|
RBA Starblade posted:It is? Yes. You see more derision thrown its way than admiration.
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:17 |
|
|
The reviews all seem to say one positive thing which is what this movie needed: the new characters are good. I dont care if the plot is rehashy of the OT, the new characters need to be able to stand on their own and if they are excellent characters then I cant wait to see where they go after this movie. the prequels had poo poo characters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:The EU was clearly only allowed to run rampant with the whims of bad genre writers because they never intended to actually make any post-ROTJ movies. That changed when Disney bought the company and assets. Yeah, and not just post-OT stuff either. That's the whole reason behind the levels of canon - it's a way for Lucas to say "look you can do your thing but remember that I don't have to give a gently caress about any of it".
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
morestuff posted:If you're unwilling to accept anything but complete and total satisfaction you're setting yourself for disappointment Mad Max: Fury Road gave me complete and total satisfaction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:Looking at the tomatometer, it looks all the critics are saying "Yea, it's pretty good..." For reference, Metacritic has VII at an 81 Into Darkness settled on a 72
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:Mad Max: Fury Road gave me complete and total satisfaction. That doesn't mean you should expect it of everything
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:Mad Max: Fury Road gave me complete and total satisfaction. Mad Max: Fury Road isn't like most movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
kiimo posted:95% tomato meter is great news no matter how you slice it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
ComposerGuy posted:For reference, Metacritic has VII at an 81 And Empire Strikes Back has a 79. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Star Trek 09 got 95%. And it's a good fun movie?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
computer parts posted:And Empire Strikes Back has a 79. Well, to be fair, Empire only has 16 reviews counted. The other two have over 40.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
iSheep posted:And it's a good fun movie?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Star Trek 09 got 95%. Excellent news.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:The EU was clearly only allowed to run rampant with the whims of bad genre writers because they never intended to actually make any post-ROTJ movies. That changed when Disney bought the company and assets. Pretty much this but it doesn't really change the fact that the lovely genre fiction got a fanbase and, regardless of how much people scream that it was almost all poo poo (and it was), they're not glad to see it cut off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Star Trek 09 got 95%. Makes sense. It's a really good movie. I do wonder if the RT score will crash as more reviews come in or if it will stay high like Fury Road.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
iSheep posted:And it's a good fun movie? Then the new Star Wars movie is a "good fun movie" by that same metric, I suppose. Sigh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:Then the new Star Wars movie is a "good fun movie" by that same metric, I suppose. Sigh. I'm going to recommend you not see this movie, because it really feels like you're sliding into a depression about Star Wars and I'd hate to see you do something rash.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Yes. With an empty antagonist. It's a movie that masks its aggressive stupidity with panache and momentum.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Pretty much what is to be expected out of JJ. I don't know why anyone would assume anything else. Rian Johnson may deliver a more visceral episode VIII depending on how much free reign Disney gives him but don't count on that either. EDIT: Even then we would go right back to box office garbage with Colin Trevorrow's movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Star Trek 09 got 95%. That's what usually happens when you make a visually beautiful, action-packed movie filled with actors who deliver good performances and have chemistry with each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Beyond the fact that the prequel trilogy did actually acknowledge at least one part of the EU, there were also television shows, video games and other material which absolutely recognized the EU in fairly significant ways. If you liked Mara Jade there were two video games where you could play as her. TV shows and games are EU as well. They aren't movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:It's a movie that masks its aggressive stupidity with panache and momentum. Your arguments are really weird. You think the new movie is going to be derided like the last Star Trek movie....because lots of people like it now? Maybe just see it and stop having this weird existential crisis over it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Seems like peoples biggest fear about TFA's quality isn't that it will be terrible, but that it will be safe, milquetoast, and passable. I have to admit Abrams' Star Trek films felt like they were above average but largely generic sci-fi action films with a Star Trek re-skin so I'm hoping he does something a bit more interesting with TFA, but as someone else already mentioned "above average but largely generic" may very well be Abrams' ceiling as far as director skills go. I find him to be mostly overrated, but who else could they have got to helm the project? At least we didn't get stuck with even more generic milquetoast directors like Len Wiseman or Brett Ratner. God forbid they gave it to Michael Bay, there would've been literal riots in the streets. My fantasy director would of course have been James Cameron, since you know, no matter what happens, it's going to be something truly amazing, but otherwise I can't really think of anyone else. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:It's a movie that masks its aggressive stupidity with panache and momentum. "Aggressive stupidity" doesn't actually mean anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
I loved both of the new Star Trek films and thought they were super fun, but to be fair I also found every episode of TNG I've seen to be ruthlessly boring and terrible so there's that. Really JJ just seemed to be a better fit to Star Wars than Trek anyway. He's done a pretty great job too since the reviews are pretty glowing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:Seems like peoples biggest fear about TFA's quality isn't that it will be terrible, but that it will be safe, milquetoast, and passable. Zach Snyder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Without spoiling anything, let me just say that the fridge logic of this movie's story has my head spinning. But it's an Abrams film, so I expected that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
