Abrams Directing Star Wars

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by Kamdan, Jan 24, 2013.

  1. YARN

    YARN Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    We don't have any choice. Nothing said here can empower or impede Mr. Abrams.

    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.
     
  2. Ovation

    Ovation Vice Admiral Admiral

    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).
     
  3. DarthTom

    DarthTom Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Atlanta, Georgia
    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.
     
  4. throwback

    throwback Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    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/vid...st&utm_medium=index_carousel&utm_campaign=all

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

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    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. :shrug:

    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.
     
  6. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    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.
     
  7. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    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.
     
  8. Tom Servo

    Tom Servo Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Really, what is horrid and childish about his visual treatment? Please enlighten us all.
     
  9. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Another fan bloviating into a webcam. Meh.
     
  10. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  11. controlfreak

    controlfreak Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Location:
    Under foot.
    You know you would if you could!! That's quite a sandwich.
     
  12. The Stig

    The Stig Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    BBC Storage, hiding from Chris Evans
    Last I checked, you weren't the final arbiter of 'artistic use of lens flare.'

    I found their use added to the frenetic energy that set Trek 09 apart from the other installments.
     
  13. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    Even Julia Child was on record as loving Burger King's french fries (but not McDonalds'). :)

    You go in knowing what to expect, and when it's done right, you're satisfied. And, a well-made cheeseburger is harder to find than one would think it should be, too.
     
  14. YARN

    YARN Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Nor do we owe anything to them. We don't owe them our time our attention or our hard earned dollars. We could simply take a pass on both franchises and they couldn't do a thing about it.

    Seeing as how, however, they do want our money, and seeing as how Nemesis (and how many other failed films?) proved that not just anything will get our support, they do owe us.... ...something. It's not a moral imperative, but an economic imperative.

    And seeing as how millions of dollars, careers, and even the health studios themselves are at stake, it turns out they owe us quite a bit.

    They need to keep our interest, our good will, and most importantly our hope and faith.

    Not really. As corporations, studios have a legal responsibility to their shareholders to make money. Studios cannot simply do anything they please, but must actively seek to turn a profit. They could not, therefore, push a release date to 2065, spend millions in development, and claim to be acting in good faith to their shareholders.

    Since their legal charge and (apparent) self-interest is to maximize profit, they must, in fact, focus their efforts on the best strategies for exploiting their properties. They cannot simply do anything they please. If they did, they will not be in business for very long.

    And what makes money? Making the public happy. Turns out we matter after all.

    When lobbyists finally gain enough power to force congress to pass a law requiring us to buy movie tickets, perhaps it won't matter (we already have film copyright being protected and investigated by the Dept. of Homeland Security, as if video piracy makes one a homegrown terrorist), but until then, their fates depend on our tastes.

    And what else do you think happens on an anonymous internet forum (the few that are left now that Reddit and Facebook are ascendant)?

    We are not only entitled to like and dislike, but to speak of our likes and dislikes and to express how we feel things ought to be. There is absolutely nothing improper about this and no amount of railing about the private property of filmmakers will make it otherwise.

    Our talk here is not hurting their property. It does absolutely nothing, at least not directly, to impel or impede their plans or profits. Our talk here is just talk.
     
  15. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Who doesn't love cheeseburgers? ;)

    There's an independent place two blocks from my front door, Stage Burger, that has the best cheeseburgers around. It's hard to find a place in this part of the country that offers sliced avocado - as distinct from guacamole, which a lot of places do.

    Cheeburger, Cheeburger isn't bad, either, but they're more notable for their "frings" baskets.
     
  16. Ovation

    Ovation Vice Admiral Admiral

    Exactly my point.

    Nope. They still owe us nothing. They can ask for our money in return for their product, but we are not owed anything prior to the handing over of the money--and even after that, we are not owed satisfaction.
    Nope. They only owe us an entertainment experience IF we choose to fork over the money. They are not required to satisfy us in any way. It is, of course, in their interest to satisfy as many people as possible, if they wish to stay in business, but they most certainly do NOT have to satisfy any one person in particular.
    Judging by their past track record, collectively, they've already done this many times and will very likely do so again.

    Well, if you're going to parse technicalities to this degree in a causal discussion board, ok. They are beholden to their shareholders. Technically, as long as they convince the shareholders that a profit will be made, in some fashion or another, even with a release date of 2065, then they are free to do so. Of course, you knew perfectly well that I meant the "when they damn well please" in relation to the general public. I forgot I was responding to the kind of pedant who looks for technical exceptions to make tangential points in order to avoid conceding the larger, more obvious point. Won't happen again.

    How they choose to act in order to remain in business is entirely up to them. Even whether they choose to remain in business is entirely up to them. There would be consequences to bad choices, of course, but they are still free to make them.

    I'd say they're quite skilled at doing so, given the very high degree of happiness they have, collectively, engendered among the public (measured by the only criterion that matters--the number of people who paid to see the work).

    In that case, their fates seem rather promising, given the evidence available. But they remain free to offer what they want, when they want (subject, of course, to shareholder approval--don't want to forget the technicalities).

    Certainly. People are free to talk all they like--whether they like Abrams' work, hate it or are unmoved by it. Never have I said otherwise. However, I will continue to say, as I am entirely correct in the matter, that no artistic producer (in the broadest sense, encompassing all manner of formats) owes anything in particular to the audience prior to receiving compensation of some sort and, subsequent to that compensation, owes ONLY an artistic product. NEVER does such a producer owe anyone whatsoever any form of satisfaction.
     
  17. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    Actully got my picture on their wall for eating the Pounder (20 oz.) cheeseburger at the original Cheeburger, Cheeburger in Sanibel, FL a few years ago.

    Spelunkers in Front Royal, VA (out by Skyline Drive). Best ever. Period. Frozen custard, too.
     
  18. ThunderAeroI

    ThunderAeroI Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Location:
    Perpetually being chased by airplanes
    I guess this then asks the question: What is the core difference between the two? I don't even know hoe to answer that question.

    One seems more for grown-ups and one seems for kids, but really what is different about their souls?
     
  19. Ovation

    Ovation Vice Admiral Admiral

    Are we talking Cheeburger, Cheeburger vs. McDonald's or Trek vs. Wars? Inquiring minds want to know. :)
     
  20. SalvorHardin

    SalvorHardin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    Star's End
    Enough with the cheeseburger analogies, I'm getting hungry.:klingon: