Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-17 13:16:14
- Fan servicing (past character returning. Think Advent Children for another example)
- Worse fan servicing ("Darth Vader" is back. Yeah, I know it's not him, but it is, isn't it!?)
- CGI crap that looks utterly fake and appeals to lowest common denominator
- Heavy emphasis on explosions and out of control action sequences because they are likely compensating for lack of decent pacing / plot (think Advent Children and Star Wars Prequels)
All the hallmarks are there, people. It's up to you whether you part with your money, but I'd strongly suggest waiting for some proper feedback before being conned by what is, imho, another complete cash-in. I'm fed up with this crap. Watch Plinkett's reviews and you'll realize why we've seen this all before and why it never works out. I am waiting for the day that CGI and graphics lose their ability to sell. Surely even the dumb masses around today are finally getting sick of it?
I'll be very surprised if the film is anywhere close to the standard of Ep 4-6. VERY.
Edit.
And I was right. No surprises.
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-17 14:02:55
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-17 14:06:50
I doubt it's going to blow my mind because I can already see the signature of failure stamped on that trailer. But we'll see.
Post by: nfitc1 on 2015-04-17 14:10:17
I will have NOTHING to do with this Disney trilogy. Disney buying Lucas Arts was the worst thing to happen to Star Wars since Jar Jar Binks. I have 0 desire to watch anything related to it. I haven't even seen a trailer and I know I'd hate it if I did. I've seen two stills from episode 7 and they are appalling for every reason DLPB mentioned.
I had the same misgivings about the J.J. Abram's Star Trek movies and they were correct. Those were terrible movies. They took everything I liked about Star Trek and did the exact opposite. It's all "eye candy, eye candy, eye candy" now and I've been sick of that since the first 10 minutes of Avatar. :(
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-17 14:25:01
Post by: Covarr on 2015-04-17 16:06:09
Did you even watch the new teaser? Or read the several interviews? Abrams has really heavily emphasized the use of practical effects, not CGI, and most (albeit not all) of these effects shown look practical to me.
- CGI crap that looks utterly fake and appeals to lowest common denominator
The rest of your points are moot because this is still just a teaser; it's not uncommon for teasers and trailers to show the most fanservicey bits of a movie, rather than something indicative of the tone and style of the film as a whole. It's ridiculous to assume that just because of the trailer. Hell, even just from the director; keep in mind he was also responsible for Fringe, which was all about well-written characters and interesting plots.
I'm not saying it won't turn out like everything you said, but we don't have nearly enough to go on to make those assumptions.
What we do have to go on is that Abrams is well aware that the prequel trilogy wasn't exactly well received, and while he hasn't outright said it, he has hinted that he himself thinks they weren't very good. I'd be very surprised if he's not specifically targeting the problems those movies had. My prediction for the new trilogy based on currently-available media (both trailers and interviews) is that it won't near live up to the originals, but it'll still be leagues better than the prequel trilogy.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-17 16:08:11
I won't base my views around what Abrams says (because, frankly, I am sure his overwhelming concern is raking in cash and I also find him totally over rated)... I base it around what I have already seen and know about this new episode. In my view, it's overwhelmingly likely to suck. All the bad tick boxes are there in my first post, and they are all ticked. The very fact the trailer focuses almost entirely on eye candy is a symptom of the bigger picture. This episode is not aimed at telling a faithful story - if it were, it wouldn't need to use cheap tactics like recasting old codgers from the much better trilogy. Not only that, adding that Darth Vader fan service just takes the biscuit. Star Wars has flown... it flew after Jedi. The exact same team and ethos are not present and I've seen how "good" Abrams is with that Star Trek film, it was piss poor. I am also told he had a hand in that disaster "Lost".
edit.
Actually, we can add another to my list. The name "The force awakens". It sounds so amateur, like something a really bad writer would come up with.
But in any case, there's no way I can *prove* it's going to be bad, I can only go on what I've seen and heard. But don't be surprised if I turn out to be right. How many of these are they making anyway? Another 3? Talk about milking the name dry.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-17 16:22:24
And he's already found a plot problem haha
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-17 17:29:47
"Ooooh look, that person is wearing a wrist watch and they just showed a pile of dirt, this movie must be pointless because I foresee what the plot is and anything canon to the franchise is dumb"
What needs to be recognized is that this new movie isn't going to be The Original Movies v2.0. It is made by mostly different cast, crew and writers while also being produced in a totally different era of film making. It is just a different beast that should probably be judged objectively by how it stands on its own. If the movie really sucks, then fine, I'll join in on this hate party. Until then, this is all just pessimistic speculation.
For the record, I think it is impossible to satisfy a person's "chasing the dragon" of nostalgia for a series, when that feeling itself can only materialize through the passage of time. Any new film wouldn't stand a chance. That nostalgia is what turns fanboys into crude haters.
"This successor isn't giving me the feeling that "X" thing did before, its different therefore it sucks"
When you first played FF7, it wasn't nearly as special or interesting as when you looked back on it several years later amirite?
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-17 17:33:57
And yeah, FF7 has remained to me a well written tale since 1997. So has the original Star Wars. The Prequels still suck, and I am confident this will as well.
Post by: obesebear on 2015-04-17 19:13:12
Post by: genesis063 on 2015-04-17 22:54:01
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-18 01:13:48
Wait a second, I think I see a pattern here. Have you liked anything that's happened in the past 15 years? :P
Yes ;)
From 2000 onwards:
Game of Thrones
The Big Bang Theory (Season 1-3, and some of the rest)
The LOTR trilogy, mostly
I have not seen Breaking Bad
I am sure there are more, but it's very few and far between. I liked Truman Show a lot, but that's 1998.
