J.J. Abrams to direct next "STAR WARS" flick

POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 18:01
VIEWED: 10217
PAGE 2 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

BYTEMITE

Friday, January 25, 2013 6:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Great, he helped ruined Star Trek

If by "ruined" you mean "made the most popular film in the entire series - which a relative few oldschool fans hate" then, sure.

Ill admit the script for Star Trek was weak, but that had a lot to do with the strike at the time. I thought he nailed the characterizations, myself.

And really - my biggest problem with it was that it felt too much like.... a Star Wars film. So, his moving on to Star Wars proper seems like a hell of a good fit to me.

I didn't see the Star Trek movie, but my understanding was that the oldschool fans didn't like it as much because it wasn't so philosophical and ponderous, more action.

And that basically describes Star Wars in a nutshell, so... I'm with Story here.

LILI

Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57 PM

Bah. I was hopeful they would hand this to Joss after the success of Avengers. If anyone can restore the shattered legacy of Star Wars, I think it would be him. I'm less cray about Abrams; don't hate him, but don't think he's the best man for the job.

Facts are stubborn things.

BYTEMITE

Friday, January 25, 2013 6:58 PM

Since I mentioned the tvtropes:

Quote:
Contrary to popular misbelief, his involvement in LOST is extremely marginal: He was asked to help fleshing out a concept for a show when the guy who had the initial idea (then ABC chairman Lloyd Braun) was not happy with what the first guy asked to flesh out the concept (Jeffrey Lieber) had come up with. Abrams was never really committed to the show, and had another (rejected) pilot called The Catch that he was already working on, so another guy (Damon Lindelof) was hired to flesh out the concept for the show together with Abrams (they threw everything Lieber had previously come up with out of the window, effectively leaving only Braun's initial idea intact. Regardless, Lieber was later granted a ridiculous 60% creator's credit after taking legal action). Abrams wrote and directed the pilot and then went off to direct Mission Impossible III just as the first season was taking off, arguably similar to his abandonment of Alias for Lost. Lindelof, suddenly left alone with the Showrunner burden, considered quitting too, but was convinced by his former co-writer (Carlton Cuse) to stay. Cuse then joined the show as a second showrunner, and has been pulling the strings together with Lindelof ever since.

Abrams later briefly returned and wrote the season 3 premiere together with Lindelof, but apparently realized the show really wasn't for him. Regardless, he's still officially credited as an executive producer as of season 6 (the final season), even though he has repeatedly confirmed in interviews that he has nothing to do with the show anymore, and all he really does is approve everything Lindelof and Cuse come up with. (Lindelof even once joked that Jimmy Kimmel knows more about LOST than Abrams does.)

Now, guess who both the mainstream media and casual viewers still constantly refer to as the "mastermind" behind LOST. Hint: This article is about him.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Creator/JJAbrams?from=Main.JJAbr
ams

M52NICKERSON

Friday, January 25, 2013 7:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by THESOMNAMBULIST:
Hey M52NICKERSON.

I just wanted to ask because I'm genuinely confused. Was his Star Trek really that bad to Trek fans? Because I honestly thought it was way better than any of the previous star trek films. (apart from Wrath of Khan)

So to an uninitiated Star trek viewer can you or someone else please point out why it was so bad? And why you think he ruined it?

I'm not trying to be confrontation by the way, I'm just curious.

°...Well here I am.°

I know I'm in the minority for not liking the new Star Trek.

Storymark stated one of the problems. While the film was popular it was not a Star Trek film. It did not even look like a Star Trek film. Star Trek was almost always more about tackling ethical and moral questions than it was about action. The new movie changed that even more that some of the other movies in the series did.

Plus popular does not mean good! If it did we would all be discussing season 10 of Firefly right now.

One of my biggest problems with it is that it is a re-boot which seemed to go out of it's way to destroy the old Trek story line. Had it been a straight re-boot that would have been fine, but no it used a shitty time travel device to de away with the history of all the other series and movies.

Next you have the fact that bright lights and flashy CGI were more important to the film than any type of science. I know Trek has often mangled science in its story telling, but this movie does not even try. It all starts with a magical super nova which threatens Romulus and no one noticed well in advance or somehow can travel faster than light. Plus...Red Matter.

I could go on about how the new Enterprises main engineering section look like a water treatment plant, or about how Abrams took the idea of lens flares to a ridiculous place, or how simple things like why most of Star Fleet is made up of students...but why?

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

STORYMARK

Friday, January 25, 2013 7:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:

One of my biggest problems with it is that it is a re-boot which seemed to go out of it's way to destroy the old Trek story line. Had it been a straight re-boot that would have been fine, but no it used a shitty time travel device to de away with the history of all the other series and movies.

No, it didn't. They specifically address it in the dialog of the film itself. Nothing is re-witten - it's a new, divergent timeline, ala the Mirror Universe.

Now, I can understand the complaints of those who felt there was a lack of the philosophical/ethical issues that Trek often deals with - but its hardly like they've done that with each and every story. Wrath of Khan was not a deep philosophical treatise, nor were many of the best episodes of all the varried series.

"Wagon-train in space" does not always require Socrates, so to speak.

Nor is it true that all old-school fans disliked the reboot. I personally know a LOT more old fans who liked the reboot than those who didn't. Which is not to dismis the complaints of those who didn't like it - but to pretend that view is anything approaching universal is simply fallacious.

