** Star Wars Episode VII - SPOILERS WITHIN **

[No1newts]

It's set more than 10 years after ROTJ, especially if one of those characters is as rumoured to be, Han's daughter. WIth the age of the originals I always thought they were going for 30 years after ROTJ.



My son loves it, he's watched them all over and over. It's our thursday thing to sit and watch the new one if he's been good. I'm never dissapointed if he's been bad and we don't watch it for a week It's just awful, Star Wars christmas special awful. Yet the commissioned a 2nd series before the pilot had aired. Purely because you only have to go into a toysrus or see the incoming lego sets to see how much has been invested in the rebels series. Even the art work is terrible, it's drawn like Aladdin



Yeah I said that time and time again on here. I am looking forward more to being in the cinema with my son watching it and seeing his reaction. Adults will pick this one apart as much as the prequels because they will wee all over their originals. My 5 year old will reach for AOTC and ROTS before any of the originals. The phantom menace he's just waiting for the fight at the end. I think if anyone thinks we are going to get action in line with the originals they are deluded. You only have to see that falcon motion to see that will also be cranked up 10 notches. No more lazy listing to the left

My son will eat up the merchandising and that is the target audience, 5 year old boys to hook for another 10 years

Yeah Rebels is on repeat all the time in my house at the moment with my son I will go and see it but happier going in thinking it will be **** then being pleasantly surprised as opposed to getting really hyped then let down.

Hate that JJ is involved though, LENS FLARE ZOMG WHO NEEDS A STORYLINE!?

 

[Hades]

That looks good. Excited about it now.

 

[Begbie]

Yeah Rebels is on repeat all the time in my house at the moment with my son I will go and see it but happier going in thinking it will be **** then being pleasantly surprised as opposed to getting really hyped then let down.

Hate that JJ is involved though, LENS FLARE ZOMG WHO NEEDS A STORYLINE!?

Yeah, though only seen one bit of lens flare there. Why does he still do it?! I seen an interview with him when it was talked about. He commented saying he realised he's over done it with lens flare and something he is going to look at in the future. Hopefully he has realised.

 

[redline]

Yeah, though only seen one bit of lens flare there. Why does he still do it?! I seen an interview with him when it was talked about. He commented saying he realised he's over done it with lens flare and something he is going to look at in the future. Hopefully he has realised.

Where is the lens flare in that trailer?... there is a little in the Falcon flying scene, but not the typical, stretched, anamorphic lines of light he is known for. I see nothing intrusive, like in the link below

http://www.trekmate.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Star-Trek-2009-lens-flare.jpg

 

[Hades]

Yeah, though only seen one bit of lens flare there. Why does he still do it?! I seen an interview with him when it was talked about. He commented saying he realised he's over done it with lens flare and something he is going to look at in the future. Hopefully he has realised.

I guess he'll always keep a little flare in all his films as it's a trademark of his now. It's a bit like Alfred Hitchcock always played a background character in his films and Christopher Walken usually tries to get a dance included in anything he's in.

 

[Shamikebab]

Lens flare is a technique. It's fine using it, the problem is the way he has used it in the past. Nothing in this trailer suggests that really, it's just people trying to find a problem.

 

[Simian]

Reference Cumberbatch. There are plenty of people who are indicating the voice-over is actually Andy Serkis.

I forgot Smegol was in this!!

 

[No1newts]

I'm not complaining about the trailer itself, just JJ in general. If he has learned and doesn't over use it then that's grand!!

 

[Begbie]

Where is the lens flare in that trailer?... there is a little in the Falcon flying scene, but not the typical, stretched, anamorphic lines of light he is known for. I see nothing intrusive, like in the link below

http://www.trekmate.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Star-Trek-2009-lens-flare.jpg

Yeah as I said only seen a little bit, and it was also the Falcon scene. Though the trailer is only just over a minute

I'm sure this is the article I read where he admits he went OOT. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/03/star-trek-into-darkness-jj-abrams-lens-flare

 

[Vidar]

Why do people always moan about the damn lens flares, alright they where a bit excessive in the two JJ Abrams Star Trek films but come on, they in no way detracted from the quality of the films... JJ took a pretty much dead franchise in such as there wasn't any further TV shows etc planned and dragged it into the 21st century for a new generation of fans.

I for one loved those two films and could not be happier that it's him directing this new Star Wars film! Yeah okay there are some questionable choices, The force awakens isn't what I was hoping for title wise and that light saber... looks a touch questionable to put it mildly but these are just two gripes out of everything we know so far.... I for one am very excited about this!

 

[Begbie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpfWrh1scZU#t=67

 

[Ninco!]

I just hope that the film is not a CGI fest.

