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

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

I'm talking about the general public not fanboys. Regular people don't give a rat's ass about Wrath of Khan or the Patrick Stewart/Data ones. The recent two Star Trek films appeal to all.

Yeah I like them more than any of the ones before Abrams but for some reason most Trekkies who are not me seem to be angered by them.

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

Yeah I like them more than any of the ones before Abrams but for some reason most Trekkies who are not me seem to be angered by them.

Well, Trekkies are the fanboys. I personally love Star Trek 4 the most but it's not liked much by the rest of the world. While fanboys may think 1-10 are better than the last two, they are still very blind and forgiving to the mistakes in all of them which make them not good films as a whole.

Fanboys ignore elements of problematic filmmaking - just like with the Star Wars prequel lovers and just like the Matrix trilogy lovers (I'm a Matrix fanboy and love all three).

[octagon]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

Well, Trekkies are the fanboys. I personally love Star Trek 4 the most but it's not liked much by the rest of the world. While fanboys may think 1-10 are better than the last two, they are still very blind and forgiving to the mistakes in all of them which make them not good films as a whole.

Fanboys ignore elements of problematic filmmaking - just like with the Star Wars prequel lovers and just like the Matrix trilogy lovers (I'm a Matrix fanboy and love all three).

Yes, if fanboys are known for anything it's their willingness to overlook flaws and mistakes.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

Well, Trekkies are the fanboys. I personally love Star Trek 4 the most but it's not liked much by the rest of the world. While fanboys may think 1-10 are better than the last two, they are still very blind and forgiving to the mistakes in all of them which make them not good films as a whole.

Fanboys ignore elements of problematic filmmaking - just like with the Star Wars prequel lovers and just like the Matrix trilogy lovers (I'm a Matrix fanboy and love all three).

Where do they keep the nuclear wessels?

[kamphausd1]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

Well, Trekkies are the fanboys. I personally love Star Trek 4 the most but it's not liked much by the rest of the world. While fanboys may think 1-10 are better than the last two, they are still very blind and forgiving to the mistakes in all of them which make them not good films as a whole.

Fanboys ignore elements of problematic filmmaking - just like with the Star Wars prequel lovers and just like the Matrix trilogy lovers (I'm a Matrix fanboy and love all three).

This is news to me.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by kamphausd1

This is news to me.

Yeah, it's not one of my favorites but The Voyage Home did pretty well at the box office. It grossed 109M domestically back in 1986 which works out to somewhere around 231M in 2013 dollars. Into Darkness grossed 229M domestically so it's hard to argue that one had significantly wider support than the other among the movie going public.

(and yeah, okay, this is now totally and inarguably irrelevant)

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by wormraper

like I said 40 million frenchman can't be wrong. .... probably a good 80-90% of the world doesn't deserve oxygen

A couple WWII dictators agree with this statement.

and using rotten tomatoes is a joke. it only polls a small percentage of the actual public...

I see you're totally ignoring the critic scores, the professionals who study film as an art form. The actual "crap" you mention got TERRIBLE critic scores. Into Darkness most certainly did not. It's pretty much only a certain group of Trekkies that hate the film (and they are very vocal about it). RT is a reliable barometer of a film's quality way more often than not for years, you can't dismiss it because you don't personally agree.


All of Abrams' films have had majority positive reviews and audience reaction. Needless to say Episode VII is in good hands.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I see you're totally ignoring the critic scores, the professionals who study film as an art form. The actual "crap" you mention got TERRIBLE critic scores. Into Darkness most certainly did not. It's pretty much only a certain group of Trekkies that hate the film (and they are very vocal about it). RT is a reliable barometer of a film's quality way more often than not for years, you can't dismiss it because you don't personally agree.


All of Abrams' films have had majority positive reviews and audience reaction. Needless to say Episode VII is in good hands.

wait??? are we now actually LISTENING to critics???? I'm never sure. one moment we're supposed to hate every critic and make up our own minds about a movie and the now we're supposed to take their words as what is good????

and as for the "critics" score on RT... you do realize ANYONE who writes for a blog, a newspaper, a hometheater website, the pro critics etc can apply for "critic" status on there? I am actually on RT as a critic because of my own work as a reviewer elsewhere.... food for thought. not everyone on their listed as a critic spends some 4 year film degree to get their.

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by wormraper

wait??? are we now actually LISTENING to critics???? I'm never sure. one moment we're supposed to hate every critic and make up our own minds about a movie and the now we're supposed to take their words as what is good????

and as for the "critics" score on RT... you do realize ANYONE who writes for a blog, a newspaper, a hometheater website, the pro critics etc can apply for "critic" status on there? I am actually on RT as a critic because of my own work as a reviewer elsewhere.... food for thought. not everyone on their listed as a critic spends some 4 year film degree to get their.

