Abrams Commits To Direct

[LOKAI of CHERON]

I'm 42; been an avid fan of Star Trek in its entirety since the early 80's - and I love JJ's Trek. For me, it captures the spirit of TOS perfectly, albeit in an updated iteration. Tidus, I feel you're overreacting just a smidgen - I'm certain Jeff's initial response was not intended as insulting in any way, and was given purely in the interests of debate.

[Gojira]

milo bloom wrote:

---

Seriously, this.

Even the SW films were every three years.

After the first one did so much better than expected, the sequel should have been immediately green-lit for release within 2 years, and we should be talking about the third film now and if we'll finally get Trek back on TV where it belongs.

While I agree that the new movie should have come out this year I think Trek belongs both in the theaters and TV.

[Jeff O'Connor]

LOKAI of CHERON wrote:

---

I'm 42; been an avid fan of Star Trek in its entirety since the early 80's - and I love JJ's Trek. For me, it captures the spirit of TOS perfectly, albeit in an updated iteration. Tidus, I feel you're overreacting just a smidgen - I'm certain Jeff's initial response was not intended as insulting in any way, and was given purely in the interests of debate.

Thanks, LOKAI. You're too kind.

[Jeff O'Connor]

And yeah, I don't think there will be a four-year gap between XII and XIII, in any case.

[Tidus79001]

LOKAI of CHERON wrote:

---

I'm 42; been an avid fan of Star Trek in its entirety since the early 80's - and I love JJ's Trek. For me, it captures the spirit of TOS perfectly, albeit in an updated iteration. Tidus, I feel you're overreacting just a smidgen - I'm certain Jeff's initial response was not intended as insulting in any way, and was given purely in the interests of debate.

I am not the only person who doesn't prefer "Abrams Trek". Just because the board is mostly pro "Abrams Trek" doesn't mean that other fans out there don't feel the same way I do. There are plenty of fans out there who I have seen express the same dissatisfaction as myself who aren't on this board.

Attempts to try to make me feel marginalized in my views on "Abrams Trek", or on any of my views have & will always fail miserably.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Tidus79001 wrote:

---

Attempts to try to make me feel marginalized in my views on "Abrams Trek", or on any of my views have & will always fail miserably.

You already feel marginalized. That's why you're so reactive to what you perceive as criticism.

And, in fact, you're "marginalized" by the marketplace rather than by the fact that most fans like the last movie.

You know other fans that didn't like it? That's fine. It's to be expected. Some Trek fans didn't like TNG. Some didn't like DS9. Many didn't care for Voyager or Enterprise. And you'll find a few at TrekBBS who actually are bored by TOS (not I). Nonetheless, we're getting another nuTrek movie because the vast majority of people who are interested in Star Trek at all supported the last one.

[LOKAI of CHERON]

Tidus79001 wrote:

---

I am not the only person who doesn't prefer "Abrams Trek". Just because the board is mostly pro "Abrams Trek" doesn't mean that other fans out there don't feel the same way I do. There are plenty of fans out there who I have seen express the same dissatisfaction as myself who aren't on this board.

Attempts to try to make me feel marginalized in my views on "Abrams Trek", or on any of my views have & will always fail miserably.

Personally, I'm not trying to ostracise/marginalise you in any way - and I don't believe anyone else in this thread is/has either. I am 100% respectful of your views and opinions. There are many members here who share your sentiments.

[Squiggy]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

It's like Star Trek Nemesis all over again!

Except critically acclaimed, Oscar winning, and wildly popular.

Good news though.

[sonak]

Dennis wrote:

---

Uh...well, for starts just the fact that because the first Abrams movie was a success the studio is doing a second movie in the same setting with the same cast and crew.

Hope you're not waiting on the next Star Trek: Enterprise show or movie, or anything. That's the difference between failure and success.

If your question is meant to be "what's the difference in the rate of supply of new product between failure and success" then the answer is: you're getting a new movie, period. Failure = no new Trek, at all.

None of that is unclear, is it?

No, a longer gap should work out fine. People may not get tired of this version as quickly as they did the last if they have to wait a little longer.

I doubt that there will be another four-year gap after this one, though.

I don't agree with this. There's no Star Trek on TV right now, so there's no real risk of "over-saturation," like when there was two TV series and a movie series going on at the same time. Also, TWOK-TVH came out every two years and were all big hits.

There's no other new Trek competing with these movies right now. Long delays between them are more likely to crush momentum than they are to whet the appetite.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

sonak wrote:

---

There's no other new Trek competing with these movies right now. Long delays between them are more likely to crush momentum than they are to whet the appetite.

Really? This forum has remained remarkably active for the last two years.

I don't think the market will bear any more Star Trek than it will any other franchise film series, and they don't need to be diluting it by putting it back on TV right now. Three years would probably be better than four, and I imagine that's what we'll see next time.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

Jeff O'Connor wrote:

---

And yeah, I don't think there will be a four-year gap between XII and XIII, in any case.

I expect Star Trek XIII to coincide with Trek's 50th anniversary.

[Jon1701]

sonak wrote:

---

wow, a potential four and a half year gap between movies is just ridiculous

There was 4 years between Back to the Future and parts II & III.

Seemed to work out okay.

[Jeff O'Connor]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

I expect Star Trek XIII to coincide with Trek's 50th anniversary.

Quite possibly so.

[Squiggy]

Jon1701 wrote:

---

There was 4 years between Back to the Future and parts II & III.

Seemed to work out okay.

There was also a 4 year gap between Die Another Day and Casino Royale.

There were 3 year gaps between all the Spiderman movies, as well as Batman Begins and Dark Knight. I don't think an extra year will hurt things much. I'm sure word of mouth is going to be huge before hand.

[malchya]

I, for one, am thrilled to hear the news. Was Abrams Trek perfect? Nope. Did it exactly coincide with my personal "vision" of what Trek is or should be? Not even close. Did I enjoy the film despite the differences between the released product and my own view of where I would like Trek to go? Yes.