Sign In

Star Wars: Episode VII to be directed by J.J. Abrams **NON SPOILER THREAD** — Page 3

Author
Time

I'm still forming my opinion on the idea, but I'd like to point out that all the articles "confirming" it point to the same article on a site you've never heard of using no quotes and a single unnammed source who "works close to the production".

Even EW, who got the quote saying he'd rather just be in the audience and wasn't interested, immediately posted a link to this site and said "well, I guess he changed his mind" without putting up a disclaimer that no one has spoken to JJ since the "announcement". People are saying that the LA Times saying "sources confirm" is confirmation. Note they don't say "OUR sources confirm" or what those sources could be. They don't even have a link to the original article!

I'm wary, especially so soon after reading this:
http://x-surface.tumblr.com/post/41282771026/x-surface-dont-believe-everything-you-read

If it is true, its a leak that couldn't come at a worse possible time. The first comic lead in to Star Trek Into Darkness came out this week, the "Countdown" is literally beginning. Now that news is overshadowed by him abandoning the Trek ship for Wars.

I'm unconvinced, even with Jett Lucas and Bob Orci making it sound like its definitive.

I also can't imagine what sites like TFN will do with the complete secrecy JJ would bring to a Wars movie. They'd get so frustrated not knowing who the villian is!

This post has been edited.

“Oh yeah. I’m a dummy.” - me

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress / Facebook / Twitter

005’s List of List & Comparisons

Author
Time

It's a safe but solid choice imo.

I'm not Abrams biggest fan, I do have my issues with ST09, but they are mostly linked to the stupid script, not his direction, but I do think that he gets a good performance out of his cast. The kids in Super 8 were great, and on the whole the cast in ST were good too.

The thing is, I don't feel that he has his own voice as a director. He is a great mimic of style (especially Spielberg's) but he hasn't yet brought anything to the table that makes me think 'This is an ABRAMS movie' (lens flares aside). GL, despite his many perceived faults as a director definitely has his own visual stamp, and crams the frame with epic amounts of creativity and imagination.

With Abrams previous rejection of the directors chair for SW VII, I'm of the opinion that maybe he has now seen a draft of the screenplay and really likes what he sees. And this bodes well. A naff SW VII would surely be career suicide for any director, why would he risk his 'reputation' on this movie, he must know (if he is as big an SW's fan as he says he is)  that every single second of screen time, every frame will be under the most intense scrutiny from SW's fans and critics alike?

This post has been edited.

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

I'm still forming my opinion on the idea, but I'd like to point out that all the articles "confirming" it point to the same article on a site you've never heard of using no quotes and a single unnammed source who "works close to the production".

Even EW, who got the quote saying he'd rather just be in the audience and wasn't interested, immediately posted a link to this site and said "well, I guess he changed his mind" without putting up a disclaimer that no one has spoken to JJ since the "announcement". People are saying that the LA Times saying "sources confirm" is confirmation. Note they don't say "OUR sources confirm" or what those sources could be. They don't even have a link to the original article!

I'm wary, especially so soon after reading this:
http://x-surface.tumblr.com/post/41282771026/x-surface-dont-believe-everything-you-read

If it is true, its a leak that couldn't come at a worse possible time. The first comic lead in to Star Trek Into Darkness came out this week, the "Countdown" is literally beginning. Now that news is overshadowed by him abandoning the Trek ship for Wars.

I'm unconvinced, even with Jett Lucas and Bob Orci making it sound like its definitive.

I also can't imagine what sites like TFN will do with the complete secrecy JJ would bring to a Wars movie. They'd get so frustrated not knowing who the villian is!

oooookay where does it say he is abandoning star trek???????? you guys crack me up i swear.

Author
Time

Not what I expected, but I'll wait and see what he turns out.  All I know is that there were certainly a few moments I'd prefer to see *edited out* of J.J.'s initial 'Trek' reboot, which makes me a little wary of what he'll do with this.

But mainly, I'd like John Williams back to score this final 'trilogy of treatments' from GL, to round off the '9 picture saga' consistently. 

After that, Disney and various other directors/writers can then go nuts with any future 'Star Wars'-related 'spin-offs' or instalments if they wish, as far as I'm concerned. 

(I guess a lot of Trek sites are currently twitchy about this news too, lol.)

 

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

 

marcchrome said:

oooookay where does it say he is abandoning star trek???????? you guys crack me up i swear.
I just don't see Paramount being happy sharing his time with Disney.

And since all of this is RUMOR, we can discuss whatever possiblity we like.

 

last time i checked he has absolutely no exclusivity to paramount nor anyone else.... and do you work for paramount pictures to actually even know if they would be salty???? and your earlier statement about him abandoning star trek holds no merit because that is exactly what you are doing. spreading a rumor. but i digress.........

Author
Time

If this is just a rumour I imagine David Icke will be receiving a new clutch of devotee eggs in the morning.

It's everywhere and nobody is officially denying it.

An interesting observationoid though is that Dave's former employers, the BBC aren't running the story even though The Guardian and the Independent are.

This post has been edited.

When the student is ready, the Master speaks?

Author
Time

If this is legit...

 

Why I'm stoked.

  • Star Trek showed a fondness for practical sets and effects.
  • Super 8 showed that nostalgia might guide his hand a bit.
  • He makes sure his CGI looks darn good. 
  • In general I like his movies.

 

Author
Time

Some thoughts after hearing the news:

I'm not thrilled with the idea. I don't like how both the Star Trek and Star Wars franchises are both being directed by the same person. It would be better for fans if the two different franchises were allowed to show different styles, from two different directors' talents. Instead, there's no denying that the new Star Wars films will feel similar to Star Trek 2009.

I'm not a big fan of Star Trek 2009. I was impressed with the casting, as far as the actors nailing the performances, but I hated the script, I hated how they rewrote Star Trek history, and I hated all the juvenile action and the lack of a captivating villain. Nero was uninspiring and his reasons for wanting vengeance didn't make much sense, nor did his actions.

I can't stand Abrams' use of lens flares. I was surprised to read this earlier today:

http://io9.com/5230278/jj-abrams-admits-star-trek-lens-flares-are-ridiculous

In this article he admits that he went overboard with the lens flares. He also explained how he went to such great lengths to create the abundant lens flares - I thought he used CGI, but no - he did them all in camera - often pointing huge lights at the camera off-frame to create them. This is a very strange  thing to obsess over, and I recently tried to re-watch Star Trek 2009 on cable and just changed the channel because the lens flares were literally so distracting that I wasn't in the mood. I loved Super 8 but it also had the same issue with lens flares - it's overwhelming and actually distracts the viewer.

I really hope he dials way way back on that effect - the last thing this new Star Wars series needs is something like that to weigh it down. It already has a lot to go up against like the failures of the prequels.

We'll have to just wait and see I guess - I think he's a competent director overall. But Disney needs to tell him to back off the lens flares, seriously. The thing I worry about most is in the end, Star Trek and Star Wars will be done by the same director, and will look too similar. It seems like a safe choice since his films seem to do well, but it probably isn't the best choice. I do like Fringe a lot, I've followed it since the first episode, so there's hope. I think Super 8 showed his love for the old 70s/80s films - it felt very nostalgic, even though there were some inconsistencies regarding the dates of some of the featured props like the Walkman and the Rubik's cube. Perhaps he will treat the new Star Wars with the same type of dignity, though he didn't do that so well for Star Trek.

 

 

This post has been edited.

Author
Time

If this were a reboot like Star Trek more or less was, I'd be happy, but these films are supposed to fit with the past ones, both in terms of content AND visuals.

What you're asking for is impossible. The Star Wars saga is presently incoherent and discontinuous, both in tone, visuals, and content. There's no way for the ST to maintain harmony when the internal harmony has already been destroyed by the PT and related media.

Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!

Author
Time

Mavimao said:

I don't get all of the love for JJ Abrams - I think he's a decent TV director and producer, but I feel like I'm living in some weird parallel world when people praise his Star Trek reboot. I didn't mind the concept, but the execution was atrotious and totally went against the whole mythos of star trek. The smug kirk eating the apple during the kobiashi maru, him driving a car over a cliff, Spock and Uhura... WTF? It was pretty and exciting but dumb - a play told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

It was about seeing Kirk and company on the start of the path that makes them who they are when we saw them in the series. Maturity comes with life experience. That "smugness" and the willingness to take risk have always been part of Kirk, tempered by the responsibility of command.

Uhura flirted with Spock (to no avail) in "The Man Trap". Those scenes were cut out of syndication prints for decades.

