>Within the withering spotlight as no other film has ever been before,JJ Abram's "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" had it's world première last evening. And now that the wraps are off, the mystery has been exposed and Mr. Abrams and the Disney directors have taken the much-debated leap, it can be safely stated that not making this film would have been a crime. For, in spite of some disconcerting lapses and strange ambiguities in the creation of the principal character, "The Force Awakens" is far and away the most surprising and cinematically exciting motion picture to be seen in many a moon. As a matter of fact, it comes close to being the most sensational film ever made by Hollywood.
MOVIE OF THE YEAR FUCKING CONFIRMED
>Disney PR in top form
>any reporter who says anything bad about it before the general audience premier will meet a grim end in a dark alley
yeah I totally believe you OP
Everyone raved about The Phantom Menace the first few days after it came out too.
Wait a month, then you'll see some honest criticism.
>>63638076
No they fucking didn't you stupid cunt. One British paper broke embargo and called it an Ed Wood style disaster.
>>63638006
you spelled Abrams' name wrong
2/10 for making me confirm you made that shit up
>>63638006
>in spite of some disconcerting lapses and strange ambiguities in the creation of the principal character
Confirmed for reviewer thought it was shit but just doesn't want to rock the apple cart and risk enraging hordes of angry star wars nerds / has been paid off.
>the most surprising and cinematically exciting motion picture to be seen in many a moon
in a year such as 2015 has been this sentence is entirely meaningless
"cinematically exciting"
it's from the review of Citizen Kane
>>63638119
Yes they did you fucking underage ape. If the movies all kept their orginal scores it would be the highest rate one out of the six with 4 behind it.
>>63638076
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/star-wars-episode-i-the-phantom-menace-1999
>>63638006
That couldn't be more fake if you tried.
>most sensational film ever made by Hollywood
I mean come the fuck on.
>>63638229
Oh god my sides. I can't believe he called Phantom Menace an achievement in imagination, and people took him seriously after that.
>>63638179
Bullshit. It was almost universally hated on release, you fat spastic.
>>63638006
>no "a black lead in 2015"
8/10 pasta
>>63638312
Both he and Siskel were absolute faggots...as are all 'critics'
>>63638006
I'm calling it now.
IF it is even somewhat DECENT, it will completely smash box office records, blowing Avatar the fuck out.
It had a fuckload of marketin, it is arguably the best known/loved franchise on the planet with 3 generations of fucking fanboys waiting to watch it 10 times in one month.
Trust me, if it doesnt suck it will kill, the hype is just too big.
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9E00E3D6173AE33BBC4A53DFB366838A659EDE
>>63638127
>in a year such as 2015 has been this sentence is entirely meaningless
This.
2015 might have been one of the worst, if not THE worst, years for film in a long, long, LONG while. It made 2011 look great by comparison.
Seriously, when Mad Max Fury Road is getting serious consideration for Best Picture that should say everything (note: I think Mad Max is a great movie, but the point is the typical 'Oscar Bait' films are so bland that the typically stuffy critics are turning towards MM).
>>63638369
OP blown the fuck out
I never understood why /tv/ is banking on this movie to be shat on. It's clearly going to be good, JJ and Disney are playing it safe. They probably hit all the marks with a few hit or miss moments. It'll probably end up with a 90% on RT and loved by pretty much everyone.
But /tv/ has to be so contrarian that every time a movie is clearly tracking to be great, we have to shit on it until it comes out and we get BTFO.
Why? Why do we do this?
>>63638490
>JJ and Disney are playing it safe
Maybe that's why. Sorry, but I like movies to take some risks - fanboys and fangirls be damned.
Of course Disney only cares about the $$, so it will make a bland, run-of-the-mill action film that'll be less art and more Marvel-esque.
And yes I'm aware I come across as a pretentious douchebag, but i know that even if this movie is mediocre all it has to do is be better than the prequels for everyone to fall over themselves to heap praise atop it.
>>63638490
It's like /v/ with tortanic
>>63638544
You expect them to be risky with their first movie since the disaster trilogy? The last thing Disney wants right now is for people to give up on post-OT Star Wars forever.
Besides, we're getting risky shit with the Anthology series.
>>63638551
but /v/ was right about TORtanic. it went f2p within a year.
