Jump to content

Star Wars Episode 7


Recommended Posts

There is rumours that JJ might direct episode 9, which means he might go right to it once 7 is in theaters. The director for #8 is no longer confirmed to do #9.

 

Nolan is doing what I've been promoting movie makers should do since the 90s. I admire his work very much and would make the same decisions he would in terms of shooting on 65mm film, IMAX, etc. Shooting in 65mm has complications as we all know, which is why Nolan still used 35mm for the bulk of his films. IMAX cameras are extremely noisy, which means dialog scenes must be ADR'd, which is not a fool proof method of doing sound. And I've heard 5 perf 65mm has complications too because the cameras are big, but not sure exactly what that is. I don't think JJ is up to the challenge to do more of his films with IMAX cameras. It slows things down immensely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny, but the Star Wars I remember had a terrible script, and a hugely limited Director. The special effects, which were ground-breaking for the time, were all that made people want to see the movie. Of course, I saw Star Wars long before it turned into a cult.

 

I don't think Star Wars is especially all that great but I did think it was very atmospheric. This is down to the score, the beautiful shots in Tunisia, the great set design and outstanding cinematography and models. I don't think the scripts that great, terrible might be overegging the pudding but they did make some wise cuts to the film.

 

I'm not sure what you mean about George Lucas being a hugely limited Director and of course he was only the director for the first movie and the prequels. I actually think George has created some really good work as a director in the past. To be honest I think he might well be better than JJ going on these 2 trailers for ep 7.

 

Someone here mentioned something about it being better if it was slower moving and I think they are onto something there. I thought all the stuff they cut out of Episode 1 for example was the stuff that should definitely have been in there. All that slow moving stuff about relationships on the desert planet. A good mix of slower almost meditative stuff and faster action stuff would be a lot better.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

All that slow moving stuff about relationships on the desert planet. A good mix of slower almost meditative stuff and faster action stuff would be a lot better.

 

That's been a change is film-making in general...not just the Star Wars films. Having just watched Interstellar, you can compare that film to 2001: A Space Odyssey using the same thought-process. While I enjoyed Interstellar very much, many of the concepts Nolan illustrated verbally, Kubrick would have done visually or with very sparse dialogue over a long, drawn-out contemplative sequence. A perfect example was when Anne Hathaway explains how the concept of love is the one thing that can travel through any dimension. Instead of saying it, Kubrick would have portrayed it.

 

But this is more of an instant, "give it to me yesterday" attitude that pervades every aspect of society, these days...not just filmmaking. The average spectator doesn't have the attention span to sit through a slow-paced, though-provoking film. It makes me wonder how 2001: A Space Odyssey would fair at the box office and with the critics if it were released today.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, man...that looks like it's gonna be fun. I mean, come on...Han Solo is back!

 

Not for nothing, this is probably the trailer/teaser they should have initially lead with.

 

Definitely! This trailer is a lot better than the last one and makes me think this film is going to go down really well and knock a lot of peoples socks off. It's going to be a big hit which is good news. However as Tyler is saying I'm more optimistic about Episode 8 and the Gareth Edwards movie at this point. There is so much that doesn't work in the new trailer for me and especially the direction of the actors. The stuff when people are talking in the trailer tends to sound all wrong to my ears. I would have gone for another take on all of it.

 

I was very happy about one moment in the new trailer tho. The stuff at 1:19 with the spaceships is exactly right they have done that outstandingly well and you look at that and it definitely seems like they have that down.

 

The preceding shot where they guy takes his helmet off looks very good to me too! Again the desert stuff looks beautifully shot and very nice so I hope there is a lot of stuff in the desert in this movie. OTOH I think all the sith stuff looks awful. I don't like the metallic black and red look.

 

Too many close up shots but I am expecting that is deliberate to keep things a bit more secret. Beachball droid even looks good in this for me. Two other things don't work for me tho. The Matte painting at the start is cool and everything but it is too in your face. Back in the 70's they would have tried to hide the matte paintings as much as possible to try and give a more subtle effect. Here it's too in your face like "look a cool matte painting" which I'm not sure works.

 

The other thing that is very strange is the footage with Han Solo and Chewie. This looks really odd. The acting here seems terrible. Maybe it works in context I don't know but it also seems like there is something odd going on with the look of the footage that I can't put my finger on. Maybe I'm wrong and it is just the acting but either way it's not working for me.

