>>63710637
Or just read them and realize it's heavily flawed and derivative.

the phantom menace was real star wars. this new movie is phony.

>>63710682
"Heavily" is a strong word.

They didn't have as many internet fanboy "critics" back then. You just need to get Harry Knowles some tranny hookers and you'd be set

>only approved marketers have seen sw7
>people think the response is genuine

people aren't this stupid, right?

>>63710782
>people aren't this stupid, right?

WRONG

>>63710782
Oh boy, the delusion is real with you

Just saw it, it's got it's flaws, might not appease the 'muh originals' crowd, but it's twice the movie episode 1 ever was.

>>63710637

>counting reviews that were made years later

>>63710682
Nearly all movies are flawed, and if it's derivative it should feel right at home in the Star Wars catalogue

>>63710825
the only way you could prove hes delusional is by proving marketing doesn't exist.

>>63710782
>>only approved marketers have seen sw7
Scott Mendelson has been rooting against Star Wars for a while, saying a sequel shouldn't beat an original movie like Avatar in the boxoffice, before getting invited to the premiere. He gave it a muted rotten, and twitted it was ok.

I'll give it a month before enough genuine reviews have come in, written by people who actually stopped to digest what they watched rather than writing it out while they still had stars in their eyes and Lucas' cock in their mouths, before the aggregate score begins to approach an accurate assessment of the film.

>>63710706
This. Star Wars without George Lucas is like Smashing Pumpkins without Billy Corgan.