ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

JJ Abrams Interview

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 16 2013, 4:36 am

Where he basically admits that he made "Star Trek For Dummies"


He pretty much thinks he "fixed" Star Trek.  When it wasn't broken.


http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-13-2013/j-j--abrams


Sarcasm is my native language.
JJ Abrams is not of the body.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 16 2013, 8:01 am

Dude,


Respectfully, you're turning into a broken record. 48 posts, all on the same general subject. And, you're not even out here for debate and exchange of ideas. You're just out here to continue throwing gas on a small insignificant fire.


We had a very good discussion going on about "was it broken" (to your attempted point above) in the "Zealous Fanboys" thread. You challenged me to prove my positon that Star Trek was indeed BROKEN (without question...regardless of your own personal feelings about it). I provided tons of facts and numbers showing exactly that. And then, rather conveniently, you simply disappeared from the conversation. "Oh, no...! Don't want to have a discussion where I might be proven wrong"


So, enough already. If you're not going to be big enough to admit that things are headed full-steam and successfully in a direction you personally don't like, but that it is simply your OWN OPINION fueling your displeasure...there's really nothing anyone can talk with you about. Be secure in your feelings enough to be at peace with reality. Stop banging your head against a nutronium wall. These movies represent the new evolution of the franchise. Everything (organisms, businesses, entertainment franchises) evolves to suit its new environment or it dies. That's it. You need to get your head wrapped around it and move on.


You as an individual have different tastes and desires than what is being catered to. I hate to break it to you, but:


1. You're in the vast minority, so "thanks for your input" but nothing is changing


2. Welcome to real life. It happens.


It's nothing you can control, change, or impact. Tons of people are out enjoying the new movies. And, to be straight with you, your implication that others enjoy them because they were made for "dummies" is the height of personal arrogance. Like somehow you're smarter and more enlightened than most people because you prefer a different style of entertainment.


Stop being so insecure about the whole thing. Your opinions are totally valid, but stop trying to further validate them by trying to point out that it is "fact" that these are horrible movies. That's just insecurity talking, because the evidence is overwhelmingly not in your favor there.  It's OVER. It's been over for a long time. The tide isn't going to turn. It's never going back.


 

Somniac

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 462

Report this May. 16 2013, 8:25 am

You could do with taking your own advice. 


I can't believe you actually counted his posts! Sheesh.

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 16 2013, 8:36 am

Vger23, Do you feel the need to cut off someone's feet to make yourself feel taller? Or dismiss someone else's feelings because they're "the minority".  Hmm, well then if I'm a broken record, don't read my posts. Especially my newest one in regard to one fans point of view.  I don't recall breaking into your house, grabbing your face and forcing you to click.


And you've really not proven anything with "facts".  If I drop out of a conversation it's because I'm elsewhere doing other things.  And again, you make me laugh by auditing the number of my posts when you have over 6700.  Nerd vs Nerd? "I'm a cooler nerd than you!"  Is that it??


Don't tell me to be quiet because we have a very different opinion.  Targeting me personally has nothing to do with the movie, the debate or Star Trek and shame on you for doing so!


Sarcasm is my native language.
JJ Abrams is not of the body.

darmokattanagra

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 386

Report this May. 16 2013, 9:20 am

And, to be straight with you, your implication that others enjoy them because they were made for "dummies" is the height of personal arrogance.

No, claiming this was "the only way to go" and trying to shut down any criticism of this "new" direction is what is arrogant.

And please stop feigning insult everytime someone says these movies were made for "dumb" or "stupid" people. You've said yourself several times that the whole idea of this reboot was to "make Trek more appealing to general audiences." There's absolutely no way to acheive that without "dumbing it down" for the lowest common denominator.

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 16 2013, 11:06 am

Thank you darmokattanagra.  I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a certain level of intellectual material from Star Trek, to be very disappointed when it doesn't reach that expectation and reject it. 


Not everything needs to be cerebral entertainment.  I  don't go into the latest Arnold Schwarzenegger film expecting high art. I wholly enjoy action films where things blow up and there's romance and chase scenes.  But I expect more from Star Trek.  I enjoy McDonald's and I enjoy fine dining at steak houses.  But if I go into Peter Lugers I do not expect or want a Big Mac. If I want a Big Mac I will go to the place that sells them.


 


Sarcasm is my native language.
JJ Abrams is not of the body.

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this May. 16 2013, 12:00 pm

I haven't seen Into Darkness yet, so I will just weigh in with what I feel about Trek 09.


First of all, Abrams openly admits making it for "fans of movies" and not "just Trek fans." This is not to be insulting or condescending towards Trek fans, though I can see how people can take it that way. This, to me, is like comic books. Comic books have this huge following and mythology that quite honestly I cannot get in to-there is just too much there and the back story has back story flowing from the back story...  I can't keep up.


Star Trek is that way. There is so much back story that the average person, average movie goer, can't get in to it. My wife is a prime example. She enjoys some science fiction, but she can't get in to Star Trek. This is unlike myself who grew up watching recorded episodes on VHS and reading Bjo Trimble's Star Trek Concordance.


