Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

[DalekJim]

SalvorHardin wrote:

---

Really? You don't like being called names for not liking movies but you don't seem to have trouble calling others names for the same reason.

At no point in that post did I say that all people who like JJ Trek are dumb or self-loathing. Not only that but it's from a completely different thread, out of context and from a discussion that a mod told to stop.

[SalvorHardin]

^Nice try, I give it a 2/10

[DalekJim]

Oh no, the opinion of an Abrams acolyte means everything to me .

[Hartzilla2007]

[QUOTE=J.T.B.;7447927]

What was the "essence" that TMP was far away from or should have aspired to be? TMP was consistent with the tone and themes of several TOS episodes; in fact it was criticized as being a retread of a couple of them.

Which episodes had them staring at a blue screen for minutes at the time?

Last time I checked TOS was a fun space adventure show. TWOK was the movie more like TOS the series.

TMP ended up a mess but there are undeniable building blocks there that bespeak a movie crafted to be something thoughtful and substantial as well as entertaining.

Seemed more like it was boring and obsessed with its own special effects aka the afore mentioned blue screen stairing at.

[davejames]

"Self-loathing" has nothing to do with it. The reason we all enjoyed (despite its flaws) JJ's Trek is because it breathed real life and energy into the franchise again. It was big and dynamic and fun, and captured the spirit of TOS better than any Trek ever has.

I adore the more sophisticated TNG and DS9 as well, but it's ridiculous to suggest that's the only way Trek should ever be done from now on.

As for SW, I suspect the real reason JJ (and all those other directors) don't want to do it is because SW just doesn't seem all that cool to them anymore. The dull and overblown prequels killed their enthusiasm for this world just like it did for many of us.

[JarodRussell]

davejames wrote:

---

because it breathed real life and energy into the franchise again. It was big and dynamic and fun, and captured the spirit of TOS better than any Trek ever has.

Into the franchise? The movie was energetic alright, but ever since that film, nothing has happened in the franchise for 4 years.

Unless someone can link TOS and TNG HD releases to the success of Trek 2009.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

This is good news for Star Trek, certainly - there's no evidence that anyone other than he and the people he has working with him can make the Franchise work at this point. If Trek fans are lucky, the studio will keep him on as producer to guide the new director and other creatives after he's made the third one.

davejames wrote:

---

As for SW, I suspect the real reason JJ (and all those other directors) don't want to do it is because SW just doesn't seem all that cool to them anymore. The dull and overblown prequels killed their enthusiasm for this world just like it did for many of us.

Possibly. Star Wars fans would be lucky beyond their reasonable expectations to have Abrams doing those movies.

[EnsignRicky]

Enterprise is Great wrote:

---

Too bad. Abrams would make a hell of a Star Wars film.

In accordance with everything I've ever heard about hell, I would have to agree.

[davejames]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

Into the franchise? The movie was energetic alright, but ever since that film, nothing has happened in the franchise for 4 years.

Unless someone can link TOS and TNG HD releases to the success of Trek 2009.

It raked in tons of money, made Trek cool for a new generation of fans, and removed the stink of the last couple TNG movies. And the sequel will likely be an even bigger hit.

As far as the studio's concerned, that's probably MORE than enough.

[Shazam!]

DalekJim wrote:

---

JJ-Trek is all we have and watching it is a joyless, depressing experience.

The problem I have with the new movies is that I'm basically watching a glorified fan-film. We are told IN THE MOVIE that we are watching alternate versions of our favourite characters. Therefore I give as much of a shit about this iteration of Star Trek as I do about that alternate Riker who got blown up by the Borg or Smiley O'Brien. I don't want to see movies about those guys.

The Prime universe is continuing on just fine and that's the universe I'm interested in. I resent being TOLD that we now have to follow these mirror versions (no fault of the actors, save for Sylar who I'm not into as Spock. I'm already wishing Cumberbatch had been around to take the role) instead of the 'universe' we had invested countless hours in.

Of course, if the movie had been engaging in any way other than as a spectacle I may I have felt differently. I don't even blame JJ; I think he's a decent director. My issues lie with the writing.

[JarodRussell]

davejames wrote:

---

It raked in tons of money, made Trek cool for a new generation of fans, and removed the stink of the last couple TNG movies. And the sequel will likely be an even bigger hit.

As far as the studio's concerned, that's probably MORE than enough.

Well, since I'm not the studio and personally didn't like the film, I don't care about that at all.

[davejames]

Shazam! wrote:

---

The problem I have with the new movies is that I'm basically watching a glorified fan-film. We are told IN THE MOVIE that we are watching alternate versions of our favourite characters. Therefore I give as much of a shit about this iteration of Star Trek as I do about that alternate Riker who got blown up by the Borg or Smiley O'Brien. I don't want to see movies about those guys.

That was just a storytelling conceit to allow them to write new stories for this crew. For all intents and purposes, these are still supposed to be the same characters as in TOS. And I have no problem accepting them as such.

Besides, no matter how they got to that point, the idea of starting fresh with the TOS crew is a really exciting one, I think. And much better than simply dragging out the existing continuity for even longer.

[JarodRussell]

If they only had been portrayed like those characters... I don't see any resemblance in any of the characters, and I'm not talking looks.

[Hartzilla2007]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

If they only had been portrayed like those characters... I don't see any resemblance in any of the characters, and I'm not talking looks.

So Karl Urban's McCoy was nothing like the TOS version at all?

[Yminale]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

So Karl Urban's McCoy was nothing like the TOS version at all?

Basically what we got were carricatures of TOS characters. It wasn't Kirk, Spock and McCoy. It was stupid man-whore, pissed off Vulcan and irrate drunk.