The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/index.php)
-   Off Topic Discussions (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   J.J Abrams is Star Wars-ing it now as well............ (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12075)

kevin 01-24-2013 01:12 PM

J.J Abrams is Star Wars-ing it now as well............
 
http://m.deadline.com/2013/01/j-j-ab...ie-for-disney/

Oddly, I'm less interested in what it means for future Wars films as I am what it does for future Trek films.

Quark 01-24-2013 01:36 PM

...Not a fan when I heard this news. He has officially put his mark on two of the most popular franchises of all time. Why not make it the next Star Trek movie as well?

NCC-73515 01-24-2013 01:43 PM

"There were the very early conversations and I quickly said that because of my loyalty to Star Trek, and also just being a fan, I wouldn’t even want to be involved in the next version of those things." - JJA, trekmovie.com

samwiseb 01-24-2013 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin (Post 328618)
Oddly, I'm less interested in what it means for future Wars films as I am what it does for future Trek films.

That pretty much hits it right on for me as well.

I am intrigued by the possibility of more SW films, even if mostly out of curiosity (doesn't mean it's not a mistake). But what does it mean for ST. I'm always going to be more curious about that.

horatio 01-24-2013 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCC-73515 (Post 328621)
"There were the very early conversations and I quickly said that because of my loyalty to Star Trek, and also just being a fan, I wouldn’t even want to be involved in the next version of those things." - JJA, trekmovie.com

Liar liar your pants are on fire.
Why am I not surprised that this "I am so committed to Trek" talk was always bullsh*t?

Abrams is a great director but a horrible moviemaker. Its all based on fairly primitive emotional manipulation, e.g. the vague post 9/11 fear stuff in Cloverfield and Star Trek or the fake "the monster is kind" idea of that E.T. copy. From another angle it is just an overplay of mysticism. Gee, I am a sucker for mystery movies but when mystery becomes omnipresent in your workand merges with an anti-enlightenment attitude it becomes reactionary garbage.
Back to Wars, as Abrams will not come along with his usual creative colleagues but just direct a movie which is written and produced by somebody else, as Wars will still be a Lucasfilms product with the emphasis being on Lucas, i.e. even though the master retreats it is dogmatically Lucasian (which reveals my European position, appreciating auteur cinema I favour absolute artistic power in the hands of one guy; Hitchcock was only good because he was dictator on the set), his influence will be limited.
So yeah, no news at all, the guy just directs the movie. You might notice his style via the lensflares or whatever but basically (or rather hopefully) it is just a technical and not a creative matter.

martok2112 01-24-2013 02:14 PM

And here I am waiting on hearing from the more hard core's who'll say:
"Yeah, now JJ is where he belongs because the last Trek movie might as well have been Star Wars Episode VII"

Gee, I'm glad I don't constrain myself to one take or view or dogma on Trek/Wars/Galactica, etc. :)

horatio 01-24-2013 02:21 PM

Given that I am currently more into Wars than Trek and given that unlike Trek Wars is primarily a cinematic genre I'd rather argue the other way around. Contain the damage and keep him in Trek, after three movies he is gone anyway.
Seriously, I don't think that there are (m)any Wars haters here. And if there are, well, we all know how a lightsaber vs. phaser duel ends.

martok2112 01-24-2013 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horatio (Post 328627)
Given that I am currently more into Wars than Trek and given that unlike Trek Wars is primarily a cinematic genre, i.e. more damage could be done by a creative guy you don't appreciate, I'd rather argue the other way around. Contain the damage and keep him in Trek, after three movies he is gone anyway.
Seriously, I don't think that there are m(any) Wars haters here. And if there are, well, we all know how a lightsaber vs. phaser duel ends.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

horatio 01-24-2013 02:28 PM

About dogma, Lucas' basic worldview is a gnostic or Buddhist one whereas mine is a Christian one. Notice that Anakin is a Christological figure who does evil precisely because he loves his wife too much and how this is contrasted with this "balance to the force" crap and the Jedi notion of detachment. Gee, Yoda even once says that you should let go the people you love when they are about to die. Fu*k it, precisely because I love them I would do everything to prevent them from dieing and dieing is never "natural", it is always a catastrophe.

I couldn't have a more opposing view of the world than Lucas but I also want Wars to be as Lucasian as possible. Artistic expression of an individual, a piece of art not being harmed by too many cooks, not softening its rough edges (aka not making it PC) and so on. Of course movies and TV shows are always collaborative enterprises but there has to be if not one leader at least one key main idea, one guideline, one unique artistic expression in it to make it worthwhile to be watched.

omegaman 01-24-2013 04:03 PM

Well there you go… JJ is after all is a "clone" of Spielberg.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.