Abrams Moves On To Next Project

TrekToday · April 26 2008, 02:40 AM

Working on Star Trek XI was exciting and challenging, according to J.J. Abrams.

As reported by Livevideo.com, Abrams finds Star Trek XI to be a "huge, massive epic film."

Just as most have nothing but praise for Abrams, so does Abrams have praise for the Star Trek XI cast. "The cast is spectacular," he said. Abrams went on to enthuse about his time working on Star Trek XI. "We wrapped production on Star Trek last week and we're editing now," he said. "It was the most exciting, challenging, but satisfying experience. The movie is, I think, so much fun. I'm just dying for you to see it."

Now that Star Trek XI has finished and is being edited, Abrams will be moving on to other projects. Next up is the comedy Hot for Teacher. Hot for Teacher is about three high school boys who make a pact to have sex before they graduate. One of them sets his sights on their attractive teacher.

To read more, head to the articles located here and here.

Broccoli · April 26 2008, 05:01 AM

Is it me, or does the premise for Hot for Teacher sound like it should be one of the incredibly stupid American Pie spin-offs?

Photoman15 · April 26 2008, 04:15 PM

Not spin-off, an origin story or a re-boot, if you will

ancient · April 26 2008, 04:37 PM

Will Hot For Teacher be a huge, massive, epic film?

Locutus of Bored · April 26 2008, 04:50 PM

I hear that it will be made for people who love movies, and Van Halen references.

T'Bonz · April 26 2008, 07:02 PM

ancient wrote:

Will Hot For Teacher be a huge, massive, epic film?

It sounds like what I call a "teenage fanboy wank" film.

Oh well. I guess that stuff sells. And Abrams needs to work. Not all films put out are good films.

Then again, I rarely like films, finding most of them to be stupid sheeple films.

tomalak301 · April 26 2008, 07:05 PM

So does that mean you'll be passing on Star Trek XI?

T'Bonz · April 26 2008, 07:24 PM

No. *sigh*

Each Trek film recently, I've hoped for the best, but feared the worst (and usually got the latter.) This film is no different. Perhaps I'll get lucky this time.
I'm reading the same blather though, that I read before both Enterprise (admittedly not a film) and Nemesis, so I'm a bit, well, wary.

Augustus · April 26 2008, 07:27 PM

This idea lowers my respect level for Abrams...I mean seriously??

ancient · April 26 2008, 07:45 PM

I have to admit that, though I am optimistic for this movie, most of what we've heard has largely been hot air and lip service. That doesn't mean the movie will be bad, but it does mean we have little clue as to what's actually going to come out in May.

NEM had an uber-fanboy, Hollywood darling writing it, and the producers were saying it would be the biggest, bestest Trek movie evAr. We know how well that turned out. A lot of people (myself included) consider it the worst Trek film of all time, and it bombed badly. So there are no guarantees.

I'm giving Abrams a chance to show us what he's done before I start bitching though.

PowderedToastMan · April 26 2008, 08:42 PM

Abrams owns Bad Robot which has a multi picture deal with Paramount Pictures and he is credited as a producer on all projects, like Cloverfield and this new comedy. There are a number of other films Bad Robot has going at Paramount as well. However Abrams is still mostly full time on Trek while it is in post-production. As director he works closely with the editors and ILM every day. He certainly is not 'moving on' and wont until Trek is in the can.

Broccoli · April 26 2008, 10:31 PM

Photoman15 wrote:

Not spin-off, an origin story or a re-boot, if you will

Well...if they recast Jason Biggs, I'm boycotting it!

T'Bonz · April 26 2008, 11:07 PM

PowderedToastMan wrote:

Abrams owns Bad Robot which has a multi picture deal with Paramount Pictures and he is credited as a producer on all projects, like Cloverfield and this new comedy. There are a number of other films Bad Robot has going at Paramount as well. However Abrams is still mostly full time on Trek while it is in post-production. As director he works closely with the editors and ILM every day. He certainly is not 'moving on' and wont until Trek is in the can.