>>63638594
Man of Steel is /tv/'s tortanic. The first, and only, time /tv/ was right. Ever since then they try to recreated it like /v/ does and it never works anymore.
The last time /tv/ was close was with Pacific Rim, but it still ended up being pretty loved and mildly successful.
>>63638544
It's almost impossible for it not to be better than the prequels as long as it has some semblance of a cohesive plot. Tbh as long as a few interesting things happen it'll be better than the snore fest that was ROTJ as well.
The absolute worst case scenario is its average and the world applauds it anyway. No way in hell /tv/ is getting their wish.
>>63638490
>It's clearly going to be good
What's this assertion based on?
>>63638490
>implying that playing it safe automatically means that it will be a good movie
>>63638594
SWTOR still has a subscription, and a ton of people pay it. One of the best MMOs on the market right now
/v/ was, as usual, totally incorrect
>>63638627
All 300 trailers that can be stitched together to form like 30% of the movie.
>>63638648
Are you autistic? How long do you think a movie is?
>>63638648
But the trailers dont show anything other than action scenes and the characters, there isn't even a clue of the plot in the trailers.
>>63638627
I think it's going to be good because of the amount of attention devoted to it. Abrams isn't a moron. He might not be a genius, but he knows what an entertaining movie looks like. So does every one of his overseers at Disney. If it were going to be truly bad they wouldn't let it happen. It probably won't be great, but it doesn't need to be.
>>63638678
>>63638694
kek can't wait for you fatasses to be BTFO when everyone loves it and you're acting like a pissy sissy white boy contrarian
It's going to be action packed, exciting, engaging, and forgettable.
>>63638712
You're so fucking stupid. I'm confident people will love it and I hope i'll love it. That doesn't mean the trailers showed 30% of the movie you dumb cunt.
>>63638368
Even if it sucks it will kill.
>>63638615
>implying tv was not right about the hobbit trilogy
>>63638594
I mean every new release has to be the next one
>>63638712
>hurr i dont have any argument so i am just gonna call you a fat white boy
You conviced me with this hot opinion of yours anon.
>>63638758
>/tv/
Even fucking reddit knew it was going to be shit.
>"Star Wars: Episode I--The Phantom Menace," to cite its full title, is an astonishing achievement in imaginative filmmaking.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/star-wars-episode-i-the-phantom-menace-1999
DOUBTERS BTFO
PREQUELS CONFIRMED FOR GOAT
LUCAS DOES IT AGAIN!
TRYHARD HATER DAMAGE CONTROL MODE ACTIVATED
>>63638006
>As a matter of fact, it comes close to being the most sensational film ever made by Hollywood.
This is a bit hard to believe.
>>63638749
I feel that this time there could be some "serious" backlash, with all this social media fuckery.
Yeah it would still do a fuckton, but it would hurt
I think the one question we all do have is how much actual screen time the nigger has...if it's no more than what that nigger Billy Dee Williams had, we're in the clear, senpais
>>63638490
Because /v/ took over /tv/
>>63638119
>one British (kek) paper broke embargo
>THE MEDIA DIDN'T DICKSUCK PHANTOM MENACE HARD BECAUSE THIS ONE LITERALLY WHO PAPER TALKED SHIT ABOUT IT
>>63638312
It was a visually imaginative movie.
>>63638006
where can i read this actual review?
>>63638006
Hey, remember when James Cameron sat in front of a camera and said Terminator Genisys was the best sequel made so far and a true successor to his work?
Yeah, I don't trust ANYTHING said about films in the run up to/the direct aftermath of their release at this point.
>>63638312
>only my opinion is good
>other opinions are shit
Hello, Reddit.
>>63638368
The fucking pre-sale tickets have already sold for like a billion dollars.
There's literally no chance TFA will bomb in the box office.
Even if it's literally the worst movie ever made it'll reap billions for Disney.
>>63638853
That is literally how everyone here is kek
>>63638732
Well put, my main.
>>63638849
I'm pretty sure he was either paid or contractually obligated to do so
>>63638780
Not before the first one came out, everyone was really excite and had high hopes.
Don't you remember the hype when Jackson started the youtube diaries of production, and when the dwarf song was released.
>>63638006
>As a matter of fact, it comes close to being the most sensational film ever made by Hollywood.
Now THAT is a new level of $hilling.
>>63638841
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9E00E3D6173AE33BBC4A53DFB366838A659EDE
OP's memeing a meme
>>63638903
Which is an especially sad event for society at large.
>>63638591
>we're getting risky shit with the Anthology series.
>a young Han Solo movie
>a rebel movie
How are these risky at all, people have been begging for a Han Solo movie for literally decades.
It's easy fucking money and you know the Solo movie will be the blandest action movie ever with memes and quipping all over the place.
>>63638490
I HATE reddit infiltrators.
>>63638591
>You expect them to be risky with their first movie since the disaster trilogy?
Maybe not too risky, but some risk is always good.
One of my biggest issues with Disney's live action films (whether it is their films, or Marvel, or whatnot) is that they aren't just generic stories, but visually bland.
I don't know if it's just me, but the recent TV teasers for Star Wars seem to look cheap. They have lots of pretty CGI explosions, but the cinematography and style seems bland.
Again, I could be wrong, but based on Disney's recent track record of playing it safe both from a story standpoint and a visual one - I am not holding out too much hope.
Plus I'm not as obsessed with Star Wars as most people seem to be.
>>63638997
What did you think of JC?
>>63638914
>>63638780
>>63638758
And yet, there are still normies who fucking love the Hobbit trilogy more than LotR.
I'm not kidding.
>>63638006
Just bought my ticket online. So far I'm the only one for Saturday morning screening lol.
This sounds like the best children's movie since Up, I'm hyped.
>>63638903
I didnt know that, I guess the hype will just do it alone.
It being a good or bad movie will have just a marginal effect then
>>63638712
I know I'll sound like a snob, but the general public has terrible taste in movies.
Let's not forget some of the highest grossing films of all time include the Transformer films, Jurassic World, and Minions.
>>63638952
It's true, all of it. The memes, the bane posting, they're real.
>>63638368
>IF it is even somewhat DECENT, it will completely smash box office records, blowing Avatar the fuck out.
Delusional. Even if it's good it won't come close to Avatar. Even the "great" star wars can't compare to Jim's success. Look at Titanic and TPM.
>>63639046
To be frank cinema is the longest form of entertainment.
>>63639089
>longest
Meant "plebbest".
>>63639043
That's because it's not true you dumb cunt. It hasn't even made $60m in presales, let alone fucking $1b which is absurd.
>>63638910
Exactly his point.
You can't trust anything anyone says a month before and after the release of a major title like SW TFA.
You'll probably be lynched in the street if you criticize the movie after it's released because the Star Wars fans are the biggest beta keks in this universe.
>>63639059
>calling him Jim
He is not your cousin pleb, he is a god.
>>63638910
Which is pretty much exactly my point. Probably Disney made every kek critic, blogger and YouTuber queuing up to see this drivel sign some form of binding NDA that also prevents them from saying anything negative about the film until x amount of time after the initial release.
So they either keep their mouths shut until three months down the line and lose out on readers/clicks/views, or make reviews now saying how 'OMG SO FUCKING AMAZEBALLS XDDDD' it is and retract those statements as being 'the hype getting to them' later.
Everything surrounding a tentpole movie like this is controlled, artificial, paid off, etc. at this point. They even whip up the plebs into some kind of cult-of-personality frenzy in the run-up to the release and if you dare to criticise the trailers, etc you get a social media feed of braindead morons tearing into you for 'being a buzzkill about their hype'.
>>63639131
timmy go to bed and learn to behave
star wars marketing threads: They'll get hundreds of replies even if the marketers have to make every reply themselves.
>>63639185
I think that's not really feasible, that would involve thousands of people and a leak would be bound to happen. also, i dont know much about laws but it doesnt sound legal, but I could very well be wrong.
Your view has some truth to it but it gets distorted by your eccessive hate for the industry or just exagerration because you're online.
Imo it's mostly extreme fanboyism, going with the flow, covering the biggest movie right now and just denial in the case of it not being good.
Yours is a bit too much of a conspiracy theory.
>>63639185
Oh please, do you seriously believe that no one would dare to publish something like "Why TFA is shit in 5 minutes" for free millions of views?
>>63638952
well unmeme'd my friend
>>63639312
It literally is legal if the reviewers/youtubers/whatever faggots attended signed the contract.
And do you really think Disney is a happy go lucky corporation made for families?
>>63639511
no, but nice false dichotomy over there
>>63639385
Have you ever considered there must be a reason that doesn't already happen?
>>63639312
I used to work in advertising. You wouldn't believe what marketing departments get up to with regards to social engineering and manipulation of the law.
Reminder that Disney is one of the companies pushing hardest for TPP and similar legislation so they can extend their copyrights and exert more legal power over the press and consumers.
>>63639312
If you sign a contract, it is legally binding unless it violates some law.
>>63638490
Autism
>>63639385
And piss off the Star Wars faithful (combined w. the Disney faithful) who will hurl death threats at you?
>>63639573
Of course they do that stuff, social engineering and marketing. Super markets do that shit. And I'm sure they do and try to do some morally questionable shit in order to maximize their profits.
But from that to saying that the whole film review industry is just paid off and threatened to criticize a film is a pretty big leap and dumb in my opinion
>>63639637
yeah I realized that's pretty dumb.
>>63639312
>I think that's not really feasible
With Disney in charge of it, I wouldn't put it past them.
Not only are they manipulative and sadistic as a company, they are also all-powerful.
>>63638824
GREEN TEXT FAT SWEATY VIRGIN WITH RAGE
>>63639672
>Not only are they manipulative and sadistic as a company, they are also all-powerful.
you need to give me some evidence supporting such harsh claims.
>>63639637
Eh, it worked well for literal whos from RLM.
>>63639667
>its not feasible for tightly controlled screenings to have associated NDAs
... you realize the gag order lifts 2 days before opening night, right?
>>63638006
>in many a moon
>>63639770
oh I wasnt talking about screenings I meant the general review industry, since his/yours comment kinda implied a complete evil blanket effect on the industry
>>63639637
5 million views is like $50,000 dude.
>>63639830
Uh, no. Though you are kinda expanding his argument to that to make it seem completely unrealistic. For some reason.
But acting like extremely selective screenings can't require the signing of binding NDAs before admittance is naive to an extreme degree.
>>63639914
I agree with the screenings stuff. I guess I misread the other stuff
>>63639934
Furthermore, another issue at play is how any publication/critic depends upon the good graces of the bodies they're criticizing in order to earn a living wage. Which means critics have basically every incentive to suck that corporate cock as hard as possible.
>>63638544
>art
Implying the OT wasn't basically a live action really high budget/high production quality saturday morning cartoon.
Don't get me wrong, they're great, but they aren't "artistic".
>>63638312
critics are all a waste of time, at least for trusting their recommendations. they are sometimes worth following for entertainment value.
>>63638903
>The fucking pre-sale tickets have already sold for like a billion dollars.
Disney don't get that money you know
>>63638749
this, thats just how stupid Americans are
>pre-booked tickets for 00:05 16th
>can't tell if that means tomorrow night, or the day after
surely it's not tomorrow night?
Exactly how can it be better than Guardians of the galaxy :^)
>>63640317
It's on the 16th idiot.
>>63638967
People seem to care more about brand name these days with films than the actual content....sigh
>>63640317
Tomorrow night
>>63638006
PLANT.
>>63638312
It was a good looking flick.
Still is.
>>63638006
>it can be safely stated that not making this film would have been a crime.
What the shit kind of statement is this for a film critic to make?
>>63638229
>>63638312
Eberts review of first Transformers is equally baffling.
>withering spotlight as no other film has ever been before
lol this means nothing since they can just buy hype. including this article
>Within the withering spotlight as no other film has ever been before, Orson Welles's "Citizen Kane" had is world première at the Palace last evening. And now that the wraps are off, the mystery has been exposed and Mr. Welles and the RKO directors have taken the much-debated leap, it can be safely stated that suppression of this film would have been a crime. For, in spite of some disconcerting lapses and strange ambiguities in the creation of the principal character, "Citizen Kane" is far and away the most surprising and cinematically exciting motion picture to be seen here in many a moon. As a matter of fact, it comes close to being the most sensational film ever made in Hollywood.
Nice ruse. :^)
>>63640971
but Transformers is good
>>63638006
>in many a moon
Did reddit write this?
>>63638006
At least Lucas didn't give a fuck about playing it safe and just made movies he liked.
The whole Jew Jew movie will be
>wink wink do you remember this from the original trilogy wink wink
>it's like poetry
>I copied it
>>63638006
Source?
>>63642667
its in the thread at >>63638369
