test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
J.J. Abrams not a trek fan.
my1alts2alt3
Member Posts: 176 Arc User
http://guardianlv.com/2014/01/j-j-abrams-may-face-the-ire-of-star-trek-fans-over-star-wars-episode-vii/
J.J. Abrams May Face the Ire of Star Trek Fans Over 'Star Wars: Episode VII'
Star Trek director Abrams may find himself facing some ire from the fans of the series, when Star Wars: Episode VII is released. Despite the relief among fans over J.J. Abrams' 2009 revival of the Star Trek series, 2013 saw him face scathing reviews over allegations of the poor treatment of the franchise's characters in the sequel Star Trek: Into Darkness. First, the world's largest media corporation, Disney, acquired Lucasfilm, the Holy Grail of science fiction feature films, in 2012. The two largest science fiction franchises on the planet were then placed in the hands of one man: J.J. Abrams.
Abrams' meteoric ascent to director and writer of the Star Trek series is as impressive as the impact of the two television shows he created: Lost and Alias. While the latter may be consigned to the back room of collective celluloid memory, albeit with positive reviews, the former occupies a special place as one of the most engaging science fiction dramas of modern television. Both give him a solid resume with the genre.
With at least two Emmy Award winning series, Abrams' candidacy as director for two of the longest running science fiction series on television and on the big screen may be justified. This, however, may leave die-hard fans with a degree of uneasiness and even ire that Abrams may find hard to overcome when Star Wars: Episode VII hits theaters in 2015. Some of this discomfort comes from the fact that Abrams appears to have reneged on his own claim of loyalty to the Star Trek franchise. In a 2012 interview, he declared that 'because of my loyalty to Star Trek, also just being a Star Wars fan, I would not even want to be involved in the next version of those things.'
Nine months later, Lucasfilm confirms his involvement, not just as replacement screenwriter, but as director of Star Wars: Episode VII. This is not the first of the turnarounds that J.J. Abrams can be accused of. Within the industry, rumor mills continue to generate hype about the possible fallout between Abrams and IMAX's Richard Gelfond. Back in September 2012, Gelfond, the chief executive officer of IMAX made a very public announcement that Star Wars: Episode VII may be shot on IMAX. This month, Abrams announced that he prefers to shoot the movie on film, citing the noise and unreliability of IMAX as a significant problem. Sci-fi fans around the world may suffer his choice to direct both franchises, but the question remains as to whether the industry will tolerate such a quick decision to change formats.
Finally, there is the admission that could see Abrams expelled from Star Trek conventions around the world. In several interviews, Abrams has admitted to not being a fan of the original series
'Frankly, I was not a big Star Trek fan when I first got involved with the films,' he said, 'but the idea of a Star Trek that did appeal to me was an exciting challenge.'
There is only one problem with creating a film that appeals to a director's interpretation of a franchise with a cult following; admitting to loving his own interpretation more than the original films or television series. To an extremely faithful fan base, this has been the most damning revelation. It is one that may see J.J. Abrams face their collective ire when Star Wars: Episode VII is released. Abrams may still be able to redeem himself with an untitled Star Trek sequel that is currently said to be in development. Until then, despite all the rumors, Abrams remains securely in control of two of the greatest science film fiction franchises on the planet.
J.J. Abrams May Face the Ire of Star Trek Fans Over 'Star Wars: Episode VII'
Star Trek director Abrams may find himself facing some ire from the fans of the series, when Star Wars: Episode VII is released. Despite the relief among fans over J.J. Abrams' 2009 revival of the Star Trek series, 2013 saw him face scathing reviews over allegations of the poor treatment of the franchise's characters in the sequel Star Trek: Into Darkness. First, the world's largest media corporation, Disney, acquired Lucasfilm, the Holy Grail of science fiction feature films, in 2012. The two largest science fiction franchises on the planet were then placed in the hands of one man: J.J. Abrams.
Abrams' meteoric ascent to director and writer of the Star Trek series is as impressive as the impact of the two television shows he created: Lost and Alias. While the latter may be consigned to the back room of collective celluloid memory, albeit with positive reviews, the former occupies a special place as one of the most engaging science fiction dramas of modern television. Both give him a solid resume with the genre.
With at least two Emmy Award winning series, Abrams' candidacy as director for two of the longest running science fiction series on television and on the big screen may be justified. This, however, may leave die-hard fans with a degree of uneasiness and even ire that Abrams may find hard to overcome when Star Wars: Episode VII hits theaters in 2015. Some of this discomfort comes from the fact that Abrams appears to have reneged on his own claim of loyalty to the Star Trek franchise. In a 2012 interview, he declared that 'because of my loyalty to Star Trek, also just being a Star Wars fan, I would not even want to be involved in the next version of those things.'
Nine months later, Lucasfilm confirms his involvement, not just as replacement screenwriter, but as director of Star Wars: Episode VII. This is not the first of the turnarounds that J.J. Abrams can be accused of. Within the industry, rumor mills continue to generate hype about the possible fallout between Abrams and IMAX's Richard Gelfond. Back in September 2012, Gelfond, the chief executive officer of IMAX made a very public announcement that Star Wars: Episode VII may be shot on IMAX. This month, Abrams announced that he prefers to shoot the movie on film, citing the noise and unreliability of IMAX as a significant problem. Sci-fi fans around the world may suffer his choice to direct both franchises, but the question remains as to whether the industry will tolerate such a quick decision to change formats.
Finally, there is the admission that could see Abrams expelled from Star Trek conventions around the world. In several interviews, Abrams has admitted to not being a fan of the original series
'Frankly, I was not a big Star Trek fan when I first got involved with the films,' he said, 'but the idea of a Star Trek that did appeal to me was an exciting challenge.'
There is only one problem with creating a film that appeals to a director's interpretation of a franchise with a cult following; admitting to loving his own interpretation more than the original films or television series. To an extremely faithful fan base, this has been the most damning revelation. It is one that may see J.J. Abrams face their collective ire when Star Wars: Episode VII is released. Abrams may still be able to redeem himself with an untitled Star Trek sequel that is currently said to be in development. Until then, despite all the rumors, Abrams remains securely in control of two of the greatest science film fiction franchises on the planet.
Post edited by my1alts2alt3 on
0
Comments
I think some people take this too seriously.
Next they'll be saying Sir Elton John is TRIBBLE :rolleyes:
Of course they don't count because their name is not JJ and are safe from the ridiculous hate.
Well, duh.
Next thing you know they'll be saying that Sir Patrick Stewart is British, Worf is a Klingon, the Scimitar is overpowered, and Benedict Cumberbatch is a brilliant actor. :cool:
Actually he has admitted to not being a fan lol. The thing with JJ is how he bashes fans on the head with how much he is not a fan by getting the lore wrong. I still enjoy the films but warp cores don't look like that, there are only unnamed alien species save for Romulans Vulcans and Klingons and all the pocket protector wearing fanboys with enterprise technical manuals hate all the innacuracies with the ships. He has purposely rubbed it in your face that he is not a Trek fan and since his films are a reboot of sorts he can get away with it. He will need to stick to the lore with Star wars or fail miserably.Personally I dont see things going well most of the characters are dead. Is it just gonna be Ghostbusters in space?
Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
And despite not being a fan, the new films have brought in millions of new fans and revived the franchise again.
They're names just not remembered as easily as JJ's. I hate the director of "Nemesis" just as much and for the same reasons.
And look what he did as a director. "The Final Frontier".
Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
Never forgive him for what? Breathing new life into a dead franchise?
Because that's exactly what J.J. Abrams did, no matter how much it causes geeks to go into a frothing rage.
I personally loved the 2009 "reboot", although I'm kinda "meh" in regards to "Into Darkness".
I'll also admit i wasn't the greatest fan of the original series, Parts of it were fantastic, but i found there were sporadic episodes which i intensely disliked , which kinda soured the series as a whole for me , And lets not get started on the Original movies.....
Surprisingly Shatner isn't actually a terrible writer. Just a bad director.
NOOOOO, That movie must not be named!
But... I like Final Frontier...
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Gene Rodenberry wasn't a Star Trek fan when he started working on the show either... there wasn't any Star Trek yet to be a fan of!
What movie?
ST5 has a special spot on my Shelf Of Shame. Next to Highlander 2. And the Twilight movies I was given as gag gifts. And 'Sharktopus", which was just pathetic.
But the weird (and possibly only good) part about the revamp is that the Old Republic Era and earlier are remaining intact. So KotOR 1 and 2 as well as SWTOR are completely in the clear as well as the origins of the Jedi and Sith. So, yay I guess? I'm personally glad my SWTOR game is not going to be rebooted, but it's still under EA. So my story is intact but it costs me an arm and a leg to maintain. Which sucks, but at least it's still a good story.
-Leonard Nimoy, RIP
I don't think one could possibly make a good movie if they had to make it consistent with the entire Expanded Universe. Jettisoning it is the way to go.*
*I don't think they need to be removed from publication or anything, but the movies should be able to freely contradict them. Just like officially-licensed, non-canon Star Trek stuff.
My character Tsin'xing
Lucas himself threw out a ton of it when he made the prequels.
Same old argument. Doesn't change the fact that JJ is an egomaniac and a TRIBBLE director who can't plot his way out of a box.
The 2009 movie had a nonsensical plot, LENS FLARES, science that was bad even for Star Trek, and bad acting. Into Darkness had better acting, but a worse plot and even crappier science, plus more lens flares.
I could've made a new trek movie that would've been at LEAST as successful as JJ's drek in my SLEEP. It's super easy.
1. Give McCoy more time. Karl Urban is criminally underused.
2. Get a better Kirk. Chris Pine is a brick, and New Kirk is a sexist jerk and a moronic tool. He's downright unfit for command.
3. Make it about Sulu. Seriously, Mr. Sulu is awesome.
4. Better plot. This one's easy. Use the Borg instead of the Romulans; have the Narada get blown up early, but the Borg parts alert the 23rd century Collective. Easy, terrifying, and epic.
In the Prime universe, Khan was defined by his obsession with vengeance over Kirk, though there were elements that showed he cared for his people, but it didn't show up that often.
In the JJ universe, there he cares far more for his 'family' than anything else, even enough to suppress his hatred for 'inferior' beings to do what they say, when they're threatened. That's pretty biased lol, as far as denying the value about arguments that you don't agree with, and overblowing elements that, while certainly vary between people, still aren't as bad as you say imo.
And even if they were, it can't 'ruin' ST forever; people have been claiming that since TNG when the Enterprise-D showed up, and looked what happened. JJ Trek, whatever opinions about him or the movies, DID breathe life back into this franchise, and nothing can diminish that fact imo
And I can't take your 'more lens flares' seriously, because ST:ID toned them down somewhat compared to ST:2009
That is all I wished to say in this thread.
Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
I'm honestly to the point that as soon as I see the phrase "lens flare," I disregard the rest of the post.
It's become such a lazy criticism to make, of something that's purely a stylistic visual choice and has little-to-no bearing on the plot, or acting, or any other important elements of the films.
In short, can we please retire the "lens flare" complaint in favour of something more worthy of criticism?
But yeah, best to disregard it now.
Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
Oh yes, I was agreeing with you. Apologies if that wasn't clear.