test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Is it good news to you that JJ is leaving Trek?
darthstormstrike
Member Posts: 771 Arc User
Opinions?
I'm sure the lens flares will be seen in SW Episode 7.
I'm sure the lens flares will be seen in SW Episode 7.
___________________
"There is no problem in the universe that can't be solved with a bribe, a paid assassin, or an overpowered fighter." - Chubain from Jumpgate Evolution
"There is no problem in the universe that can't be solved with a bribe, a paid assassin, or an overpowered fighter." - Chubain from Jumpgate Evolution
Post edited by darthstormstrike on
0
Comments
1.Is there a plan for another Star Trek movie?
2. If so, who is the director, and what is the plot, setting,, and timeline.
I like JJ as a director. I watched the behind the scenes documentaries and the passion and innovation he brings is impressive. I think he did a fantastic job and I loved the films and im sad he wont be directing, but there are plenty of decent directors out there.
im sure whoever we get next will get just as much hate for not making a film that perfectly fits everyone's individual view of trek.
Nope, that would be Geko. Not even JJ is that messed up.
And Star Wars... well Lucas ruined that enough with his prequels. I'm actually curious how Jar Jar makes it worst...
Well ID was A LOT better then the first abomination.
Still, no matter if the director has written the script or not, the director is responsible.
Not to defend JJ, because lord knows he doesn't deserve defending after what he's done, but, a director can only shoot the actors with the scripting they're given... When the plot itself has holes (ie the multiple Prime Directive violations on Nibiru, and the 'cold fusion' device) it's not the director's place to correct the (unless the director is also the writer, ala George Lucas with the prequels...) But yes, ID was a vastly superior film, and one I'm hapoy to watch frequently, where Star Trek, if I see that again it'll be too soon...
That said, J.J Abrams has admitted to having been Star Wars fan and not a Star Trek fan (which explains a lot ...), and my view is that they should have found someone who was a Star Trek fan from the start. Trek shouldn't cater to fans of the great light show whose only actual content was naught but Neo-Jungian Achetypalism (I happily admit that Star Wars, or at least the original trilogy, was entertaining, but Star Trek should be more than that). Star Trek is not -- and should not be -- Star Wars; Star Trek is -- and should remain -- entertainment which challenges the viewers to think outside the box, to consider how our society could actualize our highest ideals more properly, to remember that we hold liberty, equality, and justice for all as lofty and worthy goals, and to realize that we have often failed to live up to those ideals, but that we can be better than we are.
JJ was also producer on both films. I admit my knowledge of production roles is sketchy, but doesn't that mean he has the power to say "yea" or "nay" to a script? Assuming I'm correct, that means he signed off on both as "good", when he could have demanded re-writes to address the oft-stated glaring flaws.
I'm not hating on JJ, just making the observation. He created, produced, and often wrote for the TV show Fringe, which I really liked, so I cut him some slack, though I do think he owes it to the fans, who revived Star Trek first, to produce a film that is in line with their ideals, including tight scripts.
Ouch. That burn was so harsh I think you deorbited.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Problem on Abrahams films was: It doesn't challenge the viewers, it punishes for thinking about it.
Thats my biggest problem:
I like to compare the Jar Jar reboot with the James Bond reboot.
Both have, in my opinion, little in common with what the original franchise.
But while the Bond movie might have failed as a Bond movie it was really really great Film as a Film.
I think the Star trek movie was even WORST on its own merits then as a Trek film. Its just bad. All over. Its a stupid movie that pretends to be smart, and it insults the audience by believing it would not be smart enough to see how stupid it is.
As a TREK movie it isn't worst then Generations. That had no plot either. (Just better actors)
Your knowledge is correct.
What the director can or can not do differs. When it comes to cinema, usually a director can reject a script too, especially if his name counts for something.
A James Cameron or s Stephen Spielberg can reject a Script without being producer. And (although it is insulting to mention Abrahams in a line with those 2), he had name already.
Only when they are absolute no-names they don't reject scripts. Mainly because they can't effort not to make the movie and therefor don't get a paycheck.
A producer can always reject a script.
So Jar Jar Abrahams is still fully responsible.
He read the script and said "This is awesome. I make this and put my name under it". Its HIS work of "art".
