Skip to content

Star Wars Trailer

Amber_ScottAmber_Scott Member Posts: 513
So I presume everyone has been watching this all afternoon?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCc2v7izk8w
«1

Comments

  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156
    No, but I'm going to allocate the rest of my evening to it.
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    Chewy, We're Home!
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    I think I have plans on Christmas now.
  • proccoprocco Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 915
    Oooooh man, that looks so good! Can't wait....
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    Well, I have to say that looks about a 100 times better than the first trailer from a few months back. That said, I still haven't got a clue what this is going to be about, and "Into Darkness" wasn't what I had hoped. It LOOKS like Star Wars, but I'm becoming increasingly convinced that simply requires skillful use of the music and the established aesthetic. The crashed Star Destroyer was epic. Was Luke on Endor paying a visit to his father's funeral pyre?? Good trailer though, I feel much better than I did before.
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,754
    Christmas 2015: Episode 1 - The Star Wars movie watching
  • AdsoAdso Member Posts: 122
    Did anyone else see in the foreground of that Star Destroyer scene (it goes by fast), a hunk of metal or rock thing that said "Starkiller was here"?
  • cyberhawkcyberhawk Member Posts: 350
    This looks embarassing... Why can't we have something new? Why does everything must be a re-release or an enhanced edition of something that already exists? Once in a while re-releasing something might be a good idea, but it's some kind of trend. It's called: "let's not make any effort to create something new, let's just take something popular, and milk it, again!"

    I'm very sceptical about this new Episode. Even if it will be a good movie, it will be bad because it is plain old Star Wars, but milked to the max, again. Poor H. Ford has to play same old Han Solo again, this is really a bad choice. He isn't in the right age for this, Ford is supposed to play different characters by now! Imagine Sir Alec Guinness playing Han Solo in the original movies, does that sound like the right choice?

    Honestly, don't we have enough Star Wars? We got two freakin' trilogies, that's six full movies. And that's only the main thing, there is the expanded Universe still, even if it's non-cannon now, one can still enjoy the books and whatever there is. Who is going to watch all of this, if it never ends? Even LotR isn't that long!
  • TeflonTeflon Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 515
    Oooh, I heard rumor about mark hamill.
    Maybe it is good time to check out.
    Thanks.
  • cyberhawkcyberhawk Member Posts: 350
    yeah, I'm not against such things in general. But it's everywhere, it seems no one bothers doing anything new anymore. I'm against it being the only form of creativity.

    One can find justification for BG:EE, as well as for the new Star Wars if one is inclined to do so. BG:EE also was also a project that wasn't nearly as big as doing a new movie, with a budget like Star Wars would have. So one can't complain much about BG:EE, it allows playing a classic on newer platforms more easily (without the hassle of mods). It also hopefully helps Beamdog to create something original in the future, now that there is an established fanbase and so on.

    But imagine you have the budget for doing something as big as Star Wars, and what do you do? Dig out some ancient franchise, and let the elderly actors play their young and energetic characters from back then. This is called milking a franchise, it's happening everywhere and with everything. I'd rather see something new being created, instead of watching H. Ford embarrass himself playing a womanizing, reckless, shoot-first-ask-questions-second smuggler, while he should be playing someone an elderly person can better portray...
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    Why people, as you said, "don't bother doing anything new anymore"? Because it works. More or less. I don't usually give a damn about cinema or movie industry in general, but I'm sure there are less known movies that aren't run by big companies you might support.

    There is something that makes me uterrly content with Harrison Ford playing in this movie. We have to consider all years that might have passed between episode VI and VII. Getting to see older Han Solo is not a shocker to me. I kinda called it.
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    Quite apart from the fact that I'm really looking forward to seeing this, when I look at this objectively it makes some sense of the fairly awful (for me) episodes 1,2 & 3. They at least kept the franchise alive long enough for the money to keep coming in and provided a suitable time interval for this new series to be made.
    All through 4,5 & 6 we were thinking "What's going to happen next?". That hook was largely lost in the frankly rather onanistic 1,2 & 3. Now however we are being offered the scenario of "Whatever happened to......?".
    As someone who was in his twenties when Star Wars first came out and is now in his fifties I look forward to seeing how 'my' characters have fared in the intervening years!
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    I like Star Wars.
  • MichailMichail Member Posts: 196
    edited April 2015
    Chewy is a bit different. A minor thing but it still bothers me that he looks like a different wookie.
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    @cyberhawk - Maybe I am just not understanding what your complaint is here. Of course it is "More Star Wars". That was what it was meant to be. That is what people have been clambering for since Return of the Jedi closed. That's what people want. And yes, there is the whole expanded universe. The audience for that is quite small in comparison to the Movie patronage.

    As for Ford's (and Hamil and Fisher and the rest) inclusion, that again is exactly what people have been asking for, some link to the original series. And until you see how they are used, I am not sure how you can judge if it is appropriate. They may not play the action heroes and may be more parental in appearance. Think Connery in The Last Crusade. Until we see, it doesn't make sense to judge.

    It is true that Hollywood in particular does a lot of reboots. I don't suspect that this is (as you put it) "let's not make any effort to create something new, let's just take something popular, and milk it, again!" so much as "with as expensive as everything is to make today, the INVESTORS aren't willing to take a risk on an unknown quantity." If it isn't a guaranteed money maker, why invest billions of dollars in it on the HOPE that it will sell. At least that is what the investors are saying. And considering how much it takes to make a big budget movie like Star Wars, can you blame them for not wanting to back something completely untested over a known and successful formula?

    Star Wars was one of those million to one combinations that struck a cord with the general public. It was alchemy as much as it was chemistry. Magic in a bottle. The fact that the second trilogy didn't do well is a proof enough of that. Hopefully that which you are poo-pooing, a return to the original in full force, will recapture some of that original magic.

    But don't fall under the 'Trendy' belief that just because a lot of people are doing it that there can't be originality out of it. I went into a store one time in my 'Walking Dead' tee-shirt. The kid behind the counter said that they would never watch that show because "Everything today was Zombies. It was all done to death." Yes, there are a lot of zombie movies and TV shows out. Yes, quite a lot of them are crap. Judging "The Walking Dead" sight unseen, merely because others have done it and not done it well, is kind of blind in my view. Maybe he wouldn't like what he saw if he watched it. I can take that. But to blindly judge without sampling? Not smart in my book.
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,857
    The 'Expanded Universe' stuff being defrocked (...seems appropriate for something no longer canonized), it'll be interesting seeing what exactly they try to do with the void they have created. The big annoyance is the 'loss' of some great characters, IE Grand Admiral Thrawn, but who knows exactly will be permanently discarded, and if they might be able to include some of the best stuff from the EU while discarding some of the stuff that really didn't fit in that well (or was just incredibly boring to read IMHO... Back when I was a teen, I read pretty much everything SW, Forgotten Realms, still own almost all of the Ravenloft novels, etc, and there was definitely some stuff that I won't miss, even if I am a bit ambivalent about the whole change.

    IMHO, Star Wars is not a bad thing to keep making the odd movie for. Do you know War and Peace was not really meant to be read as one ginormous book, but several different ones? Big novels from famous big-name writers were often serialized back in the 1800s? This is a lot like that I think, and it's not necessarily a bad thing to break things up a bit.

    As for creativity, the most creative things usually happen when working with lots of restrictions. Anyone can draw a line, for example. How about we put some restrictions, like using ink when you only have a pencil to write with? You'd have to get creative, probably grind up the poor pencil to make bad ink. :open_mouth: Artists working within an existing universe have more restrictions, so if they can produce something truly good, it has to be more creative in some ways than someone who creates an entire universe.

    The biggest reason hands down we will keep getting SW movies as long as they are profitable though isn't just money though, it's also the fact that people like sci-fi and fantasy, and NOTHING is as hard as making a sci-fi or fantasy movie in a new, unfamiliar universe. Its hard to get the balance right between explaining whats different/possible without being tiresomely pedantic, and this is why most mid or low budget fantasy movies tend to falter. LotR helped get around this with pretty big prologue sections, and by making the movies EXTREMELY long (though IMHO very good and worth watching). Books have the same problem, if an author sucks at introducing and explaining their New World, the whole thing was a waste of everyone's time. So, considering how not spectacular the track record is for fantasy and sci-fi, it should be expected that studios will prefer to work with existing franchises where people already know what Hyperspeed is, or what the Galactic Empire is (and that they're Space Nazis).

    @the_spyder I don't know if I'd say the prequel trilogy didn't do well, it just wasn't as popular, especially with the loud 'hardcore' SW fanbase. And the funny part, most clearly still went to the prequels after meeting Jar-Jar Binks, the most unintentionally disturbing thing I've ever witnessed in a movie. I'm sure it made decent returns, or we wouldn't likely be seeing any new investment. http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/Star-Wars this suggests they were VERY profitable actually, even without accounting for the truly stupendous returns on the paraphernalia, which must have dwarfed the considerable box-office returns. Tons of games, toys, more novels, etc.
  • AdsoAdso Member Posts: 122
    Ok, how many of you were like this when you watched that trailer?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYHdQUyOunA
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    Star... Wars? What's this? Never heard of such a thing. Kind of looks like a Spaceballs knock-off to me though. But I guess we can't fault them for that. After all this movie was truly a masterpiece!
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,354
    @Cyberhawk - some of us have been waiting (not so) patiently for a new start wars movie since 1983 :) The prequel trilogy was a nice chance to see lightsabers in action again, but otherwise it did not feel like Star Wars - where we the tie fighters, the X-wings, the star destroyers? The setting lost that famous lived-in feel, the story and characterization somehow became more infantile, targeting a younger audience that the whole family audience, which made it impossible to show a dark enough path for the supposedly compelling main theme of the fall of Anakin (to set up the redemption in the original trilogy).

    This looks like a step forward of the things that, thematically, made the originals great. And who's to say that Harrison, Carrie and the rest are not filling in the Alec Guiness role? Personally, I am expecting mostly glorified cameos from them, as they provide a link from the old story to the new.

    Abrams is much more suited to the Star Wars universe than Star Trek. I never felt at home with his 2 voyages with the Enterprise, as he was telling different stories in a different (more visual, action-oriented) way than the Star Trek audience expect. These were great space opera movies, and name checked all the right places from the Star Trek canon, they just did not feel like Star Trek movies. Those same skills play much more to the strengths of the Star Wars universe.

    One thing I am guessing that will not be appreciated by a large part of the audience in this forum is just how significant Star Wars is to those of us who grew up with it transforming science fiction and cinema around us. If you watch the original trilogy now, as one of many available stories, if feels trite and very cliched - that is the unfortunate fate of a movie that is so influential that it affects everything that follows. So many of the standard tropes, gags and throw-away quotes that are ingrained in our culture now come from those movies, but if you did not live them back at the time, they feel more like a hacked up collection of pop-culture references rather than being the source. If you lived through them, that connection to the source is strong, and 30 years on the desire to live just one more adventure in a long time ago in a galaxy far away is stronger than ever.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    Michail said:

    Chewy is a bit different. A minor thing but it still bothers me that he looks like a different wookie.

    He looked more different in Empire Strikes back than he did in the other two (+prequel) movies he appeared in.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    cyberhawk said:

    yeah, I'm not against such things in general. But it's everywhere, it seems no one bothers doing anything new anymore. I'm against it being the only form of creativity.

    One can find justification for BG:EE, as well as for the new Star Wars if one is inclined to do so. BG:EE also was also a project that wasn't nearly as big as doing a new movie, with a budget like Star Wars would have. So one can't complain much about BG:EE, it allows playing a classic on newer platforms more easily (without the hassle of mods). It also hopefully helps Beamdog to create something original in the future, now that there is an established fanbase and so on.

    But imagine you have the budget for doing something as big as Star Wars, and what do you do? Dig out some ancient franchise, and let the elderly actors play their young and energetic characters from back then. This is called milking a franchise, it's happening everywhere and with everything. I'd rather see something new being created, instead of watching H. Ford embarrass himself playing a womanizing, reckless, shoot-first-ask-questions-second smuggler, while he should be playing someone an elderly person can better portray...

    The is no such thing as a "new" story.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited April 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    Wow, been a while since I last saw an octuple post. :p
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited April 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156
    ?
  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156
    I really should check that I'm on the last page before posting.
Sign In or Register to comment.