JJ Abrams: Trek XI NOT a reboot.

LINK

For what it's worth.

This is a man who declares that its fun and exciting to break the rules of canon, redesigns the Enterprise completely and builds it in Iowa, says he's more of a Star Wars fan and says the movie isn't made for Star Trk fans.....yet we are to accept that its not a reboot.


What a total fucking cunt.

He messes with the font and he's gonna have to answer to teh Baba...

Not to Baba, to ME! and he already has changed the font.

Talking with you is OK if he wants to get it right. He messes with teh Baba because we want him to suffer!!

Damn that's cold.

I was never a big fan of the going back story in the first place. I would have much preferred going forward and picking up where current century left off. Plenty of story potential there: Cardassians are in ruins,Dominion are being reformed,Romulans and Federation in a more diplomatic tone,The Borg are still out there....They could have created a new crew for the enterprise and moved forward. But I guess reboots and reamaginings are the wave in Hollywood right now.I'll still go see it, but my expectations will be very low.

I have to agree with you here. It is so obviously a reboot that I don't get why he won't admit it.

I agree with El.
That's what really throws me about this movie.

JJ completely reimagined the entire Trek universe, BUT he doesn't think he reimagined it ? That's not a good sign.

And you know, its not going to play well for some people. People like us who keep up with spoilers are braced for this. We know whats coming.

But think of all those poor saps who don't read the spoilers and BELIEVE JJ's press releases about how it fits into canon. Boy are they in for a shock.

He doesn't admit that it's a reboot because he wants Trek fans to get more angry about it.

a.

Why would he want that?

In order to be able to read and laugh about people complaining about canon violations.

a.

That's the dumbest theory I've ever read.

His goal is not simply making money. He needs to make people suffer. Remember, it's a Star Wars fan we're talking about here.

It's a personal vendetta.

a.

^
If I have to believe the Enterprise was made in an Iowa corn field I guess I can believe that too.

Abrams has been very adamant on this, and I don't think they've done it out of ignorance. Probably any changes they've made are explained by Nero messing with the timeline, or aren't really what we suspect at all.

I have a feeling a lot of people have a lot of things wrong about what they think is actually going on in the trailer and in the scenes we've heard descriptions of.

Actually it's all a result of the temporal cold war!

Actually I think alot of people have alot of things RIGHT about what is going on. And the Trek fans inside everyone of us are going "No, he wouldn't do that, would he? No. It's probably just the trailer."

It's happening people.
It's happening.

Fuck if he wants suffering, he should've just spent a couple of million on a trailer, then for the actual movie have Archer's gazelle speech from ENT looped for 3 hours and a soundtrack of the Alec Empire vs. Elvis Presley album*.

Thats the sort of suffering even the likes of Pol Pot would've baulked at inflicting upon others.


*The albums brilliant. But so very, very, very headfucking.

Well, I see what he is saying here.

It's not a reboot in the sense that he is not intending it to be the start of a new franchise or to take the place of old Trek.

But that's all semantics.

The fact is still that it is not the Trek we grew up with and it was never meant to be.

Plus, he would never have gotten all the canon right anyway. Why bother? Even amongst the original episodes and movies there are numerous canon violations and ret-cons...

And, honestly, no casual moviegoer gives a damn about ships James Kirk served on or how old Chekov is supposed to be.

It won't make one iota of difference to ticket sales. As far as Trek fans, he is guaranteed to piss off some segment of the fanbase no matter what he does...

So why even cater to them?

^As I've mentioned previously, there's something or a correlation between which films the fans liked and their performance at the box office.

Let's face it, peoples way of thinking is if a fan of the bloody thing didn't like, I certainly won't.

I think Trek should be trying to WIN back fans not alienating the few who are left.

My point here is that Abrams doesn't get it. In his mind he's made a completely canon film.

I think you're wrong here. Trek needs a reboot, and RM got it right a few posts up, this is a reboot. The difference between this and BSG is that he is saying he's sticking with the happy future and not going dark.

Just throw out canon and start over, you'll be much happier if you go into this with an open mind.

I do agree though, it'd be better if he just came out and said this is a complete re-imagining.

It is essentially what Ron Moore did with BSG. Re-imagined it and then threw in some little bones for the old fans to chew on every once in a while.

Among the reasons I disliked Star Trek 9 and 10 so much is precisely because they did not follow the established personalities and histories of those characters.

They were nothing like the TNG crew we saw on television.

In this case, it's not Kirk and it's not Spock. It's not Shatner and Nimoy. It's nu-Kirk and and nu-Spock.

And it could work. Is anyone still bitching about nu-Starbuck being a woman?

I'm not saying I am amazingly hyped up and excited about this thing, but I'm not gonna go into it nit-picking all the details either.

I'm willing to a point. But I seem to be approaching that point at warp speed.

I mean if the dates are alittle fuzzy - fine.
If Kirk's extended family is forgotten about - fine.
If the Enterprise is built on the ground - well ok I guess.
If the enterprise is fugly and looks like its own torpedo may blow off the deflector dish - well, uh I'll suck it up I guess
If the bridge looks like an over lit apple store sure to cause melatonin deficient night walkers - well it's just a movie I suppose
If Kirk is banging the hell out of Uhura - uh... well...
If Spock tries to mindless murder Kirk - what? really?
If Kirk is promoted from cadet to Captain in two hours... That's it, I can't take anymore, I quit.

Sure it's a reboot. He's just playing at semantics.

The names were kept. And the basic shape of the USS Enterprise.

Perhaps because -unlike nuBSG- there are no gender changes he claims is not a reboot. Or maybe JJ just says 'not a reboot' because enough negative fan press could reduce final box office, and he's trying to 'fool' most of us to holding judgment.

Heck, in a comic series called "Ultimates" (a reboot of Avengers) - reading them was the worst waste of time reading comics I've experienced in my life - they retconned Thor into a euroweenie and Banner into a criminal and ultra-pussy. They painted Nick Fury black - Marvel's transparent sop to culling a larger black readership. I view the future Avengers with skepicism too, though it's not as 'painful' as changes to TOS, or even the abominable "prequel trilogy".

Hollywood has always has a shortage of creative risk - a sequel gets funding, often even when it's crap.

Expect to see several sequels of this new team in Star Trek movies. The movie will make enough money (mass audiences like 'splosions), and the two schools of Trek fans (history matters, history doesn't matter) will either accept it or not.

But it's still a re-boot.

Um, I keep hearing this, and haven't been able to find direct evidence for it.

Seems to be more of an assumption that's taken on a life of its own.

I'd have preferred going forward too. But this is clearly a business decision, not a creative one. People know Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock and Bones. People don't know a new crew and the Trek name slapped on would make the best movie in the world nerd stuff most would avoid at all cost. That's the reality we have to face.

Wasn't "Lost" enough?

Personally I blame those New Voyages assholes. They're the ones who got the ball rolling on this anybody-can-be-Kirk thing. Ten people download and all of a sudden the studio is pissing themselves to make a Kirk movie.

The car had Iowa tags, Did the bike ? That's what I think started this. Kirk could have rode his bike from Iowa to San Fransisco, although that's a long way on a bike - especially with hoverbikes blowing you off the road.

I think there might have been evidence that a bar scene with Pike was in Iowa as well, so not sure.