The First Trailer for the New Star Wars Trilogy Is Here and It's Great


The first film in the new Star Wars trilogy, The Force Awakens, won't be about for another year, but you can see the trailer today. It's got rolling droids, Storm Troopers, X-Wings, and a nifty new lightsaber. It's great. Really, really great. 

Watch it below: 

Low-flying X-Wings on a misty river. Yes. 

I've been somewhat skeptical about this project. Another trilogy? By J.J. Abrams? The same guy whose last film was an awful Star Trek reboot sequel? But I'm slowly being won over. 

NWF Daily News

I suspect part of the reason is that, in contrast to the last Star Wars trilogy, the filmmakers and producers are actually paying attention to the audience this time around. They're aware that the prequels were poorly received, and that fans are skeptical. Part of that is the transition in creative leadership. The prequels were made by George Lucas, the creator of the original trilogy, who, with a few exceptions, often seemed uncomfortable with, if not outright dismissive of, the incredibly intense fanbase that grew up around his creation. And the prequels reflected that; watching them, you often got the sense that Lucas didn't really want to make the movies, but that if he was going to make them, he was going to make them his way, giving the fans what he was interested in. 

Since then, the Star Wars universe has been sold to Disney, which isn't bound up in the same sort of decades-old creator/fan relationship as Lucas. So you get a more straightforward, confident attempt to give fans something they might actually want to see, rather than, as with the prequels, something that the creator thought they should see. In some sense, the Star Wars franchise, which helped create both modern fandom and the contemporary Hollywood blockbuster, has been handed off to the fans. Yes, it's been bought by a giant corporate entertainment behemoth, determined to make as much money off the brand as possible, but the people involved in the film all grew up in a fan and film universe shaped by Star Wars, and the key creators on the new trilogy are all Star Wars geeks. They've all seen Star Wars invaded and shaped pop culture, and at this point they probably have a better sense of why it works and why people love it than Lucas does.

As with The Avengers franchise, what you're seeing here is a sort of pop-culture transfer of power to fans—or at the very least, a recognition that as these series and franchises have grown up and expanded and become part of the pop culture firmament, fans have become part of the story too. 

NEXT: May government reject political ads from its property, because it concludes they're false?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I refuse to get worked up over teaser trailers, as they deliberately lack sufficient information to make an assessment of the film.

    I’ve even seen some made entirely from footage not in the final product.

    1. J.J. Abrams is usually ok, so I doubt it will be absolutely awful like the prequel trilogy. On the other hand, it probably won’t be great either.

      1. I disagree with your assessment of “usually ok”.

        The only reason he hasn’t been exposed as a hack to most fans of film and TV is that in his biggest failures, he bailed out of the project before everyone caught on to his gimmicks and someone else got the blame for the mess he left behind.

        J.J. Abrams sucks.

    2. Fuck JJ Abrams. That is all.

      1. Also fuck Star Wars.

  2. How do you get a black storm trooper when they’re all supposed to be clones of Jango Fett?

    1. I thought that was only the Old Republic’s clone troopers?

    2. According to the fandom collections of data, they moved away from clone troopers to regular recruitment because A: Clones age out too fast (the abbreviated lifecycle makes them live half as long) and normal recruits are cheaper (since they don’t have to be supported from birth to enlistment by the army)

      1. Their terrible aim makes a lot more sense if they’re poorly trained conscripts rather than clones of a badass trained from birth.

        1. That, and you can’t see for shit out of those helmets that seem to offer no protection.

          1. That’s why the black guy at the start was so panicked. He’s a minority in stormtrooper armor, his only hope to survive is to get named-character status as soon as possible.

            1. That’s also probably why he took off his helmet.

              You’re more likely to live if the audience can empathize with you as a human rather than a faceless goon.

      2. That makes sense.

      3. Or you know it is some other dude in a storm trooper uniform just like Luke and Han put in in the first film.

        1. BTW $10 says that dude is Lando’s Son

    3. I am so, so, so disappointed that I have to make the “We ain’t found shit” joke for all of you.

  3. The prequels were made by George Lucas, the creator of the original trilogy, who, with a few exceptions, often seemed uncomfortable with, if not outright dismissive of, the incredibly intense fanbase that grew up around his creation. And the prequels reflected that; watching them, you often got the sense that Lucas didn’t really want to make the movies, but that if he was going to make them, he was going to make them his way, giving the fans what he was interested in the fans would empty their wallets no matter what he put out so there was no need to get out of his chair.


  4. ‘Nifty’ new lightsaber looks pretty damn silly. But I don’t watch Star Wars for realistic sword play.

    1. Right now I can invision one of the writers arguing for a saber with three full-length blases and having the rest of the staff have to negotiate him down to just quillons instead.

      1. Yeah, I’ll let it pass because ‘Rule of Cool’ but clearly the writers have no idea what quillons were for.

        Also, everyone seems to be flying their spaceships really low to the ground for some reason.

        1. Also, everyone seems to be flying their spaceships really low to the ground for some reason.

          They were students of Cruise’s character from ‘Top Gun’ and don’t know what altitude is for.

