I Like Abrams

[Robbiesan]

Re: Nimoy and the limited amount with Quito
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Leonard_Nimoy
" He also said he would not appear in the next Star Trek film, claiming it would be unfair to Zachary Quinto, the actor currently portraying Spock."

It's not distancing as much as mixing his performance juxtaposed against Quito's.

Re: merchandising
This is a complex issue. Abrams wanted some exclusivity and control over merchandising. He wanted a reduction in the older series material being sold with a vastly increased amount sold of new merchadise because he felt there was confusion. He wanted to create a Star Wars like merchandising line. That's not a surprise given the 190 million spent to make the first film.

 

[Amaris]

I'm looking forward to (hopefully) some day seeing what a Trek series looks like when there are 13 eps a year, rather than the 22+ churn out. I think it will be awesome.

Indeed, quality over quantity. I mean, there are currently only 6 (well, 7) episodes of Sherlock, and I am absolutely hooked on that show. I couldn't imagine 23 episodes a season producing a consistently high quality. It's just too damned hard to maintain those production values over that long a period.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

So where is this wondrous line of SW like merchandising. Where are my 23 different Khan figures. OH THAT'S RIGHT there are ZERO Nu-Khan figures..

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I'm looking forward to (hopefully) some day seeing what a Trek series looks like when there are 13 eps a year, rather than the 22+ churn out. I think it will be awesome.

Indeed, quality over quantity. I mean, there are currently only 6 (well, 7) episodes of Sherlock, and I am absolutely hooked on that show. I couldn't imagine 23 episodes a season producing a consistently high quality. It's just too damned hard to maintain those production values over that long a period.

I love nu-tv LOL..

Would be soooo great to see Trek get this kind of care.

 

[Kelthaz]

I was just reading someone saying something about him in the Star Trek Movies XI+ forum, and I'm just saying: I like the guy.

You monster.

Yeah, I like him too. "Into Darkness" was a stinker, but overall he's a good director. I'm sorry we're losing him for Star Trek 3, but I'm excited to see what he can do for Star Wars.

 

[Amaris]

I love nu-tv LOL..

Would be soooo great to see Trek get this kind of care.

I agree. Sometimes less is more, and if there were only, say, 13 episodes of a show produced per season, the quality would have to be higher in order to keep people watching. I think it would work.

I was just reading someone saying something about him in the Star Trek Movies XI+ forum, and I'm just saying: I like the guy.

You monster.

Yeah, I like him too. "Into Darkness" was a stinker, but overall he's a good director. I'm sorry we're losing him for Star Trek 3, but I'm excited to see what he can do for Star Wars.

I expect the next Star Wars to be so damned good, that after the movie, I'll smoke a cigarette.

I don't smoke.

 

[Robbiesan]

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Star...s-From-Building-Massive-Trek-World-37587.html
Some information about the issues with merchandising with the reboot:
"An interesting column over on The Wrap explains how licensing and merchandising rights debates mired Bad Robot and Paramount in legal battles with CBS about what elements from Star Trek canon could be used … and which couldn’t. In fact, these hostile negotiations, according to the report, blocked Abrams from turning his 2009 reboot of the series into a multi-platform entertainment experience that would have included a television show, comic books, digital entertainment and more. In the process, these obstacles might have helped push Abrams into the welcome arms of Star Wars -- a franchise that likely worships all of this multi-platform ideas."

A lot of directors have come out in the last two years and complained about the new process of making a film, famous directors who've made money for the studios in the past, but who realize how much the process has changed for making films. It's so expensive to do now, partially due to star's salaries, but also the huge demand for special effects, spectacle, and world-wide gross sales...not just US sales.

One wonders if a lot of famous films could be made today because of market forces as well as corporations in control of that process.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/13/4...rge-lucas-usc-film-industry-massive-implosion
"You're at the point right now where a studio would rather invest $250 million in one film for a real shot at the brass ring," he said, "than make a whole bunch of really interesting, deeply personal — and even maybe historical — projects that may get lost in the shuffle because there's only 24 hours."

All of that affects any future Star Trek projects. I'm ambivalent about Abrams personally. I do think the actors put in fine performances regardless of the script. Don't hold it against them.

We might be watching a television series right now on Star Trek, had this merchandising row not happened. It certainly was planned by Abrams.

 

[F. King Daniel]

So where is this wondrous line of SW like merchandising. Where are my 23 different Khan figures. OH THAT'S RIGHT there are ZERO Nu-Khan figures..

He has a Kre-o (knockoff Lego) figure!

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Those things are ugly. How am I suppose to ship a Kre-o Khan with my Nu Kirk figure from XI?

 

[Plum]

Some information about the issues with merchandising with the reboot: ... SNIP!...

Long story short. Yea. The corporate world today is far, FAR, more complex and, well, full of lawyers. Armies and armies, I'm pretty sure they are the Borg. Anyho', JJ Abrams left Star Trek mainly because of this (or so I speculate). Disney offered him a fresh start with Star Wars and that was far more attractive than the mire and mud that is the Star Trek franchise.

Just imho.

 

[Robbiesan]

Back when Dilbert was popular, and downsizings were occuring in every corporation, then that comic parroted the "you will be assimilated" line over and over. It's certainly appropriate to consider the corporations the Borg.

Regarding short runs of television, I've mentioned how HBO could do Star Trek well with ten or twelve episodes. That would be perfect. We'd probably see at least eight good episodes a year this way.

The BBC often has three or six episode television series and these are frequently done well.

I'm going through withdrawal because it's been so long since Star Trek was on television now. The longer it's gone, the harder it is to bring it back. And think how each time there have been letter writing campaigns to keep it on. That's definitely influencing the fact that there isn't a series right now.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Those things are ugly. How am I suppose to ship a Kre-o Khan with my Nu Kirk figure from XI?

Love transcends all boundaries. Just say Khan fell through this black hole:
[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC6R76Deb1E[/YT]

 

[2takesfrakes]

I like J.J. Abrams, too, USS Triumphant! Whether he knew anything about STAR TREK going in, whether he was a fan, or not ... none of that's important. What is important is that he wanted to make a STAR TREK movie that was entertaining. And this he has in common with everyone from Roddenberry, to Bennett, to Nimoy, to Frakes ... all down the line, that's all anyone involved in STAR TREK has wanted to do. Not all, or even many, of these attempts were entirely successfull, either. Yet, J.J. Abrams was and continues to be ...

That's someone I very much want to have hold the reins of this beloved franchise! And he did everything he could to soften the blow of a reboot, including - and especially - putting it in its own "timeline." But, at some point, this director had to make it his own and he did that ... again, mind you, successfully! You know, I could be mistaken, but didn't STAR TREK '09 even win an Oscar for effects? STAR TREK winning an OSCAR?! Wow, the cartoon was certainly touting that Emmy for decades, and not even Nick Meyer's revered Wrath of Khan got STAR TREK an Oscar. STAR TREK's hitched its wagon to a star, so yeah ... I like Abrams.

 

[SpocksLeftEar]

While I realize that you're joking, please keep the personal commentary about other posters out of the thread.

Two things
- I wasn't joking
- I do believe that I read at least one personal commentary somewhere in the 130,000+ threads. Maybe even more than one. And I couldn't find any post like the one I just got.
Would you care to explain this?

 

[milojthatch]

I was just reading someone saying something about him in the Star Trek Movies XI+ forum, and I'm just saying: I like the guy. I don't know him personally, but during the filming of Star Trek 09, he was roaming around the set in an Infocom shirt. I freakin' love Zork and the other old Infocom games! So, until given a direct reason for it not to be true, we're cool.

Why do I mention this? Because I feel like I see a LOT of comments - and I've almost certainly been guilty of this, myself, regarding Frakes and B & B - where people have clearly just allowed themselves to turn these people into the stupidest, most evil and poorly intentioned people EVER. They can't just be people who are trying to make the best entertainment they can and live their lives, and are just misguided or bad at it, or bad at doing it in a way that makes all of us happy. No, instead, THEY ARE RAPING OUR BELOVED HOBBY!!!1!!one!

It is more fun, perhaps, to demonize people who do things we don't like, but, it is also pretty much directly against the hopeful vision for mankind's future that Roddenberry and others have tried to show us. An impulse that we need to get past in each of us if we're ever going to achieve anything close to it.

And for the record, while I want JANEWAY cycled through the airlock, I quite like Kate Mulgrew, too.

It's just my opinion, but there is literally nothing JJ Abrams has made tv/film wise that I think is actually any good. I felt that way before JJ-Trek and the feeling has only intensified since. I think the man is a hack trying a little too hard to be the new Steven Spielberg.

That said, I don't know the man personally and have never met him, so I try not to comment on JJ Abrams the man and keep my comments strictly to JJ Abrams the Hollywood director/producer/writer. I do know he has a family, and from what I've heard, he tries to be a good husband and father, so if that is true, then I have to respect him for that.

As for Berman and Braga, while I agree that some of their stories have been kind of meh, over all, I'll defend them. Unlike a lot of "fans," I don't feel the so called down fall of Star Trek was because of them. If anything, I feel they did the best they could to keep it together for as long as they could. I firmly put the blame on the executives at the studio. They were the one who told Berman "Make us a new show or we get someone else to do it" not once, but twice. They were the ones who insisted on Enterprise having something futuristic on the show that lead to the stupid Temporal Cold War. They were the ones who fired Berman and hired Abrams and Orci.

The fact is Berman was hand picked by Roddenberry to keep the Star Trek legacy going and Abrams wasn't. It really is that simple for me.

 

[Amaris]

...

The fact is Berman was hand picked by Roddenberry to keep the Star Trek legacy going and Abrams wasn't. It really is that simple for me.

To be fair, Gene was kind of dead when J.J. stepped into the picture.

 

[SpocksLeftEar]

...

The fact is Berman was hand picked by Roddenberry to keep the Star Trek legacy going and Abrams wasn't. It really is that simple for me.

To be fair, Gene was kind of dead when J.J. stepped into the picture.

But Berman could have picked a successor who wouldn't have come up with such a bunch of dumb ideas

 

[Robert Comsol]

I expect the next Star Wars to be so damned good, that after the movie, I'll smoke a cigarette.

Then, let's just hope he understands he is doing a sequel and not - I repeat NOT - a reboot.

Bob

 

[F. King Daniel]

Gene Roddenberry was, by many accounts, a rather unpleasant person. He also took credit for a LOT in Trek which had nothing to do with him. "What Gene would have wanted" is usually thrown around by fans completely ignorant of the man.

 

[Robert Comsol]

But from various interviews and anecdotes one red thread of what Gene Roddenberry actually wanted becomes clear: Less militaristic overtunes and more scientific exploration.

That was one of his criticisms of Franz Joseph's Technical Manual and one of his criticisms of how Nick Meyer handled things in TWOK (IIRC).

I think TNG is a good showcase of his philosophy against which to measure other Trek incarnations, IMHO.

Bob