PDA

View Full Version : Star Wars: The Force Awakens trailer


Mort
11-28-2014, 03:21 PM
The (real trailer) is here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erLk59H86ww

Not sure what to think of it. It says barely nothing. But that sword is just god awful. They wanted to do some new awesome lightsaber but failed so hard.

https://33.media.tumblr.com/07e36a0b1e0010d5430e3113eca4db1b/tumblr_nfrlyfoFJm1qhoollo1_400.jpg

Frenzy
11-28-2014, 04:13 PM
R2 units are World Cup fans?

Nazbaque
11-28-2014, 04:39 PM
R2 units are World Cup fans?

Get it right Frenzy, they are astromech units. R2 is practically ancient. This would be the R7 or R8 series.

On the whole the thing looks like another throve of material for the debate on how badly episode IV would have flopped if there hadn't been people to tell Lucas some of his ideas were fucking stupid.

Those people were like master engineers making sure the building designed by George Walton "Glory Whore" Lucas actually stayed up. Now that the man's vanity has gotten rid of such people the buildings amazingly collapse soon after completion.

ShadowbaneX
11-30-2014, 12:00 AM
this helps

http://i.imgur.com/MVhkmQa.gif

GonzoTheGreat
11-30-2014, 04:55 AM
I got the impression that they're planning to merge Star Wars into the Highlander series. I'm not sure that would be a really good idea.

Nazbaque
11-30-2014, 07:10 AM
Well it would explain all the continuity problems. If it's Highlander it can't make sense.

Davian93
11-30-2014, 03:35 PM
The lightsaber Claymore is godawful...the rest seems decent at least.

I'll give it a chance as Abrams has always been a huge SW fan and he made a pretty good SW movie when he made the new Star Trek. Still, if its as awful as the 2nd new Star Trek movie, they might as well just bury SW as a product all around...as that movie was utter crap.

Or course, most of what Abrams does is utter crap so that's not a surprise.

ShadowbaneX
11-30-2014, 04:04 PM
The lightsaber Claymore is godawful...the rest seems decent at least.

I'll give it a chance as Abrams has always been a huge SW fan and he made a pretty good SW movie when he made the new Star Trek. Still, if its as awful as the 2nd new Star Trek movie, they might as well just bury SW as a product all around...as that movie was utter crap.

Or course, most of what Abrams does is utter crap so that's not a surprise.

Good. Give in to your anger and your journey to the Dark Side will be complete.

Tomp
11-30-2014, 05:47 PM
I'll "accept" the sword if it's a purpose behind it.
For example if there are special functions (other than an inpractical cross guard) or if it's an ancient relic.

I do like the flickering beam of the sword though.

BTW have you seen this SW-TFA George Lucas edition spoof https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v93Jh6JNBng
More isn't always better

Daekyras
12-01-2014, 06:11 AM
The lightsaber Claymore is godawful...the rest seems decent at least.

I'll give it a chance as Abrams has always been a huge SW fan and he made a pretty good SW movie when he made the new Star Trek. Still, if its as awful as the 2nd new Star Trek movie, they might as well just bury SW as a product all around...as that movie was utter crap.

Or course, most of what Abrams does is utter crap so that's not a surprise.

Woah, Woah, WOOOOOOOOAAAAAAH!!!

What??

Into darkness was not a five star instant classic movie but it was not utter crap.

A three or four star movie easily.(out of five)

Davian93
12-01-2014, 07:58 AM
Woah, Woah, WOOOOOOOOAAAAAAH!!!

What??

Into darkness was not a five star instant classic movie but it was not utter crap.

A three or four star movie easily.(out of five)

Yeah, I liked it a bit more the first time they made it...when it was called Wrath of Khan.

The entire movie was a 2 hour homage/ripoff of the original. Its not that hard to come up with original ideas you know.

The only saving grace of the movie is the sheer awesomeness that is Benedict Cumberbatch.

Daekyras
12-01-2014, 08:24 AM
Yeah, I liked it a bit more the first time they made it...when it was called Wrath of Khan.

The entire movie was a 2 hour homage/ripoff of the original. Its not that hard to come up with original ideas you know.

The only saving grace of the movie is the sheer awesomeness that is Benedict Cumberbatch.

It is a far superior movie to Wrath of khan....:)

Davian93
12-01-2014, 08:47 AM
It is a far superior movie to Wrath of khan....:)

No. Wrath of Khan relied on 20 years of character building and the entire plot made sense. The mistakes of Kirk's youth were coming back to haunt him. The anger from Khan made sense as he had been marooned by Kirk and seen his wife die as a result of Kirk forgetting about him and simply washing his hands of the mess. The relationship between Kirk and Spock made sense too as they had been friends and comrades for decades by then. The symbolism throughout the movie all made sense from that perspective.

With Into Darkness we have Action scene "Ooh look, they're running" followed by action scene followed by action scene with very minimal character development. The movie doesnt work unless you've seen Wrath of Khan. That's a problem...especially with a reboot. You have to view it with what you basically know from Star Trek 1 and Star Trek 2. In that perspective, it makes no sense for any of it to occur. The whole movie is one big homage to a far superior film that actually had all those things.

And then there's the whole "magic blood cures everything" Deus Ex Machina they pull out of their ass to avoid having to come up with good writing.

And then there's the warp reactor scene. Kirk is supposed to be a brilliant genius who got promoted to captain (in the real storyline and this stupid storyline) super fast due to that brilliance...thus, this once in a generation commander fixes the warp core by kicking it real hard. I mean, really? REALLY???

Wrath of Khan was, by far, the best ST movie made and this movie was an utter joke in comparison.

Daekyras
12-01-2014, 10:06 AM
With Into Darkness we have Action scene "Ooh look, they're running" followed by action scene followed by action scene with very minimal character development. The movie doesnt work unless you've seen Wrath of Khan. That's a problem...especially with a reboot. You have to view it with what you basically know from Star Trek 1 and Star Trek 2. In that perspective, it makes no sense for any of it to occur. The whole movie is one big homage to a far superior film that actually had all those things.



Mrs. Daek has never seen Star Trek. She hadn't even seen the first of the reboots.

She had no problem understanding the story.

It appears, Dav, as If you are holding onto the past. Wrath of Khan was great but the new series is in a different continuity.

It is a homage to the original series and films. Inspired by but not controlled by them.

Kirk- Still the irrepressible, inspiring and unorthodox leader of me.

Spock- still wrestling with his duality whom usually obeys logic but when he becomes emotional can have outbursts of anger.

Bones- still a doctor not a (insert occupation)

Uhuru- Still hot.

Etc.

Now as for Khan "not making sense". His anger is completely justified in this movie. They were going to kill his crew(Family). It may not have been the motivation he had in Wrath of khan but I must re-iterate that this is not set in the same continuum.

I fully appreciate your preference for the original movie over this as they are both very good but for you to describe "Into darkness" as utter crap and be serious about it is very strange.

And as for blood being Deus ex machina- It would be not the first such occurrence in a star trek universe, c.f crusher, wesley.

Also, kicking the thing into place is stupid. About as stupid as spock fixing the warp core in wrath of khan. Think about it- how would he have known how?

ShadowbaneX
12-01-2014, 11:20 AM
Being able to transport to the Klingon Empire/planet/whatever breaks Star Trek. The entire purpose of Star Trek is to go out there and explore. If you can just teleport between planets then the entire purpose just unravels.

Same in the first movie, only in this case it seems that it takes a matter of minutes to warp from earth to Vulcan. Or the fact that Spoke can watch his homeworld blow up from a planet that's supposedly on the rim of the Galaxy. When you make the galaxy seem so small the journey, the trek, just isn't important any more.

Davian93
12-01-2014, 01:43 PM
Being able to transport to the Klingon Empire/planet/whatever breaks Star Trek. The entire purpose of Star Trek is to go out there and explore. If you can just teleport between planets then the entire purpose just unravels.

Same in the first movie, only in this case it seems that it takes a matter of minutes to warp from earth to Vulcan. Or the fact that Spoke can watch his homeworld blow up from a planet that's supposedly on the rim of the Galaxy. When you make the galaxy seem so small the journey, the trek, just isn't important any more.

Yup...those are just two minor points that I didn't even bother touching on as they are so egregiously bad.


There's also "both ships falling from a moon orbit into the atmosphere because the plot required it" in Into Darkness

Repeat: The fact that they rehashed the plot of their most popular movie because they couldn't come up with their own idea. That level of "fan service" is just brutal.

