JJ Abrams Directing Star Wars - Episode VII

toddthatcher

Just curious to hear any thoughts on the JJ Abrams announcement today. I think it's a pretty darn inspired choice and further thoughts are below. Surprised it's him after earlier denials.

http://toddmthatcher.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/star-wars-director-announced-the-force-is-with-j-j-abrams/

Barry Nelson

Script, script, script, if the script is good, Abrahams can tell the story cinematically, script blows, no one can help.

ChromeJob

Oh. God. NO.

I haven't seen an Abrams film I've really liked. I think he's 90% flash, and 10% talent ... and that's being generous. SUPER 8 had some nice character bits with the boy and girl, ruined by some crazy, preposterous, incomprehensible crap.

Mr Martini

We also have a Star Wars Episode 7 thread here:


http://ajb007.co.uk/topic/39475/star-wars-episode-7-officially-confirmed-for-production/page/2/

welshboy78

Suprised also since denials. Enjoyed Star Trek so hopefully he pulls it off

Mr Beech

I think Star Trek (2009) was very charming and better than most of the other reboots of the post-Nolan Batman and Casino Royale universe. Certainly beats the new Spider-Man, Hulk, etc. for me.

That is precisely why I find this choice strange. Star Trek is a similar, rival series of Star Wars and it is still expected to continue releasing after this year's new entry. With this news, my guess is Abrams has decided not to direct the likely third Star Trek film after Into Darkness. Otherwise, there might be some issues with him being at the helm of and most famous for two competing series. Unless Lucasfilm has just decided they don't mind what film franchise he's famous for, so long as he handles theirs right.

James Suzuki

He must feel quite chuffed, If I was given the role to direct Bond 24 I would be more then chuffed.

Thunderbird 2

I agree with Chrome Job, except the film I have seen was Trek 11. After 4 and a half series and 10 films, this was "Trek Lite" crap. No substance.

Its too easy to compare STrek and Star Wars on the surface, but they are quite different in many ways. SW has always had a bigger, mythical story to tell. Violence and destruction have been a constant, as Good wages against Evil the core to its narrative. The prequels got the dynamics wrong, bogging down with the whole Annikan angst. Technically Abrams will do a good job with this new film, but I don't have expectation for the content.

welshboy78

A reboot of the prequels would be good

Mr Beech

I don't think Star Trek is a heavy film in its drama and thematic content, but I don't think that makes for a poorer film experience or that it was ever conceived to have those things and then somehow failed. It knows it was light, which is why there is only one scene that is emotionally heavy while the rest all aim for that inspirational action spark in each character to get them, and the audience's minds, going.

I really enjoyed it beyond the technical and visual success it obviously holds. There was a story that didn't lose ground, a great sense of humor, fantastic visuals, and was a real pleasure as far as the summer movie goes.

Brilliant, accessible splendor.

ChromeJob

Trek 11 violated so many laws of logic and storytelling skill that it seemed to implode into a black hole. They completely turned the Spock character inside out, making him a Star Fleet "company man" at the Academy instead of the alien outsider that made him so compelling to pay attention to (not to mention giving him a gf, which made me hurl). Kirk was just ballsy and snotty, not passionate or a canny tactician. The Enterprise was cobbled together from two or three different designs. The sets didn't even match, if they had I could forgive the Wal*Mart bar code scanners and Dyson hand driers.

Imagine Casino Royale (2006) with Russell Brand cast as Bond. That's how I feel about Trek 11.

If Abrams does that crap to SW, it'll make the prequels look like Jackson's LOTR.

Thunderbird 2

ChromeJob wrote:

Trek 11 violated so many laws of logic and storytelling skill that it seemed to implode into a black hole. They completely turned the Spock character inside out, making him a Star Fleet "company man" at the Academy instead of the alien outsider that made him so compelling to pay attention to (not to mention giving him a gf, which made me hurl). Kirk was just ballsy and snotty, not passionate or a canny tactician. The Enterprise was cobbled together from two or three different designs. The sets didn't even match, if they had I could forgive the Wal*Mart bar code scanners and Dyson hand driers.

Imagine Casino Royale (2006) with Russell Brand cast as Bond. That's how I feel about Trek 11.

If Abrams does that crap to SW, it'll make the prequels look like Jackson's LOTR.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

Mr Beech

ChromeJob wrote:

Trek 11 violated so many laws of logic and storytelling skill that it seemed to implode into a black hole. They completely turned the Spock character inside out, making him a Star Fleet "company man" at the Academy instead of the alien outsider that made him so compelling to pay attention to (not to mention giving him a gf, which made me hurl). Kirk was just ballsy and snotty, not passionate or a canny tactician. The Enterprise was cobbled together from two or three different designs. The sets didn't even match, if they had I could forgive the Wal*Mart bar code scanners and Dyson hand driers.

Imagine Casino Royale (2006) with Russell Brand cast as Bond. That's how I feel about Trek 11.

If Abrams does that crap to SW, it'll make the prequels look like Jackson's LOTR.

I agree with the consensus that it stayed well within the respectful grounds of a reboot while being among the top notch effects, action, story, and humor people could hope for. I think it earned its awards and viewers, including the first Academy Award for the franchise.

They couldn't have asked for a more successful Star Trek reboot, critically and commercially, than they got.

That of course, leaves the difference opinions and your freedom to not enjoy it, but with the budget it got and the proven talents it had to go through to get on screen, I can't take your first statement seriously.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/

Theundeadkennedy

Mr Beech wrote:

ChromeJob wrote:

Trek 11 violated so many laws of logic and storytelling skill that it seemed to implode into a black hole. They completely turned the Spock character inside out, making him a Star Fleet "company man" at the Academy instead of the alien outsider that made him so compelling to pay attention to (not to mention giving him a gf, which made me hurl). Kirk was just ballsy and snotty, not passionate or a canny tactician. The Enterprise was cobbled together from two or three different designs. The sets didn't even match, if they had I could forgive the Wal*Mart bar code scanners and Dyson hand driers.

Imagine Casino Royale (2006) with Russell Brand cast as Bond. That's how I feel about Trek 11.

If Abrams does that crap to SW, it'll make the prequels look like Jackson's LOTR.

I agree with the consensus that it stayed well within the respectful grounds of a reboot while being among the top notch effects, action, story, and humor people could hope for. I think it earned its awards and viewers, including the first Academy Award for the franchise.

They couldn't have asked for a more successful Star Trek reboot, critically and commercially, than they got.

That of course, leaves the difference opinions and your freedom to not enjoy it, but with the budget it got and the proven talents it had to go through to get on screen, I can't take your first statement seriously.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/

Word