'Furious 7' - April 3rd, 2015

[jvince]

Originally Posted by aoife

I hope Chris Morgan remains involved. And personally, as long as Dom and Brian are in the movie, I'm in. The rest of the characters, while I love them, are just added value. Let's see what happens in the 6th movie and then maybe we can speculate who could come back.

Personally, I'd love Leon to come back. Did we ever find out if Jesse really die? But then again, Letty's back, so who knows, right? Personally, after seeing Vince in Fast Five, I would love to see the rest of the original gang back.

Given the premise of Fast & Furious 6, I really think the 7th movie could drop the character of Hobbs and move on. But who knows? We'll see!

[Show spoiler]As much as I've loved Justin Lin's movies in this series, I would love to see James Wan's take on the 7th film, especially if we consider that, from what we know, the 7th film could very well be a revenge story. James Wan is so good at that!

My two cents.

Part 6 definitely

[Show spoiler]sets the next one up to be a revenge story for both sides. I could see how Hobbs would be excluded if The Rock isn't available. The only thing I don't like is that they seem to be regressing back with Part 7 instead of continuing the franchise's successful evolution into heist films

.

[Scourge]

Originally Posted by jvince

Part 6 definitely

[Show spoiler]sets the next one up to be a revenge story for both sides. I could see how Hobbs would be excluded if The Rock isn't available. The only thing I don't like is that they seem to be regressing back with Part 7 instead of continuing the franchise's successful evolution into heist films

.

Well, yeah, but it's also a fresh take on the series. I mean, it certainly has potential and it prevents the whole thing from growing stale. Who knows? I think there will be more to come. Given the series' success (the last one made almost $700 million and I think the sixth film will be a massive hit as well), I don't think Universal is going to let this series die so easily. I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with a new trilogy after FF7, but as long as the quality remains the same, I'm in!

Now, if Hobbs is in it or not, I trust Chris Morgan's judgment. He has managed to create a pretty awesome tale so far, and he's very economic with his storytelling. He's not greedy and uses the elements he has at his disposal and that reflects in the quality.

Also, the amount of inner logic and overall structure he has injected into the FF series is amazing. Not even George Lucas was able to do something even remotely similar with his prequel trilogy (and he wrote the whole thing!)

So I think we should trust Morgan and the filmmakers. I think they've realized that being true to the characters and the story pays off. As much as I like Hobbs, I hope they only bring him in when the story calls for his presence.

That's what I think, anyway!

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by aoife

Well, yeah, but it's also a fresh take on the series. I mean, it certainly has potential and it prevents the whole thing from growing stale. Who knows? I think there will be more to come. Given the series' success (the last one made almost $700 million and I think the sixth film will be a massive hit as well), I don't think Universal is going to let this series die so easily. I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with a new trilogy after FF7, but as long as the quality remains the same, I'm in!

Now, if Hobbs is in it or not, I trust Chris Morgan's judgment. He has managed to create a pretty awesome tale so far, and he's very economic with his storytelling. He's not greedy and uses the elements he has at his disposal and that reflects in the quality.

Also, the amount of inner logic and overall structure he has injected into the FF series is amazing. Not even George Lucas was able to do something even remotely similar with his prequel trilogy (and he wrote the whole thing!)

So I think we should trust Morgan and the filmmakers. I think they've realized that being true to the characters and the story pays off. As much as I like Hobbs, I hope they only bring him in when the story calls for his presence.

That's what I think, anyway!

4 and 5 were very good movies, so far out of all the movies they made im going to guess 2 is the one they regret the most. 3 brought something new and energetic to the series. Lets also be real the Vin Diesel Cameo at the end of the movie was so well placed and fueled the speculation he was ready to return to the series.

[Scourge]

Originally Posted by R3P0

4 and 5 were very good movies, so far out of all the movies they made im going to guess 2 is the one they regret the most. 3 brought something new and energetic to the series. Lets also be real the Vin Diesel Cameo at the end of the movie was so well placed and fueled the speculation he was ready to return to the series.

Honestly, I find 2 Fast 2 Furious to be very entertaining and a lot of fun. Plus, I love the visual aspect of the film, it's so bright and colorful, my girly side finds it irresistible.

Tokyo Drift, while I don't dislike it, it's my least favorite, because even though they're making great efforts to connect it to the main plot now, at the time it was just Universal's way of milking a franchise dry, just like they did it with The Bourne Legacy.

