Actually, I was genuinely trying to help, but as you wish.
Abrams gets credit for what he does. Whether ignorants know his resume or not is irrelevant. Lost and Cloverfield would not exist without his contribution, that much is certain.
Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek
- Thread starter brian577
- Start date
- Status
Actually, I was genuinely trying to help, but as you wish.
Abrams gets credit for what he does. Whether ignorants know his resume or not is irrelevant. Lost and Cloverfield would not exist without his contribution, that much is certain.
Can I have a seat on the upper-lower tier please?
Yeah, Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy has her developing some chops, but nothing on Luke's fighting level, which is perfectly fine.
Abrams is a very energetic filmmaker; M-I:III and Trek XI are such frantic movies one can almost feel one's chair move on hydraulics, as in Star Tours. And, with one of the chief PT complaints being the flicks' stogdiness, one can see Disney's interest in bringing someone like him on board, even if one isn't a huge fan of his.
I think Abrams can be good, I really enjoyed Super 8 and think the Lost pilot is really well made. Star Trek is poor though and MI:3 is as far from my kinda film as you can really get. He has his gushers online willing to yell at anybody who doesn't think he's the sexiest man in the world, but they're just going along with the hype. He's neither as good as his biggest fans say or as bad as his biggest haters say. He's a competent director of dumb action films.
That bugs the hell out of me. I don't care if you don't like him, or you find him just competent of what you feel are dumb action movies, but don't just write off the opinions of those you disagree with a wave of the "they're just going along with the hype." It's incredibly condescending.
MAYBE people actually genuinely LIKE his work. And, yeah, MAYBE more people than you. It doesn't change or alter your opinion.
This.
I can take or leave much of his work, but I thought the actual directing on Star Trek 2009 was top notch. My wife is a fan of Alias and Lost but didn't much care for Star Trek 2009 and is lukewarm to the idea of Abrams directing Episode VII.
Opinions... everyone has them and one isn't anymore right than another.
You know one of them that use the Abrams avatar actually wrote a couple of episodes of TNG? I don't always agree with him, but his opinion isn't derived from an uneducated point-of-view.
Maybe worth repeating that I thought Super 8 was really good and I think part of that was that he was so passionate about the Spielberg films he was homaging. He has the same passion for Star Wars so hopefully he'll deliver with Episode VII. I'm convinced it'll at least look and feel like Star Wars which is likely more than can be said for Into Darkness and it's Trek-ness.
True, I don't expect Star Trek Into Darkness to feel like Star Wars.
What Trek are you actually referring too? I'll agree that the Abrams films don't resemble Modern Trek all that much. But I think they did a nice job of updating TOS and it does resemble the characters and setting of that series.
I think they got the TOS tone right sometimes (They got McCoy pretty dead-on!) but the plot was way too big and loose to feel like my fave TOS episodes. It definitely had more in common with the looser, camper Season 3 of TOS than the more sci-fi, ideas orientated first season. That whole Nero plot was just.. all over the place.
Most of my probems with Abrams' film are with the script but he had the authority to fix all those problems. All that business with the ice planet is just ridiculously loose writing.
With SW7 he has some proper writers and not just noted racist robot aficionados Orci and Kurtzman so I have more hope in that department.
Joss, however, was heavily involved in all stages of production on Cabin in the Woods - co-wrote the screenplay, second unit director, etc. He and Drew Goddard both deserve plenty of credit.
A better example might be when "the general public" assumed that Quentin Tarantino directed Yimou Zhang's Hero due to its U.S. release being billed as "Quentin Tarantino Presents."
No - because Abrham's film was worth paying for a cinema ticket.
Disagree all you want, but Greg's right and you're wrong.
Seriously? Patrolling? Policing?
Should we take EVERY avatar as seriously? Are you patrolling the forum with Clara? No. You LIKE her. You're EXCITED.
As much as you don't get it or like it, people are EXCITED by Abrams directing Star Wars, especially for many who felt the prequels were lackluster. The avatars are just showing that love.
And sure, there are probably a few who are enjoying watching the internet burn as fans who take this shit way to seriously twist in their Star Wars Underroos having a meltdown. But, fuck those guys...
And to be blunt, if people are getting insulting... like ACTUALLY insulting and not just disagreeing with you... then notify a moderator. Or put the posters on ignore. Or just scroll by the post...
He may have had creative authority, but the writer's strike may have stopped him from exercising such authority.
Rest of your post is facepalm worthy and jingoistic (Stop yelling man, Jesus!) but this is something I've considered actually. Star Trek 2009's script stinks of being a loose first draft and I fully expect Into Darkness to be more coherent. I'd be shocked if Harrison wasn't a huge improvement on Nero.
- Status
Similar threads
