Abrams: Star Trek Maybe
- Thread starter TrekToday
- Start date
I'd certainly like to see him back. If not, whoever he hires to do the job will do just fine.
Gee, with his succinct summation of what he feels makes "Star Trek" so relevant and enduring, “Hey, it wouldn’t be Star Trek if there weren’t some hot young actors, women and men, in various moments of either undress or flirtation.”
Wow, I got my fingers crossed ... not.
We'll make a trekkie of him yet
But do we really, really want to?
His first outing with Trek was fun. In a couple weeks or so we'll get something that looks to be similar. Here's hoping that the third Trek will show us something a bit more ambitious.
Abrams is a very talented individual yet still a bit immature in terms of filmmaking sensibilities. It would be interesting to get Ridley Scott for the third one. Hell, at this point, I would even go for Oliver Stone, Spike Lee, Tyler Perry or Quentin Tarantino ... just for an interesting change of pace.
Not trying to sh*t on anything just expressing one humble opinion. YMMV.
Gee, with his succinct summation of what he feels makes "Star Trek" so relevant and enduring, “Hey, it wouldn’t be Star Trek if there weren’t some hot young actors, women and men, in various moments of either undress or flirtation.”
Wow, I got my fingers crossed ... not.
We'll make a trekkie of him yet
But do we really, really want to?
His first outing with Trek was fun. In a couple weeks or so we'll get something that looks to be similar. Here's hoping that the third Trek will show us something a bit more ambitious.
Abrams is a very talented individual yet still a bit immature in terms of filmmaking sensibilities. It would be interesting to get Ridley Scott for the third one. Hell, at this point, I would even go for Oliver Stone, Spike Lee, Tyler Perry or Quentin Tarantino ... just for an interesting change of pace.
Not trying to sh*t on anything just expressing one humble opinion. YMMV.
Wait, you're kidding, right?
NONE of those people will ever do Trek.
Have we all forgotten William Ware Theiss's stock-in-trade, throughout TOS - and even TNG Season One?
That is NOT his "succinct summation of what he feels makes 'Star Trek' so relevant and enduring." It's just his description of one aspect of TOS, and he is correct.
I never understood the mindset that just because he signed on for Star Wars then he couldn't do Star Trek. It will be 3 to 4 years before the next Trek movie comes out, plenty of time for him to do both. Sometimes directors work on 2 movies at one time. I could easily see him working on post for SW while working on pre-production for Trek.
Gee, with his succinct summation of what he feels makes "Star Trek" so relevant and enduring, “Hey, it wouldn’t be Star Trek if there weren’t some hot young actors, women and men, in various moments of either undress or flirtation.”
Wow, I got my fingers crossed ... not.
We'll make a trekkie of him yet
But do we really, really want to?
His first outing with Trek was fun. In a couple weeks or so we'll get something that looks to be similar. Here's hoping that the third Trek will show us something a bit more ambitious.
Abrams is a very talented individual yet still a bit immature in terms of filmmaking sensibilities. It would be interesting to get Ridley Scott for the third one. Hell, at this point, I would even go for Oliver Stone, Spike Lee, Tyler Perry or Quentin Tarantino ... just for an interesting change of pace.
Not trying to sh*t on anything just expressing one humble opinion. YMMV.
I wouldn't want ANY of those directors anywhere near Star Trek, except for Ridley. I'd accept that. Tyler Perry? Seriously? I'm not trying to start an argument, but what has Tyler Perry done with film making that JJ hasn't? He's just terrible as a filmmaker. As a businessman though, he is fantastic. He knows his demographic and milks the everliving shit out of it.
I like miniskirts--they're exciting!
Bullshit, and never say never.
If the film's script is good, and if the directors in question (obviously not Perry) can be persuaded to do so, then these people could direct a Star Trek movie; I said so as much when I mentioned that JMS and Peter Jackson could write and direct one previously.
And "those people" puzzle me.
The most unique, rare feature of the "Star Trek" franchise is that it was purposely crafted to be able to tell any story one could imagine - why in hell do "those people" want to shackle it to some nebulous ideal?
I don't know that name (Mathew Vaughan), but I would be open to him or anyone else. I'd love for a woman to be given the reigns if for no other reason than to see a different perspective, hear a different voice.
In order to live up to the "infinite diversity in infinite combination" we need a diversity of contributors and a diversity of stories being told.
Please, do not take this personal, but I don't. It's not that I think Abrams is evil (because I do not) - his best years are still ahead - it is just that he still needs to broaden his repertoire.
I also question why should one person (regardless of who that person is) be put in control of the two biggest space-opera franchises?
There are a lot of equally talented people who could do wonderous things with either - so why put it all in one person's hands, to have both seen through just one set of eyes, to be given just one voice?
And it is not just one person doing both at different times in their career, but at the same time ... it is stiffling and cynical and really not right whereby more folks should object.
Indranee said:
Maybe those specific names wouldn't. Then again maybe they would. Some in Hollywood only make certain types of films because they are the only type of films they are allowed to make - IOW, they might jump at the opportunity.
In any event, my thesis is one of diversity. Some would say if something ain't broke then don't fix it ... except with Star Trek, if you are only getting one type of story and one type of storytelling then it is broke.
You shame me in that it is only right to give William Ware Theiss thanks and praise for his minimalist approach to Star Trek. Salute.
It is a question of one person needlessly being given a creative monoply by virtue of having the reigns of the two biggest science-fiction franchises going. I think if Abrams was a bit more mature he would hand of "Star Trek 3" to someone else just on principle and out of decency.
I would hope people would argue against anyone cornering any market. Would we want only one conglomerate making all the movies? All the news? All the ... anything? We shouldn't and I don't.
Again, my opinion.
Has the hypothetical one person in question actually been put in such a position, though, or has he merely been hired to direct a single picture (written and produced by others not of his own selection) in one franchise while continuing to carry out his job as producer (with option to direct) of a set of films in the other?
Joss Whedon would indeed be an awesome choice, although I doubt they could afford him these days, what with him being the director with the highest grossing movie of all time not named James Cameron.
Another good choice would be Duncan Jones. Both Moon and Source Code were excellent films featuring both science fiction elements that are compatible with Trek, some great moments of pathos, and probably the best lead performance that either Sam Rockwell or Jake Gyllenhaal have ever given.
Another good choice would be Duncan Jones. Both Moon and Source Code were excellent films featuring both science fiction elements that are compatible with Trek, some great moments of pathos, and probably the best lead performance that either Sam Rockwell or Jake Gyllenhaal have ever given.
Or shirtless Kirk in several episodes. People who want to disavow Star Trek's use of sex (appeal) puzzle me. Abrams is correct in saying that attractive people in skimpy clothes (or lack there of) flirting is part of Star Trek. Especially TOS.
Star Trek was all but dead and buried until JJ Abrams via Bad Robot took the reigns. Now Star Trek is popular and profitable. Disney, who now owns Star Wars, recognized this fact and asked JJ Abrams to direct SW7.
Disney wants their new property to be as popular and profitable as Star Trek... yes, Star Trek is now a role model for another franchise. It is good to be a Trekkie these days!
Disney wants their new property to be as popular and profitable as Star Trek... yes, Star Trek is now a role model for another franchise. It is good to be a Trekkie these days!
