JJ Abrams apologizes for lens flare

[Kruezerman]

Wow, all these new members! Feels so alive here.

Anyway, he shouldn't (and I don't believe he did) apologize for shit. Trek is his baby now and he should make it his, and he's done a damn good job of it.

 

[geneo]

I think "camera walk alongs" was really big in The West Wing.

don't apologize jj. don't EVER apologize.

If you are wrong about something, do the manly thing (if you are a male) and apologize. Since he admitted he had a problem with lens flares then he needs to avoid them next time, don't keep making the same mistake.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

If you are wrong about something, do the manly thing (if you are a male) and apologize. Since he admitted he had a problem with lens flares then he needs to avoid them next time, don't keep making the same mistake.

This sounds like a step in a special lensflare detox program.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Lens flares as seen in the Abrams films are annoying, but nothing as bad as the scripts. Once Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof apologize for their scripts (both Trek and Beyond) then that will be something.

 

[BillJ]

Lens flares as seen in the Abrams films are annoying, but nothing as bad as the scripts. Once Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof apologize for their scripts (both Trek and Beyond) then that will be something.

I wouldn't hold my breath on them apologizing for making Star Trek fun and watchable again.

 

[Jeyl]

I wouldn't hold my breath on them apologizing for making Star Trek fun and watchable again.

I'm still waiting for Robert Orci to apologize for calling me a crack user.

 

[The Wormhole]

Lens flares as seen in the Abrams films are annoying, but nothing as bad as the scripts. Once Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof apologize for their scripts (both Trek and Beyond) then that will be something.

I wouldn't hold my breath on them apologizing for making Star Trek fun and watchable again.

Well, they should. Star Trek is not meant to be fun and watchable. It's meant to be a profound contemplation on life and humanity's place in the universe, as well as a guide to technology and how it will develop in the future.

If you want fun and watchable, stick to Star Wars.

 

[JarodRussell]

Well, they should. Star Trek is not meant to be fun and watchable. It's meant to be a profound contemplation on life and humanity's place in the universe, as well as a guide to technology and how it will develop in the future.

These are not mutually exclusive, despite what Abrams & Co claim.

 

[Sindatur]

I think "camera walk alongs" was really big in The West Wing.

don't apologize jj. don't EVER apologize.

If you are wrong about something, do the manly thing (if you are a male) and apologize. Since he admitted he had a problem with lens flares then he needs to avoid them next time, don't keep making the same mistake.

So, like STiD then, which didn't have the annoying, blinding Lens Flares that ST'09, they were very much subdued in STiD compared to ST'09

 

[AUbricklogic]

I think "camera walk alongs" was really big in The West Wing.

don't apologize jj. don't EVER apologize.

If you are wrong about something, do the manly thing (if you are a male) and apologize. Since he admitted he had a problem with lens flares then he needs to avoid them next time, don't keep making the same mistake.

So, like STiD then, which didn't have the annoying, blinding Lens Flares that ST'09, they were very much subdued in STiD compared to ST'09

Actually it contained a huge amount of lens flares as well and was made fun of for doing so a second time after it was already kind of a big thing people remembered about '09.

 

[Sindatur]

I think "camera walk alongs" was really big in The West Wing.



If you are wrong about something, do the manly thing (if you are a male) and apologize. Since he admitted he had a problem with lens flares then he needs to avoid them next time, don't keep making the same mistake.

So, like STiD then, which didn't have the annoying, blinding Lens Flares that ST'09, they were very much subdued in STiD compared to ST'09

Actually it contained a huge amount of lens flares as well and was made fun of for doing so a second time after it was already kind of a big thing people remembered about '09.

Yea, I know there were Lens flares in STiD, but (for me at least) they weren't as blinding and obnoxious. The only ones that bothered me in ST'09 were on the stark white bridge, where I couldn't see what was going on or really even appreciate what the bridge looked like (I had no problem with the lens flares against darker backgrounds). In STiD, there weren't any like that, and I didn't notice them without looking for them, they were more subdued or something, not blinding

 

[Franklin]

Well, they should. Star Trek is not meant to be fun and watchable. It's meant to be a profound contemplation on life and humanity's place in the universe, as well as a guide to technology and how it will develop in the future.

These are not mutually exclusive, despite what Abrams & Co claim.

It may be nice to see both, but it would also be the first time ever in Trek that we did. So, let's not hold Abrams to a standard Trek never really met (the "profound and contemplative" part, not the "fun and watchable" part).

 

[M'Sharak]

I wouldn't hold my breath on them apologizing for making Star Trek fun and watchable again.

I'm still waiting for Robert Orci to apologize for calling me a crack user.

One might be moved to wonder what you called him first in order to prompt such a response, but Orci doesn't post here and you're quite clearly dragging in a beef from some other board or forum.

Don't do that.

 

[Jeyl]

One might be moved to wonder what you called him first in order to prompt such a response,

Since you make a good point, I'll elaborate a bit more for the sake of making sure no one has to wonder. It's kind of funny because I wasn't even responding to a post he had made, let alone call him anything to provoke such a response. On Trekmovie's Post-release Into Darkness odds & ends and General Discussion comment section, Other Guy (post #231) made a comment about how Marcus wanting a war with the Klingons was akin to the US attacking Iraq even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or the accusations we used to go to war in the first place. I made a post (#257) saying how even though that is true, we still attacked Afghanistan first since that was a country that was harboring those terrorists. Not only does Marcus not have any beef with the Romulans, the Romulans aren't even mentioned at all in the movie. Despite saying only that, boborci responded (#291) by simply saying "enough crack smoking. Say no."

And that is it.

 

[BillJ]

One might be moved to wonder what you called him first in order to prompt such a response,

Since you make a good point, I'll elaborate a bit more for the sake of making sure no one has to wonder. It's kind of funny because I wasn't even responding to a post he had made, let alone call him anything to provoke such a response. On Trekmovie's Post-release Into Darkness odds & ends and General Discussion comment section, Other Guy (post #231) made a comment about how Marcus wanting a war with the Klingons was akin to the US attacking Iraq even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or the accusations we used to go to war in the first place. I made a post (#257) saying how even though that is true, we still attacked Afghanistan first since that was a country that was harboring those terrorists. Not only does Marcus not have any beef with the Romulans, the Romulans aren't even mentioned at all in the movie. Despite saying only that, boborci responded (#291) by simply saying "enough crack smoking. Say no."

And that is it.

No one cares. Really.

 

[trevanian]

One might be moved to wonder what you called him first in order to prompt such a response,

Since you make a good point, I'll elaborate a bit more for the sake of making sure no one has to wonder. It's kind of funny because I wasn't even responding to a post he had made, let alone call him anything to provoke such a response. On Trekmovie's Post-release Into Darkness odds & ends and General Discussion comment section, Other Guy (post #231) made a comment about how Marcus wanting a war with the Klingons was akin to the US attacking Iraq even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or the accusations we used to go to war in the first place. I made a post (#257) saying how even though that is true, we still attacked Afghanistan first since that was a country that was harboring those terrorists. Not only does Marcus not have any beef with the Romulans, the Romulans aren't even mentioned at all in the movie. Despite saying only that, boborci responded (#291) by simply saying "enough crack smoking. Say no."

And that is it.

No one cares. Really.

Wrong. Really. Really wrong.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Lens flares as seen in the Abrams films are annoying, but nothing as bad as the scripts. Once Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof apologize for their scripts (both Trek and Beyond) then that will be something.

I wouldn't hold my breath on them apologizing for making Star Trek fun and watchable again.

If only they were fun and watchable. If only.

 

[BillJ]

If only they were fun and watchable. If only.

They are. I've seen Star Trek 2009 easily a dozen times and Into Darkness seven.

Thinking about doing a double-header this weekend.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Your opinion, pal. I don't find much fun in watching them, especially the 2009 film. STID has the opening sequence going for it, but it just goes downhill after that for me.

 

[BillJ]

Your opinion, pal. I don't find much fun in watching them, especially the 2009 film. STID has the opening sequence going for it, but it just goes downhill after that for me.

Not every Trek works for every person. While I don't hate them, if I never saw Deep Space Nine, Voyager or Enterprise again, I'm not sure I'd even notice.