It's true I don't like much these days, but that's because the standard itself has dropped significantly in the last decade. I hardly ever concentrate on or review films that I thought were good because I expect big budget movies to be good regardless. That's the contract I enter into with a big budget movie... I don't expect to be robbed or swindled. There are, however, some films that insult my intelligence far more than others, for example:
Battlestar Gallactica (new series)
Lost
Minority Report
Star Wars Prequels
Transformers
Avatar
The Matrix Sequels
Saw
Final Destination (perhaps more the useless sequels)
Armageddon
2001 Space Odyssey
Dr Strangelove
Knowing
Titanic (at least the set design and sinking were great)
The Hobbit Trilogy
All the new James Bonds
Dark Knight Rises
Terminator 3 +
Pan's Labyrinth
New Star Treks
I'll stop there... but it is a huge list. And that's because most modern films are nearly entire illogical CGI and battle fests designed to pull in as many people as possible. Whilst I agree there are some older films that also sucked (like the 2 above), the last decade has gone into meltdown with all these graphic fests that won't survive the test of time.
My favourite are:
The Good the Bad and the Ugly
Babylon 5 (TV Series)
The Big Bang Theory (S1-3)
Game of Thrones (TV Series / Books)
The Wicker Man (1970s)
The Dollar trilogy in general
The Shawshank Redemption
Star Wars Ep 4-6
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
The Silence of the Lambs
The Green Mile
Alien
The Sting
Toy Story 1,2,3 (Mainly 1)
Beauty and the Beast
Aladdin
Groundhog Day
The Sixth Sense
LOTR Trilogy
Jaws
Most of the old Bonds
Back to the Future Trilogy
Total Recall (old film)
Predator
Terminator 1 and 2
The Truman Show
The Matrix (somewhat)
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-18 02:54:26
http://io9.com/5611489/original-star-wars-producer-explains-what-went-wrong-after-empire-strikes-back
http://whatculture.com/film/star-wars-episode-7-10-reasons-why-it-will-suck.php/11
A good read. He's right, too. They've already started with Star Wars cereal at my local supermarket.
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-18 15:37:18
Post by: Tekkie.X on 2015-04-18 15:45:39
I know it's a popular show but I actually don't know anybody in my social circles that actually likes it, general consensus is that it tries too hard and the unnaturally long gaps in the dialogue to put in the canned laughter only wakes it worse.
I don't hate it myself, just never got into it.
Sex and Death I do like though (yes, I mean Game of Thrones)
As for the actual main topic, I will probably go and see it, I just won't get excited for it, same goes for Batman vs Superman, I really enjoy superhero stuff and the Daredevil series on Netflix was really good, but that trailer is just awful and the Bat suit, while trying to emulate Dark Knight Returns' old and fat Bruce Wayne, it only serves to make a regular sized actor look like he just ate an entire restaurant chain out of business.
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-18 15:54:41
Post by: obesebear on 2015-04-18 17:15:04
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-18 19:14:09
An episode of The Big Bang Theory sans the laugh track - it's pretty painful to watch.It isn't a laugh track, from what I remember. It's a live audience. It is NOT canned laughter, there's a difference. Like with Red Dwarf.
Post by: Covarr on 2015-04-18 19:39:38
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-18 20:08:00
It's both. They have a live audience, but often don't use that track, and supplement it with canned laughter.
It sure doesn't sound like it in the first 3 seasons. Sounds nothing like Friends. But if they use canned in there in part, it's a mistake. It doesn't take away from the writing, though.
Post by: insidious611 on 2015-04-19 04:39:31
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-19 05:11:54
I like the first 3 seasons of BBT especially because they are clever. Very clever. The science is as good as it really gets for a comedy and the characters are brilliantly scripted. It's an exceedingly well written show (and I find it hilarious) for the first 3 seasons (which went down hill further and further to appeal to a larger audience). It's still good, but no longer great.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFB2QDNswmE
You can take almost any random clip and it's good.
Although, Sheldon is too clever to believe in Cold Fusion ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZC5p2aTqM0
"Your cologne is an attack on the senses"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRvrOL8DnO8
and Sheldon doesn't like Babylon 5 :cry: :cry: :cry: (But that's again being clever, because Trekkies used to have running battles with B5 fans).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZGtGJNGdow
Post by: Kaldarasha on 2015-04-19 13:00:45
The only things I don't like about the big bang are that it presents Dr. of science as low budget earner and that the dollar of these days didn't exist in 1800.
http://haraldkraft.de/thebigbangtheory/#snap044
It exist only since the bankers created the FED in 1913/14. I would like to give you a link to prove it, but I haven't seen it on the English wiki. Though it is mentioned on the German.
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-19 16:48:20
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-19 17:00:17
I dislike Sheldon because he insists that Physics is superior to Engineering disciplines. Engineering masterrace.
He gets called out on that a few times. He also considers biologists to be at the bottom of the food chain but is made to look stupid later in the series because of it haha
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-19 20:26:25
Post by: White Wind on 2015-04-20 15:46:37
But I like the characters ( Leonard is cute ..lol ) and I don't find that the show is insulting or too much stereotypical, but rather done with some heart. The laughters are too pronounced though.
And about Fast 'n Furious 7... I mean, SW ep.7, well I'm the kind of nostalgic pessimistic person, but for reasons.
But come on, how do we call it now ? A light sword ? A multi-knife saber ? ..meh
Post by: gjoerulv on 2015-04-21 10:28:26
The really messed up thing about this is that STAR WARS don't need this kind of advertisement -or facecandy- to make a fuckload of money. It's freaking STAR WARS. Its box office success is already ensured. Sure, it's expected that it'll have a certain production value, but what they should focus on is setting, character, plot and story. You know, to not be the fiasco 1-3 was.