I think that Trek 09 is wonderfully layered. There is action and fast pace and young actors and the like that people who go to movies to see that can enjoy. I can see that being called "dumbing down" because Trek was not always about the effects (TMP being a notable exception) and so the effects assist non-fans to get in to the film.


But, the part that I have a difficult time with is the idea that if it has the above explosions and action that it is for the low brow masses or not for the more cultured fan. I get that Trek has a bar that has been created over the years, but lest we forget the origin that it was billed as a "western in space" and "action with social commentary" by its creator.


So the action doesn't bother me. But, as I have argued in many threads, I believe that there are several themes in these movies that are more commentary than people realized. Part of that feeling comes from me feeling like Trek 09 gets treated as an action flick, therefor we do not think about.


Roddenberry often talked about humanity reaching its potential, for want of better terms. In TNG humans are shown pursing a philosophy of self-enlightening that transcends possessions. Ok, that's fine. But, what we see in Trek 09 is Kirk not reaching that potential. He isn't striving to be better, to due his best or to even be anything. He just drinks, gets in fights, lather, rinse, repeat. Pike calls him a "genius level repeat offender," so clearly Kirk basically goes through life not caring about anything or anyone. Pike challenges him to do better.


That to me is a great theme in the movie-the challenge to be better. We look at TOS and we see the idealized future, the Captain Kirk who is a veteran and learns from his mistakes. What Abrams shows us is a man who is flawed, and needed some to challenge him to become better. We don't get the finished product-we get the raw material and in that process are challenged to become better.


Again, that's my personal take, and no doubt some will argue my points. That's fine and I will no begrudge fans for their feelings.  I have feel this movie gets sold short becomes it gets billed as an action piece and pigeonholed as such

KelisThePoet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 636

Report this May. 16 2013, 1:07 pm

1)  Making a movie for "general audiences" is not synonomous with "dumbing it down."  Generally, audiences are not dumb.  They just hold certain kinds of knowledge in common as a group while possessing different kinds of specialized knowledge as individuals.  I'm not smarter than you because I know more about John Milton's poetry, I just study it for a living.  I'm not smarter than you because I know more about the Minnesota Vikings, I'm just a fan of that team.  And we (Trek fans) are not smarter than the other people generally found in a theater audience.  We just watch more Trek.


2)  Everyone who ever worked on Star Trek has claimed to aim for general audiences and wider audiences (whether they all made good on that claim or not).  Nicholas Meyer claimed it with The Wrath of Khan.  Rick Berman claimed it with The Next Generation.  Harve Bennet and Leonard Nimoy claimed it with Star Trek IV.  Brannon Braga claimed it with First Contact.  If anyone in the entertainment business claimed not to be interested in drawing wide audiences and new audiences, they would be fired, rightfully so.


3)  Most self-proclaimed intellectual entertainment is dull, self-important garbage full of condescending establishment of the obvious and glaring pseudo-intellectual errors . . . in my own personal opinion, based on my own entertainment tastes, of course.  What I'm trying to say and probably should say in more diplomatic and nuanced terms is that the question of what counts as intellectual or smart or thought-provoking entertainment is an open one.  Personally, I think Star Trek (2009) is a smart, sophisticated response to or revision of "Journey to Babel."  And personally, I think Star Trek Into Darkness defends and explores the central Star Trek vision and philosophy more bravely and thoughtfully than anything I've seen from this franchise in a while.


Falor was a prosperous merchant who went on a journey to gain greater awareness: Through storms he crossed the Voroth Sea/ To reach the clouded shores of Raal/ Where old T’Para offered truth./ He traveled through the windswept hills/ And crossed the barren Fire Plains/ To find the silent monks of Kir./ Still unfulfilled, he journeyed home/ Told stories of the lessons learned/ And gained true wisdom by the giving. – Falor’s Journey, “Innocence”

wissa

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4023

Report this May. 16 2013, 3:16 pm

Before star trek '09, almost Star Trek movies were crap.  There is only one or two of them I can even recall the plot of and I've seen all of them more than once.  I couldn't even be bothered to see any of the tng era films in a theatre.  Star Trek has always been better on the small screen.  And that is where the social commentary and character development really shines.  There is only one reason to put it on the big screen and that is to have big action and big budget special effects that aren't possible on the small screen.   Having said that they did do a great deal of character growth and commentary in star trek '09.  Sometimes I wonder if people are watching the same movie as me 


We welcome st.com refugees! click on the image

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 16 2013, 3:55 pm

I disagree on the movies. I think most of the TOS movies were very good.  TMP and TFF were the weakest, but even they have good parts. After reading Shatners book, I see why TFF was not what he wanted it to be.  Generations and First Contact were good, not great, but good. Insurrection was very poor, I'll grant that that. Nemesis had the potential to be very, very good but missed. I personally think they churned out TNG movies too soon after the series. They literally went to work shooting Generations about a week or so after "All Good Things" wrapped.  It was too much of an assembly line.  They should have waited a few years and let the series breathe.


Star Trek does do better on the small screen, which is why I doubt Abrams ability to nurture a fully fleshed out series.  


(Now see, you said something I like is crap and I didn't call you names or take it personally, now did I?)

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 16 2013, 5:38 pm

Quote: bunkey @ May. 16 2013, 8:36 am

>

>Vger23, Do you feel the need to cut off someone's feet to make yourself feel taller? Or dismiss someone else's feelings because they're "the minority".  Hmm, well then if I'm a broken record, don't read my posts. Especially my newest one in regard to one fans point of view.  I don't recall breaking into your house, grabbing your face and forcing you to click.

>And you've really not proven anything with "facts".  If I drop out of a conversation it's because I'm elsewhere doing other things.  And again, you make me laugh by auditing the number of my posts when you have over 6700.  Nerd vs Nerd? "I'm a cooler nerd than you!"  Is that it??

>Don't tell me to be quiet because we have a very different opinion.  Targeting me personally has nothing to do with the movie, the debate or Star Trek and shame on you for doing so!

>


This is a typical reaction when someone gets called out for being overly obsessive-negative. It becomes "turn the tables" time, right. It's the old game of "I know you are but what am I!!??" Right!


1. I was neither dismissive nor did I insinuate EVER that because you are in the minority that you are not valid. I'm starting to question your reading comprehension skills. How many times have I said that your OPINION is just as valid and reasonable as anyone else's. It's simply your way of trying to deal with your angst that I object to. Stating *as fact* that Star Trek is "wrong" now and all that other stuff is NOT how to get it done sir. Deal with your opinion, express it, but stop trying to rationalize it by making it all about how everyone else is wrong and only you know what "real Star Trek" should be all about. I must have said this 6 or 7 times now. You keep missing it, my guess is purposefully. 


2. So, ummm I didn't provide any "facts" huh? Interesting take on the discussion (and this actually WAS an opportunity for a good debate, unlike most of your posts which are just single-minded). You claimed that Star Trek never needed "fixing." I said that it did, becuase it was basically in decline since TNG went off the air. You essentiall called me a liar and challenged me to prove it. I went out and found ratings information that showed what most people already know...that Star Trek's popularity on televison and in the theaters declined SIGNIFICANTLY and steadily post TNG. And then you just disappeared. Because....I guess it's no fun when you get proven wrong. I appreciate that you'd like to defend yourself by saying you are "elsewhere doing other things"...but you certainly had time to post numerous times since that exchange on why JJ Abrams is awful and the new Star Trek movies are idiotic. So...what gives on that one? In fact- I now remember that I asked you ANOTHER question during a lively discussion that you never answered. You said something like "you know...if they had made the exact same movie with a few minor tweaks and set it in the 25th century with a different set of characters, I would have liked it" and I threw the WTF flag on that one too...because that makes NO SENSE. But, conveniently...you must have been busy with other things when I wrote that.


3. I'm quite certain you'd beat me in a nerd-off. I don't lose all sense of stability because a movie or two don't match up to my particular tastes. Your post count is right under your freaking avatar. It doesn't take long to look at and determine how many posts you've made. And, I didn't audit their content. I simply took a guess that basically every single thing you've written out here has been aimed at the idea that you don't like the new Star Trek movies. I think, at the time I called it out, that was a pretty accurate statement. 


Its not personal. I assure you. I'm sorry if you take it that way. But, if you're going to continue posting rabidly like a man with a cause, I'm going to continue to challenge you. I'm not going to "ignore your posts" because I LIKE them. I LIKE engaging you. I LIKE trying to challenge your approach and your need to rationalize. It's what the interwebs are all about, my man!!


 


 


 


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 16 2013, 5:43 pm

Quote: darmokattanagra @ May. 16 2013, 9:20 am

>

>And, to be straight with you, your implication that others enjoy them because they were made for "dummies" is the height of personal arrogance.

No, claiming this was "the only way to go" and trying to shut down any criticism of this "new" direction is what is arrogant.

And please stop feigning insult everytime someone says these movies were made for "dumb" or "stupid" people. You've said yourself several times that the whole idea of this reboot was to "make Trek more appealing to general audiences." There's absolutely no way to acheive that without "dumbing it down" for the lowest common denominator.

>


 


1. I'm simply challenging the criticism with strong arguments. That's not arrogant.


2. This argument makes no sense. In fact, it's really just further proving what I've said. Saying that "general audiences" are the lowest common denominator is arrogant. It IS insulting. I don't feel offended becuase of the insult to the "general audiences" though...I am actually just offended by the outright insecurity it must take to fuel an attitude like this, and the fact that it comes from a fellow Star Trek fan.  


"I don't like it because I'm smart. I prefer smart entertainment. But most of the other people are 


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 16 2013, 6:43 pm

VGer, I'm quite done with your passive aggressive methods. It has nothing to do with the Star Trek debates. It's your continued personal jabs boring and stale and not in the spirit of Star Trek debates.  So you can assume that you "won" in your mind. 


For someone who doesn't audit posts, you sure refer back to them often. You must have them bookmarked. You monitor my replies and if I don't reply to something you assume I have no valid response? Because I couldn't possibly be doing something else.  Besides, I frequently get distracted by lol cats and porn, though not at the same time.  


 And I'm not "my man". You may refer to me as "M'Lady" if you like, though.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: 22123magic

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum