STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS - Blu-Ray Thoughts

[mkaroly]

Disney was the worst film studio to get the rights to the SW franchise, IMO.

[AndyDursin]

Final poster is out -- Harrison Ford gets top billing! What's the over/under on when Han Solo dies -- 60 minutes? 75?

[AndyDursin]

LOL -- FORCE AWAKENS poster breakdown

http://uproxx.com/movies/2015/10/the-fo ... ns-poster/

"Here we see Harrison Ford and Annette Bening reprising their roles from Regarding Henry. It’s been 24 years since we last left Henry and Sarah Turner, and, from the look of this poster, much has changed. The pistol that Henry is holding makes us think he’s out for some sort of revenge, which probably has something to do with the convenience store robbery that took away the dickish side of Henry’s personality. It’s a little surprising to see Henry and Sarah in this setting, but you’re forgetting that J.J. Abrams wrote Regarding Henry, so this is a fitting tribute."

[DavidBanner]

I thought he got killed in the first five minutes, literally right after the credits.

They open up in the Millenium Falcon, the first line of the movie is Solo announcing "Chewie, we're home", at which point there's this huge explosion, and well, you know...

[BobaMike]

And...presales crashed every movie ticket site. Trying to get mine for the local Alamo Drafthouse for the Thursday premeire...and then some for the next day. Everything keeps timing out :-/

I may skip work for the Friday opening and get a substitute teacher. I already told my students I only miss for 2 reasons: my son being sick or star wars.

[DavidBanner]

I can't imagine paying to see a JJ Abrams movie in a theater.
I'll probably catch it when it hits video in early 2016. Abrams' shows always play better on television for some reason.
The one major concern is that they seem to have rushed to get this into theaters by their deadline, rather than taking their time and putting the movie out during the summer. Really not sure why they did that, other than being compressed by their other new movies in the instant franchise.

[AndyDursin]

Every scrap of footage that comes out makes this look more and more a remake of the first movie. Daisy Ridley instead of Mark Hamill, etc. A typical Abrams pastiche really.

[DavidBanner]

I hate to say this, but the trailer was, well, boring.
Nothing here to recommend.
But again, anyone knowing the track record here wouldn't have expected anything more.
I'm sure it will make a fine Blu-ray or digital download by March.

[AndyDursin]

The movie does "look", visually, interesting. It looks more physical and less CGI riddled than the prequels and the cinematography looks "right".

It just screams of being a thinly clouded remake in every way.

[DavidBanner]

I'm honestly not sure if it's a remake or just an odd attempt to reboot the series in the way we discussed last year - essentially using the older characters to bookend Abrams' introduction of the new young cast. I don't know. I haven't really paid attention to any of the rumors - it may be a sign of my age but nothing about this movie has seemed that important to me. I tend to agree with your earlier thought that it probably would have been best for John Williams to have called it a day when he finished the last prequel. Let the new movies be what they are - new attempts, starting with one by Abrams, apparently in the same mode as his Star Trek inflictions.

I confess actually seeing more CGI than I had expected in the new trailer. Several of the big shots looked completely artificial - including the bridge of what I presume was a new Star Destroyer. It's possible the shots aren't finished yet, so I'm happy to give them the benefit of the doubt. But it looks to me like the rush to finish this movie to make that predetermined date has had exactly the consequences we predicted. Given that they were put into an unfortunate position with their late filming start, and then with Ford's injuries, one would have thought the better course of valor would have been to push back to 2016. But that would assume that they were actually trying to make the best movie possible, rather than fit into the framework of an instant franchise.

I have to wonder if Abrams, in making this fast of an exit, is actually making the smart play here.

[John Johnson]

You know it makes sense...lol

[AndyDursin]

I'm honestly not sure if it's a remake or just an odd attempt to reboot the series in the way we discussed last year - essentially using the older characters to bookend Abrams' introduction of the new young cast.

Well of course it's that also. But I don't think you need to even read a rumor site to see that this appears to be a very clear, if not outright obvious, reworking of STAR WARS '77. Instead of Luke, you have this girl, also on a desert planet, also thinking she's living a lonely existence and "doesn't matter in the galaxy", going on a quest adventure to save the universe. Probably (likely?) finding out she's from a more important line of lineage than her modest means suggest (is she "_____'s daughter"?). Instead of Obi-Wan, we'll have Luke filling that role, plus Han being the "sacrificial lamb" that serves as the motivation for the young heroes to take over. That's how it's looked and this latest trailer did little to dispel my feelings. Obviously the old cast is there to "pass the torch", because Ford isn't even signed (allegedly) for another film, meaning he's toast before this one is over.

I dunno, maybe it'll all be wrong -- I keep thinking Luke's absence from any of these trailers is serving some larger purpose (is he the real bad guy? There would be bricks tossed at the screen if that turned out to be the case), but otherwise, it looks like a basic reconfiguration of the original STAR WARS. Just with white male(s) being the bad guys, and the Ridley and Boyega being the leads -- in keeping with today's (and Disney's) "socially progressive" slant.

As for Abrams -- we are on the same page there David. All these people trashing Lucas don't seem to acknowledge Abrams' slender filmography (he's only directed four other films -- two STAR TREKs, the third MISSION IMPOSSIBLE and the mediocre SUPER is almost entirely comprised of movies that mimicked/recycled Spielberg or someone else's property. He's never made an AMERICAN GRAFFITI or produced an original property of his own -- and yet THIS is the guy all the fanboys are waiving their arms for as if he's the savior of the franchise?

This is the same guy who made STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS -- a movie far worse than ANY of the Lucas prequels.

[DavidBanner]

I almost completely agree, Andy. It does appear that they're promoting this movie to make it look like a replay of the 1977 original - but I also wonder if that's just editing for the trailers. That may only be one component of whatever Abrams is trying to do for his attempt at a Star Wars movie. And you may well be right that they're setting up for the white female/black man=good guy vs. white man=bad guy notion. But I also remember that Lucas did plenty of this in the original movies. Albeit with the white British guys being the bad guys. I don't think that anyone doubted that Lando Calrissian would wind up as a good guy. The oddest moment to me was having James Earl Jones being revealed to be Sebastian Shaw at the end, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.

We're in agreement that this trailer doesn't give any indication that the JJ Abrams who inflicted not one but two bad Star Trek movies, and two other really subpar movies to go with them, has grown at all as a filmmaker or storyteller. Granted, the Abrams who wrote and directed for television in the 90s and early 2000s did some great stuff there - particularly with LOST as we've discussed before. And if we were back in the 1970s, he'd probably still be doing good work there, like Bochco and Cannell and Bellisario before him. Yes, Spielberg came out of television, but he didn't just suddenly come up with JAWS. There was that smaller project called The Sugarland Express, which reaffirmed that he understood character. Abrams has yet to do anything that shows he can handle the simple quiet character interactions that can be huge, even in a large-scale movie. All I've seen in his big screen attempts have been frantic flourishes - the shaky cam and the lens flares are just symptoms of a lack of storytelling vocabulary. And for that reason, I'm more than concerned that he was the one chosen to make a new Star Wars movie. I would have preferred that the producers find a more interesting director - heck, I'd go with Guillermo del Toro - at least you'd know you were getting someone with some visual ideas. (Yes, I know everyone is going to slam his new movie - but I still think he's an interesting director. Or they could have gone with someone like Cuaron. But Abrams? Really?

As we've said, this will make for what will look like a proficient movie. And I don't anticipate seeing it before it quickly lands on home video.

[AndyDursin]

That may only be one component of whatever Abrams is trying to do for his attempt at a Star Wars movie. And you may well be right that they're setting up for the white female/black man=good guy vs. white man=bad guy notion. But I also remember that Lucas did plenty of this in the original movies

I should probably clarify -- it's more the fact the heroine is a girl, that goes along with Disney's seemingly endless line of "girl power" stories (in their animated offerings and live-action fare) that I find very "contemporary". Seems very calculated IMO, as if it's been focus-grouped to death and pushes whatever agenda they have at their disposal.

[AndyDursin]

This concept is picking up steam...

http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2015/10/t ... akens.html