The first review is in!
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/entertainment/movies/2015/12/16/tom-long-star-wars-review-force-awakens/77395392/
Tom Long is a solid film critic, and he basically said this film is Fucking Based! Revan who is played by Adam Driver is the breakaway star by far.
This is easily getting 90% on Rottentomatoes no problem!
Pottery, pottery and nothing but pottery: the movie
Confirms another summary of the film I read.
So it really is basically a remix of A New Hope.
>and he basically said this film is Fucking Based!
please fucking kill yourself immediately, im serious
>>63695005
Doesn't matter, /tv/ will deny it.
Hey yo, We did it again, homie!
He gave it the same score that he gave Terminator Genisys.
Epic dude!!1
>>63695005
/TV/ ON SUICIDE WATCH
IT'S FUCKING HAPPENING
>>63695348
>>63695450
Hello Reddit!
>>63695005
Find me one of his review of avengers age of ultron i will now if he is based
>>63695740
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/entertainment/movies/2015/05/01/avengers-movie-review-hulk-thor-hawkeye-ultron/26658283/
>'Ultron' is the rare sequel that improves on original 'Avengers'
>B+
>>63695450
It may do well with critics, but this is going to bomb at the box office after opening weekend.
>Completely Safe: The Movie
>>63695850
Ok he is a solid critic, you got me.
>>63695883
it's going to be huge because parents who kind of like the original movies are going to take kids who have never seen lightsabers
>>63695005
>Revan
>>63695850
lmao
/thread
Here's another review.
http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/HolyCinema/archives/2015/12/16/new-star-wars-offers-mediocre-fx-and-action-unsatisfying-ending
>>63695005
>Ray
Quality journalism
>mfw even Devin Faraci of all people said it was shit
>>63696014
>MEDIOCRE
>>63695005
>It's practically exactly the plot of a New Hope
>Quibbles? Sure, a few. Finn isn’t really fleshed out, and Poe is re-introduced with a sudden flimsy explanation. And with its basic premise of family dissonance, as well as so many other familiar touchstones, some may think the film too similar to the original
Yup this is how TPM started. Everyone gushed over it at first, only to admit it was shit later. The only clues were that reviewers would say things like "well some might be disappointed, but hey come on it's STAR WARS!"
>>63695450
trying too hard
>>63696014
>mediocre FX
How they manage to fuck that ?
Star Wars used to be on the edge on a technical level.
Star Wars & shitty effects = Holiday special
>>63696123
You can tell shit looks kind of bad in the trailers. Especially when they're in the forest.
/v/ here, I've come to collect /tv/ tears.
You deserve every bad thing that happens to you.
>>63696101
It took the better part of the entire theatrical run of Tpm before people stated to admit how bad it was.
>In fact, all of the action and visual effects are surprisingly mediocre — there’s nothing here that makes us say wow, which is a flaw given how creative the Star Wars movies have historically been.
>>63695005
what does armond say?
So temper those high expectations, folks. In its totality Star Wars: The Force Awakens is a bit of a letdown, a movie ready to light the box office on fire with around-the-clock screenings that lacks the ingenuity and overall quality we’re rightfully expecting.
>>63696148
The muddy sets near the forest looked pretty bads, too earthy.
>>63696197
Boyega is an Uncle Tom and the movie is western agitprop
>>63696123
Because they still ultimately have to rely on today's CGI which is half-assed.
>>63696014
Dis nigga sounds painfully honest. This review is probably spot-on and I've got a good nose for reviews.
>>63696073
I have witnessed this post.
>>63696123
FX alone isn't impressive anymore. What's important is creativity.
From what I've heard, Episode VII seems to be more concerned with paying homage to the original trilogy than inventing new things.
Which means that, to an extent, it's more of what we've already seen. And we've been seeing X-Wings and Death Stars and alien nightclubs since fucking 1977.
Say what you will about the prequel trilogy, but they were at least visually inventive.
Boyega is the new DiCaprio, if you disagree you're a racist.
>>63696123
>>63696148
On that note, what movie in the past 5 years does /tv/ think had the best FX? Not the best for its time, though it may be the same one, but the one when looked at now, seems most cutting edge? Because I think I'm starting to see a stagnation and slowdown and stagnation in the quality increase of CGI, and I'd like to be proven wrong.
>>63696248
>This review is probably spot-on and I've got a good nose for reviews
You hang out on /tv/ - you have taste from where you sit, buddy.
>>63696173
That's really a bad news.
Even the beginning of ep III was pretty slick :
This cgi battle looks still 2015's good : https://youtu.be/vT7vD8uAGEQ
>>63696250
Really? I found the prequel trilogy to be garbage in terms of visuals. I'd rather have nicer versions of nice things, than poor versions of shit things.
