Star Wars: Episode VII to be directed by J.J. Abrams **NON SPOILER THREAD** — Page 93

Well it's the best of the ones I list it with, but still not as good as any of the four best ones.

Pre-JJ there are really only two very good Trek Movies and Search for Spock is average at best. As a Trek fan I'll watch any of the movies if they're on TV because even The Final Frontier has redeeming elements, but as a movie fan I can't even begin to defend most of them.

The first two I like for opposite reasons (TMP is cinematic, epic and played straight, TWOK is tatty, camp and and a load of fun). The other films have nice bits in them as do the JJ ones but the JJ films aren't anything special in my book.

ST2009 is pretty much identical to Nemesis.

You see, I didn't mind the excessive throwbacks to Wrath of Khan in STID.  When you think about it, it was a very logical way of doing things.  It's not like Khan wouldn't exist and try essentially the same thing just because the timeline shifted.  He would still exist (apparently as a white guy? but i forgive that because Cumberbatch was fantastic) and still want the same things, therefore a very similar story would unfold, only things would be slightly different because of the alternate timeline.  It made for an interesting movie at the very least.  But, either way, you can't look at Star Trek as an example of what JJ will do with Star Wars story-wise because there were different writers working on them.  You also can't look at it for what he'll do with it as far as visuals because JJ seems to put a different look to each project he does.  He gets a lot of crap for his lens flares, but that's something he did specifically for the stylistic look of Star Trek.  The only thing you can look to ST for as an example of what to expect from SW is directing style, and JJ has proven himself an exciting, fast paced director who knows how to get a great performance out of his actors.  Is there really anything more we want out of SW than that after the boring, lackluster, terribly acted prequels?

Darth Lucas said: "JJ has proven himself an exciting, fast paced director who knows how to get a great performance out of his actors. Is there really anything more we want out of SW than that after the boring, lackluster, terribly acted prequels?"

Actually, yes, there's a lot more that I want. The prequels haven't reduced what I want out of a Star Wars movie. Just because the prequels sucked so badly doesn't mean that now I'll take anything that doesn't suck like the prequels and that's entertaining and has good acting. Perhaps that wasn't what you meant, Darth Lucas, but I do get the impression that a lot of people feel that way. Also, "fast paced" isn't synonymous with "good." If Abrams' movies are better than the prequels, that fact alone will be enough for many members of this forum, but not for me.

Also, there isn't nearly enough respect for "Star Trek VI The Undiscovered Country" in this thread

Darth Lucas said:

You see, I didn't mind the excessive throwbacks to Wrath of Khan in STID.  When you think about it, it was a very logical way of doing things.  It's not like Khan wouldn't exist and try essentially the same thing just because the timeline shifted.  He would still exist (apparently as a white guy? but i forgive that because Cumberbatch was fantastic) and still want the same things, therefore a very similar story would unfold, only things would be slightly different because of the alternate timeline.  It made for an interesting movie at the very least.

 And here I thought poor rationales for poor writing were limited to the prequels. *sigh*

Has this movie come out yet?  Someone wake me when it has.

^ There is a certifiable time machine on eBay for a hefty price.

Abrams, the Sith died in ROTJ.

Reegar, I say the forum should pool our resources to buy that time machine. We can easily make the money back by betting on past World Series winners (my original idea).

Davenes007 and Tack were wondering why Star Trek was being discussed in this thread. You may have read the title of this thread without following the actual posts closely.

The subject of this thread is "Star Wars Episode VII to be directed by J. J. Abrams." It's as much about Abrams as it is about Star Wars. Naturally, when discussing how good Abrams might be as a Star Wars director, his work on Star Trek would be used as evidence by some people. People have been discussing the pre-Abrams Star Trek movies because the subject of how they compare to his version of Star Trek has a bearing on how his version of Star Wars might compare to previous Star Wars.

As Frink pointed out, until we actually have episode VII we can only speak hypothetically.

Admittedly, there was a string of posts about Star Trek which didn't mention Star Wars, so you would only know the connection if you read back far enough. It was rabbit-trail-ish, but it's not as random or wildly off topic as Davenes007 and Tack made it sound. This thread's title already says everything we know about the movie, so we're struggling for things to discuss, which explains how we've ended up with meta-conversation.

Pretty sure this new meta-conversation is still off-topic.

Tack said:

darklordoftech said:

Abrams, the Sith died in ROTJ.

 We get it! You don't like the continuations of the Empire or the Sith! You have expressed this opinion on SEVERAL different occasions! Let! It! Goooooooo!

 I was wondering when his posts were going to make someone snap. 

timdiggerm said:

Tack said:

darklordoftech said:

Abrams, the Sith died in ROTJ.

 We get it! You don't like the continuations of the Empire or the Sith! You have expressed this opinion on SEVERAL different occasions! Let! It! Goooooooo!

 I feel like that would be counter to the entire ethos of this forum.

Same here. For the most part, this entire forum is people repeating, "the prequels suck."

DominicCobb, my post was at least related to J. J. Abrams directing Star Wars, which is (supposedly) the topic of this thread. You might notice that that's not true about your post or any post since. If you were really so concerned, you could have said something more "on topic."

Post #2308 by Frink summed up the problem with this thread. It clearly doesn't matter much what people say in this thread anymore if they insist on continuing to post in it.

Yeah I was making a joke.