DominicCobb said:
generalfrevious said:
DominicCobb said:
generalfrevious said:
DominicCobb said:
frevious please stop basing your opinions on other people’s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ukk5TJL27pE
God I can’t watch that. “Epidemic”? That would imply it’s a bad thing that so many movies are passable. It’d be worse if they weren’t.
I wasn’t exactly wild about Rouge One. No internet reviewer gave me that opinion.
The Studios have more creative control than in any point in Hollywood’s history.
Totally untrue. See 30s, 40s.
The 1930s-1940s gave us Orson Welles, Howard Hawks, John Ford, and John Huston, to name a few. Where are today’s auteurs that aren’t either puppets of corporate America or holdovers from 20 years ago?
Abrams was chosen because he was the ideal studio director: one that could be molded by the producers to churn out middle-of-the-road products designed to rake in enough money opening weekend.
This is a ridiculous notion. TFA would have made millions opening weekend regardless of director. LFL hired him specifically because he would bring something to the table, hence his impact on the story/script. This isn’t Marvel, LFL wants strong creative voices, hence why they aren’t hiring randos off the street like Scott Derrickson and Peyton Reed. If they wanted someone who they could control, they wouldn’t hire someone who has their own production company. They’d hire someone new and cheap who can’t say no to anything (which we have seen done on a SW film before, and not in this century).
TPM made millions regardless of quality. And Abrams is a Spielberg clone who basically combined ANH and ESB into one film. Otherwise you got me there.
I don’t like the films made by committees as opposed to auteurs. Say what you want about George Lucas and the prequels; at least they had some kind of ambition, some sort of risk-taking of CGI boundaries, willing to bring in political themes unseen in previous films. They’re not good by any means, of course, but an ambitious failure is always more interesting than a solid yet forgettable blockbuster.
Now I know you’re basing your opinion off others because this is the same tired bullshit I hear ad nauseam from internet d-bags. TFA was written by three people: JJ Abrams, Lawrence Kasdan, and Michael Ardnt. If by committee you mean the story group, well sure they were involved, but that’s mainly from a broader universe building/continuity perspective. If you’re talking about some sort of nameless committee of Disney execs looking at made up focus group opinions - that’s just utter nonsense.
And then to bring George fucking Lucas into it… no ambition there. Just a dude “writing” scenes last minute and telling his concept artists, modelers, costumers, etc. to create hundreds of different potential elements (based on half-baked, underdeveloped notes) that he’d just literally stamp for approval. They were mostly CGI because he was too fucking lazy to leave the studio and because he wanted to be able to basically continue to write and shoot the movies while he was editing them and realizing what important scenes they were missing. The political themes, I mean I don’t even know what to say. I mean good for him I guess to try it? But is it ballsy to put the most boring and poorly handled political subplots in your big budget movies? In a way maybe, but again, mostly just lazy in that he just threw shit against a wall and didn’t try to concoct any sort of interesting story out of them. It’s insane to me that people are saying TFA failed by not having enough politics. The OT didn’t have any politics. A film is not made good by politics. A film is made good by telling a good story. Since the PT didn’t do that, what I say when you said at least it had political themes is who gives a shit.
All I said was that the prequels were failed experiments. Lucas thought he could make a movie entirely with computers because he didn’t want to go through another nightmare like the production of ANH. It’s still lazy, I agree, but he was under the delusion that he could cut corners and make a great film (he could not), and with a 22 year gap since being in the director’s chair. Obviously he lost whatever talent he might of had in the seventies.
Which film would you watch again, The Room or Captain America: Civil War?
Captain America. Next question.
Which film is going to remembered ten years down the road? People will still be making fun of The Room and quoting the worst lines while Civil War fades into obscurity.
I find it surprising that people on this thread are suddenly defending TFA when they have been bashing it only a few hours ago as “crap is crap.”
I don’t think anyone here defending it ever called it crap. Most people are pretty constant in their opinions. Except you, I guess, who literally hours ago said you “really liked TFA.”
I said I might reconsider my opinion on TFA. I didn’t actually say that my mind was completely changed in the span of a few hours. I’ll probably hold the same opinion on TFA like I did when I saw it a year ago.
