How do you feel about Colin Trevorrow directing?

I was not impressed by either Safety Not Guaranteed or Jurassic World. However, Kathleen Kennedy, the person in charge at Lucas Film, is married to Frank Marshall. Frank Marshall was the producer of Jurassic World. His experience with Colin Trevorrow was apparently good enough to recommend him to his wife.

 

I'm cautiously optimistic. Of his films I've only ever seen Jurassic World, which I thought was... okay on the whole. But he did a competent job as a director and that was his first big-budget blockbuster, so hopefully he's better acquainted with the process when he comes into IX.

As well, I get the feeling that JW was much more of a studio-driven project, rather than director-driven like the Star Wars films seem to be, so I'm hoping that he get to put some of himself into this film.

 

List of directors who would be better choices:

David Fincher
Matthew Vaughn
JJ Abrams
Guillermo Del Toro
Gore Verbinski
Rian Johnson
Francis Lawrence
Sam Mendes

George Lucas met with Colin Trevorrow in 2012. It appears Georgie still has influence over these movies.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/...or-met-with-george-lucas-for-star-wars-7.html

 

The meeting between Lucas and Trevorrow apparently took place several months before Lucasfilm was sold to Disney in a multibillion dollar deal.
The article is kind of irrelevant.


He has 3 years and 9 months. If he screws up it's on him. The time to craft the movie is there. I have my faith.

 

What's with people hating on movies (and their directors) that are financially successful (obviously not flops from a money standpoint)? Is this a trend, to hate on financially successful movies because it's a popular thing to do (and spread that hate via the Internet)? This has happened to a lot of movies, from the PT to the new Star Trek movies, Avatar, the Dark Night Rises, Spider-Man III , the Amazing Spider-Man 2, the Transformers movies, Jurassic World, some of the Fast and Furious movies, some of the MCU movies (Age of Ultron for example);heck, I could go on with a list of financially successful movies - yet seems like many hate on them based on Internet comments - but my point remain: why the hate?

It seems to me that most people that are hating on financially successful films are just hating because they act like sheep and only follow movie critics' opinions. They can't form opinions of their own and instead just copy and follow opinions of so-called professional critics and then go around the internet passing off their opinions as their own.

People aren't going to pay money for a product that sucks (people that go see something will let others know about it and if those 1st viewers don't like it, they'll let may others know about it thus inhibiting said movie from gaining more money). Those of you that say that money-making movies don't necessarily mean that they're any good are probably individuals who think they know how a movie's story should be like and probably have near-impossible ridiculously-high expectations who seem to be way too critical to enjoy anything (instead of just allowing themselves to be entertained they decide to be super judgmental and act like pretentious people who think they are super intelligent and have good taste in things).

It's sad that society has gotten to this point, of popularizing trolling. These people must be pathetic no-life losers if all they seem to do is constantly complain and be negative on the Internet.

P.S. You do know that movie studios consider movies to be successful if they make a lot of money, right? Financial success is the (seemingly) biggest factor that these studios take inter consideration in determining if their movies were successful or not with moviegoers.

 

Many people do hate on films without good reason, yes.. but putting the Trevorrow doubters into this category is not justified. He is not up to the standard that modern Star Wars director should be.. and neither is Gareth Edwards or the guys directing the Han Solo spinoff.

List of directors who would be better choices:

David Fincher
Matthew Vaughn
Guillermo Del Toro
Gore Verbinski
Francis Lawrence
Frank Darabont
Sam Mendes
Peter Jackson
Alfonso Cuaron
Kathryn Bigelow
Ang Lee
Robert Zemeckis

 

Why are people so freaked out about directors and how impressive their records are? Who directed the OT?
Prior to Star Wars, GL had directed American Graffiti, which I personally don't like very much, and THX-1138, which I like but honestly know is pretty weird and not everyone's cup of tea. If that was the resume of someone being looked at for these sequel movies, everyone would be saying all these same things they are now.

What about Irvin Kershner or Richard Marquand? I mean really?
This is Irvin Kershner pre Empire:
Eyes of Laura Mars
1976Raid on Entebbe (TV Movie)
1976The Return of a Man Called Horse
1974S*P*Y*S
1972Up the Sandbox
1970Loving
1967The Flim-Flam Man
1966A Fine Madness
1964The Luck of Ginger Coffey
1963Face in the Rain
Have you heard of any of these?
And Richard Marquand pre Jedi:
Eye of the Needle
1979Birth of the Beatles
1978The Legacy

People can make a great star wars movie with just a couple unknown movies under their belt. The fact that Treverow knows how to handle a team and project that costs 250 million dollars is a good thing.

 

He will do great.

 

http://www.slashfilm.com/first-jurassic-world-clip/

Don't really agree with that, it often leads to shitty female characters when they treated like some other thing.

 

I said some unkind things about Colin Trevorrow’s directing in the past but I may have been a bit harsh. My basic view has been that this job is beyond his artistic sensitivity level. But, here’s another side of the story: In order to accomplish the extremely rare task of creating an excellent film, any director would need to reach far beyond their everyday capabilities. Great movies don’t result from “great directors” just being their “great selves”. To make a really good film, any director would need to be more artistically attuned and humble than they and others had thought possible up until that point.

Trevorow’s strength is his ability to put fun into the cinematic experience (the fun of Jurassic World was no small feat) and if Trevorrow were to compliment and balance his joyride sensibility with a production design/cinematography team that’s earthy, believable and picturesque (a team like Emmanuel Lubezki, Jim Clay & Geoffrey Kirkland who did Children of Men) the result could be something really wonderful. There is enough time between now and episode ten for Treverrow to gather and deeply take in an incredibly inspiring body of influences and to cultivate a greater level of artistic insight. With the right self-exposure to challenging art such as films like Andrei Rublev and paintings by artists like Bruegel the elder as well as moderate psychedelic drug use in places where it’s legal, Trevorrow can become his greatest self and make a film that’s more exciting, memorable, and real than anyone could have expected.

 

I had no issue with Trevorrow on as Episode IX director until I recently saw Jurassic World. After such a great showing at the box office and mainly positive reviews from people that had seen it, I thought it would at least be a solid, entertaining film. In my opinion it was much worse than "solid". I was even embarrassed for poor Vincent D'Onofrio whose character was as cliched and one-dimensional as you can get.

I trust Kennedy and Co. because of the decisions they've made so far. I saw Safety not Guaranteed years ago and liked it (didn't love it but I still remember it to this day so it must have made a positive impression). I wonder if Trevorrow was hired by Lucasfilm because they needed a "Yes-man". I would hope that Kennedy would be looking for the best talent but perhaps they don't want to find themselves in a situation like Fox was with Fantastic Four (Trank fired from Star Wars only supports this).

I am hoping that Trevorrow was hired because the word around town is that Trevorrow did about as good as one could've done with Jurassic World. I saw somewhere that the writing was to blame for JW being so lukewarm. I am hoping with great writing-and characters having been developed by two previous installments-that he won't have a difficult time finishing their story arc for the saga.

 

I share your respect for Kathleen Kennedy but my guess is that she has no choice in the Trevorrow decision. I get the sense that George Lucas hand picked Trevorrow and sold Star Wars to Disney partially on the condition that Trevorrow direct one of the films. If that's true then the only people who could change the decision would be Trevorrow or George Lucas.

 

I think people are being harsher than they need to be.
Here's the Trilogy that everyone loves:
4 - Fun, Campy, Original
5 - Serious chapter. Brings the whole thing artistic integrity.
6 - Fun, Campy, Remember why you liked the first one so much?

So, using the OT as the blueprint informs the directorial decisions that KK is making.

7 - Fun, Campy, Nostalgic (JJ is the king of fun/nostalgic)
8 - Serious Chapter, Brings the whole thing artistic integrity. This is Rian's job. He is the one between the three chosen with the most artistic cred.
9 - Fun, Campy, Remember why you liked the first one so much? This is Treverow's job. And it is what he did with Jurassic World.

I watched both Jurassic Park and Jurassic World this week. Is Jurassic World better or as good? No, not at all. Did anyone think it was going to be? Jurassic Park is one of Steven Spielberg's last action classics. It has John Williams at his finest, and an excellent judicious use of special effects, and it is scary. Now, Spielberg directed Jurassic Park 2, and it is terrible. Sure, Jeff Goldblum is fun, but when the scariest part of a dinosaur movie is a bus falling off a cliff, you know you've got problems. 3, also terrible, hardly worth mentioning. Then we come to Jurassic World. It isn't a classic. It isn't winning any awards. I was honestly not excited for it at all during trailer season. But it won me over. It hit all the nostalgic points, had excellent visual callbacks not just to jurassic park but to Spielberg's entire career, and and built slowly to a fun, underline it, fun climax that left me satisfied.

I've been saying this for a while, but if Richard Marquand can direct a final trilogy installment, so can Colin Treverow. The best part is, Lucasfilm is going to give him more resources than Universal gave him. He will be getting John William's god willing. He will be getting a special effects house now dedicated to creating more than just a CGI fest. That combined with his sense of awe for classic blockbusters will make for a fitting trilogy end.

 

These are not encouraging words coming after the mess that was Claire and Jurassic World's plot in general. Please don't do anything stupid with Rey...

 

Yikes! I'm right there with you. We'll see how he does.

 

I enjoyed "JURASSIC WORLD" very much and I also enjoyed Colin Treverow's work. And if I must be brutally honest, I was more impressed by the character development of Claire Dearing, than Rey's. She was a strong character with her personal flaws. She wasn't a Mary Sue.