Star Wars Episode VII cast announced

[Kaotik]

http://starwars.com/news/star-wars-episode-7-cast-announced.html

Actors John Boyega, Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, and Max von Sydow will join the original stars of the saga, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Kenny Baker in the new film.

Great to get finally confirmation on the original cast returning. Too bad it will be pure crap polished with lens flares, since it's being directed by J.J. Abrams.

According to rumours, the official name of the movie will be Star Wars Episode VII: Blinded by the Jedi Flares

 

[Mize]

Better than Peter Jackson. Can you imagine Luke blasting his fists through a wine barrel, firing up two light sabers and then spinning around like a Mario character killing Storm Troopers?

 

[Grall]

I've enjoyed the Abrams movies I've seen, the two Star Treks were good and great respectively IMO, Super8 was pretty great (mostly for the actors, not so much the script), and Cloverfield was awesome, with the caveat I seem to recall being told he didn't direct that one, just (co?)write it. I also liked the seasons of Lost I've watched, so I think he couldn't possibly do any worse than Lucas himself. The new (most recent?) trilogy is watchable at best and outright painful at worst. The only really interesting thing about the new trilogy that Lucas did with it was Palpatine's playing-out of both ends against each other, most of the rest was just pure bullshit, including the portrayal of Anakin as a petulant whiner, Jar-Jar Fking Binks and a million other things.

 

[RudeCurve]

Man with the main cast making a cameo it will be interesting to how they merge that into the plot/timeline.

I think JJ Abrams will do a good job with the SW franchise though.

 

[Kaotik]

I've enjoyed the Abrams movies I've seen, the two Star Treks were good and great respectively IMO,

Sure, if you forget that they had nothing to do with Star Treks except the names, they were full of lens flares even when there was no light source to cause the flare, despite the fact that Abrams was even told to reduce the amount of flares

 

[Mariner]

I'd imagine the new trilogy will be a lot better than the last one (not difficult!), but will fall somewhat behind the original trilogy. I've generally been a bit disappointed by Abrams' highly-lauded work. It's generally not bad, but I think it could easily be a lot better. I have a feeling he listens to the know-nothing studio execs too much and dumbs down the storyline accordingly.

Oh, can't finish a post about Abrams without saying, 'lens-flare'!

 

[AlphaWolf]

If the worst thing about abrams is lens flares he must be really good.

 

[Kaotik]

If the worst thing about abrams is lens flares he must be really good.

That and the usual ADHD-style of today.
This quote fits pretty well what I'm expecting from the movie(s if Abrams gets to ruin them all), translated by me, sadly the drift of the message might be lost in translation

It's sad, that it's already known how the movie will be.
It'll follow a group of young jedis with ultra-shiny crafts going from cgi-planet to next (with trembling camera), while they get to 10 life-threatening situations (siths, explosions, planets exploding) during 20 ADHD-minutes, enter short dialog and continue with the ADHD-action with 3D effects flying around, cameras switching 4 times per second and guys jumping off cliffs while camera rolls 1080 degrees around it. It'll have the theme at the beginning and the end titles to remind you that you actually just watched a star wars movie.

Only thing missing from the quote above is lens flares, more lens flares, lens flares everywhere and the camera being switched 8 to 16 times a second when it's not being switched 4 times a second.

 

[Grall]

Sure, if you forget that they had nothing to do with Star Treks except the names

Not sure what you're getting at. Nothing to do with Star Trek? There's all the original cast, staying surprisingly close overall to the general character of each cast member, there's Klingons, Vulcans, even Romulans (even if weird ones.) The Enterprise is there, looking pretty much the same as in the 60s - or the 80s, if you will - IE, weird. Except bigger this time, but since there's no real sense of scale in any of the exterior scenes this doesn't matter.

There's bizarre physical phenomena not rooted in known science ("red matter", which creates spontaneous black holes), and bad technobabble resolutions to the same ("eject the core!")

...Sounds like Star Trek to me!

they were full of lens flares even when there was no light source to cause the flare, despite the fact that Abrams was even told to reduce the amount of flares

Oh god, please stop this obsession over lens flares. Seriously, I swear, you've got a bigger hard-on about lens flares than Abrams does!

Just see the flares as a direct visual representation of a bright future, OK?

If the worst thing about abrams is lens flares he must be really good.

I have to agree.

Yeah, he's not the best movie maker ever, but shit, even the best movie maker ever isn't the best movie maker ever. Writers, directors and so on, their fortunes wax, then wane. Stephen Spielberg did great movies mainly in the 80s and early 90s (except for Hook, which was shite), and these days, what's he done that was worth a damn? Ridley Scott; Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Gladiator - then follow that up with Prometheus. I would bring up James Cameron too, but he spent most of the 90s doing nothing as far as movies go, and then Avatar, and I really liked that one. Peter Jackson, same thing there. Lord of the Rings - good. King Kong - weeelll... Hobbit - terrible.

So yeah, they all tend to follow the same curve. Frank Darabont once directed what has been called the best movie of all time, what's he done lately...?

It's inevitable. No one can create masterpieces EVERY TIME.

 

[Arwin]

Also a matter of taste. I like the Hobbit and am thankful it's a trilogy. Finally at the correct pacing, Tlotr was about 5 mins per chapter, lost all sense of the books as a result, and only the first movie bears rewatching ... The Frodo and Sam desperation scenes are too much for me. I also liked Hook a lot. I thought the Star Trek movies were ok, bit too much action, but hey, they were young so even that makes some sense.

 

[Grall]

By the way - Max Von Sydow? Damn. I wanted him as Denethor in Lord of the Rings! Hope he gets to play a badguy. Old shakespearian actors make the best badguys.

...Well, in his case it's more "Ingmar Bergmanian" perhaps, but whatever!

 

[Kaotik]

Not sure what you're getting at. Nothing to do with Star Trek? There's all the original cast, staying surprisingly close overall to the general character of each cast member, there's Klingons, Vulcans, even Romulans (even if weird ones.) The Enterprise is there, looking pretty much the same as in the 60s - or the 80s, if you will - IE, weird. Except bigger this time, but since there's no real sense of scale in any of the exterior scenes this doesn't matter.

There's bizarre physical phenomena not rooted in known science ("red matter", which creates spontaneous black holes), and bad technobabble resolutions to the same ("eject the core!")

...Sounds like Star Trek to me!

Star Trek was always, before anything else, about morals, with added adventure besides it. The new movies are solely about ADHDkillactionboomfight with characters as thin as paper (No, the Spock's childhood stuff wasn't even a good try to bring any of the original essence to the movie)

 

[swaaye]

Gotta give him a little credit. He certainly resurrected Trek successfully. The Berman formula was totally burned out.

I would've preferred new characters but it's pretty obvious that reinventing the old characters was a popularity win. It did sadly turn Trek into a strange humorous camp retro thing though. Common folk really dig it which is a little horrifying but alas. Perhaps the new popularity will lead to interesting new experiments someday.

As for Star Wars.....heh well my opinion is it surely can't be worse that what George did. JJ will probably try to reinvent himself. We will see.

 

[Wynix]

I read somewhere that abrams wife complained to him about the lens flares stating that she couldn't see what was happening in the movie, i think he agreed that he has a problem with overusing them.
So hopefully they are reduced.

 

[Pixel]

I read somewhere that abrams wife complained to him about the lens flares stating that she couldn't see what was happening in the movie, i think he agreed that he has a problem with overusing them.
So hopefully they are reduced.

 

[Wynix]

They are not interested in a new TV series? i guess the movies make more bank and they don't want to split the audience.

WHOEVER WATCHES THE NEW MOVIES ARE TO BLAME.

 

[Mariner]

A TV series set in the expanded Star Wars universe developed in books over the past 20-odd years (which Lucas completely ignored with the last trilogy) and filmed with similar production values to Game of Thrones could be really, really good. Unfortunately, I think the comment that this wouldn't make enough money are probably correct. I suppose it is more difficult to hang a crap load of crap merchandising on the back of a TV show as opposed to a whizz-bang movie series which the media will hype up for free.

Oddly enough, the advancement of CGI over the past couple of decades has actually proven to be of detriment to some film making as too many producers/directors just throw endless SFX at a movie instead of actually using it sensibly and coherently as an aid to the plot. SFX instead of plot.

Abrams isn't as bad as some filmmakers at this (take a bow Michael Bay!), but when someone with the track record of Ridley Scott produces something as risible as Prometheus, you can see a lot of people have a real problem knowing when to stop with the CGI.

 

[Blazkowicz]

SFX over plot has been done for the last 80 years? I'm picking that date because King Kong was that much long ago and it was not the last monster movie. Then SF movies, movies with Jason and the argonauts fighting mythological creatures and so on. 2001 Space Odyssey was entirely about the scenery, effects and musical score with plot as a convenient excuse.

Now, with CGI you sure have a ton of overuse, that often amounts to an animation film with actors thrown in (not speaking of Avatar. I finally watched it and it is an animation movie )

Yeah, he's not the best movie maker ever, but shit, even the best movie maker ever isn't the best movie maker ever. Writers, directors and so on, their fortunes wax, then wane. Stephen Spielberg did great movies mainly in the 80s and early 90s (except for Hook, which was shite), and these days, what's he done that was worth a damn? Ridley Scott; Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Gladiator - then follow that up with Prometheus. I would bring up James Cameron too (...)

Nooooooo! Hook was great! Fantastic movie, if you watch it when you're a kid at least.

 

[Grall]

Star Trek was always, before anything else, about morals, with added adventure besides it.

Not the feature movies. They were far more action-oriented than the early trek TV shows. The most successful trek feature, Star Trek: Back to the Future (With Whales), was at its heart much more a light-hearted comedy rather than a morality piece. The other trek movies made their money back and a modest profit on top; enough that the movie company would sign on to make another one, but none of them were blockbusters by any stretch. Besides, as Swaaye already mentioned, Berman ran the trek formula into the ground, so there's that as well.

The new movies are solely about ADHDkillactionboomfight with characters as thin as paper

It's your assertion characters are as thin as paper, I wouldn't necessarily agree. These are action movies. They're not character dramas. You can't expect loads of character development in a feature movie, there's not time enough for that. I think you expect too much of JJ's movies, TBH. No other director could accomplish more in the same time spent, because there just isn't time.

I expect that's largely why they didn't invent a new cast. The old characters are already invented and well known, the audience knows what to expect of them. Kirk's arrogant, brash and heroic, Spock is thoughtful and analytical (except, well, when he isn't! ), Bones is a curmudgeon chirurgeon, Sulu...well, Sulu can fence...and so on.

New characters would be a blank slate to the audience. Often, that's why the first (and sometimes only) installment of a superhero movie is so lacklustre, because you have to spend much of the movie to establish the character(s). Trek, you have an audience which already know the characters and know them well. They're part of western cultural heritage at this point, by and large.

Nooooooo! Hook was great! Fantastic movie, if you watch it when you're a kid at least.

Hmh, I was like 20 years old or something when it came out. I was not overly impressed one might say.

 

[Blazkowicz]

I didn't see the JJ Abrams movies (I don't relate that much to the original Star Trek series by the way)

It's your assertion characters are as thin as paper, I wouldn't necessarily agree. These are action movies. They're not character dramas. You can't expect loads of character development in a feature movie, there's not time enough for that. I think you expect too much of JJ's movies, TBH. No other director could accomplish more in the same time spent, because there just isn't time.

Some character development could be done by spending all the screen time on it, leaving no time for battles, fights, explosions, finding and exploring the planet/station/thing where you encounter the menace/bad guy/space-time fault that will destroy the enterprise/take control of all systems/do something similarly dangerous.

I'm imagining a movie that happens in a single evening at Quark's bar, and almost only there . The main characters chat, talk and discuss all long. They'll play a couple games, and oh the movie will be two and a half hour long! There'll be a bar fight involving Klingons but just for the fun of it and normal activity resumes after that. There can be casual updates about how the captain is missing and the station will explode in a couple hours if they can't manage to do whatever, as part of general small talk.