Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by tmosler, Jan 25, 2013.
None of them gets a vote that matters. Period, full stop.
Because a group a "fans" want Star Trek to remain something only a small and shrinking fanbase enjoys until it eventually dies out.
Probably he just wants it to be something he likes.
More like a vocal minority.
The folks who vote at fan websites are only a tiny sliver of the moviegoing audience.
That's not Abrams's fault.
That's kind of too bad, since it is already something a great many other people like instead.
He seems to dislike his contribution most.
And again, as long as Abrams is pleasing a mass audience that's just too bad for folks who dislike him.
Hmm so between now and 2016 (Trek's 50th anniversary) JJ is supposed to direct and produce, Star Wars VII, Star Trek XIII, and Mission Impossible 5, and any other movie and TV projects he aspires to complete....
The man is an artist. Not a director for hire. He'll give 2 years to Star Wars, take a break , and maybe focus on other projects. Paramount will likely ask JJ to be a consulting producer for Star Trek XIII. Since JJ dragged his feet about even saying he would commit to Trek sequel back in 2011 while promoting Super 8. However I think Paramount will go a different route and choose another director to helm Trek. It'll be like the Bond franchise almost.
Even for fans of new Star Trek I'm not sure losing JJ is going to be all that devastating. For the most part I think changing directors can keep a movie series fresh. It's not like this is his baby and we can't even imagine anyone else making a good Star Trek movie. We've had good ones by other directors before, no reason we wont have more after him.
I hear he might also be taking over as Pope and rebooting the Catholic church now that Benedict XVI is stepping down.
It's worse. A bunch of ungifted dilettantes are in charge.
I guess they don't want to wait for the King of Lens Flares to finish with all those other projects.
That worn out false choice again.
The man is a con artist.
No. Nothing would be worse than that.
In the meantime, most of us are enjoying the new Star Trek.
And Abrams is not going to "take a break" after the Star Wars movie.
Why couldn't that happen?
With all respect to him as an artist, I hope he's more of a director for hire in Star Wars - do the technical stuff great but leave the blobby look to Star Trek. Here it was fresh, in Star Wars it'd be doing it wrong.
...not that I can remember anything about them, but it's edgy and post-TOS Trek's smooth, aren't they? Maybe the prequels are more blobby though. Still different from Trek.
Dix, stop being so selfish with this call for tired rehashed cheese trek, the needs of the many easily outweigh yours buddy.
There is a huge back catalogue of berman-era nelix cheese fest trek you can loop over and over.
^Can't there be different new type of Trek? Also he's got to tell someone how it's ruined to him. Otherwise things would progress like American Psycho
I feel like Abrams' presence or absence as director of the third film is largely irrelevant. Given the success of ST09 and assuming the success of STID, Paramount aren't apt to sign off on some massive tonal or stylistic shift for the third film - don't mess with success and all that. Any incoming director would presumably be required to stay within shouting distance of Abrams' treatment of the material.
The original 6 movies had different directors, yet the styling and tempo of storyline seemed to carry through all of them.
All though I think ST V had very much lead character self-indulgence in it not dissimilar to what you'd find in Insurrection and Nemesis.
Separate names with a comma.