OMG OMG OMG SW

matt3o · 16 Dec 2015, 16:15

I won't say anything about it, don't worry.... but just came back from Star Wars....

I can only say that it's the forth best star wars ever (bust still forth).

seebart · 16 Dec 2015, 16:19

If you say it's the fourth best then it must be quite good. I only ever liked the first three, empire being my fave.

I feel forced to post this now:

: IMG_20151216_162054.jpg (617.19 KiB) Viewed 5226 times

derzemel · 16 Dec 2015, 16:21

matt3o wrote: I won't say anything about it, don't worry.... but just came back from Star Wars....

I can only say that it's the forth best star wars ever (bust still forth).

SHUT UP!!!!!!!!
I will go to see it Saturday, I have tried so hard for so long not to watch any trailers or images or discussions about it. I want to be completely surprised

andrewjoy · 16 Dec 2015, 16:21

I have been told its decent , i am surprised as he missed the point with star trek.

Will have to see it myself to be sure.

SL89 · 16 Dec 2015, 16:25

THIS IS WHY I NEED TO MUTE THREADS

romevi · 16 Dec 2015, 16:27

andrewjoy wrote: I have been told its decent , i am surprised as he missed the point with star trek.

Will have to see it myself to be sure.

JJ's always been a huge fan of Star Wars. Star Trek he was sorta new to when he rebooted the films.

ramnes · 16 Dec 2015, 16:28

Star Wars? nothx

matt3o · 16 Dec 2015, 16:32

seebart wrote: If you say it's the fourth best then it must be quite good. I only ever liked the first three, empire being my fave.

I believe there's a citation to the original trilogy in every frame (and few other Lucas/Spielberg movies as well).

chzel · 16 Dec 2015, 16:36

Over here our geniuses decided that a Dec 24 premiere would be better...So we have a whole week for practically everyone in the world to bombard us with spoilers before we even get the chance to see it...Wankers...

lolpes · 16 Dec 2015, 16:39

I am going to see it at midnight here in Portugal, glad to see that everyone that saw it enjoyed it quite a bit

matt3o · 16 Dec 2015, 16:43

we will talk about it extensively in the coming days. I don't want to spoil the experience to anyone.

lolpes · 16 Dec 2015, 16:44

yup

no that big of a fan, but I do enjoy the movies, haven't basically anything more beyond that :p

kristofv · 18 Dec 2015, 19:36

Can only watch it in 2 weeks

. It's hard to avoid spoilers atm

E3E · 18 Dec 2015, 21:13

Oh boy. I don't get out enough. I'm probably not gonna be able to catch it in theaters. I'll send money to Disney and then watch a bootleg.

Nah, IDK. But I really do want to see it!

Findecanor · 18 Dec 2015, 21:52

I saw it a couple days ago, and I can't stop thinking about it. I can't stop discussing and analysing it at length on Star Wars forums every night ... I want to go see it again but that would be after Christmas.

My opinion about it: I both love it and hate it. Nothing is "meh" or boring about it. Many things in it are absolutely awesome. Some things are disappointing.
There were things I loved and hated about the prequels too, but they are the completely opposite aspects. This movie is the "anti-prequel".

matt3o · 18 Dec 2015, 23:18

don't read if you haven't seen it

Spoiler:

Redmaus · 19 Dec 2015, 01:25

People on reddit, 4chan, etc keep posting spoilers nonstop.

I won't do that crap here but I already know one of the main plot elements that take place.

Muirium · 19 Dec 2015, 02:17

I saw The Godfather and Apocalypse Now before I saw Star Wars. (In the cinema, during the pre-prequels warmup.) Can't say I was nearly as impressed as the generation immediately above me who grew up with every frame. The original three are good, with a lot of heart, but not astonishing, redefining movies. Guess you had to be there for the phenomenon. The prequels, meanwhile, didn't scar me as they did the true fans, but yeah they're turds.

Star Trek meanwhile is mine, having grown up with it instead. JJ did a surprisingly good (yet sometimes off track) job with the first movie. But the second one pissed me off as an all too war happy, inconsequential violence fest like so many modern films. He got Star Trek yet he didn't get it at all. I expect the same sensations during the new Star Wars.

fohat · 19 Dec 2015, 17:50

Muirium wrote:
Star Trek meanwhile is mine, having grown up with it instead. JJ did a surprisingly good (yet sometimes off track) job with the first movie. But the second one pissed me off as an all too war happy, inconsequential violence fest like so many modern films.

I made a very similar post on GH. I even liked "Star Trek - The Motion Picture" but the rest of that crop was weak (although the whale one was great high camp).

I did not like the first Star Trek reboot when I first saw it, but since I have teenage kids, we watched it repeatedly and it really grew on me. But the 2nd one is worthless. I never liked the Khan character anyway and always thought he was lame, even his first appearance in the 1960s. But Sherlock as Khan? Nope.

seebart · 19 Dec 2015, 18:21

To me real Star Trek is only TOS and TNG, although some Star Trek movies were OK. No matter how good the force awakens is no Star Wars movie will ever come close to the original trilogy that I saw as a child when they came out, which probably has a lot to do with that. The impact was gigantic at the time.

scottc · 19 Dec 2015, 18:26

I think that real Star Trek is everything but Enterprise and the JJ Abrams reboots... I really enjoyed both DS9 and Voyager.

Muirium · 19 Dec 2015, 18:34

I'm in between you guys. Even Enterprise is Star Trek, but to me there is indeed a break in feel and continuity between TOS and TNG. I love TOS the best, like TNG a lot — the more Geordi and Data scenes in an episode the better! — and DS9 is such a trip it has a good claim to be the best Trek of all. Even Voyager is a solid show once Seven of Nine came aboard and developed her own and Janeway's characters extensively. Only Enterprise failed to keep me aboard for the whole run. That theme song said it all!

I just watched the pilot to the original series (Captain Pike! First Officer Majel Roddenberry! Dancing naked green woman!) And it's amazing just how much of all the Trek ahead was there, right at the start. Roddenberry had a vision, all right. Peaceful explorers trying to make their sense of space, who will protect themselves and innocents if they have to. Such a relief from Cold War going on back then, and the trend towards assertive hyper violence in politics as well as movies today.

@Fohat: Yup. Everyone's mad for Cumberbatch, and Khan has a special place in Star Trek lore (that I don't fully appreciate either) but putting the two together? Less than the sum of its parts. Way less.

The first JJ Abrams Star Trek movie had a complete no show of a villain, and the closer the plot got to him the further it got from making a lick of sense. But damn it if he hadn't got the crew so right! The chemistry was there. Updated really quite remarkably well, especially in the case of Uhura who had the soul of her old self but with refreshed contemporary attitude and glamour. I winced at every single lens flare, and I really couldn't stand the plot. But you can go surprisingly far just with characters alone. It had almost the feel of a sitcom to it, with all that dialogue and attention to character. Enjoyable. Strangely, sure. But definitely a renewal of the venerable franchise.

Yet the second one was all bloody guns and self righteousness. Ugh. Fuck that. Star Trek isn't about warfare and vengeance. It's about moral conflict in space! With the occasional off camera sex scene and a lot of heroics in engineering. Scotty was the only good thread in the second one. He was always a persnickety character, but damn it if we Scots don't see ourselves in him!

Fortunately, JJ got the foundations right. So whoever takes over the Trek films from him has an amazing construction set to play with. Let's hope they build something more about exploration and discovery than punching bad guys in the face for 90 minutes.

fohat · 19 Dec 2015, 18:47

seebart wrote:
To me real Star Trek is only TOS and TNG,

I never saw TNG until recently. I watched TOS as a teenager in the 1960s and sporadically in reruns ever since. I was a full-grown adult who rarely watched TV when TNG came on and I mostly ignored it.

About 5 years ago, when my son was about 10, we started watching TOS in order, semi-regularly but not consistently, and it took about 2 years to get through. Then we started into TNG and it was incredibly lame to me, although my son liked it moderately well.

TOS was full of camp and humor, painfully lacking in TNG. Picard walks around with a stick up his butt, and even 4 separate characters could not replace Spock. (an alien science officer on the bridge, a 2nd in command, a mind-reader, and the logical one together do not even begin to equal Spock)

Then they had to re-make many of the iconic plots to boot. Why do they have to do that ?!?!

seebart · 19 Dec 2015, 18:51

On a side note; the madness is exquisite:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/bigpic ... P_Headline

Muirium · 19 Dec 2015, 19:11

The first two seasons of every Star Trek, besides the original show, are doomed to be bad. What they got so right in TOS they seem to need a couple years to learn all over again on every other run.

TNG gets so much better. As much as I like Scotty, Geordi is my favourite engineer in Trek as he works like one, instead of relying on magic. His logical approach is more methodical than Spock, let alone Scotty, and I find him a very sympathetic character as he struggles with the load Picard gives him. DS9 is completely transformed a few seasons in when Sisko shaves his head and shit gets real. That show becomes something unseen anywhere else in Star Trek: a multi season arc building up to the final climax at the show's end. Think Babylon 5. DS9's writers surely did!

fohat · 19 Dec 2015, 19:28

Muirium wrote:
TNG gets so much better.

I will try to have the patience to persevere. My general TV experience suggests that most shows get worse as time goes by, usually falling into a character-driven scenario instead of remaining plot-driven.

I have seen "The White Iris" of these at Dragoncon and I was moderately well impressed:

http://www.startrekcontinues.com/episodes.html

SL89 · 19 Dec 2015, 20:00

Star Trek is just people talking, in rooms, in space.

Muirium · 19 Dec 2015, 20:02

Exactly. Which is why it's so good.

@Fohat: Screw patience. Just skip to season 3. You'll miss nothing. Applies to TNG and DS9. You'll know by characters' facial hair. You're looking for Ryker's beard and Cisko's!

matt3o · 20 Dec 2015, 00:42

I recently completed my Star Trek marathon (starting from TOS up to Voyager). I liked most of it, with probably the second half of voyager being my least favorite. I must say DS9 is pretty entertaining. JJ Abram's Star Trek is annoying at best.

scottc · 20 Dec 2015, 00:50

DS9 was incredible, in my opinion. It was so gritty and dark at times, yet so undeniably Trek regardless. It's the only series that really got so dark, which is why I think it's one of my favourites. Trek was never about the wars, never glorified them. DS9 just showcased how grim and dismal it is.

...so, this is a great Star Trek thread!