Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in XI

[CommanderRaytas]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

And nice to see he's not in denial about the movie's faults, like a lot of Trek directors usually are.

And some of the fans.

I guess it's one thing to see the film's flaws, but that doesn't mean they make you like it less. Like, there are about 3 mistakes in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, but to me, they're still the best books ever. So a few flaws don't necessarily take anything away from the enjoyment. Also, enjoying something does not mean you can't see it's flaws.

Nothing and no-one is perfect imo.

 

[Penhall99]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

The end line should have been "Where no MAN has gone before..." Didn't sound right with Nimoy saying "Where no ONE has gone before..."

And I think the Klingon escape scene really should have stayed. Just watched it on my blu-ray copy and it was awesome.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

And nice to see he's not in denial about the movie's faults, like a lot of Trek directors usually are.

And some of the fans.

I guess it's one thing to see the film's flaws, but that doesn't mean they make you like it less. Like, there are about 3 mistakes in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, but to me, they're still the best books ever. So a few flaws don't necessarily take anything away from the enjoyment. Also, enjoying something does not mean you can't see it's flaws.

Nothing and no-one is perfect imo.

Exactly.

Moreover, even if you see the flaws it doesn't mean you have to obsess and talk about nothing else all the time.
Or try to discover new ones constantly, even where there aren't any.

 

[Cryogenic]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

And nice to see he's not in denial about the movie's faults, like a lot of Trek directors usually are.

That's quite heartening, and real. Those are two of my big criticisms of the film and to hear him echo those, and agree, shows a humility and can only be a good sign for Trek XII.

Not really. It's just good PR. Notice the timing? Two days before the DVD/Blu-ray came to stores.

Abrams will never acknowledge his complete trashing of real Star Trek in favour of a two-hour thrill-ride. His concessions to minor, trivial aspects (with respect to the whole) are piecemeal, at best.

If Abrams had truly cared about crafting an authentic Star Trek movie, he'd have recognised his abject lack of interest in anything Trek, not to mention his general lack of aptitude for hard Sci-Fi, and he'd have walked away. But no. He happily perverted Star Trek into disposable adolescent schlock, and now he plays the humble artiste and earns vanity points by pointing to deficiencies that are as plain to see as the nose on one's face.

This is superficial stuff. And with everything getting a free pass, right down to Abrams' contrite, and comically-transparent, self-flagellation, it can only get worse.

 

[startrekrcks]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

that is harsh

 

[Shazam!]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

And nice to see he's not in denial about the movie's faults, like a lot of Trek directors usually are.

And some of the fans.

I guess it's one thing to see the film's flaws, but that doesn't mean they make you like it less. Like, there are about 3 mistakes in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, but to me, they're still the best books ever. So a few flaws don't necessarily take anything away from the enjoyment. Also, enjoying something does not mean you can't see it's flaws.

Some, not all.

Whereas Abrams has stated here that he's open to criticism, certain fans will defend his honour to the death if you dare say anything negative.

 

[Shazam!]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

If Abrams had truly cared about crafting an authentic Star Trek movie, he'd have recognised his abject lack of interest in anything Trek, not to mention his general lack of aptitude for hard Sci-Fi, and he'd have walked away.

By that logic, we'd never have had Star Trek II.

I agree that the latest Trek is nothing more than a Summer popcorn flick, but the idea that a non-Trek fan can't produce quality Star Trek material isn't one I can get behind.

 

[Cryogenic]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

that is harsh

But true.

If Abrams had truly cared about crafting an authentic Star Trek movie, he'd have recognised his abject lack of interest in anything Trek, not to mention his general lack of aptitude for hard Sci-Fi, and he'd have walked away.

By that logic, we'd never have had Star Trek II.

If only.

I agree that the latest Trek is nothing more than a Summer popcorn flick, but the idea that a non-Trek fan can't produce quality Star Trek material isn't one I can get behind.

Fair enough.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

And some of the fans.

I guess it's one thing to see the film's flaws, but that doesn't mean they make you like it less. Like, there are about 3 mistakes in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, but to me, they're still the best books ever. So a few flaws don't necessarily take anything away from the enjoyment. Also, enjoying something does not mean you can't see it's flaws.

Some, not all.

Whereas Abrams has stated here that he's open to criticism, certain fans will defend his honour to the death if you dare say anything negative.

And some will always try to bash Abrams and twist his words and everything positive he might do or say into negative.

Extremes are on both sides. Always have been,always will be.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

And some of the fans.

I guess it's one thing to see the film's flaws, but that doesn't mean they make you like it less. Like, there are about 3 mistakes in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, but to me, they're still the best books ever. So a few flaws don't necessarily take anything away from the enjoyment. Also, enjoying something does not mean you can't see it's flaws.

Some, not all.

Whereas Abrams has stated here that he's open to criticism, certain fans will defend his honour to the death if you dare say anything negative.

That's true. It's the thing though: an extreme statement provokes people to say the exact opposite. So, if I am a fan of Abrams' work (I am btw), and read someone bashing him, it'll provoke me.... and I'll write a response that's supposed to wind people up.

This is how many arguments around here ensue, I suppose.

