Watch the first trailer for Star Wars: Episode VII

Thanks to the Thanksgiving holiday, ahem, there isn't much in the way of tech news out there today. But there is a new trailer for a little movie you might have heard of: Star Wars: Episode VII, otherwise known as The Force Awakens.

Winter is also coming to the Star Wars universe, it seems, and it's packing a lightsaber that looks like a broadsword longsword. Hmmm.

What do we think?

Comments closed
    • rutra80
    • 5 years ago

    The overall style seems to have more in common with the 80s movies than the newer ones, which is great. Hopefully it will be the same with everything else (writing, acting, etc.). I find the 3 newer movies directed more towards children instead of a more mature viewer.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 5 years ago

    So much hate in the comments. I actually was pleasantly surprised by the trailer. Abrams can direct quite well, my great concern was actually weather the screenplay was any good because we all know who his favorite writers are and how good they are… (orci and kurtzman)

    • derFunkenstein
    • 5 years ago

    I know we’re a year out, but man…that showed basically nothing.

    • Bensam123
    • 5 years ago

    Just like with Star Trek… Is this going to stay true to the original roots? No… Is it going to be good in it’s own way and worth watching? Yes.

    Star Trek had the same thing done. JJ Abrahams is great at pooping all over your conceptions of what something should be and making it what he thinks it should be. This wont be a classical Star Wars and people who think it is (or that it should be) don’t watch it.

    In a lot of ways he does what other people don’t want to do or don’t think they should, by going against the grain and offering something that is more up to date regardless of what the expectations are or the fans want. Episode 1-3 was supposed to be what the fans wanted and we saw how that turned out.

    I don’t exactly hate a retelling of a story, especially when it’s told in a different way with someone elses flare added onto it. There will still be the original story you can go and watch again.

      • Major-Failure
      • 5 years ago

      You can rest assured there will be Millions of folks crying murder because they expect this film to cater to their whims. People have such a huge sense of entitlement these days, especially in the comments section.

        • Bensam123
        • 5 years ago

        More like they think there is only one possible right solution and it’s theirs. I’d say it’s more about tolerating difference.

      • TwoEars
      • 5 years ago

      I think the story in episodes 1-3 had potential, huge potential in fact. It just seemed that George Lucas had lost his artistic touch. Or maybe he never he had to begin with, maybe somone else did most of the legwork that he later took the credit for? Maybe drugs ruined him? Maybe the abscence of drugs ruined him? Who knows…

      • derFunkenstein
      • 5 years ago

      I agree about the flare, as long as it’s not lens flare. :p

      (PS: I think you meant flair)

        • confusedpenguin
        • 5 years ago

        Once you get used to the lense flare, you don’t notice it. lol.

      • confusedpenguin
      • 5 years ago

      I liked what J.J.Abrams did for Star Trek. He made it less cheesy(nerdy). Not that the first 6 episodes of Star Wars are nerdy(except for that abomination Jar Jar Binks), but I think J.J.Abrams will improve Star Wars in a way. Anyway, back to Star Trek. Star Trek Enterprise wasn’t too bad. Star Trek TNG and it’s associated movies were the worst. It was filled with horrible cheesiness and nerdgasm-inducing punch lines that made me cringe with embarrassment while reaching for the remote to change the channel. I mean the humor seems like it was meant to either relate to a 9 year old or those classmates in high school who still picked their noses and ate their boogers while drawing pictures of their Nintendo gear and showing them off to their nerd classmates.

        • Palek
        • 5 years ago

        So far I have really liked everything JJ Abrams has been involved in. Super 8 in particular was excellent. Sure, the man may love his lens flares too much, but he’s a solid director, and is especially great at writing great characters, finding the right cast, and then squeezing great performances out of them. Lost and Fringe had some of the best-written characters on TV. He also knows how to film action scenes properly and uses special effects in service of the story, not the other way around. The Star Wars franchise is in much better hands with him than with Lucas.

        • travbrad
        • 5 years ago

        Yep. I don’t think the new Star Trek films are amazing or anything, but they are way better than those horrible TNG movies that were almost painful to watch. The only good Star Trek films up until the new ones were with the original cast, and even some of those weren’t very good (plus they were obviously aimed at fans of the show rather than a general audience). The Star Trek TV shows have always been better than the movies IMO.

      • travbrad
      • 5 years ago

      I don’t really understand why people are so worried about JJ “ruining” Star Wars. He couldn’t possibly do worse things to it than George Lucas has for the last 15 years. Star Wars already hit rock bottom and things can only get better from now on.

    • Vrock
    • 5 years ago

    So that makes, what…five black guys in the galaxy now?

    1) Lando. The black guy to end all black guys.
    2) Black guy X Wing pilot in ROTJ
    3) Black guy Captain in charge of something in the prequels I’ve mostly forgotten.
    4) Samuel L. Jackson. AKA “Hand me my lightsaber. It’s the one that says Bad Motherf*cker on it”.
    5) Stormtrooper black guy in Ep. VII.

    Yeah, I’m going to see this at some point. Probably won’t like it. Oh well. I’ll try, at least.

      • TwoEars
      • 5 years ago

      If it makes you any happier I can tell you that 90% of the storm troopers are black, you just don’t see it.

        • Vrock
        • 5 years ago

        So much happier, thanks.

      • chuckula
      • 5 years ago

      YOU FORGOT JAMES EARL JONES!!

        • MadManOriginal
        • 5 years ago

        Such stereotyping of the black man as the bad guy πŸ™

          • chuckula
          • 5 years ago

          [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgTuarwFm6s[/url<]

          • Vrock
          • 5 years ago

          Hollywood typically only knows three ways to portray black guys:

          1) The villain.
          2) The Magical Negro, AKA the wise, benevolent character with special insight/gifts.
          3) The loud, obnoxious “street” type, who usually doesn’t survive the movie.

        • Vrock
        • 5 years ago

        Black guy voice, hmm…not sure if that counts as the actors who play Darth/Anakin are white as Wonder Bread.

          • chuckula
          • 5 years ago

          You REALLY need to watch that youtube link I posted.

          #WhatsANubian

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 5 years ago

      Who cares. Must everything be about political correctness? It doesn’t add anything to the movies.

        • Vrock
        • 5 years ago

        Clearly you aren’t a member of the GAACP (Galactic Association for the Advancement of Colored People).

      • jihadjoe
      • 5 years ago

      Since the stormtroopers are the clone army, does this mean that all the stormtroopers are actually black?

        • Krogoth
        • 5 years ago

        That’s only few generations during the Clone Wars. After the Clone Wars, the Galactic Empire started to pick up conscripts from normal citizens.

      • Krogoth
      • 5 years ago

      There was some extras and I think a few of young Padawans are on the list. πŸ˜‰

      • Choz
      • 5 years ago

      You have to remember, it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…

      6) So many deserts, so few arabs.

    • TwoEars
    • 5 years ago

    I don’t like J.J. Abrams all that much.

    He’s only half as smart as he thinks he is and he goes about making his moves like if they’re a collection of set pieces. “This is very there is a bit of love action”, “this is where they wink at eachother”, “this is where they have the big fight”, “this is where the lead-actor looks tough”, “this is the plot twist”, “this is where you clue audience in”… so on and so forth. You get the feeling you’re on rails and it gets boring pretty quick, at least for me.

    He might give you a dozen 8/10 movies, and keep on doing that until he’s 65, but I doubt he’ll ever make a truly great 10/10 movie like Alien, Blade Runner, A New Hope etc etc. He’s just not a “visionary force” like the truly great directors and writers.

    • gamoniac
    • 5 years ago

    That is the dumbest lightsaber design ever, clearly by someone who has never held a sword. For something powerful as the lightsaber, the level of mastery hinges on by one’s agility (footwork and wrists). That “wrist guard” will clearly cause one to sever one’s own wrist before the enemy does. As if the original light saber fight wasn’t rigid enough… I just want a more realistic lightsaber fight, that’s all.

    They try way too hard to be cool.

      • alphadogg
      • 5 years ago

      In case you haven’t noticed, it’s not a real sword, emphasis on “not real”.

        • cphite
        • 5 years ago

        Wait… what? Not real? But it says clearly at the beginning of all of these movies that they took place in a galaxy far, far away! Are you telling me that we’ve been lied to all this time? That none of these things actually happened?!? Luke? Leah? Han? They were just… pretend?

        Yes, genius – we know it’s not a real sword. But even as a pretend sword, it’s a silly design.

    • swaaye
    • 5 years ago

    I’m guessing it will be solid, action-filled Star Wars fun since Abrams has proven he can do some decent work even if it’s not exactly revolutionary visionary stuff. I like the generally authentic look of it too.

    • Shouefref
    • 5 years ago

    Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.

    Fact is: the aim of my life is not to see Star Wars.

    And when it comes to movies: I’ld rather have something new instead of repackaged old stuff.

      • Choz
      • 5 years ago

      And yet you chose to comment on a Star Wars dedicated article?

      Not to mention if the aim of your life is to avoid a series of movies, maybe you should aim a little higher?

    • Krogoth
    • 5 years ago

    Protip: Star Wars Episode VII is marketed towards the new generation of kiddies. They are going to setup them with a new generation of characters.

    Disney doesn’t care about old fans (Discrediting the entire EU line-up is proof of this). They are going to kill off/write off the old cast in this movie. Original actors probably see this as a way to get themselves out of the franchise.

    [spoiler<]Luke is going to pull a Obi-Wan. Han is going to get shot (I hope JJ Abrams has the bad guy do it first πŸ˜‰ ). Leia dies from a broken heart (+1 trolling to old fans + continuity nod to her birth mother's fate). Chewy goes on a berserker rage to revenge Han but dies in the process. C3P0 is going to get scrapped or reprogrammed(in-universe explanation on why its voice changes.) [/spoiler<]

      • Krogoth
      • 5 years ago

      Search your feelings, fanboys.

      You know that it is going to be true. πŸ˜‰

        • Ninjitsu
        • 5 years ago

        Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

      • Laykun
      • 5 years ago

      “Disney doesn’t care about old fans ” except the entire trailer is composed of imagery from the original saga, designed to APPEAL to the older generation of fans.

        • Krogoth
        • 5 years ago

        Not really, the trailer looks like the Star Trek reboots, expect with Star Wars props.

        The only thing that is a nod to the old fan is the Falcon.

          • blastdoor
          • 5 years ago

          And the X-wings that sound like X-wings, and the Tie fighters that sound like Tie fighters, and a character who is clearly impersonating a storm trooper as in ep4.

          The Star Trek reboot movies were full of shout outs to the old fans — sometimes to an almost ridiculous extent. I suspect these new Star Wars movies will be too, for better and worse.

      • willyolio
      • 5 years ago

      [quote<]Discrediting the entire EU[/quote<] yeah, that's pretty much necessary to write any kind of coherent story at all, given what a gong show the EU canon is.

        • Mikael33
        • 5 years ago

        That was one of the dumbest posts on the internet I’ve seen Krogoth.

    • Laykun
    • 5 years ago

    Apparently Star Wars is a story about X-Wings, Light sabers, cloaks and the millennium falcon. Here I thought these were just props to help tell the story, props that became iconic BECAUSE of the story, not the other way round. I see a trailer designed to sell a product to people who recognise imagery from the original Star Wars films with a cheesy/cliche bad guy voice over. I’m not going to judge the entire film on this trailer but needless to say it doesn’t set a good precedent.

      • albundy
      • 5 years ago

      is there such a thing as irony in reminiscing?

      • alphadogg
      • 5 years ago

      You are bitter because they created a TEASER trailer that actually teases instead of giving away the main plot! Oh my word, how evil of Hollywood!

