Roberto Orci Not Directing Trek XIII

[Mach5]

Why do people even think disney wanted JJ in the director's chair for star wars?

Becase he:
A) is a solid director who knows how to work with actors
B) has an eye for aesthetics, and an unequaled talent for shooting intense action sequences
C) has a signature visual style that is, we can surely all agree,
absolutely perfect for Star Wars
D) is a MASSIVE Star Wars fan who understands the material better than practically anyone (including Lucas )

Star Trek boxoffice takings have little to do with it. A Star Wars movie, even a really really bad one, is guaranteed to make zillions, no matter who directed it.

 

[Mudd]

People who express strong opinions are more likely to complain than to praise. That's just a fact.

Trekkies are welcome to keep complaining, and the studio will keep doing what they've learned works best. They've no reason now to humor the fan base beyond some occasional lip service.

 

[Smellmet]

Why do people even think disney wanted JJ in the director's chair for star wars?

Becase he:
A) is a solid director who knows how to work with actors
B) has an eye for aesthetics, and an unequaled talent for shooting intense action sequences
C) has a signature visual style that is, we can surely all agree,
absolutely perfect for Star Wars
D) is a MASSIVE Star Wars fan who understands the material better than practically anyone (including Lucas )

Star Trek boxoffice takings have little to do with it. A Star Wars movie, even a really really bad one, is guaranteed to make zillions, no matter who directed it.

Couldn't agree more. The Star Trek movies were merely auditions for the job for JJ and I reckon he's passed.

 

[Mach5]

People who express strong opinions are more likely to complain than to praise. That's just a fact.

I had nothing but praise for the JJ Treks, despite (supposedly) being a "glass half empty" type of person. Go figure.

Trekkies are welcome to keep complaining, and the studio will keep doing what they've learned works best. They've no reason now to humor the fan base beyond some occasional lip service.

Studio's only responsibility is making money for its corporate parent, who in turn answers only to its shareholders. Fanboys aren't a part of this equation, unless they own shitloads of stock.

However, I'm a Trekkie, and if I want to complain about Voyager being shit, no one is gonna stop me.

I'm never buying that blu-ray! You hear me, Brannon? Never!

 

[Tom Servo]

I'd love to see Edgar Wright do it personally, or Rupert Wyatt.

Though can we please PLEASE PLEASE stop with the suggestions of Leonard Nimoy, or Jonathan Frakes or Nick Meyer? ITS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. The last thing Paramount would want is for the movie to feel like the anything from the old selection of films...the films that the general movie going public gave absolutely no care about at the end of their runs. I feel like those sorts of suggestions are just wistful wishing for the past at their worst.

 

[Mach5]

I think Frakes could do a decent JJverse flick, but honestly, I don't give a shit who directs it, so long as it's not some rookie who never directed anything before. You know, like Bob.

 

[Franklin]

I'd love to see Edgar Wright do it personally, or Rupert Wyatt.

Though can we please PLEASE PLEASE stop with the suggestions of Leonard Nimoy, or Jonathan Frakes or Nick Meyer? ITS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. The last thing Paramount would want is for the movie to feel like the anything from the old selection of films...the films that the general movie going public gave absolutely no care about at the end of their runs. I feel like those sorts of suggestions are just wistful wishing for the past at their worst.

No Shatner, then?

I really didn't care if Orci did it because I figured the powers that be must've thought he could do it or they wouldn't have offered it to him. That said, something must've destroyed their confidence in him, and better to make a change now than before production really gets going.

I have no opinion on who should direct now, because I don't have the depth of knowledge of who's out there who could do Trek well. A fair number are posting Edgar Wright as their preference, so fine, I'll jump on that bandwagon. Edgar Wright for director!

 

[BillJ]

...unless they suddenly felt like applying internal consistency and logic to scripts. That'd shoot down something like Into Darkness pretty fast.

That would shoot down much of Trek pretty fast.

 

[Amaris]

...unless they suddenly felt like applying internal consistency and logic to scripts. That'd shoot down something like Into Darkness pretty fast.

That would shoot down much of Trek pretty fast.

That would have shot down the original series, that's for sure!

 

[Mudd]

...unless they suddenly felt like applying internal consistency and logic to scripts. That'd shoot down something like Into Darkness pretty fast.

That would shoot down much of Trek pretty fast.

It would destroy the holy continuity of the franchise.

 

[Smellmet]

I cannot possibly see anyone from previously being handed it. They surely will want someone fresh to the franchise who has a good visual style. The likes of Meyer and Frakes are yesterday's men as far as these type of movies go.

 

[Phily B]

Edgar Wright please.

 

[M'Sharak]

My reaction to Robert Orci not directing...

Had already been done, 35 posts earlier. Being pleased about a change of director is one thing, but let's not just spam stuff in the thread, 'K? I don't think Kool would approve.

 

[Set Harth]

D) is a MASSIVE Star Wars fan who understands the material better than practically anyone (including Lucas )

Was that meant to be some kind of ironic humor, or do you really mean that?

 

[Danlav05]

I hope the project can be revived with a new experienced director.

The story sounds ok but as well as fans you have to cater to mainstream movie goers. The situation with Star Trek is weirdly reminiscent of Doctor Who - the last season is quite good following a lag; there is no series but a movie does well for itself; people want a series but the rights are tied up in movies.

Jj is making the movie franchise he grew up with now; so maybe Bad Robot could leave Star Trek? If CBS even want to do specials for the golden anniversary they should if the 13th movie can't be done in time.

Granted a film in 2016 would be nice. Hope Shats still in it (lol we did that in 2007/08 and again there was the 'will the classic Doctors be in it' for the Who 50th)

 

[Lakenheath 72]

I am speaking on a tangent here.

Hour of Victory was rated on Metacritic a score of 37, which is bad. The consensus was that the game was "broken". Well, I played it and I didn't find it broken. The game mechanics worked fine. I encounted two technical issues: a tank getting caught in an awkward position and NPCs falling through a door. These are common issues with many games.

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim was rated on Metacritic a score of 96, which is near perfection. I played this game. This game had major technical issues.

At the launch of Skyrim, a multitude of technical issues ranging from small to large in scale were being reported. Some examples include a texture down-scaling issue on the Xbox 360 version when the game was run from the hard drive;[71] crashes, slowdown and frame rate issues on the PlayStation 3 version when save files exceeded 6 MB,[72] commonly occurring due to extended game play times;[73] and various crashes and slowdowns on the Windows version. According to Skyrim's director Todd Howard the misconception of 'restrictive RAM'[74] is incorrect, "It's literally the things you've done in what order and what's running."[75]

Since release several patches have been published to address technical issues and improve overall gameplay. Patch 1.2 was released on November 29, 2011, to fix some of the game's issues;[76] however, some players reported new bugs in the game following the patch, including more frequent game crashes.[77] Patch 1.3 was released on December 7, 2011, to improve stability, further address known issues, and fix some of the problems that were introduced in version 1.2.[78] Patch 1.4 was released on February 1, 2012, for the PC. Another list of issues and bugs were addressed in this patch as well as the Skyrim launcher support for Skyrim Workshop (PC).[79] Patch 1.5 was released on March 20, 2012, for the PC. Numerous bugs were fixed, as well as the inclusion of new archery/spellcasting killcams.[80] On April 12, 2012, Bethesda announced that Kinect support would be coming for the Xbox 360 version of Skyrim. It features more than 200 voice commands.[81] Patch 1.6 was released on May 24, 2012, for the PC. This includes a new feature – mounted combat.[82] Patch 1.7 was released on July 30, 2012, for the PC,[83] and 1.8 was released on November 1, 2012, for the PC.[84] These two introduced only minor bugfixes. Patch 1.9 was released on March 18, 2013. In addition to providing various bug fixes, this patch also added new features, most namely the new 'Legendary' difficulty and 'Legendary' skills.[85]

An unofficial community patch tries to fix remaining issues unattended by the official patches.[86] The latest iteration of the so-called Unofficial Skyrim Patch, released in May 2014,[87] lists hundreds[88] of gameplay, quests, and other bugs as fixed in the game and its add-ons.[89][90]

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elder_Scrolls_V:_Skyrim#Technical_issues) The numbers refer to notes.

The issue I encountered was that my game froze when my character crossed a bridge.

My point is this, ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic should not be used for gauging the quality of a product.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

My reaction to Robert Orci not directing...

Had already been done, 35 posts earlier. Being pleased about a change of director is one thing, but let's not just spam stuff in the thread, 'K? I don't think Kool would approve.

Whops, didn't look back 30 posts ago. (As I mentioned in another thread, sometimes I'm personally either doing something else while on Trek bbs...or zero time to read pages upon pages of previous responses).

Too, I didn't realize posting my own personal reaction to this particular news - with an accompanied video - was considered spam. And, I disagree: Kool would possibly approve, as I'm a fan of the band's music and it brings back some nostalgic elementary school memories - i.e. I recall dancing with some others students to this music on the school bus. (Too, I'm sure he wouldn't mind a young black man still rockin' his music after all these years, considering what passes for music these days).

Whatever.

Noted, let's move on....

 

[BillJ]

My point is this, ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic should not be used for gauging the quality of a product.

Forgetting that games are completely different from movies for a moment, what should we use as a gauge of quality?

 

[Maurice]

To the earlier point about screenwriters being interchangeable on feature films, sure. But it's more accurate to say that TV is a producer's medium and film is a director's medium. In TV the producers are frequently writers, for instance, so there's a different dynamic than feature films.

As to credits, there actually is a process the WGAw uses to determine writing credits (a "rewrite" must constitute a greater than 30% change to the script, for instance, if I recall), and rewriting most of the dialog in a film is generally considered a "dialog polish", unless said dialog changes alter the story and/or characters, thus not a rewrite per se. Also, the WGA limits the number of writer credits that can appear in the film, so if over that number work on it, only those who who are considered to have done the major work get credited and the others go uncredited... and some don't ask to be credited.

So, yes, I'm absolutely sure the WGA sometimes gets the credits "wrong", but the credit determining process is not arbitrary—however, as with most things—it is frequently subjective.

 

[CorporalClegg]

My point is this, ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic should not be used for gauging the quality of a product.

Forgetting that games are completely different from movies for a moment, what should we use as a gauge of quality?

His argument is meaningless. He's trying to assert technical stability as the primary constant of quality.

Hour of Victory has an amazingly low meta score because it's an amazingly awful video game, technical issues not withstanding. Skyrim as a high score because it's already considered to be a classic.

But even addressing the technical issues directly, one finds that HoV's issues effected it's playability, which does have a significant impact on the score. Skyrim's were mostly just annoying inconveniences.

It was a bad analogy. Meta scores are fine. They aren't perfect, but the fact that Citizen Kane is on one end of the spectrum and Saving Christmas the other isn't a fluke.