Why does Abrams keeps giving the middle finger to Trek fans?

[Danoz]

“We weren’t making a movie for fans of Star Trek. We were making a movie for fans of movies.”

I mean, fine, even the "I've never been a fan of Star Trek" comes into play here.

We all know what he's doing. Why does he need to throw it in our faces? I've come to understand the Star Trek that I know and love will be available to me in the future only in novel form-- but even with your "reimagining" of Trek, do you have to keep shitting on the life-long fans?

I'm admittedly still pretty excited about this movie because I have an open-mind, and I do "like movies." I loved Transformers, X-Men, the Incredible Hulk, and all the cheesy remakes plaguing our society . I think J.J. Abrams is well-suited to creating something that "most people" will actually find they enjoy, having never seen an episode of Star Trek. Remember, after Nemesis, keeping Star Trek on the big screen required nothing less than a complete overhaul-- back to the basics. I remain cautiously optimistic, but I find it unfortunate that Abrams feels the need to estrange the people who... um... still chat about Star Trek on message boards

 

[seigezunt]

“We weren’t making a movie for fans of Star Trek. We were making a movie for fans of movies.”

I mean, fine, even the "I've never been a fan of Star Trek" comes into play here.

We all know what he's doing. Why does he need to throw it in our faces? I've come to understand the Star Trek that I know and love will be available to me in the future only in novel form-- but even with your "reimagining" of Trek, do you have to keep shitting on the life-long fans?

I'm admittedly still pretty excited about this movie because I have an open-mind, and I do "like movies." I loved Transformers, X-Men, the Incredible Hulk, and all the cheesy remakes plaguing our society . I think J.J. Abrams is well-suited to creating something that "most people" will actually find they enjoy, having never seen an episode of Star Trek. Remember, after Nemesis, keeping Star Trek on the big screen required nothing less than a complete overhaul-- back to the basics. I remain cautiously optimistic, but I find it unfortunate that Abrams feels the need to estrange the people who... um... still chat about Star Trek on message boards

I think he's trying to keep it light, and send a message that "hey, you don't have to be a complete loser to like my movie." That, and the fans have in many ways become a burden to anyone who would inherit the franchise. I mean, look at the carping about trivial details that we have already, and that's over a sixty-second trailer. He knew this was going to be an uphill battle with the "faithful fans," and there's probably a little well-deserved hostility in there, too.

 

[God Magnus]

Considering some of the things fans are saying about him I think he's entitled to a light jab.

 

[DeafPoet]

I think it's a necessary evil, unfortunately.

He needs to say stuff like that because he's been talking directly to the press recently and he needs them excited about this thing for the publicity. And journalists, as we've seen from the reports, fall along pretty much the same lines of division as the regular public does: 90% of people writing about this thing aren't genre fans. He needs to encourage them that this thing won't be a sciencey snooze fest.

Now, I don't think he's lying when he says this to them, but you're right, he's playing it up. And I'm fine with it.

I could care less about the guy's Trek pedigree. First of all, he's got a bunch of people who know Trek inside and out around him and secondly, the fact that he's not a Trekkie doesn't mean he's not capable of making a film that speaks to me. Don't feel estranged in the least. I guess you could say I'm secure enough in my own fandom that his or anyone else's opinion or take on Trek isn't really going to fuck with my world perspective that much.

 

[Danoz]

Considering some of the things fans are saying about him I think he's entitled to a light jab.

I think he's trying to keep it light, and send a message that "hey, you don't have to be a complete loser to like my movie." That, and the fans have in many ways become a burden to anyone who would inherit the franchise. I mean, look at the carping about trivial details that we have already, and that's over a sixty-second trailer. He knew this was going to be an uphill battle with the "faithful fans," and there's probably a little well-deserved hostility in there, too.

These are both very fair points. Good call.

 

[Ovation]

Considering some of the things fans are saying about him I think he's entitled to a light jab.

I'd be far less "understanding" of some of the crap spewed at him and his crew than he's been. Not to mention that we're getting reports from multiple sources over several days of the same press conference or two--makes it seem like he's saying it far more often than he really is.

 

[Danoz]

I think it's a necessary evil, unfortunately.

He needs to say stuff like that because he's been talking directly to the press recently and he needs them excited about this thing for the publicity. And journalists, as we've seen from the reports, fall along pretty much the same lines of division as the regular public does: 90% of people writing about this thing aren't genre fans. He needs to encourage them that this thing won't be a sciencey snooze fest.

Now, I don't think he's lying when he says this to them, but you're right, he's playing it up. And I'm fine with it.

I could care less about the guy's Trek pedigree. First of all, he's got a bunch of people who know Trek inside and out around him and secondly, the fact that he's not a Trekkie doesn't mean he's not capable of making a film that speaks to me. Don't feel estranged in the least. I guess you could say I'm secure enough in my own fandom that his or anyone else's opinion or take on Trek isn't really going to fuck with my world perspective that much.

Another good point.

I just read the quotes and was a little surprised by them, like, "is this really necessary?"

Especially after seeing that awesome trailer, I have no idea why so many Trek fans would be so cynical about this initiative.

 

[DRMidnite]

I'm a die hard Trek and while I'm not too crazy about some of Abrams' shows (Lost? I don't see what all the excitement is about, to be honest) and feel that here we go again with the ret-conning, I don't think he's flipping fans the bird so much as he's trying to stir interest.

 

[God Magnus]

Completely off topic Danoz, but that dog in your avatar is beautiful! Is that a husky mix of some sort or a pup?

And I agree with the posters above - he needs to stir interest.

 

[Squiggy]

Why does Abrams keeps giving the middle finger to Trek fans?

