luckydube56

towne32 said:

Dear Internet,

Are Chewbacca's eyes okay in this photo or are they still completely unacceptable?

edit: I missed adywan's opinion. Checked one for 'okay eyes'.

Closer look at the eyes.  BTW, love the fact they're in the Falcon cockpit in this shot...classic. 

imperialscum said:

Mondess122 said:

In short: darker, more realistic, more natural. Less about the fight between good and evil, more about the gray area. 

Sounds like DF series, which is good. :)

 No Jedi whatsoever.  Good.

brash_stryker said:

Expanding further on the hexagonal symbol. It's not outside the realms of possibility that Lucasfilm have taken a shine to this symbol and imagery and want to use it. Afterall, the EU isn't off limits if they see something they like. 

The game is set 4,000 years before the movies, and this is the symbol for the ancient Sith Empire of that time. 




It's sort of a precursor to the Galactic Empire symbol. They have similar designs except the obvious different basic shapes.

I don't know about you guys, but the symbol on the flag in the trailer seems to be a hybrid of the two designs to me. It utilises a circle within a hexagon, with a 'spoked' design just like the others.
Could this be symbolic of the Imperials/Sith returning to their roots?

I know this idea relies on Lucasfilm referencing the symbol from SWTOR (those who know the game will get it, those that don't won't care), but it just seems too perfect to me to be coincidence. 

EDIT: Also, it's worth noting that despite being technically non-canon now (being EU) it's still a thriving MMORPG that's making them money. Tying elements of a game in with their new movies for the purpose of cross-promotion (even if its something as insignificant as the origins of a symbol) is exactly the kind of thing Disney/Lucasfilm would do. In fact they're doing just that already with the upcoming DLC for Battlefront that shows the player the battle that left all those derelicts on Jakku.

 Nice work.

I actually like the concept of the new enemy built off the old.  Kind of like the Romans building their civilization off the Greeks.

I know nothing so take it for what its worth.   But there does seem to be a lot of respect being paid to Darth Vader by this new villain.  This new empire seems a bit more of a religious bureaucracy.  Or maybe just more zealous to the last man.

The old empire was Hitler + Wehrmacht.

The new empire seems Hitler + SS.

If that makes any sense.

Ronster said:

SilverWook said:

No problem. And it took my brain this long to notice the ROTJ homage in that shot. Considering I hated the snap zooms and shaky cam on the BSG reboot, that zoom oddly doesn't bother me at all.

First Order... Wasn't the Empire called "First Choice" in Backstroke of The West? ;)

 The Shaky Cams and Snaps zooms never really bothered me with the BSG reboot because I saw it as a totally new *product*

Because this film is meant to be a sequel, I think they should tone down what they CAN do today to fit in a bit more with what could not be done when the original came out.

It's not to say I don't see the success in what they are achieving I have to say I am actually rather optimistic about all that I have seen so far I really like everything else about the sequence I have seen apart from that weird camera move as the falcon does the loop and the snap zoom.

I am not nit picking either I think if they could give it back the sweeping and gracious moves we are used to, I think it would be an  all out winner it's the only fear I have that there could be a lot of this type of stuff?... There might not be however.  Let's just wait and see... I give it a very good stamp overall.

I'm hoping that the shaky cam and zoom snaps are used sparingly.  We did see a sweeping shot early so we've got too little to really say how much will be one or the other stylistically.

All I know is I still get the chills every time I watch the trailer.  

SilverWook said:

luckydube, your image is broken...

Sorry wook.  Dont know what happened to the original.  But I found another.

When the OT ended back in 83 and I knew that was all there was, in my own imaginations I'd visualized sequences that could be if there would ever be 'the further adventures of...'

Right off the bat, you can tell this is the galaxy we came to know and love.  The shiny sparkly color saturated look from the PT is gone.  The rebels look like rebels.  The Empire or whatever they're called these days, is sleek and dark and slithery as ever.

These are images that seem to have been taken straight from my own imaginations and I'm sure many other die-hard OT fans could say the same.

JJ has such deference to those films. 

I got such an adrenaline rush when i saw this part of the trailer.  It was the same adrenaline rush I felt seeing the speeder bikes in the ROTJ trailer.

mfastx said:

Anyone expecting to see a film that looks like it was made in the late 70s/early 80s will be disappointed.  This film is made in 2015, obviously special effects and the exact way things look will be a little different. 

From a strict special effects perspective, I think it looks great.  Really excited about this film. 

Agreed.

People forget how much more polished the look of ESB was over Star Wars and likewise how ROTJ was more polished than either of the previous two.

Well it is 30 years later; to expect it to have the same unpolished look is an odd thing to me.

Things like this image below are exactly the kind of things many fans imagined in their own further adventures.  Well, Abrams is a fan and it shows.

towne32 said:

True. But that was just based on a few concept art images. I imagine they would gear what they show to shareholders to be the more modern and, as they say, video game like aspects rather than the retro qualities that may hopefully be present as well. The people reporting from the meeting also said that the people/soldiers in the images had no qualities that really made them discernible from one another. These scenes might not represent the bulk of the movie.

I don't have too much faith in the standalones being good. They'll probably get less of the care and concern that folks like us are interested in, compared to the ST. But I'll wait until we get a bit more news about completely giving up on them. 

If done right and in the spirit of the original trilogies, it could be great.

There was such a spirit of camaraderie among Rebel pilots from the original films.  It would be nice to explore that further.  

Hollywood has been lacking a good aerial dogfight movie.  There is potential here for Rogue One to capitalize on a vacuum and go down as one of the best Star Wars films ever made.  Assuming execution is done well, of course.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I certainly hope they don't decide to do any more prequels set before ROTLA*. It was bad enough when they made TOD a prequel; any more encounters with supernatural/paranormal phenomena at a time when Indy's supposed to be a firm skeptic would be outright inane.

*Unless said prequels eschewed any overt, direct exposure to the supernatural/paranormal. In that case I wouldn't mind more pre-Raiders prequels.

The great thing about the Indiana Jones franchise is that I never had to contend with inconsistencies in plot.  These are not meant to be viewed as a single threaded plot running thru the entire franchise like Marvel is currently trying to do or that Star Wars did.

Indy flicks are one-off adventures.  You can bounce from one point in time to another.  Let's not over complicate the thing.  I think of these films as a re-telling of random stories from an adventurers life.  Fans of more 'serious' franchises tend to want to view the series as a historical chain of events that must maintain logical consistency.  I dont want to turn Indy into something for which we have to put our serious faces on.

Just my opinion but I'm not to keen on the Dread Pirate Roberts scenario for Indiana Jones.  Just make Pratt Indy and do a couple new movies set in the 1930/40s.  And at the same time you could jump forward in time and create seperate episodes with Harrison Ford.

DominicCobb said:

I was hoping they weren't going to reboot, but I guess why not?

I love adventure movies, and the Indy franchise has got that genre down pat. Every adventure film since has just paled in comparison. Why should a franchise that is over have a monopoly on a genre? 

Bring on the soft reboot. No origin story, no pretension that this fits into the continuity of the last four films. New actor, back to the 1930s setting.

Chris Pratt is not Harrison Ford, but that doesn't mean he's not as good. He's just different. Bond has thrived on variation in the casting of their main star. So they should go with Pratt, because he's a fantastic actor. As long as they don't make him act like he's Ford, we should have a great new Indy.

Now hire Brad Bird and get cracking!

 I agree with this.  

Pratt doesnt have to do his best Ford impression.  He can make it his own and likely will.  

Warbler said:

Another Indian Jones movie?!? Without Harrison Ford?!?!?!?  

No! No That's Not True!! That's Impossible!!!!! 

 Search your feelings. You know this to be true!!

The rumor mill is chruning:

http://deadline.com/2015/01/chris-pratt-indiana-jones-guardians-of-the-galaxy-disney-1201360637/

SilverWook said:

So there are some reshoots being done? Will be interesting to see who gets called back.

 I dont know for sure but if they just hired three new people, I assume its for re-shoots or new scenes.  

I just heard they hired 3 martial artists for this film.  Apparently they needed new scenes or needed to redo some scenes or maybe the parkour guys just didnt work out on film.

Dont know how I feel about that.  I could go for a little less martial arts in film.  I am not too keen on the parkour idea either.

Minor quibble.  I'm actually okay with improvements in the action sequences over the original trilogy.  Mark Hamill's biggest stunt was swinging from one ledge to another ledge 10 yards away.  He wasnt exactly good at martial arts either.  The story, characters and themes and tone of film is still the most important thing.  They are what allow us, even to this day, completely forgive the lack of polish the Original films had.  Lets hope JJ didnt forget that.  Lets hope he isnt merely swapping CG showmanship for Practical Effects showmanship.

TheBoost said:

"Darkness"? 

Star Wars is kinda a fairy tale. I don't mind 'darkness' involving destruction, scariness, fear, even pain and death. 

