Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[Shanderson88]

Originally Posted by JLaw1719

Nerds really need to get over the lens flare.

Good god this +9000. Every single time I click on any story about Abrams or Star Wars I see 20 different comments from a dude who thinks he is original by making a lens flare joke.

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by bluthx

I hope that he will do all three. That way they'll all have the same feel and continuity.

Episodes 4, 5, and 6 were directed by three different directors and they all have the same feel, continuity, and are all awesome.

Episodes 1, 2, and 3 were directed by one director and every single one of them feels off and, of course, just bad.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

Episodes 4, 5, and 6 were directed by three different directors and they all have the same feel, continuity, and are all awesome.

Episodes 1, 2, and 3 were directed by one director and every single one of them feels off and, of course, just bad.

I enjoy the prequels ... but yeah I agree with your point 100%

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by Talyn

Oh I agree.... I happen to like both, myself, but I do....sadly have friends who are staunch supporters of one or the other.

A small example from college went like this, ST First Contact came out. I was in a ST viewing club, we all got tickets and a bunch of new people came along. As we waited in line it started "I'm not here for this p*ssy trek sh*t...I'm only here to see the SW trailer." it continued for an hour. After the movie, all the way back it was "That was the best trailer ever! SW trailer this, SW trailer that... what movie was that sh*t." It was awkward and got contentious. Every con I go to I see some of this. Now while that was quite some time ago...to this day though, any Trek fans and SW's fans that friends of mine pan each other. Sometimes it's very civil but times it's like a cat fight and can be awkward. It's no indication of the fandom as a whole but there is a majority that feel a certain way.... A recent example involved the reboot and how insepid it was, now the others have already started firing back. Got a text this morning, "JJ stands for JarJar.....SW VII: Attack of the LensFlare.....SW SuperVII : Rise of the Binks!" It is...what it is....

From I'm seeing on my other boards it's not too bad yet but it seems the flame wars are sparking....

Though I'll say this the worst fight I ever saw, was one that resulted in an actual fight. It was Babylon 5 and ST : DS9 fans... I was out of there in 30 seconds....

hey, i never thought that the JJ stands for Jar Jar. it explains so much

i think part of the issue is that Trek was a show first and as a fan, I can laugh at some of the 60's stuff that appeaed on the show - the space hippes, etc. I think some people think of it as more of a kids show because of that while they think of Star Wars as more adult but it never made sense. First, Trek was a very adult show. for every space hippie there was a "City of the Edge of Forever" or "Balance of Terror". Also, Star Wars was based off of the serial movies which were aimed at kids. Lucas just matured them a little. in the end, they are still aiming for the same market but i think each group thinks the other franchise is too kiddie. it is odd. i have never had a problem liking both even though i do know the Enterprise would kicks the Falcon's ass same with Babylon 5 and DS9 - oh my god, they are both set on spacestations. didn't know when one sci-fi series used an idea, the rest were not allowed to anymore.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

+1. They're both set in space, and that's about all they have to really do with each other.

And Trek spends a lot more time in space.

Fantasy and sci-fi in my opinion. The unfortunate thing with Trek is it was mostly hard sf in '66. But theories on science have changed, and Trek has had to keep its canon. I've discussed this with Trekkies, but I think JJ's modern Wars approach to Trek is the right thing to do. Ignore science a little, so the show can remain true, without dialogue about the workings of machines that become less and less true as time goes on.

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by CraigW

Although not officially confirmed by the people involved, Hollywood Reporter and Variety have stated they have confirmed through their sources. To me those trade papers carry much more weight.

Also we haven't heard an official denial at this point. The Zak Synder thing was denied within 24h of the story.

I'm guessing that the reason for this is getting out of the long term deal at Paramount for Trek. I highly doubt that Disney and Kathleen Kennedy are going to want his efforts divided between the two franchises once he is done with the current work on new Trek movie.

Was JJ or his production company committed to another Trek movie after this one?

Variety

Hollywood Reporter

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I'll repeat - why does everyone assume Abrams is going to direct 8 and 9 as well? This could be just a one picture deal.

Yeah, only one episode please.

[Darth Marcus]

So who do you think J.J. Abrams will go with? Michael Giacchino or John Williams? John Williams is definitely getting up there in age (he's about to turn 81).

[MiracleandWonder]

With JJ Abrams onboard... I guess this means Greg Grunberg as a stormtrooper, right? That guy owes his entire history of employment to JJ

[saprano]

Originally Posted by MiracleandWonder

With JJ Abrams onboard... I guess this means Greg Grunberg as a stormtrooper, right? That guy owes his entire history of employment to JJ

He does?

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by Darth Marcus

So who do you think J.J. Abrams will go with? Michael Giacchino or John Williams? John Williams is definitely getting up there in age (he's about to turn 81).

It must be John Williams, unless he declines to do it. Then I would like to see John Powell take the baton. But knowing Abrams, he will go with Michael Giacchino (he was great with Ratatouille, ok with Star Trek, but I don't remember any notes from Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol and Super 8.

Again, only if John Williams declines.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

Any respect that guy had has long since gone out the window, and he should be held up as a lughing stock to other 'Exclusive News!' wannabe's that feel like posting BS. That includes the other guy that posted after him as well.

As for Abrams, rock solid choice, he is a decent action and character director with a strong cinematic feel so should do a half-decent job of it. The Executives at Disney need to ensure that Episode 7 at least has the same feel as the original trilogy, which did't go for a tremendous amount of Bay-esque camera movement and chose to simply shoot the action wide.

Am I the other guy? I've been confirming it, tongue in cheek. Sorry if I offended anyone.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

hey, i never thought that the JJ stands for Jar Jar. it explains so much

i think part of the issue is that Trek was a show first and as a fan, I can laugh at some of the 60's stuff that appeaed on the show - the space hippes, etc. I think some people think of it as more of a kids show because of that while they think of Star Wars as more adult but it never made sense. First, Trek was a very adult show. for every space hippie there was a "City of the Edge of Forever" or "Balance of Terror". Also, Star Wars was based off of the serial movies which were aimed at kids. Lucas just matured them a little. in the end, they are still aiming for the same market but i think each group thinks the other franchise is too kiddie. it is odd. i have never had a problem liking both even though i do know the Enterprise would kicks the Falcon's ass same with Babylon 5 and DS9 - oh my god, they are both set on spacestations. didn't know when one sci-fi series used an idea, the rest were not allowed to anymore.

B5 and DS9 is more than that. But both are good.

It was meant to be Star Trek: Babylon 5. But Trek turned it down cause there was no Trekking. After it had one successful season though, all of a sudden there was DS9. Similarities include:

- Space station.
- Station in orbit of hyperspace gate (B5), and wormhole (DS9)
- Number in name. 5 and 9.
- Captain loves baseball.
- Ancient war between supreme beings, seen as angels and demons.
- Humans caught in the middle of such war.
- Recent struggle between religious and oppressive. Oppressive reptilian Cardassians vs. religious humanoid Bajorans and Oppressive humanoid Centauri vs. religios reptilian Naan.
- Station under joint control of multiple races. 2 in DS9, 5 in B5.
- Character named Damar.
- B5 features many Trek actors, though none from DS9

And there's probably more. But both are executed very differntly. And were very good shows. Add Battlestar and Star Wars to the equation, and there's really nothing else you need from sci-fi.

Would anyone be interested in a reboot of Babylon 5 on the big screen? Could be a good trilogy, I reckon!

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

hey, i never thought that the JJ stands for Jar Jar. it explains so much

i think part of the issue is that Trek was a show first and as a fan, I can laugh at some of the 60's stuff that appeaed on the show - the space hippes, etc. I think some people think of it as more of a kids show because of that while they think of Star Wars as more adult but it never made sense. First, Trek was a very adult show. for every space hippie there was a "City of the Edge of Forever" or "Balance of Terror". Also, Star Wars was based off of the serial movies which were aimed at kids. Lucas just matured them a little. in the end, they are still aiming for the same market but i think each group thinks the other franchise is too kiddie. it is odd. i have never had a problem liking both even though i do know the Enterprise would kicks the Falcon's ass same with Babylon 5 and DS9 - oh my god, they are both set on spacestations. didn't know when one sci-fi series used an idea, the rest were not allowed to anymore.

They've been calling him Jar Jar Abrams on startrek.com since '09. Jar Jar/JJ ruined Star Wars/Trek. Whatever.

I love sci-fi almost as much as I love lens flare, so Abrams can do every sci-fi movie for the rest of my life if he wants.

[wormraper]

hmmmm, I hope star wars won't be obliterated by shaky cam and Lens flare galore... I'm a little of leary of JJ being handed the reigns but I'll reserve judgement till I actually see it

[bluthx]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Episode 4-6 had different directors, and they had the same feel/continuity.

I wasn't really implying that 4-6 had different feels. Just concerned that if they went with the "flavor of the month" director route for each film that it might impact the feel of them. But I see your point also.

[Packerfan75]

Originally Posted by wormraper

hmmmm, I hope star wars won't be obliterated by shaky cam and Lens flare galore... I'm a little of leary of JJ being handed the reigns but I'll reserve judgement till I actually see it

Yes, exactly. Please no shaky cam or flares. One of the reasons why I'm not crazy about Abrams. I like his storytelling but Cloverfield and Super 8 give me reason to doubt. Still hoping Matthew Vaughn gets the job. Love how he handles charcter interaction.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

Yes, exactly. Please no shaky cam or flares. One of the reasons why I'm not crazy about Abrams. I like his storytelling but Cloverfield and Super 8 give me reason to doubt. Still hoping Matthew Vaughn gets the job. Love how he handles charcter interaction.

Abrams didn't direct 'Cloverfield'. As far as this is concerned, Abrams is the done deal for 'Episode VII'. Lucas' son has confirmed it, as have sources in Lucasfilm and Bad Robot. Vaughn might get a crack at 'Episode VIII' or 'IX', but it won't be 'VII'.

Also, what shaky cam? Abrams doesn't use a lot of it in his films. 'Star Trek' and 'Super 8' had almost none, and 'M:I:3' might have had some, but I don't remember there being too much, but I'd have to re-watch it to be sure.

[MiracleandWonder]

Originally Posted by saprano

He does?

His three long-running TV stints (Felicity, Alias, Heroes) were all JJ Abrams shows, and he always cameos in JJ stuff. They are lifelong friends and JJ always throws him work, I'd be surprised if he doesn't at least cameo in Episode 7.

[kristoffer]

Not the best choice and not the worst. I didn't like MI3 but loved Star Trek.

[fgomike]

I think no matter the choice, fault would be found with it. Just be glad it's not Lucas himself. In J.J we trust!