Alderaan

Oldfan said:

 I completely disagree. Why would I need them to spoil everything with dialogue that ruins all the plot points for me?

 A trailer should give you a heads up heading into the film about what you are going to see:

1. Who is the protagonist / who are the protagonists?

2. What is the protagonist(s) goal?

3. What villains or obstacles might stand in their way?

For instance, I have seen that new Mars trailer with Matt Damon several times this season. I haven't seen the film, but I know that if I do see it, I will be watching a movie with Matt Damon's character being the main character, and he will be stuck on Mars and people will be trying to rescue him. Whatever else happens in the film, I have no idea, and I have no idea whether he will live or die or whatever larger point there might be to all of it, so it's a nice mix of setting up the audience but not giving away too much.

This Star Wars Trailer on the other hand tells me:

Explosions! Storm Troopers! Lightsabers! Jedi! Harrison Ford is back!

It's Star Wars!

You see how underwhelming that looks to anyone who isn't drunk on kool-aid?

The trailer looked terrible. Doesn't even look like a Star Wars movie. Looks like some random blockbuster film with explosions and lens flare, with STAR WARS plastered all over it to sell to audiences.

I really liked the teaser last winter or whenever, but this new trailer sucks. Looks like a non-Star Wars movie that happens to include previous Star Wars references for no particular reason.

If you take out Jar Jar, The Phantom Menace is the best of the prequels. Not saying much, I know.

It's been 20 years since the negatives have been touched. They may very well be in need of an extensive restoration.

I like Return of the Jedi, but I can see why people hate it because of the Ewoks. That whole concept probably did go too far.

Personally, I would rank the Star Wars films in this order:

The Empire Strikes Back >> Return of the Jedi > Star Wars

With all three of them being very good.

What, there were other movies? Not as far as I'm concerned. Trash is trash.

****ing technocrats.

unamochilla2 said:

How did Padme look during her action sequences?  Was her hair and makeup still perfect? 

To be fair, Leia's hair in SW went from messy to clean on occasion.  Sometimes from shot to shot. :-)

 What action sequences? TPM had her in like one, barely. Otherwise she just sat around talking on couches for three movies.

RU.08 said:

A brilliant plan by Disney to have Christensen removed from ROTJ?

Darn, I was hoping they would replace Alec Guinness with Ewan McGregor, and maybe even manage to squeeze Kit Fisto and Mace Windu high-fiving each other into the background.

Oh and I was referring to the shaky cam. There's nothing "real" about snap zooms. It's very unnatural.

Akton said:

 And yet the space battles in SW were shot and edited to emulate WWII dogfight footage... precisely because Lucas wanted an element of dynamic realism that had never been seen in a sci fi film before.

The new stuff is simply following that philosophy with modern filmmaking tools...

The dogfights were effective because of the editing, not the camerawork.

Ronster said:

I really think they should scrap the documentary hand held style shaky cam and just realize it's just not needed... It's not an improvement.

Overt camerawork can be effective in some stories, but not in epics. A mythological narrative like Star Wars needs a certain gravitas to it, but it gets stripped away if the filmmaker goes for a more "real" look.

I'm a big fan of the visuals in the teaser, but I have to say the zoom shot is so heavy handed and unnatural. It completely takes me out of the flow of that scene and disrupts my suspension of disbelief.

I can't get over this "First Order" stuff. It's so technocratic.

The trailer made me want to believe because it was good, but I've got a bad feeling about the story. Seems like it will be wonky.

Verboten said:

Anyone else notice there's a creepier, fainter voice that repeats Luke's lines just after he does? Hmmmm....

 I think it's Yoda, also taken from Return of the Jedi.

ratpack1961 said:

Alderaan said:

rpvee said:

The Empire is now The First Order

The Rebellion is now The Resistance

 Seems like brand destruction and a dumb change to me.

So the Rebels are victorious at the battle of Endor and 30 years later they are still the resistance?

 How do you defeat an entire galactic empire in one battle? What, all imperial troops abandon their posts and gathered together in the same star system?

I'm getting the feeling OOT will not be coming out for many years still. Disney will probably wait until after their new films are done, either to stretch out the lifespan of the series, or if nothing else as an insurance policy on their investment. Waiting until years later would also maximize their distribution rights.

I couldn't disagree more. Visually, everything looks fantastic. It looks like a Star Wars movie should.

I'm more worried about the story being potentially contrived and paper thin.

Well, I don't see why they would change their name. The Greeks in Turkey continued to call themselves The Roman Empire for 1,000 years after the fall of Rome. Even more, I'm surprised Disney would green-light that kind of change.

rpvee said:

The Empire is now The First Order

The Rebellion is now The Resistance

 Seems like brand destruction and a dumb change to me.

TV's Frink said:

Alderaan said:

Second half was visually strong, but short on story.

 Lol, it's a trailer.  A teaser trailer.

Trailers should still frame the story for you without giving too much away.

eiyosus said:

I just realized the "We're home" line is in reference to the Millennium Falcon.  Did everybody else catch that, or am I just very slow?

Caught it, but I also think its referring to the franchise getting back to the originals.

Trailer was good. First half was excellent. Second half was visually strong, but short on story. Would have liked shots with the new characters speaking/shouting included. Feels a bit sterile from their point of view.

Akton said:

If this attitude carries over into the ST (i.e. no references to anything PT-specific, midichlorians, gungans, clonetroopers, etc.) I will be even more (delightfully) stunned. And I will find myself holding on to hope for something I've hoped for since the Disney acquisition was first announced in 2012 - a remake of the Prequel trilogy.

 

 Why would you ever hope for that? There's no story to tell in the prequels. That's the major reason they were awful, it was all just backstory.

grainger said:

 Fair point, but it depends what you're saying "I don't know" about. "Are we being attacked?" "I don't know" is a reasonable reply, until you've seen evidence that it's happening. Rather than saying "Yes - let's fire the nukes" when there's no evidence there.

Coming back to Qui Gon, though: I don't remember him saying "I don't know" - if it was in reference to Jedi skills or organisation, then I agree with you, it makes him look incompetent. If, however, it was about what was happening, and they really didn't know, then he's probably being wise. As long as the movie gives him a chance to show his wisdom in other ways - e.g. coming up with a reasonable course of action. Can you give an example of what he said he didn't know/

How many times did Obi-Wan or Yoda say "I don't know" in the OT?