        2. Also, everyone seems to be flying their spaceships really low to the ground for some reason.

          Orders came through. Coming in from the north, below their radar.

          1. One of the all-time funniest films.

        3. Because flying close to the ground give you a perception of speed. And fast is cool!

        4. ” the writers have no idea what quillons were for.”

          Oh god shut the fuck up already, no one cares and you haven’t seen the movie yet. You don’t even know they ARE quillons, what or how they’re used in lightsaber combat, and whether they make sense.

          You people are so fucking tiresome. Like idiot uncivilservant stupidly wondering why in the three fucking second clip, we don’t get the context of why the guy lit it in the woods.

          What a stupid fucking attempt at smarkyness.

          1. Calm the fuck down?

            I’m just busting the movie’s balls, Star Wars has always been stupid, silly fun not meant to be taken too seriously. You know, the movie about the space hairdresser and the cowboy who save the universe with teddy bears.

          2. Hmmmm… This guy seems to think that the lightsaber is stupid without a hand guard:

            Yes, I know, I want one too. But I tell you what: I want one with a hand guard. Otherwise every lightsaber battle would consist of sabers clashing and then their owners sliding as quickly as possible down the shaft to lop off their opponent’s fingers. You say: Lightsabers can slice through anything but another lightsaber, so what are you going to make a hand guard out of? I say: Dude, if you have the technology to make a lightsaber, you have the technology to make a light hand guard.


            1. Simple fix – dual crossguards – upper crossguard made of saber beams, lower made of metal to prevent the user’s hand from slipping up against the upper crossguard.

            2. I, too, have been bothered by this since I was a young child and tried sword fighting with brooms.

            3. John Scalzi for the win.

              1. Yeah, but too bad Scalzi has turned into (or turned out to be) a total SJW groupie.

          3. What a stupid fucking attempt at smarkyness.

            Talk about projection!

    2. Also, why did he wander out into an empty forest to light up the saber?

      My mind is filling in an internal monologue for the character….

      “Sheesh, ‘No playing with your laser sword in the house.’ It’s not a ‘laser sword’, mom. Just because I cut the house droid in half a I gotta go out into the woods to practice. And don’t pretend you didn’t want a window in that wall…”

      1. His day job is clearly as a lumberjack. Killing Jedi just doesn’t pay the bills anymore, and the Empire cancelled his pension.

          1. You’re both the worst example of people who comment on this.

            1. If you can’t have fun, don’t try to spoil it for the rest of us.

            2. Oh no, suddenly I’m not allowed to have an opinion on a silly movie franchise because I’m a snarky bastard!

            3. Somebody is new here.

              And where in the hell is Jar Jar Binks?

              It can’t be terrible without him.

              1. Somebody is new here.

                It’s She Who Shall Not Be Named, you idiots.

              2. I think Jar Jar sinks to such a terrible low that it’s not even visible from the on going list of logic fails.

            4. The Whole Truth: Star Wars sucks. It always has and always will. This trailer does nothing to change my mind on that, and people here are just pointing that out. Picard would wipe the floor with Luke Skywalker’s moppy hair after he shoved it up his ass.

              1. I don’t see how people regard those franchises as mutually exclusive fandoms. They’re both wildly successful children’s entertainment.

              2. Muad’Dib would mind-fuck Picard so hard he’s grow hair.

                1. If I recall from the Lynch version, they were on the same side…

                  1. Hell, Gurney Halleck could probably kick Picard’s ass. But you’d never know who won.

                2. Stop with your Islamophobia. Besides, Picard is the most powerful telepath in the world. Murka Diba or whoever wouldn’t stand a chance.

                  1. Muad’Dib got pre-destination on his side. Even if Picard kicks his ass, it’s all according to plan.

                    1. Until they decide they need to reboot the series and fuck with the timeline.

                      Come to think of it, it’s remarkable that they haven’t rebooted Star Wars yet.

                    2. Technically… this is a soft reboot, they jettissoned a lot of the baggage from the canon. (Makes me happier, since much of that piled up from just awful tripe)

                    3. Technically they kind of are I think. I have no idea what the Expanded Universe is like but apparently that’s a thing that’s been going on for years that could be rendered non-canon by this movie.

                    4. The high point was also the start. Timothy Zahn wrote a trilogy that was great, then quality just kept slipping as other installments were added. It got to the point of absurdity, where even the sympathetic among us would look down on the ravening hordes still buying the crap with pity and order them purged by fire for their own sake.

                    5. Its all already been rendered non-canon. Disney’s pretty explicitly jettisoned the cruft. And they seem to be pretty unconcerned with the concept of ‘canon’ in the first place, so we’ll see how that goes.

                  2. Paul Muad’ib is the most powerful telepath (and precog) in the known *universe*.

              3. Why would you mop the floor with someone’s freshly-shit covered hair?

            5. Hey! I’m supposed to be the humorless fuck here.

  5. This trailer did almost nothing for me. I think the prequel trilogy and especially all the pointless tinkering with the original trilogy has rendered me incapable of getting excited about Star Wars ever again.

      1. I don’t understand. A-are you trying to say my comment was overwrought, badly acted, and more concerned with CGI flash than story substance?

