Star Wars: The Force Awakens International Teaser Trailer IS LIVE ON YOUTUBE!!!

I have a bad feeling about this ...

Alexandre Orion wrote: I have a bad feeling about this ...

Al menos parece que va a ser entretenida ....

The lightsaber blade is different. I don't mean the extra two beams but the flickery firelike texture. Could it be a ancient Sith lightsaber?

steamboat28 wrote:

Cyan Sarden wrote: Looking awesome, albeit a bit 'martial'. Was to be expected from a J.J. Abrams movie, I guess

Heaven forbid we expect something 'martial' from a movie called Star Wars.

Surely - but Abrams tends to sacrifice the story in order to push an action spectacle. The original movies used action sequences to enhance the story telling, the new one will, in all likelihood, have a story somewhere hidden between action sequences. I hope I'm wrong about this - but that's what he did to Star Trek.

Br. John wrote: The lightsaber blade is different. I don't mean the extra two beams but the flickery firelike texture. Could it be a ancient Sith lightsaber?

I'm going to chalk it up to what is, currently, my main concern: the cinematographic "feel" of the trailer.

The prequels (May They Be Ignored) at least paid homage to the original and classic cinematography and styling of the original trilogy--through the cuts, the wipes, the angles, etc.--while still using modern filmmaking technique. This does not seem to be doing that, and it's just not Star Wars without wipe cuts. I'm sorry.
[hr]

Cyan Sarden wrote: Surely - but Abrams tends to sacrifice the story in order to push an action spectacle. The original movies used action sequences to enhance the story telling, the new one will, in all likelihood, have a story somewhere hidden between action sequences. I hope I'm wrong about this - but that's what he did to Star Trek.

It's actually not at all what he did to Star Trek. In fact, Into Darkness was as timely for its audience as the original series could ever hope to be. While it didn't carry on the tradition of Roddenberry's ungodly abrasive optimism, it still resonated with his memory in the way it tackled current issues (terrorism, sleeper cells, the mistreatment of soldiers, etc.) in the same way I believe he would've. Only, slightly darker and with lots more lens flare.

steamboat28 wrote: It's actually not at all what he did to Star Trek. In fact, Into Darkness was as timely for its audience as the original series could ever hope to be. While it didn't carry on the tradition of Roddenberry's ungodly abrasive optimism, it still resonated with his memory in the way it tackled current issues (terrorism, sleeper cells, the mistreatment of soldiers, etc.) in the same way I believe he would've. Only, slightly darker and with lots more lens flare.

Personally, I'm a sucker for GR's "ungodly abrasive" optimism - to me, that's the essence of Star Trek. And Abrams really sacrificed that on the altar of boom and bang. I thoroughly enjoyed both Star Trek and Into the Darkness - but certainly not from a long-time fan point of view. Anyway - that's just my personal opinion and I'm not in the business of arguing about personal views.

The new Sith saber is nice, getting medieval on the Jedi... :evil:

I prefer without the two extra beams, how to carry such a thing..

Aqua wrote: I prefer without the two extra beams, how to carry such a thing..

Must be a Sith thing, lol...