View Poll Results: Is JJ Abrams a talented Film-Maker

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    22 55.00%
  • No

    6 15.00%
  • Talented but overrated

    12 30.00%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 58
  1. #31
    Relic Seeker Pinsir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Ravnica
    Posts
    3,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by titanfan View Post
    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. They were well received critically.

    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)
    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).
    Want to read Wonder Woman stories, but don't know where to start? Check out my top 10 lists for Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age and Modern Age Wonder Woman tales!

  2. #32
    Mighty Member stargazer01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,950

    Default

    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.

  3. #33
    Spectacular Member PoorStudent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    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.

  4. #34
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    6,179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoorStudent View Post
    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.
    Why? The Star Trek 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?
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  5. #35
    Astonishing Member superduperman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Metropolis USA
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C_Miller View Post
    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.
    I guess I"m not entirely clear what the Kelvin timeline is, then.
    Now listen to me, Clark! This great strength of yours--you've got to hide it from people or they'll be scared of you!

  6. #36
    Relic Seeker Pinsir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Ravnica
    Posts
    3,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stargazer01 View Post
    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.
    It was Into Darkness 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.
    Want to read Wonder Woman stories, but don't know where to start? Check out my top 10 lists for Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age and Modern Age Wonder Woman tales!

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsir View Post
    It was Into Darkness 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.

  8. #38
    Extraordinary Member Jokerz79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    5,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James T. Kirk View Post
    This and Weller make it better than Insurrection

  9. #39
    Incredible Member Dr. Skeleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    786

    Default

    Not a fan of his alternate Star Trek series and yes, he is overrated.

  10. #40
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    6,179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by superduperman View Post
    I guess I"m not entirely clear what the Kelvin timeline is, then.
    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.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  11. #41
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    5,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsir View Post
    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).
    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.
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

  12. #42
    All-New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    UK, Wales
    Posts
    4

    Default

    I'm big fan of JJ Abraham's and love his style of film making.

  13. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Taylor View Post
    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 fucking HATE that lens flare nonsense!

    Quote Originally Posted by Space_Dementia View Post
    I'm big fan of JJ Abraham's and love his style of film making.
    If you were REALLY a big fan, you'd know his name was Abrams and not Abraham.

  14. #44
    All-New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    UK, Wales
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James T. Kirk View Post
    I fucking HATE that lens flare nonsense!

    If you were REALLY a big fan, you'd know his name was Abrams and not Abraham.
    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.

  15. #45

    Default

    he needs to join the DC party. Might as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •