What really worries me...

[Praetor]

And it may worry some of you, too.

Ok, I've come to accept that this is a disguised reboot, that Old Spock is going to somehow change 'history' to give them carte blanche to do whatever they want with the franchise afterward. The casting doesn't bother me. The uniforms look great. I'm pretty much 50/50 on whether or not this is going to be a good movie.

What really worries me are comments that have been coming out of Abrams lately, particularly his little comment about 'putting Star Wars into Star Trek.' I'll admit I have never been a fan of Abrams. I hated Cloverfield. Now I know, on the surface it seems like he means put some action and wonder into Star Trek and that seems like a good thing. But Star Trek is at its core, for all of its action and adventure, and introspective on the human race. Star Wars is a gussied-up space fairytale. Now, combine this with Abrams' comment about trying to not make the movie 'Galaxy Quest' and it seems like Abrams has built-in disdain for the franchise and a need to make it cool again.

My fear is this: that by 'putting Star Wars into Star Trek' he means adding superfluous things that look and seem cool (i.e. turbines on the warp engines and having the Romulans travel around in a flying squid and their leader carrying a trident and having eeeevil tattoos.) To me, the production design seems to evoke a Star Wars prequels feel in the set designs seen so far. Maybe this is just the subtle influence of Ryan Church's artistic style. John Eaves doesn't really worry me, although he has been heavily criticized for his apparent belief in form over function; by his own admission the man is a TOS purist and may offer us the best hope of something true to the original. My fear is that Abrams could have become so preoccupied by trying to make Star Trek cool again that ultimately the story is going to feel like a second thought, a derivative rehash of material that Star Trek has done before. Abrams has said that this was a story he has always wanted to tell, but do we really know that this is some grand operatic story that he has long wanted to tell, or does this simply mean that he's always wanted to tell the story of how the crew came together and the story has come together on the fly?

Does anyone else share my fears and train of thought or am I just being paranoid?

 

[shapeshifter]

That could all be true but, we have to wait and see. I try not to let the detractors of this film bum me out before we know for sure there is solid reason to be.

 

[SalvorHardin]

To be honest, no I do not share your train of thought.

We know very little about this new movie and have about 10 photos and one teaser that shows almost nothing at our disposal.

People tend to overthink, overanalise and nitpick to death every little detail jumping to final conclusions about the story, the quality and success of the film.

Personally I'm patient. I like what i see so far, I'm optimistic and will wait until i see the movie to decide if it's good or bad.

The Star Wars comments can be interpreted in different ways.Both negative and positive.There's no sure way to know.
So I simply don't get paranoid over them.

 

[MattJC]

Right now, I'm more annoyed by this quote from the Empire article (I read this at Trekweb): "...anyone who thinks they have seen it all before, who thinks they know what Trek is, they’re in for a surprise when they see this movie. "
That's just wonderful. First he wants to do a reboot, and now he wants to tell people what is and isn't Star Trek?

 

[M'Sharak]

Right now, I'm more annoyed by this quote from the Empire article (I read this at Trekweb): "...anyone who thinks they have seen it all before, who thinks they know what Trek is, they’re in for a surprise when they see this movie. "
That's just wonderful. First he wants to do a reboot, and now he wants to tell people what is and isn't Star Trek?

I don't think that's what he's saying there, Matt. It sounds like he means there's going to be something we haven't already seen in a Trek story -- that's all. Honestly, if we don't expect to see something new, why would anyone bother to watch?

 

[xortex]

Right now, I'm more annoyed by this quote from the Empire article (I read this at Trekweb): "...anyone who thinks they have seen it all before, who thinks they know what Trek is, they’re in for a surprise when they see this movie. "
That's just wonderful. First he wants to do a reboot, and now he wants to tell people what is and isn't Star Trek?

I don't think that's what he's saying there, Matt. It sounds like he means there's going to be something we haven't already seen in a Trek story -- that's all. Honestly, if we don't expect to see something new, why would anyone bother to watch?

The story he's gonna tell is to his grandchildren about how he got sooo much money to screw the fans. Wow, what a story. Tell us another one grandpa.

 

[gastrof]

What concerned me was the obvious distain he revealed for the original. He calls the uniforms silly (and then goes and KEEPS them?!?!?!), calls the look of Vulcans "ridiculous"...

Yeah.

This guy has a real feel for Star Trek.

I think this was a flavor of the month for him, and he doesn't really care about it, let alone how his actions will affect the franchise or existing storyline.

The other guys who ARE Trek fans are likely the ones who insisted on telling us "it's not changing the continuity" because they knew fully well the effect the film would have on the Trek universe, or at least our perception of it.

The comments he made make it pretty clear he's NOT a Trek fan, and has no appreciation for Star Trek.

Why would someone like him be GIVEN a Trek movie to do?

Simple...

Trek is currently owned by CBS, and they've already shown what contempt they have for the franchise.

Paramount may be doing the movie, but let's face it, CBS owns Trek now.

It's now in the hands of people who don't love it. You tell me what that sort of situation can lead to.

 

[JuanBolio]

As far as the story goes, many people who got involved with this project did so only after reading the script and being impressed by it, including Leonard Nimoy. It was written by Star Trek fans. Everyone who's seen advance screenings of it have come away with nothing but praise. I, too, am I little wary of Abrams' seeming negative outlook on Trek, but the guy is a without question a competent filmmaker. I for one am willing to give him and this project my full optimism and enthusiasm, at least until I see some footage that convinces me otherwise, or better yet the full film itself.

 

[pookha]

Right now, I'm more annoyed by this quote from the Empire article (I read this at Trekweb): "...anyone who thinks they have seen it all before, who thinks they know what Trek is, they’re in for a surprise when they see this movie. "
That's just wonderful. First he wants to do a reboot, and now he wants to tell people what is and isn't Star Trek?

heck that could be a tag line for a lot of episodes of tos such as errand of mercy which in many ways redefined what star trek was.

as for every thing else do remember that the writers are star trek fans.
who not only watched the series but cared enough to go and read the novels.
thats serious fan stuff there.

Trek is currently owned by CBS, and they've already shown what contempt they have for the franchise.

Paramount may be doing the movie, but let's face it, CBS owns Trek now.

It's now in the hands of people who don't love it. You tell me what that sort of situation can lead to.

i am probably wrong about this but my understanding is cbs only has say so over tv productions of trek.
since the movie franchise already existed it was allowed to continue with paramount after the viacom split.

they only say so cbs has in some marketing stuff since they are using tos but not in creative.

 

[Praetor]

What concerned me was the obvious distain he revealed for the original. He calls the uniforms silly (and then goes and KEEPS them?!?!?!), calls the look of Vulcans "ridiculous"...

Yeah.

This guy has a real feel for Star Trek.

I think this was a flavor of the month for him, and he doesn't really care about it, let alone how his actions will affect the franchise or existing storyline.

The other guys who ARE Trek fans are likely the ones who insisted on telling us "it's not changing the continuity" because they knew fully well the effect the film would have on the Trek universe, or at least our perception of it.

The comments he made make it pretty clear he's NOT a Trek fan, and has no appreciation for Star Trek.

Why would someone like him be GIVEN a Trek movie to do?

Simple...

Trek is currently owned by CBS, and they've already shown what contempt they have for the franchise.

Paramount may be doing the movie, but let's face it, CBS owns Trek now.

It's now in the hands of people who don't love it. You tell me what that sort of situation can lead to.

Yeah, I think you've summed up my fear pretty well.

As far as the story goes, many people who got involved with this project did so only after reading the script and being impressed by it, including Leonard Nimoy. It was written by Star Trek fans. Everyone who's seen advance screenings of it have come away with nothing but praise. I, too, am I little wary of Abrams' seeming negative outlook on Trek, but the guy is a without question a competent filmmaker. I for one am willing to give him and this project my full optimism and enthusiasm, at least until I see some footage that convinces me otherwise, or better yet the full film itself.

You're right, I do still have faith in Nimoy and Kevin Smith and the others who have seen it. And I'm not saying it's going to be bad, I'm still on the fence. I guess I was just having a nerd freak moment. The Star Wars prequels have still left a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[cynical dreamer]

Nemesis was written by a fan and it turned out rather poorly. TWOK was directed by a non-fan and was phenominal. I'd say that being a fan or not being a fan isn't a real great barometer to go by in terms of Trek films.

Speaking of Nemesis. It's my opinion that the fault with that film was not with the editing or direction by non-fan Baird. Rather the fault for me lies with the script written by raving fan Logan. Again, fandom isn't a real great barometer in these things.

Too much fandom can lead to the inbred feeling that some of the later tv series had.

In the end, tell a great story. It's not about how many nacelles there are or what color Kirk's uniform is.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Does anyone else share my fears and train of thought or am I just being paranoid?

No.

Really, at this point it's a completely new version of "Star Trek," or nothing. There is nothing to motivate the studio to spend more money on the old version.

Since none of us have to see the movie, we're free to choose "nothing" if it offends us. At least with Abrams we have a choice between the two.

 

[Devon]

i am probably wrong about this but my understanding is cbs only has say so over tv productions of trek.
since the movie franchise already existed it was allowed to continue with paramount after the viacom split.

Exactly.

 

[Jon1701]

Star Trek needs more Star Wars.

Unless they are the prequels, in which case it doesn't.

 

[AudioBridge]

I'm just as worried as you, Praetor. The comments that bother me the most are ones like this:

"For me, the costumes were a microcosm of the entire project, which was how to take something that’s kind of silly and make it feel real. But how do you make legitimate those near-primary colour costumes? How do you make legitimate the pointy ears and the bowl haircut? It’s ridiculous and as potentially cliched as it gets. How do you watch Galaxy Quest and then go make a Star Trek movie?"

Umm, you don't have to "make legitimate" any of those things. The fact that both Star Trek and science fiction in general are an accepted part of our movie-going culture now makes that an unnecessary concern. People have been used to seeing pointy ears and strange costumes on screen, and accepted them, for decades. Lord of the Rings, anyone? I don't remember people laughing and pointing in the theater when Christopher Reeve appeared in the Superman suit. I suspect most people's reactions were along the lines of "holy crap, there's Superman!"

And what is his obsession with Galaxy Quest? He's mentioned that several times. I think he is paranoid about that fact that essentially there has already been a parody of the film he is about to make. But just because SpaceBalls is out there does not make Star Wars look bad.

I think he has always been nervous about this project, for a variety of reasons. I don't think he wants to be potentially known for "screwing up" Star Trek. I don't think he wants to be known as the "Star Trek" guy, i.e. he doesn't want to be the next Roddenberry. And I don't think he is very fond of Star Trek. I think the whole "we need to make Star Trek more like Star Wars" is simply an effort to put more ballsyness into Star Trek because he is embarassed about making a film with pointy ears and bright costumes.

Despite that, I have faith that he'll make a good, enjoyable movie. I've enjoyed his shows, and I liked Mission Impossible III a lot. I thought Tom Cruise was great, in no small part because of Abrams direction. But do I have faith that Abrams will make a great Star Trek Movie? No. If it turns out to be a great Star Trek Movie it will be more because Orci/Kurtzman, the design team, etc. manage to put one together.

There is Nimoy's endorsement of this project, of course. Maybe he has some bad gambling debts, but otherwise I doubt he'd get involved unless he thought it would turn out well. We'll see. Regardless, if we ever want to see Star Trek on the small screen again we need this film to do well.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Umm, you don't have to "make legitimate" any of those things. The fact that both Star Trek and science fiction in general are an accepted part of our movie-going culture now makes that an unnecessary concern.

Except that whatever being an "accepted part of our movie-going culture" might mean, it does not extend to people actually going to "Star Trek" movies.

It hasn't in years. And the kind of performance that even the previously most successful Trek movies turned in doesn't represent the kind of return on investment that would make restarting the Franchise worthwhile to Paramount.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Okay, POV time.

From what I've read, JJ Abram's approach to Star Trek in terms of "More Star Wars" was in teh context of making things visceral, and bringing in the sense of awe that the original Star Wars inspired. In 1977, everyone's jaws dropped. It was fantastic, but believable.

There has also been a quote about Star Trek getting an "Action Upgrade".

This means that things are likely to be fast paced, and also speaks to the "Star Wars" influence.

When push comes to shove, we are not going to hear John Williams and see Tie Fighters attacking the Enterprise.

This is the first Star Trek movie since the Berman/Braga administration ended.

Obviously, it will be VERY different in a lot of ways.

But JJ Abrams has also, a couple of times, noted that positive, optimistic aspects of Star Trek.

That tells me that although a lot will be different, he DOES get it. He UNDERSTANDS it at it's CORE.

In Star Trek VI, Gorkon mentioned "The Undiscovered Country". People can be very frightened of change.

 

[Procutus]

As far as the story goes, many people who got involved with this project did so only after reading the script and being impressed by it, including Leonard Nimoy.

That's one of the things that continues to keep me optimistic about this film is Nimoy's approval and involvement. Here, certainly, is a man who knows Star Trek, and short of having Robert Justman and Herb Solow involved, is the best voice of expertise to have. If the story really was shit, then I fully suspect that Leonard would've passed on it. He doesn't need to portray Spock again. He did it because he felt Spock's presence in the story was integral.

If nothing else, if this film really does fall flat on its face, at least we'll have had a one-shot deal where we got a Trek film with an actual blockbuster-budget and a chance to see one of the original cast once again. If it turns out to be a stand-alone film, then so be it. Enjoy it for what it is. I seriously doubt it can be worse than either Insurrection or Nemesis. Or The Final Frontier, for that matter.

 

[cynical dreamer]

When push comes to shove, we are not going to hear John Williams and see Tie Fighters attacking the Enterprise.

Is it wrong that I would pay money to see that?

 

[JuanBolio]

As far as the story goes, many people who got involved with this project did so only after reading the script and being impressed by it, including Leonard Nimoy.

That's one of the things that continues to keep me optimistic about this film is Nimoy's approval and involvement. Here, certainly, is a man who knows Star Trek, and short of having Robert Justman and Herb Solow involved, is the best voice of expertise to have. If the story really was shit, then I fully suspect that Leonard would've passed on it. He doesn't need to portray Spock again. He did it because he felt Spock's presence in the story was integral.

If nothing else, if this film really does fall flat on its face, at least we'll have had a one-shot deal where we got a Trek film with an actual blockbuster-budget and a chance to see one of the original cast once again. If it turns out to be a stand-alone film, then so be it. Enjoy it for what it is. I seriously doubt it can be worse than either Insurrection or Nemesis. Or The Final Frontier, for that matter.

Then again... its by the writing team from Transformers. Try as I might, I cannot remember one intelligent exchange or line of dialog from that film.