Official Star Wars The Force Awakens HD Trailer

En Sabah Nerd · 11-29-2014, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiberius

Also, the helmet are very much a love child between these

+

=

Nah the love child of the AOTC helmet and the original stromtrooper helmet is the ROTS trooper helmet. This is really just the original with the mouth lines extending to connect with the visors which also now connect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trivial Psychic

Y but nearly no one can seem to find anything to discuss other than the lightsaber. It reminds me of when the trailer for "The Phantom Menace" debuted, and they showed us all of this neat stuff we never saw before, and all anyone wanted to talk about was Maul's staff saber. In fact, all the way up to the movie, it was all anyone wanted to talk about.

Hey, I for one have mainly been talking about Andy Serkis' narration. And kind of touching on the helmets too, though those have been shown for a good while now.

Skoob · 11-29-2014, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scarecrow

...JJ Abrams has a good eye for cinematography, which is honestly more important than a story with Star Wars.

You're saying that just to provoke, right? Cinematography is Abrams' weakness, with those infuriating lens flares and oblique camera angles, constant reminders of the fact that we're sitting in a theatre watching a canned product, shattering the immersive experience. Abram's cinematography is to be despised. But he's older now, more experienced, likely working with a different crew, under a different banner, with different rules and standards. One can hope.

Your dismissal of storylines seems outrageous to me. Have you never enjoyed a good book? Ask anyone who has ever sat around a campfire: even the best SFX is no substitute for good, imaginative storytelling! IMHO, Hollywood relies too much generally on technology and other elements and distractions to compensate for weak storytelling. Fortunately or unfortunately, the special effects goose is just about cooked, especially for graphic depiction of violence. You can only blow stuff up so many times and so many ways before it gets boring.

That's another talking point for the new movie: the biggest SFX in the original movie were the graphic destruction of a planet (Alderaan) and a big space station (Death Star). Abrams has likewise blown up a planet (Vulcan) and a starship (USS Vengeance) and a city (Starfleet Academy, future downtown San Fran). His MO suggests that something else will be blown up. I would guess that the destruction in this new movie will involve use of Force Power on a grand scale, like to move large objects and cause lots of explosions along the way. And if Luke has been practicing for 30 years to perfect his Jedi powers, including a stint on the Dark Side, then the biggest bad guy may well be Luke.

Maybe the movie starts out with that destruction during a dark period in Luke's past, and then someone SIMILAR to the Inquisitor is sent after Luke, living a pastoral life on the familiar Tatooine property that he inherited from his relatives, to bring him to trial: a kind of "Jedi Inquisition."

I agree with Catatronic (above) re: the droid ball thing and the speeder resembling a bar of soap. The point would appear to be an indication that the movie will include many similar novelties, likely leading to interesting licensed merchandise...!

I can live with the new helmet design for the stormtroopers -- not much choice (!) -- but I have reservations about the rest of the suit, which seems to make the wearer look fat. Militaristic armor should look daunting, not marshmallowy. And there's no denying that the original design is so iconic that they mess with it at their peril. Since this is set in the future, maybe we'll see a little old AND a little new. One hopes.

You have to admit that those 88 seconds have given us lots of food for thought!

I still think the narrator is Cumberbatch.

En Sabah Nerd · 11-29-2014, 11:41 PM

^^^
Yes, Hollywood's big movies do like relying on cgi and not story. However I still think it's necessary to have modern special effects in the movie or new audiences might lose interest, attention spans have dropped greatly since the original trilogy came out. Story should come first, but if not then good characters ought to be next on the list of priorities. Guardians of the Galaxy didn't have a great or original story itself, but the characters and their interactions managed to outweigh the cgi.
*points to lake* Look out there where nobody finds out whose voice it really is and Cumberbatch can narrate all the trailers you want. *readies pistol*

Bradsdadg · 11-30-2014, 05:39 AM

I won't mention my issue with the lightsaber :P But I do wonder how that round, rolling ball droid keeps his head on?

Dr Kain · 11-30-2014, 09:30 AM

Abrahms is the man who made Star Trek watchable, so I trust whatever he has planned for Star Wars. Plus, after watching this trailer again, I can not wait to see this movie.

En Sabah Nerd · 11-30-2014, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Kain

Abrahms is the man who made Star Trek watchable, so I trust whatever he has planned for Star Wars. Plus, after watching this trailer again, I can not wait to see this movie.

