So we have Abrams… What does it mean for Star Wars?

Vader Into Darkness

Naturally, it seems like everyone has thoughts on J.J. Abrams directing Episode VII. Overall, I’m pleased – I think he has the specific skill set that Star Wars needs to go forward – but I’m no expert on the man or his works, so let’s ahead on to the links.

Or: Sick of analysis already? The Internet Photoshoppery Guild has been busy.

io9’s Charlie Jane Anders asks if Abrams can – or should – do for Star Wars what he did for Star Trek. “Abrams reliably brings a lot of energy and a sense of fun to whatever he tackles, along with a commitment to personal drama in the middle of huge set pieces. I’ve never been bored watching something Abrams was directly involved in. Even if you hated Abrams’ Trek, you have to admit it packed in some powerful emotional moments, and was way more entertaining than the best moments of the last two TNG movies put together.”

HitFix’s Drew McWeeny on why Abrams is the right choice for Star Wars, and ponders on what he thinks might have made him change his mind.

Author John Scalzi has a nice (if reluctant) rundown of the qualities that make Abrams a good choice for the job.

Entertainment Weekly’s Darren Franich has 14 things we can expect, while Vulture’s Margaret Lyons and Gilbert Cruz go beyond the lame lens flare jokes for seven things. Listacles. Whoo.

Over at Tosche Station, Emily gives us a Trekkie’s take on why Abrams will be good for Star Wars.

Tricia Barr thinks the Abrams’ resume means good things for those hoping for more diverse protagonist.

Kevin Smith is very excited. Of course.

And’s Christian Blauvelt talked to Bonnie Burton, TFN’s Eric Geller and me about the choice.

Whatever your opinion, I have to admit I’m relieved to have one of the big questions answered, but there’s one thing we can count on, from a man who won’t even reveal the name of his next movie’s villain – there will be no lack of big secrets going forward.

9 Replies to “So we have Abrams… What does it mean for Star Wars?”

  1. Look at you, getting all quoted in big articles! Go, Dunc!!

    And I’m very excited about this, but already getting a bit tired of the “what effect will JJ have on Star Wars” stories. And it’s only been a couple of days!

  2. Abrams may not be divulging the name of his next movie’s villain, but LFL has been equally cagey in the past, especially for *The Phantom Menace* . . . I seem to recall it was well past principal photography before they finally confirmed the names of Liam Neeson’s and Natalie Portman’s characters.

    Here’s my question/admission: I’m not at all familiar with J.J. Abrams’ work. I saw *Star Trek* (which I thought was flawed but entertaining) and watched *Felicity* and, uh, didn’t he direct *The Office* once? Other than that, I’m woefully ignorant of what he’s done. If I wanted to see some of his stuff, where should I start? *Super 8*? *Lost*?

  3. Yeah, LFL loves their secrets.

    As for JJ… Super 8 for sure. And the first couple seasons of Alias are pretty good. Maybe whichever Mission: Impossible he directed?

    For Lost… He did direct the pilot (which was excellent,) among other things, but it wasn’t necessarily ‘his’ baby the way Alias and Felicity were.

  4. Greg: He directed Mission: Impossible III, and was one of the producers on Brad Bird’s Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol.

    While he helped develop Lost, it really ended up being mostly Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse. Similarly, Fringe was a project of his, though I don’t know how close he stayed with it over the course of the show with his co-creators Kurtzman and Orci (who also both were on board for Star Trek and seasons 2-3 of Alias).

  5. I’m curious what sort of background Abrams has in fields other than film. Anybody know if Abrams is a “student” of history or mythology? Lucas of course was very interested in historical and mythological parallels in his films. Lucas actually majored in Anthropology for a while.

Comments are closed.