RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,699
Posts: 5,213,713
Members: 24,208
Currently online: 794
Newest member: meshman63


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 > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 17 2013, 11:57 AM   #31
Relayer1
Commodore
 
Relayer1's Avatar
 
Location: The Black Country, England
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

Three's it - after that the contracted cast wanders off elsewhere and it's spin off movie and/or back to TV time...
__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...
Relayer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 12:54 PM   #32
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Third Nacelle wrote: View Post
The problem is the Abrams-era movies are watered down (all looks, no substance) Trek designed to appeal to mass audiences who aren't traditional Trek fans. Those fans might stick around for two or three films, but eventually their short attentions spans will move on to something shiny and new.

Then what? Reboot again? Cast preteens in the main roles? Have 90 minutes of planets imploding? The reboot was a nice way to make a summer blockbuster, but eventually cheap tricks like that reach a point of diminishing returns. I seriously doubt 30 years from now anybody will look back and remember ST09/STID the way we remember the first six films or even the TNG films.
What's a traditional Trek fan?
Aging, for the most part.

There is no indication that more than an itty-bitty fraction of fans have abandoned these movies. Abrams has succeeded in enlarging the audience. Some of those folks may not stick around? Oh noes! The audience will still be bigger than it was before, so...win.

The notion that Trek's been "watered down" somehow is laughable.

Last edited by Admiral Buzzkill; April 17 2013 at 01:58 PM.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 01:15 PM   #33
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Well with JJ walking away from Trek for Star Wars
Link?
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 02:21 PM   #34
AllStarEntprise
Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Location: Galactica Actual
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

SalvorHardin wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Well with JJ walking away from Trek for Star Wars the next movie's future is kind og up in the air at the moment. Sure Paramount will hire a new director and executive producer

Even if Abrams can't direct, Bad Robot & him as a producer are not going away for the 3rd movie.
With those situations he'll most likely be relegated to a consulting producer. The executive and directing team can approach him with ideas about how they should or might steer the movie but he won't be making big calls on it.




CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Well with JJ walking away from Trek for Star Wars
Link?
Uh isn't it common knowledge JJ is doing Star Wars for a 2015-2016 release? He's not going to juggle both its not his style. See how he handled Super 8 and Into Darkness back in 2011. He didn't commit to trek until Super 8 was weeks before hitting theatres. Never mind the film had finishing production he spent time promoting the film as well. Paramount may give the reigns of Trek to someone else to have a movie out by 2016 for Star Trek's 50th. Or we could wait on JJ to make the next trek film in 2018, assuming hs doesn't sign on for more Wars movies.
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 02:27 PM   #35
HaventGotALife
Fleet Captain
 
HaventGotALife's Avatar
 
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

It seems to me that Batman had to answer this after "The Dark Knight" because it was a great movie, not just a good comic book movie. And where do they go from there? I think there's room to tell another story, but to sustain this for 10 more movies? Probably not a good idea. They would be treading on James Bond territory, as far as a formula.

I have my doubts about going forward, but that just means Star Trek may be headed back to the small screen, and I would love that.
__________________
"Cogley was old-fashioned, preferring paper books to computers. He had an extensive collection of books, he claimed never to use the computer in his office."
HaventGotALife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 02:37 PM   #36
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

Third Nacelle wrote: View Post

Are we watching the same show? Sure all the ST series and films had their share of explosions and shaking, but they never sacrificed substance for style.
I'd hate to think I've spent over 40 years watching something else.

Oh, there was a fair amount of "substance" in ST09. More than many of the films and episodes. Heck, the first 15 minutes contained more than the previous 10 films put together. Folks too easily distracted might have missed it though,
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 02:51 PM   #37
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

I don't remember worrying about where Trek was going to be in 2007 when I was watching TWOK in the theater with my school friends. It's all cyclical anyway. The future will take care of itself.
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 02:58 PM   #38
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

indranee wrote: View Post
I don't remember worrying about where Trek was going to be in 2007 when I was watching TWOK in the theater with my school friends.
Bingo!

"Save something for the sequel" is just a long way of saying "fail."
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 03:34 PM   #39
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

Third Nacelle wrote: View Post
The last movie completely erased that and turned it into an action movie. A very entertaining and beautiful action movie, but it wasn't really Trek.
Trek's had action episodes and action movies throughout it's 45+ years, so I say it's definitely "real Trek". What you mean to say is "it's not what I think Trek should be."
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 03:41 PM   #40
Borgminister
Moderator
 
Location: California
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

Is it sustainable?

It's green!
Borgminister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 03:44 PM   #41
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
Third Nacelle wrote: View Post
The problem is the Abrams-era movies are watered down
The notion that Trek's been "watered down" somehow is laughable.
IMO, the watering down of Trek is...

-Giving Romulans brow ridges so audiences don't confuse them with Vulcans.

-Making all alien species into monocultures that look, act and dress exactly alike.

-Making all technology uniform, so all Federation tech looks the same, as does all Klingon or Romulan or Cardassian tech as if only one manufacurer builds every spaceship or piece of equipment for an entire planet or empire.


These things were all introduced in The Next Generation.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 03:53 PM   #42
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

The monoculture thing goes back to TOS.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 04:03 PM   #43
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

Yeah, TOS was the worst perpetrator of the monoculture, not TNG or the other series. But I forgive TOS for it. They didn't know any better.
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 04:16 PM   #44
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

'Watering down' would imply adding more of the bad part. That can hardly be said of these movies. It's really the opposite. JJ Trek is like Everclear Trek.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 04:17 PM   #45
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Is J.J. Abams "Star Trek" Sustainable?

indranee wrote: View Post
Yeah, TOS was the worst perpetrator of the monoculture, not TNG or the other series. But I forgive TOS for it. They didn't know any better.
They also had no money.

Nothing scares me more than the thought of Michael Bay taking over the Trek movies. Whatever layers are in the Trek movies now will be replaced by slo-mo artsy beauty shots and Steve Jablonsky music. I'd take Brett Ratner first.

I'm not too worried as long as (if ID is good) the same writers are on board next film. This trilogy, if it is one, seems to be about "watching Kirk grow." What happen in this film will no doubt play into the next. Why don't we see Into Darkness before we wonder about movie #3?
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 06:29 AM.

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