J.J. Abrams To Direct "Star Wars Episode VII"

[ChrisIII]

Funny thing is one of the main criticisms of the TNG films is that they had tried to make Captain Picard too much of an action hero. He was always kind of the philosopher/diplomat/historian type, while Riker was more the man of action. That kind of got flipped in those movies, you had Riker commanding most of the time while Picard was going off-road driving or shooting Borg in a holodeck.

[SephirothDZX]

Funny thing is one of the main criticisms of the TNG films is that they had tried to make Captain Picard too much of an action hero. He was always kind of the philosopher/diplomat/historian type, while Riker was more the man of action. That kind of got flipped in those movies, you had Riker commanding most of the time while Picard was going off-road driving or shooting Borg in a holodeck.

Yeah. I swear the TNG movies were written by Mirror Universe TNG writers who come from a universe where TNG actually sucked.

[jesse_custer]

You're very selectively forgetting parts of the movie. Pike and Spock Prime both have discussions with Kirk about the type of man Kirk can become. Spock has a few conversations of a similar topic with Spock's mom, his father, and Spock Prime at the end of the movie. Nero also had the quirp about how James T Kirk was a great man, but that was a different life, which would also fall into the over all theme of the movie. The difference between the Abrams movie and the other Trek movies is that Abrams has the common sense to end the scene before it drags on for way too long, which was a big part of why the Trek movies fell out of popularity in the first place.

And those examples I just gave were easily more effective than anything the TNG movies ever accomplished.

To be honest, I don't think most people saw that "message" about Kirk, and if they did, I don't think most of them cared. Plus, that "message" is so character-specific that it's really not a message at all. It's just fodder.

Why would people care about Kirk more now than they did in the past? Answer: people respond to "cool" and "hip" characters with "origins," and that's what the new Star Trek gave them.

[SephirothDZX]

To be honest, I don't think most people saw that "message" about Kirk, and if they did, I don't think most of them cared. Why would they care about Kirk more now than they did in the past? People will, however, respond to "cool" and "hip" characters with "origins," and that's what the new Star Trek gave them. Plus, that "message" is so character-specific that it's really not a message at all. It's just fodder.

In the way its applied to the movie was very Kirk/Spock specific, but if you break away the character specific points it is very applicable to others.

Regardless, Abram's Trek movie was a substantially more entertaining movie than any of the other Trek films besides Star Trek's 2 and 6. As much as I love Star Trek, I'm also understanding enough to understand that most of the Trek movies also sucked balls and a change was desperately needed.

[Mat001]

Trek in general has always been about philosophical discussions, while exploring strange new worlds and having some fighting. Each of the first ten films retained that in some form or fashion. "The Undiscovered Country" and "First Contact" were the only films to not feature interstellar exploration as part of the story. The first film was about the question of existence and what lies beyond. The second film was more than getting old and dying. It was about not letting others tell you want you can and cannot do, when you grow old. Kirk believed that he had to be an Admiral, stuck behind a desk because he was fifteen years older now, since all other Admirals and Commodores did that. When it came to death, it was Kirk feeling the weight of death very heavily since he had managed to cheat it for years. The third film was about making sacrifices for friendship, as well as the moral question regarding playing God, which went back to the second film. The fourth film was about the whales, but it was a profound message to make about the consequences of the actions of today. The fifth film was about faith and how it can be corrupted. The sixth film wasn't so much about racism as it was about change. The fear of change which went back to "Errand Of Mercy". The seventh film was about mortality and feeling as if you have something left to do. To have a legacy. The eighth film was about aspiring to greatness and overcoming anger. The ninth film was about appreciating life and the little moments. The tenth film was about choice. Whether you choose to let your inner nature dictate the kind of man you want to be.

But even with that, the films still had space exploration. From what I gather with the new film, it's an action film straight up. At least with "Star Wars", Abrams will be right at home with the action.

[Sighphi]

You're very selectively forgetting parts of the movie. Pike and Spock Prime both have discussions with Kirk about the type of man Kirk can become. Spock has a few conversations of a similar topic with Spock's mom, his father, and Spock Prime at the end of the movie. Nero also had the quirp about how James T Kirk was a great man, but that was a different life, which would also fall into the over all theme of the movie. The difference between the Abrams movie and the other Trek movies is that Abrams has the common sense to end the scene before it drags on for way too long, which was a big part of why the Trek movies fell out of popularity in the first place.

And those examples I just gave were easily more effective than anything the TNG movies ever accomplished.

I'm not forgetting anything because those scenes added nothing, they had basically the same dialogue repeated several times. What did Old Spock tell Kirk that Pike hadn't already told him? It was the same thing. All of that was more of a reminder to the audience or at most the writer saying, "we need to add something between the running, and the screaming, and the blowing up!" And they just copy/pasted what was done earlier.

