RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,915
Posts: 5,478,190
Members: 25,053
Currently online: 486
Newest member: johnclever25

TrekToday headlines

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old January 26 2013, 07:11 AM   #316
Guy Gardener
Fleet Admiral
 
Guy Gardener's Avatar
 
Location: In the lap of squalor I assure you.
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

I hope Artoo and C3po finally do it.

This will they won't they shit is for the birds.
__________________
"Glitter is the herpes of arts and craft."

Troy Yingst. My Life as Liz
Guy Gardener is online now  
Old January 26 2013, 08:06 AM   #317
degra
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

I'm tired of Abrams. He is really overrated. Most of the stuff he is associated with is pretty shallow,,,which is fine if it entertaining but in my opinion it is not.

it is just a bunch of ADHD pacing where you really can't appreciate what's going on, gimmicks like flashbacks, twists cliffhangers in place of coherent storytelling. Characters who are plot devices and stories that are emotionally vacuous.

fringe was a mediocre series,,,hardly in the pantheon of solid sff shows. Undercover spy on NBC was bland. Star trek was a pitiful film with a weak villain, plotholes galore and no heart. His most recognizable show being lost ultimately was an overly complicated gimmicky convoluted mess with no coherence and way too many characters to care about. Alcatraz was more of the same mystery hand waving and was rightfully canned.
degra is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 09:51 AM   #318
brian577
Captain
 
brian577's Avatar
 
Location: United States of Equestria
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

theenglish wrote: View Post
JD wrote: View Post
Damn. I can understand that not everyone likes the same things, but I don't think there is any way someone could actually convince me that Abrams' Star Trek is actually that bad.
I'm really tired of people telling me that "real" Star Trek has to be cerebral and moral and teach me a lesson about the human condition every step of the way. Star Trek is many things, that's the beauty of it and why it has endured.
Not every step of the way, but having it as a underlying theme on occasion is nice. Even the worst of the original 10 had this on some level. Nemesis had nature vs. nurture elements, Generations had regret. These elements don't define the story but they are generally present. Not so with ST 09
brian577 is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 11:21 AM   #319
scnj
Captain
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

brian577 wrote: View Post
theenglish wrote: View Post
JD wrote: View Post
Damn. I can understand that not everyone likes the same things, but I don't think there is any way someone could actually convince me that Abrams' Star Trek is actually that bad.
I'm really tired of people telling me that "real" Star Trek has to be cerebral and moral and teach me a lesson about the human condition every step of the way. Star Trek is many things, that's the beauty of it and why it has endured.
Not every step of the way, but having it as a underlying theme on occasion is nice. Even the worst of the original 10 had this on some level. Nemesis had nature vs. nurture elements, Generations had regret. These elements don't define the story but they are generally present. Not so with ST 09
Fatherhood. Kirk was a rebellious little shit because his father died, but he got in line when he had a surrogate father (Captain Pike) to live up to, as well as the legacy his own father set. Then there's Spock, who wants to be the best Vulcan he can and take after his father's side of the family, but has trouble keeping his human emotions in check.

How do people continually say that ST09 had no themes whatsoever?
scnj is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 11:55 AM   #320
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Spock came out of the closet in the last movie, TOS allegory style. TOS fanboys who worship the original for it's allegories totally missed it. LOL.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 12:06 PM   #321
The Mirrorball Man
Vice Admiral
 
The Mirrorball Man's Avatar
 
Location: Switzerland
View The Mirrorball Man's Twitter Profile
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

kirk55555 wrote: View Post
Yes, because god forbid you like something enough to be invested in it. No one should ever care about anything, if they're going to get angry about it. Honestly, I find your post almost offensive. Why shouldn't I care enough about a frnachise to get angry? I care about it, enough that yes, I do become enraged at times. As for doing something more productive? Well I have to say that I HATE "get a life" people. I'm a fan of Star Trek. I get angry at things involving it sometimes. So, I'll just say what I always want to say to a person who belittles peoples interest in something (or imply that they are wasting time by liking something) by saying people need to basically "get a life": Frak you.
I meant no disrespect and I have nothing personal against you. Obviously it's good to be passionate about things. I'd say that being passionate about the things you do and the people you love is usually more rewarding than being passionate about Hollywood franchises, but to each their own. It's just that, I don't know how old you are, but after a while you learn to get some perspective and stop focusing too much on the negative.
__________________
Check out my deviantArt gallery!
The Mirrorball Man is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 12:50 PM   #322
Mach5
Rear Admiral
 
Mach5's Avatar
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

OdoWanKenobi wrote: View Post
Where is all this talk about Abrams destroying Star Trek coming from?