        1. All three

          1. Good call, my young padawan.

  6. Better than the fake trailer, but not much there. Getting too tired of hype-formula-hiatus cycle of pop culture. Development hell seems to produce very few new ideas.

  7. Leilafair . you think Allen `s comment is astonishing, on friday I bought a gorgeous Aston Martin DB5 when I got my cheque for $8527 this past month and just over ten grand this past-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the most-financialy rewarding I have ever had . I began this 8-months ago and practically straight away began to earn at least $72, per hour .
    Published here ????????? ??????????

  8. Re: the opening sequence of Episode IV, from Plinkett: “In fact, this is so genius, I have a feeling that George Lucas had nothing to do with it and probably fought against putting it in the move”.

    1. I hope Abrams watched Plinkett. He destroyed these movies with sharp, constructive criticism. His takedown of the third, which the critics went for, was particularly good.

    2. “This new trailer is so dense, every frame has so much going on…”

      I’m looking forward to the RedLetterMedia review of Episode 7 (even if it’s only Half in the Bag, not Plinkett) more than I’m looking forward to the movie itself.

  9. Lens flares missing. Sure this is Abrams?

    1. Someone at Disney probably hit him with the lens-flare generator and broke it.

    2. There’s a lens flare in the Millennium Falcon scene. Also lens flare comments were never funny.

      1. Dah! Should have hit refresh first.

    3. 1) It’s only 98 seconds long.

      2) 1:04.

  10. That was teh awesome!

    What a bunch of cynics here.

    1. I didn’t see much to get worked up over. Basically it said “We’re a Star Wars Movie!”, which we already knew.

      1. I think because the lack of dialog and previous actors implied that it’s starting new and shying away from the crap we’ve come to expect.

  11. The same guy whose last film was an awful Star Trek reboot sequel?

    Star Trek Into Darkness wasn’t The Godfather, sure, but it was a perfectly fine film.

    1. +1. The only thing that really dragged the Abrams Trek movies down was the presence of Fossil Spock.

      1. I could deal with it in the first one, but old Spock should not have been in the second one. It makes it as if the crew cannot solve their own problems.

    2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is the greatest movie ever made. Star Trek Into Darkness was an abomination on almost every level.

      1. It says a lot that Abrams blatantly taking as much as he could from Wrath of Khan still only slightly improved his product.

        1. It says that it was already so good, it could hardly be improved.

          1. Your opinions have been noted on Star Trek before, and disregarded.

            1. I have committed the sin of seeing things without nostalgia-goggles.

              1. Yes, because no one could possibly have different taste than you, Cytotoxic, Arbitor of All That Is Good In Movies. Arrogant idiot.

                1. They can have different taste. It’s just almost certain to be inferior taste.

              2. No nostalgia about it…if you watch both movies, Wrath of Khan is to Journey Into Darkness what The Matrix (first one) is to Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever. Journey Into Darkness was an Uwe Boll film with a budget.

            2. Your opinions have been noted on Star Trek before, and disregarded.

              This also works.

      2. I thought Armageddon was the greatest movie ever made?

        1. Armageddon would have been the greatest movie ever made, if they left Ben Affleck on that asteroid.

          1. Armageddon would have been the greatest movie ever made, if they left Ben Affleck on that asteroid the cutting room floor.


      3. How can a great movie star one the shittiest actors-Shatner-ever on screen?

        1. Eat a dick, Mr. “I Never Watched Boston Legal”.

          Most people who think Shatner is a horrible actor are basing their judgment off of parodies of Shatner’s acting, not the actual work he did.

    3. but it was a perfectly fine film.

      The first one was awesome. The second was good.

      And if Siskel and Ebert want to bust on it for lens flares they can kiss my big, fat, white ass!

      1. Star Trek Into Darkness was an abomination on almost every level.

          1. Never compare my mother to an Abrams film.

        1. No it wasn’t. Stop being butthurt about Abrams putting every Trek-related before him to shame.

          1. All I read was Abrams and shame.

    4. THANK YOU. Suderman’s taste in film is just offensive. Get over it trekkies: Abrams did it better.

      1. The first Abrams Star Trek movie was good.

        The second was completely terrible. It’s not even bad compared to Wrath of Khan – it’s just an awful movie. The writing is bad and it makes no sense.

        When you make me hate a movie with Benedict Cumberbatch in it you should be ashamed.

        1. There was nothing wrong with STID after the admittedly stupid first 15 minutes. The problem must be with you.

        2. I agree that the first Abram’s movie was good.

          However, I wouldn’t classify the second as terrible, instead it struck me as mediocre. It’s a pretty basic modern block buster with minimal dialog (with a lot jokes thrown in) and maximal fast action scenes.

          Generally speaking, most of the Star Trek movies weren’t that good. Outside of Wrath of Khan, none of the Star Trek movies were nearly as good as the original 3 Star Wars movies. However, the characters from the TV shows were so good in their own right, that the movies tend to hit above their weight, just because it’s a chance to see those characters in action.

          I think that leads to the dichotomy of why someone that grew up watching the various TV shows, tends to like the Star Trek movies and why someone that never much watched them, tends to not like the Star Trek movies.

          Also, Star Wars was always space cowboy fantasy, whereas Star Trek was harder science fiction.

          1. Star Trek (and I’ve always loved it) was never ‘harder science fiction’ (no matter how their PR teams tried to spin it), even compared to Star Wars.

            Star Trek is full-on shit science and techno-bable and the later series devolved into ‘oh no something horrible is happening’ at the begining of the episode and is resolved by ‘turn on the thingammy and reverse the polarity of the whoozit and that should solve everything. Brilliant idea ENS Whogivesashit – I should have though of that myself, what with my decades of experience but your the best and brightestest in the whole galaxy’.

            Star Trek is good *drama* and ‘humanist’ fiction with a sci-fi candy coating to make it go down well for the masses.

  12. It’s hard to get excited about the 7th movie in a series in which only the first two were any good. It’s like the triumph of hope over experience.

    1. On the upside, the movies you said weren’t aany good were those where the recently removed creative head was given the most free reign. With a different team, the chances of it being redeemed are nonzero.

      1. Part of me would like to see it be redeemed. But the other part if me enjoys mocking Star Wars fanboys. So either way it’s a win.

    2. Return of the Jedi definitely had its shortcomings, but Luke’s super-calm rejection of the dark side in Palpatine’s face was the greatest payoff in the history of cinema. Everything that Luke had faced for two and three-fourths movies came down to that one scene, and he knocked it out.

      “Never. I’ll never turn to the Dark Side. You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

      1. I like Return of the Jedi. Most criticisms seem to come down to “Ewoks suck”.

        1. It was definitely the weakest of the trilogy but it had its moments-none of them feature Ewoks. The editing got pretty bad, and I really did not like the resolution with Darth Vader and Luke. The space battle was awesome though.

        2. “I like Return of the Jedi. Most criticisms seem to come down to “Ewoks suck”.”

          I’d modify that slightly: a) Ewoks suck and b) You built a trillion dollar massive space ship with the same fucking defect that got the first one blown up? Really?

          1. Uhm, they didn’t so that second thing.

            Even the movie *itself* references that the shields are better – not allowing fighters in while they’re up (which is why they were used in the first) and requiring the team to go to Endor to bring the shield down.

            And the MF flew down an opening that was only there due to the ongoing construction. I can’t really hold that against the Empire.

      2. “I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

        Except his father did turn to the dark side, so that’s fucking stupid, and destroys the idea that it’s the greatest payoff at all. It’s Luke being naive and dumb.

        1. That’s all part of Luke’s psychological ploy – one he can pull off because he remains calm and rational throughout (most of) the ordeal.

          Notice how Palpatine is taunting him the whole time – that sequence is as much a mind-fuck contest between Palpatine and Luke as it is a lightsaber fight between Vader and Luke.

          Its at *that* point that Luke show his Vader his strength of will and turns his father *back* into a jedi.

          Its subtle shit like that, that makes the 2nd and 3rd films awesome (the first is a good sci-fi romp but its not a deep film) – and its their lack that makes the prequels blow.

  13. JJ Abrams is probably a hell of a lot better fit for Star Wars than Star Trek. The Star Trek movies, outside of a few (The first one, Wrath of Khan, that Whale Rescue One, etc.) have always had the problem of going for too much action and not enough substance, and Abrams’ style just exacerbates the problem.

    As a friend put it: “Star Trek is about a bunch of different coloured, snobby people going ‘the fucking engine’s broke’ and trying to fix it while having first year philosophy lectures”. Star Wars is a lot more suited to Abrams’ action driven style than Star Trek’s much slower movements.

    1. “Star Trek is about a bunch of different coloured, snobby people going ‘the fucking engine’s broke’ and trying to fix it while having first year philosophy lectures”

      That would explain why it fucking sucked so much before Abrams rescued it.

      1. We get it Cytotoxic, you like the new movies and hate old Trek. Good for you.

        1. But now everyone has to agree with me!

          1. Fortunately we’re not a colossal hive mind of arrogance.

            1. Colossal Hive Mind of Arrogance….and that’s going to be the name of my new hair salon.

              1. Pretty sick band name actually.

              2. I’d tender it to ‘Bleeding Heart Libertarians’ as a potential name-change first.

  14. It is hard to even remember the feeling now, but the trailers for Phantom Menace were fabulous and very exciting. The worlds looked really good, for all you could tell the plot was going to be cracking. And then came one train wreck after another. So we will see.

    1. Yes, this is true. The trailer to PM was the best thing about the movie.

  15. Oh for fuck’s sake. Another SW trilogy? *sigh*

    My wife is going to drag me to see it and you nerds will have endless discussions about it which I will have to scroll past.


    1. Embrace the lunacy, Suthenboy, It’s mindless escapism and supposed to just be fun. It breaks down when you think too hard about it.

    2. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate.. to suffering.

      (Yes I’m aware this entire line of thought is stupid)

    3. Now you know how some of us feel during football season.

    4. I yield to no one in the dislike of nerds, but shouldn’t someone who obviously married one like start to adapt.

      1. There are things one has to put up with if one wishes to bang a chick who will enthusiastically dress up as Leia.

        1. Are we talking RotJ Leia or A New Hope Leia? The cinnamon roll hair bun doesn’t do it for me but she is pretty hot in a bikini and chains.

    5. “My wife is going to drag me to see it and…”

      Clearly your better half.

      1. Yeah, they’ve got some sort of odd gender role reversal thing going on.

  16. I’m way more excited about the next Avengers movie than I am about the next Star Wars movie.

    1. Either way, your money goes to the mouse.

  17. While you’re reading breathless blogs about police atrocities, help yourself to a bottle of Coca-Cola. That bubbly, refreshing goodness is just the thing for fighting empire, counter-trolling racists, or just chilling with friends, noontime, teatime, anytime. Have a coke and a smile!

    1. Regular Coke? I can’t drink that syrup.

      1. So? Water it down with some whiskey or rum.

        1. Wouldn’t that be “booze it down”.

  18. Having recently watched the original three movies with my son, I now wish the whole “franchise” would die a thousand deaths. Viewed with jaded eyes I found the old movies just plain mediocre. But it is the fan boys that mostly annoy me.

    1. My wife never saw them until I forced her to sit down and watch the first three in a row. I’ll admit, there were definitely some moments where nostalgia had obviously been doing some great editing of the films in my memory.

    2. The original trilogy was only great compared to the craptastic movies that were the norm in the 1970s.

      1. There were a lot of fine ’70s movies: Taxi Driver, A Clockwork Orange, Chinatown, Deliverance, The French Connection, The Sting, The Conversation, Jaws, Animal House, Alien, Close Encounters, Apocalypse Now, The Godfather….

  19. Considering how atrocious everything post-Empire Strikes Back from Lucas has been, I think Abrams can only improve. As long as he bears in mind that the movies will be infinitely improved by omitting the comic relief for five-year-olds, things should be fine.

    1. Last crusade.

  20. I don’t understand how Abrams has any kind of notoriety. He has made some adequate TV series. He can do special effects. Whoop de shit. Am I out of touch for thinking that there should be more to a movie than how loud and shiny it is? Is loud and shiny just par for the course in action movies here on out?

    1. “Loud and shiny” has been the central theme of most modern day ‘summer blockbuster’ movies. And it works, to some extent (see: most of Michael Bay’s filmography and movie revenue).

      1. I actually prefer Michael Bay in theory, (although I haven’t seen one of his movies in several years) because he doesn’t seem as pretentious as Abrams. He knows he’s about the special effects and he owns it. Abrams doesn’t seem to know that he’s only about the effects, he always thinks he’s making some grandiose point which rings hollow (see: Lost, Super 8) He’s full of himself.

        1. As UnCivilServant mentions, Abrams has never had a major flop. Even his gimicky as shit stuff like Cloverfield has always at least partially succeeded. That, and getting things like the Star Trek license, probably goes to the man’s head a bit.

          1. That’s because when his creations blow up and get exposed for how empty they are, he’s long since bailed on the project and left someone else holding the bag.

            I’d compare Abrams to Joel Schumacher…a guy who built a rep off of a couple of good films, and then coasted on that rep for years, turning out shit.

        2. I actually prefer Michael Bay in theory, (although I haven’t seen one of his movies in several years) because he doesn’t seem as pretentious as Abrams. He knows he’s about the special effects and he owns it.

          Okay, now you’re just talking crazy. Michael Bay couldn’t make a movie about robots without thinly veiled racism and one of his robots inexplicably had swinging metal testicles.

          There is nothing worse than Michael Bay.

          1. At least you know what you’re getting when you watch a Michael Bay movie, that is, lowest common denominator bullshit. I didn’t go into Pearl Harbor expecting an accurate World War 2 period piece, I went into it expecting lots of MURICA, FUCK YEAH moments, laughably dumb character arcs and EXPLOSIONS. At least Bay seems somewhat aware that he’s a hack.

            1. JJ Abram never made the audience look at robo-testicles or robots that are nothing but walking black stereotypes.

              There’s admitting you’re a hack and being a hack of the Bay variety.

              1. Yes, Abrams does not have that sin at least, but he also encouraged the SHAKY CAM genre with Cloverfield and made Star Trek even dumber than when Roddenberry was in control. His sins are his own.

                1. Shaky cam was happening way before Cloverfield (not a good movie but very entertaining) and he MADE START TREK WATCHABLE.

                  1. Hence ‘encouraged’ and again, your opinion on Star Trek has been noted and disregarded.

                    1. Shaky cam is nowhere near as bad as robo-testicles.

                    2. Fair enough, I’m just saying, Abrams has his issues, and he doesn’t wear them on his sleeves. Bay at least does that, even if he is the hackiest of hacks.

            2. The Rock and Armageddon are works of schlock-art

              I honestly think its Jerry Bruckheimer who brought the core ‘entertaining’ aspects to the early Bay films

              I don’t think he’s had anything to do with him since the 1990s and consequently his movies are dull CGI-orgies intended to make a billion $ in Asia even if no American ever sees it.

              1. Armageddon is legitimately one of the most brilliantly dumb movies ever made. It’s like someone was trying to kill NASA engineers with media.

                1. I admit to enjoying both The Rock and Armageddon.

                  Things got pretty dark for Bay after that.

            3. this sums up M. Bay MUCH better…


          2. I’m late returning to this, oh well. Michael Bay’s films are schlocky crap, however I actually detest that less than pretentious crap. But I agree that his films are worth all of the criticism they get.

        3. he always thinks he’s making some grandiose point which rings hollow (see: Lost)

          He directed the pilot and co-wrote it. Other than producing the series, LOST was almost all Lindelof/Cuse.

    2. It’s not so much that he’s been a spectacular success, but that he’s not been a spectacular failures. He isn’t carrying around any major flops, so the studios see him as a ‘safe’ option.

    3. To be fair, the original Star Wars was the first ‘loud and shiny’ movie, where special effects became an important part of the movie.

      1. True. I wasn’t alive when the originals came out, but people were probably complaining then too. I’m not against special effects, but I don’t think they should carry a movie.

      2. What about the original King Kong?

    4. WHAT??!
      /Michael Bay

    5. The first Star Trek movie was good fun and Super 8 is a solid Spielberg ripoff.

      He’s a capable director. He’s just hit or miss.

      1. “The first Star Trek movie was good fun “

        Do you mean the one where the child-Kirk steals a corvette while they play AC/DC? That’s when i vomited and turned it off. I presume you’re saying ‘it got better’

        1. Yes it got better. STID also got better after the beginning. You made a foolish choice.

          1. Oh, right. You’re the one who liked that movie. A lot.

            I have a vague recollection that people here agree with your foreign policy hawkishness more often than they do with your taste in film

            1. A lot of libertarians have a weird affection for the schlock they grew up with. I’m here to save them from themselves. Your welcome.

              1. Your welcome what?

                *runs away*

    6. He made Star Trek watchable.

  21. Aweful Star Trek reboot? Really?

  22. I’ve been somewhat skeptical about this project. Another trilogy? By J.J. Abrams? The same guy whose last film was an awful Star Trek reboot sequel? But I’m slowly being won over.

    Given that JJ Abrams is the guy who took a Star Trek movie and tried to turn it into a Star Wars movie, he probably should have been doing Star Wars to begin with.

    Plus, Abrams seems to want to make the movie look at least moderately realistic instead of the video game aesthetic Lucas had for the prequel trilogy, so it’s a guarantee these are going to be better than those shitty movies.

    Also, the writing and acting cannot conceivably be worse than the prequel trilogy. There’s just no way.

  23. meesa been hurt before; meesa maintain low expectations

    1. I once texted the squeeze “meesa horny”. I didn’t get laid that night.

      1. I’m surprised you ever got laid again.

      2. That no one ever did a Jar Jar Banks remix is reason for belated thanks

        1. Then no one will ever get laid. Ever again.

  24. I’m going full retard on special effects this evening with my day-after-Thanksgiving tradition of putting up the twinkly lights and watching The Polar Express. So there.

  25. Are we going to talk about that picture of Suderman or what?

    1. Holy shit! I didn’t even realize that was him until your comment.

      1. Nor did I, you can barely read the caption in the image.

      2. I would say that it’s good Suderman’s gotten cooler since he was 17, but he writes for a libertarian magazine so that’s kind of debatable.

        1. Counterpoint: We’re here.

          1. I’m not.

            I’m at work. I’m just snarking here because the day after Thanksgiving is dead at my job (too many people take the day off).

        2. Yeah, I’m thinking Suderman still has that get-up in his closet, ready for the premier of VII.

        3. He writes for a libertarian magazine and has a libertarian wife. He still doesn’t like sports, though his wife is a Yankees fan. Winning?

  26. On the subject of fine movies like STID, Gone Girl is movie of this year. Go see it right now.

    1. The ending of Gone Girl is terrible.

      Unfortunately there aren’t that many great movies this year, so it actually is up there.

      1. WHAT? The ending of Gone Girl is the best part; the capstone that made the movie great. They could have undermined the movie but they didn’t.

        1. So you like ridiculously stupid anti-climaxes based on slow motion fade-ins and fade-outs.

          The last 10 minutes of Gone Girl consists entire of contextless scenes that fade into one another with no narrative throughline. It’s terrible.

          1. Was your brain on during the last 10 minutes? I actually wonder if we watched different films or something. “Contextless!?!?” She played the situation perfectly.

            1. Let’s run down a list of problems with the denouement:


              1. This place she’s in has cameras everywhere, including when you walk into the building. There are therefore going to be a bunch of shots of her NOT being tied to the bed. Since her story relies on the claim that she was tied up the entire time she was in the chateau, her entire story would fall apart in about 3 seconds.

              2. Amy was allegedly beaten unconscious with a piece of wood – that’s where the blood was supposed to have come from. She then shows up at the end of the movie with no head wound. At no time do the cops think ‘gollie gee, how did she get knocked out and kidnapped when there is no wound consistent with her story? Did her kidnapper heal her with black magic?’

              3. How’d she get pregnant again? She apparently had Nick’s sperm – but the sperm bank sent Nick a letter saying the sample had been destroyed. Why would they send him that letter if it was actually with her? Furthermore, what doctor performed this artificial insemination? Surely there would have been medical records related to the procedure. Also, given that the majority of the time attempts at artificial insemination don’t work her playing ‘the situation perfectly’ was based, as far as I can tell, on total blind luck.

              1. 1. I thought the Chateau only had cameras in some places, and the bed wasn’t one of them.

                2. A lot of time passed after that head wound (that never happened). She should have healed.

                3. This might be a legit point, but I think there’s other ways she could have gotten Nick’s sperm.

          2. I think the more telling thing is that he could stand to watch Ben Affleck for more than 5 minutes.

            1. He was good in this film.

    2. Finish this sentence: There are more holes in Gone Girl than…

      …a dog after trying to say hi to a cop…

      1. Like what?

        1. Oh God, In on a mobile device. This may be difficult.

          1) The wife barely changed her appearance but the yeah girl doesn’t recognize her when they are watching TV about her kidnapping together? Even after she realizes she’s a fake?? BS.

          2) She goes to a casino to remain anonymous?? With mite cameras pet square inch than anywhere else on Earth?

          3) Her story about being kidnapped would be so easy to disprove. There would be video of her entering the house for the first time willingly fit starters. Plus the time stamp would be wrong. She wouldn’t be able to get rid of the wine soaked dress without it being on camera, but they could easily determine it was wine. She’d have a head injury after getting knocked out, and there would be evidence of that. No drugs in her system. There would have been no physical signs of pregnancy or a miscarriage v when they checked her out at the hospital. These are all things they would have found or while investigating the creepy dude that for his throat cut out.

          4) Ben gives up on recording her after one yet but is clearly allowed to eat clothes in her presence eventually.

          5) Still not clear on how she got pregnant.

          There were others that I thought of while watching.

          1. None of which is to say that it isn’t a good movie. But the ending definitely undermined it for any thinking audience.

          2. 1) I thought she looked pretty different.

            2) She went to the casino to meet Ben. The cameras are their to look for cheaters.

            3) Some of these are good points, but she was gone so long I would think the head injury and miscarriage signs would be gone, as would the drugs. I don’t even think the hospital or po-po would investigate. “I you say you’ve just endured a rape ordeal but we want to do a ton of invasive tests on you.”

            4) Wait what?

            5) True.

  27. You call that trailer “great”? When did Tracy Morgan become a storm trooper? What if someone kicks that soccer ball drone? You know they’re tempted. Why fly spacecraft in a lake? Where’s Hans Solo?

    1. Where’s Hans Solo?

      In Neu Corellialand?

    2. You call that trailer “great”?

      Not my words, man.

      When did Tracy Morgan become a storm trooper?

      We had a conscription drive after we lost a legion to Teddy bears.

      What if someone kicks that soccer ball drone? You know they’re tempted.

      Broken toes, that thing looked to be four feet tall.

      Why fly spacecraft in a lake?

      The cooling systems failed, they needed to shed heat.

      Where’s Hans Solo?

      Check the fridge.

      1. “Check the fridge.”

        Heh, heh.

    3. When did Tracy Morgan become a storm trooper?

      Affirmative Action quotas man. Someone finally twigged that there was only one black guy in the galaxy so they had to go to an outside galaxy to hire another.

      Though I *like* Morgan, he’s bringing the average down for the brothers in another galaxy – Any character played by Billy DEEEEEEEE! Williams is worth, like, 10 regular black characters.

      1. I don’t think it’s actually Tracy Morgan; dude just looks like him.

        1. Close enough for government work.

  28. I loved it when Spock used the power of the Force to pinch Darth Vader’s neck and knock him out.

  29. I’m skeptical. I believe it will have cool action sequences, a darker tone, and amazing visual effects. However, like in Star Trek, I believe that there will be plot holes/inconsistencies and the storyline will generally suck.

    1. Its going to start with Han Solo in college and then push, at breakneck speed, through all the inconsistencies and just plain ‘that would never happens’ to end the movie with him in the captain’s chair despite there being many more suitable and experienced people available.

      1. Don’t forget the supernova that will destroy the entire galaxy.

  30. My theory. Feel free to pick it apart (as if I have to invite that).

    The first Star Wars was great for various reasons, one being an accident: Lucas wanted to remake Flash Gordon but couldn’t get the rights. Forced to do something new(-ish), he made something better.

    The next two films were also good, in part because he brought in good writers and directors. (Leigh Brackett being an actual science fiction writer: hooray! More like that, please.)

    The prequel trilogy sucked (in part) because by now Lucas was a god. Nobody would tell him what sucked. It happens to writers, too: they make it big, and then write bloated, self-indulgent books because they either don’t listen to editors, or because editors are too intimidated to say anything. Tom Clancy and Steven King come to mind.