'Darkness' like the Batman "Arkham Asylum" games I can do without. I'd hate to see everyone be dirty physically, bad language, sexual content, drugs, degradation, and revealing outfits be (as is all too common) offered up as a thin layer of 'adult sophistication.' 

 I agree.  There have been darker versions of fairy tales but they dont have to be gothic.  

Star Wars, the good ones anyways, have had a nice mixture of light hearted action, comic relief, romance, dark whatever, sci-fi, fantasy, western and everything in between.  

But for really dark themes and mood, other sci fi franchises fill that niche just fine.

The Prequel Trilogy suffers from George Lucas and his 20 years of building up flashy toys which he spewed upon the world.

I'm beginning to understand the OT were a happy accident.

When I joined this forum.  Just kidding.

I knew almost the moment I saw the Phantom Menace that it was not Star Wars.  I mean within the very first scene I knew this thing was going nowhere.

I kept giving the trilogy the chance to prove me wrong and in each case I was proven right.  Its the only trilogy in the history of trilogies where I think a great number of the fans knew at some point how bad it was going to suck and paid money just to be proven correct.  

Ironically, this is what Disney knew when they bought the franchise.  It's got a built in fanbase that cannot be deterred.  That's not to say they aren't working in earnest to produce good films but they know there is no money loss in this venture.  They bought a business that cannot fail.  

I'm not watching it or any other popular movie on opening night after the Aurora,CO batman massacre.  

Call me paranoid but it just sounds like fertile grounds for you know what.  

NeverarGreat said:

luckydube56 said:

The more I watch this trailer:

1.  The more I like the lightsaber.  Especially the way in which the wielder presented arms....its bad ass.

2.  The less I care about the soccer ball droid.

If for no other reason, the lightsaber is cool because it isn't a prequel-era glowstick. It crackles with barely contained energy, it's rough and dangerous, it's everything an eviscerating killing device should be.

As others have pointed out, this is very much a Medieval Long Sword type weapon with reach and possibly even overpowering (as you point out).

And the form of the weapon will shape how the wielder uses it.  The traditional saber was often brought up like a baseball bat when presented.  Clearly this guy uses a different technique/style of fighting that may involve brute force.  It does not appear to be a weapon designed to be twirled like a baton as in the PT.

So maybe the notion the laser hilt presents a danger to the user is..well..nonsense.

The more I watch this trailer:

1.  The more I like the lightsaber.  Especially the way in which the wielder presented arms....its bad ass.

2.  The less I care about the soccer ball droid.

Bingowings said:

I just hope the people that made this Star Wars knock off:

don't sue ;-D

 Boba Fett and Dengar?

ray_afraid said:

RicOlie_2 said:

TMBTM said:

 

ray_afraid said:

-I hate that soccer ball droid. How's his R2 head staying on? Looks so silly. 

Magnetic power of some kind.

Again, use your imagination people! This is not Star Trek, were everything have to be explained on screen with lousy concepts. This is Star Wars, were the lousy concepts are the ones the fans should bring during discussions with their friends! Anyone have the right to not like the look of that droid. But saying that you "hate" a 3 seconds video clips of that cute little droid because you don't understand how its head stands on its body... Come on. Maybe it will be your favorite character in the end! ;)

 This. Although I'm not a fan of the droid, I don't hate it. Many, many aspects of the OT didn't, and don't make sense. Yet when similar things pop up in newer films, they're criticized and torn to bits. I think Ray has the right to his opinion, and I'm not criticizing him for it, but complaining about technological aspects of the movie (as distinct from story, which does need to make sense) when the OT was plagued with things that didn't make sense is silly, if you think the OT was amazing at the same time. It's hard to make sequels to classic movies and make them good enough for people to be happy with them, so don't be too picky or you'll end up with negative feelings about the trilogy for sure.

 There are things in the OT that don't make scientific sense, but it all makes visual sense. There's nothing in the OT that needs to be explained because you see it you just understand.
I guess this could fall into the same category to some, but it just looks silly to me.
Why does it need an R2D2 head on top?

 That's a fair point.  The OT universe, as described by Lucas himself, was one where you could see the rivets.  You could see how something was built.  And maybe in that sense, the contrast of that universe to the sub culture of The Force stands in stark contrast as something mystical.

That's what I mean.  It is a teaser trailer done right.  So many teasers show little to nothing in order to reveal nothing.

This could actually qualify as a trailer in terms of content shown.

The trailer showed a lot yet managed to reveal nothing.