Abrams Directing Star Wars

[Devon]

panthers34343 wrote:

---

JJ Abrams as the common denominator? NO thank you. The guy made technically made a Star Trek movie (with the title and characters whatever) but he didn't really make a real Star Trek movie. It didn't have a soul.

Of all the souls I have encounted, his was the most........ human.

As he himself said he made a Star Trek movie that he himself would want to watch, not something based on the appeal of the previous series.

That is not what he said (to the highlighted parts.) Your putting words in his mouth.

DalekJim wrote:

---

No Orci and Kurtzman is why I'm optimistic. Most of the problems with Trek 09 are with the shitty script. The visual style irritates me a lot too at times but otherwise it's very cinematic and not too bad. Frankly, the writers of Transformers 2 have no interesting thoughts to ever offer me.

The writers of the most financially and critically successful film in the Star Trek franchise should though. Who is that? Orci and Kurtzman.... don't be mad bro.

[DarthTom]

controlfreak wrote:

---

Abrams is the Nerd King of all of us.. Star Trek and Star Wars, and they'll both be worth watching!! Maybe a Trek vs. Wars film in the vein of AVP...I don't think Abrams is going to abandon the Trek franchise any time soon. He's only doing the one Star Wars for now. I like how everyone is freaking out, though.. I don't see why he can't do both. Wouldn't you want to do both if you could?

I don't see as many Star Wars fans freaking out about this on popular Wars message boards like stardestroyer.net. God some sci-fi fans can be incorrigible.

[Nerys Myk]

controlfreak wrote:

---

Abrams is the Nerd King of all of us.. Star Trek and Star Wars, and they'll both be worth watching!! Maybe a Trek vs. Wars film in the vein of AVP...I don't think Abrams is going to abandon the Trek franchise any time soon. He's only doing the one Star Wars for now. I like how everyone is freaking out, though.. I don't see why he can't do both. Wouldn't you want to do both if you could?

A bit like Betty or Veronica, isn't it?

[cooleddie74]

Abrams has proven he knows what the hell he's doing so let him take a shot at both franchises. If the man can get the project done on time, on budget and with the minimum of fuss and problems then I don't care if he's the King of Lens Flare.

As I've said before, almost complete unknowns to the outside world like spy thriller director Richard Marquand were chosen for past Star Wars films and those guys - even without a lick of experience in the sci-fi/fantasy genre - turned out very good product people still enjoy and even love to this day.

[Set Harth]

DalekJim wrote:

---

You Abrams lickers

Talking to yourself?

[YARN]

cooleddie74 wrote:

---

Abrams has proven he knows what the hell he's doing so let him take a shot at both franchises.

We don't have any choice. Nothing said here can empower or impede Mr. Abrams.

cooleddie74 wrote:

---

If the man can get the project done on time, on budget and with the minimum of fuss and problems then I don't care if he's the King of Lens Flare.

Sure, and if he can do a remake of the Godfather within the same amount of time, why not?

Realistically, if he insists on being totally hands-on with both, both projects will take longer, and with greater fuss.

[Ovation]

So what? Really. So what? It's not like either Paramount or Disney owes the movie-going public anything by a specific date. In fact, neither of them owes us anything at all. They are entirely free to produce a film and release it when they damn well please. We are entitled to like, dislike or be indifferent to whatever they release--that is the extent of our rights. Composers, filmmakers, writers, playwrights, painters, sculptors…anyone who puts something creative out into the marketplace (whether mainstream or off, off, off, off Broadway) does so without owing the audience a thing. The audience is free to take it or leave it. Given the combined appeal of Abrams' work in the aggregate, Trek and Wars in particular over the past several decades and the fact that two major studios have placed multiple major franchises into his hands, I'd say general audience satisfaction is practically guaranteed. All while continuing to allow anyone who is disappointed to voice that disappointment, if they so choose (or ignore the product altogether if they really can't stand his work).

[DarthTom]

Ovation wrote:

---

So what? Really. So what? It's not like either Paramount or Disney owes the movie-going public anything by a specific date. In fact, neither of them owes us anything at all. They are entirely free to produce a film and release it when they damn well please. .

Ovation part of the problem IMO is that some fans of Trek are so self deluded they think they can demand that major studios acquiesce to their demands. For example the recent attempt to save Star Trek Enterprise.

Save Star Trek Enterprise

As if a major studio like Paramount gives two shits about a handful of disgruntled obsessive compulsive Star Trek fans.

[throwback]

I was watching this video at escapistmagazine.com. I feel the blogger is saying that Abrams is a reflection of what the corporate media wants and what the fans, over the past decade, have come to accept from their films. He creates entertainment that is not edgy nor visionary, has no thematic signature mark that identifies him as a director, and that delivers a "...superficial authentic translation but without any kind of animating spirit underlying it."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...m_campaign=all

I feel the blogger raises valid questions and concerns, and that is why I introduce his video into this thread.

[BillJ]

What concerns? It's entertainment and speaks to each individual differently. For me, it's not about "thematic signature", Star Trek 2009 was about pure unadulterated nostalgia. For two hours I felt like a kid sitting in the theater. It doesn't mean its a film without flaws but it served its purpose for this individual.

I went to see The Hobbit with my wife whose been a fan of the story since she was a little girl. It was more fun for me to see that film transport my wife into a world she always loved than the entertainment value I got out of it. From what I did pay attention to, it was a very dull, uninspiring experience. And for all the things I can count wrong with the film, it won't sway my wife's belief that it was an incredible film.

Different strokes for different folks.

[Franklin]

throwback wrote:

---

I was watching this video at escapistmagazine.com. I feel the blogger is saying that Abrams is a reflection of what the corporate media wants and what the fans, over the past decade, have come to accept from their films. He creates entertainment that is not edgy nor visionary, has no thematic signature mark that identifies him as a director, and that delivers a "...superficial authentic translation but without any kind of animating spirit underlying it."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...m_campaign=all

I feel the blogger raises valid questions and concerns, and that is why I introduce his video into this thread.

I'd tell the blogger thanks for playing our game. The questions aren't valid, and the assessment may be accurate, but it's misapplied. It's popular culture, for crying out loud. Like it or not, Abrams is involved in providing commercial products, from "Lost" to "Star Trek" to "Star Wars". No studio is going to put $150 million or more into a movie and tell the director, "Make it edgy. Be visionary. Take real chances thematically."
Abrams job is to give us really well made cheeseburgers and fries that we enjoy with chocolate malts. As long as he's consistent in that, we're pleased. No one expects a Michelin Star meal. Just good cheeseburgers. We'll go somewhere else for gourmet when we feel like it.

[trevanian]

Franklin wrote:

---

No one expects a Michelin Star meal. Just good cheeseburgers. We'll go somewhere else for gourmet when we feel like it.

Awful lot of effort going into defending the makers of cheeseburgers. Would make Ray Kroc proud.

THROWBACK's summary of the video intrigues me, as it touches on the notions that seem most essentially wrong with the Abrams treatment (apart from his horrid and childish visual treatment.) Will have to give it a watch.

[Tom Servo]

trevanian wrote:

---

Awful lot of effort going into defending the makers of cheeseburgers. Would make Ray Kroc proud.

THROWBACK's summary of the video intrigues me, as it touches on the notions that seem most essentially wrong with the Abrams treatment (apart from his horrid and childish visual treatment.) Will have to give it a watch.

Really, what is horrid and childish about his visual treatment? Please enlighten us all.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Another fan bloviating into a webcam. Meh.

[trevanian]

Go watch the movie again. There is such a thing as artistic and appropriate use of technique: in terms of lens flare, DIE HARD is about as far as you'd want to go, and it works just fine. This THING from 09 is lens flare masturbation. The only justification I could imagine would be to hide the art direction from serious view, but with what they spent on that, you'd figure he'd keep it front & center.

As for the credibility of a visual environment, having an all-glare surrounding (and I'm not talking the flares, I'm talking the actual lighting in the sets, especially work areas like the bridge) is the worst notion imaginable, since it interferes with being able to see and react to readings.

I'd put it on par with the idiotic lighting-from-the-floor in parts of TMP, which only makes sense if you do your reading while standing on your head, but the visual aesthetic is even more corrupt here.

And just to sidestep wrongheaded comparison ... it isn't fair to compare any of this with TOS lighting here ... if these guys had to shoot ASA 50 stock for interiors like Finnerman and Francis did, they'd probably have shot themselves instead of dealing with it.

to reiterate: just go rewatch the movie. You don't need to ask for enlightenment (while being sarcastic or dismissive, which is playing to the strengths of some of the other Abrams toadies here), just pay attention.