But, hey, there is a reason star wars has that box office security. It's partly (mostly) due to explosions and facecandy. No wonder investors and shareholders (if any) want them to appeal to as many (kids) as possible. More explosions and CGI = more £$¥€ from people who like explosions and CGI. And there is a lot of people who favour explosions and CGI over story. Who cares about being recognised as one of movie-history's marvels when we should focus on making as much £$¥€ as it's possible to make?
On a sidenote, the ewoks can also go... do something with themselves... The only "real" good star wars movie, imo, is 5... And the final scene with Luke vs Darth Vader (but that entails you know the rest of the stuff, so, shrug).
I could get into BBT, were it not for that in-your-face-obvious love interest and the "handsome", "kind-of-normal" nerd lead role. I get some laughs out of it though.
To be nitpicky, it's kinda the same joke told over and over. A real life situation taken to the nerd extreme.
One of my fav comedies is Curb Your Enthusiasm. It starts kinda slow but it gets funnier and funnier.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-21 11:04:33
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-04-22 11:02:14
This is another example. The new Chewbacca looks completely out of character (supposed to be a wild, aggressive creature), less realistic and well... more "Hollywood" It just comes across as completely crap. As for Han, I know everyone is having an orgasm over him being in the film, but seriously... bringing back a character that old for ratings is a bad idea. We loved the characters for what they were and this will just cock them up. Lest we forget that other cash-in: Crystal Skull. Han Solo is the kind of character that goes out with a bang before he is 35... not grow as old as a dinosaur still jumping about as if he were 21.
When I see that picture above, it ticks another "going to be a load of crap" box.
And, if you care about the Extended Universe (which I don't, but I can appreciate some do), then that's another slap in the face because Chewbacca is dead.
Post by: White Wind on 2015-04-23 04:02:14
because Chewbacca is dead.
Nooooooooo xD seriously, what a joke x)
Maybe it's Chewie's soft-hearted cousin.. Cabbachew
And that guy, why did he do an Indiana Jones cosplay ?
Post by: White Wind on 2015-04-24 08:53:02
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-07-19 22:36:04
Wait a second, I think I see a pattern here. Have you liked anything that's happened in the past 15 years? :P
I have revisited this in light of recent events. I completed Breaking Bad today and it became the third show (I think third) to get a 10/10 score from me when considering the whole series (Fawlty Towers and Babylon 5 being the other two). So there is hope ;)
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-19 20:36:33
What was interesting is that I kept a good eye on IMDb and there were initially thousands of 10/10 ratings. So obviously some people and some advertisers are clicking 10 before they've even seen it. IMDB should make it so only reviews count towards rating.
Post by: Kaldarasha on 2015-12-19 21:00:46
Post by: genesis063 on 2015-12-19 22:15:49
Post by: olearyf2525 on 2015-12-19 23:41:55
Walt Disney is probably rolling in his grave.
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-19 23:55:38
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Post by: Bukharin377 on 2015-12-20 13:16:37
Post by: Insight on 2015-12-20 13:31:03
There is always room for improvement. Not everything in this movie is a 10 imo.
Nonetheless, i will be watching it for a second time tomorrow :)
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-20 13:53:44
You haven't even watched it...? Perhaps do that before going all out on a rant insulting those who have and think it's a great movie.
Considering the complaints that have come back and the fact me and my cousin criticize the exact same aspects of films (CGI over substance, bad acting, grab for nostalgia, lack of originality, leftist propaganda, plot holes (there are dozens in this film), bad script, fan service) - the answer to that is no. And the smart people are the ones who don't go to watch something they are sure they'll hate. Not hope it will be different and come back disappointed. The only reason my cousin went to watch it is because he was taking his friend's son.
I have read all the spoilers and imho everything about it from its feminist nonsense right through to its absolute mimicry of the originals (in numerous places) is pathetic. I've seen and read enough material to form an opinion on it. I didn't buy FF13 or any of the FF7 spin offs for the same reason - that's what reviews are there for. What is the point of a review site if you don't then go and make a judgement based on them? I fear some people have completely missed the point of what reviews and word of mouth are about - they are not solely to rant.
When I see things like this:
Quote
I'm so sad about this DUMB movie! It could have easily being a success, but unfortunately in the wrong hands everything can spoil. It was the same scenario as with The Hobbit franchise. They had it all, good and loved characters, money, time to make good and smart script, etc... However, they decided to go the modern way, the way of mighty CGI! Who needs brain, when we have CGI? Such a shame!
and this
Quote
Wow, I am in utter disbelief. I read multiple good reviews about this being 'back' and was actually optimistic about seeing this.. And we didn't even get an actual movie? What did I even just watch? I really don't even know, a bunch of blasters, a couple of random guys off the street with a lightsaber, a cgi demon leader, a bunch of explosions, and a bunch of flying.
There was no plot..
There was no dialogue..
There was no character development..
There was no explanation of the last 30 years..
Just random random random.
The whole movie went 100 miles per hour, I truthfully have never seen a movie so rushed and fast paced in a long time.
This movie I cannot believe isn't getting torn apart by the fans. I think fanboys are just way too devastated to accept/admit episode 7 was no less disappointing than the prequels and there may never be another true star wars continuance to the original trilogy masterpieces.
and
Quote
Have you heard of that concept called 'character development'? Don't expect to see it in this movie, because it isn't there. And neither is 'sense of humour', 'story plot', or 'acceptable acting'. Whoever cast Daisy Ridley as Rey and John Boyega as Finn must have been drunk at the time because they are both horrendous actors. Also, does anyone know what Finn's role was during the entire movie? I don't. The only thing you can expect from this movie is that the characters will express emotions that just don't feel natural in the slightest because not at one point does the script say, "Character is feeling emotion X because of event Y," - no, no, they just go: "Character is feeling emotion X. That's the end of it
It resonates with me. When I see that repeated on review sites 100x... I skip the film. :)
I am not telling you that you won't like it (unless you have high standards, like I do - or you are similar in taste), I am saying that I know I won't and that I consider it shit.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-20 14:28:35
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-20 15:43:40
Post by: -Ric- on 2015-12-20 17:31:31
I know that no matter what those two release, I won't like it. I consider them intellectually bankrupt (thick as turd) and there's no chance I would ever be optimistic based on a number of factors. The same goes for these cash-in sequels.