[jesse_custer]

In the way its applied to the movie was very Kirk/Spock specific, but if you break away the character specific points it is very applicable to others.

Regardless, Abram's Trek movie was a substantially more entertaining movie than any of the other Trek films besides Star Trek's 2 and 6. As much as I love Star Trek, I'm also understanding enough to understand that most of the Trek movies also sucked balls and a change was desperately needed.

Perhaps, but we could also underline similar themes in Van Damme movies.

I think your second paragraph explains the intent of the new Star Trek quite well. And I have no problem with the intent once I drop the sci-fi perspective. The problem comes when I consider the new Star Trek as action entertainment; the film doesn't measure up to the good action movies I've seen, whether they have sci-fi clothes on or not.

[jediracer]

"Star Trek Into Darkness" director J.J. Abrams has been confirmed to direct "Star Wars Episode VII" for Disney with a 2015 target release date.

"has been confirmed" .....by everyone except for Lucasfilm and Disney.

Still waiting to hear something official.

[David Walton]

I thought the message was that it's okay to jettison a crewmember onto an ice planet with giant monsters if he questions your authority.

Star Trek Eleven: The Sedition Acts!

[Prodigy X]

I'm not forgetting anything because those scenes added nothing, they had basically the same dialogue repeated several times. What did Old Spock tell Kirk that Pike hadn't already told him? It was the same thing. All of that was more of a reminder to the audience or at most the writer saying, "we need to add something between the running, and the screaming, and the blowing up!" And they just copy/pasted what was done earlier.

Please stop trying to make any of these movies anything other than summer fun. I've never gone into any Star Wars or Star Trek movie looking for some overall them or message. I went to be entertained, not preached to. They are meant to be entertainment and the Abrams reboot was extremely entertaining. There are only three Trek movies that really entertained me. Wrath of Khan, First Contact, and the Trek reboot. The same goes for Star Wars. If you combine all three prequels together, you can get one good movie, and Episode 4 and 5. Other than that, they were all extremely average and really offered very little.

[Sighphi]

Please stop trying to make any of these movies anything other than summer fun. I've never gone into any Star Wars or Star Trek movie looking for some overall them or message. I went to be entertained, not preached to. They are meant to be entertainment and the Abrams reboot was extremely entertaining. There are only three Trek movies that really entertained me. Wrath of Khan, First Contact, and the Trek reboot. The same goes for Star Wars. If you combine all three prequels together, you can get one good movie, and Episode 4 and 5. Other than that, they were all extremely average and really offered very little.

Everyone knows that the Trek movies are lighter than the episodes but what make Trek, Trek was still there. What JJ did was make a stupid action film with Trek costumes and, yes, we do know that the general public likes stupid action films cause..... Transformers..... but that doesn't excuse what was done. And i do say in my first post that the transition between stupid action movie from SW film will be easier because the SW concept isn't that far off.

[Frank]

I didnt say that all Trek movies are serious but they do have some discussion of a certain subject. Discussion meaning that there is some ACTUAL dialogue between the characters after the point of discussion is brought up, this is something known in Trek....people talking.
The JJ one DID NOT have any of that, the JJ one just had Pike wanting Kirk to join and once he joins Kirk just does his Kirky things and really at no point is there any else added to the original discussion. The same goes with Spock; Spock flips out because some one disses him mother then for the rest of the movie he tries to hide that to point where Kirk uses it against him.

The JJ Trek was just a silly action movie from start to end.

Pretty much.

And it's good resume of JJ's career so far. Average filmaker that somehow made a name for himself in genre. And that geek cred allows him to do stuff like being chosen to do Star Wars.

[David Walton]

Abram's film is the only Trek movie my wife will watch, and I enjoy it, too. I think he did a pretty good job with Spock and Kirk's relationship, which was the heart and soul of the movie. So I don't think it's simply 'geek cred.' He reached mainstream audiences that had no interest whatsoever in the original films.

[dupersuper]

Abram's film is the only Trek movie my wife will watch

She's missing so much...

[Prodigy X]

Everyone knows that the Trek movies are lighter than the episodes but what make Trek, Trek was still there. What JJ did was make a stupid action film with Trek costumes and, yes, we do know that the general public likes stupid action films cause..... Transformers..... but that doesn't excuse what was done. And i do say in my first post that the transition between stupid action movie from SW film will be easier because the SW concept isn't that far off.

Wow..what a moronic comment. The fact that you can even remotely compare the quality of the Trek reboot to transformers automatically disqualifies you from making comments.