For instance, just compare classic films such as the original Star Wars Trilogy, Alien and The Terminator, whereby costumes, models and real film sets were created and the use of blue screen effects was limited (due to technology of the time etc).

Nevertheless, models look so much more convincing than CGI, take the opening sequence of A New Hope with the Star Destroyer, even today it looks awesome, furthermore, the original puppets used for Jabba and Yoda compared to the CGI versions which look awful and bear limited resemblance to the original characters.

 

[Rroff]

Poll

Do you approve of the New Light Sabre?

Yes

No

Whats a Light a Sabre


I myself think it looks crap but the trailer looks ace and really hooks in to the look and feel of the original star wars thank god

That light sabre looks a complete gimmick probably "thrown in for the kids" and seems like a departure from the spirit of the original movies whereas most of the rest of the trailer seemed to hit the spirit of the original movies pretty much dead on.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

That light sabre looks a complete gimmick probably "thrown in for the kids" and seems like a departure from the spirit of the original movies whereas most of the rest of the trailer seemed to hit the spirit of the original movies pretty much dead on.

Probably, and hopefully, the only one like it in the film.

 

[Ninco!]

Absolutely, its inevitable, designed for the toy market along with an upgraded Falcon and X-Wing. Hell, with the prequels they upgraded the figures to look like He-Man!

 

[redline]

I just hope that the film is not a CGI fest.

For instance, just compare classic films such as the original Star Wars Trilogy, Alien and The Terminator, whereby costumes, models and real film sets were created and the use of blue screen effects was limited (due to technology of the time etc).

Nevertheless, models look so much more convincing than CGI, take the opening sequence of A New Hope with the Star Destroyer, even today it looks awesome, furthermore, the original puppets used for Jabba and Yoda compared to the CGI versions which look awful and bear limited resemblance to the original characters.

I'm pretty sure its been said that JJ wanted to use practical effects as much as possible. I'm not sure I agree about models v CGI... it really does depend on the quality of artists with CGI, but when done well I feel they eclipse models, which almost always give away their scale. The CG in the prequals was very poor at times, but things have moved on, and feel confident this film will look great, even if CG heavy.

I can't believe the fuss over the sabre... some people on here are tinder dry, and sooo boring; where is your sense of fun?... oh, you don't have one

 

[Ninco!]

I'm pretty sure its been said that JJ wanted to use practical effects as much as possible. I'm not sure I agree about models v CGI... it really does depend on the quality of artists with CGI, but when done well I feel they eclipse models, which almost always give away their scale. The CG in the prequals was very poor at times, but things have moved on, and feel confident this film will look great, even if CG heavy.

I can't believe the fuss over the sabre... some people on here are tinder dry, and sooo boring; where is your sense of fun?... oh, you don't have one

Fair point, the films I quoted are 30 years old and (in my view) have still dated better than say, The Phantom Menace etc.

With todays technology, I feel the use of models, real film sets, costumes would be more convincing when compared to CGI. The costs are the killer, building sets when compared to blue screen...

The Lightsabre, Darth Maul used a fancy pants double ended version, what thirty years before Vader's existence?

If only Vader knew, Luke would be toast.

 

[_Jimlad_]

Fair point, the films I quoted are 30 years old and (in my view) have still dated better than say, The Phantom Menace etc.

With todays technology, I feel the use of models, real film sets, costumes would be more convincing when compared to CGI.

The Lightsabre, Darth Maul used a fancy pants double ended version, what thirty years before Vader's existence?

If only Vader knew, Luke would be toast.

Disney gonna rape this franchise. But I am keen for that. Look fwd to a film / spin off every year. Boba fett gonna still be alive 100% sure on that.

 

[Xordium]

I've decided I quite like the lightsabre - it gives it quite a quasi-religious medieval look like some dark inquisitor. And I base that decision on a good twenty odd viewings.

Roll on next year.

 

[redline]

Fair point, the films I quoted are 30 years old and (in my view) have still dated better than say, The Phantom Menace etc.

With todays technology, I feel the use of models, real film sets, costumes would be more convincing when compared to CGI.

The Lightsabre, Darth Maul used a fancy pants double ended version, what thirty years before Vader's existence?

If only Vader knew, Luke would be toast.

I agree... I think the originals (not the CG enhanced versions) do hold up very well, and most of the effects look great, unlike the prequels, although they too look stunning at times. At the end of the day effects are effects, and film makers use the resources available to them at the time.. they would have used CG if was there 30 years ago.

To me Star Wars has always been fantasy (a fairy tale) not Sci Fi.. so pretty much anything goes as far as I'm concerned, so a sabre with fancy side burners is all good... it myth and magic in space, not 2001.