I can only assume their reaction would be something like:
(http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Woody-Harrelson-Wiping-Tears-Money.gif)
No, seriously, who cares?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
:mrgreen:
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-20 17:38:02
What the negative reviews are saying is being repeated thousands of times from people on forums and numerous review sites. So I highly doubt they're all lying (especially regarding the dumb story and plot holes). And my cousin certainly isn't. So, I'd rather not go and watch something I know is a pile of crap (my personal opinion on this type of movie).
Anyway, that's my 2 cents.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-20 17:47:08
Quote
I can only assume their reaction would be something like:
(http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Woody-Harrelson-Wiping-Tears-Money.gif)
I disagree. I think they're actually laughing at people who fall for it as they roll around with their money ;)
Post by: -Ric- on 2015-12-20 17:58:56
I disagree. I think they're actually laughing at people who fall for it as they roll around with their money ;)
Who cares. It's like everything else in life, some will love it, some will find it "ok" and some will hate it.
There is no pleasing everyone, ever. What's the big deal about it?
Oh and i totally missed this:
But there are thousands of people out there who think Bieber is a genius. What does that tell me? We have an awful lot of silly people about. But I am not one of 'em :)
Really? People are "silly" for having a musical taste different than yours? I'm a HUGE Heavy Metal & Rock fan and cannot stand the mainstream music nowadays but to go as far as saying "We have an awful lot of silly people" based on their musical taste and then claiming you are not one just because that's not your type of music... Sorry but, you're the one being silly.
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-20 18:18:46
He actually is a remarkably talented singer, and I think it's a shame he wastes it on the music he sings.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Post by: -Ric- on 2015-12-20 18:43:54
It is objectively wrong to think he's a brilliant songwriter because he doesn't even write most of his own music. He gets it all from the studio, and just performs it.
He actually is a remarkably talented singer, and I think it's a shame he wastes it on the music he sings.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
True, but that does not give anyone the right to call his fans "silly" just for... well, being his fans. Or being fans of any other artist for that matter.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-20 21:28:36
I'd wager you that there is a direct correlation between intelligence and so-called taste. Not a perfect straight line correlation - but there nonetheless. In fact, I know there is. Almost every single person I've met who is as dumb as a brick is either into modern pop ('90s onwards, I'm talking about), rap, or gangsta hip hop. None of them enjoy classical music. Very few enjoy older bands. It's no coincidence. Clearly, there are exceptions - but that's not the argument here.
Also, a lot of these people are conformists who "enjoy" an "artist" because of the image. I had a deaf friend who was "in to" Tupac. When I noted that he was deaf, so how could he like the music, he gave me a lousy excuse that he could still feel the beat. It was nothing to do with "the beat" and everything to do with the gangster image (himself a wannabe gangster at the time).
But you know what - this argument doesn't lead anywhere except OUTRAGE and counter arguments I've heard 100 times before and dismissed. But it's my opinion and, well, that's that. If that makes me an ass or arrogant or any other label you wish to use - cool. I look forward to other people's reviews regarding this film, good or bad. Metacritic is quite informative at the moment also.
Post by: -Ric- on 2015-12-20 22:17:47
Well, I disagree, Ric. "Really." People who like atrocious music are akin to those who think random smatterings of paint on walls is talented or "art". They try to come up with some pseudo-intellectual argument also. But the truth is it just sucks and so do they.
Again, atrocious to you does not mean atrocious to other people. You obviously have an issue with anything that doesn't suit your own personal taste or beliefs so whatever, why do i even bother.
But it's my opinion and, well, that's that. If that makes me an ass or arrogant or any other label you wish to use - cool
And you're 100% entitled to it. However you could just either try to express it in a not-so-negative way or simply not express it all because in the end of the day, people who enjoyed the movie will not care about your opinion, just like people who listen to Justin Bieber will not care about your opinion.
How about respecting the fact that people are entitled to enjoy whatever it is that they enjoy? Be it music, movies, or videogames regardless if you think they are good or not?
Your opinions don't make you an ass or even arrogant, the way you express them shows a complete lack of respect towards anyone who might have different views than you though.
But the truth is it just sucks and so do they.
With that being said, so do you.
Post by: gjoerulv on 2015-12-20 22:39:42
My predictions, without saying if it's good or bad:
Play on nostalgia. Convoluted story. Good visual effects (duh!). Semi-intresting characters. Luke is heavily involved with the "twist". New threat (kinda obvious) that rebells defeats against odds.
These are kinda no-brainers, but still, am I right or am i right?
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-20 23:06:10
ok, didn't read anything to avoid getting spoiled... Gonna see it within a week probably.
My predictions, without saying if it's good or bad:
Play on nostalgia. Convoluted story. Good visual effects (duh!). Semi-intresting characters. Luke is heavily involved with the "twist". New threat (kinda obvious) that rebells defeats against odds.
These are kinda no-brainers, but still, am I right or am i right?
You're not going to believe how much worse it actually is. But plot hole bonanza and rehash of Episode IV would be close. Oh, and throw in some politically correct rubbish too. Mix it in. I'd like to say that "I am not sure" or "I didn't think they'd do that" but from everything I am reading and hearing, they've done pretty much everything I expected... except one thing. And that thing is so so CRAP and insulting. But I will wait until you've seen it and see what your opinion is.
