MrGeezer All valid points. But I hate it when a reviewer trashes a movie because some movie 30 years ago is perceived to have done something similar much better. Simply because the plot-line or even the story (a remake) is so similar they seem to discount the new movie without truly evaluating it. Some old movies might be better, but I find many are outdated, using old cinematography techniques, or bad special effects. I want the new movie evaluated for what it is, for the audience of today (who may never see the old movie). So, yes, while comparison is obviously a valuable tool that you can't get away from, at least do your due diligence and evaluate the movie at hand, stating what is done well and what is not. Don't get lazy and simply say the old one is better - this doesn't really help anyone. For example, the original Total Recall may be considered a classic (by some) and a better movie, but I can't watch it because of Arnold's poor acting and the old cinematography and the poorer special effects. I prefer the new Total Recall with Colin Farrell, although there are changes or missing bits that bother me. In the end, the new one is a better movie for me. But reviewers often forget to take these sorts of things into account with a newer audience (who haven't been so jaded by watching so many movies as a reviewer might). And by the way, I am not a young puppy. I am 50+. But I can also appreciate that different people have different tastes/opinions, but let's be honest about that.
His rant is not classy and is somewhat mean-spirited. but he also does make a few good points. Few reviewers appear to have an independent thought these days and rarely look at a movie on it's own merits (always comparing it with others, often from years ago). It would have been better had he been saying these things (but more tactful) about another movie, instead of his own. It comes across as being petulant. As for the movie itself, I have no idea. Maybe I'll watch it when it comes on Netflix.
@Thanatos2k: And as far as consumers it's also probably more popular because although there are pre-orders, these are ALL pre-release products, which means mainstream media is not paying a lot of attention yet. So whoever is getting the most media coverage right now is the most popular, and guess what - that's Oculus Rift. We'll see what happens when actual product is in the hands of consumers and what mainstream media says then. Remember, first out of the tech-gate doesn't always win over the long haul (think Lotus 1-2-3 and so many other products). But Zuckerberg is putting a lot of money into this and it's likely to have an industry shaping impact. Read the comment by TheZeroPercent, who nicely lays out the kind of progression we are likely to see over the next 5 to 10 years (based on past gaming advances). However, this impact will not be just for gaming, but for interfacing to the internet, in education, medical and engineering, etc. We are likely on the cusp of another major change in computing and the man-machine interface. But don't expect the first products to be the end-all be-all. It will evolve as new and better technologies are invented.
@balintcsikos: Thanks. And you're right. Anakin was a child genius, which just supports my argument. The Force is trying to do something and isn't finished yet.
@mirage_so3: Then you misunderstood me, because I was talking about movies and how serious movie makers take their stuff. Of course people borrow from stuff in the real world, but obviously Neo and the Matrix are not real, which I made a comparison to. I guess you just couldn't follow my logic. But I just might have you wondering now, as well as others who have read my original post.
@mirage_so3: I did say I was speculating didn't I. That's what this comment section is all about. I notice you provided no logic to refute any of my ideas. You, of course, are free to disagree. But I'd be interested to hear your reasons "why" you think what I've described is so over the top. Personally, I think my speculative ideas provides a much better explanation than most of the other theories out there. I also think you are under-estimating just what a person like George Lucas or JJ Abrams puts into the stories they tell in their movies. A lot of movie makers actually try to tell a deep and profound story with all sorts of subtleties (even if most people miss them). And no, movies are not just movies. They are an art-form that communicates a message whether those watching are aware of it or not. However, in the end we know next to nothing about Rey (and other things). And we won't know any more until the next movie. But I do think my ideas make more sense than a lot of others, and you'll think of me if I manage to come pretty close to what they end up doing. Time will tell. But isn't the conversation about possibilities fascinating in itself?
Here's my 2 bits, full of speculation and spoilers...
What is the one thing that is "a long time ago, far far away"? What is the core of the Star Wars universe, the glue that holds everything together? Is it not the Force? I had read one speculative theory that Rey is Anakin reincarnated by the Force, to complete what the Chosen One (Anakin) did not complete. This is possible. Anakin also had an immaculate birth initiated by the Force, marking him as the Chosen One who would "bring balance to the Force". The Force seems to have a will of it's own, though I would be hesitant to ascribe it personality. The point is, the Force can and does make certain things happen. Rey doesn't have to "be" Anakin reincarnated or have had an immaculate birth to be the Force's next prodigy. She could have very normal parents, but the Force intervenes to instill within her all the attributes and powers of the Chosen One. She takes up the mantle of the one who was prophesied. This also provides a reasonable explanation as to how, with virtually no training (unheard of!), she learns Force abilities in The Force Awakens on her own, and quite easily compared to those who came before her. In a way, she is the Force personified in human form. She may very well be the Force incarnate (i.e., in the flesh, in human likeness). Thus she could be understood to be as old as the universe and have access to powers we have yet to see. Of course, she could still be the Chosen One without specifically being the Force incarnate, so it will be interesting to see what JJ Abrams and the other writers and directors come up with. But I believe the answer to who Rey is will be on this level. She will be the Star Wars version of Neo. And just like Morpheus and Trinity did for Neo in The Matrix, I believe there are those who have begun to recognize Rey as the Chosen One in Star Wars (including Maz, Leia, and Luke) - this is the subtle look of recognition they each give her. It is unlikely that she is a Skywalker at all, except in type and heritage with the Force. This also means that there may be more meaning to the title, "The Force Awakens". The Force doesn't just return (after a brief hiatus) , but is embodied more fully in a specific person - Rey.
No way! I appreciate what George has brought us, but directing is NOT his forte. Besides, he has stated several times that he does not share Disney's (and JJ Abrams) vision. He admitted he would just get in the way and create more tension that it's worth. No, move on to new projects George - introduce us to another new and awesome story. But by all means, Disney should ensure the right director is obtained for the next two movies.
So in essence, in the wake of vague and nebulous software patents, you have one company who will endeavor to make it's fortune through litigation, as opposed to actually developing something. For-shame. But such has the battleground in the software industry become. A sad commentary on where we are at and the chaos of this frontier industry. May the one with the best lawyer win I suppose. Actually, may the one who will benefit game development and gamers win.
Riprock's comments