Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I liked Interstellar. It definitely had some beautiful shots. But it never really wowed me. I got wowed at least every 10 minutes in TFA. Not only were the settings more striking, but Abrams is much better at framing a shot, putting characters in the setting, then doing fun things with the camera to just make it more visually interesting.
And really, much of Interstellar had a rather boring design. I know they were going for scientific accuracy, which was great. But the other planets they visited were just kinda ... meh. Nothing really striking.
And really, much of Interstellar had a rather boring design. I know they were going for scientific accuracy, which was great. But the other planets they visited were just kinda ... meh. Nothing really striking.
Different ball, different wax. Interstellar is more concerned with plausibility, and that's an aspect that is largely ignored in space opera films like Star Wars. That's why characters bounce from a desert planet to a forest planet to a large icy moon and finally to a waterworld where hermits reside on atolls.
JJ's a fine director, but I don't rate him above Nolan. I was watching Star Trek Into Darkness again last night and that film certainly demonstrates many a pitfall where direction and cinematography are both concerned. JJ was much more careful with The Force Awakens.
Different ball, different wax. Interstellar is more concerned with plausibility, and that's an aspect that is largely ignored in space opera films like Star Wars. That's why characters bounce from a desert planet to a forest planet to a large icy moon and finally to a waterworld where hermits reside on atolls.
JJ's a fine director, but I don't rate him above Nolan. I was watching Star Trek Into Darkness again last night and that film certainly demonstrates many a pitfall where direction and cinematography are both concerned. JJ was much more careful with The Force Awakens.
That's a good analysis.
Nolan certainly gives more attention to plausibility and explaining how characters get from A to B to C. I appreciate that.
Abrams final visuals are much more compelling, but he frequently ignores the ramifications or plausibility of what you're seeing onscreen.
I get the impression that both guys storyboard everything, then when someone asks, "Okay, but how does that work, and what are the consequences?" Nolan actually tries to come up with an answer, whereas Abrams says, "Who cares? As long as it looks good!"
The end result is that I find Abrams stuff MUCH more fun to watch, but Nolan's stuff certainly makes more sense. TFA was a beautiful thrill ride from beginning to end, but scarcely 20 minutes went by without another yawning plot hole.
The funny thing about Star Wars is how everyone zips around the cosmos like they're headed down a freeway. Everything feels so "provincial." C3P0 couldn't identify the map fragment BB8 held that supposedly pinpointed Luke's location, but once the rest of it was provided, it seemed like everyone went "Oh, yeah, merge onto the Stardust Fwy, third exit down, a right, then another right...and a left!" Then Rey and Chewie were there like nothin.'
In Star Trek, you get a better sense of distance, but like Star Wars, nobody ages in FTL travel. More or less, the same thing.
For Interstellar, Nolan initially wanted to convey FTL, but was talked out of it.
In spite of everything, I enjoyed The Force Awakens. It was a nice brew with something of everything, and it's the movie we should have gotten in '99. It made me give a crap about Star Wars again. I just want the next two movies to be more original and less inclined to fan-service.
The funny thing about Star Wars is how everyone zips around the cosmos like they're headed down a freeway. Everything feels so "provincial." C3P0 couldn't identify the map fragment BB8 held that supposedly pinpointed Luke's location, but once the rest of it was provided, it seemed like everyone went "Oh, yeah, merge onto the Stardust Fwy, third exit down, a right, then another right...and a left!" Then Rey and Chewie were there like nothin.'
In Star Trek, you get a better sense of distance, but like Star Wars, nobody ages in FTL travel. More or less, the same thing.
Yup.
Abrams has a history of ignoring established rules of a universe. He did it with Star Trek. Now he's doing it with Star Wars. Two points about TFA that really bugged me:
In the original trilogy, "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dustin' crops, boy!" It was dangerous and precise calculations were needed. In TFA, not only only do they never take time for precise calculations, but the Falcon leaves hyperspace in a planet's atmosphere.
And did they ever explain how Starkiller Base was able to travel from system to system? How do you move an entire planet through hyperspace? Was that ever explained in the movie? Did I miss it? Or was this just Abrams ignoring plausibility again?
What a waste of time and money. Seriously, if I wanted to see a movie with 1984 special effects, robots and bad acting, I could have just plopped the Empire Strikes Back DVD into my MacBook.
Silly me. I was expecting the advances in technology since the 1980s to produce a Star Wars movie that was actually awe-inspiring with its special effects. Instead, what we get with the Force Awakens is essentially a re-do of the very first Star Wars movie. Except the new young actors are nowhere near as good as Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford were. I am having a hard time deciding which of them was the worst actor, but Boyega has to be at the top of the list. The girl was decent at least.
Speaking of Harrison Ford, it is so obvious that the dude had zero enthusiasm for this new movie. His acting is REALLY bad, he can barely walk, much less run, and he just looks like he is having a miserable time being in this movie the whole time. Every time he was on the screen I just cringed. Same goes for Carrie Fisher.
Then, I was really looking forward to the last scene, which was supposedly so incredible.
It wasn’t.
If you want to blow 15 bucks sitting through a boring movie that looks and sounds like you are watching something from 1984, by all means run to the movie theater and see this film. But come on, Abrams, you could have infused some newness into the cinematography and effects. You could have casted some people who know how to act. You could have done something to spruce up BB8, undoubtedly one of THE lamest Star Wars sidekicks ever. This was simply JJ Abrams' re-do of the first movie, how he would have done it. And he would have done a crap job, in fact.
And I say this as someone who loved the first two Star Wars movies, especially TESB, arguably one of the best movies EVER.
Even Return of the Jedi was better than this crap.
Abrams has a history of ignoring established rules of a universe. He did it with Star Trek. Now he's doing it with Star Wars. Two points about TFA that really bugged me:
In the original trilogy, "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dustin' crops, boy!" It was dangerous and precise calculations were needed. In TFA, not only only do they never take time for precise calculations, but the Falcon leaves hyperspace in a planet's atmosphere.
That was nuts. Totally nuts. Visually cool, but nuts. They should have disintegrated against the mountain. I don't see how the First Order wouldn't have detected their entry, anyway. They apparently weren't that far from one of the main doors. Maybe the Stormtrooper who's usually at the security cam hub was in the crapper. LOL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
And did they ever explain how Starkiller Base was able to travel from system to system? How do you move an entire planet through hyperspace? Was that ever explained in the movie? Did I miss it? Or was this just Abrams ignoring plausibility again?
No, it wasn't explained. Obviously, it has to move, because I doubt they have the resources to keep building Starkillers on every planetoids that's conveniently situated next to a stars You'd also think, with such a wonder-weapon, and with what happened to two Death Stars, that they would make it decidedly more difficult to cripple or destroy the Starkiller, not to mention maintain a denser defensive force around the whole ice cube.
I also thought Finn's and Poe's escape from the hangar could have been choreographed better. The tether was hysterical. If you don't want something like that to slide, obviously a sliding arm or platform would lock it in place at the wings.
The funny thing about Star Wars is how everyone zips around the cosmos like they're headed down a freeway. Everything feels so "provincial." C3P0 couldn't identify the map fragment BB8 held that supposedly pinpointed Luke's location, but once the rest of it was provided, it seemed like everyone went "Oh, yeah, merge onto the Stardust Fwy, third exit down, a right, then another right...and a left!" Then Rey and Chewie were there like nothin.'
In Star Trek, you get a better sense of distance, but like Star Wars, nobody ages in FTL travel. More or less, the same thing.
For Interstellar, Nolan initially wanted to convey FTL, but was talked out of it.
In spite of everything, I enjoyed The Force Awakens. It was a nice brew with something of everything, and it's the movie we should have gotten in '99. It made me give a crap about Star Wars again. I just want the next two movies to be more original and less inclined to fan-service.
What you want is a movie based on "The Forever War," in which the time dilation effect is a major driver of the plot.
What you want is a movie based on "The Forever War," in which the time dilation effect is a major driver of the plot.
And I'd be anxious to see that movie.
Oh, hell, YES. I just mentioned this last week in the TV forum. A film or series based on that novel would be spectacular.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
