Akton

Well, a good trailer trumps a bad poster any ol' day of the week... and that was a damn good trailer.

Of course, we've all seen great trailers for crappy movies before (it's become something of a genre unto itself in 21st Century cinema), so, as previously mentioned, my optimism (though now tamped up) remains cautious.

I will say that Kylo's voice comes across much better here than it did in the clips of the talking action figure (as one would have every reason to expect, really). And were those fellow Ren Knights loitering about with him in the rain?

Ah, forget I asked... I think it's time to step back from any more spoilers or speculations and just let the film speak for itself. Two more moons to go, gents... 

Sevb32 said:

I really don't think anything will please some people, no matter what they put out it would have it's detractors. Struzan has his detractors.  The old saying you cannot please everyone. It's all subjective and not scientific fact anyway.

Good heavens, yes! If even an uninspired photoshop hackjob complete with copypasta mirrored stormtroopers won't please these fussy, Tom Jung-loving nitpickers, then literally nothing on earth will!

Here's to the only kind of complaining permitted (and regularly engaged in) by the positivity-at-all-costs crusaders: complaining about complaining.

The poster is a cluttered mess, and as soulless a piece of digital hackery as I'd ever hoped not to see. Makes me sorry I was so hard on Struzan's mediocre (but still not completely soulless) D23 poster.

I honestly don't get the fatalistic comments I hear about how we "can't" expect this film to have a good, painted poster in the classic style of the OT posters. Why the hell not? Is it a question of money? Does a talented, classically trained illustrator cost much more than some cut-and-paste hack with a Mac? And, what with all of the other overtures having been made to old school filmmaking techniques on this production, was expecting that philosophy to extend to the film's poster really so unreasonable?

I'm also deeply disappointed that Starkiller Base is really nothing at all more than a third Death Star. I mean I knew it kind of was conceptually already, but the disappointment is much more visceral now that I see that even on a visual level it is nothing more than (yet another) copy and paste job. I agree with the analogy to the A-Bomb on the one hand - yes, there's no practical reason why a super-weapon design would be completely jettisoned when it has proven effective in the past. But come on, we're talking about a Space Fantasy saga where creativity and spectacle have trumped practicality in such delightful fashion, giving us such wonderful impractical implements of war as the AT-AT Walker and, well, the lightsaber.

Let's hope the trailer delivers a bit more reason for optimism. But, as old-timers who've lived through the bad days of the PT, let's continue to keep any such optimism cautious. 

TV's Frink said:

Akton said:

Why can't they just do this, but with Star Wars?

 I like to think that 99% of the posts here (other than mine, of course) have already been posted multiple times previously.

Probably holds true for roughly 99% of the internet's fora, too... 

Though it's shame so few of them are lucky enough to have you around to point it out to them, Frinkie, old boy.

It's not like we want them to blaze a trail in virgin territory. There is a precedent for what we're looking for.

Why can't they just do this, but with Star Wars?

"It's gonna be great."

"It's gonna be great!"

"It's gonna be great."

joefavs said:

side note, everyone in those movies is way too blasé about the growth acceleration thing. all those clones being sent into combat are like, ten years old or something, and there isn't even a whiff of the sense that this state of affairs is even ethicall shaky.

Well, sir, you're forgetting the powerful moment when Obi-Wan stared blankly at the morally horrific sight of the army of disposable ten year old men secretly ordered by a dead guy and said something to the effect of "Hmm." or "Oh" or "...."

Not to mention the scene at the end of AOTC where he discusses the matter with Yoda and concludes, to paraphrase the wise Jedi, "Well, we won the battle thanks to them, so, y'know, whatever."

Besides, why should we get our panties in a bunch over something like the moral duties of Jedi? After all, "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."

... which is, of course, an absolute statement.

So I guess Obi-Wan was evil all along, which explains his moral laxity.

So, you see the genius of George Lucas at work here.

...Okay, I'm physically ill after that brief round of playing "devil's advocate" for PT apologists. I'm gonna go lie down now.

Lord Haseo said:

It's not really a bad idea to begin with. If Luke were to tell Kylo Ren about the dangers of the Darkside you people would have no problem with it. But because one strand from the prequels would be in the ST then suddenly the idea is shit. Let me ask...who would know most about how toxic the Darkside is? Anakin of course seeing as how he was engulfed in it for decades. I don't see any reasoning for that being a bad idea other than "its bad because prequels"

Obi-Wan's ghost, apart from being an exposition delivery vehicle, was there to provide some bare minimum of guidance for Luke on his path to becoming a Jedi. Luke's final glance at the ghosts of his three "fathers" at the end of ROTJ is only meaningful if it is just that - a final glance - which the film strongly implies it is by showing Luke finally turning his back to them and rejoining the world of the living.

