Discussion J.J. Abrams on Howard Stern Today

Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by phatdude1138, May 13, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. phatdude1138 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2005
    star 4
    For the uneducated, Howard Stern is just strippers and lesbians, however he actually is a great interviewer and is known for "getting information" out of his guests. I'm actually on the west coast so I don't know if I missed the interview or if it is still coming up.

    J.J. is obviously promoting Star Trek, however I know that Howard has mentioned that he is very interested in him directing the new Star Wars film.

    Anyhow, if any of you have satellite radio, you should tune in.
    [IMG]
  2. Luukeskywalker Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 5
    I listened on my way to work today. He did bring up Star Wars, but Stern seemed to go out of his way to predictably rip the prequels. JJ really didn't give any new information other than the fact that the script is being written still.
  3. phatdude1138 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2005
    star 4
    Cool. I hope to hear it on the replay.
  4. phatdude1138 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2005
    star 4
    Actually it is starting on "Howard 100" right now.
  5. Pfluegermeister Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 30, 2003
    star 4
    "...Stern seemed to go out of his way to predictably rip the prequels." Only here do you even hear things like this. Somebody "seemed to go out of his way" to "predictably" rip the prequels. No one ever says someone "goes out of their way" to "predictably" praise a film that deserves praise, but somehow if someone rips something that deserves ripping, then somehow he's bad. It couldn't be because the film was bad; it has to be because Stern is a bad person.

    No one is saying that people seem to be going out of their way to rip on American Idol now that it's clearly become a joke. No one calls it predictable when people criticize it. No one should, because the evidence is crystal clear: the show didn't become bad simply because people were saying things; people were saying things because IT BECAME BAD. It's a little thing we like to call cause and effect.

    Look, like it or not, people are going to have to come to terms with the fact that, for better or worse, the public reached its verdict on the prequels years ago. It's far too late for minds to be changed. It's been fourteen years since TPM came out, and it's place in people's minds has been concretely fixed. Fourteen years after ANH, that position of that film in people's imaginations was also set in stone: no one would question why people continued to praise that film; no one would call it "predictable" to praise it; no one would be said to be "going out of their way" to give it props. It was simply understood that the film was good and everyone agreed with that assessment. So why should people be in any way upset or surprised by the fact that the world has made up its mind on these prequels? Why should anyone think that these films will suddenly become accepted one day when they haven't been for fourteen years? What's supposed to happen, are we supposed to wake up one day and suddenly see nuances in those films that we hadn't seen before, despite having watched them for decades? And are those non-existent nuances supposed to make TPM, which the world has long since written off, into something better than it actually was? That's roughly equivalent to us looking at the same pine tree we pass every day, which has stood as a pine tree for decades or longer, and deciding that it's actually a palm tree. And it's not gonna happen. If it was ever going to happen, the 3D release would have been the time; we all know that it underperformed, or else the other two prequels would still be set for 3D releases. But no one was interested. No one's going to be. No one's going to convince themselves after fourteen years that black is white or that red is blue.

    Of course none of this has anything to do with the PT, with Abrams, or with the Stern interview in general, but we've already established that Abrams had nothing of importance to say about the ST on Stern's show, so this thread is already as good as locked. All that's really worth commenting on is this base assumption that the supposed honor of the prequels needs to be defended, against Stern or anyone else. These "defenders" are about as sensible as those who defend the notion that the Sun revolves around the Earth; both viewpoints rest comfortably on the wrong side of history. The prequels were NOT good films, and people sticking their thumbs in their ears and humming real loud like obstinate little children won't make them into good films.
  6. The Hellhammer Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2012
    star 5
    @Pfluegermeister Source?!
    Hm. Not as fun as I imagined it would be, screaming that. Oh well.

    Either way, didn't listen to the show but I guess since there isn't any new info I'll go out of my way not to listen to it.
    hear+soul likes this.
  7. Dranem JCF Banner Contest Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2012
    star 1

    I don't consider myself a defender of my own tastes in movies, I just like what I like. I don't try and shove my opinions down other peoples throats, and am quite happy being able to enjoy all 6 movies in different ways. I grew up with the OT and was an adult during the Prequels and never thought twice about whether or not someone ELSE enjoyed them because I did. I still contend that when we talk about "great" Star Wars films the only one that fits into that category is The Empire Strikes back. Every other entry is marred with the same silly dialogue and clunky acting criticisms that seem to be lobbed only at the prequels. People forget the original trilogy was not much of a critical success as they were box office smashes upon initial release.

    And just as I don't expect everyone to share my opinions of the things I like, I also don't expect everyone to make blanket statements about me being a "defender" or "apologist" in regards to Star Wars. Why do we have to lump everyone into categories when things like taste in movies and music is so subjective? For instance I think one of the greatest comedies of the last 10 years was Macgruber, but I doubt I can find many that share my sentiment. That doesn't make my opinion any less true. And if we want to judge the movies just on metrics or factual evidence, I know filmmakers that would kill to get the kind of haul Episodes I-III did on opening night let alone their entire theatrical runs.
  8. Samnz Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 3
    Very true. I'm also amused and irritated at the same time when people bring up the "defender arguement".
    They are good films for me, I like them. That's my opinion and I don't and won't "defend" it. If you need to "attack" my opinion, then do that as much as you won't. But I still won't defend. I'm not in a war of opinions where other's views have to be "attacked" and "defended".

    Alone the fact that Pluegermeister felt the need to tell us or "lecture" us about his perceived "facts" or "realities" we have to " accept" makes their validity questionable at least.

    For your consideration:
    - http://www.gallup.com/poll/3757/public-gives-latest-star-wars-installment-positive-rave-reviews.aspx
    - http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=1180 (section with the droids)
    - http://www.killermovies.com/s/starwarsepisodeiii/articles/5763.html
    Of course the internet knows better...:oops: As always.
    Last edited by Samnz, May 13, 2013
  9. Darth Chiznuk Superninja of New Films

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2012
    star 6
    It never fails to give me a chuckle when people try to lecture others why they're wrong for liking a set of movies that they themselves don't like and then try to back up their opinion by saying they're in the majority and we're in the minority. I had a big laugh today so thank you @Pfluegermeister. :)
  10. Bob Octa Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 6, 2013
    star 2
    Bashing the prequels for the 438-quadzillionthplex time is neither funny nor fun. And a Bababooey to you all.
  11. kegs202 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 26, 2013
    star 1
    I enjoyed the prequels. Whether anybody else did or didn't doesn't have any effect on me and I personally couldn't care.
    JainaSoloYJK and Darth Chiznuk like this.
  12. Sith_Knight087 Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 1
    I thought Episodes I & II were OK at best (saying that is being very generous indeed). Episode III in my opinion was pretty good, but still no where near as good as Episodes IV, V, VI.
    Last edited by Sith_Knight087, May 13, 2013
  13. Pfluegermeister Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 30, 2003
    star 4
    Actually, your MacGruber analogy is a fine way for me to describe the crucial difference between your specific attitude, that of someone who both watched and found things to like in the prequels, and the attitude of someone who is somehow surprised that the world felt differently about them than you did. As far as the film itself is concerned, I won't make comment on it because I haven't seen it; I don't have the right to pass judgment on a movie that I haven't seen a single frame of. But if we're talking about what in your opinion can be reasonably considered "true," technically speaking, then a slight tweak may be needed. It would be true for you to say, "That film made me laugh more than most comedies of the past ten years," or "I responded to that film more than I have to most comedies of the past ten years." Either one of those would indeed be considered true, and they both say the same thing: it was great for you, and for you, that's enough.

    But that's just you. As you say, you doubt many others would feel the way you do about that film, but you wouldn't then be surprised that Howard Stern "went out of his way" to "predictably" rip on the film. You clearly understand the kind of position the film has been relegated to in the marketplace, you understand why, you understand that you have a singular liking for it, and you don't treat other people's dislike for the film as surprising. You just say "I understand that not many people like this film, but it does something for me personally." For you, it's a guilty pleasure. No shame in that, we all have those kinds of films in our libraries - whatever name it has, everyone has at least one guilty pleasure picture. Hell, I have several of my own (The Black Hole comes immediately to mind), but I still understand that they're crappy films, or at least highly flawed ones. I don't get surprised when, after about thirty-five years, some radio jockey remarks on what a bad film The Black Hole was. I don't defend Old B.O.B. when I know he's a cheesy character. I don't attempt to use box office metrics to defend the quality of The Black Hole when I know that three decades on, what it made during release doesn't matter; the verdict of history is what matters, and history has decreed that the film sucks as hard as its titular stellar phenomenon. It's a bad film. I know it's a bad film; I accept that it's a bad film; I just happen to respond to it, warts included. But I don't deny the existence of the warts.

    That's essentially how you are with MacGruber: It was great for you, and for you, that's enough. That's radically distinct from someone expecting society at large to perform a one hundred and eighty-degree turn and embracing the film when they never have for the past three years, and have never evidenced any desire to do so either. If a critic in Minnesota does his job and calls the film out by writing, "If you've ever seen someone walking a dog and wondered what was in that plastic supermarket bag they dutifully carried behind, I'm pretty sure it was the script for this movie," you would probably laugh, but you wouldn't act like you're sick and tired of the criticism and decide that the defense of MacGruber was the hill you wanted to die on. You wouldn't say the critic "went out of his way" to "predictably" razz the film. If they were to re-release MacGruber in theaters (in 3D!) and it tanked, you would probably not be surprised. You certainly wouldn't dig your heels in and insist it was great when the entire world has largely walked away from the film and moved on. And I'll bet you definitely wouldn't call those who point out any flaws the film may have as "haters" when you know damn well they have a point. You don't look at a film through rose-colored glasses that no one else seems to have. You don't point at a piece of dirt and call it gold; you just like that particular piece of dirt for what it is.

    And as far as J.J. Abrams and Howard Stern are concerned, frankly, I'm glad Stern unloaded on the prequels like he did, and I wish I could have heard it. I think Abrams needs to hear that criticism from every corner he can hear it from. The biggest problem with LFL as a company is that it closed its ears to criticism, so its head was still in the sand when the inevitable reckoning finally came and the company became so weakened that it had to be sold to Disney to survive. We put up with that obstinancy once; never again. By God, the people making the ST have to hear the general public's perfectly valid criticism of LFL's past work, even if we have to pry their hands from their ears with crowbars. Abrams needs to know, if he doesn't already, exactly what's expected of him. We all know what that expectation is; we can sum it up very simply: "Remember those prequel movies? Don't do those."
    Last edited by Pfluegermeister, May 13, 2013
  14. EHT New Films Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Sep 13, 2007
    star 6
    I liked the PT, and I also get tired of people saying that "everyone but you has accepted that the PT movies were not good." It may be a popular notion to repeat, as many movie critics (some of whom even liked the PT initially) even do, but nothing subjective can ever be established one way or the other objectively. That said...

    This is not the thread to argue about the merits of the PT. As has been mentioned, not much came from this Howard Stern show appearance, so what little there is left to say about this appearance can be discussed in the existing JJ Abrams threads. Locking this one.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.