kamino but it also has those incredible lows of the love story and nothing else I can really remember. ROTS basically has the only scenes that I remember when I think of the prequels, but its still not good and its been built on a such a boring mountain of shit that I think everybody just wanted the whole thing to be over by that point. Same as whatever was that third matrix movie.

Darth Maul was underused. Let's be fair. He could've been the antagonist along with the Senator but noooo, killed off after one film with barely any backstory (that was thrown into the expanded universe which then was jettisoned out the window for NuExpanded Universe).

And I know it's an unpopular opinion, but JarJar as a character wasn't that bad. Cartoonish and for kids, sure. But I never got really annoyed with him outside of the "comedy" bits that were clearly trying to aim for kids but falling flat. Same with Jake Lloyd or Christian as Anakin. A lot of the problems with Anakin came sorely down to George Lucas not being a good writer/script writer/dialogue. This is apparent when you know that the original trilogy later got a few collaborators for Lucas to bounce the ideas off of and they improved those.

Really though, Star Wars has a huge issue with introducing characters into stories/games and then never fully fleshing them out because they're a one-and-done character plot-point and thats it. Like the Darth Sidieious(?) character in KotOR2 who apparently eats worlds but is only explored in that game and barely. Never fleshed out in the expanded universe or anything.

Darth Nihilus

Am_I_Anonymous · « **Reply #453 on:** October 21, 2015, 08:02:52 AM »

Quote from: CatsCatsCats on October 20, 2015, 09:36:31 AM

Quote from: Yulwei on October 20, 2015, 01:41:34 AM
well... there are spoilers going around for this movie. i just got spoiled and dunno if i want to watch it now

Is Luke the bad guy or not?

I mean, all those contractors he murdered has to be worth a trip to the dark side amirite

I don't know that I think he'd be a full on bad guy. I think he's gonna struggle with the dark side for a minute, runs in the family :-)

chronovore · « **Reply #454 on:** October 21, 2015, 08:31:50 AM »

Quote from: Am_I_Anonymous on October 21, 2015, 08:02:52 AM

Quote from: CatsCatsCats on October 20, 2015, 09:36:31 AM
Quote from: Yulwei on October 20, 2015, 01:41:34 AM
well... there are spoilers going around for this movie. i just got spoiled and dunno if i want to watch it now

Is Luke the bad guy or not?

I mean, all those contractors he murdered has to be worth a trip to the dark side amirite
I don't know that I think he'd be a full on bad guy. I think he's gonna struggle with the dark side for a minute, runs in the family :-)

I'd be surprised if he goes bad to struggling with it. He struggled on Bespin and again on the second Death Star, when fighting in front of Palpatine. At this point, I think he's the Obi-Wan character -- in fact it wouldn't surprise me if they "rhyme" the sacrifice gambit for one of the new characters in this film or the next.

edit: fixed quote tags

Tasty · « **Reply #455 on:** October 21, 2015, 09:32:58 AM »

Quote from: WRATH VICE™ on October 21, 2015, 12:59:22 AM

Rian Johnson directed Star Wars movie coming up after this

Lol this new trilogy really is going to mirror the original in terms of quality as well.

The "homages" just won't stop.

Am_I_Anonymous · « **Reply #456 on:** October 21, 2015, 09:37:17 AM »

http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2015/10/your_most_ridiculous_the_force.html#incart_river_home

Tasty · « **Reply #457 on:** October 21, 2015, 01:26:12 PM »

I really dug the first Star Trek and Lost.

Cloverfield wasn't bad either. Haven't seen Super8.

Rahxephon91 · « **Reply #458 on:** October 21, 2015, 02:41:22 PM »

Into Darkness being the exception, but I don't think JJ Abrams makes bad movies. They look good and are mostly entertaining. They just aren't anything remarkable and are the definition of safe.

Tasty · « **Reply #459 on:** October 21, 2015, 03:08:57 PM »

I didn't think Into Darkness was terrible either, just a little too hamfisted with its pandering.