I don't know why so many people hate FF2. After 4 & 5, 2 is probably my third favorite. It always puts me in a good mood. I love the relationship between Brian and Roman, and I am glad they brought Roman back.

[kemcha]

I've enjoyed every single one of these films but I don't believe the spoiler information that was posted simply because of the events that happened in Tokyo Drift make the spoiler information simply just innuendo.

I won't post the spoiler info concerning the seventh film because it completely contradicts what we saw in the third film, Tokyo Drift. During Sean and Han's final ride, Han is killed during the confrontation/race with D.K., which is why I don't believe the AICN spoiler news. This isn't a situation like Letty's supposed "death" where it was assumed that Letty had died.

Does anyone question the supposed spoiler info? Because, it seems that Universal has taken the "Marvel Comics" approach to "people never stay dead", we simply rewrite the story so that they never died.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by kemcha

I've enjoyed every single one of these films but I don't believe the spoiler information that was posted simply because of the events that happened in Tokyo Drift make the spoiler information simply just innuendo.

I won't post the spoiler info concerning the seventh film because it completely contradicts what we saw in the third film, Tokyo Drift. During Sean and Han's final ride, Han is killed during the confrontation/race with D.K., which is why I don't believe the AICN spoiler news. This isn't a situation like Letty's supposed "death" where it was assumed that Letty had died.

Does anyone question the supposed spoiler info? Because, it seems that Universal has taken the "Marvel Comics" approach to "people never stay dead", we simply rewrite the story so that they never died.

It's true. Letty is Alive. Just watch the trailer. The Han death spoiler is true as well. The movie has already begun screening and has been confirmed. There's nothing not to believe about it. Han is still dead, and the letty thing is easily explainable.

[Samus Aran]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

It's true. Letty is Alive. Just watch the trailer. The Han death spoiler is true as well. The movie has already begun screening and has been confirmed. There's nothing not to believe about it. Han is still dead, and the letty thing is easily explainable.

Does the movie explain how Han got 10 years younger when he went to Tokyo?

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

Does the movie explain how Han got 10 years younger when he went to Tokyo?

He basically looks the same now as he did then. It doesn't bother me.

[kemcha]

This is the problem with Universal, and this series in particular. It's so full of plotholes and inaccuracies that it's basically the only thing I agree on with many critics that you actually have to suspend your thought processes and just watch the movie as a simple movie.

Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy these movies but this all started because Universal was unusally tight lipped about how Tokyo Drift had ended and they left it so ambiguous that you assume that Han had died in Tokyo Drift. It wasn't until recently, that Universal started adding these "post credit" scenes in their films to kind of explain how events set up the next film. I think that Universal messed up by leaving it oipen to interpretation that viewers thought Han had died during that fatal car chase/assault near the end of Tokyo Drift.

I think if Universal had been more transparent about what happened to Han in that film that they wouldn't have had to do this whole "resurrection" thing with the characters in this series. What's next? Jesse returns from the dead for "Fast Eight"? After awhile, you start to see a pattern emerging. For this franchise series, even if you die, you can come back to life. lols

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by kemcha

This is the problem with Universal, and this series in particular. It's so full of plotholes and inaccuracies that it's basically the only thing I agree on with many critics that you actually have to suspend your thought processes and just watch the movie as a simple movie.

Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy these movies but this all started because Universal was unusally tight lipped about how Tokyo Drift had ended and they left it so ambiguous that you assume that Han had died in Tokyo Drift. It wasn't until recently, that Universal started adding these "post credit" scenes in their films to kind of explain how events set up the next film. I think that Universal messed up by leaving it oipen to interpretation that viewers thought Han had died during that fatal car chase/assault near the end of Tokyo Drift.

I think if Universal had been more transparent about what happened to Han in that film that they wouldn't have had to do this whole "resurrection" thing with the characters in this series. What's next? Jesse returns from the dead for "Fast Eight"? After awhile, you start to see a pattern emerging. For this franchise series, even if you die, you can come back to life. lols

you do realize that fast and furious tokyo drift is in the FUTURE. han DOES die at the end. the order is fast 1, 2 ,4 ,5, 6, 3, 7 in terms of chronology

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by kemcha

This is the problem with Universal, and this series in particular. It's so full of plotholes and inaccuracies that it's basically the only thing I agree on with many critics that you actually have to suspend your thought processes and just watch the movie as a simple movie.

Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy these movies but this all started because Universal was unusally tight lipped about how Tokyo Drift had ended and they left it so ambiguous that you assume that Han had died in Tokyo Drift. It wasn't until recently, that Universal started adding these "post credit" scenes in their films to kind of explain how events set up the next film. I think that Universal messed up by leaving it oipen to interpretation that viewers thought Han had died during that fatal car chase/assault near the end of Tokyo Drift.

I think if Universal had been more transparent about what happened to Han in that film that they wouldn't have had to do this whole "resurrection" thing with the characters in this series. What's next? Jesse returns from the dead for "Fast Eight"? After awhile, you start to see a pattern emerging. For this franchise series, even if you die, you can come back to life. lols

Uh, it's not up for debate at all. The last two films make it clear Han hasn't even arrived in Tokyo yet. He says "he'll get there eventually," not that he's already been there. As wormwraper said above me, 3 takes place after 6 and before 7. It's not open for debate, it's how it is. The continuity in these films is actually pretty intricate and has been handled very well. None of what you're saying is true.

[Tcan21]

I wonder if

[Show spoiler]Lucas Black's character will be involved in some capacity

[kemcha]

The only reason Universal states that message in Fast Five is because Universal tried to retcon the "events" in Tokyo Drift" concerning Han's death without retconning the entire film from the history of the film franchise. Since you brought it up, explain how Han "died" in Tokyo Drift? If we believe what Universal and the producers are saying about the film franchise series, Tokyo Drift takes place after the events of Fast Six.

because of the post credit scene, here is a spoiler tag

[Show spoiler]So, if Han dies in the post credit scene in Fast Six, explain how he survives the post credit scene in fast Six to appear in Tokyo Drift?

Unless Han pulled some of "Jedi Knight Mind Trick", Tokyo Drift and Fast Six is the result of some of the worst writing in any movie or television series by writers who aren't aware that in order to make your story somewhat believable, the characters you are writing about have to obey the laws governing "life" and "death". Despite what many may believe, even in movies, you cannot come back to life, unless you're immortal. The one thing about the Fast and the Furious film franchise is that the series is somewhat grounded in the present "real" world.

Sorry, everyone, not trying to sound sarcastic about this but there is obviously a major disconnect with whoever decided to write the post credit scene in Fast Six. Judging by what others have said about this post credit scene, it appears that the Fast Six writer didn't even bother to watch "Tokyo Drift" and to make some competent try to, at least, connect Tokyo Drift into the chronology of the Fast and the Furious film series.

From the way I understand it, Tokyo Drift's death scene is the actual one, but the writer for Fast Six tries to write that post credit scene without making some kind of attempt to explain that Han is pulled from the wreckage in time so that his appearance in Tokyo Drift can still be explained. *Granted that I have yet to see this post credit scene and I would welcome someone to post any detailed info about it.

[kemcha]

Sorry for the double. But, the only way I can see this being explained is if the Statham scene happens during the events in Tokyo Drift where Sean and Han are involved in that car chase/assault with D.K. and Morimoto. If that's the case, then it makes sense. But, this would mean that the post credit scene take place during Tokyo Drift ... judging from what I read on another blog, this is the only way that the post credit scene wouild make sense.

[madlost1]

Originally Posted by kemcha

Sorry for the double. But, the only way I can see this being explained is if the Statham scene happens during the time where Sean leaves Han's car. If that's the case, then it makes sense. But, this would mean that the post credit scene take place during Tokyo Drift ... judging from what I read on another blog, this is the only way that the post credit scene wouild make sense.

Your reading into this way too much.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by kemcha

The only reason Universal states that message in Fast Five is because Universal tried to retcon the "events" in Tokyo Drift" concerning Han's death without retconning the entire film from the history of the film franchise. Since you brought it up, explain how Han "died" in Tokyo Drift? If we believe what Universal and the producers are saying about the film franchise series, Tokyo Drift takes place after the events of Fast Six.

because of the post credit scene, here is a spoiler tag

[Show spoiler]So, if Han dies in the post credit scene in Fast Six, explain how he survives the post credit scene in fast Six to appear in Tokyo Drift?

Unless Han pulled some of "Jedi Knight Mind Trick", Tokyo Drift and Fast Six is the result of some of the worst writing in any movie or television series by writers who aren't aware that in order to make your story somewhat believable, the characters you are writing about have to obey the laws governing "life" and "death". Despite what many may believe, even in movies, you cannot come back to life, unless you're immortal. The one thing about the Fast and the Furious film franchise is that the series is somewhat grounded in the present "real" world.

Sorry, everyone, not trying to sound sarcastic about this but there is obviously a major disconnect with whoever decided to write the post credit scene in Fast Six. Judging by what others have said about this post credit scene, it appears that the Fast Six writer didn't even bother to watch "Tokyo Drift" and to make some competent try to, at least, connect Tokyo Drift into the chronology of the Fast and the Furious film series.

From the way I understand it, Tokyo Drift's death scene is the actual one, but the writer for Fast Six tries to write that post credit scene without making some kind of attempt to explain that Han is pulled from the wreckage in time so that his appearance in Tokyo Drift can still be explained. *Granted that I have yet to see this post credit scene and I would welcome someone to post any detailed info about it.

six's post credit happenings and tokyo drift happen simultaneously. there's an overlap of the two films. 6 and 3 happen (for the most part) in the same time frame)

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by kemcha

Sorry for the double. But, the only way I can see this being explained is if the Statham scene happens during the events in Tokyo Drift where Sean and Han are involved in that car chase/assault with D.K. and Morimoto. If that's the case, then it makes sense. But, this would mean that the post credit scene take place during Tokyo Drift ... judging from what I read on another blog, this is the only way that the post credit scene wouild make sense.

That's exactly what happens, kemcha. What are you not understanding about what we're saying? The scene in question takes place during 'Tokyo Drift'. They're playing it as we've all thought it was an accident up until this point, but it turns out it wasn't. There's no disconnect at all. It's funny you're making such a fuss over it, considering you think that Craig's Bond films are prequels to Connery's, when that isn't the care at all. Also, is it a post credits scene, or is it the end of the film? I've heard both.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

That's exactly what happens, kemcha. What are you not understanding about what we're saying? The scene in question takes place during 'Tokyo Drift'. They're playing it as we've all thought it was an accident up until this point, but it turns out it wasn't. There's no disconnect at all. It's funny you're making such a fuss over it, considering you think that Craig's Bond films are prequels to Connery's, when that isn't the care at all. Also, is it a post credits scene, or is it the end of the film? I've heard both.

I was always under the impression Casino Royale was supposed to be Bonds first mission and QOS was the direct followup of it.

Granted its not that hard to realize that at some point during or after Fast 6

[Show spoiler]Han leaves for Tokyo and gets killed

you guys really need to start using spoilers in this thread because some of us had forgotten or managed to ignore the

[Show spoiler]Han Death Spoiler

up to this point.

[kemcha]

I think what everyone was missing was the fact the the post credits in Fast Six and the events that happen in Tokyo Drift look like they happen at different points in time and Universal Studios, if they decided that the post credit scene DID take place during the "pursuit" chase at the end of the third film, then they really should have indicated at that.

It just looks like that Tokyo Drift and the post credit scene happen at different times.

I wasn't reading too much into it but when I watch a movie, I prefer to watch a movie that doesn't decide to insult the intelligence of the person watching it. While I don't expect too much from movies produced by Hollywood, I do expect some common sense. I don't know, I just don't think it's asking too much.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by kemcha

I think what everyone was missing was the fact the the post credits in Fast Six and the events that happen in Tokyo Drift look like they happen at different points in time and Universal Studios, if they decided that the post credit scene DID take place during the "pursuit" chase at the end of the third film, then they really should have indicated at that.

It just looks like that Tokyo Drift and the post credit scene happen at different times.

I wasn't reading too much into it but when I watch a movie, I prefer to watch a movie that doesn't decide to insult the intelligence of the person watching it. While I don't expect too much from movies produced by Hollywood, I do expect some common sense. I don't know, I just don't think it's asking too much.

Not really the point of the scene is speculation but it sounds like After Fast 6 but During Fast 3 which is After Fast 6 yet Before Fast 7

The timeline is something like this

Fast 1-5, Fast 6, Fast 3/Fast 6 Credits Scene, Fast 7