Post by: Tekkie.X on 2015-12-20 23:17:26
Post by: olearyf2525 on 2015-12-21 01:17:17
Spoilers. Link instead of direct image. ~Covarr http://i.imgur.com/TmV1ILm.jpg?1
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-21 03:46:29
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-22 06:02:55
Spoiler: show
I will reiterate this, because it needs reiterating. I do not think this is a perfect film. I think it's ridiculous that anyone gave it 10/10. But as I don't see things in extremes, I also don't think "not perfect" is the same as "terrible." I'd give it a solid 7/10. There is room for improvement, but it was good enough that I enjoyed it.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 06:25:05
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-22 06:36:07
I mean casting a black person simply because it ticks a boxThe black person wasn't to tick a box. He was right for the role. Having seen it, I wouldn't cast anyone else. Did you say the same about Lando? Do you say the same whenever a black person is cast in anything? He was a good actor, and it's downright insulting to J.J. Abrams to assume he was cast just for that (and also doesn't make sense, considering Abrams showed with the casting of Into Darkness that he doesn't give a rip about race when casting.
and having a female protagonist who is wonder woman simply to show us how "equal" (or in this case, better) women are to men.I never got the impression that's why they did that. They had a female protagonist because she and the black guy have a Han/Leia dynamic. Otherwise it would've been two guys, and if they tried to do that there'd be accusations of them doing it just to show a gay couple.
From what I hear, she fixes Han Solo's ship despite him knowing it back to front (and her knowing nothing)This is not remotely the case. mild spoilers. The ship had been stolen from Han and left on her home world for quite some time. It is heavily implied that she'd had a chance to take a look at it over the years, and she makes two repairs throughout the film. The first before he even appears, and the second is to some modifications that were added years after the ship was stolen from him and he wouldn't have had any way of knowing about. It's not remotely suggested that she's better with ships than him, or even better with this ship, just that she was in the right place at the right time and he wasn't.
and also kicks the arse of someone experienced in the Force with little or no training whatsoever.This is the only one of these that is a real problem, and I will not argue with it. But even so, I have every reason to believe it would've been exactly the same problem with a male lead, because it was rooted in the film's pacing problems.
Your other complaints come across as totally uninformed, and just make it obvious you haven't seen the film and are speaking on hearsay. It is exceedingly evident to me, who actually saw the film, that the vast majority of your opinions on it are based on half-truths and misinformation. Look, if you don't wanna see it, don't see it. You were absolutely right to say earlier in the thread that it would be dumb to see a movie you think you won't like. But if you don't see it, stop complaining about it, because most of your complaints are based on a heavily skewed version of the film that is totally different from the movie they actually made. Frankly, you come across like you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 06:39:19
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 06:43:53
In fact, there's one right there recommended by hundreds.
Quote
9. Clear liberal Hollywood feminist propaganda, I don't mind a strong female lead at all! But did they have to make her a completely unrealistic super woman!? She learns she has force powers, figures out how to use said force powers by her self in what could have only been a couple days at most and beats the hell out of the multi year trained bad guy apprentice!!!
So, people do agree with me. People who have seen it.
One review is entitled: Feminist garbage!! (126 out of 232 people found the following review useful)
Here's the thing. You've admitted that these things do happen - so I am wondering how me watching it happen is going to change my view?
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-22 07:00:21
In actual reality, one-star and ten-star reviews can almost always be discarded, because people decided the score they were going to give and only watched the film to build a case. Ten-star reviewers knew they were going to give a ten-star review before they saw it, and one-star reviewers knew they were going to give a one-star review before they saw it. It's the 3-7 star reviewers who actually have a hint of an idea what they're talking about, but on IMDB they rarely do.
I'm one of the most conservative people I know. I voted for Romney, I voted for McCain, and I get as annoyed as anyone when I see something that smells like propaganda. But despite specifically looking for it, I didn't see it, because though I was searching for it, I wasn't going in with the hopes of finding it. I did my best to go into the film without any bias. I know absolute zero bias is impossible, but I got as close as I could. I was ready to find it great, terrible, okay, mediocre, or anywhere in between.
It's really easy to hate something when you form your opinions in advance, agree with reviews that agree with your preconceived notions, and then disregard anyone that disagrees with you as fanboys, and it definitely seems like that's exactly what you've done here. You decided (and proclaimed) how you felt about it when it was first announced, before even the teaser was shown, and without even a first-hand frame of reference, judged the reliability of reviews entirely based on how well they aligned with what you'd already decided to feel about it. That's the textbook definition of confirmation bias.
All that having been said, I don't think you watching it will change your view. But even if I concede the leftism thing, a good two-thirds of what you have said about the film has been measurably wrong. I'm just asking you either to inform yourself properly before you speak (by seeing the movie) or not to speak. Substantiating an opinion only based on the views of one group is herd mentality, whether you're on the 10/10 herd or the 1/10 herd, and it's better not to have an opinion at all
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 07:24:21
I suppose next time I should just pretend I've seen it and structure a response on it - that way I'd have saved us all this unnecessary back and forth.
Post by: olearyf2525 on 2015-12-22 07:56:05
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-22 08:00:16
Quote from: DLPB
That would just make you poorly informed and a liar, and based on the number of facts you got explicitly wrong about the film, such a lie would become immediately obvious. I suppose that's a good move if you're trying to lose people's respect.
I suppose next time I should just pretend I've seen it and structure a response on it - that way I'd have saved us all this unnecessary back and forth.
All you're doing here is pooping in the punch bowl. Is it not enough not to enjoy it, you have to ruin it for everyone else who might have enjoyed it too? Angry, poorly informed complaints won't stop anybody from seeing the film, they won't prevent more from being made. Literally the only thing your ranting could possibly achieve is to make people less happy, and I sincerely hope that's not your intent. Heck, the constant obsession with things you don't like can't possibly make you feel better either. At best, you'll share mutual dislike of something with someone else, but there's no joy in that, only salt.
