 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
....WHY ALL THE HATE?!?!?!?!?!?!
I don't see why most of you bash him, and for that matter, his "composer of choice" Giacchino as well.
Both are great at what they do, so please list your "grievances" here... I'd truly like to know the reasons for all the hate!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* I absolutely hate the schtick this guy writes in (its all caps) but he makes some terrific points about how Episode VII is the worst of the Star Wars films by several country miles - http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/06/28/star-wars-the-force-alluded-to
Honestly, man, I couldn't get a full paragraph into that blog. The all caps, the first person references to himself as HULK and that he takes forever to get to the point had me checking out like Homer Simpson at a power plant staff meeting.
Can't say I disagree with your assessment overall, though. TFA was a wasted opportunity to bring the narrative forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 12, 2017 - 6:31 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Octoberman
(Member)
|
I don't hate Abrams, but I do strongly feel like he is not well-suited to big screen stuff.
He comes across to me as being better suited to TV. As a storytelling medium, TV is a lot more forgiving when it comes to a lack of originality.
As far as his rep as a film maker goes, I feel like he has attained the stature that he has mainly by standing on the shoulders of giants--hitching his wagon to pre-existing works which were already so beloved that the fans of those works, starved for anything new, would turn out in droves to support them.
And even if some of those fans came away with a bad taste in their mouths after swallowing his permutations of those works, well, who cares? He's got the box office receipts--he's happy.
I have to qualify my remarks with the disclosures that I found some enjoyment in the NuTreks and the NuStarWars.
Not a lot, but some. And it's not due to anything Abrams did--it's more to do with my already-existing love for ST and SW.
"Cloverfield"... not horrible, but again, a story that was derivative of a half dozen others.
"Lost"... didn't watch it--didn't appeal to me.
So, yeah. He seems like a fan-fic writer that got very, very lucky.
But more power to him. He may very well blossom into a master movie maker in the future. Who knows?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 13, 2017 - 9:57 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
He has never made a really bad film, and not a terrible film.
Is a master film maker? No.
What he did with Trek was divisive, but at least Trek 2009 did break it free of some moorings. It did not do much afterwards, Into Darkness is a pretty good film- it was impressive in Imax- but only if you do not look at it as Trek. As for his Star Wars work, I though Force Awakens, within the very strict confines of what Disney gave him, worked pretty well, I think it is the best of the new Star Wars pictures so far. And he is a pretty good replacement for Trevorrow, and again, working within the
strict confines of Disney it will be a serviceable picture I am sure. What JJ brought to film was working for years within the business of television, which meant he knew efficiency of shooting and putting the dollars on the screen. As for his artistic choices - certainly up for debate, but the idea that he is a terrible director is silly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No personal touch or creativity aloud. If you're not a "yes" man, they fire you for being disobedient.