I'd (somehow) forgotten that, but you're absolutely right... A producer does sign off on script etc, and with Kurzman and Orci also producers, yeah, they were probably too busy high-fiving each other to actually take the time to view their progress objectively (Much like Lucas with the prequels where he gave Rick McCallum the token role of producer, but still kept himself as executive producer, so he was still the one making the final calls
To quote somebody whose name I can't remember:
"If an episode of TOS had dinosaurs in it, it would be hailed as the greatest Star Trek episode of all time."
Anyway ... I liked both of JJ's movies, though I'm looking forward to seeing what the next director comes up with. I don't anticipate a great change in format, though.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
-Thomas Marrone
Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, writers for both of the "JJTrek" films, are avowed Trekkies.
Keeping it in-house isn't always the best idea.
And confirming that, there's also ST5:FF, with Shatner at the helm.
Plus, he was flat-out lazy. I'd rather have James Cameron making overdone Trek-in-name-only epics than JJ at the helm for another.
Came here to say it's neither good news nor bad news, it's OLD news. But Iconians beat me to the punch.
TMP was the death of Star Trek when it barely resembled TOS and was boring as hell.
WoK was the death of Star Trek when they killed off Spock.
TSfS was the death of Star Trek when they blew up the Enterprise.
TVH was the death of Star Trek when they went back in time to rescue whales.
TUDC was the death of Star Trek when... well. Yeah. It was Star Trek V and lets leave it at that.
TFF was the death of Star Trek when they made Klingons peaceful with the Federation.
Generations was the death of Star Trek when they killed off Kirk.
First Contact was the death of Star Trek when they gave the Borg a 'face' even though we all know the Borg have no individuals.
Insurrection was the death of Star Trek when Worf and Data were reduced to comic relief and the movie itself was more of a long episode.
Nemesis was the death of Star Trek when the promised 'Romulan' movie was a rehashed clone and revenge plot.
Star Trek (2009) was the death of Star Trek when it was lens flares and Abrams.
Star Trek (2013) was the death of Star Trek when they whitewashed Khan and turned the movie into a fanboy YouTube video about how awesome WoK was.
I think a few more deaths, and we're eligible for a free zombie Gene Roddenberry.
Actually, I'm just pointing out how Star Trek fans have been crying wolf since 1979 over their beloved franchise dying with each subsequent movie.
That's not trolling, that's hard fact. I was walking out of theatres listening to other people whine and moan about how the movie "ruined" or "killed" Star Trek forever before I ever had internet access.
It's hard to take people who say JJ Abrams "killed" Star Trek sincerely when you listen to that rhetoric for a few decades or so.
At the point that he said he was not a Star Trek fan growing up, I didn't want him doing Sta Trek. He point blank said he was a Star Wars fan, and they are not even close to the same in feel.
I'm happy he's gone from the directors chair, and hope whoever they get for the next one actually has some semblance of a way to make it a Trek again instead of Wars.
This got me thinking, "these new movies are aimed at children and young adults, not older adults." Which is how you market a product to make money (Paramount, i'm looking at you) but that's not how you capture the feeling of Star Trek. I pondered this while washing the dishes and listening to The Undiscovered Country's soundtrack. While playing out the scenes in my head to the music, I thought of how "adult" the plot of that movie is. Comparing that with the plot of Star Wars: A New Hope made me realize the fundamental differences between the franchises, and what makes each one work for their own benefit.
JJ incorporated Star Wars elements of action/adventure into Star Trek, which frankly doesn't work. Not saying that Star Trek can't have action, but the action can't just be to dazzle the audience, it has to prove a point, to have a meaning...something an adult would understand but a child wouldn't notice. DS9 played with this and handled it well, the question of "how can a utopian society deal with a war but still hold on to their principles."
JJ's movies don't touch on that (even though some attempt was kind of made in Into Darkness) and just come off as "dazzling the audience." They dumbed down Star Trek and made it for young people, and in this new distracted generation, you simply have to "dazzle" them or they'll move onto something else in 5 minutes.
So to wrap it up, I'm glad JJ has moved on to Star Wars (he's better suited for that) and i'm looking forward in seeing where our beloved franchise will go next. Preferably TV, where it truly belongs.