        • Laykun
        • 5 years ago

        I’m not bitter at all, I’m just extrapolating the movie from the teaser. I see a lot of movies and after a while you find theirs no point in getting bitter over films, but you do get a certain feel for how things might play out in a film, even based off a trailer. You see when it comes to these kind of products you have to decide how to hit your key demograph, there’s lots of complicated decisions backed by lengthy discussions about how to do exactly that, because lets be honest, Hollywood films are products and not artistic master pieces (not necessarily a bad thing). Now this is just a teaser, so it MAY not be indicative of the final product, but the items that they chose to tease can lend you some insight into their decision making process and what they prioritise in the production process.

        To put a finer point on it, the part of the teaser that worries me is they chose to use iconic imagery, and it’s only iconic because it was backed by such an amazing story and characters from the original saga, but in isolation they provide no real value to the viewer except a sense of nostalgia. I think this worry is compounded by the fact by the imagery that they chose to tease that wasn’t in the original saga looks stupid as heck, a lightsaber with a hilt ( wouldn’t it instantly get cut off by a light saber striking it?).

        Now if we dial back to J.J’s previous Star Trek movies you can further extrapolate how a movie might turn out from there. I’ve seen all the Star Trek movies and there’s a lot to love there, but there’s also a lot more to hate with some absolute trash over the years, but side-by-side with the new movies you notice that J.J. tends to straight lift and steal moments, ideas and imagery for the sole purpose of inducing a sense of nostalgia in the viewer, but for someone like me who isn’t a ‘fanboy’, but is familiar with the content, it comes off as cringe worthy and awkward (Old Spock’s numerous appearances, the reactor scene from Wrath of Khan.). I feel like the fact that they had to balance pleasing old fans but also appeasing to new audiences detracted from the overall story of the movie and the flexibility they had to write something that was truly good. I would hate for the same to happen to the new Star Wars franchise as part of me was looking for some great new characters and a refreshing divergence from the original saga but sticking to the original theme of a relate-able nobody origins story turning into an epic space adventure.

        But hey, the teaser might just be the first 5 minutes of the film, which provides the user with a back story that leads up to the events of the movie which actually are new, refreshing and fun. The point is I’m expressing concern, I’m certainly reserving my judgement for the final product but I’m certainly not hating on the movie because of it’s teaser. That probably won’t help me, but it’s my only hope.

        • Laykun
        • 5 years ago

        Also THIS WORRIES ME A LOT :

        Writing Credits (in alphabetical order)
        J.J. Abrams … (screenplay)
        Lawrence Kasdan … (screenplay)
        [b<]George Lucas ... (characters)[/b<] George Lucas writes TERRIBLE characters (Episode 1, 2 and 3). Oh well, I suppose at least Damon Lindelof isn't on the writing staff.

    • fhohj
    • 5 years ago

    Why couldn’t they just leave the lightsaber alone? Why? The staff was a logical and badass extension.

    This thing, not so much.

    What this should have been, instead of what it was, is like a hidden staff or something. He shuts off his saber for a second, pops that thing off the top, and then one-hand staffs it like Darth Bane or something.

    T-Rexsaber.

    Lilsabers.

    D**ksaber.

    They got the effect right anyway. It is looking as it should again. The move to CGI and subsequent cleaning it up sucked all the character from it.

    Looks cold in that shot. Explains the saber nipples erecting themselves. Take the saber nipples away please. If the saber nipples are a gimmick please replace them with said saber staff gimmick.

    I’ve changed my mind.

    Any PC enthusiast should clearly just respect what the man has done with his build there.

    I’m sure it suits his needs and the kind of workloads he throws at it.

    For all we know the lilsabers are a workaround or patch of some kind. Yes that is it. Jedi Tuesday patch LB2817163 (for lightsaber base. get it?), which is a workaround for certain security vulnerabilities affecting lightsabers version 1, which could result in successful remote compromise.

    This where I’d ask Krogoth to give them one for me.

      • dragontamer5788
      • 5 years ago

      Lucas wanted Light-nunchucks, and Light-Tonfas and Light-Whips existed in the extended universe.

      Be happy its basically a Scottish Claymore, which is honestly a very elegant weapon.

        • fhohj
        • 5 years ago

        Maybe it is, but this isn’t a claymore, it’s a lightsaber with two little lightsaber twerps sticking off the handle. Part of the reason the claymore is popular is because of its tradition. Sticking little impractical doodads on the sides of your lightsaber hilt isn’t elegant. It doesn’t even achieve what it is supposed to particularly well as anybody can still cut through that saber provided they hit the corner where the secondary emitters end.

        What about a cortosis glove? Like a shiny black michael jackson cortosis glove and the dude catches a lightsaber with his hand at one point? That’d be new, and cool. They could even make it like cortosis isn’t invincible and after enough strikes he loses the glove. I don’t like the twerpsabers.

          • Voldenuit
          • 5 years ago

          [quote<]I don't like the twerpsabers.[/quote<] Twerpsabers - that's my new word of the day. Props for that.

      • alphadogg
      • 5 years ago

      I never realized till this batch of comments that one can be a nerd and a hipster at the same time!

      • trackerben
      • 5 years ago

      Funny but those looked like side-firing flames instead of extruding “lightbeams”. It does look like a cold winter scene so what silly came to mind was, “aha, hand warmers!” I can imagine the Sith popping a Jabba cigar, lighting it up two-handedly with lightsaber broad to his cloaked face.

      But it’s Disney and this isn’t happening.

    • End User
    • 5 years ago

    Hell ya!

    • Krogoth
    • 5 years ago

    Looks like the Star Trek reboots expect with Star Wars props.

      • JumpingJack
      • 5 years ago

      This.

      • End User
      • 5 years ago

      Just retire to the old fuddy duddy farm already.

        • Krogoth
        • 5 years ago

        I honestly don’t care. It looks like Episode VII has a good chance of being the next “Crystal Skull”. I doubt it will beat Episode I in terms of hamfisted awfulness.

        Hell, Disney already tried its own “Star Wars” clone with a lesser-known flick called “Black Hole”…..

          • End User
          • 5 years ago

          Of course you care. You are here!

          LOL at the Black Hole. I have it. How on earth you managed to bring up that 1979 classic in 2014 is beyond me. You must be as old as I am but bitter and jaded.

            • Krogoth
            • 5 years ago

            Black Hole was a Star Wars rip-off + “Ghost Ship in Space!”

            Black Hole itself was a whirlpool not the genuine object. >_<

            • MadManOriginal
            • 5 years ago

            ‘…not the genuine object…’

            What? Did you expect them to film near an actual black hole?

      • BIF
      • 5 years ago

      The problems with the Star Trek reboots are that they…

      1. broke the timeline (and left it a mess)
      2. didn’t fix the timeline (or at least mend it so it wasn’t a mess)
      3. made major canon changes and didn’t fix the biggest ones
      4. loaded both movies with a lot of plot and technological inconsistencies
      5. didn’t really develop the characters very well. After two movies, Kirk and Spock still seem two-dimensional to me and we barely know Uhura, Sulu, and Checkov. We don’t even hear the names of the new temporary characters. Examples: “Buttercup” security guy who they killed off anyway and that lady who sat in the right seat in the second movie, and none of the other expanded Bridge crew for that matter… At least we know a little more about Scotty; he’ll quit rather than violate his principles.
      6. take too long between movies; by movie 5, all the characters will be older than the TOS characters at the start of the first movie in ’79.

      Star Trek needs television.

      There I said it. Star Trek is about the characters, and only in a weekly television show can the characters REALLY be explored. A 90-minute movie every 4-5 years simply can’t do justice to the characters. It’s like mental rice-cakes. Not filling, not satisfying, and with no nourishment.

      But it won’t happen because Hollywood is lazy and fresh out of ideas in between lame (un)reality shows.

    • JumpingJack
    • 5 years ago

    Oh dear….. I’ve got a bad feeling about this.

      • Krogoth
      • 5 years ago

      We haven’t seen the new flaring effects on blaster shots and lightsabers crashing. πŸ˜‰

        • JumpingJack
        • 5 years ago

        I saw enough of the new lightsaber to make me cringe … not only do they have the quillons but the light glow is rough, shimmering, almost electric like. Not that bright with the diffuse drop off glow of the beloved lightsabers in Ep 4-6 ….

        Ohhh, and don’t forget the crackling sound effects……

        My tummy is feeling just a bit uneasy, and it is not from yesterday’s dinner.

    • Platedslicer
    • 5 years ago

    I’m not completely against some significant changes in the “traditional” Star Wars way of things. I mean, the Jedi Order was essentially wiped out by the Empire, along with much of their records, traditions… it only makes sense that things would turn out different when rebuilding from scratch.

    On the surface the trailer seems to indicate that Disney chose to stick to the “Republic vs. Empire” (and later the Yuuzhan whatever) theme of the Expanded Universe. That’s unfortunate… I always thought it would make for much better plot opportunities if the galaxy splintered into myriad political units. Guess they decided to play it safe and stick to the “good guys vs. bad guys” theme.

    • SoberAddiction
    • 5 years ago

    What the hell did they do to the Millennium Falcon?????

      • Krogoth
      • 5 years ago

      Same ship more of a less, except it uses a CGI model instead of the old ILM model.

      At least JJ Abrams throws a continuity nod by giving it a replacement sensor dish that looks more “modern”. πŸ˜‰

        • fhohj
        • 5 years ago

        I don’t hate it.

          • Krogoth
          • 5 years ago

          I’m indifferent.

        • SoberAddiction
        • 5 years ago

        While I like the detail on the ship itself, I’m more upset with the engines losing the blue aura. They elongated and made them skinnier. I just feel like the powerful thrust-look-thingy they had is gone.

          • Bensam123
          • 5 years ago

          Because they can actually show thrusters now instead of pasting a blue blur over the back of the entire ship to give the illusion of a engine.

      • Choz
      • 5 years ago

      CGI because someone dropped the model and broke it.

    • christos_thski
    • 5 years ago

    So am I the only one who thought this was through and through a run of the mill, flick of the month hollywood trailer? If it didn’t boast the “star wars” brand, this trailer would not warrant a second look, regardless of marketing hype.

    I’ve seen trailers for “critters” that had more oomph.

    • trackerben
    • 5 years ago

    Episode V=

    • invinciblegod
    • 5 years ago

    So are the storm troopers clones in Ep 4-6? Because if they are, there can’t be a Black storm trooper because they should all be clones of that one guy in Ep2. Or is he a spy? Or did they retire clones in favor of drafting after the prequels?

      • Tumbleweed
      • 5 years ago

      Nope, they’re not all clones in Eps 4-6.

      • curtisb
      • 5 years ago

      I took it as a disguise…as in “Aren’t you a little short for a storm trooper?”.

      • Vaughn
      • 5 years ago

      You need to brush up on your stars wars.

      The empire stopped using clones after the clone wars and started to recruit normal people.

        • bthylafh
        • 5 years ago

        According to some nerds they went with conscription instead of recruitment.

      • tipoo
      • 5 years ago

      Lots of reasons there’s nothing wrong with this. Simplest one is that he does seem to be a spy, judging by how nervous he looks and the close up face shot (would they do that with any old storm trooper?). But anyways, the storm troopers are not all clone troopers, by the original trilogy I think most were not, with a few clones scattered in. That’s why there was also a gulf in skill between them, storm troopers took a lot more crappy people. Also, they started changing around the genes of the clones to be more varied, since a single type was not a great idea for many reasons (i.e. one disease could affect them all, or they could all have the same idea of rebellion, etc). So they could have also made different racial traits just for variance.

