STAR WARS VII (2015) - John Williams Signed Up!

[Jedbu]

Here is the story from The Wrap (evidently Ben Affleck was on the short list, as well):

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/j ... sive-74596

[AndyDursin]

Despite his detractors, of the younger generation (so to speak) of filmmakers, he's the closest one to turning out Spielberg/Lucas types of fantasies out there...so this is a very safe, even predictable, choice.

Hopefully the shaky cam and lens flares will be at a minimum...and maybe Brad Bird will be coerced into helming one of the sequels, which I wouldn't mind.

What was the alternative? Michael Bay or one of HIS protoges? No thanks!

[BobaMike]

I think this is the best (and most obvious) choice that could be made at the moment for Star Wars.


Assuming Williams says no, I would guess that Giacchino will score the new ones.

[Eric W.]

I think this is the best (and most obvious) choice that could be made at the moment for Star Wars.

Probably although I'm wondering if it's almost a default because, like Andy said, who else do you really go to? Bay and his guys?

Assuming Williams says no, I would guess that Giacchino will score the new ones.

That's good news if he apes Williams like he did on the Medal of Honor games. Otherwise it's going to be a huge drop off.

[Monterey Jack]

Hopefully the shaky cam and lens flares will be at a minimum..

Ahhh....took only one post into the thread to hear a lens flare complaint.

[AndyDursin]

Hopefully the shaky cam and lens flares will be at a minimum..

Ahhh....took only one post into the thread to hear a lens flare complaint.

LOL I had to do it! If it wasn't me, it would be someone else.

As I've said before, the shaky cam bothers me more than the lens flare.

[Monterey Jack]

While I agree that Abrams could tone down the flares a bit, the meme revolving around complaining about them every time his name is mentioned is just beginning to piss me off. Get some new jokes, please.

[AndyDursin]

While I agree that Abrams could tone down the flares a bit, the meme revolving around complaining about them every time his name is mentioned is just beginning to piss me off. Get some new jokes, please.

I actually haven't even mentioned it in most of my reviews, though SUPER 8 did have a few too many for my liking.

What's funny is that Abrams gets more ribbing for it than, say, Oliver Stone did back in the '90s for his ridiculous, over the top cinematography on garbage like NATURAL BORN KILLERS. I put that film on the other night (saw it once in the theater before) and couldn't believe how positively unwatchable it was. There's not a single stationary shot it seems in the entire movie -- the whole thing is off-kilter and laughable, yet most critics drank the kool aid on his body of work from PLATOON on, telling everyone how "important" his movies were.

Go back and watch most of his movies today -- nearly all of them completely suck, save for John Williams' scores. (Though of course I thought they sucked back then too!)

[Monterey Jack]

While I agree that Abrams could tone down the flares a bit, the meme revolving around complaining about them every time his name is mentioned is just beginning to piss me off. Get some new jokes, please.

I actually haven't even mentioned it in most of my reviews, though SUPER 8 did have a few too many for my liking.

I wasn't specifically singling you out, Andy, but it seems like every single discussion thread about any Abrams project (even things he only produces) has at least two or three complaints about lens flares within the first dozen posts. It's seriously getting old.

[AndyDursin]

No I gotcha, especially at AICN. They can't let it go over there.

[Monterey Jack]

No I gotcha, especially at AICN. They can't let it go over there.

Plus the ever-popular nickname "Jar-Jar" Abrams. Abrams has his faults, but I've enjoyed all of his feature films and most of his TV work to date, so I don't know why everyone hates him so much. He saved Star Trek from stale, pop-culture obscurity and actually made it popular amongst "regular" moviegoers instead of just cranky, aging Trekkies, and this is the thanks he gets?

[Eric W.]

As I've said before, the shaky cam bothers me more than the lens flare.

Far and away I hate the shaky cam a lot more but I don't the Abrams hate I see out there, either.

But that's the Internet. What can ya do?

[AndyDursin]

No I gotcha, especially at AICN. They can't let it go over there.

Plus the ever-popular nickname "Jar-Jar" Abrams. Abrams has his faults, but I've enjoyed all of his feature films and most of his TV work to date, so I don't know why everyone hates him so much. He saved Star Trek from stale, pop-culture obscurity and actually made it popular amongst "regular" moviegoers instead of just cranky, aging Trekkies, and this is the thanks he gets?

I agree, I was a big fan of STAR TREK in spite of some fans who -- let's face it -- would've been unhappy with anything he made. The movie may not have been "perfect" (what Star Trek film IS?) but I still stand behind my review and my thought that it's the best of all the modern "blockbuster" genre films of the last 5-10 years or so. He at least GETS IT in so far as understanding what these movies are supposed to be. The Trek movies generate scant interest outside the U.S. and I think he's made the series relevant to viewers outside, like you said, aging Trekkies just irritated "someone's done something to their Star Trek" -- even though the franchise was pretty much DOA after polluting the airwaves with too many mediocre spinoffs and the mostly tepid TNG theatrical films.

I've also enjoyed much of his TV work and some of his feature output, though I think the problem for people is that he's trying so hard to be the next Spielberg, and he's just isn't. He hasn't made a movie (or come close to making one) that can compete with the best of his mentor's output -- even though he's tried, desperately, like with SUPER 8, which was merely "okay" for me and had some obvious problems.

The reality, like I said before, is that he's the only one out there who is seemingly close to being the sort of filmmaker in 2013 to understand what the spirit of these films, at least, is supposed to be (that was what I liked so much about STAR TREK; it would've been easy for someone to go the Battlestar Galactica route and turn all the characters into "Edgy, dark" protagonists -- and that's not what he did). And that's as good as we're going to get right now -- given the alternatives, again, I think it's a solid choice.

[Eric W.]

And that's as good as we're going to get right now -- given the alternatives, again, I think it's a solid choice.

That's just it. What alternatives? Maybe James Cameron? I start running out of ideas fairly quickly.

[jkholm]

I think Abrams is a great choice. I did not know there was such hatred for him on some sites. STAR TREK was fantastic, one of the best SF films in recent memory. As far as his TV work goes, both Lost and Fringe are two of the best SF shows of the last several years as well.

I just hope he makes Episode VII a PG-rated film. I get why Revenge of the Sith was PG-13 but the series as a whole does not need to be (as is often said around here) edgy and dark. My kids will be 7 and 9 when it comes out and I'd love to take them without any qualms about the content.