Board 8 > Worst Jar Jar Abrams movie?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Truth be told, I do think Abrams is talented, but being such an influential guy on the state of TV and film over the past two decades has made it easy to hold him to scrutiny. Anyway, my vote is Rise of Skywalker because lol.

---

Jar Jar

---

First four votes for Rise of Skywalker, glorious.

I didn't think it was a terrible movie, but mostly because I thought it had some good ideas and had only two major complaints with it. Just crushingly average, and I HATE when people insist that The Last Jedi messed it up.

---

LinkMarioSamus posted...

and I HATE when people insist that The Last Jedi messed it up.

I mean, this is objective fact. Rise would be a very different movie if JJ had made the whole trilogy like he should have.

---

after TLJ, abrams shouldn't have brute forced his own ideas for what he thought the ST should have been into RoS. the trilogy would have still been a disjointed mess but probably better than what we have now.

---

How is into Darkness the last one to get a vote?

Also how is M:I3 in second?

Abrams and Terrio are lazy bums when any fairly competent screenwriter could have followed on from TLJ more effectively. I thought that movie set up an obvious path going forward, but no instead we have to reveal the Big Bad from the first six movies has been resurrected and has been BEHIND THE FIRST ORDER ALL ALONG dear god and I actually kind of feel like the sequel trilogy's worldbuilding failures are somewhat overplayed but what is this?

That and the rushed exposition were my only especially major problems with Rise of Skywalker, but I found little to like. It was a very meh movie.

---

LinkMarioSamus posted...

Also how is M:I3 in second?

it's the second worst rated abrams movie on IMDb as well. not an uncommon opinion!

---

Beautiful evisceration of Rise of Skywalker here. Next will be a Star Wars poll!

---

All of these are good movies except for TRoS.

Honestly the vocal minority against Into Darkness has always been silly. Yes, it's not as good as the 2009 Star Trek but that's legitimately one of the best summer blockbusters ever. Yes, it doesn't earn the last act after only ~1.7 films as opposed to decades of material, and yes it really needed to split that plot over two films, but it still largely works and is very entertaining for most of the runtime. It's good! And I guess I'm glad to see that vindicated here haha.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

All of these are good movies except for TRoS.

Honestly the vocal minority against Into Darkness has always been silly. Yes, it's not as good as the 2009 Star Trek but that's legitimately one of the best summer blockbusters ever. Yes, it doesn't earn the last act after only ~1.7 films as opposed to decades of material, and yes it really needed to split that plot over two films, but it still largely works and is very entertaining for most of the runtime. It's good! And I guess I'm glad to see that vindicated here haha.

Obviously I frequent Midnight's Edge way too much. Their commenters have an absolutely vicious loathing for J. J. Abrams, so that gives me the impression practically no on likes his Trek films. Then I got check the comments sections for YouTube videos about Abrams Trek or just Abrams in general and lots of people say they like them. To be fair it doesn't help that Roger Ebert gave a mixed 2.5-star review to the first Abrams Trek film (he never lived to see Into Darkness).

From what I can tell most of the reason Into Darkness carries such a notorious reputation is because it's essentially a remake of one of the most well-known Star Trek stories. I guess part of the problem is that Alex Kurtzman, one of the co-writes of the Abrams Trek films, went on to be the showrunner for the massively-contested series Discovery and Picard which were generally well-received by critics just like the Abrams Trek films. Also to a lesser extent Kurtzman's one attempt at directing a movie on his own was The Mummy with Tom Cruise which might have worsened his reputation even more. Oh and I forgot he has writing credits on Michael Bay's first two Transformers flicks and the notorious franchise non-starter The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Andre from Midnight's Edge seriously said he thought the state of Star Trek is at an all-time low. I don't know Trek well enough (for new Trek, I saw the 2009 one in 2010 and flat-out haven't seen its follow-ups), but that sounds a bit radical.

---

yeah, kurtzman as a screenwriter is pretty hit or miss. obviously, revenge of the fallen has a terrible screenplay but i think that's probably ehren kruger's fault (though it's always difficult to tell with movies with several screenwriters). almost all of the movies kruger wrote have mediocre or bad IMDb and RT ratings - how this dude continues to get job offers is beyond me.

---

I havent watched it in yeeeeears, but I feel like MI3 was one of the best ones?

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Honestly the vocal minority against Into Darkness has always been silly.

I think if people stopped focusing on Khan's skin color for like five minutes they might notice it's one of the more entertaining and thematically rich entries in the series
---

LinkMarioSamus posted...

Obviously I frequent Midnight's Edge way too much. Their commenters have an absolutely vicious loathing for J. J. Abrams, so that gives me the impression practically no on likes his Trek films. Then I got check the comments sections for YouTube videos about Abrams Trek or just Abrams in general and lots of people say they like them. To be fair it doesn't help that Roger Ebert gave a mixed 2.5-star review to the first Abrams Trek film (he never lived to see Into Darkness).

From what I can tell most of the reason Into Darkness carries such a notorious reputation is because it's essentially a remake of one of the most well-known Star Trek stories. I guess part of the problem is that Alex Kurtzman, one of the co-writes of the Abrams Trek films, went on to be the showrunner for the massively-contested series Discovery and Picard which were generally well-received by critics just like the Abrams Trek films. Also to a lesser extent Kurtzman's one attempt at directing a movie on his own was The Mummy with Tom Cruise which might have worsened his reputation even more. Oh and I forgot he has writing credits on Michael Bay's first two Transformers flicks and the notorious franchise non-starter The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Andre from Midnight's Edge seriously said he thought the state of Star Trek is at an all-time low. I don't know Trek well enough (for new Trek, I saw the 2009 one in 2010 and flat-out haven't seen its follow-ups), but that sounds a bit radical.

stop stop Stop Stop STOP

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I havent watched it in yeeeeears, but I feel like MI3 was one of the best ones?

From what I remember, it was the least... Mission Impossibly of the MI series. Before they became "let's see what stupid stuff Tom Cruise will actually do this time."

It came out while I was working at Hollywood Video so I watched it for free. It was mostly fine.

---

I watched TROS again lately and liked it a little more (though it's still not great and easily the worst Disney Star Wars).

Went with MI3, which was fine at the time but was so outclassed by the three that followed it that it looks worse in retrospect

---

also Into Darkness is like the most bog-standard Holywood sequel ever, though Benny C elevates it

---

Into Darkness sucks, but I also don't care for Cumquatch (I've never even seen people discuss his skin color, seems like a scarecrow), and the dumb pointless bullshit Hollywood fistfight over moving vehicles was soooooo stupid.

---

I totally believe that Spock would have a Fistfight on top of a hovercar.

---

they had like 80 superhuman popsicles why were they so insistent on getting khan's blood specifically

---

I like all of them but the disaster that was Rise of Skywalker.

---

I was fine with Rise of Skywalker, considering it was about the best movie I feel it could have been after the mess that was The Last Jedi.

---