|
|
Post by regulator on Dec 29, 2015 15:41:09 GMT -5
I enjoyed the movie for what it was, even with the overblown hype attached to it. JJ Abrams had an impossible task, and for the most part I think he pulled off the best he could. C. Fisher and H. Ford seemed lackluster, like they were not cast correctly. I got the impression from Han that he wasn't into this role that much. After I saw the movie, I learned more about the reasoning behind all that.
The story was completely unoriginal. They just rehashed'A New Hope' to fit this modern era. No new ideas really. BB-8 was real cool though, I liked him. It was a fun movie to watch, and I am nowhere near a star wars geek as others are. There was no expectation or emotional impact on this movie. It's funny to see how people really get into this stuff like it's real.
I gave the movie a '7'. It was cool, not boring, entertaining, but overall kinda 'meh' in the whole saga.
|
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Dec 29, 2015 21:11:39 GMT -5
Luke was great.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Dec 30, 2015 10:21:11 GMT -5
The hype is real for this movie once I saw this trailer. Oh, wrong one.....  |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Dec 30, 2015 10:57:22 GMT -5
Who gave it a one?!? You know that doesn't mean number one movie right?!  Or a zero? Maybe zero should have meant "Haven't seen it". |
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,849
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jan 1, 2016 21:10:01 GMT -5
Gave it a 6, I just thought it too much of a deja vu remake of episode IV and wasn't its own movie. The acting chemistry, IMO, was sorely lacking. Here's hoping the next episode can stand on its own and the acting improves.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolle on Jan 2, 2016 6:26:22 GMT -5
I selected 6 also. I gave it a 5,5 in another Forum. Same reasons as mentioned by LCSeminole apply for me as well. As an Addition, the bad guys were too incompetent / not menacing for me. EDIT: Didn´t know we have a filter active here until now. It doesn´t allow me to call the bad guys S*T*U*P*I*D - perhaps their force is stronger than I thought. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,086
|
Post by klinemj on Jan 3, 2016 18:11:08 GMT -5
I give it a seven...same as I would give any others in the series. And I am thrilled there were zero Ewoks and NO Jar Jar.
Mark
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Jan 4, 2016 6:56:08 GMT -5
I also gave it a seven. My son and I enjoyed the movie. I thought the pacing was good and never felt like the movie was long. A little disappointed in the Rey character. Things happened too easy for her yet she struggled so much in the beginning? I think Ren was interesting. He was flawed and inexperienced as a leader right from the beginning. Making the same mistakes I'm sure Vadar did when he first started. (for anyone that follows the saga via the books, Vadar had to do some really bad things before he eventually became the cool villain of Episode IV) www.theverge.com/2015/12/16/10215194/star-wars-the-force-awakens-guide-canonMaybe in the future movies we see this also happen to Ren. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 6, 2016 16:13:09 GMT -5
Bump for more votes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 11, 2016 17:58:26 GMT -5
So with 68 votes in, we have an average score of 7.4.
When I get a minute I'll make a few more comments on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by indyscammer on Jan 12, 2016 8:56:20 GMT -5
6.....I just can't get past the Episode IV retread. Cinematically good....just thoroughly unoriginal. They didn't even try to create something new.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 12, 2016 11:32:51 GMT -5
56% scored it eight or higher(!)
And 10% scored it four or below. Now that's pretty good performance right there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 12, 2016 11:57:17 GMT -5
56% scored it eight or higher(!) And 10% scored it four or below. Now that's pretty good performance right there. Well if you ask me, anyone rating it lower than 4 should be tossed out, as should all the votes for 10. 10? 10? Really? 10 means this is an all time classic that ranks up there with the very best Sci-fi and Fantasy movies have to offer, of all time. There ain't no way in hell this movie does that. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 12, 2016 12:02:49 GMT -5
Dangit I gave it a ten!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 12, 2016 12:10:20 GMT -5
Dangit I gave it a ten!!! And since you did then, why don't you try to equate to me how this very unoriginal movie matches up with something like, say, Close Encounters. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jan 12, 2016 12:12:02 GMT -5
56% scored it eight or higher(!) And 10% scored it four or below. Now that's pretty good performance right there. Well if you ask me, anyone rating it lower than 4 should be tossed out, as should all the votes for 10. 10? 10? Really? 10 means this is an all time classic that ranks up there with the very best Sci-fi and Fantasy movies have to offer, of all time. There ain't no way in hell this movie does that. The score awarded is a subjective thing so the criteria employed by each respondent is not necessarily going to agree among everyone. One person's "10" is another person's "8" or "9" or whatever. Your opinion of tossing out scores below 4 or scores of 10 is subjective as well and would only serve to corrupt the poll. It is also subjective as to what person A feels would be the "best" sci-fi movie, versus person B's criteria. If Garbulky thinks it is a "10" then he'e entitled to his opinion, same as for the two who gave the movie a "0" score. As of now the average score is 7.2. The median score is 8 as is the mode so from a layman's perspective, my conclusion would be that the film was favorably received overall. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 12, 2016 12:20:45 GMT -5
Dangit I gave it a ten!!! And since you did then, why don't you try to equate to me how this very unoriginal movie matches up with something like, say, Close Encounters. Coz it was a ten dangit! It was a 30 year sigh of relief. Something like that deserves a ten! Versus the prequels where there was a lot riding on it and it couldn't deliver the hype. They had a lot to lose on this gamble. And they stuck it right imo in terms of tone, the feel, the sense of wonder. Close encounters was a seven imo. Though I like pretty much all of Spielbergs other stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jan 12, 2016 12:28:53 GMT -5
And since you did then, why don't you try to equate to me how this very unoriginal movie matches up with something like, say, Close Encounters. Coz it was a ten dangit! It was a 30 year sigh of relief. Something like that deserves a ten! Versus the prequels where there was a lot riding on it and it couldn't deliver the hype. They had a lot to lose on this gamble. And they stuck it right imo in terms of tone, the feel, the sense of wonder. Close encounters was a seven imo. Though I like pretty much all of Spielbergs other stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 12, 2016 12:36:43 GMT -5
And since you did then, why don't you try to equate to me how this very unoriginal movie matches up with something like, say, Close Encounters. Coz it was a ten dangit! It was a 30 year sigh of relief. Something like that deserves a ten! Versus the prequels where there was a lot riding on it and it couldn't deliver the hype. They had a lot to lose on this gamble. And they stuck it right imo in terms of tone, the feel, the sense of wonder. Close encounters was a seven imo. Though I like pretty much all of Spielbergs other stuff. So because they didn't screw it up, and it literally directly imitates the originals, which in turn gives you a big warm and fuzzy feeling inside, that's a reason to give it a 10?  As reboots go, I'd give JJ's own 2 new Star Treks movies higher accolades than this one. Super 8 was better too. All JMO of course. As I've said, I liked this movie, but I didn't love it. It's in 7th place, even behind the prequels. They were far from perfect, but at least they had somewhat original stories. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 12, 2016 12:36:59 GMT -5
It's more like You say Tomato I say Tomato  |
|