Hey, Star Trek the Next Generation was actually good on its own, and Star Trek 2: the Wrath of Khan was good too. Just because the original was as corny as it could get, and the other series were less than par doesn't mean that the entire Star Trek deal was unwatchable before Abrams revived it. Granted I like Star Wars a hell of a lot more than Star Trek, I do like TNG and I do acknowledge Star Trek as making Star Wars possible. Or maybe you just meant that Abrams did good with Trek so it seems natural that he'd do good with Wars, then yes I'd like to think so too.

Bradsdadg · 11-30-2014, 12:08 PM

Never been a Trek movie fan. TNG and DS9 were great shows though. I could watch them anytime.

Dr Kain · 11-30-2014, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by En Sabah Nerd

Hey, Star Trek the Next Generation was actually good on its own, and Star Trek 2: the Wrath of Khan was good too. Just because the original was as corny as it could get, and the other series were less than par doesn't mean that the entire Star Trek deal was unwatchable before Abrams revived it. Granted I like Star Wars a hell of a lot more than Star Trek, I do like TNG and I do acknowledge Star Trek as making Star Wars possible. Or maybe you just meant that Abrams did good with Trek so it seems natural that he'd do good with Wars, then yes I'd like to think so too.

I've never been able to get into anything Star Trek outside of the two Abrahms movies.

En Sabah Nerd · 11-30-2014, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Kain

I've never been able to get into anything Star Trek outside of the two Abrahms movies.

It's okay, I'd personally rather you be into Star Wars than Star Trek. If JJ Abrams messes this up though, we'll all know that those two "J"s in his name stand for Jar Jar.

Dr Kain · 11-30-2014, 11:31 PM

lol

Dr Kain · 12-01-2014, 10:05 AM

malcontentman · 12-01-2014, 10:15 PM

The light saber makes sense. A lot of swords have hand guards so that the blade of the opponent does not slides down the length of the blade and chop your hands off, so the only effective type of hand guard for a lightsaber blade would need to also be a lightsaber beam. My gripe is not with concept though, but rather with the execution. They could have made it look cooler. Either way though, I know Abrams won't disappoint... that is until he actually does one day. Hopefully, the day Ep. VII is released will not be that day.

malcontentman · 12-01-2014, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by En Sabah Nerd

It's okay, I'd personally rather you be into Star Wars than Star Trek. If JJ Abrams messes this up though, we'll all know that those two "J"s in his name stand for Jar Jar.

Ha! I am going to use that. I will also be sure to accredit you.

Skoob · 12-03-2014, 01:03 AM

This is for Trivial Psychic. Gave me a laugh, anyway.

Stephen Colbert explains Star Wars: The Force Awakens’ controversial three-pronged Lightsaber (c/o YouTube)

I would have preferred a single blade that resembles flickering torchlight, skipping the crossguard altogether, but that's just me.

Tohnee · 12-03-2014, 04:33 PM

I can't wait for this movie..

Skoob · 01-23-2015, 01:24 AM

I hope these give fellow Star Wars fans a smile:

Star Wars: Force Awakens Teaser Trailer PARODY ("George Lucas Special Edition")

Leaked Filmset Footage: Frankfurt Airport

Skoob · 02-08-2015, 10:48 PM

JJ Abrams Parody

Skoob · 02-11-2015, 02:10 AM

Modern Lightsaber Battle (parody; ignore annotations)

Skoob · 07-21-2015, 03:47 PM

Jedi Chipmunks

Skoob · 12-05-2015, 04:48 AM

STAR WARS VII - THE FORCE IS LOST (Trailer Parody)

Joe Moore · 12-07-2015, 05:55 AM

Really no need to keep bumping this with unrelated stuff.

11-29-2014, 10:19 PM	#51
En Sabah Nerd Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Texas Posts: 9,789	Quote: Originally Posted by Tiberius Also, the helmet are very much a love child between these + = Nah the love child of the AOTC helmet and the original stromtrooper helmet is the ROTS trooper helmet. This is really just the original with the mouth lines extending to connect with the visors which also now connect. Quote: Originally Posted by Trivial Psychic Y but nearly no one can seem to find anything to discuss other than the lightsaber. It reminds me of when the trailer for "The Phantom Menace" debuted, and they showed us all of this neat stuff we never saw before, and all anyone wanted to talk about was Maul's staff saber. In fact, all the way up to the movie, it was all anyone wanted to talk about. Hey, I for one have mainly been talking about Andy Serkis' narration. And kind of touching on the helmets too, though those have been shown for a good while now. __________________

