Having seen this last night, I may not have bothered knowing that it was going to use all the same broad plot points as A New Hope.
I mean, I didn't hate it. It's just reading reviews and what not saying "it captures the spirit of the original movies", I didn't think it'd literally be a revisiting of the previous movies, right down to not-the-rebels destroying not-the-deathstar.
I also found that the world-building was particularly uninspired. I mean, the prequels annoyed me as much as the next guy, but at least Lucas created some unique, memorable locations in there (Naboo; Kamino; Mustafar). We had desert planet and snowy planet (that is also not-the-deathstar) and forest with a bar in it, except none of them were close to being as visually striking as anything from the original or prequel trilogies.
(While I'm at it, I also rolled my eyes at that patented JJ Abrams moment of destroying something to show the power of the bad guys - it was Vulcan in Star Trek which at least we had some connection to, whereas Republic HQ when we've literally just been re-introduced to the Republic had no emotional attachment).
| Wright said:
I like his Star Trek movies. He pulled out that parallel universe not to conflict with the originals, and so he's good to do whatever he wants without screwing up the legacy. Also, I found them entertaining to watch. |
I love the Star Trek TV series', and I can safely say that I really enjoyed what he did with the first film - it was very well handled, in my opinion. Which makes it such a shame that Into Darkness was handled the way it was. Beyond is looking dodgy too, I have to say.
