
post
Which quite possibly kicked the idiot bandwagon in Hollywood/StreamingLand of hiring people who do not like the IP into overgear. "It made money one time, so we should do it forever" - High Level Business Executive Thinking. So many promising projects ruined.
David Lynch didn't read Dune until his movie version of the novel was already in production.
That doesn't seem possible at face value given that he was also the writer and the majority of the film is faithful to the book, sometimes word for word. Also, [searching] https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/pc5g58/jodorowsky_and_lynch_both_read_dune/
J. J. Abrams is a hack and I hate that he keeps getting work
Eh, he’s done some decent work he just isn’t always the right fit for the properties he’s given.
Sorry I can't read your comment. The 20 lens flares he put on screen still have me blinded
Edit: to be clear. I don't think his movies are bad per say. They're just painfully mediocre.
What director is that supposed to represent? JJ flares are horizontal, sometimes have multiple occurrences in a single frame, and often are accompanied by a briefly blown out image in case the viewer doesn't notice the insane distraction.
The JJ lens flare then made it into DISCO although I think they toned it down a bit for SNW. I checked out of SFA after 3 episodes so I don't know if they continued to be flare happy there.
For better and worse, Discovery took a lot of cues from the Abrams films, being more action focused, with flashier effects and cinematography, for example.
It got toned down as time went on, but there were parts here and there in Discovery where you can tell they were trying to replicate the films.
Yeah, the Disco premiere was very action-oriented, very JJ coded. I was like, ok, they're trying to draw in viewers with a flashy beginning, but hopefully they'll start being a proper Star Trek show soon. Oh, well. Happily, some people liked the show, but it wasn't my cup of tea.
DISCO? SNW? SFA? I guess with concerted effort I can use context clues to figure it out but like, how often are you typing these things?
We're in a Star Trek community. I think most people are going to understand those without an issue.
Most /= all but thanks for sharing
Not all people speak English. What's your point?
Wouldn’t that exact point lend itself to the idea that spelling out obscure acronyms would be beneficial for people passingly curious to the conversation? Or is this some s-tier wagyu elite topic gatekeeping that must separate itself? I don’t think that’s very Federation of you, bud.
Yeah it took me a second. And, i don’t like / haven’t seen those.
My engine room is cardboard and red light bulbs.
He's always the wrong choice for anything that calls for the bare minimum planning and substance, but that's what they keep giving him. He has good instincts for cinematography but shouldn't be trusted with anything that requires an actual plot.
Now I kinda want to see him make an Avatar movie.
(Blue skinned aliens, not ATLA. Although his ATLA would probably be better than what we got.)
You can be a hack and still do great work, look at Ridley Scott.
what is this decent work you speak of? did he make a never published short or something?
Like Chris Nolan. Has his name attached to a couple good things and now he's treated like King Midas
At the time, liked it out of pure desperation for good sci-fi to exist again. As a whole, just a mediocre money-grab with the classic attempt to "appease all audiences" while abandoning the franchise with a parallel universe loophole.
He was right. My GF never liked Star Trek but went "holy fuck!" to the opening of the 2009 movie.
"We don't like or know the IP and we wrote a script until everyone liked it instead of saying anything because I don't like philosophy."
We, the communities, need to start buying IPs of the shit we like before it becomes a target for the mainstream to steal and destroy.
It's the circle of life and happens with everything.
Either your favorite thing stays niche and withers slowly, never achieving it's full potential; or becomes successful and becomes an increasingly derivative cash cow for whatever production company throws the most money at it.
Thankfully there are exceptions.
Mainstream success is not potential fulfillment, it's cultural appropriation and butchery. Subcultures can and do very comfortably thrive for decades, gratifying their communities, without the need for the attention of the majority.
Ok, hear me out: First, fuck IP. Second, AI is pretty lackluster atm, but a lot of people are experimenting. It can reach an amazing high visual fidelity and FX already, and lackluster things like acting and errors or fight scenes could improve in the coming years.
It could be cool to see sort of like "councils" for various franchises pop up and approve / produce different AI fan projects and crowd sourced directors that tell or retell the story of our franchises.
Like imagine a dozen different fan writers and directors creating different seasons 8, 9 and 10 of game of thrones. Much will be shit, but as technology advances it might be possible to even merge or "remix" the scripts of different productions together to come to an "ultimate edition".
Similar to how Hamlet or other classic theater stories are remixed.
Counterpoint Tony Gilroy who doesn't like star wars made the best Star wars. So I can't fully endorse this POV
FWIW, Star Trek isn't the only sci-fi franchise he manages to drive against the wall.
The other big one is known more for action than philosophical discussion. You'd think he'd have been a better fit!
People are taking this interview out of context.
He said, as a kid, he never liked Star Trek. But as an adult, after rewatching TOS to prepare for the 2009 film, he grew to appreciate Star Trek.
But as an adult, after rewatching TOS to prepare for the 2009 film, he grew to appreciate Star Trek.
Right, so he should not have been hired to do the job. He didn't rewatch it until money, and he likes money. He liked it because of money.
I don't think it's inherently bad for Abrams himself to not have seen the show until asked to do it, but there's absolutely a good question of why the people that commissioned Abrams chose him, when he had no familiarity with Star Trek beforehand.
There is a weird thing that i think was hinted upon in a ds9 interview that for some reason “they” do not like to have star trek fans working on the set and those that where where supposed to act low profile about it.
I can kinda see how it can be both distracting to get work done and irritating or to have crew argue canon all the time (Henry Cavill in the wincher)
But i also can’t not see how political this might all be.
the wincher
Henry Cavill plays a tow truck driver who repossesses the realms most powerful monsters cars.
I'd watch that.
I think arguing canon on set is one thing, I think enjoying the work and understanding it from the start is another.
He wasn't into Star Trek, he said he was after being paid to be into it. Thats it - and honestly I don't believe he liked it in his rewatch either - and that is the issue. He wasn't interested in making a Star Trek movie. He got brought on because "BIG NAME MEAN BIG $$$" and not because it would be good for Star Trek. imo of course.
he grew to appreciate the money he was going to make from Star Trek.
Fixed.
Indeed. Nicolas Meyer was the same, and most fans seem to love his contributions to the franchise. Being a newcomer isn’t a bad thing. Sometimes a fresh perspective can be a great thing.
Not to say I love Abrams’ work, but in the end he did more harm to Star Wars than to Trek, and by all accounts he’s a life long Star Wars fan.
To be fair a fair number of TOS handlers probably didn’t like it either until it grew on them.
Nicholas Meyer had never seen Star Trek before he did Wrath of Khan.
People are just crybabies.
....but he clearly came to understand it, and coaxed great performances from the stars. WoK is one of the best films.
Eeh. Most of the complaints I see in this thread about Trek 2009 would apply as well to TWoK if people were being even handed. It's a pew pew action film. There are no deep philosophical questions being tackled. It's not utopian -- Starfleet is portrayed as a straight forward space navy that works with real scientists only begrudgingly.
There's kick ass high drama and a decent character study of an ageing Kirk, but the character work on Kirk and Spock in 2009 wasn't all that bad, either.
I actually think 2009 is pretty good for a scifi action movie, and the cast is phenomenal. Chris Pine especially kills it as Kirk. The script is a little stupid, but so is First Contact. I'd still say WoK is better though, but they both saved the franchise in a way.
It's the one with Khan I really don't like, and Beyond is just forgettable. And that script was only saved by Simon Pegg, who pretty much just said FINE, ILL DO IT MYSELF GODDAMN.
He wrote a two part blog about how he was recruited to direct and working with Ricardo. He did his research and found his "in" for the movie which Rodenburry approved of which iirc was Hornblower in space.
kinda doesn't count, he accepted the job, and was given the job, despite not liking the source material,
him doing basic research later and changing his mind is irrelevant.
Why accept a job making media you don't care about. besides the money
Because its his job.
With art it is a bit more complex than that. Think of a photographer. Many people love photography, not all people love wedding photography, for example. It is not a great idea to have someone who loathes wedding photography as the photographer at your wedding. But, there's no shortage of photographers who don't like weddings working it because it is the most predictable and lucrative income source for a professional photographer. The results will depend on the level of professionalism of the party involved, sure they are doing it for money. But it is not hard to imagine that a photographer who actively enjoys the subject matter will turn out a more satisfying result than someone who, however professional, is only going through the motions. This is how many a couple end up with boring cookie cutter photos of the most important ceremony of their romantic relationship and quickly end up burying it in a basement or closet somewhere, never to be seen again.
First, you're assuming you have to love the story or the universe to make a good movie set in that universe.
Second, if you could get paid several tens of millions of dollars to make a movie I'm pretty sure you would, and you'd probably do a hell of a good job catching yourself up.
I'm not sure why you'd say it "doesn't count".
I also assuming that there are countless talented people who love the source material, and better to give them a chance than giving it to someone who just makes content.
I am not going with "hire fans" bullshit, just that there are so many actual directors in the industry who already have a passion for it, so it is just a marketing choice to hire someone for the name.
Art is art, not content, when it is turned to content we get slop like those movies.
i mean, i'm a musician. there's music i love and music i hate. from my perspective, about a quarter of the music i make, i don't really like that much. but you know, i get to make music with people i love, and that is the real point from my perspective. and in my region, there are maybe three or four musicians who can match me technically and none who can match the mental work i put into it. so like, they want me to play even if i dislike the music. and i want to play even if i dislike the music, because i'm still making art.
does hearing the mental process from another field about similar decisions help explain it?
Are you saying he's not an actual director? What makes someone an "actual director"?
Why do you think it was a marketing choice to pick him? He wasn't exactly a major director at the time. He was far from unknown but he didn't have a lot of movies.
Which Star Trek to you is art and not content? I assume you mean made as a passion and not for commercial purposes?
I feel like that's just ignorant of how movies are actually made.
Is it content because it's popular and you don't like it?
Meant directors who actually like the subject.
The Abraham Star Trek movies were just forgettable. he tried to turn star trek into star wars. They are content made in meeting rooms by executives, not really creative decisions or story telling.
To a lesser degree that happens to every major movie,
You had a director who actually liked the subject. It's right there in the interview. Wasn't a fan as a child, liked it as an adult.
It sounds like you didn't like the movie, so you're saying it was because the director lacked something or the writers lacked something relating to "art", instead of just saying you didn't like the movie.
All but the most niche movies are about making money. That's what they are. People can make good movies, but they're all still fundamentally about money. The entire star trek franchise exists to make money.
The early movies were made as a cash grab to chase after Star wars money. You've got the movie director saying the series is boring and being selected because he can make it for cheaper.
It's fine to not like the movie, but acting like the movie can't be good because those making it have financial incentives? C'mon.
In the text here yes he does say as a kid he didn’t like it. He also describes later how he was in a mix of people, some writers who loved it, one who never saw it, and him, who “was not a fan.”
That’s at the time they were making the movie. The “as a kid” part was just a lame ass excuse for an opinion he seemed to know on some level shouldn’t be uttered without one.
So yeah, no. He said he didn’t like Star Trek, AND moreover that he thinks that was an important opinion to have in the room while making a Star Trek movie!!!!
Fuck this guy!!!!!!!!
The problem with the Kelvin movies is they are all pale imitations of Wrath of Khan. Dude has a problem with Starfleat. Dude enacts revenge. Wrath was a shiny red button you press once. They've pressed it four times now and each iteration keeps on getting shittier. As much as I love Star Trek, it's time to take it off life support. At this point it's more Weekend at Bernie's than Let That Be Your Last Battlefield.
Jonathan Frakes never watched Star Trek as a kid either. He preferred Bonanza.
He wasn't directing the show.
He directed 8 episodes of TNG, as well as First Contact and Insurrection and some of the newer stuff too, in fact he said that when they brought Riker back for Picard, he was terrified of screwing up, because he hadn't acted for years, and had only been directing.
He's directed something like 30+ episodes throughout the franchise. Most recently an episode of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy this year. He's contributed a lot to Trek,
Obviously his most important contribution to modern cinema is his voice work as lead protagonist Goliath in Disneys Gargoyles, but the Trek stuff is ok too.
Obviously his most important contribution to modern cinema is his voice work as lead protagonist Goliath in Disneys Gargoyles, but the Trek stuff is ok too.
respectfully disagreed. also have you ever seen a really big dog?
We all agree his work on Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction was a great contribution to society, but I disagree with your disagreement.
Actually I just mentioned it as related trivia, not to to make an argument for or against anything - although this is always the default assumption - you can take people out of reddit but you can't take reddit out of them lol.
It's difficult to have that conversation without making assumptions about... Things.
But for what it's worth, ST is still somewhat popcorn in its subject matter.
i have been enjoying SNW. it was a good jumping off point for the larger universe. we finished a season and my wife asked to watch TNG, with the sole prompting of "what do you want to watch next", so on that basis alone it is a good show
It's certainly many times better than Discovery.
I'm assuming you're a Trekkie and your wife is the newbie in this situation?
Picking the entry point of a franchise is a huge consideration undertaking. Lots of possibilities.
🌽 Cornrect🌽 . The best type of correct. We're both in our 40s and her family is a star wars family. I'm a "scifi is cool" person, during the console wars I thought both Sonic and Mario were cool, yknow?

top 100 comments