>>63695850
>Finn isn’t really fleshed out
The one character they desperately needed to justify the existence of, and they apparently failed to do so. I guess I'm not all that surprised though, we all knew he was just there to be the token nigger.
>>63696270
It's a shitty movie but Oblivion with Tom Cruise had some really great renders. That movie served more as an FX showcase than anything else IMO.
>>63696278
my bad habit of stopping by the car wreck that is /tv/ has no bearing on my fine taste of cinema.
I called it with Prometheus, and I've called it with many other movies. Reviews can reveal a lot, especially when you read a bunch of them. You can get almost an exact feel for how a movie's gonna be.
>>63696270
DESU the movies with the best FX these days aren't big action movies or science fiction spectacles, they're things like The Wolf of Wallstreet. Almost every exterior shot in that movie is a VFX shot but you'd never notice it.
Fury Road had great VFX for the most part because it was generally only used to improve practical SFX, not replace it.
Basically, whenever CGI isn't the focal point of a scene is where it's at its best.
>>63696270
Quite possibly Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.
![Maz[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/fMCdK7q.jpg "Maz[1].jpg")
How do you guys think Maz Kanata will stack up to Jar Jar Binks?
>>63696353
Yeah this
>>63696363
How can people see this and then think the movie won't be completely terrible? Even worse when it's being voiced by a long out of date SJW flavor of the month.
>>63696270
>5 years
You're gonna have to go back to The Matrix or Lord of the Rings to find something that was cutting edge. Nothing since then has even attempted to do something new aside from Avatar and that movie looked like dogshit if you weren't watching it in 3D.
>>63696014
I'm a little surprised that they've managed to deliver something so subpar in terms of VFX.
>>63696363
BB8 is the Jar Jar of this movie
>>63696335
Agreed there
>>63696353
I actually did notice that in some areas, like the storm scene and a couple others
>>63696356
This one I think I agree with the most. the realism of the apes' faces even in the closeup shots was pretty impressive, and the art of making human-like faces with CGI seems to be one area they're getting much better at.
>>63695850
>improves on the original
>B+
what the fuck did he gave the first one then?
>>63696284
It's going to be really shit if there's nothing at least on that level.
>>63696284
that fighter design is shit though, looks like a fat bug
>>63696406
Avatar was 2009 m8. That's precisely why I said "last 5 years", because I couldn't remember anything that impressive since.
GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+GRADE: B+
>its shit
>>63696461
Still. I'd say Lord of the Rings was far more impressive than Avatar melding real life with CGI/models in the same way the original Star Wars movies did.
>>63696270
>>63696353
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvwS_E91fZA
>>63695005
Choice for you, is the view to a shill.
>>63696339
>Reviews can reveal a lot, especially when you read a bunch of them
>Only two actual reviews are out there
>Has perfect idea of how the movie is based off the one of those reviews that was less than glowing
Yep
>>63696505
True. God those Hobbit movies were a letdown after that. Especially the visual style. Just bloom-covered over color-saturated ass. Looked like a God damned video game cinematic.
>>63696505
I think LotR use of "Bigatures" combined with CGI was fantastic, and it's a fucking tragedy that not only has the trend not caught on in Hollywood, but that even Jackson trashed it when he made the Hobbit movies.
It's really unforgivable when you see how much better a real life model combined with cg looks compared to pure CG.
And you know the excuse? of course it's "well using cgi is just cheaper."
>>63696505
>Lord of the Rings
Made me so bored of ground battles. The second and third movies were just lots aof tiny CGI guys running at each other, cut to close ups of actors wear Weta plastic armor. So repetitive and boring.
Then all those green CGI ghosts saving the day at the end of the 3rd movie was hilariously bad. It looked so fucking cheesy.
>>63696557
Here's a good video that explains what bigatures are by the way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYUY3i9TamY
>>63696514
I question why any of that is necessary though. Is it to get the mood and visuals just the way the director wants them? Because otherwise, why not just film at a real house?
>>63696574
>WETA armor
>plastic
you don't know what you're talking about
>>63696593
We know.
>>63696270
Young Michael Douglas in Ant-Man was some pretty impressive CGI. No other effects in the movie were remarkable though, it was just that one scene.
>>63696514
CGI ≠ green screen with image composing.
It's like saying matte painting (something use since 1920) is cgi
>>63696557
>http://www.detroitnews.com/story/entertainment/movies/2015/12/16/tom-long-star-wars-review-force-awakens/77395392/
blame studio suits, not the creative producer
>>63696557
It doesn't really make sense for Jackson considering the budget that The Hobbit had, but for the rest of Hollywood, bigatures are exceptionally expensive and even that is an understatement
>>63696593
Post it on Reddit. No one here cares.
So Force Awakens is not canon right?
>>63696164
To quote a certain British man, it's 2015. We decide things are shitty MUCH faster nowadays.
