All those frivolous CGI background characters take time to render!
Lol. Perhaps they need to buy a bunch of maxed out Mac Pros to speed things along.
All those frivolous CGI background characters take time to render!
Disney might actually make this good.
http://www.theverge.com/tldr/2014/11/3/7150431/star-wars-episode-7-farewell-letter-from-jj-abramsTo the Extraordinary Cast and Crew of Episode VII:
It is a true honor and absolute joy to come to set every day and work alongside each of you. Your professionalism, passion, and patience is more deeply appreciated than we could ever express. From the deserts of Abu Dhabi, to the Forest of Dean, to the stages of Pinewood, you have risen to every challenge and been as wonderfully kind as you are brilliantly talented. Our ambition here is large, of course, and it must be: we are here to make a film that entertains millions of people, of all ages, for generations. To create an experience people will cherish watching as much as we will cherish having made it, together. How lovely it would be if you had, in addition to your name on the screen, some actual, real, tangible proof that you were part of it! Here, then, is that proof. Wear it well, wear it healthily, wear it proudly. But, mostly, thank you.
With love,
J.J. Abrams, Kathleen Kennedy, Bryan Burke
Never heard of any of these so-called actors.
Star Wars is about Star Wars, not A list movie stars
After seeing the teaser trailer, it looks like Star Wars will get the same Abrams-izing that Star Trek did. Saw the first one in 77; won't be seeing the new one.
After seeing the teaser trailer, it looks like Star Wars will get the same Abrams-izing that Star Trek did. Saw the first one in 77; won't be seeing the new one.
A pretty good job for an otherwise horribly written character perhaps. (not Kahn himself, but that movie's portrayal of Khan)I can't tell that by watching the trailer. Not to argue with you, but of the Star Trek movies of which I've seen all of them, before Abhrams they mostly suck. For the first Star Trek movie they had to establish the ST ecosystem. It was very entertaining, but I'd rather see new stories, than repeat stories like Khan although Cumberbatch did a pretty good, mesmerizing job.
A pretty good job for an otherwise horribly written character perhaps. (not Kahn himself, but that movie's portrayal of Khan)
I agree that the earlier movies were hit and miss. Star Trek II and VI are still the best. IV and First Contact are decent. III was a mess, but had some redeemable characteristics. The rest honestly aren't worth re-watching IMO. Now regarding the Abrams movies... eh, they're watchable. I just felt that the first one was bogged down with "teenage drama" BS, and while Into Darkness started out strong, it quickly devolved into a mindless action flick. (Star Trek is a series centered exploring morality and issues such as prejudice, NOT SHOOTING BIG GUNS!)
Now Star Wars is a much more action-oriented series than Star Trek. As such I'm not as critical with the choice of Abrams to direct it.
Didn't James Earl Jones character die in episode VI? If he appears as a ghost neither of the two actors were James Earl Jones!
So how is it a given?
but that didn't prevent him (and Alec Guiness, IIRC) from showing up in a hokey heartwarming ghost scene
Yoda might get a stand alone movie at some point. More of a back story into Yoda.I'm hoping they make a clean break from from some of the characters like Yoda. Don't get me wrong, I liked in him in the movies, but I agree, he's dead in Episode 6, so lets have some new (and different) characters.
The reboot of the universe, where vulcan was destroyed by a time traveling Romulan. I think he could have been true to the older series without such antics.
The second movie was ok, except it was a complete and utter ripoff of the wrath of khan. If you're going to reboot the entire series, why copy a storyline.
But will it have the obnoxious wipe cuts.Thanks to Abrams .... Star Wars 7: Return of the Lens Flare