Because there aren't enough "Trek fans" left to keep the franchise going.

 

[btflash]

theres plenty of trek fans out there ! abrams needs to deliver a quality film and they will go see it.not another "enterprise"!

 

[Logical Leopard]

What's the old expression about being able to please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time?

I think it's even more appropriate when it comes to movies and television, especially Trek. I don't think there's a such thing as a "Fan-Proof" movie or television episode. No matter how JJ makes the movie, even if he had the whole thing scripted and painstakingly researched by the most scholarly Trek fanatics, someone would be like "That Klingon's head isn't bumpy enough" or "The explosive yield of a quantum torpedo is 52.3 isotons. Destroying a meteor with five quantum torpedos is simply not credible. You'd need five and a half, five and three quarters if it had a nickel/vanadium core..."

JJ was doomed from the beginning. So I think he made the right choice of trying to make the best possible movie that he can about Star Trek to appeal to the broadest possible audience, with the one central theme of Star Trek - optimism. Which I believe he's been described in the EW article as being a pretty big optimist. Which results in stuff like the Enterprise being built on planets. When people said no, he said "YES WE CAN!"



Also, onething we tend to forget is that Star Trek, no matter how much one might love it and the many concepts and contributions it's made to us as individuals and a society, it's still a series of television shows and movies. And the object of television and movies is to make money. Yes, it can be used for more than that, but that's the heart of it. And I think everyone involved in Trek understands that, from JJ to B&B, and yes....even Gene Roddenberry.

 

[JNG]

We all know what he's doing. Why does he need to throw it in our faces?

It's because he doesn't like Star Trek and wants the film to be a mass-market success seen by a new audience. He thinks he can defeat the perception of the film as being targeted at a niche nerd audience by being down on that audience and making it clear he has never felt a connection to it.

 

[JoeZhang]

We all know what he's doing. Why does he need to throw it in our faces?

It's because he doesn't like Star Trek

I think that's the key to it, he's so personally filled with hate that he's spent the last two years working on a project about a subject he dislikes - yeah that's it.



Give a break... this is a director at the top of his career able to pick and choise his projects - he picked Star Trek because he didn't like it?

People are confusing (or projecting their own perspective as a fan into being the same as being a professional filmmaker) the fact that he's never been into much as a fan with his professional take on it in terms of making it work as a film.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

“We weren’t making a movie for fans of Star Trek. We were making a movie for fans of movies.”

I mean, fine, even the "I've never been a fan of Star Trek" comes into play here.

We all know what he's doing. Why does he need to throw it in our faces? I've come to understand the Star Trek that I know and love will be available to me in the future only in novel form-- but even with your "reimagining" of Trek, do you have to keep shitting on the life-long fans?

I'm admittedly still pretty excited about this movie because I have an open-mind, and I do "like movies." I loved Transformers, X-Men, the Incredible Hulk, and all the cheesy remakes plaguing our society . I think J.J. Abrams is well-suited to creating something that "most people" will actually find they enjoy, having never seen an episode of Star Trek. Remember, after Nemesis, keeping Star Trek on the big screen required nothing less than a complete overhaul-- back to the basics. I remain cautiously optimistic, but I find it unfortunate that Abrams feels the need to estrange the people who... um... still chat about Star Trek on message boards

I think he's trying to keep it light, and send a message that "hey, you don't have to be a complete loser to like my movie." That, and the fans have in many ways become a burden to anyone who would inherit the franchise. I mean, look at the carping about trivial details that we have already, and that's over a sixty-second trailer. He knew this was going to be an uphill battle with the "faithful fans," and there's probably a little well-deserved hostility in there, too.

The problem is that, as I think you're saying... Abrams thinks that Trek fans are "complete losers."

That's even less respect that the Beebs showed us. They thought of us as children, needing to be fed the same bland diet consistently or else we'd soil our diapers. Abrams' recent (and ongoing) comments don't even show that level of concern. We're talking "encouraging infanticide" here...

 

[Logical Leopard]

Give a break... this is a director at the top of his career able to pick and choise his projects - he picked Star Trek because he didn't like it?

People are confusing (or projecting their own perspective as a fan into being the same as being a professional filmmaker) the fact that he's never been into much as a fan with his professional take on it in terms of making it work as a film.

Exactly. And from the EW interview, it seems as though JJ is an optimist. And optimism is a dominant theme in Star Trek. So, maybe he took a look at it, identified with that part of it, and said "I'm going to make this work. These bones can live again."


Either that, or he's working for George Lucas, and trying to actively discredit Trek so that the next US space shuttle will be named "Millenium Falcon"

 

[Logical Leopard]

Infanticide? *scratches head* Now JJ is King Herod?

 

[T'Aerwynd]

I mean, fine, even the "I've never been a fan of Star Trek" comes into play here.

Being a fan of a subject or franchise is not a prerequisite for making a movie about a subject or franchise. As others have said, Abrams has endured a bunch of total crap from some really rude people who are supposed to be fans of a show that always championed open-mindedness and acceptance. I feel bad for the guy and, given the treatment I've seen of him, I can't believe directors even WANT to make movies.

 

[DeafPoet]

The problem is that, as I think you're saying... Abrams thinks that Trek fans are "complete losers."

*sigh*

Link?

 

[Logical Leopard]

No wait, I got it now...


JJ is King Herod, and he's trying to "kill" the spirits of the one who will one day become the Trekssiah and write THE ONE AND ONLY COMPLETELY FLAWLESS, TOTALLY CANON, STAR TREK MOVIE" Even better than Roddenberry himself.

Oh, well, that's terrible then! We've got to do something NOW, if we ever want to see TOAOCFTCSTM.....