With you being a reviewer from a different site I find this interesting

And when did this get all thrown off topic

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

With you being a reviewer from a different site I find this interesting

And when did this get all thrown off topic

lol, yeah I usually never mention where I do so because I never want to come across as someone who farms for reviews. I do it because it's a fun side thing where I get to do what I love most. watch movies and talk about em. (actually think we have reviewers on here as members from a lot of the major sites, HTS, HTF, HDD, Examiner, DVDTalk ..a few others If I remember correctly


and yeah, this has gotten ridiculous, back to star wars.

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by wormraper

lol, yeah I usually never mention where I do so because I never want to come across as someone who farms for reviews. I do it because it's a fun side thing where I get to do what I love most. watch movies and talk about em. (actually think we have reviewers on here as members from a lot of the major sites, HTS, HTF, HDD, Examiner, DVDTalk ..a few others If I remember correctly


and yeah, this has gotten ridiculous, back to star wars.

I & all the Mods know who all the reviewers from other sites are here. I think they spend more time here then there Believe it or not the list is somewhat long

Thanks for the back to Star Wars

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by wormraper

and as for the "critics" score on RT... you do realize ANYONE who writes for a blog, a newspaper, a hometheater website, the pro critics etc can apply for "critic" status on there? I am actually on RT as a critic because of my own work as a reviewer elsewhere.... food for thought. not everyone on their listed as a critic spends some 4 year film degree to get their.

That's why they have a "top critic" filter, and STID is still at 82%, which is still pretty darn good.


And I do listen to critics to get how artfully a film is received.

[Det. Bullock]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

That's why they have a "top critic" filter, and STID is still at 82%, which is still pretty darn good.


And I do listen to critics to get how artfully a film is received.

Sometimes critics are generous with "blockbusters" because they think that as long as they are a fun ride all is good and don't give negative marks unless it's either Michael Bay level schlock or too weird for their taste (remember we are talking about an aggregator, a divisive film has often a low percentage because critics are split in half on it).

Abrams' Star Trek film have very good directing and superlative production values but have really problematic scripts filled with stupid things that stand out like an eyesore to many people.

[Himmel]

A storyboard drawing of the Darth Vader flashback scene from TFA.
(Hurry before it's get taken down!!)


Flashback details...

[Show spoiler]Lord Vader while hunting the last known survivors of the rebel outpost that has been burned to the ground on the planet moon LV-426 he also comes to blows with the moons...other indigenous life forms.

[Show spoiler]

[Riddler The Slag]

JJ Abrams on the new Star Wars trailer to come.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakin...rs-663366.html

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by Terminated

A storyboard drawing of the Darth Vader flashback scene from TFA.
(Hurry before it's get taken down!!)


Flashback details...

[Show spoiler]Lord Vader while hunting the last known survivors of the rebel outpost that has been burned to the ground on the planet moon LV-426 he also comes to blows with the moons...other indigenous life forms.

[Show spoiler]

that would be awesome. I was trying to think of the last "threatening like an Alien" monster a jedi/sith faced, and I unfortunately had to skip any of those non-threatening cgi jokes-of-monsters (the Gungan sea creatures, the Genosis gladiator creatures) from the prequels - all the monsters from the OT were pretty menacing (garbage dump monster, the giant asteroid worm, the abominable snowman guy, even the little bat creatures in the asteroid worm, the Rancor Beast, and the desert monster).

[Sodslaw]

Given that the filming of Blade Runner 2 is scheduled for summer 2016, I think I can guess Hans fate in Episode 7 unless his role is dramatically reduced in Episode 8

[Guydowood]

Originally Posted by sodslaw

given that the filming of blade runner 2 is scheduled for summer 2016, i think i can guess hans fate in episode 7 unless his role is dramatically reduced in episode 8

HAN 2.jpg

[CinemaBlu]

Originally Posted by Sodslaw

Given that the filming of Blade Runner 2 is scheduled for summer 2016, I think I can guess Hans fate in Episode 7 unless his role is dramatically reduced in Episode 8

Droids evolve into replicants and Han becomes a model for the first.

[DisneyBlu]

______ to Make a Cameo in The Force Awakens?

According to an insider who reported their information to The Sun,

[Show spoiler]Billy Dee Williams

will return as

[Show spoiler]Lando Calrissian

in Star Wars: The Force Awakens! Although it won't be a main role, it's said to be a "fun cameo" that "

[Show spoiler]Billy's

definitely up for."

[Show spoiler]http://www.bostonherald.com/entertai...ar_wars_return