54%
JUST
>>63591707
probably bulllshit NOW....but seeing the trailers...
They have nothing new to offer other than "New Star Wars, YEAH!"
Is too focused on the original trilogy.
Isnt shot or edited like the originals.
Has a tone of a a more serious MCU movie, actually Jurassic World comes to mind (especially since that faggot director is directing the 2 sequels).
None of the new characters seem at all interesting and i think we havent even seen the pilot guy speak.
Im thinking its going to be the worst possible thing you can do to star wars.
Be boring and forgettable.
>>63591779
FORCE
>>63591707
isn't there an embargo on reviews? there's nothing to get a score from at the moment in the first place, right?
>>63591797
>Isnt shot or edited like the originals.
Sounds like they do offer something new.
>as if Disney and JJ haven't paid off reviewers to give the film good reviews
It doesn't matter what RT says, we'll have to find out ourselves.
I can't wait for this to be MOTY and /tv/ gets BTFO forever.
>>63591885
not when its the same cinematography from the shitty star trek and amazing spiderman movie.
infact
>Cinematography Dan Mindel
Mission impossible 3
both star treks
John carter
Savages (bleh)
ASM2
absolute shit.
>Edited by Mary Jo Markey
"Markey has edited several mainstream films including The Perks of Being a Wallflower and Mission: Impossible III. She has also worked as an editor on several television shows, such as three episodes of Felicity, Breaking News, Skin, fourteen episodes of Alias, and was also chief editor on Lost. She is a member of the American Cinema Editors and is a frequent collaborator with J. J. Abrams, having worked with him on three of his television shows (Felicity, Alias, and Lost) as well as editing his debut feature film (Mission: Impossible III), the 2009 Star Trek film and the 2011 film Super 8."
garbage to mediocre
>and Maryann Brandon
Alias - 2001–05
Mission: Impossible III - 2006
The Jane Austen Book Club - 2007
Star Trek - 2009
How to Train Your Dragon - 2010 (co-edited with Darren T. Holmes)
Gulliver's Travels - 2010
Super 8 - 2011
Star Trek Into Darkness - 2013
Star Wars: The Force Awakens - 2015
so between the 4 of these fucks the best movie they worked on was How To Train Your Dragon....and it was only PARTIALLY done by them.
WE HANDED STAR WARS OVER TO THESE CUNTS!?
Isnt A New Hope supposed to be the greatest example of film editing to make a story work?
Its famous story of how awful the shooting went and how they had to scrape everything together to make it coherent because they lacked a few pages of the script shot?
>>63592037
>I can't wait for this to be MOTY and /tv/ gets BTFO forever.
Yeah like all the other times /tv/ has confidently declared a movie to be a sure flop, only for it to succeed
>>63592042
>Edited by Mary Jo Markey
A woman editted Star Wars? This is worse than the nignog, I wish I didn't know that
>>63592082
like Mad Max?
thats MOTY material.
>>63592082
/tv/ called Avengers shit and it became a success. Stay BTFO /tv/.
>>63592088
Wasn't the first Star Wars edited by Lucas wife?
>>63592088
So was the first Star Wars you pleb faggot.
>>63592100
>still flops
The Patriarchy did this!
>>63592162
Yes, and she saved the film by all accounts.
next week on /tv/ is going to be amazing
>>63592162
yes.
but she also edited Taxi Driver and American graffiti.
so that anon is a faggot.
its about what you have in that portfolio.
also a fucking academy award
>>63592042
>you actually typed all this out
>>63592220
it didnt flop.
and the feminist HATE mad max and tried to sabotage it you fucking idiot. Get with the updated news.
>>63592228
>people still pretend star wars was good
>you share an art board with these anti-art Redditors
>>63592231
What was /tv/ like during the prequels?
>>63592268
Like half was copy and paste from wikipedia, queer.
>>63592273
Wait, I thought they were all for it?
What happened?
>>63592273
Nice disinfo, Reddit. The movie sucked and flopped.
>>63592293
They realizes that the strong women still needed a man to bail them out? I never understoodhow anyone thought the movie was feminist.
>>63592283
/tv/ didn't exist until 2006
when are we gonna get the rips :DD
>>63592329
shows what I know
>>63592326
Action movies starring a woman are automatically thought of as feminist for some reason.
>>63592371
I thought the boy was more of a protagonist than the girl. And Max was the most important thing in it too.
>>63591797
>Isnt shot or edited like the originals.
Trailers are edited differently from the actual movie...
>>63592320
cost: 150 mil
made: 370 mil
ok
>>63592421
Thanks for proving my point
>>63592293
it was a feminist trick to cause people to hate MRAs.
when it was revealed MRAs didnt give a shit about boycotting it and the movie turned out to be a masculine action flick where the dames needed saving by the men who made up a majority of the film...they hated it like usual again.
>>63592320
even with marketing its still made more than half its money back.
Projectionist at a cinema here, ask me anything about the release. To prove credibility, I guarantee that leaks will start popping up on wednesday seeing as keys for the movie unlock in America then.
>>63592421
>cost: 150 mil
+100 million $ marketing.
>made: 370 mil
And just 50% of that goes to the studio, rest stays in theaters.
>>63592402
Edited, sure, but shot?
nope. Plus look at who edits the thing.
>>63592042
cant wait to NOT see those those good classic wipe transitions, those famous long shots of enviornments, and not seeing a great tracking side scroll shot that is cut and switching cameras all to hell.
Star wars is shot and edited ina very specific way, shit on the prequels all you want, cinematography and editing wise (dialouge scenes aside) its a damn master piece.
Examples
long establishing shots with very few cuts, no close up, midium shot for character emotion. Subject, luke, is off center. End on a wipe transition.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gpXMGit4P8
Long slow panning shots, slow zoom shot, almost unnoticable, Lighting gives uncomfortable mood (anger, doom, ect)
brilliant touch with Luke's face being half in the light, half in the dark (yes, that episode 3 meme was done on purpose in the movie, its all over the franchise) minimal cuts, even in the fight.
camera is zoomed out giving enough room for the saber swings. Great side tracking shot of them leaving the dark of the stair well in one of the best shots of any film ever, followed with a good top down zoomed out establishing shot showing us where and what. No confusion as to where anything is. Characters are still the focus but we are aware of the environment subconsciously.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE1nL4xFOfM
>>63592231
I have mixed feelings with the idea baneposting might be surpassed.
On one hand, dank memes. On the other hand, tradition.
Time is cruel.
>>63592695
What are the "keys for the movie"?Only thing I know how to project is 8mm.
>>63592756
Dumbass, marketing is not that high.
star wars 7 only has a marketing budget of 60 million.
And theaters keep less than 10%, they make it up in drinks and snacks.
so its
150+20 budget
370 gross not counting DVDs and merch
90% of that goes back to studios.
Also sequels were already confirmed you dumb son of a bitch.
>>63592820
In digital cinema, you have encrypted content that comes via hard drive. The keys say that the movie can be played on the projector but wont play before the date attached to the key.
>>63593030
But what are the keys exactly? A physical object, a password, a program or what?
>>63593266
program usually installed into the projector.
>>63593266
They are files that are sent to us via email. They are specific for each version of the movie (3D, 2D, different aspect ratios depending on masking setting, closed/open caption, etc) and expire every few weeks.
I can't wait until the studio finally plops this turd out and we can move on.
>>63593330
>>63593382
Cheers.
>>63592042
>not when its the same cinematography from the shitty star trek and amazing spiderman movie.
I wouldn't call the spiderman movie that amazing.
