Why does Abrams keeps giving the middle finger to Trek fans?
- Thread starter Danoz
- Start date
- Status
First its 'canon', and second - ah no on that whole Trek-lite that. WTF its the same GINO argument the BSG orthodoxy pushers use to bash the new show and that has zero merit.
Just from the trailer I've gotten more of a "Trekkian" vibe then I have in a long awhile in regard to any Star Trek production in recent years.
Before you pronounce and throw around terms like "Trek-lite" please define what that means, Star Trek is a combination of varied aspects which can compliment what it is - it is not a monolithic idea.
Sharr
"not for fans of star trek".. Abrams is simply trying to put across the fact that its a total reimagining-he knows many die hard fans will NEVER be happy with such an idea.. but then, thats the whole point of reimagining. making it different enough to warrant its presence in the first place! I am a fan of all previous trek. If it turns out to be buffy or dawsons creek in space, then so be it. Someone will no doubt enjoy it.. ill just stick to the originals! I cant say that ill be avoiding it when it comes to the cinema though. If it turns out to be poor (which im sure it wont be) then the supposed appearance of old cast, and the comedy element of its general all round awfulness will give it some appeal after all! Lol. Only time will tell.. 
There's a wonderful half-page image of Nero in today's Herald Sun (major paper of Victoria, Bana's home state). It links to an article where the first comment from Abrahms is that he was not a fan of the original series, and describes the film as a "reinvention" of Star Trek.
Look at Nicholas Meyer as one example. He came into the Trek universe with an understanding that, by his own admission, went as far as "that's the one with the guy with the pointy ears." And yet he went on to make what is, to this day, widely considered the best of the Trek films. Now, not everyone agrees with that assessment of TWOK, but you can't deny that it's the general consensus.
Lack of Trek knowledge is not a problem. A lack of respect for Trek, ala Stuart Baird, is. Although I see clearly that J.J. Abrams wants to make a film that will attact a mass audience from the general moviegoing public, I see no indication that he lacks respect for Trek or its fanbase.
All the films bar the pre-TNG TOS films are arguably Trek-lite because they're trying to appeal to a broader audience than the TV show to bring in more dosh.
Most of the TOS-based films aren't very good movies.
Only just over 50%? That poll was obviously done on a Star Trek forum!
No, they were obviously done for the fans. Star Trek has never been about™ making money. Gene only accepted the money because he had a gun pointed to his head. His vision™ was to do a free show, and so was the studios. They only took the money because by law they had to. This Johnny-come-lately idea of making a franchise money just shows how much J.J. hates Star Trek™ and is only in it for the money. Gene Almighty's dream has been abolished. This movie will be blam blingity boom YAYYYY and us 12 Star Trek fans who hate this movie will protest it to no end. This makes me SICK.
I didn't get a Star Trek vibe from the last two movies, either. They were just your run of the mill action movies with muddled stories, no character development, and a whole lot of pew pew pew with nothing much to justify it. I want epic majesty again in my Trek, something that has been too few and far between these last twenty years.
The only logical answer to the O.P.: We like getting the finger from Abrams! -- RR
Didn't Epic in Trek take up like 2 3 and 4...
Yeah Epic stories are overrated especailly when the source material is an Episodic Television show....
Well it's the weak leg of the three part story, Spock dies, Kirk risks it all to save his friend, Kirk does something outlandish, saves the universe and keeps his job (kinda)
Abrams just waves to us, and some people only notice one finger.
Nobody can be this dense.
Paramount did it for money.
Gene Roddenberry aslo made some money from that franchise. And I don't recalled seeing him complaining about making money from it.
That's it. I am only start a thread. Watch for it.
Wow.
Last edited:
A
Amaris
Guest
Are we talking about the same Gene "I wrote lyrics to a TV theme to make money from royalties" Roddenberry?
I respect Gene Roddenberry greatly, but let's not kid ourselves and make him into something he wasn't.
J.
I'm pretty sure Devon posted that with tongue firmly planted in cheek. It's satire. I'm almost positive.Nobody can be that dense.
Paramount did it for money.
Gene Roddenberry aslo made some money from franchise. And I recalled seeing him complaining about making money from it.
That's it. I am only start a thread. Watch for it.
Wow.
J.: same message.
I'm pretty sure Devon posted that with tongue firmly planted in cheek. It's satire. I'm almost positive.Nobody can be that dense.
Paramount did it for money.
Gene Roddenberry aslo made some money from franchise. And I recalled seeing him complaining about making money from it.
That's it. I am only start a thread. Watch for it.
Wow.
J.: same message.
God, I hope so.
A
Amaris
Guest
Once you've been in TNZ as long as I have, you start to wonder.
J.
J.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