    1. The prequel trilogy sucked (in part) because by now Lucas was a god

      Sure, the ‘god’ theory is completely valid.

      but i don’t think thats most of it. A lot had to do with everything they forgot about what actually made the original films so amazing = a completely ‘realistic’ (read: dirty props, practical effects, naturalistic dialogue) science fiction world which had never been seen before… and talented actors who brought zero baggage (but lots of personality) with them.

      The choice to make the prequels ‘super-shiny CGI’ productions, with lots of hammy alien cyphers, and completely ‘delicate and impractical’ futuristic design was to me the biggest initial mistake

      (i’m thinking of the way they made the cities and the spaceships in the prequels look = they were supposed to be ‘older’ than the original, but instead looked like everything was made of liquid stainless steel – whereas in the original you could see the rivets in the spacecraft, and hear the gears creak when shit moved.)

      the second major problem was the cast = loading up the films with well-known movie stars.

      the third was choosing to extend the prequels backward from the original, relying on the ‘annakin’ thread to continue to matter. it was a ‘backstory’ that still depended on the original material.

      lastly = “the princess and the farmboy” motif had been done already. They tried rehashing the same fucking plot.

      1. re: “choosing to extend the prequels backward from the original”

        yes, i know thats what ‘prequels’ are… what i meant was, it could have been a far more interesting series of movies if it were instead about ‘the dirty secrets of Obi Wan’s past’, and not about rehashing Darth’s adolescence.

        They had such a great open-field universe to play in, and instead they chose to stick with a plot thread that already had its emotional climax.

      2. Yes, the art direction of the prequels suffered from the “Look at this cool stuff we can do” tendency, and it didn’t really fit the feel of the original films.

        For many CGI-fest movies these days, the art direction and design is the best thing in them, but it didn’t work in the prequels.

      3. the second major problem was the cast = loading up the films with well-known movie stars.

        like Alec Guinness, James Earl Jones, and Peter Cushing?

        Of the three main actors in the prequels, Portman and McGregor did OK considering the material they had to work with. The butcher was the unknown guy.

        1. “like Alec Guinness, James Earl Jones, and Peter Cushing?”

          Of the three, Alec Guinness was the only ‘recognizable’ face/name.

          JEJ, and Peter Cushing were relative nobodys from the Hollywood POV. JEJ (voice only?) was a stage actor with little name for himself and Cushing was a British B horror-movie veteran from the 60s

          The point was that the Luke, Han, Leia characters were all unknowns, more or less. They were typecast, and the roles reflected their personalities, which ultimately carried people through 3 movies..

          vs, Ewan Mcgregor, Natalie Portman, Liam Neeson, and people like Sam Jackson in otherwise bit roles… it was completely different. These were stars. And frankly i think none of them did anything the slightest bit useful except maybe mcgregor (even considering that the movies would have sucked balls regardless) They weren’t even necessary and could probably have all been replaced and had someone else serve the (shitty) story better.

          Just saying… the casting blew dicks on top of huge errors in plot, production, staging, etc. The prequels were shit from top to bottom and are a case study in big budget cinema failure.

    2. I don’t think it was so much that he was now a god, as he couldn’t use the excellent film editor who worked on the original trilogy.

      Editors are under-credited for films, but they’re tremendously important. And the original trilogy had (in ESB, uncredited) the same film editor as American Graffiti, Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, and Taxi Driver.

      George, of course, couldn’t use her on the prequels because he’d divorced her during/after Return of the Jedi.

    3. If you go back to the original trilogy and watch it without nostalgia, you’ll see that the dialogue there is also awful and the plot full of holes. Lucas didn’t change. Those warts aren’t as noticeable in Ep 4-6 because it was a much simpler plot.

      Also, Lucas’ propensity for putting distracting garbage all over the screen was extremely constrained by available tech. You could tell this was likely to be a problem for the prequels just by looking at the 1997 Special Edition of the original trilogy.

  31. But I’m slowly being won over.

    Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design. Your friends, out there, watching the trailer, are walking into a trap. It was *I* who allowed Abrams to make the new movie. An entire legion of my best accountants awaits them.

    Oh, I’m afraid the movie will be quite shite when your friends arrive.

    1. That is great.

  32. I’ll wait the two weeks it takes to hit Netflix.

  33. If you google “best star wars movie”, you get an image of the Phantom Menace on the right side of the page.

  34. A sequence of video graphics clips that we’ve seen before with some minor variations, and a cheesy voiceover that doesn’t make any sense. Yeah, my concerns about the new trilogy are totally alleviated.

    I guess Abrams’ tendencies for frenetic, mindless piling-up of complications to the plot (which are never resolved) are preferable to Lucas’ tendencies for dull, plodding, talky piling-up of complications to the plot. So it should be more entertaining, at a rat brain level at least.

  35. So long as there are space battles with lots of ships and lasers, I’m watching it.

  36. my classmate’s step-sister makes $82 an hour on the internet . She has been fired from work for seven months but last month her pay check was $21896 just working on the internet for a few hours. go to this website….


  37. I read David Lynch was given an offer to direct Revenge of the Jedi. Instead he made Dune….which is honestly better then the Return of of the Jedi

  38. a nifty new lightsaber


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.