But maybe that's what people will like about the new SW.

seagrams hotsauce · « **Reply #460 on:** October 21, 2015, 03:52:46 PM »

http://www.avclub.com/article/watch-mark-hamill-basically-pitch-evil-luke-skywal-227192

Tasty · « **Reply #461 on:** October 21, 2015, 04:10:52 PM »

Well....... damn.

toku · « **Reply #462 on:** October 21, 2015, 04:56:15 PM »

Quote from: WRATH VICE™ on October 21, 2015, 01:14:23 PM

No, Andrex aside from Ewoks Return of the Jedi kicked ass. Had some of the best moments in the series. Colin Treverow directing

I've made fun of JJ Abrams in the past, but he can put together a great fan film like how Super 8 is essentially a Spielberg rip off. And that's the only movie of his I love. This movie is a lot more than Abrams though, since all it needs is a decent Original Trilogy rip off that's fine.

The Rian Johnson one will most definitely rule though. Have all the faith in the world in his direction. I just wish earlier reports of him doing both sequels were true.

Bro! I love Super 8 too. The Elle Fanning train station scene gave me chills no lie. Probably the single best "moment" Abrams has put on screen so far.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #463 on:** October 21, 2015, 08:32:25 PM »

Quote from: Am_I_Anonymous on October 21, 2015, 09:37:17 AM

http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2015/10/your_most_ridiculous_the_force.html#incart_river_home

Manabyte said it's 100% not true.

Tasty · « **Reply #464 on:** October 22, 2015, 04:45:21 PM »

chronovore · « **Reply #465 on:** October 22, 2015, 11:26:02 PM »

Wow, somehow I had never recognized the similarity between Obi-Wan's battle with Vader, and Luke's, where they both just shut down their lightsaber. That's pretty neat.

Of course, the scenarios are different; Obi-Wan sacrifices himself because Luke needs to escape before Vader can realize his son is nearby and susceptible, whereas Luke is just openly defying the Emperor's attempt to turn him. Luke is ready to die rather than turn, making him more noble than his father.

Barry Egan · « **Reply #466 on:** October 23, 2015, 12:12:51 AM »

Quote from: chronovore on October 22, 2015, 11:26:02 PM

Wow, somehow I had never recognized the similarity between Obi-Wan's battle with Vader, and Luke's, where they both just shut down their lightsaber. That's pretty neat.

benjipwns · « **Reply #467 on:** October 23, 2015, 01:00:23 AM »

Trailer only has 38 million views.

Absolute bomba confirmed. Star War is dead.

Quote from: Tasty Meat on October 21, 2015, 03:08:57 PM

I didn't think Into Darkness was terrible either, just a little too hamfisted with its pandering.

It doesn't even pander well. And that's ultimately the problem. This was supposed to be a brand new universe to do all sorts of exciting new things in and Abrams Inc. gives us a Nemesis remake and screws up Khan. (Are we supposed to be sympathetic to him? Is he an anti-hero? Is his anger justified? Who exactly is he seeking vengeance against again? Why betray the Enterprise when they're on his side until Spock pulls up old Spock's wiki entry on Khan? Why are we just zooming past RoboCop's valid points? Why is RoboCop over the top evil? Where did he get so many people that agree with him, yet he still needed to gun down the ten other admirals left? Why are we ignoring this "valid" debate that's ideal for Trek? Why am I continuing to do this criticism masked as just asking questions? Did Kirk bang Carol Marcus? Why does she have a British accent when RoboCop's her dad?)

ST and STID are both like The Dark Knight Rises in that the first third or so of the movie is quite good, (in TDKR's case arguably the best part of the trilogy) because it's doing new things "freely" but then then the film decides to GET BIG, loses track of time, tries to explain itself, hook in all the NAMES and the whole thing collapses into a black hole of plot holes, zero sense of time and incoherence, and there's no red matter to blow up and ride the shockwave out of it.

Now that I think about it...the same thing kinda happens in the first two Star Wars prequels...it doesn't in the third because the pacing is shot from the start.

I'm sure Star War will be fine. I think the sequel and side-stories idea set just past the originals is way better way for "bringing it to a new generation" (who will have at least seen the old Star War trilogy by now) than the prequels were. That was always dumb thematically. (Lucas knew Anakin was supposed to be the main character right?) Except Darth Maul.

I thought Trek would have worked better to not do a reboot, but do something like Star War is doing, where you have some old folks to link it in, but you're creating a "new crew" for the "new fans." Trek had precedent with TNG. Characters who are arguably as beloved by later fans as Kirk/Spock/McCoy were. Plus Spock isn't even dead in the original Trek timeline so you still could have had Old Spock!

Cerveza mas fina · « **Reply #468 on:** October 23, 2015, 01:38:45 AM »

Star Trek doesn't have the same broad appeal and clout that Star Wars has so a reboot made more sense. Its also a lot easier as there are like 5 characters that are famous. In Star Trek only nerdlings know about timelines different generations and wtf is going on.

I may have low standards but especilly the first ST movie was great fun.

benjipwns · « **Reply #469 on:** October 23, 2015, 01:57:49 AM »

I'm not sure that Kirk/Spock/McCoy is much more recognized than Picard/Data/Worf among newer generations. Giving them a new crew with some older dudes showing up just to tie it in much like was done with TNG seems to make far more sense. Especially, with what was done with the "reboot" in the end.

And that's what Star War seems to be doing. New characters can be part of a mythos but not tied to existing characterization/traits/etc. which is what Abrams' Star Trek is. It's the old characters again. Kirk is still a brash, ladies man who doesn't believe in no win scenarios. Spock is logical and strong. McCoy is grumpy. Scotty is Scottish. Sulu is Asian and therefore likes swords. Chekov is Russian and has a goofy accent. The reboot added a goofy love thing between Spock and Uhura. Also it made Uhura force herself onto away missions so she can bitch at Spock. Otherwise, it's just new stories (or not, in the case of the two films) with the old characters in a slightly off kilter version of the universe. (And the comics do a way better job of "retelling" the old episodes with new slight differences. Which makes them quite enjoyable actually.)

Giving them a new crew instead of rehashing the old one poorly is giving them "their" Star Trek/Star Wars. I think that played a big role in Into Darkness hitting the "cap" at the box office and why Paramount chose to essentially start the reboot over.

EDIT: The Nolans' reboot of Batman worked because they told a story that hadn't been told in the mass-market (Begins) and a different mass-market take on the other main character of the mythos (Joker as a force or concept, rather than a person), and Rises is hurt because they undershot the al Ghul background in Begins, so once they're introduced rather than it just being something new with Bane and Catwoman, it all falls apart trying to hold everything together. (Though it's not their fault Ledger died and took their third act with him.)

Star Trek started to do that, but suddenly, at arguably the peak of the Academy plot with Kirk's gaming the Kobayashi Maru, says "forget all this origin stuff, everybody's in their old roles, half the universe is destroyed, all of Starfleet is dead, life is terrible, let's have some adventures!"

benjipwns · « **Reply #470 on:** October 23, 2015, 02:40:39 AM »

Quote from: benjipwns on October 23, 2015, 01:00:23 AM

Quote from: Tasty Meat on October 21, 2015, 03:08:57 PM
I didn't think Into Darkness was terrible either, just a little too hamfisted with its pandering.
It doesn't even pander well. And that's ultimately the problem. This was supposed to be a brand new universe to do all sorts of exciting new things in and Abrams Inc. gives us a Nemesis remake and screws up Khan. (Are we supposed to be sympathetic to him? Is he an anti-hero? Is his anger justified? Who exactly is he seeking vengeance against again? Why betray the Enterprise when they're on his side until Spock pulls up old Spock's wiki entry on Khan? Why are we just zooming past RoboCop's valid points? Why is RoboCop over the top evil? Where did he get so many people that agree with him, yet he still needed to gun down the ten other admirals left? Why are we ignoring this "valid" debate that's ideal for Trek? Why am I continuing to do this criticism masked as just asking questions? Did Kirk bang Carol Marcus? Why does she have a British accent when RoboCop's her dad?)

