Yeah I heard that also, so this is suprising for me. I love Abrams, and I think he will do a great job...I just kind of wish he wouldn't do it.Berithil said:Huh, I thought he had originally turned that down (can't remember where I read that...)
So, we're gonna have a ton of lens flares, then? Well, I'd prefer him over Michael Bays fetish for explosions.
The effect is not only silly, but the technique of making it is too. They basically shine a light from the side at the camera, and it looks really bad.Lionsfan said:So the movie is gonna be unwatchable then? I mean, I somewhat understand "wanting" lens flare to make things seem realistic, but this:
![]()
is
![]()
fucking
![]()
ridiculous
I heard most of the lense flares in Star Trek '09 were CGI'd in in post production, which makes it even worse.IamQ said:The effect is not only silly, but the technique of making it is too. They basically shine a light from the side at the camera, and it looks really bad.Lionsfan said:So the movie is gonna be unwatchable then? I mean, I somewhat understand "wanting" lens flare to make things seem realistic, but this:
![]()
is
![]()
fucking
![]()
ridiculous
Hearing his reason for them is awful too.IamQ said:The effect is not only silly, but the technique of making it is too. They basically shine a light from the side at the camera, and it looks really bad.Lionsfan said:So the movie is gonna be unwatchable then? I mean, I somewhat understand "wanting" lens flare to make things seem realistic, but this:
![]()
is
![]()
fucking
![]()
ridiculous
I think seeing a Star Wars movie directed by Tarantino would be very interesting. If he got complete freedom from Disney to make it into whatever kind of movie he wanted, it could turn out pretty cool.Rogue 09 said:The problem is not with just the lens flare, that's oversimplifying the actual problem. And I would accept just about any other director except the following three:
1) George Lucas
2) JJ Abrams
3) Quentin Tarantino
Nah, you know what would REALLY be interesting? Star Wars as directed by Joss Whedon, if only because I want to see how his experience with the space-western that is Firefly would affect his work on the space-opera that is Star Wars.Pinkamena said:I think seeing a Star Wars movie directed by Tarantino would be very interesting. If he got complete freedom from Disney to make it into whatever kind of movie he wanted, it could turn out pretty cool.
I have a vague memory of JJ saying he didn't want to do it because he was quite a big Star Wars fan and would have a lot to live up to just in his own mind.Berithil said:Huh, I thought he had originally turned that down (can't remember where I read that...)
So, we're gonna have a ton of lens flares, then? Well, I'd prefer him over Michael Bays fetish for explosions.
Rogue 09 said:I would even have more faith in you, Copper Zen, directing than anyone of the aforementioned list.
A couple of things spring to mind after reading this.Rogue 09 said:The problem is not with just the lens flare, that's oversimplifying the actual problem. And I would accept just about any other director except the following three:
1) George Lucas
2) JJ Abrams
3) Quentin Tarantino
Other than that, I really don't care. I would even have more faith in you, Copper Zen, directing than anyone of the aforementioned list. What is shocking to me is that, after the complete destruction of Star Wars cannon by George Lucas in the prequels, they go with a director who also blatantly violated cannon with Star Trek '09. This is the very worst things to say to your fans.
And one last thing: I love my family... but I would rather have JJ Abrams and George Lucas tag team my younger sister and leave her spent on the side of a deserted freeway in shame and misery than have either one of them touch Star Wars. This isn't whining or moaning, this is trying to protect something sacred that has influenced the very culture of our society.
And Joss Whedon may not be a great choice for the new Star Wars movies either, but I'd take him happily. He can also bang my sister.
1. Consistently terrible, yes! Really now, Abrams isn't that bad. If he can keep his lens flare in his pants he's perfectly serviceable, and that's all Star Wars really requires. Star Wars is kind of an innately stupid IP, but it's like crack for geeks. There's something about it that's silly and fun, when some old coot with a goiter the size of a minivan isn't draining away its soul with dreadful dialogue and racist aliens.Rogue 09 said:A couple of answers spring to mind after reading this.
1. Yes, really. I would prefer Uwe Boll. Don't dismiss me on this, I'm not lying and will explain why. Uwe boll makes terrible movies (and I have no idea why I watched all 3 BloodRayne movies...) but he keeps it pretty freaking consistent. And maybe we can finally get Carrie Fisher nude. (What?... WHAT?... We've all been waiting for it, and it's about damn time we got it!)
2. Lucas was an inspiration to us all and a genius... a long time ago in a studio far, far away. Whatever spark was there for Lucas in the 70s and 80s... it was long dead. You can point to the prequels, you can point to Indy 4, you can point to the "Special Editions"... but the spark is dead. He needed someone to slap him and tell him he was being an idiot. The fans tried, but his buddies told him it was fine, so he ignored us and got butthurt. I don't consider him the same man that made those movies that I still like watching today.
As for cannon... I mean, c'mon. Obi Wan said that he was trained by Yoda (not as a school child) and Leia said she remembered some things about her mother. It's not like Trek cannon where there is a lot to sift through, the guy just had to spend 6 hours at the end of writing each script to make sure he didn't F up.