        • curtisb
        • 5 years ago

        No, you have it all wrong. Clearly they made them immune to any type of disease and removed all thoughts of rebellion. However, this came at the expense of any sort of accuracy with a weapon, just short of being able to hit the broad side of a planet with a moon-sized weapon.

      • chuckula
      • 5 years ago

      I think this instructional video tells us everything we need to know about the men of the imperial forces: [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvswNDAAZCU[/url<]

    • Ninjitsu
    • 5 years ago

    I remember dad telling me how mesmerizing the first movie was back in the 70s…I think, in terms of visuals, I’m going to have a similar experience when this movie releases.

    Though I wish they’d show something in…you know, space.

    • albundy
    • 5 years ago

    THX just kicked in on my klipsch pro medias!

    • tipoo
    • 5 years ago

    Lightsaber could use a few improvements

    [url<]https://scontent-b-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10690238_10203911718166254_7359997061316162092_n.jpg?oh=fa16e18db6d58498ebaf752c60e563e1&oe=5516CA4E[/url<]

      • tipoo
      • 5 years ago

      [url<]https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10411936_970157739680120_2239468310416561299_n.jpg?oh=796103b47ac1cd82e549a896a973f8c5&oe=5512E127&__gda__=1427884447_b75eeb9ab0057e53d8dde6f247e453df[/url<]

        • curtisb
        • 5 years ago

        That was my first thought, too! You just know JJ did that on purpose…

        Also relevant given his “batmobile hitches a ride” video:

        [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj23dwWHukY[/url<]

      • curtisb
      • 5 years ago

      Sith Army Knife.

    • sweatshopking
    • 5 years ago

    THIS…. PAGE…. HAS…. TOO MUCH NERD TO HANDLE… HAVE TO NAVIGATE…. AWAY….

      • Ninjitsu
      • 5 years ago

      Use the force to guide you.

    • PainIs4ThaWeak1
    • 5 years ago

    Call me crazy, but I can’t seem to bring myself to dislike any of the movies!

    For me, its more about seeing more of the story on screen than it is actor/actress performances, the quality of CGI, or the random “goof”-up, etc.

    Though I will admit, I’m the son of a man who saw the original 26 times while it was first in theaters. So maybe that has something to do with it. (Though, I’m undoubtedly much less enthused about the series as he was/is.)

      • TheEmrys
      • 5 years ago

      I thought that way before Episode 1. And then Jar Jar happened. And the CGI. Then the writing.

      I am hopeful, but not quite exuberant.

      • tay
      • 5 years ago

      Meesa calls yousa crazy.

      • FuturePastNow
      • 5 years ago

      I dislike Episode II, because I actually fell asleep watching it. The prequels all have problems but I and III weren’t boring.

      I don’t know what I expect JJ Abrahms to deliver, but after watching this trailer, I expect it to not be boring.

    • atari030
    • 5 years ago

    Based on the disasters that Episodes I-III were, I’m trying not to get too excited.

    However, I can’t help but be very optimistic given all the significant factors that have changed since those were produced and the new Episode VII. The trailer looks [b<]bada**[/b<]

      • chuckula
      • 5 years ago

      The good news is that Episodes I – III were so bad that even something so-so will look good in comparison!

        • derFunkenstein
        • 5 years ago

        True dat.

      • sweatshopking
      • 5 years ago

      SUCH ACTING! [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfevBIsVG1o[/url<]

    • Major-Failure
    • 5 years ago

    Some time … in the not so distant future … December 2015!

      • Ninjitsu
      • 5 years ago

      I KNOW RIGHT? A bloody [i<]year[/i<] of teasers to sit through! I just hope they don't go Ubisoft on us.

    • tipoo
    • 5 years ago

    Cross guards make perfect sense, but the base extension thingies could still be cut off.

      • dragontamer5788
      • 5 years ago

      But circa 1400s or so, swordplay users began to [url=http://i.imgur.com/R4zsPC9.jpg<]grip the sword at the cross-guard[/url<], because it was more comfortable to do so. (I know this is a Rapier picture, but pretend that the picture wasn't a rapier but just a simple longsword) Soon after that, Rapiers were invented so that your index-finger (which was now "above the crossguard") was protected as well. (The dull "Ricasso" portion of the blade + the finger-ring) So that section of the light-saber, in historical terms, would be gripped by the index finger of the sword user. ------------- Not that I actually expect the new Sith-lord to actually grip the light-saber like this... but I'd be very impressed if that happened πŸ™‚

    • dragontamer5788
    • 5 years ago

    [quote<]Winter is also coming to the Star Wars universe, it seems, and it's packing a lightsaber that looks like a [b<]broadsword[/b<]. Hmmm.[/quote<] That's not a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basket-hilted_sword<]broadsword[/url<]. Its a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longsword<]Longsword[/url<].

      • Melvar
      • 5 years ago

      Either way, it looks incredibly stupid as an energy weapon.

        • StuG
        • 5 years ago

        Honestly I liked it, it makes total sense for the same reason a Longsword has that anyway.

        • dragontamer5788
        • 5 years ago

        [b<]Every single Jedi fight[/b<] has ended with some guy's hand getting chopped off. Cross-guards were invented to protect your wrists. They don't get in the way of fights. Actually, normal light-sabers look dumb in comparison. Lets look at this from a historical perspective. Name me an European Middle-Age or later sword that didn't include some form of wrist protection. Wrist-protection / Hilts only got more complex as time went on. Historically, fights end when your wrists get cut by the opponent. Crossguards were the first and simplest historical answer to this problem. (Not enough however. The height of wrist protection was the [url=http://i.imgur.com/D11AeQs.jpg<]crazy Rapiers[/url<] that came out hundreds of years later. Note that Rapiers not only have a crossguard, but also a ton of other metal there to protect your hand from other angles). Honestly, its ridiculous that crossguards haven't entered Jedi-training [b<]sooner[/b<].

          • Melvar
          • 5 years ago

          That’s all great, but those weren’t lightsabers. Those two extra lightsabers coming out of that lightsaber seem like they would be far more likely to cut the user’s own hand off than prevent the opponent from doing it. Lightsabers don’t have a dull side.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 5 years ago

            I’m not a swordplay expert, nor a fencing master. But in my… short time… with swordplay. I have [b<]NEVER[/b<] had the cross-guard touch my hand or wrist. So with what experience do [b<]you[/b<] speak of with? Why do you think a crossguard would get tangled up in someone's hand? They're placed along the edge of the blade, because your wrists can't move in that direction! Its very convenient and doesn't get in the way, at least with European-style martial arts. Now note, the recent "style" of Star Wars fights has been Chinese / Japanese swirly Wushu stuff. Which is kinda nice (maybe historically accurate, I'm not a Wushu expert... but I really don't know). Those Wushu swords didn't have cross-guards (or at least, had very small crossguards) which allowed for those swirly-spinny moves. ([url=http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3/BlazeLeeDragon/RoninFactsheetJianParts_zps44655547.jpg<]Jian[/url<] and [url=http://imgur.com/1UBZARY<]Dao[/url<]) But European Knights never did spins or swirls. Their cuts were direct, [url=http://youtu.be/TtNZQBc4RpE?t=1m<]full of power and strength[/url<]. Its a very distinct style of combat, and I'd [b<]LOVE[/b<] to see the Sith Lord fight like this. Lightsaber (episodes 4 through 6) were truly sabers. (They hired a master Saber Fencer to teach the actors). Lightsaber (episodes 1 through 3) were Chinese Martial Arts. Dao, Jin, Bo-Staff (Darth Maul was fighting Bo-Staff style). Spin-spin-spin is how a lot of that stuff goes. Lets hope for an Episode 7 through 9 European longsword-style combat. Its actually quite mesmerizing to watch.

            • Melvar
            • 5 years ago

            I’m not trying to come off as an expert in swords. If this actually was a lightbroadsword with some sort of shield around the hand & wrist that would make sense to me. This is like having two dagger blades for a cross-guard, which seems like something you might do for show, but probably not in a sword that was likely to be used frequently in combat.

            Also, wrist, chest, leg, friend fighting next to you, whatever. It just seems like you’re now constantly pointing additional weapons around, and eventually with enough of these in service it will result in accidental casualties.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 5 years ago

            I’m not an expert either. But I do have limited experience with LARPing with weapons with crossguards, as well as some beginner-level fencing experience. And mind you, the “LARPing” does include fighting with many people. The biggest fight I was in was ~30 vs 30 as a spearman, although my friends have gone into 1000+ person fights.

            So yes, I’m also comfortable in saying that your crossguard probably won’t hit people next to you. In fact, your own allies need to stand a fair bit away from you, lest you get “tangled up” in their moves. Formation is not about standing shoulder-to-shoulder, its more about 2 or 3 steps away on both sides.

            I mean honestly, you wouldn’t be able to move your spear if your allies were too close. You learn pretty quick what the proper distance away from your allies is.

            But going back to this: just grab a sword with a crossguard, (or pretend to play with one). Swing it around a few times, and you’ll notice that the crossguard just won’t really hit you. Your wrists don’t bend in the direction where you’d really hurt yourself… not if you’re doing anything that looks like European Martial Arts. (Again, ignore the spinny Wushu stuff that the Prequel Trilogy was so fond of)

            Granted, European Martial Arts includes armor, and gripping the blade in… strange ways… to deliver [url=http://youtu.be/1S_Q3CGqZmg?t=2m12s<]strange blows[/url<]. So clearly, not everything can translate into light-saber combat. Also, because the cross-guard doesn't extend all the way to the hilt (there's the part that projects the beam), it won't be able to lock the opponent's sword against your hilt. (Which was an important swordplay technique). But the "Longsword" concept is there nonetheless. I honestly can't think of a single villain (or hero for that matter) that used historically accurate Longsword styles or poses. It'd be quite refreshing to say the least.

            • sweatshopking
            • 5 years ago

            LARPING?!?!? NOOOOOO MY NERD GAUGE IS EXPLODING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            • NovusBogus
            • 5 years ago

            I’d be more worried about it coming in contact with my torso during a close parry. If it works on the same spacemagic that the rest of the lightsaber does, that’s not going to end well.

            • cphite
            • 5 years ago

            Episodes 4-6 used classical fencing technique, which is entirely fitting since you essentially have combatants who are unarmored, and so depend on avoidance or using the weapon itself to deflect incoming attacks.

            Episodes 1-3 were kinda-sorta based on Wushu, which itself is basically stage-fighting; not really suited to actual combat. A good fencer would cut someone down in a heartbeat if they tried all of that fancy swirly-spinny stuff.

            But the reason I like the original movies sword work goes beyond realism… it has more to do with what the sword work conveys about the characters.

            The duel between Luke and Vader at the end of ROTJ was excellent… not only because of the technique, but because of how the technique changed with the emotion of the fight. Vader was an experienced master, and conducted himself as such – his movements were calm, calculated, and efficient throughout. Luke, in the beginning, was tentative. Then, after Vader threatens to go after Leah, Luke’s entire approach to the fight changes. He becomes far more aggressive, almost reckless, but it works. You could watch that scene with no dialog and still get a pretty good idea of what the characters were feeling, just from the sword work itself.

            You can’t convey that same sort of emotion through movement when both players are spinning, jumping, and flying around the screen from the outset.

