MovieChat Forums > J.J. Abrams Discussion > I would love to slap this guy upside the...

I would love to slap this guy upside the head......

posted 10 years ago by amr3078
9 replies | jump to latest

for what he's done to Star Trek.

I admit, I saw the first one he did. I just couldn't get into the changes he made to the franchise as a whole. The look of the ship and it's bridge, the incredibly attractive cast members, the obvious reliance on action scenes and ship battles in place of believeable plot or actual character development, those kind of things. But I did stay for the whole thing because I wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt, and as I left, I was confused and bewildered as to how this could have happened. How could WHATEVER I just saw POSSIBLY be considered "Star Trek" to ANYONE who had witnessed it? I just couldn't understand that this is what Abrams thought it was all about. And I still don't.

Everything Gene Roddenberry gave to the world, everything he put into his creation, everything he would have wanted it to become, was sadly absent in this "reboot". And I flatout refused to see the next one. And then even his own loyal acolytes began to turn on him for his excessive use of questionable filming techniques. I think you all know what I'm referring to here. I wasn't about to shed a single tear of sympathy for the man at that time, I was glad that people were criticizing the way they did.

For the love of God, I can even get behind some of what Berman, Braga, and Moore did to Trek after Gene's passing, but I just can't see fit to condone ANYTHING JJ has done for this "alternate reality" he and his writers created for the ST universe. I just can't get behind any of it. That's really all I wanted to say. JJ can go straight into a black hole and never return for all I care!

[–] Sandoz 10 years ago

That's exactly the same way I felt after seeing the abomination this Abrams-hole committed upon the world of Star Trek. Before the film was released, my biggest gripe was with the casting--I thought the actors wouldn't fill the shoes of the original cast. But it turned out (after finally seeing it) that they weren't the problem at all (most of them I thought quite good actually)...the REAL problem was the approach that Abrams brought to the reboot-it demonstrated that he understood NOTHING about what the original was all about at all. Instead of the heroic Kirk and the omniscient Spock we had from the OS, we got a punk kid who gets promoted to being captain with no experience whatsoever, and a Spock that's in heat from the time we meet him who gets all hot and bothered every time he's near Uhura. It was (is) a joke. I didn't even waste my time seeing the sequel; what was the point?

If I could single-handedly destroy Facebook...I would.

[–] pdonidvie 10 years ago

The sequel was even worse.

[–] Sandoz 10 years ago

That's what I'd heard. Luckily I'm onto this guy's crap work now...I didn't pollute my eyes with it.

"Some men just like to watch the world burn!"

[–] pdonidvie 10 years ago

I don't think he's a crappy director. Atleast, not yet. I just think Star Trek was not his cup of tea. I'm guessing he'll do a better job on the new Star Wars.

[–] russok044 10 years ago

Wouldn't full the shoes of the original cast? I love the show but the acting in the original Star Trek is terrible. How could you think that the original actors could outact the new A-list filled cast?

[–] klaatoo999 10 years ago

I agree with you, buddy.

He can go to hell for creating such Star Trek movie(s).
If only people had seen his product as crap back then and gave it what it deserves, namely poor box office results and bad ratings, then that crap which is Star Trek In name Only would have been probably forgotten. But for some reason, the audience seemed to like his stupid movie, and now he's perceived as some kind of "savior of Star Trek" by some. What a load of crap. He is a hack director who never watched Star Trek, never like it, nor did he understand it, and he also doesn't really understand what science fiction is.

[–] Degree7 9 years ago

I'll admit, when I saw Star Trek '09 in theaters, I was somewhat entertained. Critics were crazy about how "these films have brought these characters back into our lives," and I was thinking, well it is pretty sweet to have Captain Kirk, Spock, Bones, and Scotty back in the seat of the Enterprise.

But even as the film ended, I couldn't shake the feeling that the whole thing felt flat and un-nutritious. Like cotton candy. Visually appealing, but lacking substance. It wasn't until I went back to see it a second time and started tuning out with boredom, that I realized it was a soulless reboot, a generic action movie under the "Star Trek" moniker. And that seems to be Hollywood's recent modus operandi.

~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.

[–] stardust_particles 9 years ago

well, as far as I'm concerned, new ST movies are much better than the old ones. better acting, fun story, lovable characters... it's all there. you guys are overreacting, you can't expect long, geeky, boring space movies in this day and age.i became fan only after i saw 2 new ones...