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Abrams will either make the best Star Wars movie since the original trilogy or the worst Star Wars movie since the prequels. I don't see any in-between scenario here. I would prefer he didn't direct Star Wars and keep to his word and devotion to Star Trek. Kind of a finish what you start issue. We all know what happened to Bryan Singer when he ditched X-Men 3 in favor of Superman Returns.  What I'm finding so amazing about all this is that many great directors have reportedly tuned down Episode VII (including Abrams) which forced Spielberg to go to JJ and say "You OWE us for Super 8" and then the dump truck full of money poured the cash on JJ's lawn and here we are.  I'm actually really shocked that Matthew Vaughn didn't land the job.  Chloe Moretz is to blame for that I guess.

Author
Time

What reliable source has even mentioned how much money is involved? Or that Steven pressured Abrams into taking the gig? Let's stick to the facts, of which there aren't many yet.

Lucas only directed one film out of the OT, so I don't see what the big deal is here.

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Yeah, let's get all the lens flare jokes out of our system. ;)

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

That's why I suggested it as an avatar theme.

Flares are very 1970's though.

When the student is ready, the Master speaks?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:



Mavimao said:

I don't get all of the love for JJ Abrams - I think he's a decent TV director and producer, but I feel like I'm living in some weird parallel world when people praise his Star Trek reboot. I didn't mind the concept, but the execution was atrotious and totally went against the whole mythos of star trek. The smug kirk eating the apple during the kobiashi maru, him driving a car over a cliff, Spock and Uhura... WTF? It was pretty and exciting but dumb - a play told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.




It was about seeing Kirk and company on the start of the path that makes them who they are when we saw them in the series. Maturity comes with life experience. That "smugness" and the willingness to take risk have always been part of Kirk, tempered by the responsibility of command.

Uhura flirted with Spock (to no avail) in "The Man Trap". Those scenes were cut out of syndication prints for decades.


OK, I understand what you are saying about Kirk having some smugness about him and the willingness to take risks. I just feel like JJ Abrams just took it a little too far. The way they describe Kirk in Wrath of Kahn beating the Kobayashi Maru, it sounds like his "cheating" was creative and was acknowledged by his superiors as being clever. In ST09, he's just eating his apple, not even taking the situation seriously, and even making shooting gun gestures with his hand. Plus the modifications seemed so blown out of proportion and in your face, ie: this has obviously been tampered with. The lights go out, the klingons' shields magically go down, etc.

I feel like this scene doesn't so much show Kirk's rejection of the "no-win" scenario, but rather, feels like a 14 year old gamer, moding his copy of Unreal Tournament so he can make one shot kills and pissing off everyone instead of people thinking he's discovered something creative.

Does it show a young Kirk beating the Kobayashi Maru and feeling smug about it? Yes. Does it do it well? Not in my opinion.

Now onto Spock: as far as I've always understood, Vulcans were asexual except for Pon Farr every seven years. I know Spock is half-human, but he was still always depicted as a cold, logical person. This is a long cry from original trek where Bones was Kirk's heart and Spock was Kirk's brain and Kirk mediating between the both of them.

This post has been edited.

What's the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time

Besides we all know Spock and nurse Chapel were meant to be. =P

Help back DEEP SIX!

Author
Time

Yes it's more like a nerd spoof rather than events described in TWOK.

At times the comedy in that film is every bit as jarring as the shoehorned in gags in Star Trek V.

When the student is ready, the Master speaks?

Author
Time

After 4 Generations movies, 300 hours of Voyager,Deep Space etc., it doesn't hurt to have a couple action Trek movies. Don't worry, it will be back on TV lecturing us soon enough. It does seem weird there hasn't been an official starwars.com  announcement though, it's like they weren't ready to tell us yet.

This post has been edited.

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

I'm still forming my opinion on the idea, but I'd like to point out that all the articles "confirming" it point to the same article on a site you've never heard of using no quotes and a single unnammed source who "works close to the production".

I dunno why no one is paying attention to that.

Author
Time

Ady posted a page back that George's son Jett tweeted "J J Abrams will do wonders!" so there is a source close to the source, at least.

Rather than assume visual style based simply on JJ directing, who do you expect to see him hiring as his production designer? I would love to see Stuart Craig here - his work on HP to create physical models whenever possible was pretty amazing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDHswtk88SY

This post has been edited.

Some people call them Force Ghosts. I call them Midichlorian Swarms.

Author
Time

Maybe JJ will let Jett name creatures in the new movie like he did in the prequels.

I recall the word "Gungan" came from young Jett.

“Grow up. These are my Disney's movies, not yours.”

Author
Time

Aaand they give it to this noob.

The man has no talent. Franchise dead.

Author
Time

BmB said:

The man has no talent. Franchise dead.

Better to deliver the eulogy over a decade late than never at all, I suppose.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

To the top