            • fhohj
            • 5 years ago

            Exactly. A Lightsaber is not a sword. That’s part of what makes it cool. Hilts are those things that you touch. Also, if you consider the lore and whatnot behind these things (but I can understand not wanting to go that far into it), then those little lightsaber-thingies should make that thing nearly impossible to wield.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 5 years ago

            If you consider the lore, then crossguards were rare, but happened in the expanded universe. In particular, [url=http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Roblio_Dart%C3%A9<]Roblio Darte[/url<] was a Jedi who used one.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 5 years ago

            YO DAWG I HERD U LIKE LIGHTSABERS
            SO WE PUT 2 LIGHTSABERS IN YOUR LIGHTSABER

        • tviceman
        • 5 years ago

        Suddenly the internet is full of “energy weapon” experts and know exactly what “energy weapons” should look and behave like.

        • Froz
        • 5 years ago

        Light-sabers look incredibly stupid as an energy weapon. I get it, they are cool, but they are extremely stupid as a concept. And to be honest, light-longswords are more cool.

        By the way, in my language translation it was always light sword, not sabre. Which is more logical, because sabres are curved, have only one sharp edge and were used by cavalry. On the other hand, original term is more fitting, because there are not many logical things in the movies… πŸ˜€

          • dragontamer5788
          • 5 years ago

          Sabers were historically curved, but “Saber” refers to the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabre_%28fencing%29<]Saber-style of fencing[/url<]. "Saber" rules in fencing mean you can strike with either thrusts [b<]or[/b<] cuts. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Anderson_%28fencer%29<]Bob Anderson[/url<] (aka: Darth Vader stunt-double who performed the fencing moves) was a master fencer. So as far as "fencing" terminology goes, Saber is the proper term. But historically, I think you're right. In any case, there's a reason why the fights seemed more "real" in episodes 4 through 6... when you get master fencing experts to choreograph your movements... good fights happen.

          • NovusBogus
          • 5 years ago

          [quote<]By the way, in my language translation it was always light sword, not sabre. Which is more logical, because sabres are curved, have only one sharp edge and were used by cavalry. On the other hand, original term is more fitting, because there are not many logical things in the movies... :D[/quote<] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_1913_Cavalry_Saber<]Gen. George S. Patton sends his regards[/url<]. Many consider it the finest combat sword ever made; ironically, it never saw active combat because guns. I'd also be remiss if I didn't bring up the most elegant sword I've ever seen, a [url=http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=17910<]replica 16th century Swiss saber[/url<]. Slightly curved, but nothing at all like later cavalry sabers.

      • mcnabney
      • 5 years ago

      And the cross-guard does not intersect with the blade – notice the exposed bare metal where the blade and cross-guard meet. So running a blade down this sword would slice the metal of the light saber in half, completely bypassing the cross-guard. Just another ‘ooh, this would be cool’ idea that would not work in practicality.

        • Gilligan
        • 5 years ago

        It’s amazing to me that everyone is not extremely bothered by this exact point…

        Actually here is an article dedicated to the topic

        [url<]http://www.theverge.com/tldr/2014/11/28/7302383/lets-talk-about-the-new-lightsaber-ouch-hands[/url<]

      • TheEmrys
      • 5 years ago

      Not sure if that would be a longsword. Could be greatsword. Longswords can be a one handed weapon. Greatsword is two handed (scottish claymores fit here, but there was a very well renowned Italian school of greatswords in the Renaissance) . Being lightsabres and all, they all have a longer hilt, for apparently no reason as balance is not much of an issue.

      Your example of the scottish basket hilt sword, is sort of odd. There are lots of broadswords out there. The vikings used them.

      But, as this is sci-fi, its pretty pedantic.

        • dragontamer5788
        • 5 years ago

        [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_swords#Great_sword<]Longswords include many Greatswords[/url<]. Longsword vs Greatsword is extremely ambiguous. The largest of greatswords have [url=http://i.imgur.com/TTSa3fE.jpg<]double-hilts[/url<], and these massive weapons are larger than Longswords. But in any case, a Claymore (which is a smaller greatsword), is considered both a Great Sword (as per the name, which literally means greatsword) and also is a Longsword. [quote<]Longswords can be a one handed weapon[/quote<] Sorta. [b<]Bastard Swords[/b<] can be one-handed weapons. A small Longsword would be a Bastard Sword. Its also somewhat confusing because Bastard Sword also refers to the style of combat. Letting go of one of your hands to get a long extended strike would make you a Bastard Sword (aka: Hand and a Half) user, even if you were using a Longsword. [quote<] Your example of the scottish basket hilt sword, is sort of odd. There are lots of broadswords out there. The vikings used them.[/quote<] Hmm... I looked it up. A "Broadsword" is any sword that is broader than its peers. So Claymores are infact called "Broadswords" (because Claymores were among the largest of swords in its time period). Basket Hilt Swords are broadswords in the 1700s and 1800s, because most people were using Rapiers at that point. So in comparison to its peers, it was a "Broadsword". "Broadsword" is a word used by military commanders throughout the centuries to refer to different things. Because English is complicated. πŸ™

          • TheEmrys
          • 5 years ago

          Wikipedia article you cited – no citations. Check out John Clements’ books. He is a student of medieval and renaissance swordsmanship. He gets pulled out for all sorts of re-enactments and what not on the history channel. I used him for a paper I wrote on the use of greatswords despite an era which lacked armor and how it impacted the blah blah blah.

          [url<]http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/medieval-swordsmanship-john-clements/1111561535?cm_mmc=google+product+search-_-q000000633-_-9781581600049pla-_-book_25to44-_-q000000633-_-9781581600049&ean=9781581600049&isbn=9781581600049&kpid=9781581600049&r=1[/url<]

            • NovusBogus
            • 5 years ago

            Ohhh, are we gonna have an ARMA vs. SCA/LARP/everyone else fight?

            Some popcorn, I must fetch.

            • TheEmrys
            • 5 years ago

            I’m just a history dude with a bent towards the impact of war technology on society.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 5 years ago

            Apologies for linking to Wikipedia.