I liked it, it was cool and good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Zach Snyder. Yeah, I forgot about him. Visually I love the guy. 300 was pretty drat good. And I remember being so hyped after seeing this Watchmen trailer, though it seemed like they tried to do too much with that movie, and of course Man of Steel was pretty good too. I'd say overall I like him better than Abrams. He's no genius, but few are. I also would've at least been interested in David Fincher's take on Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:That's a lot to put on a child based on 4 seconds of video footage. Oh yeah? Well I bet he's a racist, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:Your arguments are really weird. You think the new movie is going to be derided like the last Star Trek movie....because lots of people like it now? Maybe just see it and stop having this weird existential crisis over it? I'm well aware I need to gently caress out of this thread, but my argument isn't weird: Abrams keeps making movies that are safe, passable and reliant on tropes established by other directors (Spielberg) or the audience's familiarity with the franchise (Star Trek, Star Wars, Mission Impossible) without showing the sort of creativity or storytelling chops that the people who established those franchises initially showed. He keeps aping Spielberg or retreading familiar ground (Wrath of Khan in ST: ID) because he can't do otherwise...he's too limited artistically, and yes it bothers me on a visceral level that this mediocre person's work keeps getting a pass from critics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:I'm well aware I need to gently caress out of this thread, but my argument isn't weird: Abrams keeps making movies that are safe, passable and reliant on tropes established by other directors (Spielberg) or the audience's familiarity with the franchise (Star Trek, Star Wars, Mission Impossible) without showing the sort of creativity or storytelling chops that the people who established those franchises initially showed. He keeps aping Spielberg or retreading familiar ground (Wrath of Khan in ST: ID) because he can't do otherwise...he's too limited artistically, and yes it bothers me on a visceral level that this mediocre person's work keeps getting a pass from critics. I'm going to reserve judgement on TFA but this actually sums up pretty well how I feel about Abrams too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:I'm well aware I need to gently caress out of this thread, but my argument isn't weird: Abrams keeps making movies that are safe, passable and reliant on tropes established by other directors (Spielberg) or the audience's familiarity with the franchise (Star Trek, Star Wars, Mission Impossible) without showing the sort of creativity or storytelling chops that the people who established those franchises initially showed. He keeps aping Spielberg or retreading familiar ground (Wrath of Khan in ST: ID) because he can't do otherwise...he's too limited artistically, and yes it bothers me on a visceral level that this mediocre person's work keeps getting a pass from critics. Yeah, I think people in this thread are being purposefully obtuse in responding to you, because it is clear what you are getting at. You are expecting from the reviews given so far that the movie will just be innoffensive or just 'ok'. I agree that that would be disappointing, and I don't know why people find that reaction confusing. Yes, not every movie that comes out will be THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE, but after the past decade of absolutely CONSTANT bland/forgettable (but still fun! oh wowee the visual spectacle!) action movies, I think it is fair to be really tired of 'just ok'. If a picture needs to be painted, just think of the MCU.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
I'll withhold judgement on TFA as well and try to talk myself down from hate-watching it. No film can survive such a hostile viewing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
starry skies above posted:I'm well aware I need to gently caress out of this thread, but my argument isn't weird: Abrams keeps making movies that are safe, passable and reliant on tropes established by other directors (Spielberg) or the audience's familiarity with the franchise (Star Trek, Star Wars, Mission Impossible) without showing the sort of creativity or storytelling chops that the people who established those franchises initially showed. He keeps aping Spielberg or retreading familiar ground (Wrath of Khan in ST: ID) because he can't do otherwise...he's too limited artistically, and yes it bothers me on a visceral level that this mediocre person's work keeps getting a pass from critics. Your argument was literally "oh gently caress man this movie is well reviewed! LIKE THAT OTHER MOVIE I HATE OH FUUUUUUUUUUCK ~hyperventilates~". Your arguments against Abrams aside, this movie is being reviewed well and people are saying it's a great Star Wars movie. As long as you aren't going in with high hopes for a Godard like masterpiece of cinema I think you'll enjoy it and have fun. Edit: Maybe I'm crazy, but getting so pissed off about a director 'playing it safe' that you're contemplating 'hate-watching' a movie for the sole purpose of making GBS threads on it seems like maybe you should just skip it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
It would be appropriate for a Star Wars movie to quote Star Wars extensively, especially the first of a trilogy whose sequels will be directed by others. Star Wars repeats itself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Wait hold on you're telling me that if Abrams can't out-Spielberg Spielberg, one of the best living directors, then critics should spit on him? Abrams isn't allowed to do anything that Spielberg does unless he does it better? That's a pretty high bar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
It seems like if any of these criticisms were held up to the OT, it too would be judged to be utter poo poo. The Hero's Journey: In Space! How derivative and boring, am I right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
it's fine if TFA plays it safe as long as VIII does its own thing, imo. if VIII continues to play it safe then we riot
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:17 |
|
|
Kaedric posted:Yes, not every movie that comes out will be THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE, but after the past decade of absolutely CONSTANT bland/forgettable (but still fun! oh wowee the visual spectacle!) action movies, I think it is fair to be really tired of 'just ok'. If a picture needs to be painted, just think of the MCU. Yeah, this is how I felt also. And not just because of the recent blitz of bland generic actions movies with a <insert comic and/or childhood nostalgia franchise> re-skin but also because it's Stars Wars; probably the most popular film franchise in the history of film. If anything deserves a full court press to make sure that's it's something more than just "pretty good", it's this. I mean I have no idea if James Cameron would've even been the right guy for the job, but I guess I just felt like the extreme level of quality of his films are what this franchise deserves and was hoping to see. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:40
|
|