As I said, you're well within your rights not to see it, or even to watch it and not to like it, but if you're not going to see it, then say you're not going to see it and move on like a normal, decent person instead of maintaining an unnecessary and unproductive hostility.
Post by: -Ric- on 2015-12-22 13:29:02
That would just make you poorly informed and a liar, and based on the number of facts you got explicitly wrong about the film, such a lie would become immediately obvious. I suppose that's a good move if you're trying to lose people's respect.
All you're doing here is pooping in the punch bowl. Is it not enough not to enjoy it, you have to ruin it for everyone else who might have enjoyed it too? Angry, poorly informed complaints won't stop anybody from seeing the film, they won't prevent more from being made. Literally the only thing your ranting could possibly achieve is to make people less happy, and I sincerely hope that's not your intent. Heck, the constant obsession with things you don't like can't possibly make you feel better either. At best, you'll share mutual dislike of something with someone else, but there's no joy in that, only salt.
As I said, you're well within your rights not to see it, or even to watch it and not to like it, but if you're not going to see it, then say you're not going to see it and move on like a normal, decent person instead of maintaining an unnecessary and unproductive hostility.
You are 100% right in everything you wrote, however, it's a battle you cannot and will not win.
"Common sense is not so common."
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 15:25:33
“We wrote these characters but when we went to cast it, one of the things I had felt, having been to the Emmy’s a couple times — you look around that room and you see the whitest ****ing room in the history of time. It’s just unbelievably white. And I just thought, we’re casting this show and we have an opportunity to do anything we want, why not cast the show with actors of colour?” JJ Abrams
Thanks for that. It's making more sense now. I suppose someone with such an insane and twisted outlook on life is bound to let that creep into a film he/she makes. That's a shocking quote, tbh. And imagine someone with that twisted (and sounds racist to me too) opinion being allowed near a film of this scope.
Post by: olearyf2525 on 2015-12-22 18:03:34
Thanks for that. It's making more sense now. I suppose someone with such an insane and twisted outlook on life is bound to let that creep into a film he/she makes. That's a shocking quote, tbh. And imagine someone with that twisted (and sounds racist to me too) opinion being allowed near a film of this scope.
Yup, it's not so much what you know as who you know and what you're willing to do to get ahead and fern others over. That's why it's called Hollyweird and uses up and spits out talented people and promotes untalented people.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 18:17:02
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BaGWg7Lh74
"I lost so many friends on a private level."
I don't agree with everything he says, but he's spot on about Hollywood being a thought police club.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-executives-admit-taped-interviews-193116
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5A8VHTyMzg
Quote
“Most of them didn’t Google me. If they had, they would have realized where I am politically,” he said. “I played on their stereotypes. When I showed up for the interviews, I wore my Harvard Law baseball cap — my name is Ben Shapiro and I attended Harvard, so there’s a 98.7 percent chance I’m a liberal. Except I happen not to be.”
Shapiro is a classic. I love that guy :)
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-12-22 21:00:56
I think DLPB has spent more time trolling this movie that he's not seen than the time it would have costed his life in actually seeing it.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 21:06:43
It was a good movie, can confirm.
I think DLPB has spent more time trolling this movie that he's not seen than the time it would have costed his life in actually seeing it.
Stating it's a good movie with no substance isn't really any type of confirmation. And your argument to the person, rather than debating the flaws I listed, is even less encouraging.
Additionally, if I had watched it I'd be a lot angrier because I'd be out of pocket and part of this corporate scam (my opinion). So, all things considered I am happier to piss against the wind.
Post by: Tekkie.X on 2015-12-22 21:51:24
While I did enjoy it, I do see a fair amount of the flaws, Rey in the 2nd half, not enough explanation about Kylo's motivations, who the hell Snoke is etc, hopefully Episode VIII explains some of it.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-22 22:03:23
Post by: Vgr on 2015-12-22 22:19:10
Post by: genesis063 on 2015-12-23 05:17:37
Post by: Tekkie.X on 2015-12-23 13:44:56
Post by: gjoerulv on 2015-12-29 07:03:36
SPOILER AHEAD! probably...
My notes:
Pacing... It moved, at times, too fast forward, not giving me enough time to digest the scenes. There was generally little room to breathe. This kind of movie making (or writing in general) isn't inherently bad, but is often used to "a-muse" the audience. As in avoid them from thinking too much, or rather, do the thinking for them. As there were plenty of filler material in the movie they should, imo, remove those parts and add some "slow-the-hell-down" scenes in.
Too much action and "ohmygodwesurvived" moments. Kinda related to the point above as much action = fast pace. The action was good. However, in my case, it got exponentially harder to buy that these guys could survive it all. The latter point is, in some sense, true for the original Star Wars as well, but the original didn't have all these "amazing" action scenes to make them even less believable. The above being said, the action was pretty solid, imo. You truly felt the blasters. If sci-fi action is all you need (which I know plenty of people are content with), then you can't go wrong by this movie.
Plot holes, bad writing and such. Probably the movies biggest sin. SPOILER: For example. R2D2's conveniently recovering at the end just to serve the plot. I could buy it if there was any explanation at all, but there was none. "Oh time to find Luke, R2D2 activate!". And how did Poe (was that his name?) escape from Jakku again? Luckily the movie has plenty of characters, action and setting to salvage (at least some) the bad writing etc, for many people. But if you're like me, a consistent story without plot-holes should be the framework to fit the other parts in. Bad writing isn't automatically forgiven by the beforementioned. This point, however, is more or less true for all Star Wars movies.
Characters. To be honest I was pleasantly surprised by the characters. Most of them felt like Star Wars characters. I see many people digging Finn, and i can see why, but imo, it was really hard to read this guy. SPOILERS As i see it, he was supposed to be the face of doubt as a storm-trooper, however, all his actions and motivations felt kinda forced. Probably because he had no back-story. Maybe that was the point? Beeing an infant-minded grown-man, confused and scarred?
The part i feared the most was that SPOILERS Kylo Ren would be a Darth Vader clone. Luckily he wasn't. May be debatable, but to me he turned out very different than DV. But that silver cloaked storm-trooper captain was a waste of space.
The nostalgia catering. Ok, it's fine to pull on the nostalgia string, but, my God, did they have to copy the original? I wouldn't mind a few scenes, but when they blatantly, in-your-face, not hiding it at all, copy the overall structure, to me, that is very cheap. I don't know what else to say. Sure they did it on purpose, and obviously sold it that way. Still, it's cheap.
Despite all the crap I've said, I'm glad I saw it. Not being a huge Star Wars fan, I don't really care that much if there are inconsistencies with the other movies, the expanded universe, etc. I've always viewed Star Wars as simple, sci-fi action flicks with some deeper elements to them. As such, episode 7 was good fun (unlike episode 1 and 2). My favorite moment in the movie was the SPOILER final light-saber fight. It felt real and personal. Too bad they conveniently got split up by the planet splitting haha!
TMTDNR:
I'm not in fan of numeric ratings as pretty much everyone scales differently, but if it helps as a visual representation of my opinion: on a bad day: 4/10. On a good day: 7/10. On an average day 6/10. But I've only seen it once, so, yeah, shrug.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2015-12-29 19:02:26
Post by: StickySock on 2015-12-30 00:40:50
SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The movie had some good moments, but was ultimately squandered potential.
Spoiler: show
Post by: gjoerulv on 2015-12-30 07:39:17
Forgot to mention Rey... How could I...
...
Blatant feminist girl-power strawberries where they waste several lines of dialogue beating you over the head that Rey is a girl but doesn't need help or saving.
They repeat that strawberries multiple times throughout the movie, all the way up until the "rescue" team is again not "allowed" to rescue the girl, because she got out of it on her own.
...
I remember the specific part you mention here, but other than that I didn't find the movie blatantly feminist friendly. Sure, Rey was kind of a mary sue character, but I didn't get the "I'm-strong-because-I'm-female-and-don't-need-any-help" vibe from the movie. I think you specifically have to look for it to see it. But, hey, maybe I'll see it too if I see it again with my googles adjusted accordingly lol. I did find it annoying how she just knew how to do everything, but her being a female had nothing to do with it in my case.
In the start of the movie I had no problem with her. Sure, I'll buy that she survives as a scavenger, and is good at it, no problem. Ok, she knows how to fight with that stick, that's cool. After that it just got in your face more and more. Sigh, ok, she knows how to handle the falcon, that's borderline acceptable, but then she knows how to fix it too?? Come on!! And, off course, she's a natural blaster expert after a minimal amount of time. Why isn't she the president of space again?!?
Maybe her backstory will explain why she is such a wonder woman. Until then I have the right to call bullstrawberries on her "perfection".
Post by: EQ2Alyza on 2015-12-30 11:55:05
I agree, we need spoiler tags on these forums. The best I've seen is highlighting your text in the color white.
Post by: Covarr on 2015-12-30 15:40:31
I agree, we need spoiler tags on these forums.
Spoiler: show
Post by: Vgr on 2015-12-30 19:18:18
Spoiler: show
Someone's been messing with some modules :D
Post by: EQ2Alyza on 2015-12-31 05:29:27
Post by: Relf on 2015-12-31 05:37:36
After the backlash the prequels got, perhaps it's not surprising they took a safer route. I imagine the future movies will deviate much more greatly and perhaps it's best to remember the stories are part of a greater whole. As an introduction to new characters and the dispatching of old ones, I felt like it did its job though it's by no means a stand-alone movie.
Funny to still see so many old faces hanging around this forum, almost a decade later.
EDIT: Can you believe it? My Avater finally expired off Mirex's trashbin.
Post by: obesebear on 2016-01-02 03:36:33
Really fun movie. I thoroughly enjoyed all the nods to the original trilogy. Easily better than the prequels. You can tell Abrams wanted to make it more like the original movies, but it's just not as good. The wow factor and feeling of being involved in an epic story are almost there, just not quite. That being said, I would see it in theaters again and am very excited to see what the next movie has in store
Post by: nfitc1 on 2016-01-02 17:55:17
You can tell Abrams wanted to make it more like the original movies, but it's just not as good.
This, but it's trying too hard to ultimately be as good. There was something threatening about the Death Star because there wasn't anything like that in cinema before. This....thing that they make into the next super weapon is just strange. The concept makes no sense and the rules of its operation change mid-movie.
There's a HUGE list of what I liked and disliked about the movie overall. I'll eventually finish typing it and post it here. I keep starting it and getting interrupted because it takes so long to write up. :P
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2016-01-02 19:43:02
The wow factor and feeling of being involved in an epic story are almost there, just not quite.
I kind of agree here. I think all of the previous star wars movies were around 3 hours long, but this new one felt a lot shorter to me for some reason. This film definitely provided a lot of setup for the next one.
Post by: obesebear on 2016-01-02 21:19:35
This, but it's trying too hard to ultimately be as good. There was something threatening about the Death Star because there wasn't anything like that in cinema before. This....thing that they make into the next super weapon is just strange. The concept makes no sense and the rules of its operation change mid-movie.Exactly. To be fair, I think I read that the process of absorbing a sun as a weapon is actually used in the Extended Universe, so it could have been a nod to that
There's a HUGE list of what I liked and disliked about the movie overall. I'll eventually finish typing it and post it here. I keep starting it and getting interrupted because it takes so long to write up. :P
I kind of agree here. I think all of the previous star wars movies were around 3 hours long, but this new one felt a lot shorter to me for some reason. This film definitely provided a lot of setup for the next one.I actually looked it up right after watching it because I thought it felt shorter, too. Turns out A New Hope, Phantom Menace, and Force Awakens are all 2h 16m. I think it's because Force Awakens seems to have more action in it than the others, so it goes by faster.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2016-01-02 21:48:46
Absorbing the sun isn't - even remotely. It's just ridiculous, and a symptom of a
The original death star didn't go into the hows and whys of the science behind the super weapon. It didn't need to because that wasn't important. And it wasn't so ridiculous that I sat there thinking "lol". You can believe that they had some form of fusion power to generate the enormous energy (although, that's also v unlikely), but the second you go too far, or start giving absurd reasoning, you lose the audience. Or, at least, you lose me and many others.
I appreciate that not everyone thinks that way, but a good number of people do - but they aren't catered for. The people catered for massively are people who think "Biggerer Death Star = betterer Death Star"
Post by: obesebear on 2016-01-03 05:06:38
I have a much bigger gripe about a highly trained force user being bested by a force user who only started discovering her power an hour or two prior to their duel
Post by: DLPB_ on 2016-01-03 05:08:55
Post by: KnifeTheSky77 on 2016-01-03 05:51:55
Post by: DLPB_ on 2016-01-05 06:40:21
From a scifi, pseudo science perspective, a sun is basically the most energy dense object in its solar system. It isn't completely unreasonable to assume that a space faring civilization would want to do something with the free energy. It's also star wars, it's never NOT been kind of outlandish. I don't know what you were expecting lol
You've completely missed the point of my argument and are also trying to annoy me with "lol" childish comments.
I wasn't expecting anything that I would call decent or to my tastes, and indeed that proved to be the case. Have you even read my first post here - or the title of this thread?
Furthermore, this isn't about harnessing the sun's power. We do that all the time here on Earth... Ever heard of solar power? This is about absorbing an entire sun and completely severing the audience (many who will be sci-fi fans) from the fiction - all for a cheap gimmick. Internal logic is important for a fiction. Evidently, not for you - which is why you run away penning 10/10 reviews everywhere. Once your writing has degraded to the point that anything can happen for any reason, it is no longer real writing. It's sloppy, basic, brainless, and cheap. The exception to this is comedy, of course - like cartoons. But even that depends on the setting. I wouldn't bat an eye lid at a sun being absorbed in a Looney Toons cartoon. But in a science fiction set mostly within the confines of our own physics- I expect, you know, some actual logic and science.
You are right that Star Wars has never been totally pure "sci-fi", but the original trilogy was a mostly solid piece of fiction. This is not. In fact, one of the major criticisms that the Prequels received is that they were way too cartoonish and wrecked tension in scenes. This film has the exact same problem in places, but seems to be getting a free pass compared.
Post by: Vgr on 2016-01-05 13:04:09
[...] and are also trying to annoy me with "lol" childish comments.
I don't think so, no. To me, this look just like a way to relax the discussion and not make it feel like you're in a political debate. From my perspective, he was simply trying to ease the tone of his argument, not annoy or attack anyone.
Post by: DLPB_ on 2016-01-05 13:07:27
I don't think so, no. To me, this look just like a way to relax the discussion and not make it feel like you're in a political debate. From my perspective, he was simply trying to ease the tone of his argument, not annoy or attack anyone.
Haha. Bollocks.
Post by: Vgr on 2016-01-05 13:16:25
Bollocks. That whole post he made was lacking substance and clearly just trying to annoy. But from now on I will respond to him with "lol". We'll see how long it is before I'm taking to task over it. Ok?
Go back to my warning at the end of the previous page; I specifically say that anything that has previously happened is irrelevant from this point onwards. I gave everyone a second chance, it would be a bad idea to waste it.
To be clear, I am not taking any side. I'm being as objective as I can, but I'm still human. My interpretation and your interpretation are going to differ - of course they're going to differ. I could be wrong, but keep in mind that you could be, too. Please don't fall into provocation or arrogance :)
Post by: DLPB_ on 2016-01-05 13:44:00
Post by: Bosola on 2016-01-13 20:02:59
It is quite a cynical and lifeless film, and I'm left wondering if Star Wars is really a franchise trapped by its reputation, too expensive and too big to innovate further. What once seemed like intransigence on Lucas' part now seems quite wise - he never let fan expectation box in his vision, even if that meant taking a few missteps now and then. His films always tried to expand the universe and the franchise, and whilst aiming his films at kids alienated many fans, at least Lucas tried to grow the franchise, in that sense, not just sit on top of it like Disney and collect its annual Star Wars tithe. I think we will never see another truly exciting Star Wars film again.
Post by: kidkat on 2016-01-14 13:32:10
If you ask me i would give it a 6/10 and I'm being generous 8-). I also think that to critize something it's better if you watch/try it first (to a certain point), but besides that, everyone is free to do what they think it's better with their money.
And to summarize and elaborate a little bit on my answer here's my PROS/CONS list
Spoiler: show
Post by: obesebear on 2016-01-15 01:02:01
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the common gripes people have about 7 start to dissipate once the other movies come out. Here's hoping at least!
Also, I think Kylo will benefit from further movies. His story prior to 7 will likely be elaborated on, making his tantrums and poor fighting more understandable. As for the helmet, there was a point in the movie where Han says something like "You don't even need that helmet, take it off". Seems to me that he wears it because he wants so badly to be like Vader. Much like a child will put on their parents shoes to pretend to be like them.