            Here’s my truly doubled-efforts now, since that was inadequate for you. The 1459 manual [url=http://www.thearma.org/pdf/Fight-Earnestly.pdf<]"Fight Earnestly" by Talhoffer[/url<] (30+MB Download) refers to the sword as a "Longsword" (Langes Schwert in the original German). While the Renaissance-era art is cringe-worthy bad, the length / proportions of the "Longswords" are very clear... and are roughly Claymore size. And yes, these are swords that can be used in one hand, [url=http://i.imgur.com/i3dJnKy.jpg<]as per this folio[/url<] (Armored Knight fighting with Spear and Longsword). The spears were thrown first, and then the knights fight with the Longswords afterwards. And more importantly, these "Long Swords" are roughly the size of the new Sith Lord's cross-guard lightsaber. ---------------------- But going with "[url=http://www.thearma.org/essays/broadsword.htm#.VHva9sl5Zjg<]Broadsword[/url<]" is most definitely a mistake. "Broadswords" were contrasted with Rapiers of the 1800s. They are only "broad" compared to the thin sabers and rapiers of its era. [quote<]It is vital to note that nowhere in the many Medieval fighting manuscripts by Masters of Defence is such a term as "broadsword" ever used (not surprisingly, no mention of the term is made in the Hispano-Italian master Pietro Monte’s encyclopedic volume on weaponry published in 1509). Nor do Renaissance masters of half a dozen nations ever mention itβ€”and if anyone would do so, surely it would be those who at the time wrote on how to use swords [/quote<] Compared to earlier eras, 1700s to 1800s-era Broadswords were quite small in fact. Again though, it seems like the term "Greatsword" is also correct. So we're [b<]both right[/b<], because English / Language is always ambiguous. I have heard "Greatsword" being used more for the Zweihanders of the Landsknechts. [url=http://i.imgur.com/Fo2GDBd.jpg<]Because those swords were massive[/url<]. No really, they [url=http://i.imgur.com/SvaDeMk.jpg<]were that size[/url<]. This might be an an anachronistic term however, as the literal translation of "Zweihander" is simply "Two-handed Sword".

            • cphite
            • 5 years ago

            The terms “long sword”, “broad sword”, and “great sword” are really informal names of weapons that fit into rather rough categories. The weapon you see in the trailer is a long sword, but you might also call it a great sword. A broad sword might be a long sword with a wider than average blade – or it might be something as short as a dagger with a wide blade.

            Only in AD&D are the above three terms actually meaningful.

      • fhohj
      • 5 years ago

      It’s a Stupidsword.

      • Fractux
      • 5 years ago

      All I can say is that if this is a Dark Jedi/Sith, then I’m sure that he realises the shortcomings of his weapon and that he’s sufficiently trained to fight with it.

      … But that’s not what I really want to see.

      The guards should be detachable throwing lightsabre daggers.
      Fun times ensue.

        • cphite
        • 5 years ago

        [quote<]The guards should be detachable throwing lightsabre daggers. [/quote<] Imagine, if you will, a device that would actually throw a beam of destructive light at your opponent [i<]at the speed of light[/i<]... it could maybe have a grip, so as to fit comfortably in the hand, so that you need only point at your foe, and perhaps pull some sort of trigger...

      • BIF
      • 5 years ago

      All this talk about the lightsaber.

      One of the things I thought was really classy of William Shatner was sometime in 2008-2009 (just before the reboot movie) when he was asked what he thought of the “New Enterprise”.

      There was a lot of criticism about the shape of the ship and its components, the color of the busard collectors (front of the engine nacelles), and the place where the nacelle pylons attached to the secondary hull, and more.

      Sure, those things are all for the makers and the fans to argue with, and I have my own opinions about these things. Whether or not the hilt should have little “saberlets” extending from the side is the Star Wars equivalent, I suppose.

      But Shatner, when asked about the new Enterprise, simply said with enthusiasm, something like “The ship is shipshape, and that’s all that matters.”

      I thought that was classy.

      So I ask you, even if YOU don’t like the new “broadsword” (or whatever), is it “battleworthy”? I think it is, little flaws aside. And maybe that’s all that matters. πŸ™‚

        • cphite
        • 5 years ago

        [quote<]So I ask you, even if YOU don't like the new "broadsword" (or whatever), is it "battleworthy"? I think it is, little flaws aside. And maybe that's all that matters. :)[/quote<] Good question. I'm going to say no, for a couple of reasons. First, as someone who's actually trained with a longsword, I would not use this weapon for the same reason I would not use an actual long sword that had blades where the cross guard would be. The danger they pose to the wielder would outweigh any combat benefit. With the actual sword, you're not just using the cross guard as a defense against the opposing blade, you're also occasionally using it for leverage. Second, the whole point of a two handed sword is leverage; and from leverage, power. The power to blast through whatever armor, shield, or weapon that happens to be between yourself and your foe. With that leverage comes a sacrifice to speed. Now, don't get me wrong - the longsword is a LOT faster than most people assume, in the hands of a good swordsman. But it's still a lot slower than a lot of other, smaller, swords; presumably also in the hands of good swordsmen. It seems to be fairly well established in the Star Wars universe that a) a lightsaber cannot cut through another lightsaber; and b) it can cut through almost anything else. Armor is essentially a non-factor. When armor is not a factor, speed is the order of the day; that's why fencers use light, nimble blades. Even assuming that the weapon is light (as in non-heavy) the length works against you in the case of the weapon shown in the trailer. You're going to find it less fast than something like a more traditional (Star Wars) lightsaber. You're going to find that the cross guard blades pose a pretty significant risk to yourself as you're trying to keep up with a smaller, faster blade. And, as others have already pointed out, since the blades extend from the central handle, which would presumably be cut by another fighters light-blade, the cross guard really doesn't offer much protection anyway. This final point would actually explain (perhaps not by any deliberate choice made by the writers) why Jedi didn't bother with cross guards in the original movies.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This