Will Gene Roddenberry be credited/tributed?
- Thread starter Bad Atom
- Start date
There's no proof of that accusation whatsoever. Post proof or retract your silly statement.
This is why I can't take most anything you say seriously regarding this production. You sound so petulant. Abrams and Co have shown nothing but respect regarding GR and Trek in every interview I've ever seen. Perhaps not the worshiping and fawning a few around here would like but they've been respectful.
And "Trek XI", isn't this movies title "Star Trek" is - I can see why that might annoy him. Sorta the way "Batman Begins" isn't Batman 5 or whatever. Though I'd love to see a link where such annoyance is voiced. Otherwise I'll just assume you're projecting.
There's no con going on here but in your own limited mind. Are they preaching the story all over the place? No - but that's just good marketing, building suspense and all... to call it a con is to ascribe motives most movie producers can't be bothered with.
Sharr
Of course he will get a "created by" credit. It may not be in the opening credits as those are often driven by money or rules but it will be there, somewhere. As more and more of the script is leaked, it is becoming obvious that TOS is being used as the jumping off point for this movie.
Hollywood loves to revel in its own history.
It could even be subtle, like a character named Rod Wesley. Hollywood is like that, giving a passing homage in a script. I thought one of ENT's nice moves was naming admirals in the pilot Forest, Williams and Leonard.
Hollywood loves to revel in its own history.
It could even be subtle, like a character named Rod Wesley. Hollywood is like that, giving a passing homage in a script. I thought one of ENT's nice moves was naming admirals in the pilot Forest, Williams and Leonard.
Mayb he would prefer it to be classed as the begining of a new series of films, I havent heard most people talk about Batman Begins or the Dark Knight as Batman 5 & 6.
He will get the created by Credit in the end credits at the least, a mention in the titles will depend on the title sequence and if there is one as alot of films and TV shows these days do away with that
He will get the created by Credit in the end credits at the least, a mention in the titles will depend on the title sequence and if there is one as alot of films and TV shows these days do away with that
"Annoyed" is not a description I've seen associated with Abrams in any of the reporting on this film. Absent a link, I'll assume that's the poster's characterisation of something that they read rather than an accurate paraphrase.
There's no doubt that Roddenberry will be appropriately credited. You do know that all of these producers really like "Star Trek," right?
There's no doubt that Roddenberry will be appropriately credited. You do know that all of these producers really like "Star Trek," right?
I'm sure there will be dedications, acknowledgments or whatever. Otherwise, the production would be handing another "issue" to fans. Best if Abrams and Paramount forestall any more eruptions of indignation.
jon1701 said:
Why would he get annoyed? Its the eleventh Star Trek film.
It's not Star Trek 11. It may be the 715th production of Star Trek produced, but it's not Star Trek 715, and it's not Star Trek XI, 11, Eleven, Ten+One. It's a total reboot, and it has nothing to do with the previous ten films.
Is Battlestar Galactica on SciFi called Battlestar Galactica 2? No.
Matt said:
jon1701 said:
Why would he get annoyed? Its the eleventh Star Trek film.
It's not Star Trek 11. It may be the 715th production of Star Trek produced, but it's not Star Trek 715, and it's not Star Trek XI, 11, Eleven, Ten+One. It's a total reboot, and it has nothing to do with the previous ten films.
Is Battlestar Galactica on SciFi called Battlestar Galactica 2? No.
Firstly, If you read my post - you'll see that I was pointing out the idiocy of the "J.J. Abrams is annoyed about the title" statement. Like he gives a shit what people all calling this movie. It is "literally" the Eleventh Star Trek movie ever made. Even Abrams cannot hide from that fact. Trek XI was the working title.
The new James Bond film is called Bond 22 at the moment. Does the director get angry about that?
He's got bigger things to worry about. If some people are calling it Trek XI, Trek Eleven, Star Trek 11 or Trek:eleven so what? Its factually correct.
Secondly, must every post you type refer to a reboot?
Ok, we hear you. We got it. Ok.
Similar threads