11-29-2014, 10:22 PM	#52
Skoob Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 2,461	Quote: Originally Posted by scarecrow ...JJ Abrams has a good eye for cinematography, which is honestly more important than a story with Star Wars. You're saying that just to provoke, right? Cinematography is Abrams' weakness, with those infuriating lens flares and oblique camera angles, constant reminders of the fact that we're sitting in a theatre watching a canned product, shattering the immersive experience. Abram's cinematography is to be despised. But he's older now, more experienced, likely working with a different crew, under a different banner, with different rules and standards. One can hope. Your dismissal of storylines seems outrageous to me. Have you never enjoyed a good book? Ask anyone who has ever sat around a campfire: even the best SFX is no substitute for good, imaginative storytelling! IMHO, Hollywood relies too much generally on technology and other elements and distractions to compensate for weak storytelling. Fortunately or unfortunately, the special effects goose is just about cooked, especially for graphic depiction of violence. You can only blow stuff up so many times and so many ways before it gets boring. That's another talking point for the new movie: the biggest SFX in the original movie were the graphic destruction of a planet (Alderaan) and a big space station (Death Star). Abrams has likewise blown up a planet (Vulcan) and a starship (USS Vengeance) and a city (Starfleet Academy, future downtown San Fran). His MO suggests that something else will be blown up. I would guess that the destruction in this new movie will involve use of Force Power on a grand scale, like to move large objects and cause lots of explosions along the way. And if Luke has been practicing for 30 years to perfect his Jedi powers, including a stint on the Dark Side, then the biggest bad guy may well be Luke. Maybe the movie starts out with that destruction during a dark period in Luke's past, and then someone SIMILAR to the Inquisitor is sent after Luke, living a pastoral life on the familiar Tatooine property that he inherited from his relatives, to bring him to trial: a kind of "Jedi Inquisition." I agree with Catatronic (above) re: the droid ball thing and the speeder resembling a bar of soap. The point would appear to be an indication that the movie will include many similar novelties, likely leading to interesting licensed merchandise...! I can live with the new helmet design for the stormtroopers -- not much choice (!) -- but I have reservations about the rest of the suit, which seems to make the wearer look fat. Militaristic armor should look daunting, not marshmallowy. And there's no denying that the original design is so iconic that they mess with it at their peril. Since this is set in the future, maybe we'll see a little old AND a little new. One hopes. You have to admit that those 88 seconds have given us lots of food for thought! I still think the narrator is Cumberbatch. Last edited by Skoob; 11-29-2014 at 10:47 PM..

11-29-2014, 11:41 PM	#53
En Sabah Nerd Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Texas Posts: 9,789	^^^ Yes, Hollywood's big movies do like relying on cgi and not story. However I still think it's necessary to have modern special effects in the movie or new audiences might lose interest, attention spans have dropped greatly since the original trilogy came out. Story should come first, but if not then good characters ought to be next on the list of priorities. Guardians of the Galaxy didn't have a great or original story itself, but the characters and their interactions managed to outweigh the cgi. points to lake Look out there where nobody finds out whose voice it really is and Cumberbatch can narrate all the trailers you want. readies pistol __________________

11-30-2014, 09:30 AM	#55
Dr Kain King of Nerdom Join Date: May 2012 Location: Melbourne FL Posts: 11,760	Abrahms is the man who made Star Trek watchable, so I trust whatever he has planned for Star Wars. Plus, after watching this trailer again, I can not wait to see this movie. __________________

11-30-2014, 11:30 AM	#56
En Sabah Nerd Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Texas Posts: 9,789	Quote: Originally Posted by Dr Kain Abrahms is the man who made Star Trek watchable, so I trust whatever he has planned for Star Wars. Plus, after watching this trailer again, I can not wait to see this movie. Hey, Star Trek the Next Generation was actually good on its own, and Star Trek 2: the Wrath of Khan was good too. Just because the original was as corny as it could get, and the other series were less than par doesn't mean that the entire Star Trek deal was unwatchable before Abrams revived it. Granted I like Star Wars a hell of a lot more than Star Trek, I do like TNG and I do acknowledge Star Trek as making Star Wars possible. Or maybe you just meant that Abrams did good with Trek so it seems natural that he'd do good with Wars, then yes I'd like to think so too. __________________