If the critic says the fx are not SW-tier i believe him, they rarely tackle the specials effects.
>>63696593
>lol, the idiot even repeats it three times like anyone cares
>>63696681
I hope you are right and people dismiss this shit fast.
it would be awesome to see some careers destroyed by this. I know it won't actually happen but one can dream.
>>63696593
nigga i love star wars to death and i already spoiled myself
no one here is going to care you spoiled them, take it to reddit or tumblr or twitter
>>63696649
>bigatures are exceptionally expensive
I'd love to see a citation for that. It's just man hours plus materials for building something much smaller than an actual set.
I'd imagine shooting on location is a much more expensive undertaking just because of all the travel and coordination needed to get anywhere.
>>63696593
we knew this like months ago.
>>63696533
If it was a shill he would've rated it higher.
Lurk more.
>>63696720
If this movie isn't a huge, smash success Disney is going to castrate Abrams. If he fucks this up it's going to leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth going forward, everyone's going to remember the prequels in the worst way. Sure, anything with the Star Wars name on it will make SOME money, but Disney is hoping for consistent years of high-grossing blockbusters. If that project fails to launch JJ is in deep shit.
>>63696589
Because there's not enough room to film inside an actual house. There's a lot of equipment and people that goes into filming a scene, so they build sets and film on them to accommodate everything they need. There's probably some scenes filmed inside a real house, but a lot of it is done on sets. They've been doing this since literally the beginning of filmmaking. It's basically just filming a play and adding shit in post.
>>63696593
OH NOEZ I GOT TROLED BY LE SPOILERMAN :(
well to be perfectly honest only the initial "oh phew they actually made it look like the OT this time around" reveal was positive
everything that came after that, the details about characters an the plot, made it sound really bland
looks like they played it too safe. it's star wars so I'm not expecting amazing storytelling or some inspired story but at the very least they could've made it a bit more exciting and energetic
>>63696742
That's a lot of in house people they have to pay to fly out to wherever they're building the sets, whereas with CGI they just outsource it to a company who hires a bunch of freelancers for shit pay.
>>63696800
>looks like they played it too safe.
i don't know what everyone was expecting coming from jj abrams. his entire career is 'safe' money making movies. he just remixes shit we've already seen and people laud him as some fucking genius
the guy is one step above michael bay. at least michael bay knows who his audience is.
>>63696557
What is a bigature?
>>63696775
STAY STRONG AND INDEPENDENT!!!
>>63696909
It's just a "miniature" that is large enough so you get a good enough amount of detail that you can composite it into a shot and combine it with CGI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYUY3i9TamY
It makes things look more realistic and less computer generated.
>>63696836
I get that I just don't see how it could be significantly more than set design.
>>63696909
this >>63696580
They went the extra mile with their miniatures in the LotR movies, making them as large as possible to get as much detail as possible.
>>63696909
obv. a creature that is also a bigot
>>63696765
Wall Street analysts are expecting $1.5 Billion, they want to see Jurassic World numbers.
If the black is the romantic lead, this will not go well in Asia. JW and Furious 7 were due to Asian ticket sales.
>>63696765
I'm confident it will do ok.
If i'm reading the reviews between the lines it's a 6/10 but since SW is whoring since day one like a young Sasha grey, he will suceed like a 9.
>>63696765
>Castrate Abrams
lel no they aren't they have no one else to blame for spending 4 billion on a damaged IP, throwing away the EU cause they didn't like (cept now they are reprinting it cause it makes them money) and letting Kathleen Kennedy write some sjw shit.
Even Marvel had the sense to stick to the already built continuity.
If these movies flop, the IP is going to milked to the ground with cartoons, mech deals etc. to squeeze every last penny out of it.
Star Wars isn't going away anytime soon but whether it will be remembered fondly or not in the next decade is another question
ehh I feel critics will be careful talking about the movie because the lead actor is Black
>>63696948
>>63696980
Woops, my bad. Didn't see post explaining bigature.
>>63696595
Yes I do.
Sorry to make you cry and crush your dreams.
>>63695005
>Actually the party’s pretty much on immediately in this movie and it rarely stops.
So just like all of JJ's movies, then? All action, no breathing room, every scene just there to move things on to the next big set piece.
>>63697110
Oh they'll continue it, no one's denying that. However, if this fails to meet their money goal, they most likely wont let JJ touch the franchise again (not that it seems he wants to anyway).
>>63697177
god you're fucking retarded
you realize they had actual blacksmiths producing shit right? Vijo Morganstein literally broke his toe kicking one of those metal orc helmets.
>>63696305
whats this horseshit
stinking turd out of 10
>>63697508
What, you haven't seen a flying truck before?!
>>63696305
No amount of context will make me think that scene is anything but utterly fucking stupid.
Like, I can't even make fun of it. It just makes me sad that that movie was made.