Also, How the hell does Kirk go from Cadet to Captain overnight? That simply would never happen regardless of him saving the universe, earth, etc.

Why is Khan a pasty faced British guy when we know he's actually a Sikh?

Why is Carol Marcus forced into the plot like that? Other than because she was in the original Wrath of Khan. Its so forced its pathetic.

Davian93
12-01-2014, 01:47 PM
About as stupid as spock fixing the warp core in wrath of khan. Think about it- how would he have known how?

He was the science officer of the flagship and renowned for his technical abilities which were demonstrated on numerous occasions. He knew what was wrong with the engine because, if you'll recall, he was on the bridge monitoring the system readouts and he had 30+ years of starfleet experience at that point. It was also his ship...he was the Captain (remember by then, Enterprise was his ship and Kirk was Chief of Starfleet Operations there on an inspection in temporary command) and he had served on Enterprise for decades. Its believable that he would know how to fix it by going into the warp core like that.

All Kirk does is kick it a few times. Now we've been shown on dozens of occasions that the dilithium crystals require precise alignment to handle the matter/anti-matter containment. Its not something you adjust by kicking real hard.

Nazbaque
12-01-2014, 01:54 PM
Being able to transport to the Klingon Empire/planet/whatever breaks Star Trek. The entire purpose of Star Trek is to go out there and explore. If you can just teleport between planets then the entire purpose just unravels.

Same in the first movie, only in this case it seems that it takes a matter of minutes to warp from earth to Vulcan. Or the fact that Spoke can watch his homeworld blow up from a planet that's supposedly on the rim of the Galaxy. When you make the galaxy seem so small the journey, the trek, just isn't important any more.

You may be correct but we must not allow misspelling "Spock". Shame on you!

ShadowbaneX
12-01-2014, 02:40 PM
I claim a case of the Monday's

Nazbaque
12-01-2014, 02:56 PM
I claim a case of the Monday's

A compelling argument. Even so misspelling "Spock" is very serious. I think I must demand proof of it being a very bad Monday.

ShadowbaneX
12-01-2014, 03:05 PM
Yesterday I got to sleep in, relax and play video games.

Today I was awake during the 6th morning hour, had to go to work and play on AutoCAD.

Nazbaque
12-01-2014, 04:31 PM
Yesterday I got to sleep in, relax and play video games.

Today I was awake during the 6th morning hour, had to go to work and play on AutoCAD.

Hmmm... Nope, not bad enough. Not for misspelling "Spock".

Davian93
12-01-2014, 04:38 PM
Hmmm... Nope, not bad enough. Not for misspelling "Spock".

I was gonna assume a typical iPhone auto-correct error...which would have been my excuse. Sadly, that was not the case.

SBX, we're gonna need your Star Trek fanboy card back...

~holds out hand~

The Unreasoner
12-01-2014, 04:44 PM
I was gonna assume a typical iPhone auto-correct error...which would have been my excuse. Sadly, that was not the case.

SBX, we're gonna need your Star Trek fanboy card back...

~holds out hand~

I actually liked Into Darkness, and never saw Wrath of Khan.

But I have never misspelled Spock (or Uhura).

Also if we're going to nitpick race: the new Sulu is clearly Korean.

Davian93
12-01-2014, 04:56 PM
I actually liked Into Darkness, and never saw Wrath of Khan.

But I have never misspelled Spock (or Uhura).

Also if we're going to nitpick race: the new Sulu is clearly Korean.

Yeah, making Sulu Korean instead of Japanese was a bit weird...it'd be like making Chekov German instead of Russian.

The "Sulu represents all Asians" excuse is a bit weak.

Nazbaque
12-01-2014, 05:27 PM
Yeah, making Sulu Korean instead of Japanese was a bit weird...it'd be like making Chekov German instead of Russian.

The "Sulu represents all Asians" excuse is a bit weak.

Well... Sulu being a Japanese name is a bit of a stretch in the first place. The whole r or l thing is a bit difficult as the actual sound is somewhere in between, but nevertheless the official spelling is r.

ShadowbaneX
12-01-2014, 07:29 PM
there's fanboy cards? The closest thing I have is a RAFO card from JordanCon when I went back in 2009? 2010?

Trust me, I've had better mornings. Only misspelling Spock was lucky.

That said, I am getting my first phone tomorrow. It's a Samsung Galaxy S5 though, not an iPhone.

The Unreasoner
12-01-2014, 07:50 PM
It's a Samsung Galaxy S5 though, not an iPhone.

A smart choice. Though, to paraphrase the late Steve Jobs: 'You might want to look at out patent portfolio before making a final deciscion'

Though, since you're not a competitor that needs to be threatened into joining an illegal wage fixing scheme, you should be okay.

ShadowbaneX
12-01-2014, 08:07 PM
I want a phone, not a fashion accessory.

Davian93
12-01-2014, 09:03 PM
there's fanboy cards? The closest thing I have is a RAFO card from JordanCon when I went back in 2009? 2010?

Trust me, I've had better mornings. Only misspelling Spock was lucky.

That said, I am getting my first phone tomorrow. It's a Samsung Galaxy S5 though, not an iPhone.

My work Blackberry is being replaced with one of those in the very near future...its supposed to be a pretty awesome phone. Congrats!

ShadowbaneX
12-01-2014, 11:07 PM
One of the reasons I picked it. ;)

The thing is a surfboard though. I really wish they'd kept the trend of miniaturizing phones instead of making them larger and larger.

Tomp
12-02-2014, 02:47 AM
Now when we're speaking Star Trek I'd have to say that my favourite of the movies is First Contact.

It was something strange with the whole thing. Although none of the other movies was really good it still followed the rule that the odd numbers were horrible and the even numbers were good/acceptable. Right up until the last of the old. The even numbered 10, Nemesis, which was a big bucket of Arsegravy.

Concerning the new ones they are so different from the old that they should be considered as a separate franchise.

Davian93
12-02-2014, 12:18 PM
Now when we're speaking Star Trek I'd have to say that my favourite of the movies is First Contact.

It was something strange with the whole thing. Although none of the other movies was really good it still followed the rule that the odd numbers were horrible and the even numbers were good/acceptable. Right up until the last of the old. The even numbered 10, Nemesis, which was a big bucket of Arsegravy.

Concerning the new ones they are so different from the old that they should be considered as a separate franchise.

STIII was pretty good too...so it kills that theory anyway. The arc from 2-4 was pretty much the peak for the movies with I & V being awful (V being the worst ST movie in existence), VI was pretty solid (the Cold War parallel was nice and Meyer did a good job back in the Director's chair).

Generations was a jumped up TV episode and was just weak all around as a result. There were honestly better 2 parters in the TNG television run that would have made far better movies on the big-screen with a big-screen budget. The Best of Both Worlds comes to mind as an obvious one as does Redemption (Klingon Civil War and Worf helping Gowron become Chancellor with the subplot of Picard stopping the Romulan involvement through Sela (Denise Crosby as a Romulan). Best of Both Worlds would have made a phenomenal movie and its a big part of why they went back to that well for First Contact with a repeat of the Borg invasion.

First Contact was the peak of the TNG movies which is kind of a back-handed compliment in a way but it's a legitimately good movie regardless.

Insurrection and Nemesis are varying levels of utter dreck and crap. Nemesis is a bit better than Insurrection but both are just awful and they basically poisoned the well for ST movies for half a decade afterward...while also helping to kill any more potential tv shows (which makes Dav sad).

The Star Trek reboot was very well done and then Abrams crapped the bed with Into Darkness.

Daekyras
12-03-2014, 08:31 AM
The Star Trek reboot was very well done and then Abrams crapped the bed with Into Darkness.

Argh.

Why is it always the extremes? You don't think it is as good as wrath of Khan. Fair enough. That doesn't make it a crap movie. You see no redeeming features in it? It is effectively Pluto Nash to you?

Davian93
12-03-2014, 02:05 PM
Argh.

Why is it always the extremes? You don't think it is as good as wrath of Khan. Fair enough. That doesn't make it a crap movie. You see no redeeming features in it? It is effectively Pluto Nash to you?

I dont like the complete rewrite of Wrath...it was a good movie overall but not a good ST movie.

Davian93
12-04-2014, 03:25 PM
Funniest Star Wars thing I've read in a while...

UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ATTACK: Was it an inside job?

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?

2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?

3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?

5) Why did Lord Vader decide to break all protocols and personally pilot a lightly armored TIE Fighter? Conveniently, this placed Lord Vader outside of the Death Star when it was destroyed, where he was also conveniently able to escape from a large-sized rebel fleet that had just routed the Imperial forces. Why would Lord Vader, one of the highest ranking members of the Imperial Government, suddenly decide to fly away from the Death Star in the middle of a battle? Did he know something that the rest of the Imperial Navy didn't?

6) How could any pilot shoot a missile into a 2 meter-wide exhaust port, let alone a pilot with no formal training, whose only claim to fame was his ability to "bullseye womprats" on Tatooine? This shot, according to one pilot, would be "impossible, even for a computer." Yet, according to additional evidence, the pilot who allegedly fired the missile turned off his targeting computer when he was supposedly firing the shot that destroyed the Death Star. Why have these discrepancies never been investigated, let alone explained?

7) Why has their been no investigation into evidence that the droids who provided the rebels with the Death Star plans were once owned by none other than Lord Vader himself, and were found, conveniently, by the pilot who destroyed the Death Star, and who is also believed to be Lord Vader's son? Evidence also shows that the droids were brought to one Ben Kenobi, who, records indicate, was Darth Vader's teacher many years earlier! Are all these personal connections between the conspirators and a key figure in the Imperial government supposed to be coincidences?

8) How could a single missile destroy a battle station the size of a moon? No records, anywhere, show that any battle station or capital ship has ever been destroyed by a single missile. Furthermore, analysis of the tape of the last moments of the Death Star show numerous small explosions along its surface, prior to it exploding completely! Why does all evidence indicate that strategically placed explosives, not a single missile, is what destroyed the Death Star?

9) And where was Emperor Palpatine when these events were unfolding? He was reading "The Pet Bantha" to a classroom of young Sith.

Nazbaque
12-04-2014, 08:22 PM
Well since we are going there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV7Ha3VDbzE

SauceyBlueConfetti
12-05-2014, 04:10 PM
Wait.


You misspelled SPOCK?


I just...no words

ShadowbaneX
12-05-2014, 05:16 PM
Monday morning. Deal with it.

Frenzy
12-05-2014, 09:56 PM
Let's ask Ihvon about it...

ShadowbaneX
12-05-2014, 10:02 PM
Sounds like a plan to me.

Ivhon
12-07-2014, 11:57 PM
"Spelling" - even the metasymbolic representation of "words" with squiggly "letters" itself - is a social construct that has no grounding in reality.

So.

Meh.

ShadowbaneX
12-08-2014, 12:01 AM
trust Ivhon. He knows what he's talking about.

Frenzy
12-08-2014, 03:20 AM
i adore how you scoff at silly spelling conventions. All i have to say, is wOw :p

GonzoTheGreat
12-08-2014, 04:26 AM
"Spelling" - even the metasymbolic representation of "words" with squiggly "letters" itself - is a social construct that has no grounding in reality.
As Thatcher taught us, there is no such thing as society, therefor the idea of social constructs is mere communist folderol. Which, I suppose, in turn means that Spelling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tori_Spelling) is actually real.

Nazbaque
12-08-2014, 04:35 AM
"Spelling" - even the metasymbolic representation of "words" with squiggly "letters" itself - is a social construct that has no grounding in reality.

So.

Meh.

Well Star Trek has no grounding in reality either. So spelling of its characters' names matters just as much as the show itself, which... would... be...

Oh. Right. Nevermind then.

suttree
12-08-2014, 12:16 PM
Classic. Wes Anderson presents the new Star Wars trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EJ6AmplD8g#t=47

Mort
12-09-2014, 05:39 AM
Yeah, I liked it a bit more the first time they made it...when it was called Wrath of Khan.

The entire movie was a 2 hour homage/ripoff of the original. Its not that hard to come up with original ideas you know.

The only saving grace of the movie is the sheer awesomeness that is Benedict Cumberbatch.

Classic. Wes Anderson presents the new Star Wars trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EJ6AmplD8g#t=47

More excited about that version actually :)

Ivhon
12-09-2014, 11:39 AM
i adore how you scoff at silly spelling conventions. All i have to say, is wOw :p

My little corner of postmodern deconstructionism.

SauceyBlueConfetti
12-09-2014, 01:12 PM
Truly. I guess it was blown out of proportion. My apologies to both of you.


I have been, and always shall be, your fiend.


:: snicker ::