• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Star Wars Episode 7 cast announced

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
KeithTalent said:
He's awesome. I like Adam Driver and Oscar Issac too, but not sure how they will work here. If the script is good, then I am sure they will be fine. Andy Serkis is always good.

KT
Click to expand...

True of almost any movie, but perhaps the biggest IF in film history!

The director certainly won't save it.
 
Kadarin said:
A lot of the faults laid against the new Star Trek movies I believe could be blamed on Damon Lindelof. A better writer would have written coherent stories that actually made sense.
Click to expand...

If Abrams was half as good as people try to tell me he is then he would have either fixed those script issues or replaced Lindelof. It's not like he's some new director with no power. Instead he chose to not only keep those scripts, he filmed them and kept all of it in the final edits.
 
Yes, because all of the Star Trek series and movies before Abrams were perfectly written without massive plot holes, continuity errors, or schlocky story lines.
🙄

I think we're into full blown "Fans are clinging, complaining dipshits who will never ever be grateful for any concession you make" territory.
 
IndyColtsFan said:
If we can ignore the fact that Star Trek and Star Trek: Into the Darkness were TERRIBLE movies, then yes, I agree.
Click to expand...


Star Trek, 2009. 95% fresh on rotten tomatoes.

Star Trek Into Darkness: 87% fresh in rotten tomatoes.

It seems as anyone worth a flip in the industry disagrees with all of you petulant, whiney, nothing will ever be as good as the original crowd.

Give it a rest. Being an elitist is so 90's/AOL.
 
zerocool84 said:
Exactly, my same feeling with the Daniel Craig Bond movies, they weren't Bond movies either. The new Star Trek movies and James Bond movies, you could have called them something else and it would have been just fine but they don't have the essence of what makes them their namesake.
Click to expand...

Have you seen any of the Bond movies before the Daniel Craig era? Casino Royal was a bit less refined, but that was because it was the first Bond novel. He wasn't as refined. The rest were typical Bond movies, to a fault.
 
AdamantC said:
Yes, because all of the Star Trek series and movies before Abrams were perfectly written without massive plot holes, continuity errors, or schlocky story lines.
🙄

I think we're into full blown "Fans are clinging, complaining dipshits who will never ever be grateful for any concession you make" territory.
Click to expand...

I give you 3/10 for your straw man. The effort was there, but it's a repost of a repost. Depending on your standards and tastes, a good third to half of all ST movies ever made were bad. That is an established fact among fans.
 
theplaidfad said:
Star Trek, 2009. 95% fresh on rotten tomatoes.

Star Trek Into Darkness: 87% fresh in rotten tomatoes.

It seems as anyone worth a flip in the industry disagrees with all of you petulant, whiney, nothing will ever be as good as the original crowd.

Give it a rest. Being an elitist is so 90's/AOL.
Click to expand...

They were generic action movies with lots of explosions and a Star Trek theme. Into Darkness was downright embarrassing and the only thing more embarrassing is the Rotten Tomatoes score.
 
Abrams direction aside, they went with a very solid casting formula here - a proven one, and that makes me think its going to work out (assuming a solid script).

The older actors are necessary for continuity, and IMO have been out of it long enough to re-find some of their enthusiasm (and not just cash a check). Von Sydow is a great experienced actor to add to the mix. Serkis is perfect for a CGI epic, though I hope they do more location shoots and robotics instead. The old Star Wars movies felt more "real" because of locations and lack of digitized effects. The new movies look like cut scenes from a video game. Striking, but unnatural, and therefore not gripping.

Back to the actors - The younger actor pool is filled with up and comers who havent had a huge box office break. Gleeson and Isaac are both excellent young actors. Driver needs to show he can handle a different role, but he has chops, and a unique look that will work for him. I havent seen Boyega yet, but buzz on him is good. The only unknown -Daisy Ridley - looks like Natalie Portman. Seriously - she could be related to Portman. Have a feeling that was intentional. If she can act at all, she'll be another home run. She's a cute girl.

Getting kinda psyched about this. The only thing that has me nervous is the short production schedule - I hope, hope, hope they did enough storyboarding w/ continuity checks, and revisions for the entire new trilogy. I do like that the guy who cleaned up Empire (especially Lucas' godawful dialoge) is working on it. Too bad we don't have Irvin Kershner (RIP) to help Abrams shoot it.
 
Last edited:
Ridley:

Daisy-Ridley.jpg


Portman (as Padme):

2014-04-16-NataliePortman-thumb.jpg
 
Printer Bandit said:
who is supposed to be the luke skywalker type hero?
Click to expand...

I think the girl they are tapping as Han and Leia's daughter. However, I am not sure. I am going to guess the black guy is going to be a hero as well.

I pretty much fully expect all the old guys to only have supporting roles or brief cameos. Similar to Spock's role in the new Star Treks.
 
I'm very much looking forward to these. I liked pretty much all of the star wars movies. Have watched all of them many times.

Now if they can combine the decent acting and scenery from the old movies with the neato effects and sound of the newer movies we've got a winner.

The decision to go with a cast of relatively unknown actors is interesting. Most of the cast in the first star wars were unknown as well. We've all seen where that led. Placing bets on Driver being the next H. Ford?
 
monkeydelmagico said:
I'm very much looking forward to these. I liked pretty much all of the star wars movies. Have watched all of them many times.

Now if they can combine the decent acting and scenery from the old movies with the neato effects and sound of the newer movies we've got a winner.

The decision to go with a cast of relatively unknown actors is interesting. Most of the cast in the first star wars were unknown as well. We've all seen where that led. Placing bets on Driver being the next H. Ford?
Click to expand...

Highly unlikely. I mean, Han Solo was perfect for Ford and so was Indiana Jones. What are the chances of someone in this film getting a role they play to perfection followed by another huge set of movies in which they also have a role they play to perfection, plus a scifi reader's wet dream movie?
 
smackababy said:
And 90% of those people couldn't pick him out of a line up. He might have gainful employment outside of the convention circuit, but that is hardly doing anything of note.
Click to expand...

To be fair, his talent turned out to be voice acting. Just because you don't recognize someone's face doesn't mean they're not famous. You've probably heard Hammill's voice in more cartoons and video games that you realize, and as mentioned, he DEFINED the Joker....after his interpretation all comic book, animated, and video game renditions have been based on him.

To put it in perspective, most people don't know who Don LaFontaine is, but his voice was known to every movie viewer in the world:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjWKE-IJ4R8
 
T9D said:
They already have a token black dude. You can't have another one, the universe will implode.

(Billy Dee is awesome though, would like to see him too)
Click to expand...

I heard Williams isn't in the best of health. Might have something to do with it. One too many Colt 45's?
 
mmntech said:
We've had this debate to death already, but here we go again. ^_^

Lucas is very much a technical director. He's really good at embracing new technologies, editing, special effects, etc. What he doesn't know how to do is direct actors or write proper scripts.

His other big problem is he's a notorious micro manager. He also likes to surround himself with yes men. Which is why the prequels were so bad. Nobody wanted to question his "vision", or makes suggestions on how things could have been done better. Of course Lucas forgets that if people never questioned his "vision", Star Wars would have been a b-movie box office bomb back in 1977. The original draft of the script was pretty bad.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Nobody is blaming Lord for being a terrible actor. We're all blaming Lucas for terrible dialog and direction. That whole cast didn't have a strong personality like Ford to stand up and tell Lucas "This is crap, let's say it like this."

True story: Lucas fought tooth and nail too make Han say "I love you too" during the Empire scene where he was going to be frozen in carbonite. Ford talked the director into filming two versions, one being the original and one with his iconic "I know." quip. Lucas had to see the reaction at a screening before OKing the change.

The last cast didn't have the balls to do anything like that.
 
Fritzo said:
To be fair, his talent turned out to be voice acting. Just because you don't recognize someone's face doesn't mean they're not famous. You've probably heard Hammill's voice in more cartoons and video games that you realize, and as mentioned, he DEFINED the Joker....after his interpretation all comic book, animated, and video game renditions have been based on him.

To put it in perspective, most people don't know who Don LaFontaine is, but his voice was known to every movie viewer in the world:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjWKE-IJ4R8
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but the definition of famous is to be recognized by many people. Don LaFontaine isn't famous. Sure, everyone has heard him, but nobody recognizes him. Who could pick him out of a line up or even identify his voice among all the copycats?

And, if asked who has defined the Joker, almost everyone would say Heath Ledger.

Like I said, sure Hamill might be employed, but as far as being a star of one of the biggest movies of all time, he hasn't done anything near comparison. Ford, on the other hand, had a huge career with a ton of other good movies. I'm not saying Hamill isn't talented nor that his work as the Joker (or in Metalacolpyse, Johnny Bravo, or anything else) but that doesn't make him famous, especially compared to Luke Skywalker.
 
smackababy said:
I'm sorry, but the definition of famous is to be recognized by many people. Don LaFontaine isn't famous. Sure, everyone has heard him, but nobody recognizes him. Who could pick him out of a line up or even identify his voice among all the copycats?

And, if asked who has defined the Joker, almost everyone would say Heath Ledger.

Like I said, sure Hamill might be employed, but as far as being a star of one of the biggest movies of all time, he hasn't done anything near comparison. Ford, on the other hand, had a huge career with a ton of other good movies. I'm not saying Hamill isn't talented nor that his work as the Joker (or in Metalacolpyse, Johnny Bravo, or anything else) but that doesn't make him famous, especially compared to Luke Skywalker.
Click to expand...

who was this narrator

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oopAtA_Q8R4
 
theplaidfad said:
Star Trek, 2009. 95% fresh on rotten tomatoes.

Star Trek Into Darkness: 87% fresh in rotten tomatoes.

It seems as anyone worth a flip in the industry disagrees with all of you petulant, whiney, nothing will ever be as good as the original crowd.

Give it a rest. Being an elitist is so 90's/AOL.
Click to expand...

Again, I don't think most people are saying they're actually terrible movies, they're complaining that it's not a genre movie. Genres are what creates cult followings, and the new Star Trek movies had none of those qualities.
 
Fritzo said:
Again, I don't think most people are saying they're actually terrible movies, they're complaining that it's not a genre movie. Genres are what creates cult followings, and the new Star Trek movies had none of those qualities.
Click to expand...

ICF was actually saying both Star Trek movies were terrible movies. I am not a huge Treky, but I didn't think they were bad Star Trek movies either. They had a good cast (I liked Kirk, Spock and Khan, Sulu was okay but no Takei, and Scotty was comic relief). The story wasn't awful, had some throw backs to the original stuff and set up the characters for the inevitable sequel. The sequel was even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top