Luke emerged from the OT as a fully-formed Jedi. Having the Force Ghosts linger on into the ST would not only diminish his role as the elder mentor figure for the new characters, it would also diminish the very concept of death (at least for Jedi) in the saga. What meaning does Obi-Wan's sacrificial death have (or Anakin's for that matter) if they can just continue to appear in the films and interact with living characters, differing from their former living selves only in that they are a bit bluer and more translucent?

Anakin's story - his arc - is finished, I'd have thought that that was one thing PT haters and lovers could agree on. It falls to Luke to impart wisdom and warnings to the youngsters now - and, as hero of the OT (and the PT too if you consider that he is his father's redeemer), nobody has earned that duty more than him. To have him sit passively off to the side while the ghost of his young-looking father lectures the new villain about the evils of villainy would be all manner of lameness and shite, and we can only be grateful that it is so exceedingly unlikely to occur under the watchful eye of the ST's creative team. 

↑ Wisdom!

ZkinandBonez said:

joefavs said:

The movies don't really have any choice about which canon to follow, though; they're bound to whatever the Lucasfilm Story Group decides, and they're most definitely going with the prequels. I honestly think it's a case of a subset of fans wildly overestimating Fett's importance, seeing there was still an actor whose character we didn't know anything about, and saying "well, obviously that has to be Boba Fett".

Like I said Kasdan and Abrams aren't going to be allowed to contradict the PT, but that doesn't necessarily meant that they will make any direct, if any, references to it other than what was already acknowledged in the OT.
And because of that Sydow cant be Boba Fett. 

It's actually kind of funny considering how so many people on this forum is almost terrified that the ST will create more universe shrinking like the PT did, while most of the fans on the internet seems desperate to prove all kinds of strange lore connections. 
I personally can't help but think "Why do so many people even want Sydow to play an old Boba Fett?" I mean is that a good thing? It's also so illogical, so why this persistence regardless.

Casting Max Von Sydow is not some kind of formal contradiction of the PT; at most, it is (from the PT fanboy's POV) a case of very bad casting. Perhaps he wears some kind of facial prosthesis which makes the fact that he's not a Maori less immediately jarring... and he's lived on (a) desert planet(s) for decades, and so he aged badly; plus he was mauled by a Sarlaac at one point - so there's your in-universe justification right there.

Outside-universe requires no explanation at all other than "he's a great actor and we thought he was right for the role." Could it be taken as a passive swipe at the PT canon on the part of the ST team? Sure, but nothing solid enough for the Corporate Canon Committee to hang their hats on.

As to why his playing Boba Fett is desirable for some of us, that's easy. Boba Fett was a wildly popular peripheral character from the OT who was given an unceremonious chump's death in ROTJ that left many fans feeling cheated. Having an actor of MVS's caliber play the character in TFA nicely fixes all of the problems that hamstrung Boba Fett to begin with: It means he survived what was otherwise the lamest onscreen death of a beloved character; and, assuming he plays a pivotal role in the plot of TFA, it means his importance to the franchise - an importance that exists solely because he was cool-looking and heavily marketed - has been justified by making him important to the actual events of the larger story beyond being a glorified delivery boy / bouncer.

AntcuFaalb said:

Akton said:

Someone on Reddit expressed his hope that this character name is not some reference to another JJ Abrams film or show. I heartily echo that sentiment.

LOr San Tekka

....bloody hell, you're right.

If that's the worst thing he does with the films, then I'd say we got off easy, but damn... I don't know if even Kevin Smith himself indulged in that much self-reference whoring in his Superman Lives script...

Lord Haseo said:

I wouldn't mind seeing Hayden in the ST. All he would need is the right acting coach to get him in the good frame of mind for his scenes and secondly he needs good dialogue. People seem to forget only amazing actors give vastly greater performances than the actual writing allows. I mean even Samuel L. Jackson wasn't good in the PT and he's an overall great actor.

I hear these kinds of defenses of Hayden Christensen a lot around here. And I just don't get them.

I've seen Shattered Glass, the film purported to be the ne plus ultra of his thespian skills,and I can honestly say I don't think he ever rose above the level of mere competence and serviceability; about as good as your average Lou Diamond Phillips performance. Nothing approaching Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction, that's for damn sure. 

