New JJ Abrams interview

[DalekJim]

It didn't need to be this obnoxious "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" monstrosity we've got on our hands.

Let's focus on the positive for a moment and forget about the histrionics. Had you been the movie's producer or director, what would it have been like? How would you have revitalized Star Trek and how would you have brought it back for a new audience and a new century?

Post-Nemesis, new crew and new ship. Prometheus-esque big budget sci-fi blockbuster that was driven by ideas, exploration and science-fiction concepts instead of being only action driven.

With enough celebrities in it and enough marketing, it would have done really well.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It didn't need to be this obnoxious "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" monstrosity we've got on our hands.

Yes, Trek needs to return to the highbrow of Data making spastic noises on the holodeck with Joe Piscopo.

 

[DalekJim]

It didn't need to be this obnoxious "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" monstrosity we've got on our hands.

Yes, Trek needs to return to the highbrow of Data making spastic noises on the holodeck with Joe Piscopo.

Pretty sure using the word "spastic" is a bit non-kosher these days but still, you missed my point entirely. I hated it when Data was given trailer lines like "Saddle up, lock and load" too.

 

[BillJ]

How would you have revitalized Star Trek and how would you have brought it back for a new audience and a new century?

Even though I'm lukewarm to Star Trek 2009, if I had been a writer/director, I'd have done exactly what Abrams did. Because my job is to get a good return on the studios investment.

Presumably there were more than one way to achieve that.

I'm honestly not so sure.

While the movie could've been "different", there were things it needed to do in order to get people into theaters. It needed big explosions, it needed the rebel hero and it needed the raw emotional hooks that were present.

 

[DalekJim]

Sci-fi action films like Inception and Looper have proven that mainstream audiences WILL flock to see sci-fi action movies that aren't as dumb as possible. I really don't see why we have to settle for Nero blowing up planets for no reason with his magical "black hole" device. Which would have been more tolerable if the writers spent 5 minutes on Wikipedia researching what a black hole was and how it works .

 

[BillJ]

Post-Nemesis, new crew and new ship. Prometheus-esque big budget sci-fi blockbuster that was driven by ideas, exploration and science-fiction concepts instead of being only action driven.

With enough celebrities in it and enough marketing, it would have done really well.

People simply won't buy tickets for a sci-fi space movie driven by ideas. Plus, people have no emotional investment in a new crew and ship. I don't think Star Trek 2009 does nearly as well without Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise being involved.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Post-Nemesis, new crew and new ship. Prometheus-esque big budget sci-fi blockbuster that was driven by ideas, exploration and science-fiction concepts instead of being only action driven.

Could you give us an example of the kind of exploration-based plot you have in mind for this hypothetical movie? As a theme, exploration often enough doesn't lend itself to a wide variety of plots, which may be the reason why it has so rarely been used in Star Trek. Do you have something specific in mind, or just an example of the kind of thing you'd have enjoyed?

 

[DalekJim]

People simply won't buy tickets for a sci-fi space movie driven by ideas.

Prometheus was a box office success this year.

Could you give us an example of the kind of exploration-based plot you have in mind for this hypothetical movie? As a theme, exploration often enough doesn't lend itself to a wide variety of plots, which may be the reason why it has so rarely been used in Star Trek. Do you have something specific in mind, or just an example of the kind of thing you'd have enjoyed?

It doesn't have to be as dry as The Motion Picture. Just have the crew go to a strange new, mysterious world and get involved in the kind of dangerous rollercoaster thrills that would please a mass audience. To me that would be more Star Trek than ANOTHER vengeance-filled villain threatening the Federation.

 

[BillJ]

People simply won't buy tickets for a sci-fi space movie driven by ideas.

Prometheus was a box office success this year.

Because it was billed as an Alien prequel and had lots of blood and guts being spilled.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

People simply won't buy tickets for a sci-fi space movie driven by ideas.

Prometheus was a box office success this year.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following you: are you really offering Prometheus as an example of smart science-fiction while mocking Star Trek?

 

[DalekJim]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following you: are you really offering Prometheus as an example of smart science-fiction while mocking Star Trek?

Yes, I think Prometheus clearly resembles the type of film I'd rather Jar Jar Abrams be making despite it's many flaws. Unlike the 2009 JJ-Trek reboot, it deals with themes of exploration, mysterious alien life, new civilisations, what it means to be human and all that stuff I like in Trek.

All of these were absent in 2009 JJ-Trek and it looks like we're getting more of the same in the next movie. Which fans are apparently cool with as long as it makes money.

 

[BillJ]

Prometheus was a box office success this year.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following you: are you really offering Prometheus as an example of smart science-fiction while mocking Star Trek?

Yes, I think Prometheus clearly resembles the type of film I'd rather Jar Jar Abrams be making despite it's many flaws.

Really?

It actually has less in common with Star Trek: The Motion Picture than Star Trek 2009 does.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Prometheus was a box office success this year.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following you: are you really offering Prometheus as an example of smart science-fiction while mocking Star Trek?

Yes, I think Prometheus clearly resembles the type of film I'd rather Jar Jar Abrams be making despite it's many flaws.

No need to worry then.
Lindelof wrote that and he also co-wrote STID. Enjoy.

 

[DalekJim]

It actually has less in common with Star Trek: The Motion Picture than Star Trek 2009 does.

Disagree. Prometheus is from that DNA of sci-fi films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner and Alien which I greatly enjoy.

"BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" sexy adventures with lots of explosions and lens flare is less my thing.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Yes, I think Prometheus clearly resembles the type of film I'd rather Jar Jar Abrams be making despite it's many flaws. Unlike the 2009 JJ-Trek reboot, it deals with themes of exploration, mysterious alien life, new civilisations, what it means to be human and all that stuff I like in Trek.

All of these were absent in 2009 JJ-Trek and it looks like we're getting more of the same in the next movie. Which fans are apparently cool with as long as it makes money.

Actually, quite a lot of people would say that Prometheus' main flaw is that it didn't deal with any theme except in the broadest sense, giving the impression that the filmmakers thought that simply mentioning those themes in passing and wrapping them in mystery was enough to deal with them. It wasn't.

On the other hand, Star Trek didn't aim as high, but it actually dealt with its themes and included them in the narrative in an organic way.

 

[Will Riker]

Star Trek won't be Star Trek again until Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and especially Damon Lindelof are not writing the movies...or involved at all. I don't blame JJ Abrams, the man can make good movies when he's passionate about it and is in charge of it (see Super 8). That team of writers, who each have some gawdawful movies under their writing credits, don't make the kind of intellectual, thought provoking films you speak of DalekJim. Orci/Kurtzman make popcorn movies that will appeal to a broader audience, Lindelof makes pseudo-intellectual crap that some people think is deep and meaningful because for some reason he has a reputation for writing such things, and then you have the name recognition of JJ Abrams. None of the people involved are passionate about Star Trek and I think that showed in the 2009 movie and in the teasers for the upcoming movie. Did I enjoy the 2009 movie? Yeah I enjoyed the style and the look of the movie, but when you get into what's being said and the logic, it's a total mess. As stand-alone space adventure films, they're perfectly fine. As pure Sci-Fi and especially as Trek, they are not even close. Does anyone really think Roddenberry would have been satisfied with the 2009 movie?

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

As stand-alone space adventure films, they're perfectly fine. As pure Sci-Fi and especially as Trek, they are not even close. Does anyone really think Roddenberry would have been satisfied with the 2009 movie?

I do, yes. Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was much more "space adventure" than "pure Sci-Fi" anyway.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following you: are you really offering Prometheus as an example of smart science-fiction while mocking Star Trek?

Yes, I think Prometheus clearly resembles the type of film I'd rather Jar Jar Abrams be making despite it's many flaws.

Well then, you got it. It doesn't need the words "Star Trek" tacked on to the credits.

 

[BillJ]

As stand-alone space adventure films, they're perfectly fine. As pure Sci-Fi and especially as Trek, they are not even close. Does anyone really think Roddenberry would have been satisfied with the 2009 movie?

I do, yes. Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was much more "space adventure" than "pure Sci-Fi" anyway.

It depends how much money he was making off of it and how many of the starlets he got to bed...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Star Trek won't be Star Trek again until...

Star Trek is Star Trek right now, thanks.

Roddenberry was dissatisfied with most of what made Star Trek worthwhile after 1969. So what?