 

However I am convinced this movie is going to go down really well with people.

 

Just not with me...

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

The Matte painting at the start is cool and everything but it is too in your face. Back in the 70's they would have tried to hide the matte paintings as much as possible to try and give a more subtle effect. Here it's too in your face like "look a cool matte painting" which I'm not sure works

 

Totally agree, Freya. I thought the idea was really cool, but the execution was really obvious compared to the more realistic effects in the original trilogy. You would think that with all this technology, it would look more realistic than ever.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Totally agree, Freya. I thought the idea was really cool, but the execution was really obvious compared to the more realistic effects in the original trilogy. You would think that with all this technology, it would look more realistic than ever.

 

I think it's deliberate. I think they are going:

 

"this is so cool, real matte paintings! Lets do it on an EPIC scale!"

"Wow it looks so amazing it reminds me of a Czech Sci-fi animation"

 

and this might be great if you were trying to remake Jodorowskys Dune or something but not so much in this context.

 

Again this is also a bit the times we are in. It's a lot like when people get the film look effects and put on all those fake scratches and other fake film artifacts and really overdo it whereas at the time all that kind of stuff was a lot more subtle and often hardly noticeable but it was just ordinary stuff and not "cool"

 

Anyway they seem to have the stuff in space down really well so lets hope there are a lot of spaceships in space shots.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Totally agree, Freya. I thought the idea was really cool, but the execution was really obvious compared to the more realistic effects in the original trilogy. You would think that with all this technology, it would look more realistic than ever.

 

BTW I don't think it has to be realistic. After all it's a fantasy space film set on far distant planets but I think it helps if it is subtle. The subtleness gives it the air of the everyday which allows you to sink into the world more.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

BTW I don't think it has to be realistic. After all it's a fantasy space film set on far distant planets but I think it helps if it is subtle. The subtleness gives it the air of the everyday which allows you to sink into the world more.

 

Freya

 

I meant realistic in the context of the original trilogy. One might argue that I was a kid when I saw those so of course everything looked "real." But I can watch Eps. IV, V & VI today and every still looks believable.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I meant realistic in the context of the original trilogy. One might argue that I was a kid when I saw those so of course everything looked "real." But I can watch Eps. IV, V & VI today and every still looks believable.

 

I do understand what you mean I'm just nervous about that word "realistic" because there is a thing at the moment to talk as if cameras should reproduce reality more whereas actually I want to reproduce other worlds more and not reality. I'm not trying to get cameras to produce a more realistic representation of reality.

 

Same when people talk about the story and say that is all that matters and then they aren't considering the visual aspects of a movie enough and things are too dialogue and fast action driven.

 

It's as you say about this being believable and that might mean getting more abstract sometimes even and less realistic.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure what you mean about George Lucas being a hugely limited Director

Lucas's directing style was famously limited to such phrases as "Faster, more intense!". The poor dialogue in the script led Ford to say to Lucas, "You can write this poop, George, but you sure as hell can't say it!"

 

My point is that due to the weird cult of Star Wars that has arisen since the initial release, the original films have become sacred territory, no matter what their faults, and the prequels and sequels are held to impossible standards.

 

Bottom line for me (and I was obsessed with Star Wars as a child) is that the originals were good, not great, the prequels were awful, and the new film deserves an open mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bottom line for me (and I was obsessed with Star Wars as a child) is that the originals were good, not great, the prequels were awful, and the new film deserves an open mind.

 

I think we agree on that much. I think the originals worked the prequels didn't and the new movie is also going to work but will be very different to the originals. Personally I would have gone back as close to the originals as I could get and moved on from there and at first it looked like they might do that but now it appears they are going somewhere else with it but I think where they are going will be VERY popular.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall I'm excited if not as jazzed as everyone else seemingly appears online. I am a big Star Wars fan but I'm ambivalent about what J.J. Abrams and Disney have planned.

 

Good points:

- "I am Chewbacca! I am a Wookiee! I fight the Empire!".

- Oscar Isaac enjoying himself flying a X-Wing.

- The charred Vader helmet was cool.

 

Observations:

- Chewie does look weird and a lot of it is down to the eyes. Instead of a shaggy dog he looks like a groomed Pomeranian.

- The footage of the TIE fighter chasing the Falcon appears to have taken its visual cues from the BSG remake - faux verite handheld and zooming.

- We see Han and Chewie, but no Leia. I don't know whether Carrie Fisher can carry it off after 30 years and the filmmakers know it, too.

- Someone else already said heavily processed anamorphic 35mm and I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- We see Han and Chewie, but no Leia. I don't know whether Carrie Fisher can carry it off after 30 years and the filmmakers know it, too.

 

 

I actually really believe in the actors. I'm just not sure about the directing in that regard tho. We see Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher to a limited extent and all the original actors are much older. They are playing much older characters too so I don't see why they couldn't all carry that off. I totally believe in the ability of the actors to make this happen as long as the script and direction is there to help them. They are all very talented actors.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how well Carrie Fisher will come across on screen. She hasn't aged well, and I heard she had trouble remembering lines. I think she may of read her lines off, but that is all rumor. I do look forward to the movie though, as I am a huge science fiction fan (love all Star Wars, Trek, BSG, etc).

Edited by Scott Pickering
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how well Carrie Fisher will come across on screen. She hasn't aged well, and I heard she had trouble remembering lines. I think she may of read her lines off, but that is all rumor. I do look forward to the movie though, as I am a huge science fiction fan (love all Star Wars, Trek, BSG, etc).

 

This whole Carrie Fisher hasn't aged well thing that people are saying is really strange. We have seen very little of her in the trailers so far. Of course all the original cast have aged quite a bit, it was all long ago in a galaxy far far away now. The thing is that the movie is going to be about the characters being much older anyway so the fact that the actors look older shouldn't be a problem. Carie Fisher has been through a lot of stuff in the intervening time but keep in mind that Princess Leia has also been through some very bad stuff in the story.

 

With regards to people not aging well, did you see Harrison Ford? It may not help that he is standing next to Chewie who looks about a couple of years older than before but you could say he hasn't aged well either.

 

All of the original cast are older although you might not notice as much with R2, chewie and C3PO but I think that will really work well. I think Mark Hamill is going to be great if JJ doesn't mess up the direction as he is a very much underrated actor. I'm a little worried because the voice over in the trailer isn't right and they should have done another take on that but it's less worrying than the performance that Harrison Ford gives in the trailer. Given that we have seen work that isn't the best from both of these members of the original cast then why do we have such doubts about Carrie whose work in the film we have seen virtually nothing of yet?

 

Now the thing with actors being unable to remember lines is a big problem and I've been there and it's really hard. However you have to work with that. The easiest thing is obviously to cast someone else but in this case you can't do that and I was in the same situation, only my situation was worse as I was locked into a script that had long and complicated dialogue and even worse obscure words that my actress couldn't even pronounce but it was a part of the project that I had to use that dialogue. I also resorted to cue cards in this situation but if I wasn't so tightly locked in I would have explored other options. JJ is in a much better situation because he can work with Carrie to get the dialogue she is comfortable with and can theoretically make it work really well. The other thing about that situation was that my actress was great and I would work with her in again in a heartbeat but I would play to her strengths and not her weaknesses.

 

I really believe that if there are problems with the acting in this movie it isn't down to the acting talent who are great but down to the director.

JJ is lucky to be working with talent of that calibre.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

There is one thing that makes a difference (between Episode 7 and the original trilogy) which nobody has commented on, but which I feel was partially responsible for people percieving the original films as more "beat up" and "gritty" looking, and that's the filmstock. Looking at these new trailers I notice how much film technology has changed over the years. This becomes more obvious when we see familiar sets and characters on screen, with an 40 year offset in film technology development. Even though the Millenium Falcon is made dirty again, everything just looks so much "cleaner" now, than it used to with the old filmstock. Cleaner shadows and highlights, smoother tone scale etc. There is so much more subtlety in color reproduction; we are talking Vision3 family of stocks vs. the old Eastman 5247. So we should be fair when comparing these two trilogies. We can't expect them to look the same even if they exactly replicated everything, including the lighting style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully it won´t look the same like the original trilogy. To my mind it would be the biggest mistake to try to make the movie like the ones shot 30 years ago. Every technology nowadays is more advanced, and one shouldn´t sacrifice that in order to make it look the same. I think it´s a great thing that JJ Abrams, als always, and Dan Mindel decided to shoot on film and to use anamorphic lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...