Star Wars - The Force Awakens
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:51 pm
Teaser number 2 is out.... Im pumped to see this movie in December!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngElkyQ6Rhs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngElkyQ6Rhs
Official Discussion Forum for the works of Stephen R. Donaldson
https://kevinswatch.com/phpBB3/
This. Abrams completely screwed up Star Trek, so I can't get excited about this.dlbpharmd wrote:I remain cautiously optimistic.
I did as well. I love the reboot he did with ST!!! It was brilliant to make a different timeline in the first one which could explain the differences in characters.Zarathustra wrote:I love what Abrams did with ST. I thought most everyone agreed.
This looks freakin cool. I love the retro SW look.
You know what credence I give consensus.Zarathustra wrote:I love what Abrams did with ST. I thought most everyone agreed.
The head has to be magnetically floating about the circular body with gyroscopic stabilizers inside the head to keep it upright.wayfriend wrote:This is undeniably cool though. (And real.)
All Hail The Roll-Tastic Wonder Of BB-8!!
They way I look at it, he was essentially trying to make a Star Wars film. Now that he has experience in it, this one should be just fine.Cail wrote:You know what credence I give consensus.Zarathustra wrote:I love what Abrams did with ST. I thought most everyone agreed.
Abrams took Star Trek and turned it into a gaudy and stylized, yet utterly generic action film. The names are the same, but there's nothing of the feel of the old Trek.
Wouldn't magnets be kinda really bad for droids? At the least it might turn them into folk singers...The head has to be magnetically floating about the circular body with gyroscopic stabilizers inside the head to keep it upright.
Nobody knows, but I imagine not.Are they keeping the "official" story line where Luke fully converts to the Dark Side after the defeat of the Emperor only to return to the Light later?
I thought he did a good job retaining or even updating the characters for younger versions of themselves. Their interactions still felt true to those characters. It did feel more "action-y," but again maybe it's just the difference in characters being at a more rash, impulsive age. Given a younger Shatner and better effects, I could easily see the original ST movies being just like this.Orlion wrote:They way I look at it, he was essentially trying to make a Star Wars film. Now that he has experience in it, this one should be just fine.Cail wrote:You know what credence I give consensus.Zarathustra wrote:I love what Abrams did with ST. I thought most everyone agreed.
Abrams took Star Trek and turned it into a gaudy and stylized, yet utterly generic action film. The names are the same, but there's nothing of the feel of the old Trek.
There was a younger Shatner on the TV series, and it wasn't like that.Zarathustra wrote:I thought he did a good job retaining or even updating the characters for younger versions of themselves. Their interactions still felt true to those characters. It did feel more "action-y," but again maybe it's just the difference in characters being at a more rash, impulsive age. Given a younger Shatner and better effects, I could easily see the original ST movies being just like this.Orlion wrote:They way I look at it, he was essentially trying to make a Star Wars film. Now that he has experience in it, this one should be just fine.Cail wrote:You know what credence I give consensus.
Abrams took Star Trek and turned it into a gaudy and stylized, yet utterly generic action film. The names are the same, but there's nothing of the feel of the old Trek.
Agreed. All that potential, and that's what they came up with? Imagine what Ronald D. Moore could have done.Cail wrote:You know what credence I give consensus.Zarathustra wrote:I love what Abrams did with ST. I thought most everyone agreed.
Abrams took Star Trek and turned it into a gaudy and stylized, yet utterly generic action film. The names are the same, but there's nothing of the feel of the old Trek.
Lucas sold the whole company to Disney. He's no longer involved, which is regarded by most people as a very good thing.Vizidor wrote:All the trailers come up as Lucasfilm Ltd. So without having to chase this down and just assume for the present that Lucas still has a mighty big input, then there's plenty of hope they'll remain tip top movies.
I am once again reminded what a damn shame it is that we live on opposite coasts.Sorus wrote:Agreed. All that potential, and that's what they came up with? Imagine what Ronald D. Moore could have done.Cail wrote:You know what credence I give consensus.Zarathustra wrote:I love what Abrams did with ST. I thought most everyone agreed.
Abrams took Star Trek and turned it into a gaudy and stylized, yet utterly generic action film. The names are the same, but there's nothing of the feel of the old Trek.
You left off the point about effects. There was plenty of action in the original Trek show, it just sucked. Trek has always had space battles and fisticuffs.Cail wrote:There was a younger Shatner on the TV series, and it wasn't like that.Zarathustra wrote:I thought he did a good job retaining or even updating the characters for younger versions of themselves. Their interactions still felt true to those characters. It did feel more "action-y," but again maybe it's just the difference in characters being at a more rash, impulsive age. Given a younger Shatner and better effects, I could easily see the original ST movies being just like this.Orlion wrote: They way I look at it, he was essentially trying to make a Star Wars film. Now that he has experience in it, this one should be just fine.