• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

Star Wars Episode VII - The Force Awakens (NON-SPOILER)

I didn't care for Thor, so I don't want Branagh touching Star Wars. I'll take almost any of the other Marvel movie directors over him.
 
I thought parts of Thor were boring but from a visual standpoint I thought it was some of the more spectacular CGI. Purple everywhere. If the script is written and the director is there to direct visual styles and acting (he brought out good acting in thor) I'd be fine with him. He was great in Shackleton too.
 
My only problem with "Marvel directors" so far, is that their superheroes movies all look a bit too clean. I mean it's logic because they're using tons of CGI, but pretty much all the "Avengers" movies look like great super deluxe TV series. They are great fun, but the only Marvel movie that somehow looks a bit better or a bit more like good old cinema is, IMO, Captain America by Johnston. Maybe it's also because the movie takes place in 1942, I don't know. But it looked not as clean and more old school than Favreau - Branagh - Whedon's movies.
So my vote goes to Johnston.
 
Yeah, Captain America looked the best out of all of them. I think Johntson was just able to use the period setting more for his aesthetic. Joss Whedon didn't have that option, because 1) the story wasn't set in the 1940s, and 2) since this was a team-up movie, he had to use the same aesthetic for everyone.

Mind you, Johntson made The Rocketeer back in the day. That was a superhero movie set in the 1940s, but it didn't have nearly as good of an aesthetic. Johntson has clearly grown as a filmmaker.

So, while I'm saying that the lack of a distinct aesthetic isn't Whedon's fault, I'm not saying that he should direct. He's got his hands full with the MCU, and I think Johntson will do a terrific job.
 
Disappointing but expected. I think he said something similar awhile back. Besides, if he was working on Trek and Wars at the same time, one would ultimately suffer (or both). Anyway, might as well give someone else a chance.
 
Yeah, he said he wouldn't do it a while back. The main news point here is that he was, in fact, approached.

I think he made the right decision. Bryan Singer left X-Men to do Superman, and we got a bad X-Men movie *and* a bad Superman movie out of it. Best for Abrams to just see a full, satisfying Trek trilogy through to the end, and let someone else handle Star Wars.
 
TomH1138 said:
I think he made the right decision. Bryan Singer left X-Men to do Superman, and we got a bad X-Men movie *and* a bad Superman movie out of it. Best for Abrams to just see a full, satisfying Trek trilogy through to the end, and let someone else handle Star Wars.
Click to expand...

I will agree X-Men 3 was terrible, but Superman Returns wasn't bad IMO. Great? No, but definitely not bad.
 
I don't think he was approached or offered the movie, that article is misleading. He declined INVOLVEMENT early on. We do know he was mailed some sort of script at the beginning. Also, how did that story suddenly become news again a month later.
 
Q2 said:
I will agree X-Men 3 was terrible, but Superman Returns wasn't bad IMO. Great? No, but definitely not bad.
Click to expand...

Concur.

And yes, it's typically better when the original director sticks with a series through all of its movies...... except, well....... you know............. in the case of Star Wars.
 
I say either Johnston or Jon Favreau. At the very least, the first film would be good. :p


But seriously, if we return to the "good vs. evil" aspect of Star Wars, add in Favreau's knack for characterization and we could get something good. Plus, Harrison Ford's said that he's open to doing Star Wars 7, so it'd be nice to see Favreau get a second try with him after Cowboys and Aliens. ;-)
 
Nic Stiz said:
I say either Johnston or Jon Favreau. At the very least, the first film would be good. :p


But seriously, if we return to the "good vs. evil" aspect of Star Wars, add in Favreau's knack for characterization and we could get something good. Plus, Harrison Ford's said that he's open to doing Star Wars 7, so it'd be nice to see Favreau get a second try with him after Cowboys and Aliens. ;-)
Click to expand...


I don't know - to me Cowboys and Aliens showed that Favreau has good intentions but no idea what to cut and what to trim or what characters are just caricatures and should be dropped (i.e. annoying little kid)

I think the abrams quote is mostly there to get trekkies(ers) on his side who feel that he is making star trek into star wars and now he tries to get even more old fans on board for his sequel
 
Q2 said:
I will agree X-Men 3 was terrible, but Superman Returns wasn't bad IMO. Great? No, but definitely not bad.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But it wasn't the great return to the form that re-launched the franchise, as everyone hoped it would be. That's why there are so many fan edits of it, and why Warner's is going with a reboot instead of a sequel to Returns.
 
To be fair though, Cowboys and Aliens didn't have a screenplay that played to his strengths. The film credited 5 writers, two of them being Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman. Honestly, the movies they worked on that got a lot of praise were Mission Impossible 3 and Star Trek, and all those movies prove is that J.J. Abrams is a good enough director. There other writing credits include Transformers (okay), Transformers 2, Zorro 2005, and The Island (not so much). Those movies (along with C&A) is that there's no clear character motivation, but when you hand Favreau a script with clear character motivation (Iron Man , Elf, Zathura) then you get decent to good movies.
 
Aaaaaand I officially don't care until any real announcement is made.
 
161016_slide.jpg
 
To quote the late, great DeForest Kelly: "That's not very damn funny."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom