Yeah I heard that also, so this is suprising for me. I love Abrams, and I think he will do a great job...I just kind of wish he wouldn't do it.Berithil said:Huh, I thought he had originally turned that down (can't remember where I read that...)
So, we're gonna have a ton of lens flares, then? Well, I'd prefer him over Michael Bays fetish for explosions.
The effect is not only silly, but the technique of making it is too. They basically shine a light from the side at the camera, and it looks really bad.Lionsfan said:So the movie is gonna be unwatchable then? I mean, I somewhat understand "wanting" lens flare to make things seem realistic, but this:
![]()
is
![]()
fucking
![]()
ridiculous
I heard most of the lense flares in Star Trek '09 were CGI'd in in post production, which makes it even worse.IamQ said:The effect is not only silly, but the technique of making it is too. They basically shine a light from the side at the camera, and it looks really bad.Lionsfan said:So the movie is gonna be unwatchable then? I mean, I somewhat understand "wanting" lens flare to make things seem realistic, but this:
![]()
is
![]()
fucking
![]()
ridiculous
Hearing his reason for them is awful too.IamQ said:The effect is not only silly, but the technique of making it is too. They basically shine a light from the side at the camera, and it looks really bad.Lionsfan said:So the movie is gonna be unwatchable then? I mean, I somewhat understand "wanting" lens flare to make things seem realistic, but this:
![]()
is
![]()
fucking
![]()
ridiculous
I think seeing a Star Wars movie directed by Tarantino would be very interesting. If he got complete freedom from Disney to make it into whatever kind of movie he wanted, it could turn out pretty cool.Rogue 09 said:The problem is not with just the lens flare, that's oversimplifying the actual problem. And I would accept just about any other director except the following three:
1) George Lucas
2) JJ Abrams
3) Quentin Tarantino
Nah, you know what would REALLY be interesting? Star Wars as directed by Joss Whedon, if only because I want to see how his experience with the space-western that is Firefly would affect his work on the space-opera that is Star Wars.Pinkamena said:I think seeing a Star Wars movie directed by Tarantino would be very interesting. If he got complete freedom from Disney to make it into whatever kind of movie he wanted, it could turn out pretty cool.
I have a vague memory of JJ saying he didn't want to do it because he was quite a big Star Wars fan and would have a lot to live up to just in his own mind.Berithil said:Huh, I thought he had originally turned that down (can't remember where I read that...)
So, we're gonna have a ton of lens flares, then? Well, I'd prefer him over Michael Bays fetish for explosions.
Rogue 09 said:I would even have more faith in you, Copper Zen, directing than anyone of the aforementioned list.
A couple of things spring to mind after reading this.Rogue 09 said:The problem is not with just the lens flare, that's oversimplifying the actual problem. And I would accept just about any other director except the following three:
1) George Lucas
2) JJ Abrams
3) Quentin Tarantino
Other than that, I really don't care. I would even have more faith in you, Copper Zen, directing than anyone of the aforementioned list. What is shocking to me is that, after the complete destruction of Star Wars cannon by George Lucas in the prequels, they go with a director who also blatantly violated cannon with Star Trek '09. This is the very worst things to say to your fans.
And one last thing: I love my family... but I would rather have JJ Abrams and George Lucas tag team my younger sister and leave her spent on the side of a deserted freeway in shame and misery than have either one of them touch Star Wars. This isn't whining or moaning, this is trying to protect something sacred that has influenced the very culture of our society.
And Joss Whedon may not be a great choice for the new Star Wars movies either, but I'd take him happily. He can also bang my sister.