Yes, it was a big, splashy adventure film - which argubly saved Trek from fading into irrelevence. The franchise as it was was running on fumes, financially and creatively. The reboot gave it a shot in the arm that was desperately needed. Something as expensive to make as Trek cannot survive by catering to a small audience exclusively.

Personally, I think Trek is better suited to TV anyway - so having Abrams move over to Star Wars strikes me as a very good thing - aside from feeling he'll make a damned good Star Wars flick - Im hoping his stepping away from the films will open the door to a new TV series. Here's hoping.

Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

THESOMNAMBULIST

Friday, January 25, 2013 7:57 PM

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

Quote:
Storymark stated one of the problems. While the film was popular it was not a Star Trek film. It did not even look like a Star Trek film. Star Trek was almost always more about tackling ethical and moral questions than it was about action. The new movie changed that even more that some of the other movies in the series did.

Hey M52Nickerson. Cheers for the reply.

I see your point and no film is without fault I guess, but for me the whole Star Trek film franchise had found itself in a rut , where the same old thing was being pedalled over and over, and really for non Trek fans it had started getting really tiresome. As a sci-fi fan I found myself being overlooked, and the films as they progressed seemed more inclined to cater to the hardcore Trek fan rather than the cinema goer. Hitting the same old marks in order to appease the fan base. Perhaps that was a good thing, I don't know, but even taking this into account I can't really think the franchise was so strong in the first place for Abrams to ruin it? Was it?

Still that said I now understand why you dislike the new one. For me personally it's rekindled my interest in Star Trek, something which had pretty much disappeared after Star Trek III.

Abrams does seem to divide the cinema going public though, so I guess it's just one of those things.

Cheers for the clear up.

°...Well here I am.°

M52NICKERSON

Friday, January 25, 2013 8:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
No, it didn't. They specifically address it in the dialog of the film itself. Nothing is re-witten - it's a new, divergent timeline, ala the Mirror Universe.

Okay, I may have missed that. Again I think a clean reboot would have been better.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Now, I can understand the complaints of those who felt there was a lack of the philosophical/ethical issues that Trek often deals with - but its hardly like they've done that with each and every story. Wrath of Khan was not a deep philosophical treatise, nor were many of the best episodes of all the varried series.

"Wagon-train in space" does not always require Socrates, so to speak.

Your right not every show or movie did. Wrath of Khan did have some questions about creating life with the Genesis device. Plus it's action was about as far from the new move as you could get. The slow "submarine" battle in Wrath of Khan was the best.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Nor is it true that all old-school fans disliked the reboot. I personally know a LOT more old fans who liked the reboot than those who didn't. Which is not to dismis the complaints of those who didn't like it - but to pretend that view is anything approaching universal is simply fallacious.

I never said otherwise. I know I'm in the minorty.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Yes, it was a big, splashy adventure film - which argubly saved Trek from fading into irrelevence. The franchise as it was was running on fumes, financially and creatively. The reboot gave it a shot in the arm that was desperately needed. Something as expensive to make as Trek cannot survive by catering to a small audience exclusively.

Well perhaps it was time for it to go. I'm not a big fan of keeping things going if it means gutting what it once was. Even if you wanted an action film to get newer and younger fans it still did not have to be one with plot problems and an overall crappy story line.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Personally, I think Trek is better suited to TV anyway - so having Abrams move over to Star Wars strikes me as a very good thing - aside from feeling he'll make a damned good Star Wars flick - Im hoping his stepping away from the films will open the door to a new TV series. Here's hoping.

Perhaps. I will not hold my breath. It will not only depend on Abrams as a director but will also depend on the script. If it is just another generic action movie with a Star Wars costume on I will be disapointed.

Maybe at this point i'm just old a grizzled. Remember I'm the person that does not want a Firefly reboot. Perhaps I will just stick with Dr. Who these days.

Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

STORYMARK

Friday, January 25, 2013 9:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:

Well perhaps it was time for it to go. I'm not a big fan of keeping things going if it means gutting what it once was. Even if you wanted an action film to get newer and younger fans it still did not have to be one with plot problems and an overall crappy story line.

Well, you know there was a writer's strike, right? And "gutting what it once was" is still the minority opinion. I don't feel it was guttet in the least - it was just, at worst, focusing on an aspect that was always there - just not the aspect you persoanlly wanted the focus to be on.

But yes, a lot relies on the script. And this one is being written by a guy who won the Oscar for his very first script, and isn't known for turning out generic stuff of any genre... Thus, I think its a bit premature to assume the script will be that.

Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

BYTEMITE

Friday, January 25, 2013 9:08 PM

Eh, the script from what I hear is something to do with a new character who's supposed to be Luke's daughter (something I'm not too excited about yet) and ignores the EU, which is good and bad.

The EU is convoluted to excess and I stopped reading stories when two of the main authors started having an ego contest killing off each other's characters. On the other hand some of the EU stories are gold and would be perfect for a movie adaption, to the point where you can not only visualize it but also hear the soundtrack.

STORYMARK

Friday, January 25, 2013 9:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Eh, the script from what I hear is something to do with a new character who's supposed to be Luke's daughter (something I'm not too excited about yet) and ignores the EU, which is good and bad.

Anything you've heard about the script is pure speculation. Nothing has been released, at all.

Which is not to say it couldn't be that (I think its a safe guess to think they'll stick to the Skywalkers to some degree), but its ALL speculation right now.

Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE