What was the last movie you watched?

[doggans]

Lucas only really had a couple movies under his belt when he made the originals.

And until Abrams also directs a nostalgia piece about teenagers in fast cars, he is absolutely FORBIDDEN from touching the franchise that gave us "Caravan of Courage"!

[Edward J Grug III]

Abrams is going to be the director with the second most movies under his belt before helming a Star Wars film, only behind Irvin Kershner.

Quantity's not the issue, in my opinion. Quality is.

Well, you're the one who said 'the five movies thing' but now you're talking opinion, so it's pointless to argue.

Having said that, check out the movies Kershner did before Empire, and tell me which of the two is a better fit for the franchise on paper.

Richard Marquand's pre-Jedi work is nothing to get excited about either.

[Darth Geek]

I think the biggest thing here is that J.J. Abrams can get good performances out of actors in effects heavy movies. Something Lucas wasn't that good at in his prime, and has only gotten MUCH worse at. That alone will propel whatever movie he makes way above the movies we've been getting for 14 years!

[Edward J Grug III]

Also worth noting: None of the Star Wars movies are actually that good.

[Edward J Grug III]

I disagree. And I guess that's the crux of it: I really like Star Wars.

I really like (some of) them too, I just also know they aren't that great.

[Nunyerbiz]

Lucas only really had a couple movies under his belt when he made the originals.

It seems to me that everyone who hated Abram's Star Trek thought that he made it too much like Star Wars. Stands to reason that he'll be good at making Star Wars, then. Unless he makes it more like Star Trek, in which case I say we start switching scripts on him. :^)

That's a bit dishonest. The point in it is that it was NOT what the franchise claimed it was.  If he was making Star Trek, he should've made Star Trek, not generic stupid action movie with vaguely Star Trek trappings.  THAT is what I'm afraid of with the new Star Wars movies.  Last I heard he's putting in the Falcon (good), but also the Cantina.  Why? Well, I'm kind of afraid that it's going to be the same stupid-ass reason he put the Enterprise being built on earth: "Because it's neat!"

So just hire some actors to ape Shatner and Nimoy? What's the point of that? I can't argue that the new Trek movies have been basically action orientated where the old Trek movies were basically Shatner orientated... But they deliberately started out years before TOS, with younger characters... so I would hope that going into things everybody knew it wasn't going to have the same tone.

And large starships can carry hundreds of people faster than the speed of light... and it's the fucking manufacturing process that trips the bullshit detector?!?

[Relaxing Dragon]

Lucas only really had a couple movies under his belt when he made the originals.

It seems to me that everyone who hated Abram's Star Trek thought that he made it too much like Star Wars. Stands to reason that he'll be good at making Star Wars, then. Unless he makes it more like Star Trek, in which case I say we start switching scripts on him. :^)

That's a bit dishonest. The point in it is that it was NOT what the franchise claimed it was.  If he was making Star Trek, he should've made Star Trek, not generic stupid action movie with vaguely Star Trek trappings.  THAT is what I'm afraid of with the new Star Wars movies.  Last I heard he's putting in the Falcon (good), but also the Cantina.  Why? Well, I'm kind of afraid that it's going to be the same stupid-ass reason he put the Enterprise being built on earth: "Because it's neat!"

I'm afraid of needless callbacks and fanservice like that because it's just so tedious. Enough winks and nods and "Hey, remember this?", those things are entirely meaningless beyond that first moment of recognition at a crowded screening. These are supposed to be new movies. Make them new. Don't go back to the same well as before and make the Star Wars universe feel that much smaller (one of the Prequel's biggest sins, really).

[Edward J Grug III]

Here's another movie round up - What I've watched in the last month. (Most recent first)

Village of the Giants (MST3K) - On my wife's birthday as it is one of, if not her favourite episode of MST3K. Excellent riffing and a fairly watchable trainwreck.
   
Gate of Hell - We've been enjoying Kurosawa films lately, having never watched much classic Asian cinema, so I picked up this Criterion release. I wouldn't say it was amazing, but it was incredibly beautiful to look at. The colours and the restoration are amazing. And it was a decent movie, just nothing incredible.

Yo Yo - The second movie in the Pierre Étaix boxset. I didn't like it as much as The Suitor, but it had a lot of really bizarre and inventive stuff. Fun for sure, looking forward to the next film in the set.

Young Adult - Finally caught up with this film from a couple of years ago. Probably even worked a little better watching this having a new baby. Unfortunately, we are also still the slobs that Charlize Theron's character is.

Diner - Really enjoyed three quarters of this movie, but the ending was a bit of a disappointment. Wrapped a lot of things up too neatly. Bacon's character should have had some kind of consequences, surely. And Mickey Rourke's ending... Yeesh. It was still mostly fun, especially to see that cast all so young!

The Public Enemy - OK, but really felt too dated. Didn't enjoy it as much as the first film in the Ultimate Gangsters set. But Petrified Forest is up next, and I love that film.

Peeping Tom - Very interesting to finally see the film that ended Powell's career. The Archers have been a huge recent discovery for me, so I was very curious. I am actually quite surprised that it was such a big deal, but thems was different times, I guess.

RiffTrax Live: Manos – The Hands of Fate - Great to finally see this!

Rocket Attack U.S.A. (MST3K) - Hoo boy. Great riffing, but a challenging movie

This Is the End - Great fun! Sure, it's dumb, but I love the concept and I laughed most of the way through it.
   
Design for Living - Surprisingly risque for the time! And a great ending that you wouldn't get away with in a mainstream Hollywood comedy ever again after the code.

Chungking Express - I preferred In The Mood For Love, but this was still great. I especially enjoyed the first story.
   
Le Havre - Surprisingly great! And beautiful to watch too! Must track down some more Kaurismäki films. (Also, there's a fantastic feature on the Blu Ray of the director and cast at a film festival doing a panel interview and being very silly.)

Behind the Candelabra - It was OK. Autobio pics are rarely that interesting. Douglas did a great job. Some of the other actors were maybe a bit cartoonish.
   
The Place Beyond the Pines - This is my second favourite movie of the year so far. Loved the structure. Seems like a lot of people who weren't impressed only liked the first third, but I thought it was all great.

Anna Karenina - Not too bad. I think the clever staging got in its own way a bit. Also, everyone seemed so young, like it was a high school production. Jude Law was excellent.
   
Drinking Buddies - A very quiet movie, but really well executed. Does a good job of not playing out exactly like you think it will at the start.
   
The Great Dictator - Conflicted on this one. Some of it 'went there' a bit too much for me. Of course it was made before the full extent of what went down was known, and Chaplin said he'd have never have made the film had he known. Touch on brilliance often, though, but in the end, I'd rather watch one of his other films, I think. Glad to have seen it though.

[mrbasehart]

Design for Living - Surprisingly risque for the time! And a great ending that you wouldn't get away with in a mainstream Hollywood comedy ever again after the code.

Fun fact: The title of the movie was originally Design for Loving, but that was considered too risque for the time.

[Edward J Grug III]

Design for Living - Surprisingly risque for the time! And a great ending that you wouldn't get away with in a mainstream Hollywood comedy ever again after the code.

Fun fact: The title of the movie was originally Design for Loving, but that was considered too risque for the time.

I did not know! Might watch the teleplay version of it tonight, which is included on the blu ray.

[Thrifty Version II]

Ok I'm lost on the Star Trek thing.  I seem to remember that when it came out 4 years ago, it was pretty popular and well received by Star Trek fans and non-fans alike.  Now people hate it?  Did the obligatory nerd rage have to go through some gestation period?

[Nunyerbiz]

specious arguments? Kind of like how you are the authority on how Abrams didn't actually make a Star Trek movie? Don't want to put words in your mouth... so quotey quote...

If he was making Star Trek, he should've made Star Trek

Nope, nothing open for interpretation and debate there... It's cut and dry and the very antithesis of a specious argument. Imrahil knows what Star Trek truly is, case closed!

I guess you can add me to the long list of folks around here that have suggested you get the fuck over yourself.

[Nunyerbiz]

[Nunyerbiz]

Yeah, so Abrams loves lens flares.  And Spielberg likes high shots.  Hitchcock liked to have his sillhouettes pop up randomly in each film.  These signature elements don't mean much if the story is compelling.  I found ST:ID compelling.

I would agree that it doesn't impact the storytelling or lack thereof... But the one caveat, as somebody else stated earlier, is that the lens flare can have the effect similar to somebody shining their high beams at you when driving at night. Spielberg can crank his camera crane as high as Bruno the Circus Dog and then jump into a damn sponge, but it's not going to actively irritate my eyes. There were a few moments in the first Abrams Trek where I looked away from the theater screen... and I don't feel that is a good use of a signature element.

[Tripe]

The only problem I have with the lens flare is that it's often a very obvious add in post; the flairs have no discernible source, that's either a bad DP or a terrible post effects editor and given the cubic nature of the flares, I know which it is more likely to be.

I actually like genuine flare, it's a tricky thing to capture often but can look cool if done right.