ST JJ Abrams to direct Episode VII

I'm not aware of Abrams having anything to do with West World on the creative side and I think its notable that unlike LOST it did have decent answers to the mystery's it raised.

I think Abrams success as a director recently has been down to being a steady hand who can provide entertaining films with some nostalgia in franchises that in many peoples eyes have gone astray. His weakness and why I think he's not managed a franchise long term like Lucas, Jackson, Nolan, etc is for me that he's not so great at creating a story/setting of depth or indeed answering his own mystery boxes, as expectations rise I don't think he's capable of rising with them.

Rogue One for me really makes clear the difference between a director who "knows Starwars" and a director who "knows how to make a safe blockbuster".

 

It's funny you say that, since I had the exact opposite reaction. I thought TFA felt more like Star Wars than anything in the last 30 years, while Rogue One, much like Gareth Edwards' Godzilla film, completely misses what made the franchise so beloved. But at least RO was fun and entertaining despite that, while Godzilla was boring and nonsensical.

 

rogue one is supposed to feel different.

 

I know and that's fine for the anthology films. It just felt emotionally hollow for me, focusing on the action over the characters, the latter of which is what makes Star Wars what it is. I don't wish to veer this thread anymore off-topic, so if you want to talk about this, you can message me.

 

TFA is more of a classic adventure film akin to ANH but really I don't think that in itself is especially rare, we've seen countless such films released in the decades since. What I think makes the OT stand out is the weight and complexity of its setting plus the quality of its characters and in these areas I really do not feel like TFA showed understanding of the OT, it made references to it yes and used some similar plot devices but the style of the film in both setting and drama for me is very much that of a hyperactive modern blockbuster lacking in depth/gravitas.

RO doesn't have as much of a classic fairy tail side to it and is more of an ensemble film but I think it very clearly does know what its doing in terms of the depth and gravity of its setting which for me makes it feel much more like classic SW and the kind of thing I want to see more of with variations on the story focus.

 

It's also cool to love both movies and appreciate the contributions that Abrams and Edwards made to the saga.

I still say that Abrams had the most challenging job. (Hey: can you create new characters that are interesting, develop them - and oh we are bringing back the hero's from the OT - you can integrate them too?)

 

Hopefully he'll never direct SW again.

 

Painfully unoriginal.
Kylo was by far the best part of it.

 

The prequels were original.

 

Being rare doesn’t say anything about the quality of something. Originality is overrated. I’ve always thought that Star Wars was so beloved because of how human it is. It takes place in the distant past, in a faraway galaxy, yet it speaks to us because its characters are so relatable. It’s not about the space ships or the action scenes. I thought TFA really got this. It was the first Star Wars movie since ESB to actually care about its characters. Abrams and Kasdan wanted us to like these characters so much that they made the main protagonist from the previous trilogy a MacGuffin, all so he wouldn’t over shadow our new heroes. Rey, Finn, Han, and Kylo Ren all develop and change over the course the movie and by the end they’re different people.

I found the RO characters bland and boring. I’d argue Jyn is the worst Star Wars protagonist we’ve ever had (at least Anakin had a personality and did things to affect the story) and after creating such a great female character with Rey, they completely botched it with Jyn. None of the characters grow over the course of the movie, nor have interesting personalities, with the exception of K2 (who ironically is the most human character, while everyone else acts like a robot). Thankfully, Edwards mostly spared us of the pseudo-intellectual speeches the characters in Godzilla gave every five minutes, leaving us with a mostly fun, yet emotionally sterile action movie.

 

Thanks for articulating that point so well, I completely agree.

Lucas was a brilliant storyteller and is creativity is second to none (although he re-used themes like Death Star, desert planets, etc.) But just think about the original characters in the prequels - did any character resonate with the audience? He couldn't make Anakin Skywalker likable - it took TCW to do that, even though we knew he was good person from Obi-Wan's OT perspective.

 

I think Qui-Gon-Jinn and Obi-Wan were by far the most relatable and likeable characters in the PT.

 

Yes, and i ****ing love them.

 

With the exception of disagreeing that ROTJ didn't care about it's characters, I am so in line with your views about both TFA and RO.

RO was an enjoyable romp, but it's flooring me how many people on this board are suggesting that they finally got SW right. As if this was the SW the world was waiting for,. as if TFA didn't have overwhelmingly positive response.

Folks are so caught up right now.

 

The big problem I see is that so many of us feel a need to pit movies against each other. That need is entirely artificial and in reality nonexistent. I mean, I can see the benefits of pointing out strengths and weaknesses, but what do we have to gain by constantly thinking in terms of "This is the best, this is the second best etc"? Why not just appreciate each movie for its individual strengths? The movies are different because they're meant to be different!
Celebrate the diversity, damn it!

 

He is a really great mainstream director. It's funny how he excells in the parts of moviemaking where Lucas is below average, they could have made a nice pair with Lucas limited to what he is really great at: ideas and universe creation.

 

Let's agree to disagree on that, on the basis of neglecting to mention one important thing -

For you. For myself and many other fans I know, the PT was enough to do so successfully

Abrams' ability to make characters, as the word is used, likeable, is very different and, while I can't say on its own I would like it, I like it for what it is in SW at the point the series is in and how that style sets in for where it's at currently

 

Even though I didn't think prequel Anakin was likeable (mostly) and thought Christensen had polarizing acting pieces (some were excellent, some were wretched), I hope we see him in Ghost form soon. I was also fine with ROTJ ending edit. AOTC was the big "swing and miss" for me regarding Anakin.

Still, I never heard of "wooden" acting until Christensen and Portman performance made it a term. Both have done excellent work outside of Star Wars. So I kind of blame Lucas for that.

I was really nervous about Ridley and thankfully was proven very wrong.

 

The extreme amount of blue and greenscreens was a big problem for the young actors, experienced actors like McDiarmid could deal with it much better. (It probably helps if you have expirience with theatre too)
Lucas struggled with guiding the actors too.

 

See i think jj shows his experience and ultimately delivers a better film than edwards, stronger characters, better pacing, better performances from his actors. Personally i find jj a master of his craft, maybe not so original but on a technical level i think he is right up there.

To echo what a chap said a few posts up, i also find it surprising so many are praising rogue one without acknowledging its faults, the end was great but the movie generally felt pretty hollow and if anything had more fan service than tfa.

I really like both movies btw.

 

That's exactly how I feel. And to intertwine those new characters with legendary old ones was nearly an impossible challenge. He somehow pulled it off.

 

That's exactly how i felt after a fairly heavy starwars Christmas this year, i find the force awakens as infinitely watchable as any of the ot and dare i say it...in some cases better.

 

From a blockbuster film perspective, JJ's film is more competent in that it hits all the right beats that a good blockbuster often does. That makes TFA a really good, smart tent-pole film. JJ's got the formula down pat.

But from a broader film-making perspective, Edward's film has an artistry and a depth to it (and an unconventional pace, to be sure) that makes it a better film, IMO. A perfect mix of the familiar, the unsettling and the bracing. There's film classic written all over it.

TFA, on the other hand, is a good film and I'll watch it again and again. But I don't think it'll ever reach classic status.

 

In my opinion Edwards film is actually lacking artistry, that´s one of ROs major flaws to me. This is an incredibly subjective topic though.
The pacing is probably strongly influenced by the reshoots.