It's probably gonna be fine. But you don't want it to be, do you?
We're all anonymous here, it's ok to admit it. You're gonna hate it despite of its quality. Am i wrong?
>>63582970
That sounds like /v/
>>63583031
I'll be how I act at Metal festivals; stand right at the front, yell abuse and throw things at the stage if it's a band I don't care for, despite knowing I don't HAVE to watch them and there's other bands playing on different stages.
Same applies for movies
>>63582970
I want it to fail. This look worse than the prequels.
>remake of the first one
>looks like a television show
>disney
>disney wanted it out as soon as they got the rights
>marvel formula wanted
>JJ
>forced bob fett character instead of a natural one
>looks like star wars for the capeshit generation
You tell us
I feel like Rian Johnson is honestly way better suited to match the OT visual style than J.J. as well as give us something new.
>>63582970
i dont know what i want anymore, the actual Star Wars movies are over, this is something new and i think it will tarnish the legacy that the other left behind regardless if it's good or not. You can't make a proper Star Wars anymore because the audience is way more demanding and you dont have room for creativity. That's why they played it safe and picked JJ Abrams as a director.
>>63582970
You're right, I don't.
I want it to be entertaining; that means I want it to be good, or be awful.
But "fine" seems to be what it'll be. Fine. Average. Safe. Boring. Mediocre. It won't end up having as much of an impact as either the originals (for their positives) or the prequels (for the negatives). It'll go down in history as those sort of okay but forgettable additions to the franchise that probably shouldn't have been made.
You know that shit about the bangs and whimpers. Revenge of the Sith was fucking abysmal and also one of the most meme-tastic films ever made, it was an absolutely perfect way to finish up the saga; an emotional roller coaster.
>>63582970
Go back to /tv/
>>63582970
If it's bad it would be super exciting because of the drama and memes.
I care little about Star Wars itself because the actors are too old and Luke barely shows up
>>63583175
Well OP?
>>63582970
I'd love to be proven wrong and get a classic Star Wars film. But is there a shred of evidence to suggest it will be a classic?
The trailer? There were some neat shots, but lots of shitty films had exciting trailers. Phantom Menace immediately springs to mind.
The writers? JJ has never written a truly great script. I'd argue the closest he came was the breddy gud script for "Regarding Henry", but that was flukey and happened decades ago.
Kasdan wrote two classic films, Empire and Raiders, but he's been in deep freeze (or a Big Chill, as it were) for decades. The last project he worked on was a Diane Keaton weepy flop called "Darling Companion".
The director? Again, JJ has done nothing new, inventive, or enduring in his career. His films have a fun pace and lots of kinetic energy, but they're merely above average for an action director. He doesn't seem to have the genius eye of Spielberg or the imagination of young Lucas.
All in all, you're basing your prediction on nothing more than hope. Which is okay I guess, because I'm hoping too... But I don't expect anything other than a nostalgic, fast-paced romp through the Star Wars universe.
If you're hoping for the magic discovery of A New Hope or the spiritual depth of Empire, I'm afraid you're likely to be disappointed.
Just go in hoping for fun, which is what I'm hoping we get after the dreary death march that was the prequel era.
>>63583317
This.
I don't want the film to be bad OP, but I'll take amazingly autistically bad like Revenge of the Sith over "Alright" like Avengers 2 any day
Right now I feel like I've already fucking watched the Force Awakens, and that going to the theater will be a mere formality
>>63583961
It's going to be a solid 7/10 movie. It will be safe, mostly formulaic and will entertain without being groundbreaking.
We can all just tell by what we've seen and heard.
Don't forget there'll be more films after this, and they all will be made the same.
Star Wars will probably never push the envelope or stand out again.
>>63584073
Fucking Marvel Model
Amazing for capeshit, terrible for movies
>>63584119
Disney has already said they will continue making Star Wars movies for as long as they can make a profit from them.
They literally announced they're doing this out of greed.
By the time the 4th new film comes out, people will be sick and tired of it. I can't imagine, when the 7th or 8th dies, and people will see Star Wars as trash that won't go away.
They're going to kill the franchise.
>>63584207
My prediction is that Rogue One or whatever the fuck is going to be good while the mainline sucks dick
But you underestimate the power of the Normie side of the force
They love franchises. They eat that shit up. They thought the last season of Game of Thrones was GOAT
>RUNNING
>LENS FLARE
>SHITTY COLOR GRADING
>MUH STRONG INDEPANDANT WOMEN WHO CANT HAVE CHARACTER ARCS BECAUSE IF THEY DID IT WOULD BE ADMITTING THEY HAD FAULTS
>DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH!!!!!!!!
>BLACK AND WHITE BABY MORALS
"Quality"
It will do fine though and I won't give a shit.
>>63584366
I thought last season was 8/10 and I'm the one who you're responding to.
I think Disney is going to put the franchise into overdrive with their greed, and people are really, really going to get sick of Star Wars eventually. They will kill the image of it.
At worst, it'll be a safe and risk-free throwback to the original. It's not going to be Prequel levels of bad, that was a very specific comedy of errors caused by a primadonna director who thought he was more talented than he actually was that had no executive oversight because the producer was a spineless wimp
At least it won't be terrible to look at because the entire movie won't be in front of a green screen
>>63582970
looks like a fucking rehash of the original trilogy
i wish they were moving the story forward and not coming in circles bringing the exact same elements of the first movies
>>63584447
It'll be the exact opposite: a spineless wimp bumboy of a director, with a demanding, controlling, raging homosexual beast that is Disney producing it.
So it will be shit.
But SJWs and toy collectors won't stop cumming.
>tfw just bough a ticket to 9pm Thursday night.
cool
>But you don't want it to be, do you
Of course not because Lucas isn't behind it and doesn't have any involvement with it. No one was passionate about Star Wars like he was.
Everyone else wants an endless repeat of the OT and the bitching of the prequels proves this. So Disney is giving "fans" exactly what they want. A soulless film that looks like Star Wars.
>"People don’t actually realize it’s actually a soap opera and it’s all about family problems"
>"It’s very much the kind of movie they’ve been looking for."
>>63583175
they did want it out as soon as they got the rights and then it was delayed
>>63582970
I don't know what I want anymore
I want it to be good, but I'm expecting shit. Nothing so far is allowing me to think that.
>>63584366
>They thought the last season of Game of Thrones was GOAT
most of the last season was weak but Hardholme was one of the best episodes of the entire show and really elevated the whole season.
>>63586219
Hardhome was good because it was respectful to the source material while expanding on it
the rest of the season was pitiful OC that pandered to the characters that the writers liked and ruined the ones they didn't and cheapened the entire series
>>63585720
>"Passionate like he was"
That's a load of crock shit. Lucas said himself he was never that passionate about the movies.
http://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/star-wars-archive-george-lucas-1999-interview/
>"I'm not that passionate about this story. I like it, it's fun and I enjoy doing it. But it's definitely not my life."
But I agree with your main point. George at least took risks.
>>63586420
>But it's definitely not my life
good for him, if it became his life that would just make him demented.
And star keks will automatically like it despite it's shitness.
>>63583126
That's a pretty fucking perfect description of 99% of metal fans.
>>63584052
I think it will all depend on how much genuine surprises there are in terms of scenes we haven't seen in trailers.
Also if the old characters actually develop or help the protagonists develop instead of just being included to please the crowd and make the whole thing look like an overblown dim hypefest.
>>63586219
a 30 minute action scene that tells us nothing new about anything is a good episode of drama how?
>>63582970
I really want it to do well. Disney has had too many John Carters
>>63584073
They're pushing the envelope by making such progressive decisions with the cast and future direction. You don't know what you're talking about.
>>63582970
It seems to me that it is a somewhat soulless cashgrab pandering to nostalgiafags and 'progressive' people and values. It is not a film with artistic integrity, so I hope it does fail and it does by default suck.
Just as a friendly reminder, JJ Abrams made a Star Trek movie in 2009 and another in like 2012. I keep forgetting, myself. And I think this is key to understanding the future of these new movies. If there's not another trilogy 20 years from now, these movies are going to fall out of people's minds. Anyone only remembers the prequels for being shitty, and no one can really point out what specifically is shitty because they are all three pretty fucking forgettable.
Star Wars used to be huge, but it was always kid shit and nerd shit. It's only acceptable now because there are new, PC movies. Five years ago, Star Wars wasn't really a huge thing. Chad and Stacy didn't wear Star Wars shirts. Now they do, so Star Wars will live on a little more. In 20 years, Chad and Stacy won't care, and Star Wars will return to faggot nerd shit
>>63583126
the fact you go to metal festivals is infinitely more embarrassing than liking Star Wars desu
>>63584073
>It's going to be a solid 7/10 movie. It will be safe, mostly formulaic and will entertain without being groundbreaking.
I feel as though you are using "7" as an average here. This will be a 6 on a scale with 5 s the average. The definition of mediocre
>>63588647
but that's the LITERAL definition of above average
>>63582970
its gonna be great
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0248pUAteWk&ab_channel=Urindunk
>>63584073
>solid 7/10
subtle trolling, i like it
>>63588677
I always took 'mediocre' to mean 'ever-so-slightly above average, but to a point where it is decently entertaining, yet not necessary at all'
A 5 here would be shit like Taken and any Oscar-bait historical drama, just by-the-numbers shit that gets plopped out with no spirit or any concern for the well-being of the cinematic medium. A 6 at least strives for greatness, but fails in the end, being worth a watch, but not worth paying money for
>>63588599
I loved Star Trek '09, and most of my friends who are into movies remember it and still enjoy watching it occasionally.
There's honestly no way there's going to be anything BUT doomsayers at a place like 4chan. All people want to do here is stir up a reaction.
>>63582970
>It's probably gonna be fine.
It's a movie about people who fight with swords in space. It'll be shit like the rest of them you stupid nerd.
>>63582970
Star Wars has closed its circle with ROTJ.
Anything made after that is irrelevant.
This movie has value only as a shitposting material, so the worst it is the better.
>>63588796
yeah fair enough, that makes sense
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNdb03Hw18M