ST and STID are both like The Dark Knight Rises in that the first third or so of the movie is quite good, (in TDKR's case arguably the best part of the trilogy) because it's doing new things "freely" but then then the film decides to GET BIG, loses track of time, tries to explain itself, hook in all the NAMES and the whole thing collapses into a black hole of plot holes, zero sense of time and incoherence, and there's no red matter to blow up and ride the shockwave out of it.

Now that I think about it...the same thing kinda happens in the first two Star Wars prequels...it doesn't in the third because the pacing is shot from the start.

I'm sure Star War will be fine. I think the sequel and side-stories idea set just past the originals is way better way for "bringing it to a new generation" (who will have at least seen the old Star War trilogy by now) than the prequels were. That was always dumb thematically. (Lucas knew Anakin was supposed to be the main character right?) Except Darth Maul.

I thought Trek would have worked better to not do a reboot, but do something like Star War is doing, where you have some old folks to link it in, but you're creating a "new crew" for the "new fans." Trek had precedent with TNG. Characters who are arguably as beloved by later fans as Kirk/Spock/McCoy were. Plus Spock isn't even dead in the original Trek timeline so you still could have had Old Spock!

Quote from: benjipwns on October 23, 2015, 01:57:49 AM

I'm not sure that Kirk/Spock/McCoy is much more recognized than Picard/Data/Worf among newer generations. Giving them a new crew with some older dudes showing up just to tie it in much like was done with TNG seems to make far more sense. Especially, with what was done with the "reboot" in the end.

And that's what Star War seems to be doing. New characters can be part of a mythos but not tied to existing characterization/traits/etc. which is what Abrams' Star Trek is. It's the old characters again. Kirk is still a brash, ladies man who doesn't believe in no win scenarios. Spock is logical and strong. McCoy is grumpy. Scotty is Scottish. Sulu is Asian and therefore likes swords. Chekov is Russian and has a goofy accent. The reboot added a goofy love thing between Spock and Uhura. Also it made Uhura force herself onto away missions so she can bitch at Spock. Otherwise, it's just new stories (or not, in the case of the two films) with the old characters in a slightly off kilter version of the universe. (And the comics do a way better job of "retelling" the old episodes with new slight differences. Which makes them quite enjoyable actually.)

Giving them a new crew instead of rehashing the old one poorly is giving them "their" Star Trek/Star Wars. I think that played a big role in Into Darkness hitting the "cap" at the box office and why Paramount chose to essentially start the reboot over.

EDIT: The Nolans' reboot of Batman worked because they told a story that hadn't been told in the mass-market (Begins) and a different mass-market take on the other main character of the mythos (Joker as a force or concept, rather than a person), and Rises is hurt because they undershot the al Ghul background in Begins, so once they're introduced rather than it just being something new with Bane and Catwoman, it all falls apart trying to hold everything together. (Though it's not their fault Ledger died and took their third act with him.)

Star Trek started to do that, but suddenly, at arguably the peak of the Academy plot with Kirk's gaming the Kobayashi Maru, says "forget all this origin stuff, everybody's in their old roles, half the universe is destroyed, all of Starfleet is dead, life is terrible, let's have some adventures!"

VomKriege · « **Reply #471 on:** October 23, 2015, 04:38:16 AM »

Quote

The Nolans' reboot of Batman worked because they told a story that hadn't been told in the mass-market (Begins)

Well yeah. Except it doesn't really work.

benjipwns · « **Reply #472 on:** October 23, 2015, 05:02:26 AM »

I wasn't really talking about the quality of the film or story. It pulled the franchise out of the goofy lull it was stuck in and led to two billion dollar films. An anti-Superman Returns.

VomKriege · « **Reply #473 on:** October 23, 2015, 05:22:13 AM »

Quote from: benjipwns on October 23, 2015, 05:02:26 AM

I wasn't really talking about the quality of the film or story. It pulled the franchise out of the goofy lull it was stuck in and led to two billion dollar films. An anti-Superman Returns.

I'm honestly not certain the success it enjoyed can be dissected with that level of detail. "A story not previously told to the mass market" is a rather vague, nebulous statement to begin with. Anyway, was just taking the occasion to riff on Nolan, so yeah.

benjipwns · « **Reply #474 on:** October 23, 2015, 05:48:02 AM »

Oh, I didn't mean it to be the only reason or anything. I'm saying that when you hit franchise fatigue and the next film comes along and offers you something other than "Batman fights wacky costumed villains played by famous people" like a detailed origin story that's the kind of reboot that "works." There's barely even a hint of any villains in the first couple trailers.

Star Trek started off on that premise, but then ditched it almost immediately. And I think that's part of why it "didn't take" and boost the franchise beyond its past numbers. Even if the potential for the franchise is much smaller than the Star War, I think an approach like is being taken with the new Star War films would have still been a better one than thinking the solution was bringing back Kirk and Spock. The focus of the teasers and trailers has been on the new stuff, with Han and Chewie getting a few seconds of "hey! they're back too!"

Star Trek kept a lot of the "hey it's that guy!" as the characters background/origin outside of Kirk and Spock, so it didn't really offer a new hook in the slightest, and then they bring back Khan another legacy character. Star War is going to have a bunch of new characters without having a legacy to drag around behind them. It's doing what I think is a perfect way to essentially restart a franchise. Trek had that opportunity and didn't take it.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #475 on:** October 23, 2015, 07:35:59 AM »

I'd like to interrupt this convo just to say I watched Empire last night and it still works. It has quite a serial feel to it. Many of the scenes almost feel like isolated episodes that tie together, some working better than others but ultimately each one is cool. Luke getting captured/Han finding him, the Hoth attack, the Falcon escaping the Empire/flying into the worm, Luke training with Yoda, etc.

I couldn't help but think of films where this blueprint doesn't really work. The Two Towers comes to mind. I still like it overall but the Merry/Pippen/Ents stuff doesn't really work. Likewise TDKR is full of shit that just isn't interesting.

Raiders is a great example of another film with a serial feel that works beginning to end.

benjipwns · « **Reply #476 on:** October 23, 2015, 08:25:18 AM »

Return of the Jedi is kinda like that too. Everything with Jabba, then stuff on Endor, meeting with Vader/telling Leia, then Luke's up on the Death Star, then Lando and the whole fleet thing is going on.

Cerveza mas fina · « **Reply #477 on:** October 23, 2015, 10:25:51 AM »

Massive respect for the insightfull posts, specially benji

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #478 on:** October 23, 2015, 12:08:16 PM »

While I agree with what Benji is saying overall, and do think that the Star War will have more focus on completely new characters than the ST reboots did, I think it's important to note that SW seems to be focused a looooooot on the past. Whether it's Kylo Ren worshiping a melted Vader skull, yet another hero emerging from a desert planet, a battle on an ice planet, a planet or solar system destroying weapon, the new movie seems intent on making enough nods to the past that it is in danger of giving itself whiplash. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but let's not kid ourselves about what it's trying to do.

Cerveza mas fina · « **Reply #479 on:** October 23, 2015, 12:13:26 PM »

Well they want to get everyone back on board, im sure if this goes down well the next one might be more out there

News:

Author Topic: It's 20XX and people are mad online about Star War! (Read 640925 times)