Abrams Chat Transcript

[TJinPgh]

How important is humour in your vision of Star Trek? And what kind of humour do you enjoy most?

JJ: I’m afraid to answer this question, because The Haters will think that I’m looking at Trek as a comedy. I am not.

Haters? Given that there were more softballs thrown at these guys than a Chris Matthews Hillary Clinton interview, I suspect "Hater" is anybody who doesn't get wet at the mere mention of the name Abrams or his pre-packaged, script written responses.

I continue to get the impression that he couldn't care less if we enjoy the movie or not, so long as he does.

For the record, not all of us who aren't thrilled by the direction of this movie are Abrams haters. Personally, I enjoy Lost (although, much of it's luster has worn off). Alias was good. Nor do I necessarily blame him for the disappointing showing for MI:3.

I simply believe the timing, budget and direction are all ill-advised.

 

[Devon]

TJinPgh said:

How important is humour in your vision of Star Trek? And what kind of humour do you enjoy most?

JJ: I’m afraid to answer this question, because The Haters will think that I’m looking at Trek as a comedy. I am not.

Haters? Given that there were more softballs thrown at these guys than a Chris Matthews Hillary Clinton interview, I suspect "Hater" is anybody who doesn't get wet at the mere mention of the name Abrams or his pre-packaged, script written responses.

I continue to get the impression that he couldn't care less if we enjoy the movie or not, so long as he does.

For the record, not all of us who aren't thrilled by the direction of this movie are Abrams haters. Personally, I enjoy Lost (although, much of it's luster has worn off). Alias was good. Nor do I necessarily blame him for the disappointing showing for MI:3.

I simply believe the timing, budget and direction are all ill-advised.

You're jumping WAAAAY too much to conclusions and taking what he said a little too personally.

"Haters" is probably referring to the people who say "This will suck" and not give it a chance.

As involved as Abrams is in this film, and the massive amount of work that has been going into it, I'm sure he and everyone else would want people to enjoy it.

 

[Roger Wilco]

I really would have liked Abrams to answer the questions about the worldwide release of the movie, I mean that's kind of really important for a lot of people...

 

[Devon]

Space Janitor said:
I really would have liked Abrams to answer the questions about the worldwide release of the movie, I mean that's kind of really important for a lot of people...

They may not know at this point or may not know for sure. For what it's worth, I don't think they would *not* announce the international dates, do you?

Also, FWIW, it was reported on TrekMovie a week or two ago that discussions were going on at Paramount about possibly moving the U.S. release back a few days. It's almost a year off, again, probably too early to know anything.

 

[Roger Wilco]

If the movie gets delayed for some reason, that's different obviously, but it would have been enough for him to say "we will try to release it at the same date worldwide", or at least "as quickly as possible". There are some dates on imdb.com, no idea where they got that from, but I hope they are wrong because it doesn't make much sense, so that's a bit confusing.

 

[Sharr Khan]

Haters? Given that there were more softballs thrown at these guys than a Chris Matthews Hillary Clinton interview,

Its a movie, all the questions are by definition supposed to be "softballs" cause, well that's really what any movie is worthy of. Abrams isn't being entrusted with the nuclear football here he's making a movie intended to generate a profit not a thing that calls for a Senate hearing.

I simply believe the timing, budget and direction are all ill-advised.

I think the evidence is trending otherwise on all accounts - Paramount thinks so and its hard not to notice the bubbling of a positive buzz about this project.

Sharr

 

[Woulfe]

I think JJ's enthusium is contagous.
I'm looking forward to see what he's done.
- W -
* Big smile on this old trekker's face *

 

[cardinal biggles]

TJinPgh said:
I continue to get the impression that he couldn't care less if we enjoy the movie or not, so long as he does.

Nick Meyer said the following in a New York Times interview from around the same time The Wrath of Khan came out in theaters:

"Robert Bresson was the one who said, 'My job is not to find out what the public wants and give it to them; my job is to make the public want what I want.' There's no way of saying this without sounding arrogant, but there's only one person I have to please when I'm working, and that's me. It is impossible to second-guess millions of people whom you have never met. Would you tell me a joke that you didn't think was funny on the off chance that it might amuse me? Unfortunately, that's the way many people make movies in this town."

Abrams wants us to like what he's doing, but he has to tell the story he wants to tell; to base it off an opinion poll or a focus group of what "devoted fans" want would be creative suicide.

 

[stonester1]

Amen. You want a talented artist with a strong vision at the center. That is priority number one.

 

[ST-One]

TJinPgh said:

How important is humour in your vision of Star Trek? And what kind of humour do you enjoy most?

JJ: I’m afraid to answer this question, because The Haters will think that I’m looking at Trek as a comedy. I am not.

Haters? Given that there were more softballs thrown at these guys than a Chris Matthews Hillary Clinton interview, I suspect "Hater" is anybody who doesn't get wet at the mere mention of the name Abrams or his pre-packaged, script written responses.

I continue to get the impression that he couldn't care less if we enjoy the movie or not, so long as he does.

For the record, not all of us who aren't thrilled by the direction of this movie are Abrams haters. Personally, I enjoy Lost (although, much of it's luster has worn off). Alias was good. Nor do I necessarily blame him for the disappointing showing for MI:3.

I simply believe the timing, budget and direction are all ill-advised.

By 'direction' do you mean the style of the director Mr. Abrams or the general direction the story of the film (of which we now nothing) itself is going?

 

[cultcross]

Favourite bit:

WILL THE DOORS GO SWOOSH WHEN THEY OPEN?

JJ: Dude. Will they ever.

dunno why, but just that bit made me believe that JJ really is 100% on board with making this Star Trek, the same creation, but a million times more awesome.

btw, was it someone on here who asked that? someone was definitely joking about it earlier kudos if it was :thumbsup:

Certainly made me more excited about the film. I'm upgrading myself from 'cautiously optimistic' to 'cautiously nerdgasmic'.

 

[Arlo]

So now we know the last scene takes place on the bridge, the whole gang on board. Not shocking, really, but a nice confirmed tidbit. I can already picture them doing what was done so well with Casino Royale. The Bond theme wasn't used in the film until the very last scene; it was perfect....

 

[ST-One]

Arlo said:
So now we know the last scene takes place on the bridge, the whole gang on board.

We do?

 

[Arlo]

^ From Zach:
" literally shooting the final scene of the movie as i type (of course we shoot out of order - there are more than two months of shooting still to go). so we are getting close to finishing all of our principal photography on the actual bridge of the enterprise (and scott chambliss has made it come alive like you won’t believe)."

 

[ST-One]

Arlo said:
^ From Zach:
" literally shooting the final scene of the movie as i type (of course we shoot out of order - there are more than two months of shooting still to go). so we are getting close to finishing all of our principal photography on the actual bridge of the enterprise (and scott chambliss has made it come alive like you won’t believe)."

Ah, okay

 

[TJinPgh]

Devon said:
"Haters" is probably referring to the people who say "This will suck" and not give it a chance.

Given that I've already stated elsewhere that, as it stands right now, I have no intention of seeing this movie, I imagine that I would be included in that.

I'm sure he and everyone else would want people to enjoy it.

Oh, I'm sure he'd like us all to see it and enjoy it. But, if we don't, I doubt he'd lose much sleep over it.

I'm not necessarily suggesting he should. Just stating an opinion.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Arlo said:
^ From Zach:
" literally shooting the final scene of the movie as i type (of course we shoot out of order - there are more than two months of shooting still to go). so we are getting close to finishing all of our principal photography on the actual bridge of the enterprise (and scott chambliss has made it come alive like you won’t believe)."

I wonder if Chris Pine, as Kirk, will flip his hand nonchalantly and say, "Out there. Thataway!"

 

[TJinPgh]

ST-One said:By 'direction' do you mean the style of the director Mr. Abrams or the general direction the story of the film (of which we now nothing) itself is going?

Some of both.

I've enjoyed much of Abrams TV related work. But, as I said before, I've grown a bit tired of Lost and the direction it's taken. A direction that his vehicles seem to take frequently.

As for the direction of the film. I've said before, I'll say it again here (since you asked). I don't like recasts. Never have. I can honestly say that I don't remember the last one that I actually enjoyed, no matter how "faithful" to the original it attempts to be.

I decided long before talk of a new Trek film came up that I was no longer going to financially support the trend. That's my personal choice and personal decision. I don't suggest anybody else follow my example.

However, I think the notion that a recasting of characters is all that is needed to cure Trek's ills is inherently flawed, particularly with a budget this huge and a cast that nobody has ever heard of.

Further, even if I were inclined to see another remake/recast, I think some of the casting choices are completely wrong.

Ultimately, I don't think that Paramount has the slightest clue why Trek fell down. And, until they figure it out, I have no confidence in anything they put out.

 

[TJinPgh]

middyseafort said:I wonder if Chris Pine, as Kirk, will flip his hand nonchalantly and say, "Out there. Thataway!"

I'm not sure now where I read it, but they said Pine would have none of Shatner's "hammy" mannerisms. So, I suppose it would depend on whether or not Abrams considers that little gesture hammy.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Wish someone would put a tribble on his captains chair, know it isnt going to happen tho.