It was never meant to imply that he was finished with Trek. Trek isn't finished with editing and such, just the initial filming, as I well-know from the many things that I read about the film almost daily.

It was only meant to mention that work goes on, that he has other projects and that the "Hot for Teacher" one (bleccch on that name, as a woman that makes me want to throw up) is next up on the slate.

Lindley · April 26 2008, 11:29 PM

That seems like a fairly low-brow followup.....

Broccoli · April 27 2008, 03:36 PM

T'Bonz wrote:

It was only meant to mention that work goes on, that he has other projects and that the "Hot for Teacher" one (bleccch on that name, as a woman that makes me want to throw up) is next up on the slate.

You're assuming the teacher is female. It's the 21st Century! Anything goes!

T'Bonz · April 27 2008, 05:15 PM

Actually, while doing the news article, I looked up the scant information available on this fine film to come:

"Hot" is a "Superbad"-like story of a high school senior who sets out to have sex with his teacher before he graduates.

So no, I didn't assume. But your point is taken. Nowadays, anything could go and it could have well been a male teacher and females swarming after him.

Except - this is Hollywood. If I hear "Hot for Teacher" as a movie title, I'm reasonably sure it's some geeky, gawky, loser of a young man trying to get laid, usually with the cheerleading section of his other geeky, gawky, loser friends egging him on.

Pioneer · April 27 2008, 08:05 PM

T'Bonz wrote:

Actually, while doing the news article, I looked up the scant information available on this fine film to come:

"Hot" is a "Superbad"-like story of a high school senior who sets out to have sex with his teacher before he graduates.

So no, I didn't assume. But your point is taken. Nowadays, anything could go and it could have well been a male teacher and females swarming after him.

Except - this is Hollywood. If I hear "Hot for Teacher" as a movie title, I'm reasonably sure it's some geeky, gawky, loser of a young man trying to get laid, usually with the cheerleading section of his other geeky, gawky, loser friends egging him on.

And you find this "bleccch" because you're a girl? What's wrong with a person trying to get laid? What I find wrong is that "getting laid" always seems to be such a struggle in this hung-up puritanical society. Is it just a stereotype that girls are always looking for a "meaningful relationship" and guys are "just" trying to "get laid" or is it human nature? I don't know.

What do you think?

Star Treks · April 27 2008, 08:52 PM

If you read The Decameron, you'll find that the stereotype was pretty much the opposite. In fact through at least several hundred years ago, women were generally depicted as the sex addicts.

To me this suggests that it's basically societal, stereotypical, cultural, and not part of human nature.

In other words, yeah the stereotypes are dumb and annoying.

Pioneer · April 28 2008, 01:14 AM

Star Treks wrote:

If you read The Decameron, you'll find that the stereotype was pretty much the opposite. In fact through at least several hundred years ago, women were generally depicted as the sex addicts.

To me this suggests that it's basically societal, stereotypical, cultural, and not part of human nature.

In other words, yeah the stereotypes are dumb and annoying.

I was more interested in talking about reality rather than fiction. Also, I wanted to get a girl's opinion. Unless you're a girl but I have no way of knowing since there is no gender info in anyone's profile. But one thing's for sure: gender really seems to matter in matters of opinion, especially around here. T'Bonz?

Oh, and why is it "dumb and annoying"? Really. Why?

T'Bonz · April 28 2008, 05:20 AM

Pioneer wrote:

]And you find this "bleccch" because you're a girl? What's wrong with a person trying to get laid? What I find wrong is that "getting laid" always seems to be such a struggle in this hung-up puritanical society. Is it just a stereotype that girls are always looking for a "meaningful relationship" and guys are "just" trying to "get laid" or is it human nature? I don't know.

What do you think?

Because first of all, I don't think it's something in which friends need to be involved. And I'm old-fashioned. I kinda link sex with a loving relationship. Usually in those types of movies though, it's SCOOORRRRE! Get the hawt girl!

And to add insult the injury, they're not only socially inept, but young, immature and not hawt themselves.

There ya go.