• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Star Wars: The Force Awakens Final Trailer

Status
Not open for further replies.
I seriously need to see an official image of Luke. The suspense...

89a974435b8d4c029dfb79f8cca67f80.jpg


it's going to be poetry
 
In marketing language, a gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. However, the special feature is typically thought to be of little relevance or use.

Hilt is not a gimmick, but this pose is a gimmick they use to obscure half of their faces. It's cool once.

What? A 'unique' saber for the sake of having a unique toy-selling saber isn't a gimmick, but havent a set of posters that all conform to each other is 'standing out' and a gimmick? I guess I'll take your word for it because you gave a definition, so it sounds legit.

God dammit I need to see this movie so I can stop bickering about useless things.
 
I love that they let the actors reveal them on their social media first.

And I wonder if the eye covering thing is a style choice or has significance.

She's "force melted" (her words) in this movie. Grandma Leia in full effect.

Never forget:

c62B4Gm.jpg

What I love about Carrie was how she could be the most severe, firm and scary woman when she was serious, but when she smiled you were suddenly disarmed by how young, petite and cute she was.

carrie-fisher-11.jpg

screen06.jpg
 
In marketing language, a gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. However, the special feature is typically thought to be of little relevance or use.

Hilt is not a gimmick, but this pose is a gimmick they use to obscure half of their faces. It's cool once.

The villain getting a uniquely cool lightsaber is a gimmick that makes it stand out from other lightsabers.

The edgy style/half-obscured face theme being used across the posters is also a gimmick that makes its character teasers stand out from other character-focused posters.
 
The villain getting a uniquely cool lightsaber is a gimmick that makes it stand out from other lightsabers.

The edgy style/half-obscured face theme being used across the posters is also a gimmick that makes its character teasers stand out from other character-focused posters.

"Edgy." Lol. It's not just an identifiable visual trait to easily see they are from the same movie when you are absentmindedly walking down the hall at the multiplex. I'll take this "gimmick" over that Ant-man shit any day.

 
Why is Leia's poster not like the others?

And why is Han's nose facing left? (or is Ford's nose like this IRL)

Overall they all look great though.
 

This is great:

As much as most of Star Wars fandom is warm and embracing, there is this strain of ugliness, this whole #BoycottStarWars movement, where people are upset that Star Wars has been co-opted by women and people of color. How did you feel when you first heard about it?

The biggest movement so far is the fact that Star Wars probably beat Hunger Games in presales eight times over. So my question is, how is that little other agenda doing?
 
Everyone wants to know who Rey's parents are. Do you know?
Yeah.
Will the viewer know after the first episode or not necessarily?
Questions will be answered, absolutely. The main question will be answered.

Jar Jar's the dad.
 
I actually like this tradition of giving the villain a unique saber

Heroes need more creative sabers too. Ezra's blastersaber is GOAT.
 
What? A 'unique' saber for the sake of having a unique toy-selling saber isn't a gimmick, but havent a set of posters that all conform to each other is 'standing out' and a gimmick? I guess I'll take your word for it because you gave a definition, so it sounds legit.

God dammit I need to see this movie so I can stop bickering about useless things.

The villain getting a uniquely cool lightsaber is a gimmick that makes it stand out from other lightsabers.

The edgy style/half-obscured face theme being used across the posters is also a gimmick that makes its character teasers stand out from other character-focused posters.

Marketing gimmicks are usually one-time use devices. You see them once and you forget. A cross-saber is a permanent feature or extension of the character wielding it, so while yes it can be labelled a gimmick, it's more a contrivance or an accessory.
 
Marketing gimmicks are usually one-time use devices. You see them once and you forget. A cross-saber is a permanent feature or extension of the character wielding it, so while yes it can be labelled a gimmick, it's more a contrivance or an accessory.

They're not going to take it away once it's had its initial impact, but its introduction and prevalence in marketing materials is definitely being used as a gimmick to get people hyped for the films.
 
Now that I know Ren is some type of Knight I quite like the hilt, hopefully it means he has a unique fighting style to make use of it.

LOL are you suggesting that the choreographers ought to make a completely new sword fighting style after thousands of years of sword fighting on Earth. That's a pretty tall task.
 
The New Face of Star Wars

I think Finn is a very interesting character. Finn is going to represent that classic “Star Wars” story and that classic “Star Wars” narrative. We have all these new characters coming in, but Finn is going to be one of the characters that carries on the narrative that we all know from the original.

So, for me, it felt like it’s necessary for my guy to be introduced — and introduced with a bang — because his story is not as straightforward.

Everybody’s asking about the mystery of who Finn is. He’s a mysterious guy so far, and no one has any clue what’s going on with him.
 
It's funny because I've seen the leaks and they don't even know who's who or what. Just theories.

Sounds like an Empire-like "only a few of the cast know" kind of thing.

In ESB to fool everyone the line was "Obi-Wan killed your father." I wonder if they'll do something similar with Luke, but reverse it. Everyone will think he's her father, but in reality he'll actually have killed him, or something.
 
Has anyone read this theory? http://www.starwarsringtheory.com/

Even if you don't end up agreeing with it, it's a very interesting read. It may explain why the prequels have so many obvious mistakes; they were already constrained by having to set up the initial state for the OT, and Lucas may have added artificial constraints in order for things to "rhyme" and thus spent too much time on the meta aspects of the movies.
 
Not bad!

Also, just realized there may be a reason for all the duck-looking helmets in this movie.

(Who else do we know has a bill?)

I've seen that somewhere...

TAJ said:
It goes deeper. The entire First Order army is patterned after Jar Jar's unholy visage.
 
I know written media can be misinterpreted, but Boyega seems so mature for his age. On one hand he gets all the deeper stuff he's surrounded by, but then at the same time his room is littered with lightsabers.

Ridley seems so...normal.

I really, really hope these two have one hell of a career path ahead of them.

Yeah, both seem to have a good head on their shoulders.
 

Man these guys are smart about movies. There's a reason they've basically defined popular perception of the prequels (through Plinkett).

I've made several of my own predictions, but these guys are saying things that... while they may or may not be true, I totally buy their argument for why it would be that way. We will see.
 
Watching the video now. Its pretty good so far, its fun to think of the possibilities.

I had a thought.
If Kylo is Han and Leia's kid, maybe Luke had refused to train him when he was younger. Which has now led him to seek out info about the force by himself etc.
 
Do you know if they are distributing posters out yet? I want to go down to my local AMC Loews or Marquee Cinemas to see if they have any.

I want to see Spectre so i might be a good reason enough to go down there
 
Has anyone read this theory? http://www.starwarsringtheory.com/

Even if you don't end up agreeing with it, it's a very interesting read. It may explain why the prequels have so many obvious mistakes; they were already constrained by having to set up the initial state for the OT, and Lucas may have added artificial constraints in order for things to "rhyme" and thus spent too much time on the meta aspects of the movies.

That's really interesting. I can totally see GL obsessed into this meta aspect of the movies.

Sadly, this doesn't change the fact that 3 stanzas of his poem just aren't very good. At the end of the day, people don't care if a poem is perfectly structured, they care about the verses.

It does make the whole more interesting, though.
 
Man these guys are smart about movies. There's a reason they've basically defined popular perception of the prequels (through Plinkett).

I've made several of my own predictions, but these guys are saying things that... while they may or may not be true, I totally buy their argument for why it would be that way. We will see.

If they're accurate about most of this, I can already hear the gears churning in Mike's head for the Plinkett video.
 
Has anyone read this theory? http://www.starwarsringtheory.com/

Even if you don't end up agreeing with it, it's a very interesting read. It may explain why the prequels have so many obvious mistakes; they were already constrained by having to set up the initial state for the OT, and Lucas may have added artificial constraints in order for things to "rhyme" and thus spent too much time on the meta aspects of the movies.

reading through it, I get the feeling that some people may go to such lengths to justify the current state of the prequels that end up creating convoluted narratives in their heads just to make sense of them and tell themselves "they have to have some deeper meaning, it just can't be this simple". It's like when some Tool fans were utterly convinced 10,000 Days was a decoy album that hid clues about the real followup to Lateralus that was coming later.

These seeming meta-structures, meta-narratives, apparent symbolic layers of stuff don't make the movies great. It probably makes them more interesting, even more thoughtful than apparent... but still doesn't make them good movies, IMHO.

Then again, the prequels/Lucas don't deserve a lot of the shit they actually get. They're disappointing and bad movies, but I don't think they're this sort of gargantuan, life-ruining black void some people make them out to be.
 
Every time I've tried to watch the Plinkett reviews, the style just puts me off so much that I can't stand it. I don't suppose there's someone who made a more I dunno, normal (?) version?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom