Star Wars: The Force Awakens teaser #2

spydy13 said:

I got a Christopher Nolan vibe from that trailer...

Click to expand...

Let's not.. get too hype..

spydy13 said:

I got a Christopher Nolan vibe from that trailer, in that he's building/returning to a dirty, "realistic" universe. His Start Trek films, imo, were very colorful and futuristic to me.

Needless to say, I'm quite excited, and what I'm seeing from JJ is better than expected (and always thought he would do a good job).

Click to expand...

Yup. To me, the visual language he's using says "Star Wars" to me, loud and clear, while still being identifiably his own take on it.

The prequels simply didn't say "Star Wars" to me, if that makes any sense.

theSTEREO. said:

Yup. To me, the visual language he's using says "Star Wars" to me, loud and clear, while still being identifiably his own take on it.

The prequels simply didn't say "Star Wars" to me, if that makes any sense.

Click to expand...

It's funny, I was talking to a colleague today and he said the exact opposite and he's an Abrams fan. I tend to agree with him. I don't feel "Star Wars" from the trailer, I get a sense that this is an Abrams movie; like Star Trek.

But with that said, I don't really care. Honestly, I'll give him a pass on that, it's not that important to me. If the movie is good, that's really all that matters to me.

I definitely don't think it looks or feels like the originals or the prequels (4 of 6 of those movies having been made by the creator of the franchise, George Lucas).

What it did look like to me was some shit out of Heavy Metal, which, is really pretty fucking awesome if that's not just representative of the trailers.

p.s.
The prequels were not intended to look like the original trilogy, this was done intentionally to show contrast. The prequels take place during a golden age of peace and prosperity in the Galactic Republic; whereas, the original films take place in what is essentially a dark age after the fall of the Republic and the complete end of the Jedi Order.

The prequels are what the galaxy looks like with democracy with the Jedi as protectors of freedom; the originals are what the galaxy looks like under despotism and authoritarianism under the thumb of the Sith.

gourimoko said:

The guys in Ep.4-6 mostly are not clones. They are mostly human-only recruits and conscripts from around the galaxy. The need for tremendous amounts of individuals immediately makes recruiting and conscription more practical than growing an army.

Click to expand...

Gotcha. Regardless, its funny how the supposedly overwhelming army has such bad soldiers. I'd say Star Trek and Star Wars were both guilty of severe cases of the incompetent underling trope, although it was very common in that era.

gourimoko said:

It's funny, I was talking to a colleague today and he said the exact opposite and he's an Abrams fan. I tend to agree with him. I don't feel "Star Wars" from the trailer, I get a sense that this is an Abrams movie; like Star Trek.

But with that said, I don't really care. Honestly, I'll give him a pass on that, it's not that important to me. If the movie is good, that's really all that matters to me.

I definitely don't think it looks or feels like the originals or the prequels (4 of 6 of those movies having been made by the creator of the franchise, George Lucas).

What it did look like to me was some shit out of Heavy Metal, which, is really pretty fucking awesome if that's not just representative of the trailers.

p.s.
The prequels were not intended to look like the original trilogy, this was done intentionally to show contrast. The prequels take place during a golden age of peace and prosperity in the Galactic Republic; whereas, the original films take place in what is essentially a dark age after the fall of the Republic and the complete end of the Jedi Order.

The prequels are what the galaxy looks like with democracy with the Jedi as protectors of freedom; the originals are what the galaxy looks like under despotism and authoritarianism under the thumb of the Sith.

Click to expand...

I think it would be unfair for anyone to compare these movies to the originals. Regardless of any intent to show differences between the regimes running the universe during the films, they were simply made in different times with different available technology.

IMO, the new movies, at least so far, seem to be keeping in line with the visual spirit of what everyone thinks of when they think "Star Wars," but they obviously aren't going to look exactly the same however hard they try.

howler1313 said:

Gotcha. Regardless, its funny how the supposedly overwhelming army has such bad soldiers. I'd say Star Trek and Star Wars were both guilty of severe cases of the incompetent underling trope, although it was very common in that era.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind, Starfleet is not a military organization. It's a common misconception, but those guys were never intended to be in the service. It even gets confusing watching because you'd assume they were given some episodes like TNG: Drumhead which show a military-style court martial.

DS9 changed a great deal of that, but TOS/TNG and VOY, those guys aren't supposed to be combat soldiers. They are explorers.

Kirk, Picard and Janeway say this numerous times and make the point explicitly; to quote Picard: "Starfleet is not a military organization. Our purpose is exploration."

To quote Roddenberry;

"Starfleet is not a military organisation. It is a scientific research and diplomatic body.

Although the duties of the Enterprise may include some military responsibilities, the primary purpose of the Enterprise — as with all Starfleet vessels is to expand the body of human knowledge.

In practice this means that our armaments and militarism have been de-emphasized over the previous series and very much de-emphasized over the movies. We will not see saluting. We may hear the word "sir", but it is extended as the same kind of courtesy used by junior and senior officers on civilian airliners. It is traditional, however, to use ship's ranks on the bridge, an acknowledgment of the naval heritage of Starfleet."

Believe me I know it's confusing, but in the 23rd century, humanity has somehow evolved beyond the need for a standing military that acts in an offensive capacity.

Much of that changes in the 24th century, obviously, with the Dominion War, Section 34, etc; but that was never the intent of the creator of Star Trek, nor was it the spirit of the shows or the movies (outside of Meyer's films).

theSTEREO. said:

Yup. To me, the visual language he's using says "Star Wars" to me, loud and clear, while still being identifiably his own take on it.

The prequels simply didn't say "Star Wars" to me, if that makes any sense.

Click to expand...

The prequels mostly said, "Why the fuck did George Lucas rape my childhood?"

spydy13 said:

I think it would be unfair for anyone to compare these movies to the originals. Regardless of any intent to show differences between the regimes running the universe during the films, they were simply made in different times with different available technology.

IMO, the new movies, at least so far, seem to be keeping in line with the visual spirit of what everyone thinks of when they think "Star Wars," but they obviously aren't going to look exactly the same however hard they try.

Click to expand...

My only issue is with this idea of what Star Wars is supposed to look like.

Star Wars is George Lucas' dream. He's the guy who made A New Hope. His argument as to the look of Star Wars between the originals and prequels makes sense. It isn't sensible to think that he couldn't have made the prequels gritty and dirty; he could have, but he made a conscious effort not to. I get that, and accept it, just as I can look at this trailer and accept that it looks like Star Trek.

I know people hate the prequels, for a lot of valid reasons, but saying they don't look like Star Wars -- I mean, I dunno what to say to that... It's just as much Star Wars as anything else.

p.s.
Sometimes it seems people just want someone to remake Empire Strikes Back, over and over again. ROTJ isn't gritty, again as Q-Tip said.. Ewoks, and to add to that, Forest Moon.

I mean, 4 of the 6 movies are directed by Lucas. I mean, Star Wars is more than just Empire, right?

I know some out there will have their gripes about the movie, approach, etc.

Step back and remind yourselves....we are getting a New Star Wars Saga. The greatest movie franchise ever. Its a story that will long outlive any of us, and we are getting something new that is unwritten. No spoilers, we don't know how it'll will play out or how it will end (i.e. Potter Franchise). We can only speculate.

Just breathe and enjoy a new story with the characters, the history, THE MUSIC, we love and will always remind us of our childhood. The prequel hurt the franchise, but told the story that was needed. Lucas over directed, Anakin couldnt act (I disagree slightly), and the CGI just hurt the beauty of the movie.

New Star Wars guys. Luke, Han, and Chewie are back. My best memories of my childhood were sitting in our recliner with my dad every Friday night after he worked 16 hours and watching these movies. Sure id fall asleep, but it was such a great memory. I can't wait to do the same with my kids. I pray to God my father, and my children get to watch these for a long time coming.

Excited for the series. No judgement here.

gourimoko said:

I mean, Star Wars is more than just Empire, right?

Click to expand...

That's kind of my point though. For a lot of people 4 and 5 are "Star Wars" even though there is a giant gulf between how those two films look, imo.

Lucas could have tried to make the prequels look like 4 and 5 and I'm sure it still would have not lived up to the look people have in their head for the movies. Trying to replicate nostalgia is basically impossible.

spydy13 said:

That's kind of my point though. For a lot of people 4 and 5 are "Star Wars" even though there is a giant gulf between how those two films look, imo.

Lucas could have tried to make the prequels look like 4 and 5 and I'm sure it still would have not lived up to the look people have in their head for the movies. Trying to replicate nostalgia is basically impossible.

Click to expand...

And therein lies a couple of problems.

4 and 5 look alike, but that's really about it. They don't share the same narrative, or direction style whatsoever. Empire is a very somber story with a deeper plot line, and a pretty fucking intense twist at the climax of the movie. It's a downer. A New Hope is a movie for everyone, it's an upbeat film with some comedy and slapstick and a bright overarching story.

Looking at ROTJ (6), this movie looks nothing like 4 and 5, but it's still a better film than A New Hope, IMHO, Ewoks or not. This movie focuses squarely on the battle of Jedi as the central point of the story; whereas the others didn't.

So to me, it's seems odd to look these three movies an pick and choose and say "this is Star Wars and that isn't." You cannot find a consistent look, feel, narrative, from film to film; they are all pretty different, reflecting the 3 different direction styles.

The grittiest of them all was definitely A New Hope, but that again, was largely because they were on Tatooine for the bulk of the film. Once they got to Yavin 4 (the final scene of A New Hope) everything was pristine.

It's also why I look at the prequels and at least give them a fair hearing (and they mostly fail, but still). I'm interested in hearing Lucas' story. I think he tells a good one. I also think though, that he's a shitty director.

With all that though, I think you are 100% correct, that many of these fan opinions are mostly nostalgia driven, and that's fine, what's wrong with that?

From my vantage point though, I try not to let it influence my opinions. That's why I sit back and say "okay Abrams, you wanted Star Trek to be Star Wars, that didn't work; so now you've got Star Wars, go for it."

I don't think the trailer looks like Empire or ROTJ, it looks very much like Abrams' take on A New Hope. There was even a side-by-side comparison of Star Trek and last night's trailer, and the point was clearly made that the cinematography is almost identical.

But from a cinematic/storytelling standpoint, which is really the most important part of this, it looks like VII is a retelling of IV, which makes a good deal of sense, to be honest.

gourimoko said:

My only issue is with this idea of what Star Wars is supposed to look like.

Star Wars is George Lucas' dream. He's the guy who made A New Hope. His argument as to the look of Star Wars between the originals and prequels makes sense. It isn't sensible to think that he couldn't have made the prequels gritty and dirty; he could have, but he made a conscious effort not to. I get that, and accept it, just as I can look at this trailer and accept that it looks like Star Trek.

I know people hate the prequels, for a lot of valid reasons, but saying they don't look like Star Wars -- I mean, I dunno what to say to that... It's just as much Star Wars as anything else.

p.s.
Sometimes it seems people just want someone to remake Empire Strikes Back, over and over again. ROTJ isn't gritty, again as Q-Tip said.. Ewoks, and to add to that, Forest Moon.

I mean, 4 of the 6 movies are directed by Lucas. I mean, Star Wars is more than just Empire, right?

Click to expand...

I don't think that the prequels should have been as dirty as the original trilogy, but to me they were just too clean and shiny. Yeah, the galaxy isn't at war, but that doesn't mean cities still shouldn't look like cities. Even our cleanest cities have some dirt and grime to them, or for older cities have monuments and structures from the past that show their age. In the prequels, everything looked brand new and it just felt false.

Even in nice cities, things look lived in and used. Everything in the prequels looked like a shiny computer graphic, which makes sense because that's what everything was.

And I think that's the heart of the issue with the prequels. In the originals, they looked real because they were real sets. In the prequels, basically everything was generated by a computer and consequently looks very fake. There are scenes where the characters are walking and you can tell that literally everything in the background is CGI and it just feels wrong. And like any movie that is over-reliant on computer effects, the prequels have aged very poorly, and ironically much worse than the original trilogy.

Not sure if you guys have seen this from Comic Con, but to me this feels pretty Star Wars-y in terms of sets & costumes at least.

Jack Brickman said:

I don't think that the prequels should have been as dirty as the original trilogy, but to me they were just too clean and shiny. Yeah, the galaxy isn't at war, but that doesn't mean cities still shouldn't look like cities. Even our cleanest cities have some dirt and grime to them, or for older cities have monuments and structures from the past that show their age. In the prequels, everything looked brand new and it just felt false.

Click to expand...

Again, I think the point is to show contrast between a dark age and a golden age. The prequels are taking place during an age of enlightenment.

Look at movies like Gladiator, Troy, 300, or Exodus; we know those cities didn't look like that. We don't see people shitting and pissing in the streets, etc.

Again, the emphasis is on the fact that these are golden ages.

That's why I think it's such an unfair criticism of the prequels, movies I dislike; but to suggest that they were too "shiny" just, isn't really a worthwhile argument in my opinion. It essentially boils down to "I wish they just remade Empire."

Jack Brickman said:

Even in nice cities, things look lived in and used. Everything in the prequels looked like a shiny computer graphic, which makes sense because that's what everything was.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree that the CG in the prequels was bad, but shininess is not a result of CG graphics; it's a result of direction. One can definitely make a gritty look with CG, in fact, it's actually a bit easier to do for a number of reasons.

Jack Brickman said:

And I think that's the heart of the issue with the prequels.

Click to expand...

See what I mean man?

If that's the heart of the issue with the prequels, then I can't get with that.

The prequels are bad for a good number of reasons, but look and feel, I think just really shouldn't be one of them. Phantom Menace was a beautiful film when released. Attack of the Clones, perhaps less so. Revenge of the Sith did things you simply could not do without green screening.

They are bad movies, no doubt. But not because of the look. That's just something I can get past. It's like shitting on the originals if you watch the non-remastered versions.

Jack Brickman said:

In the originals, they looked real because they were real sets. In the prequels, basically everything was generated by a computer and consequently looks very fake.

Click to expand...

Phantom Menace used real sets, so, most of the things you see in the movie were real. It was filmed largely in Tunisia, with massive sets.

Attack of the Clones was the first Star Wars film to be filmed almost entirely on green screens. Revenge did a better job, and I thought looked pretty solid in most scenes, but there were some that looked downright awful.

Jack Brickman said:

There are scenes where the characters are walking and you can tell that literally everything in the background is CGI and it just feels wrong.

Click to expand...

You can say this about a lot of movies man..

Jack Brickman said:

And like any movie that is over-reliant on computer effects, the prequels have aged very poorly, and ironically much worse than the original trilogy.

Click to expand...

Think about what you're saying for a second, and ask yourself this...

So when Disney redoes all of the prequels in 4K with new special effects, which surely you know is inevitable since it's a guaranteed profit center for them; would that really change your opinion of the films?

bigfoot5415 said:

I know some out there will have their gripes about the movie, approach, etc.

Step back and remind yourselves....we are getting a New Star Wars Saga. The greatest movie franchise ever. Its a story that will long outlive any of us, and we are getting something new that is unwritten. No spoilers, we don't know how it'll will play out or how it will end (i.e. Potter Franchise). We can only speculate.

Just breathe and enjoy a new story with the characters, the history, THE MUSIC, we love and will always remind us of our childhood. The prequel hurt the franchise, but told the story that was needed. Lucas over directed, Anakin couldnt act (I disagree slightly), and the CGI just hurt the beauty of the movie.

New Star Wars guys. Luke, Han, and Chewie are back. My best memories of my childhood were sitting in our recliner with my dad every Friday night after he worked 16 hours and watching these movies. Sure id fall asleep, but it was such a great memory. I can't wait to do the same with my kids. I pray to God my father, and my children get to watch these for a long time coming.

Excited for the series. No judgement here.

Click to expand...

This, pretty much. Not just this movie, but the new trilogy, and all the independent films that are coming and more stories on top of that. Disney has this huge cash cow they can milk for generations, yet I somehow feel like they will do it justice and overall treat it with dignity and respect it deserves.

I'm very optimistic. And truthfully, after the prequels, I'm probably going to go pretty easy on this film.

Not that I nitpick this shit like a lot of nerds out there, regardless. I'm not too difficult to please.

What I've seen so far I really have no complaints besides no Lando.