The Dayton Kitchens "I Hate Star Trek" box set.

Abrams made this Trek movie.

Perhaps he'll do a couple more.

But even if he does five or six Star Trek movies over the next decade, does anyone really think AbramsTrek will supplant the original universe in the minds of most fans.

Because even with half a dozen movies, most people that follow the various series will still be more heavily exposed to the original existing Trek universe.

Can five or six movies actually trump 600 hours of other on air Star Trek?

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

The recent movie trumped several TOS and VOY episodes I've seen. Though I guess that's not saying much.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Who is to say he'll even do another Trek? He's not even signed on.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I thought Abrams and the key actors had three movie options or something to that effect?

Anyway, unless you see a seven year series based on "Abrams Trek" that proves highly successful, I see a return to Trek based on the other series or movies eventually.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

By the way, I'm reminded that Glen A. Larson is negotiating with Universal over a big screen version of Battlestar:Galactica.

Based on the 1970s series by the way.

At least that is what the wikipedia entry for Larson and Time magazine both say.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

One can always hope that the plans for the sequel will fall flat, as has happened to other reboots like this before (Lost in Space and Planet of the Apes comes to mind), but chances are there will be at least one more movie. As for supplanting the original franchise, I hope not, but for the new fans, this is the only Star Trek they'll probably know or care to know.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Abrams Trek will almost certainly be a trilogy. Beyond that it has no future.
After that the franchise will have to reinvent itself again in some way.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I still maintain that several of the existing Star Trek movies could've been much better if they had the luxury of a 150 million dollar budget and perhaps even more importantly, the time to film and edit the movies properly.

One factor people forget is that the majority of the Trek movies were slammed together on a schedule that resembles an assembly line at GM.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I hate to agree with Dayton, but the JJverse is dated. It's a product of its time, whereas TOS was something that spanned generations.

I hope JJ reverts to the cerebral roots of Trek for the sequel.

That is not to say that aftr JJTrek has passed we won't have another version of the great adventure, as Gene predicted and wanted.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

TOS didn't really span generations. I find watching it today that it comes off pretty silly most of the time with a few great episodes mixed in. I am enjoying my 4th run through TNG right now, but it has a lot of poorly aging episodes as well. DS9 is the leader of Trek greatness, a bunch of JJ movies will never surpass 7 years of episodes, I doubt they will ever be better than 3 years of TOS and 6 and a half movies.

The best thing that could happen but won't would be a Star Gate like transition into television, even if you had to scrap some of the actors to do it. Keep the characters of course, just change the leading man.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I agree that ST:TNG has aged the worst of the Trek series, though to be honest Voyager and Enterprise are not far behind (mainly because they were so poor to begin with).

I think DS9 is overrated, but the best of DS9 to me generally far exceed the remainder of Star Trek.

I mean, how can you not appreciate DS9 episodes like "The Visitor" and "Duet"?

Those are the kinds of episodes that will remain classic when time has passed by many of the fx loaded extravaganzas.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I hope it has a fairly extensive future, because the formula they just built up needs several more outings to develop it's full potential, in my humble opinion.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

The thing is, I don't see Abrams as the kind of guy who is going to devote a decade to making sequels of Star Trek.

And there are few like Abrams who have the clout to get 150 million dollars to make a Trek movie.

Abrams has made his Trek movie. He will probably make a sequel. He might make a third.

Then he will be gone to some other big name project.

And with our luck, Paramount will bring in the next Brannon Braga to do something based on Abrams work.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I think the only "future" Trek or AbramsTrek has is an animated series, like "Clone Wars". Movies and Live Action TV are just too expensive.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

If TOS spanned generations, then why do mostly older Trek fans like it? TOS is the most dated out of all the series.

Edit: also seasons 1-2 of TNG, and season 1 of DS9 haven't aged gracefully either. TOS has still aged the worst, however.

Adorable.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Well, I agree that if Abrams doesn't sign on for more films, there is a good chance the films will turn into trash in the hands of lesser directors.

Like when Brett Ratner took over the X-Men series from Bryan Singer.

I would like to see at least one more Abrams Trek before the franchise flies off the rails again.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I'm not quite sure what "surplanting" means in this context. However, if nuTrek is supposed to ever rival original Trek in complexity and scope, they'll have to do a TV series at some point. Movies can only do so much, and the best creative storytelling work is currently happening on TV anyway.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Now that is a ridiculous statement. Movies are only too expensive if they flop, Abrams won't make a flop. Even bad Trek managed to stay on the air for 4 years, and worse trek (Voyager) for 7. They weren't doing it at a loss...

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

And they cut the budget for Trek films, almost every time, while expecting a bigger box office over the previous one. Shatner had his budget for V cut in the middle of filming, which would cause problems for a brilliant director.

Parts of Trek haven't aged well, but those aren't the ones that people really remember. The "Jack the Ripper" episode seemed dated to me when I saw it as a kid back in the 70s because of its attitude towards women, but an ep like City of the Edge of Forever holds up fine because it deals with universal issues to a large extent.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

You're making that judgment 43 years after it first aired. The fact that it still has many fans today I think speaks for itself. The fact that TOS had been around for a decade by the time I started watching it as a small child speaks for itself. The fact that it didn't get popular until years after it aired speaks for itself. I think your point is nonsense.

The thing about JJTrek is that it is very much a product of its time. There are no social themes, so we are getting nothing more than an action adventure picture made in a style of filmaking that is very much in line with the 2000s way of doing things, namely breakneck pace, shakey came, lens flare, pretty people, green screens and fancy special effects. In ten to twenty years time nobody will give a shit about that stuff and there will be a new way of filmaking that will be drawing the audience in and making them go "wow". By that time JJTrek will be gathering dust somewhere having been forgotten about since there aren't any aspects of it that can stand the test of time.

Actually, considering it came along 20 years later the first season of TNG looks awful and more dated than TOS IMO.

Can't agree with that. The old universe has had its day in the eyes of the studio so if it ever does come back I think it will be many many years away.

Yes, but had it not been for the popularity of Ron Moore's reimagining he wouldn't have even gotten to make the first phone call.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

If the pick the right animation style, that's actually what I WANT. But I am looking for the most realistic animation you can get, like in Final Fantasy or whatever...not the stuff in Clone Wars

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Who would expect a bsg reamke could work?

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

That might be a little difficult. Final Fantasy, despite it's poor box-office take, is still considered years ahead of it's time in terms of what a computer can do. Square-Enix is still using technology from that movie, namely the lip syncing and hair effects, to this day.

I'm guessing it's still going to be more than 5 years before that sort of animation is cheap enough to use for a weekly TV series.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

That's not a problem since a movie trilogy (and there will surely be at least three films) will take at least that long to run their course.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I happen to agree here.

Of course, all this is contingent on what the story is, who writes it and if they can convince JJ to change the way he shoots the movie.

I can see this thing, with the proper care, lasting at least for a "five year mission" or two.

The only reason that TOS lasted as long as it did, IMNSHO is that there were great fan-fiction writers who wrote stories that filled in the blanks spots.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

I just saw it tonight and walked out after 40 minutes.
The only way this reboot has a chance is if JJ Abrams *doesn't* direct the next one. IMO, he took a decent movie and totally ruined it with his use of shaky camera work, distracting lens flares, and extreme closeups.
Get another director and I'll watch the next one. Sorry for stepping on toes, but I'm mad as hell that I was so pumped to see this and it sucked. Thanks for nothing, Abrams.
You hack !!

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Yes I'm sure lots of things have "many fans" decades later, but compared to the other Trek series, how many?

My point is that TOS has picked up relatively few new fans because of how dated it is.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Not ridiculous at all, but realistic. You can only make so many movies at those prices. You may get 3 movies, maybe 4, but probably not more than that. Besides, movies only give you limited time for plot and character development, and to flesh out the nuTrek timeline. Plus, the actors are eventually going to move on to other projects to avoid being typecast. I don't see a TV series in the future, especially with these actors. So you're only real option is the animated route, for long-term viability. If it's done right and smart, it will be a major boon to the franchise.

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Well, I wasn't thinking of Clone Wars animation exactly- any kind will do (except that abortion known as anime).

Re: Does "Abrams Trek" Really Have Any Long Term Future?

Yet SOMETHING keep fueling TOS's popularity and it just ain't the older fans. More younger Trek fans like TOS than you may may think. Otherwise TOS DVDs wouldn't be selling, TOS-era books wouldn't be bought and you'd never see it on TV.