The Ultimate Poll: JJ Vs. Bay

[Crazy Eddie]

Plus, the themes of a rebellious youth going from being a nobody to a quite important somebody guided by the hand of fate couldn't be that much closer to Star Wars.

Which in turn is one of the most common themes in English language fiction. Even Star Wars probably lifted it from "The Sword in the Stone," with Princess Leia the eventual plot device to turn Luke into the King of the Galaxy or whatever.

Does anyone really believe George Lucas had a coherent plan for the entire Star Wars trilogy when he started writing "A New Hope?" I strongly doubt it.

 

[RAMA]

They're not even comparable in style. Bay is horrible.

 

[Bishop76]

Based on how the prequels turned out? Not a chance.

 

[number6]

If anything this film was closer to TOS in terms of the action and adventure, while the theme was just a more generic kind of thing rather than a Star Trek thing.

While TOS had action, it was usually to serve some sort of purpose or illustrate some sort of point. Star Wars, on the other hand was action for the sake of taking characters on an emotional journey. ST09 was the same way as there really was no greater point, it was just fun.

Plus, the themes of a rebellious youth going from being a nobody to a quite important somebody guided by the hand of fate couldn't be that much closer to Star Wars.

Which Star Trek were you watching?? The action on TOS sometimes served no other purpose than Shatner getting his shirt ripped. The scene where Kirk provokes Spock is right out of This Side of Paradise and proved a very similar point. As far as the guiding hand of fate being reminiscent of Star Wars, you could also say that Star Trek was just like Star Wars because it had space ships and guns that went pyew-pyew. Growing up without a father and becoming a rebellious young man in search of a guiding figure isn't exactly something Star Wars originated. Are there similarities? Sure, but I wouldn't say Star Trek was trying to be more like Star Wars any more than DS9 was trying to be like Babylon 5.

 

[The Castellan]

Plus, the themes of a rebellious youth going from being a nobody to a quite important somebody guided by the hand of fate couldn't be that much closer to Star Wars.

Which in turn is one of the most common themes in English language fiction. Even Star Wars probably lifted it from "The Sword in the Stone," with Princess Leia the eventual plot device to turn Luke into the King of the Galaxy or whatever.

Does anyone really believe George Lucas had a coherent plan for the entire Star Wars trilogy when he started writing "A New Hope?" I strongly doubt it.

He just ripped off westerns and samuri flcks.
If I were to pick a word to describe Lucas' success of Star Wars:

Lucky.


We need another Arthur C. Clark or something, I tell you what.

 

[number6]

Plus, the themes of a rebellious youth going from being a nobody to a quite important somebody guided by the hand of fate couldn't be that much closer to Star Wars.

Which in turn is one of the most common themes in English language fiction. Even Star Wars probably lifted it from "The Sword in the Stone," with Princess Leia the eventual plot device to turn Luke into the King of the Galaxy or whatever.

Does anyone really believe George Lucas had a coherent plan for the entire Star Wars trilogy when he started writing "A New Hope?" I strongly doubt it.

He just ripped off westerns and samuri flcks.
If I were to pick a word to describe Lucas' success of Star Wars:

Lucky.

Six times in a row!

We need another Arthur C. Clark or something, I tell you what.

Maybe he can do a prequel to 2001.

 

[The Castellan]

Which in turn is one of the most common themes in English language fiction. Even Star Wars probably lifted it from "The Sword in the Stone," with Princess Leia the eventual plot device to turn Luke into the King of the Galaxy or whatever.

Does anyone really believe George Lucas had a coherent plan for the entire Star Wars trilogy when he started writing "A New Hope?" I strongly doubt it.

He just ripped off westerns and samuri flcks.
If I were to pick a word to describe Lucas' success of Star Wars:

Lucky.

Six times in a row!

We need another Arthur C. Clark or something, I tell you what.

Maybe he can do a prequel to 2001.

6 turds are still 6 turds. It still pretty much shows that he was lucky.

I'd like to see Clark's Sentinal be made.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I liked the latest Trek film for the most part, but I did find some of the stereotypical action scenes tedious, and found some of the resolutions of the minor plot point to be lazy...
...but after seeing Abrams' Fringe and Kutzman or Orci's Hawaii Five-0, I think the criticisms I have with Trek XI come from Kurtzman and Orci, rather than from Abrams.

I would have no problem with Abrams directing again, as long as Kurtzman and Orci don't write it. Their writing isn't awful (it has its place) -- but it's not my impression of what makes good Star Trek. I especially would take Abrams over Michael Bay. Bay's style seems like the "director" version of Kurtzman and Orci's writing style.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Which in turn is one of the most common themes in English language fiction. Even Star Wars probably lifted it from "The Sword in the Stone," with Princess Leia the eventual plot device to turn Luke into the King of the Galaxy or whatever.

Yeah, I originally had something along these lines typed up, but didn't want to get beside my point too much. Star Wars mainly just popularized that kind of thing in a pseudo sci fi setting. And this isn't really my case alone given many other superficial commonalities as well as the producers outright saying they wanted to make a movie more exciting like Star Wars.

Which Star Trek were you watching??

The one that when the action was over, there was usually a significant point or moral to be made. Something one could think about. At least, the majority (and the good) of TOS was this way.

As far as the guiding hand of fate being reminiscent of Star Wars, you could also say that Star Trek was just like Star Wars because it had space ships and guns that went pyew-pyew.

You know the comment was more deep than something on such a superficial level. Star Trek was never built on a mystical sense of fate so much as it was in this movie. The clear departure from the norm of Star Trek and the clear presence of fate in the more popular Star Wars are obviously going to draw some comparisons.

Growing up without a father and becoming a rebellious young man in search of a guiding figure isn't exactly something Star Wars originated. Are there similarities? Sure, but I wouldn't say Star Trek was trying to be more like Star Wars any more than DS9 was trying to be like Babylon 5.

I can't speak on DS9/B5, but the writers of this movie actually made references in interviews to Star Wars being influential somewhat often. Obviously they're not going to emulate it bit by bit, but they heavily borrowed themes/ideas from it, and they did it right. More right than Lucas could ever even hope to.

 

[number6]

Kurtzman and Orci are already writing the sequel.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

He just ripped off westerns and samuri flcks.
If I were to pick a word to describe Lucas' success of Star Wars:

Lucky.

Six times in a row!

We need another Arthur C. Clark or something, I tell you what.

Maybe he can do a prequel to 2001.

6 turds are still 6 turds. It still pretty much shows that he was lucky.

I'd like to see Clark's Sentinal be made.

Or how about Rendezvous with Rama? Plenty of sex and violence, and you could EASILY squeeze all four books into a single movie.

 

[number6]

Which in turn is one of the most common themes in English language fiction. Even Star Wars probably lifted it from "The Sword in the Stone," with Princess Leia the eventual plot device to turn Luke into the King of the Galaxy or whatever.

Yeah, I originally had something along these lines typed up, but didn't want to get beside my point too much. Star Wars mainly just popularized that kind of thing in a pseudo sci fi setting. And this isn't really my case alone given many other superficial commonalities as well as the producers outright saying they wanted to make a movie more exciting like Star Wars.

Which Star Trek were you watching??

The one that when the action was over, there was usually a significant point or moral to be made. Something one could think about. At least, the majority (and the good) of TOS was this way.

Not always. Some of it was just to have a fist fight between the good guys and the bad guys, just like every action/adventure show in the sixties had.

As far as the guiding hand of fate being reminiscent of Star Wars, you could also say that Star Trek was just like Star Wars because it had space ships and guns that went pyew-pyew.

You know the comment was more deep than something on such a superficial level. Star Trek was never built on a mystical sense of fate so much as it was in this movie. The clear departure from the norm of Star Trek and the clear presence of fate in the more popular Star Wars are obviously going to draw some comparisons.

Spock spoke of fate and destiny in many of the films and episodes.. It was a theme in TUC and TWOK as well as every Trek show that involved time travel.
I don't think there was any real departure here.

Growing up without a father and becoming a rebellious young man in search of a guiding figure isn't exactly something Star Wars originated. Are there similarities? Sure, but I wouldn't say Star Trek was trying to be more like Star Wars any more than DS9 was trying to be like Babylon 5.

I can't speak on DS9/B5, but the writers of this movie actually made references in interviews to Star Wars being influential somewhat often. Obviously they're not going to emulate it bit by bit, but they heavily borrowed themes/ideas from it, and they did it right. More right than Lucas could ever even hope to.

Sure they were influenced by the movies they grew up with. However those movies were also influenced by Star Trek. I see this as more full circle. The Cantina scene was influenced by Journey to Babel and the bar scene in TSFS was influenced by the Cantina scene. People who worked on TMP wound up at ILM and ILM did much of the Star Trek movies and television shows. Everyone who worked on Star Wars were also Star Trek fans.. None of this equates the constant drumbeat from some fans that somehow someone is trying to turn Star Trek into Star Wars.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Not always. Some of it was just to have a fist fight between the good guys and the bad guys, just like every action/adventure show in the sixties had.

True. And I think some of their limitations of budget/time is what might have kept more of a focus on the cerebral instead of the action. Even still, regardless of if it was thrown in there as fluff, the better Star Trek still had some meat behind it.

Spock spoke of fate and destiny in many of the films and episodes.. It was a theme in TUC and TWOK as well as every Trek show that involved time travel.

How was fate a theme of TUC or TWOK?

Also, I think time travel has always been more deterministic than fatalistic, if that clarifies anything at all. An example I've used before is "Yesterday's Enterprise" where it's deterministic because Worf and Troi weren't on the Enterprise, which made sense. But if it were more guided by fate (which often has no clear cause and effect relationship) they would have still been there. This is just how the circumstances of this movie appear to me.

EDIT: The mirror universe is definitely one of fate, at least in its continuation on DS9.

Sure they were influenced by the movies they grew up with. However those movies were also influenced by Star Trek. I see this as more full circle. The Cantina scene was influenced by Journey to Babel and the bar scene in TSFS was influenced by the Cantina scene. People who worked on TMP wound up at ILM and ILM did much of the Star Trek movies and television shows. Everyone who worked on Star Wars were also Star Trek fans.

Those are all things on the superficial level though. There had often been a clear difference between the two on a non-superficial level that just doesn't exist as much anymore.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Michael Bay?

Two words:

"My bad."

 

[number6]

I just threw up in my mouth a little..

 

[number6]

Not always. Some of it was just to have a fist fight between the good guys and the bad guys, just like every action/adventure show in the sixties had.

True. And I think some of their limitations of budget/time is what might have kept more of a focus on the cerebral instead of the action. Even still, regardless of if it was thrown in there as fluff, the better Star Trek still had some meat behind it.

Spock spoke of fate and destiny in many of the films and episodes.. It was a theme in TUC and TWOK as well as every Trek show that involved time travel.

How was fate a theme of TUC or TWOK?

Spock spoke of Kirk's command as his best destiny, a theme which lasted through that trilogy. He also spoke of faith that the universe will unfold as it should in TUC.

Also, I think time travel has always been more deterministic than fatalistic, if that clarifies anything at all. An example I've used before is "Yesterday's Enterprise" where it's deterministic because Worf and Troi weren't on the Enterprise, which made sense. But if it were more guided by fate (which often has no clear cause and effect relationship) they would have still been there. This is just how the circumstances of this movie appear to me.

EDIT: The mirror universe is definitely one of fate, at least in its continuation on DS9.

Sure they were influenced by the movies they grew up with. However those movies were also influenced by Star Trek. I see this as more full circle. The Cantina scene was influenced by Journey to Babel and the bar scene in TSFS was influenced by the Cantina scene. People who worked on TMP wound up at ILM and ILM did much of the Star Trek movies and television shows. Everyone who worked on Star Wars were also Star Trek fans.

Those are all things on the superficial level though. There had often been a clear difference between the two on a non-superficial level that just doesn't exist as much anymore.

One could say that the influences between the two that fans complain about are also at best superficial. I am pointing to that as well.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Spock spoke of Kirk's command as his best destiny, a theme which lasted through that trilogy. He also spoke of faith that the universe will unfold as it should in TUC.

Neither of those things really have to do with fate as I described it. The former just means that it was what Kirk was good at, and the latter is determinism.

One could say that the influences between the two that fans complain about are also at best superficial. I am pointing to that as well.

I'm not sure to whom you are referring, but I was never complaining, and what I referred to was not at all superficial.

 

[number6]

Spock spoke of Kirk's command as his best destiny, a theme which lasted through that trilogy. He also spoke of faith that the universe will unfold as it should in TUC.

Neither of those things really have to do with fate as I described it. The former just means that it was what Kirk was good at, and the latter is determinism.

One could say that the influences between the two that fans complain about are also at best superficial. I am pointing to that as well.

I'm not sure to whom you are referring, but I was never complaining, and what I referred to was not at all superficial.

We'll have to agree to disagree, then.. I don't think anyone is turning Star Trek into Star Wars and I don't see anything wrong with the two influencing each other. The two have done so for 30 years.

 

[Ryan8bit]

They've never influenced each other quite in this way. It's usually been on a superficial level. This movie was influenced on both levels.

 

[number6]

They've never influenced each other quite in this way. It's usually been on a superficial level. This movie was influenced on both levels.

Sure they have.. This is equally superficial, and coincidental.

We'll simply agree to disagree. I will enjoy future Star Trek films and you're free to complain.