JJ Abrams on the direction of Star Trek 11

[Lumen]

I'm sure this film will be a lot more like "Star Wars" than previous Trek films have been, simply because the recent "Star Wars" films are modern adventure films with huge budgets and extensive utilization of the best effects technology available.

I'm a great deal more interested in the story and the performers than in the size or appearence of the Enterprise.

Yep. The size or length of the Enterprise doesn't affect the story one bit--be it 1000 feet or 1000 miles, it'll look the same in my theatre. Honestly, I can't bring myself to care about these insignificant details like the length of a ship or the shape of a room.

 

[Warped9]

J.J. Abrams is making a unique Star Trek film, but is aware of Star Trek's vocal fans.
As reported by Los Angeles Daily News, Abrams, who admits to having been more of a Star Wars fan than a Star Trek fan, is adding action to Star Trek. "The movie we're making won't feel like any other 'Star Trek' you've ever seen," he said. "There hadn't been this kind of action in a 'Star Trek' movie before."
But he hastened to add that Star Trek XI won't deviate from what Gene Roddenberry had envisioned for Star Trek. " is being true to the vision of our abilities and of what Roddenberry started," said Abrams. "So it's this very interesting hybrid of honoring its origins and also being something completely brand new." Abrams wants to make a good movie with appeal to all, including the existing Star Trek fans. "As a director, my sole mission was to make a movie that was entertaining and emotional and funny and scary and all of the things that I know I want to see when I go to see a movie," he explained. "It's a huge adventure. But because we've done a lot of work leading up to it, it was already honoring 'Trek' for those very vocal fans."

Let the complaining begin.

After everything that's been promised over the years this doesn't mean a thing until the movie is out.

And this from the guy who helmed the crap known as Cloverfield? It made me want to hurl. Is he going to do that for us in the Trek film?

 

[Lumen]

No, Abrams was only a producer of Cloverfield--it was written and directed, respetively, by Drew Goddard and Matt Reeves.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

And this from the guy who helmed the crap known as Cloverfield? It made me want to hurl. Is he going to do that for us in the Trek film?

Given that for the investment made "Cloverfield" was an enormous success and very well received by most of the public, we can only hope that he will.

 

[Warped9]

And this from the guy who helmed the crap known as Cloverfield? It made me want to hurl. Is he going to do that for us in the Trek film?

Given that for the investment made "Cloverfield" was an enormous success and very well received by most of the public, we can only hope that he will.

I don't care how much fucking money it made it was still a shitty movie. It's not hard to understand some folks' cynicism knowing it's the same guy.

And for the record I didn't care for his M.I. work either.

 

[ancient]

If the hangar fits in the ship, I will boycot.

 

[Warped9]

If the hangar fits in the ship, I will boycot.

 

[M'Sharak]

If it keeps Trek going, then the change will be good. But even when I went to see The Phantom Menace, and when they mentioned "The Federation" in the film, I was like, great, because I thought Star Wars using copying Star Trek now and using the name Federation for their own. I'm not a fan of Star Wars, so I'm not sure if "The Federation" was ever used in the first three films.

I just don't see the point on mixing the two, is all I am saying.

Well, I can't seem to find the exact Daily News article quoted by the OP, but this one seems to contain most of the same bits, and nowhere does it say anything about any intent on Abrams' part to mix the two. This movie might use certain elements of cinematic style which you could also find in The Phantom Menace, but that's not really indicative of anything beyond the fact that they're both films made using similar techniques.

As for whether "The Federation" was used in the original Star Wars trilogy, I'm afraid I don't remember and don't see it as being that important.

 

[Akiraprise]

I think "Federation" was used in Revenge of the Sith. They were referring to the Trade Federation if I remember correctly.

 

[SlyCardie]

I'm optimistic about this project. There's no use worrying for the next 12 or so months.

 

[Vektor]

I don't care how much fucking money it made it was still a shitty movie. It's not hard to understand some folks' cynicism knowing it's the same guy.

It’s not hard to understand the cynicism from people who thought it was a shitty movie, but people like that need to get it through their heads that not everyone holds the same opinions that they do, and it’s not a crime against humanity and good taste if they don’t.

As gimmick-based monster movies go, I thought Cloverfield was a masterpiece and I’ll be eagerly picking up the DVD right after work today. I also thought MI:III was far and away the best of the three. From where I sit, having Abrams at the helm of Star Trek is all good until proven otherwise.

What makes you right and me wrong?

 

[Therin of Andor]

It made me want to hurl. Is he going to do that for us in the Trek film?

I thought you were boycotting the new ST film anyway?

The steadycam "cleverness" was done on purpose for "Cloverfield", to give a sense of realism that we were watching actual footage, as made by a scared-out-of-his-wits amateur, on a camcorder.

Of course there's no need for ST XI to be made this way. But "Cloverfield" lived up to its media hype in every way, and made a fortune on a relatively small budget.

 

[darkshadow0001]

I think "Federation" was used in Revenge of the Sith. They were referring to the Trade Federation if I remember correctly.

You could be right. I saw all three of the "new" Star Wars films, I couldn't remember which one used it to tell you the truth. I also think your right about the "Trade Federation".

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It’s not hard to understand the cynicism from people who thought it was a shitty movie, but people like that need to get it through their heads that not everyone holds the same opinions that they do, and it’s not a crime against humanity and good taste if they don’t.

As gimmick-based monster movies go, I thought Cloverfield was a masterpiece and I’ll be eagerly picking up the DVD right after work today. I also thought MI:III was far and away the best of the three. From where I sit, having Abrams at the helm of Star Trek is all good until proven otherwise.

Exactly so.

 

[Mr. Fergy]

JJ Abraham is an OK guy, but he should have NEVER said he is more of a Star Wars fan. I am hoping he does Star Trek right and not make it a "Phantom Menace" clone.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

If it keeps Trek going, then the change will be good. But even when I went to see The Phantom Menace, and when they mentioned "The Federation" in the film, I was like, great, because I thought Star Wars using copying Star Trek now and using the name Federation for their own. I'm not a fan of Star Wars, so I'm not sure if "The Federation" was ever used in the first three films.

I just don't see the point on mixing the two, is all I am saying.

Well, "Federation" isn't some Treknical term invented by Gene Roddenberry. It's actually a very accurate description of the original (as-intended-by-the-founders) structure of the United States Government... where we had "sovereign states" with a very limited, Federal (get it?) government performing only those tasks which the states were not equipped to handle on their own.

Because we have a slightly less representative structure (ie, the average citizen doesn't get a direct voice, only through voting for our officials), we are a Federal Republic, not a Federation. Many labor unions are Federations, however... the members get direct votes on issues.

The South was going to be more representative (in theory, had they truly seceded) so they were a "Confederation" which is basically just the prefix for "together" added to the word "Federation" after all...

My point is this... the word has meaning. It's not a Trek term. If someone uses the term "The United Federation of Planets" then it might be treated as a "rip off" of Trek... but the term Federation, either alone or in some other construction? Nahhhh....

 

[Therin of Andor]

My point is this... the word has meaning. It's not a Trek term. If someone uses the term "The United Federation of Planets" then it might be treated as a "rip off" of Trek... but the term Federation, either alone or in some other construction? Nahhhh....

In "Blake's Seven", IIRC, "the Federation" was essentially the ongoing antagonist.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

JJ Abraham is an OK guy, but he should have NEVER said he is more of a Star Wars fan.

Heaven forfend.

If it's true there's no reason he shouldn't say so.

 

[Cranston]

I'm sure this film will be a lot more like "Star Wars" than previous Trek films have been, simply because the recent "Star Wars" films are modern adventure films with huge budgets and extensive utilization of the best effects technology available.

I'm a great deal more interested in the story and the performers than in the size or appearence of the Enterprise.

Yep. The size or length of the Enterprise doesn't affect the story one bit--be it 1000 feet or 1000 miles, it'll look the same in my theatre. Honestly, I can't bring myself to care about these insignificant details like the length of a ship or the shape of a room.

Agreed. Specific issues of scale are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The things I remember most about the scale of the E are things said in dialogue ("It's like a whole city in space, Charlie"), and some of the "wow" shots in TMP. So...the ship looking "big" (as in the teaser) don't bug me at all.

 

[TheMasterOfOrion]

No complaints here. Sounds good, if he can pull it off.

So the rumors about Spock's gay relationship are false ?