Official Star Wars Cinematic Universe Thread: Now Showing : Ep VIII - The Last Jedi (15 Dec)
Options
Comments
-
-
StoneColdMikey wrote: »The title for the Han Solo movie sucks.
Shoulda called it 12 parsecs -
StoneColdMikey wrote: »The title for the Han Solo movie sucks.
Shoulda called it 12 parsecs
that scene wont live up to the hype if its in this movie bet that. -
fortyacres wrote: »StoneColdMikey wrote: »The title for the Han Solo movie sucks.
Shoulda called it 12 parsecs
that scene wont live up to the hype if its in this movie bet that.
Lol why not -
fortyacres wrote: »StoneColdMikey wrote: »The title for the Han Solo movie sucks.
Shoulda called it 12 parsecs
that scene wont live up to the hype if its in this movie bet that.
Lol why not
its been hyped so much in star wars/movie lore, that it will have to be some ? we have never seen before on screen and i dont think it would be more than just a pedestrian race. -
fortyacres wrote: »fortyacres wrote: »StoneColdMikey wrote: »The title for the Han Solo movie sucks.
Shoulda called it 12 parsecs
that scene wont live up to the hype if its in this movie bet that.
Lol why not
its been hyped so much in star wars/movie lore, that it will have to be some ? we have never seen before on screen and i dont think it would be more than just a pedestrian race.
Lol well the kessel run if you break it down was han transporting spice or some ? while in hyperspace
At the most you might get
-
SuperManuel wrote: »fortyacres wrote: »SuperManuel wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't know about this having the same dude be behind the Star Trek and Star Wars movies. We don't need the two series basically becoming the same thing. I mean the Trek movies have already lost most of the Trek and mostly become generic space based movies. I enjoyed them, but they don't really capture the spirit of the series at all.
Who cares most of the old movies were boring any way and insurrection was a flop, the only good movies was wrath of khan, the voyage home, the undiscovered country, and generations. I never saw star trek nemesis either. The first two star trek reboot movies were good. The third one was slightly over the top but it wasnt bad either.My only problem with the reboot is they made sulu ? to push the agenda. Even the original sulu didnt like it . They could've made a random red shirt extra ? if they wanted to do that.I'm not feeling zoe saldana as lt. Uhura either.They shoul've gotten a no name actress to play that role.
The ? the Sulu ? thing was very very understated and if you aint really looking for it you will miss it. And probably thats more accurate about the future than just having straight people running ? in the future.
Yeah it wasn't that much implied but i'm saying why make a well known character who wasn't originally ? do that when they coul'dve just had a ? extra? It would've served the same purpose.
B/c Sulu really was ? and a ? advocate...at least the guy that played him so they made it a thing. #thegoddamnagenda -
SuperManuel wrote: »fortyacres wrote: »SuperManuel wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't know about this having the same dude be behind the Star Trek and Star Wars movies. We don't need the two series basically becoming the same thing. I mean the Trek movies have already lost most of the Trek and mostly become generic space based movies. I enjoyed them, but they don't really capture the spirit of the series at all.
Who cares most of the old movies were boring any way and insurrection was a flop, the only good movies was wrath of khan, the voyage home, the undiscovered country, and generations. I never saw star trek nemesis either. The first two star trek reboot movies were good. The third one was slightly over the top but it wasnt bad either.My only problem with the reboot is they made sulu ? to push the agenda. Even the original sulu didnt like it . They could've made a random red shirt extra ? if they wanted to do that.I'm not feeling zoe saldana as lt. Uhura either.They shoul've gotten a no name actress to play that role.
The ? the Sulu ? thing was very very understated and if you aint really looking for it you will miss it. And probably thats more accurate about the future than just having straight people running ? in the future.
Yeah it wasn't that much implied but i'm saying why make a well known character who wasn't originally ? do that when they coul'dve just had a ? extra? It would've served the same purpose.
B/c Sulu really was ? and a ? advocate...at least the guy that played him so they made it a thing. #thegoddamnagenda
You idiot i already stated that the original actor hated the dicision to make sulu ? . In another post -
-
SuperManuel wrote: »SuperManuel wrote: »fortyacres wrote: »SuperManuel wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't know about this having the same dude be behind the Star Trek and Star Wars movies. We don't need the two series basically becoming the same thing. I mean the Trek movies have already lost most of the Trek and mostly become generic space based movies. I enjoyed them, but they don't really capture the spirit of the series at all.
Who cares most of the old movies were boring any way and insurrection was a flop, the only good movies was wrath of khan, the voyage home, the undiscovered country, and generations. I never saw star trek nemesis either. The first two star trek reboot movies were good. The third one was slightly over the top but it wasnt bad either.My only problem with the reboot is they made sulu ? to push the agenda. Even the original sulu didnt like it . They could've made a random red shirt extra ? if they wanted to do that.I'm not feeling zoe saldana as lt. Uhura either.They shoul've gotten a no name actress to play that role.
The ? the Sulu ? thing was very very understated and if you aint really looking for it you will miss it. And probably thats more accurate about the future than just having straight people running ? in the future.
Yeah it wasn't that much implied but i'm saying why make a well known character who wasn't originally ? do that when they coul'dve just had a ? extra? It would've served the same purpose.
B/c Sulu really was ? and a ? advocate...at least the guy that played him so they made it a thing. #thegoddamnagenda
You idiot i already stated that the original actor hated the dicision to make sulu ? . In another post
And you think I give a ? to research your posts? -
the question was rhetorical btw
-
SuperManuel wrote: »SuperManuel wrote: »fortyacres wrote: »SuperManuel wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't know about this having the same dude be behind the Star Trek and Star Wars movies. We don't need the two series basically becoming the same thing. I mean the Trek movies have already lost most of the Trek and mostly become generic space based movies. I enjoyed them, but they don't really capture the spirit of the series at all.
Who cares most of the old movies were boring any way and insurrection was a flop, the only good movies was wrath of khan, the voyage home, the undiscovered country, and generations. I never saw star trek nemesis either. The first two star trek reboot movies were good. The third one was slightly over the top but it wasnt bad either.My only problem with the reboot is they made sulu ? to push the agenda. Even the original sulu didnt like it . They could've made a random red shirt extra ? if they wanted to do that.I'm not feeling zoe saldana as lt. Uhura either.They shoul've gotten a no name actress to play that role.
The ? the Sulu ? thing was very very understated and if you aint really looking for it you will miss it. And probably thats more accurate about the future than just having straight people running ? in the future.
Yeah it wasn't that much implied but i'm saying why make a well known character who wasn't originally ? do that when they coul'dve just had a ? extra? It would've served the same purpose.
B/c Sulu really was ? and a ? advocate...at least the guy that played him so they made it a thing. #thegoddamnagenda
You idiot i already stated that the original actor hated the dicision to make sulu ? . In another post
And you think I give a ? to research your posts?the question was rhetorical btw
Shut up -
-
I don't think I'll like this movie but I'll still go see it
-
-
The villains in the Prequels perfectly foreshadow the rise of Darth Vader. Darth Maul was a Sith consumed by hatred, Count Dooku was a fallen Jedi, and General Grievous was a cyborg. Vader is all three of these.
-
-
The old republic perhaps? There's no other direction they can go with a new trilogy
-
fortyacres wrote: »
They haven't even finished this saga yet and they already planning on more ? . This is all a big money grab -
fortyacres wrote: »
They haven't even finished this saga yet and they already planning on more ? . This is all a big money grab
Its dismey -
fortyacres wrote: »
They haven't even finished this saga yet and they already planning on more ? . This is all a big money grab
huh???
thats how film franchise always work , you plan stuff way in advance especially if it lucrative -
fortyacres wrote: »
They haven't even finished this saga yet and they already planning on more ? . This is all a big money grab
Ummm that's what youre supposed to do.. -
Splackavelli wrote: »The old republic perhaps? There's no other direction they can go with a new trilogy
Please! These ? won't give us KOTOR 3 but a movie might suffice. -
fortyacres wrote: »
They haven't even finished this saga yet and they already planning on more ? . This is all a big money grab
They already announced the next trilogy will still be centered around Rey and Finn -
sapp08_2001 wrote: »fortyacres wrote: »
They haven't even finished this saga yet and they already planning on more ? . This is all a big money grab
They already announced the next trilogy will still be centered around Rey and Finn
No they didn’t lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHgBk2fLLHY
https://youtu.be/bEraJBiTIUY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-orX6Sa1OI
