The Shrine

Really, the last two in contention to direct were fucking J.J. Abrahms and Ben Asscrack?

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/01/24/jj ... tar-wars-7

This isn't a good start for Disney......

Ben whatcrack? Are you on fucking drugs? Every single movie he has directed has been universally praised.

SineSwiper wrote:Ben whatcrack? Are you on fucking drugs? Every single movie he has directed has been universally praised.

I know, I've seen almost all of them due to the universal praise they've gotten. Same with Abrahms, actually

If I wanted Star Town: Argo Gone I may be excited. But this has got to be a consolation prize after they could get better directors like Del Toro, Whedon, etc.

Zeus wrote:Star Town: Argo Gone

There is something wrong with you

Shrinweck wrote:

Zeus wrote:Star Town: Argo Gone

There is something wrong with you

10/10

Eric wrote:

Shrinweck wrote:

Zeus wrote:Star Town: Argo Gone

There is something wrong with you

10/10

I tried to put my response to Zeus into words, but this was all I could come up with:

I honestly can't believe you guys think Asscrack - or Abrams - would be good

That isn't the issue here! :P

Zeus wrote:I honestly can't believe you guys think Asscrack - or Abrams - would be good

Shrinweck wrote:That isn't the issue here!

Kind of is for me. First of all, we'll shelf your dislike of Affleck (for whatever reason that is) and look at Abrams. Why do you think he'd be bad for this? Because you hate LOST?

He's an incredibly prolific creator and producer, and say what you will about LOST being dragged out and getting wonky as it progressed, but it still stands as one of the best modern character pieces of network TV in the last decade. And Star Trek was entertaining as hell, especially for me as somebody who never found any of the previous movies or series particularly engaging.

He knows characters and dialog well, and that's something Star Wars was sorely lacking in the last three instalments. I would take Joss Whedon over Abrams, but it's not happening. As for Del Toro, while I liked Blade 2 and Pan's Labyrinth, he hasn't directed anything since 2008 and I don't see him necessarily being a good fit for this anyway with his signature macabre comic style. Additionally, his cancelled video games (whatever that was about) and appearances at Microsoft press conferences doesn't inspire much in me.

The next movie is in good hands with Abrams directing and Kathleen Kennedy (check her IMDB credits) producing. Make a lens flare joke and move on.

I stand by the idea that nearly anyone would be better than George Lucas as long as it isn't just a Disney ploy to merchandise, which you couldn't accuse Abrams or Affleck of in any of their movies.

Also from what I can tell if Abrams merely created Lost he's a goddamned genius, it's just the direction it went was complete garbage. The first season had tremendous potential.. I'm willing to withhold judgment on how he'll do with Star Wars until I see the next Star Trek movie since that'll be a good gauge of where he is.

Revolution is ridiculously terrible though.

Shrinweck wrote:Revolution is ridiculously terrible though.

Agreed.

I watched something like seven episodes wanting it to be good and it just did not deliver in any way. There wasn't a single thing to hold onto that might bud into something worthwhile.

I watched the better part (poor choice of words?) of two episodes. Didn't care for the characters and the music cues and composition felt very soap opera to me.

I think Lost and 24 were the last two network dramas that I enjoyed. It's all HBO, AMC, Showtime and FX now.

Actually, Pushing Daisies is up there as well, though it could probably be called a comedy as well. SO MUCH CHARM.

Blotus wrote:

Zeus wrote:I honestly can't believe you guys think Asscrack - or Abrams - would be good

Shrinweck wrote:That isn't the issue here!

Kind of is for me. First of all, we'll shelf your dislike of Affleck (for whatever reason that is) and look at Abrams. Why do you think he'd be bad for this? Because you hate LOST?

He's an incredibly prolific creator and producer, and say what you will about LOST being dragged out and getting wonky as it progressed, but it still stands as one of the best modern character pieces of network TV in the last decade. And Star Trek was entertaining as hell, especially for me as somebody who never found any of the previous movies or series particularly engaging.

He knows characters and dialog well, and that's something Star Wars was sorely lacking in the last three instalments. I would take Joss Whedon over Abrams, but it's not happening. As for Del Toro, while I liked Blade 2 and Pan's Labyrinth, he hasn't directed anything since 2008 and I don't see him necessarily being a good fit for this anyway with his signature macabre comic style. Additionally, his cancelled video games (whatever that was about) and appearances at Microsoft press conferences doesn't inspire much in me.

The next movie is in good hands with Abrams directing and Kathleen Kennedy (check her IMDB credits) producing. Make a lens flare joke and move on.

Shrin, that is EVERYTHING here. Director has more impact on a film than anyone other than a very hands-on producer, which isn't common.

Since you asked directly, I'll break my rule and go through my thoughts of Abrahms' career highlights up to this point (production and direction, only):

- Alias: amazingly bad series. Horrible acting, writing, everything. Even with Garner in her best-lookin' days, this show was a bane of television
- Lost: I've said A LOT about my feelings
- Mission Impossible III: surprisingly, this was a decent flick, especially after the atrocity of the second. Not great but not a bad way to kill a couple of hours
- Cloverfield: WOW this was bad. I mean, shockingly so. I was never a Blair Witch fan but thought a sci-fi version might work. Great idea, amazingly horrible execution (THE Abrahms trait)
- Star Trek: I'm bracing for the flames, but I didn't like this movie. And I recently watched it again just to make sure. What it boils down to is Spock and Kirk are just not written well at all and sucked as protagonists. Couldn't cheer for them because I didn't like either. It wasn't the performance by either Pike or Quinto (I was actually happy when they announced Quinto, I thought he was perfect) it was the writing and execution of the script, which is all about the director. Add in silliness like Spock marooning Kirk and the importance that had (among other things) and you end up with a tolerable film but by no means a good one, certainly not even close to worthy of all the praise it got.
- Super 8: not quite Cloverfield bad, but it wasn't good at all. Characters were shit and all the buildup was ruined by an ending that was shitty in every way.
- Fringe: watched a few eps of this with the wife who loved the series. Didn't even know it was an Abrahms vehicle until now but it all makes sense now. It's fucking boring regardless of the ideas put forth

I haven't seen Person of Interest, Alcatraz, or Revolution and have never even had the desire. Of those, only Revolution did I know was by Abrahms and that was after I already heard it wasn't no good (shockingly, didn't see anything at Comic Con about this being an Abrahms vehicle).

When you're best thing is a movie within an established franchise that was just decent, that's a shitty track record. I don't want someone like this doing Star Wars. I pray Kathleen Kennedy rules with an iron fist, it's the only way this movie is gonna be any good

Zeus we can accept you rationally explaining why you don't like something, but your terminology kills us at times(See your previous posts). :p

Eric wrote:Zeus we can accept you rationally explaining why you don't like something, but your terminology kills us at times(See your previous posts). :p

This, and we're just always going to disagree with you when it comes to movies and TV shows because that's what we do.

Yes the comments were on what you were calling Affleck. I've learned to put up with M$ but Asscrack? Seriously?

I have hope for the second Star Trek movie since he doesn't have to spend 80% of the movie establishing who and what everyone/everything is like a shitty pilot episode.

Blotus wrote:

Eric wrote:Zeus we can accept you rationally explaining why you don't like something, but your terminology kills us at times(See your previous posts). :p

This, and we're just always going to disagree with you when it comes to movies and TV shows because that's what we do.

Eric, it's there to be a little entertaining. We have these long discussions and it's nice to break it up a little with a little jab/joke.

Blotus, I know, just figured "what the heck, been a long time since I had a discussion like this here, might as well try again"

Shrinweck wrote:Yes the comments were on what you were calling Affleck. I've learned to put up with M$ but Asscrack? Seriously?

I have hope for the second Star Trek movie since he doesn't have to spend 80% of the movie establishing who and what everyone/everything is like a shitty pilot episode.

I have been using Asscrack for many years. Same with DiFaggio. It's the easiest way for me to express my displeasure over their career choices and talent levels. And please, don't use the "the critics love them" or "look at all the awards they got" arguments. I'm talking about my personal views not everyone else's. And that's before we even start talking about the biases inherent in both critical reviews and awards shit.

And it's Microshaft much more than M$. $ony as well.

They're your opinions you're free to have that's not what bothers me - it's just sophomoric, school yard stuff to morph somethings name like that. (http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/07/22)

I don't really care for Affleck's movies as a whole... In fact Argo may be my favorite one in recent years and even that wasn't gripping or entertaining. The only movie he has ever done that's good is probably Chasing Amy. He takes me as a real fan of Star Wars, though, and that's what would have been nice to have in a Star Wars movie - someone that can step aside and just make a movie that's fun, what people want to see, and isn't god damned garbage.

I'm not a director nerd, but JJ abrams is a solid choice as far as I can tell (I really liked the ST reboot). Honestly, Michael Bay would do a better job than Lucas, so I imagine Abrams will be a homerun. And Del Toro? Why the hell would you want him? Creatures/aliens? Maybe, but the rest of the movie would be an uneven mess. Besides, Disney is behind this -- I am sure a lot of money will be tossed at special effects.

If I was worried about anything, it would be the guy writing the script.

Shrinweck wrote:They're your opinions you're free to have that's not what bothers me - it's just sophomoric, school yard stuff to morph somethings name like that. (http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/07/22)

I don't really care for Affleck's movies as a whole... In fact Argo may be my favorite one in recent years and even that wasn't gripping or entertaining. The only movie he has ever done that's good is probably Chasing Amy. He takes me as a real fan of Star Wars, though, and that's what would have been nice to have in a Star Wars movie - someone that can step aside and just make a movie that's fun, what people want to see, and isn't god damned garbage.

Substance over form, my friend. I could sit here and go into a Hulk-rage every time I think about the "job" Asscrack (or DiFaggio) have done in their films and take up far too much real estate. Instead, it's a fun little jab to break up a long post.

Everyone needs to get past their 10+ years of nerd rage, sit down for a second, and OBJECTIVELY try to decipher exactly what it is about the new trilogy they didn't like. I can see two real reasons from all the nerd rage (which I avoid with my "sophmoric" stuff; although I would think it's more "grade school") I've been bombarded with the last decade plus:

- they didn't like the screenplay: it's not that the story was bad or anything, it's the (juvenile?) way the script was written
- they hated the cardboard acting by young/old Anakin and Padme/Amidala

Well, the first one they got taken care of IMO. They got the guy who wrote Little Miss Sunshine and Toy Story 3. And the fact that it's not Lucas (ie. no Jar Jar type character) should cause a chaffing epidemic across the nation.

The next one requires a couple of things. First of all, they hopefully will cast someone better than the professional cryer as the main female protaganist. Seriously, you can like the movies she's been in, but Portman hasn't gained any skill as an adult actor beyond her breakthrough role in The Professional (when she was 12). She's proven she's very little more than a cutie who can cry. With respect to Christensen, he may have actually done a lot better with someone actually directing him. Whoever it is will certainly provide more direction than Lucas who was notoriously adverse to actually giving direction to actors (almost legendary) and relied on the inherent skills of his actors. It's no accident that a lot of the actors who did very well in his films are actually good actors. The kid? Well, that's something that'll come with the script and a little direction more than anything else. Kid actors are still kids actors save a few very special cases (Osmet, Foster, Fanning, Dunst, etc.).

What they're missing is the "direction" part with Abrahms. Even if you liked his movies, what strong acting performance can you remember? And be prepared for a TON of pushback if you dare to mention anyone from Star Trek. People like his stuff because his ideas are great, I've never disputed that. In fact, a large part of the reasons for me disliking him is because of the poor implementation of these ideas, a chunk of which has been not a single memorable performance by any actor in anything of his I've seen. Heck, even with Lucas he had memorable performances in the prequel trilogy (Ewan MacGregor in Attack of the Clones, in particular). This guy has never been a good director, period.

And people are sayin' Del Toro wouldn't bring anything? Look at his movies, the characters are his strength, in particular Devil's Backbone and Pan's Labyrinth (Blade II is a mulligan considering he was trying to break through in America; and it's not like the characters were horrible, just the script). Even Hellboy had memorable performances (Perlman was amazing in that). His pedigree is WAY better than Abrahms and he would be a significantly better choice, particularly as someone who has clearly shown he knows how to direct a special effects-laden film.

We'll keep the fact that the prequel trilogy was amazingly successful out of this conversation (after all, Bay is one of the most successful directors out there). We're talking about how we can improve them and whether the people being hired are good for the job