He took a franchise that had been run into the ground by lackluster installments (sound like another franchise we know?)
Uhm, Pirates of the Caribbean?
__________________
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."
― Bertrand Russell
Mach5 is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 12:54 PM   #323
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Anyone who thinks the prequels ran Star Wars into the ground is really an idiot, because they clearly didn't. You might not like them because they were tailored to a younger generation, but they were extremely successful. The next trilogy is not going to be a reboot because the franchise is dead, it's going to be a sequel because the franchise is hot.

scnj wrote: View Post
Fatherhood. Kirk was a rebellious little shit because his father died, but he got in line when he had a surrogate father (Captain Pike) to live up to, as well as the legacy his own father set. Then there's Spock, who wants to be the best Vulcan he can and take after his father's side of the family, but has trouble keeping his human emotions in check.

How do people continually say that ST09 had no themes whatsoever?
Also: nepotism. A guy who knew his father gives him a job. And Uwhora sleeps her way up the career ladder. And eventually, Spock almost makes out with his older self after his older self probably pulled some strings to get Kirk into the Captain's chair.
JarodRussell is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 01:19 PM   #324
FPAlpha
Vice Admiral
 
FPAlpha's Avatar
 
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Just to chime in.

Genius choice on the part of Disney.. Abrams is one of the few A list producers who get the material and can run with it. I love the new Star Trek movie (apart from a few logic holes and a few artistic choices) so i'm very confident that the new Star Wars can rival Empire Strikes back in quality and drama.

Abrams has a far better feel for drama.. just watch the opening of the new ST movie. The birth of Kirk in the midst of a battle where his Dad dies to save hundreds of people.

I had goosebumps during that and my chest tightened a bit and looking back i wonder how the new Lucas SW movies would have been if made by someone who can write real drama and can direct the actors to portray that.

All considered it is an excellent time to be a nerd right now.. Whedon rocks the house in Superhero movies, Abrams takes over the two biggest SF franchises.

The only thing i'd wish for is for Disney to have the balls and release stand alone movies by directors and leave them free hands.. imagine a del Toro, Tarantino or Burton Star Wars movie!
__________________
"But that emergency was supposed to be the fall of an Avenger!" Phil Coulson
"Exactly!"
Nick Fury
FPAlpha is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 02:31 PM   #325
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Mr. Adventure wrote: View Post
The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Icemizer wrote: View Post
I side with kirk55555 in this arguement but wish Abrams well in his attempts to return Star Wars to a higher level. If he is not writing, I think as a director he will be ok. I disagreed with nearly every writing decision in Star Trek. Hated the lensflare no end, but thought his overall direction and shot choices were good enough.
As director, the lens flares were part of his direction and shot choices. And you can be damned well sure he'll use them in SW.
Hard to say, I think the flares were probably to sell us on the future as shiny, bright and new. I don't know that SW warrants such. Do the flares pre-date Trek?
Lens flare have always been in movie in some for or the other, Trek XI is just infamous for having a dozen lens flare go off every 15 seconds, even in the dark, strnagely enough. The reason for the lens flares Abrams himself has given is because he likes lens flares. Since he clearly likes them so much, I'm certain Star Wars Episode 07 will have as many if not more.

And since it's now confirmed, we have to start calling this Episode 07. Abrams style numbering demands leading zeroes.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 02:33 PM   #326
The Mirrorball Man
Vice Admiral
 
The Mirrorball Man's Avatar
 
Location: Switzerland
View The Mirrorball Man's Twitter Profile
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Just a thought: can we have Faran Tahir in a larger role?
__________________
Check out my deviantArt gallery!
The Mirrorball Man is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 02:35 PM   #327
Mach5
Rear Admiral
 
Mach5's Avatar
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

I seriously hope Orci and Kurtzman don't get involved in this at some point.
__________________
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."
― Bertrand Russell
Mach5 is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 02:46 PM   #328
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

The Mirrorball Man wrote: View Post
Just a thought: can we have Faran Tahir in a larger role?
I'm easily picturing him as a badass Jedi master. Perhaps Luke's second. That could be awesome.

Mach5 wrote: View Post
I seriously hope Orci and Kurtzman don't get involved in this at some point.
So do I, but I fear Abrams may have them make revisions to Michael Arndt's script. You know, to make sure all the necessary fart jokes, immature humour, sexual innuendos and racially offensive sterotypes are present.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 03:07 PM   #329
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Mach5 wrote: View Post
I seriously hope Orci and Kurtzman don't get involved in this at some point.
Said pretty much the same thing. As a non-Trek XI fan I'm lazily labelled an 'Abrams Hater' when in fact the opposite is true; I've liked (and in some cases loved) most things he's done.

Oric & Kurtzman are far more hit and miss though, with most instances being a miss.
Shazam! is offline  
Old January 26 2013, 03:11 PM   #330
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

I just find the idea of the same person being behind Trek and Wars to be so boring it's almost sinister. These franchises should be competitive. It makes people up their game and try harder.

Imagine if Star Trek Into Darkness is awesome (Unlikely, but possible!). Then the director making Star Wars Episode VII will REALLY feel like he has to up his game and push his art further. Then Abrams will have to push Trek even harder to compete and make his third film even better than Star Wars VII.

We won't get this if the same guy is doing both. Competition is necessary and I say that as an obsessive of both franchises.
DalekJim is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
j.j. abrams, star wars

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.