And it's totally ridiculous to claim Abrams only acknowledged XI's faults as a PR gag. Does anyone here know how to read minds? Anyone got a crystal ball? This kind of thing makes folks go ballistic on other people's arses.

 

[Aragorn]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

that is harsh

I don't see any downside to his repetitive hatred for this last Trek movie. I call it addition by subtraction.

 

[Alientraveller]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

Abrams is a lovely gracious man and I can tell he doesn't want to insult those who helped them film extensively at Budweiser: but as shown on the Blu-ray it was very difficult: it was so noisy they needed to talk with headphones, Uhura's work station was freezing, the warp cores could only have seven people on at a time... I definitely think he and Chambliss will use the sequel's budget to build the engineering set.

 

[JarodRussell]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

At least he sees the flaws. Last time I checked, the scriptwriters didn't.

 

[beneldon]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

Shatner doing the voice-over in the next movie would be the single most ridiculous thing ever. What would possibly be the point other than to throw a bone to some unreconstructed fanboys?
The King is dead! Long live the King! Shat's time has passed. No amount of wankerism will make him doing the voice-over a good idea.

 

[Praxius]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

Decent answers from him and sounds like a true artist (never fully satisfied of your own work / being your worst critic)

I didn't see any mention on the lense flares people complained about..... I wonder if he'll keep them in the next movie for consistancy or intentional annoyance lol

 

[Praxius]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

Shatner doing the voice-over in the next movie would be the single most ridiculous thing ever. What would possibly be the point other than to throw a bone to some unreconstructed fanboys?
The King is dead! Long live the King! Shat's time has passed. No amount of wankerism will make him doing the voice-over a good idea.

The only logical (no pun intended) reason to have old Spock saying the words at the end of ST2009 is mainly because he was in the actual movie and used in a since to pass the torch from the original cast to the new.

To have Shatner to do it just for the sake of doing it, makes no sense at all, considering he didn't get flung back in time, he wasn't involved in the movie, and unless they decide in the next movie to somehow drag Old Kirk into the past, it just doesn't make sense.

And since Old Kirk died in Generations, that sorta tosses that out the window.

I mean if you wanted to get fancy with it and still have Shatner say the words, do it at the begining of the movie with a flash forward/back to the original Enterprise and original crew on some odd way of tieing them into the new crew and enterprise in some tangent situation..... have Shatner start the words and then about halfway through, blend into Pine finishing it off and then the movie continuing through to it's normal story, new crew and new enterprise.

But even trying to pull that off is going to take some mind bending trip sessions to figure out.

 

[Praxius]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

Not really. It's just good PR. Notice the timing? Two days before the DVD/Blu-ray came to stores.

Abrams will never acknowledge his complete trashing of real Star Trek in favour of a two-hour thrill-ride. His concessions to minor, trivial aspects (with respect to the whole) are piecemeal, at best.

If Abrams had truly cared about crafting an authentic Star Trek movie, he'd have recognised his abject lack of interest in anything Trek, not to mention his general lack of aptitude for hard Sci-Fi, and he'd have walked away. But no. He happily perverted Star Trek into disposable adolescent schlock, and now he plays the humble artiste and earns vanity points by pointing to deficiencies that are as plain to see as the nose on one's face.

This is superficial stuff. And with everything getting a free pass, right down to Abrams' contrite, and comically-transparent, self-flagellation, it can only get worse.

Well gee I guess they missed your application as director for the movie as you sure sound like you know better then he does and could have done a better job.

Think you can do better?

Hop to it.... there's still plenty of time to bug the gang to dump him and hire you on before the next movie hits threatres.

Best of luck.

(I imagine there was a good number of people who ragged all over the new Batman movies, Superman and Spiderman movies as well.... as soon as one thing doesn't look exactly as they once remembered in the old movies/series, time to grab the pitchforks and torches)

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

Here is what I posted about this interview in my news thread.

JJ Abrams is exactly who I thought he was from the fact that I heard he had been so careful with making XI and who along with Orci and Kertzman were listening to the criticisms of the film. I had expected a more in depth film in XII and it sounds like JJ wants to give us exactly that, I believe that by XII all the Trekkies and fans will be united in liking the next film when it premiers, now in 2012. Also before I had my doubts about Shatner being in or even belonging in XII but if they are careful and execute it correctly Shatner coming back one last time in XII could be a very memorable moment, in a positive way too, and hopefully a great send off for the first captain James T. Kirk. Star Trek looks from this interview to have a bright future.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

I didn't see any mention on the lense flares people complained about..... I wonder if he'll keep them in the next movie for consistancy or intentional annoyance lol

Are you kidding? Lens flare is JJ's speciality, his signature. He'll never give it up. And he's right not to.

 

[Praxius]

Re: Interview with JJ Abrams; talks about what worked & what didn't in

I didn't see any mention on the lense flares people complained about..... I wonder if he'll keep them in the next movie for consistancy or intentional annoyance lol

Are you kidding? Lens flare is JJ's speciality, his signature. He'll never give it up. And he's right not to.

Oh I never understood why there's such a hatred for lense flares.... although at times they can be annoying depending.