-
[QUOTE=titanfan;4553122]To be fair, his job for the Star Trek films wasn't really to please the Star Trek fans. He was trying to please those that wanted Star Trek to have a wider viewing audience. [B]They were well received critically[/B].
Star Wars I would argue it would be impossible to please everyone but that was pretty much as fan-servicey a movie as you could make. (Which is also why a lot of people didn't like it, I know)[/QUOTE]
Most of JJ's films are well reviewed, which I think demonstrates a flaw in using review aggregates. You can have a film score of 80+ and that's no guarantee that the its is going to resonate with the audience or create a fan base. Sure, the Star Trek and Star Wars fanbases have problematic elements, but I don't think its a coincidence that the favourite films in the franchises he helped 'reboot' were movies not directed by him (Beyond and Rogue One).
-
Picard happens in the Prime universe.
I would like to see a Superman movie directed by JJ but written and supervised by someone else who understands the character.
Star Trek 2009 is still the most successful film in the franchise at the box office and home media I think. I remember how super excited the fans were. Most loved it. But JJ dropped the ball after that.
-
If Picard sucks I think we should just say it takes place in the Kelvin universe. It can be the star trek junk yard. Just throw all unwanted star trek stuff in there and pretend nothing happened.
-
[QUOTE=PoorStudent;4554513]If Picard sucks I think we should just say it takes place in the Kelvin universe. It can be the star trek junk yard. Just throw all unwanted star trek stuff in there and pretend nothing happened.[/QUOTE]
Why? The [I]Star Trek[/I] franchise has always had stuff that "sucked." Isn't just easier to accept that not all stories are equal and focus on the aspects we do like?
-
[QUOTE=C_Miller;4554069]No it doesn't. It takes place in the Prime timeline after the destruction of Romulus. The Kelvin timeline is an alternate timeline created when Spock went back in time to prevent it, but the Prime timeline still exists and this is where Picard takes place.[/QUOTE]
I guess I"m not entirely clear what the Kelvin timeline is, then.
-
[QUOTE=stargazer01;4554399]
Star Trek 2009 is still the most successful film in the franchise at the box office and home media I think. I remember how super excited the fans were. Most loved it. But JJ dropped the ball after that.[/QUOTE]
It was [I]Into Darkness[/I] that really soured the reboot. Remaking Wrath of Khan was just lazy, and like whenever a studio remakes a film, you just open yourself to comparisons to the original. Add to that that Khan was played by a white actor and this film is probably the worst in the entire franchise.
-
[QUOTE=Pinsir;4559466]It was [B][I]Into Darkness[/I][/B] that really soured the reboot. Remaking Wrath of Khan was just lazy, and like whenever a studio remakes a film, you just open yourself to comparisons to the original. Add to that that Khan was played by a white actor and this film is probably the worst in the entire franchise.[/QUOTE][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/eFjwrnb.png[/IMG]
-
[QUOTE=James T. Kirk;4559509][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/eFjwrnb.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
This and Weller make it better than Insurrection:D
-
Not a fan of his alternate Star Trek series and yes, he is overrated.
-
[QUOTE=superduperman;4558876]I guess I"m not entirely clear what the Kelvin timeline is, then.[/QUOTE]
It's a parallel universe a la the mirror universe, the two antimatter universes, fluidic space, etc.; we just know the circumstances that lead to its creation (a time travel accident that generated a separate quantum reality from the main one) unlike others where the divergence point is unknown or was "always" separate.
-
[QUOTE=Pinsir;4554373]Most of JJ's films are well reviewed, which I think demonstrates a flaw in using review aggregates. You can have a film score of 80+ and that's no guarantee that the its is going to resonate with the audience or create a fan base. Sure, the Star Trek and Star Wars fanbases have problematic elements, but I don't think its a coincidence that the favourite films in the franchises he helped 'reboot' were movies not directed by him (Beyond and Rogue One).[/QUOTE]
Yah, it does demonstrate that flaw. But at least sites like Rotten Tomatoes allow the viewer easy access to actual reviews by individual critics. So if there is a critic who tends to line up with your individual views, you can ignore the aggregate, go directly to that person's review and see how a movie fared.
Abrams is a name draw, known for being able to put together a coherent movie with a certain feel to it. He has a decent feel for how to do action sequences and he's not afraid to make his stamp on something, like adding lens flare to a starship. But his entry into Star Trek and Star Wars, to me, smacked of desperation. It seemed that the producers decided to play it safe rather than pursue a real vision anymore.
-
I'm big fan of JJ Abraham's and love his style of film making.
-
[QUOTE=Scott Taylor;4560609]Yah, it does demonstrate that flaw. But at least sites like Rotten Tomatoes allow the viewer easy access to actual reviews by individual critics. So if there is a critic who tends to line up with your individual views, you can ignore the aggregate, go directly to that person's review and see how a movie fared.
Abrams is a name draw, known for being able to put together a coherent movie with a certain feel to it. He has a decent feel for how to do action sequences and he's not afraid to make his stamp on something, like adding [B]lens flare[/B] to a starship. But his entry into Star Trek and Star Wars, to me, smacked of desperation. It seemed that the producers decided to play it safe rather than pursue a real vision anymore.[/QUOTE]I fucking HATE that lens flare nonsense!
[QUOTE=Space_Dementia;4560619]I'm big fan of JJ Abraham's and love his style of film making.[/QUOTE]If you were REALLY a big fan, you'd know his name was Abrams and not Abraham.
-
[QUOTE=James T. Kirk;4560664]I fucking HATE that lens flare nonsense!
If you were REALLY a big fan, you'd know his name was Abrams and not Abraham.[/QUOTE]
I actually quite like the lens flare, for me lens flare adds a certain amount of authentic/authenticity to a moment/scene... maybe that's just me.
haha A spelling mistake which I just didn't notice... Im a VERY big fan of Abraham... I mean Abrams. Trust me. :D
-
he needs to join the DC party. Might as well.