FLIP wrote:I wasn't all that young at all, and I am capable of distinguishing between a film that's disappointing in context to a series (which both the prequels and TFA are) and extremely bad films full stop.
Surely if I had bad taste I'd like all of them, and all the other shite Abrams has pumped out over the years.
Well your taste is yours and you are, of course, absolutely right no question.
But... taste isn't that important, I'm sure you can dig out the Picasso quote on taste and art.
I didn't point by point answer your criticisms of the new one in your spoiler tag. Mostly because all the w&%k about spoilers just irritates me and if we are going to stifle debate to keep the babies happy let's just accept it. But anyway, most of those criticisms apply to the first three. The foreshadowing, the copy paste plot, the music (it's the same f%~king music. A pastiche of Korngold, who was a knock off of the execrable bombast called Mahler - just hum Mahlers death march and the imperial march back to back) it's just that you watched them as a kid when your critical faculties and your range of references were restricted. You want bad staging and cinematography? Go look at the later edits of the trilogy with the real action relegated to a letterbox in the bottom of the screen while Lucas adds in a load of immediately dated digital clutter distracting attention from the actors and the action. The empire, as originally released suffers none of that as it was directed by a pro. The first couple were edited by Walter Murch and his wife and done right. As he (Lucas) got complete control the films suffered.
Abrams made Star Trek like it was Star Wars and made a right mess of them. Unforgivably bad.
But. If you look at the first 30 minutes of the first ST Abrams made, it's really good. He has an ability to economically deliver the exposition and a sympathy with the characters and their histories while also allowing them to be updated subtly which boxed well for Star Wars. I think he delivered that. But then he has to do plot, and as anyone who suffered through more than a few hours of Lost would notice, he gets lost in an unholy mess with plottiness delivering pointless complexities that are labyrinthine and unengaging and profoundly silly.
Star Wars doesn't really have that problem as it is based on a ruthlessly minimal structural anthropological dissection of story, the only story. The hero's journey. All the elements are by design cliches, or memes if you prefer. In Lucas's case derived from pulp serials reflected through this high concept lens and actualised by a visual storyteller steeped in the movies and their lore.
I disagree with Lucas's (and Campbell's, his script guru) beliefs, but obviously I'm wrong and three billion people are right!
Edit: alright, here's a massive big Star Wars spoiler: