• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Abrams turns Star Wars because of his "loyalty" to Trek

Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps.

I love Star Trek. I like Star Wars, off and on.

J.J. Abrams saved Star Trek from the dustbin. Hopefully he can make a Star Wars movie worth sitting through again - something that hasn't been true since 1980 at the latest.
 
Well I greatly enjoyed all six Star Wars films and was surprisingly underwhelmed by the last Trek outing, so I'm gonna have to go ahead and be concerned.
 
Is it just me or is there a lot of hyperbole and melodrama being thrown around here?

Again, bottom line: a guy who directed a couple of movies in one series is also going to direct a movie in another, similar series. This may or may not impact his ability to direct yet another movie in the first series.

That's all.

It's an intriguing new development, but probably nothing to get worked up about.
 
Last edited:
I'm optimistic about this movie mainly because they hired Arndt first, and had him do a detailed story treatment (maybe even a script) before they hired a director. That tells me they're just looking for someone who can do dynamic visuals, more of a hired gun, rather than a director who's going to help craft the story itself.

That tells me they're doing it the right way. Story first. Then hire a well known geek director who loves Star Wars. JJ isn't producing, he isn't making it "his" story. He's just stepping in to direct. Works for me.

I agree it's nice they're focusing on getting a good script first, but I have a hard time believing Abrams still won't have a huge influence on the story. Like Spielberg, he's just got too strong a style and personality, and enjoys the process too much to ever be a simple hired gun on something.

And being a huge fan, he's probably got a laundry list of stuff he's always wanted to put in a SW movie as well.
 
Perhaps.

I love Star Trek. I like Star Wars, off and on.

J.J. Abrams saved Star Trek from the dustbin. Hopefully he can make a Star Wars movie worth sitting through again - something that hasn't been true since 1980 at the latest.

So you like four hours of Star Wars?
 
Star Trek was always my first love, but it didn't stop me from seeing Star Wars 23 times in the theaters lol... and DS9 is my favorite post-TOS series but I also deeply adore B5. No dividing line here.
 
urti6.jpg

Mace Windu: (to George) You refer to the prophecy of the Chosen One... the one who'll bring balance to the fandoms... and you believe it's this... Abrams?
 
I love Star Wars just as much as Star Trek.

Fucked up that the same guy is going to get to destroy both of them.

I don't know. It may give the opportunity to those of us who are too emotionally involved in those franchises (sometimes to a vitriolic point) to get some perspective and do something more productive with our lives.


Yes, because god forbid you like something enough to be invested in it. No one should ever care about anything, if they're going to get angry about it. Honestly, I find your post almost offensive. Why shouldn't I care enough about a frnachise to get angry? I care about it, enough that yes, I do become enraged at times. As for doing something more productive? Well I have to say that I HATE "get a life" people. I'm a fan of Star Trek. I get angry at things involving it sometimes. So, I'll just say what I always want to say to a person who belittles peoples interest in something (or imply that they are wasting time by liking something) by saying people need to basically "get a life": Frak you.


I have no problem with Star Trek/SW mxing people involved if the people were competent. I'm a fan of both. Having the director of the worst thing to be called Star Trek ever directing SW, however, is just about the worst thing that could happen to SW.

A good rule of thumb: if your sentence has the words "worst" and "ever" in it, it's probably not worth typing.


See last sentence of my above post.


Is it just me or is there a lot of hyperbole and melodrama being thrown around here?

Again, bottom line: a guy who directed a couple of movies in one series is also going to direct a movie in another, similar series. This may or may not impact his ability to direct yet another movie in the first series.

That's all.

It's an intriguing new development, but probably nothing to get worked up about.


I get what you're saying, although I personally get very worked up about it, and for good reason. I just hate that my two favorite Sci Fi franchises have gone into the gutter (live action wise, I still love the SW Expanded Universe, and most ST books that come out, so atleast thats something). In general, there is just no good shows on tV, atleast compared to the past, and definately no good Sci fi since Eureka ended last year. If a good Star Trek/Sci fi TV series was on, I would still hate Abrams, but I'd have something to watch so that I could just ignore his horrible movies. But, because there isn't an alternative, I have to look at the few things that do come out and seeing that stuff, with nothing good as an alternative, makes the horrible the stuff we do get push me from angry to enraged.
 
Where is all this talk about Abrams destroying Star Trek coming from? He took a franchise that had been run into the ground by lackluster installments (sound like another franchise we know?) and breathed new life into it. The movie was a critical and financial success. I have complete faith that he'll be able to do the same with Star Wars.
 
Anyone who "hates" Abrams needs to take a step back and get some perspective.


:rolleyes: Why can't I hate Abrams? He's a hack that keeps getting to destroy things I enjoy. Everything about him makes me wish I could spit in his face.

Where is all this talk about Abrams destroying Star Trek coming from? He took a franchise that had been run into the ground by lackluster installments (sound like another franchise we know?) and breathed new life into it. The movie was a critical and financial success. I have complete faith that he'll be able to do the same with Star Wars.

He made a movie with characters that had no depth (not to mention mostly horrible actors), a story that was written by people I'm convinced couldn't write a decent cat food commercial, and mixed it in with bad art design and more lensflare then probably any movie before it. He didn't "breathe new life" into it, he took a sleeping franchise, dragged it around back behind the tool shed, and beat it to death. It was a dumbed down action movie with a Star Trek paint job. You could remove all the Star trek stuff, and it wouldn't effect it at all. It would just be another mindless, mediocre action movie with some slight Sci Fi elements. Atleast Insurrection and ST V felt like Star Trek. Bad ST, but still Star Trek. There wasn't a second of abrams movie that didn't made me angry. Its the worst movie I've ever seen in my life, even including such films as Catwoman, Transformers 2 and Fantastic Four 2. The fact that its successful means nothing. Twilight and Transformers make a lot of money, they are also two horrible series devoid of anything good. Abrams Trek is the same way. Lucas at his worst is much better than abrams. TPM and Attack of the Clones sucked, but compared to Star Trek, they're freaking Wrath of Khan (which happens to be my favorite movie of all time).
 
Where is all this talk about Abrams destroying Star Trek coming from? He took a franchise that had been run into the ground by lackluster installments (sound like another franchise we know?) and breathed new life into it. The movie was a critical and financial success. I have complete faith that he'll be able to do the same with Star Wars.

He made a movie with characters that had no depth (not to mention mostly horrible actors), a story that was written by people I'm convinced couldn't write a decent cat food commercial, and mixed it in with bad art design and more lensflare then probably any movie before it. He didn't "breathe new life" into it, he took a sleeping franchise, dragged it around back behind the tool shed, and beat it to death. It was a dumbed down action movie with a Star Trek paint job. You could remove all the Star trek stuff, and it wouldn't effect it at all. It would just be another mindless, mediocre action movie with some slight Sci Fi elements. Atleast Insurrection and ST V felt like Star Trek. Bad ST, but still Star Trek. There wasn't a second of abrams movie that didn't made me angry. Its the worst movie I've ever seen in my life, even including such films as Catwoman, Transformers 2 and Fantastic Four 2. The fact that its successful means nothing. Twilight and Transformers make a lot of money, they are also two horrible series devoid of anything good. Abrams Trek is the same way. Lucas at his worst is much better than abrams. TPM and Attack of the Clones sucked, but compared to Star Trek, they're freaking Wrath of Khan (which happens to be my favorite movie of all time).

Twilight and Transformers don't have 95% Tomatometers. I'm not saying that you're not entitled to dislike it, just realize that you're a minority.

I found the movie to be damn entertaining, even if it wasn't some deep exploration of the human condition. Much of Star Trek is just fun fluff.
 
Anyone who "hates" Abrams needs to take a step back and get some perspective.


:rolleyes: Why can't I hate Abrams? He's a hack that keeps getting to destroy things I enjoy. Everything about him makes me wish I could spit in his face.

Where is all this talk about Abrams destroying Star Trek coming from? He took a franchise that had been run into the ground by lackluster installments (sound like another franchise we know?) and breathed new life into it. The movie was a critical and financial success. I have complete faith that he'll be able to do the same with Star Wars.

He made a movie with characters that had no depth (not to mention mostly horrible actors), a story that was written by people I'm convinced couldn't write a decent cat food commercial, and mixed it in with bad art design and more lensflare then probably any movie before it. He didn't "breathe new life" into it, he took a sleeping franchise, dragged it around back behind the tool shed, and beat it to death. It was a dumbed down action movie with a Star Trek paint job. You could remove all the Star trek stuff, and it wouldn't effect it at all. It would just be another mindless, mediocre action movie with some slight Sci Fi elements. Atleast Insurrection and ST V felt like Star Trek. Bad ST, but still Star Trek. There wasn't a second of abrams movie that didn't made me angry. Its the worst movie I've ever seen in my life, even including such films as Catwoman, Transformers 2 and Fantastic Four 2. The fact that its successful means nothing. Twilight and Transformers make a lot of money, they are also two horrible series devoid of anything good. Abrams Trek is the same way. Lucas at his worst is much better than abrams. TPM and Attack of the Clones sucked, but compared to Star Trek, they're freaking Wrath of Khan (which happens to be my favorite movie of all time).

:guffaw: okay. If you want to spit in someones face cause of a movie he directed...then that's your problem. The worst movie you've ever seen? Okay. Sorry to burst your bubble...it was one of the best reviewed films of the year. Go watch your DVDs.

It's for this kind of reaction I love the fact that Abrams gets more and more popular. I'm sure he'll do a great job. I just hope he returns for Trek XIII at some point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top