I dunno, praising an actor for simply being capable of turning in a not-horrible performance seems silly, and kind of smacks of the mentality that gives kids trophies just for showing up to the ballpark and gives congratulatory back-slaps to those Maury Pauvich and Jerry Springer guests who proudly proclaim their ability to pay their own bills.

Swazzy said:

the whole reason I want him back is because I feel he genuinely deserves another shot at this role.  

 Yes, by all means, a decision to hugely affect the Sequel Trilogy's themes, plot, and character should be made based solely on giving an actor a chance to redeem himself.

Friends, try for a moment to envision the inevitable scene that will take place (if this rumor is true) involving a spectral Hayden Christensen speaking to (or about) Adam Driver, saying something along the lines of "don't go down that path I traveled all those years ago." Are you recoiling in horror? Good. That is the correct response.

MSW is reporting that Max Von Sydow's character has been revealed to be a Jakku elder named Lor San Tekka, who knows the whereabouts of Luke Skywalker.

http://makingstarwars.net/2015/09/rumor-max-von-sydows-character-in-star-wars-the-force-awakens-is-named/

In the article, it is cagily implied that MSW knows more about the character but will not reveal it. So, hope springs eternal for the Boba Fett rumor.

Someone on Reddit expressed his hope that this character name is not some reference to another JJ Abrams film or show. I heartily echo that sentiment.

Ronster said:

 Mistakes happen, and a most unfortunate mistake it was.

That is, I can say without fear of exagerration, the most euphemistic description imaginable for gross criminal negligence resulting in the decapitation of a respected actor and two small children.

Ronster said:

 But that does not make John Landis "not" a nice person.

Very true. Even the most grossly criminally negligent manslaughterer can be pleasant and personable.

And, in light of the topic of this thread, here's hoping he's also right about the OOT, in addition to being a grossly criminally negligent manslaughterer.

Apologies if this has been posted already:

Darth Vader with Child Anakin's Voice

I'll never forget the indescribable thrill of sitting in the theater in 1999 as a 21 year old man, watching a brand new Star Wars film for the first time since I was 5 years old. Hearing the familiar fanfare, seeing the familiar logo recede into the starfield, and then seeing the crawl open with the wonderfully unfamiliar "EPISODE I" was an ecstatic, visceral experience unlike anything I've ever felt before or since.

But then the remaining 2 hours and 15.5 minutes happened, and it was all downhill from there.

I know it's beyond cliche to disparage Jar-Jar and to blame all the faults of the PT on him when he was, in fact, merely one relatively minor brick in the edifice of mediocrity and half-assery that was the Prequel Trilogy, but, having said that, I must admit that the first moment that my heart truly sank in reaction to the PT was when I found myself having to accept the utterly unacceptable fact that a major new character in the first new Star Wars film in 16 years had, in the span of just a few minutes, quoted Wayne from Wayne's World and Stephanie Tanner from Full House.

I felt like a man who'd been stabbed in the heart... and, just minutes later, when Jar-Jar says the line "Any hep (sic) here would be hot," I knew the bearded, flannel-shirted assailant was now gleefully twisting the knife.

But the true insight to just what a monumental failure the PT was came when I realized - and I think this dawned on me very slowly and painfully, with me kicking and screaming and refusing to accept it all the way - that Lucas had fundamentally failed to deliver - or to even understand, it seemed - the Prequel Trilogy that needed to be made in order to be a comprehensible prelude to the OT - namely, a PT with Obi-Wan as its clear protagonist, with the Clone Wars as the backdrop and central confilct for all three films, and with a sensible flow of theme, character and plot into the OT, respecting what the OT had already established. 

I'm for not having any Force Ghosts at all in the ST. I like to think that Luke only ever spoke to Ben, and that the final scene of ROTJ is the last he sees of any of them (and, it should go without saying, the last he saw of his father was the ghost of the old man who died saving his son, not the young, mushmouthed, child-killing dunderhead he purportedly once was according to certain spurious, non-OOT sources). 

Luke is the Ben Kenobi of the ST. He has to play that role now. To have him still conferring with a spectral Obi-Wan who by now would look to be the same age (or younger) than Luke would be a thematic mess. Likewise, the long shadow cast by Darth Vader is certainly going to be central to the plot of TFA - if not the entire ST - and a primary motivation for Kylo Ren's character arc. Vader's presence will be most keenly felt in these films paradoxically by his absence. His presence as a Force Ghost bobbing impotently about at the periphery of the film would grossly undercut all of that, most especially if he's being played by this guy.

SilverWook said:

Akton said:

SilverWook said:

I actually got the finger as a present back in 1982. I blame the complete lack of Dark Crystal toys on the market for this. At least it was more screen accurate than some of the other E.T. toys back then. The official plush toys were hideous.

And apparently somebody thought it would be a good idea to revisit this with the whole hand!

 

 

 

I blame my nearly life-long, deep-seated hatred of yappy little dogs on my exposure to this thing on the silver screen at the tender age of four.

 Anyone who doesn't love Fizzgig is clearly a Skeksis sympathizer. At least he's housebroken! ;)

Guilty as charged. The Skeksis were awesome; easily the best thing about the film, deeply disturbing though they were.

...though, not much more disturbing than the female Gelfling's inexplicable resemblance to Rebecca deMornay.

Darth Zannah said:

can you share a source for Coleman's concern regarding Jar Jar? I'm interested in that...thanks 

 http://articles.latimes.com/1999/jun/21/entertainment/ca-48611

This article is contemporary with the release of TPM so one has to read between the lines a great deal, as this is coming from one of the many well-paid LFL employees who can be seen in the PT behind-the-scenes footage nodding and smiling at everything Lucas says and laughing uproariously at his lame jokes. 

joefavs said:

This is allegedly the TFA Luke action figure:

http://serpentorslair.com/?p=42318

I'm not seeing anything about it on any of the regular sites, though, so I'm not sure if it's legit. It looks great, though.

 Frankly, it looks too good to be real. The Black Series' quality has dropped exponentially since its inception. This thing looks to be several orders of magnitude better than the other TFA Black Series offerings, so I'd say it's probably a well-done custom.

SilverWook said:

I actually got the finger as a present back in 1982. I blame the complete lack of Dark Crystal toys on the market for this. At least it was more screen accurate than some of the other E.T. toys back then. The official plush toys were hideous.

And apparently somebody thought it would be a good idea to revisit this with the whole hand!

 

 

I blame my nearly life-long, deep-seated hatred of yappy little dogs on my exposure to this thing on the silver screen at the tender age of four.

SilverWook said:

What was George thinking when he approved it? That it's battery operated to make the tongue rotate only makes it worse. ;)

The TFA merchandise we've seen seems tasteful so far.

 Jar Jar seems to have been the incarnation of GL's pent-up contempt for his audience. When all the justifiably negative reactions to the character - which he must have realized were inevitable - came flooding back to him, I think he doubled down on his gambit, and though he gave in to the public's demands on the one hand by cutting back on Jar Jar's screen time, he nevertheless gives him a crucial role in AotC, and even has him break the fourth wall and smirk to the audience at one point, as if to give the audience the finger on behalf of his creator.

So I can't help but imagine that Lucas okayed the otherwise ludicrous "tongue lollipop" concept shortly after Rob Coleman timidly expressed his concerns about the character. The forthcoming storm of fan outrage thus forecast in his employee's tentatively expressed trepidations, George probably went back to his office, rifled through the sheaves of lisencee proposals, found the one for the lollipop, and smiled grimly to himself, saying: "So they won't like Jar Jar, huh? We'll see about that, Coleman. By this time next year, I'll have the sons of bitches tongue kissing Jar Jar!"

John Doom said:

Mini-teaser this time :D

Is it just me, or the "narrator"'s voice is a bit "synthetic" this time?

 Nah, just different takes (better than the ones in the first teaser, if you ask me), with the first one having some reverb added to it.

Nice to see Finn looking confident and collected for a change, though I have the distinct feeling that this confrontation will end up much like the one in TESB.

As an aside, I'm still crossing my fingers in hopes that we'll be spared the now done-absolutely-to-death strong nigh-invincible / impossibly capable heroine trope; which might yet rear its ugly head if Rey has to show up to pull Finn's fat from the fire in his fight against Ren.

Got a cool, mysterious, menacing villain? Great! Try to keep him that way by not showing him getting the living shit effortlessly trounced out of him by a slender, petite young woman just because girl power / empowerment / role models / girls-rule-boys-drool / Bechdel Test / blah blah blah feminist sloganeering.

My opinion is that Trevorrow is an easily controlled puppet director with little to no real voice of his own. 

So it looks like they're following the precedent established by ROTJ. 

As such, we can expect it to be the ROTJ of the ST - Not as good as we hoped it'd be, but... in the end, good enough.

I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, though. Here's hoping he does just that.