Boy but I hate JJ Abrams

[flyboymb 1,068]

Finally worked up the courage to watch Star Trek: Beyond on DVD (spoilers blah blah). It was the first Star Trek movie that had come out on the big screen in my life that I had decided to skip. Why? When I saw James T. Kirk catching air on a dirt bike in the previews, I knew exactly what kind of movie it was going to be and that I wouldn't enjoy it in the least. And yet there it was, sitting on the shelf of the local rental store (yeah they still have a couple in my area). Well it's only $2.75 to rent I thought, can't be any harm in it right?

 

I usually enjoy a bad movie. The kind of 1950's drivel that took itself way too seriously while looking totally clownish. But Beyond just seemed to assume that the audience was as stupid as it was. It almost called out to me 'blah blah talk blah HERE'S AN ACTION SCENE EAT IT UP'. In fact, the only reason the scenes between the action scenes even seemed to exist was to serve as band-aids to tie the fireworks together. Here we are, once again, some random guy is pissed off at humanity, Kirk has the common sense of a stereotypical frat boy, the Enterprise (RIP) gets torn a new one when its deflector shields seem to do absolutely nothing against incoming weaponry, and the rest of the crew run around waving their arms trying to survive Kirk's latest screw-up (sometimes the arm waving occurs as they are sucked into space).

 

But lookit dat' CGI rite boyz? Itz gots da flash! And that's all it has. It's not because of the cast, they did great with what they had to work with. I'd be happy to see them in a few more movies (save poor Anton) if only they fired the director PRODUCER and went in a new direction. And really it needs to go in ANY direction besides pulling ideas from previous movies to fill in JJ's inability to create a new story.

 

First movie: Kirk takes command of the Enterprise from the former Captain to take out a giant ship that threatens to destroy Earth.

 

Second movie: KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

 

Third movie: Kirk sacrifices the Enterprise while trying to keep a deadly weapon out of the hands of a renegade.

 

Fourth movie: According to rumors there's going to be time travel!

 

Well at least he didn't do this with his Star Wars movie right? I mean that'd make him pretty much a serial plagiarist.

 

With the plummeting ticket sales from ST: Beyond, one would hope that Paramount would change the reins in order to try to regain some of their viewers, but given their past behavior with Enterprise, I imagine they'll wait until he has ripped the franchise apart like a bunch of bee ships.

Edited January 19, 2017 by flyboymb

[Toqtamish 3,643]

Try fact checking. JJ didn't direct Star Trek Beyond. He was a little busy with this tiny film called Force Awakens.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

Try fact checking. JJ didn't direct Star Trek Beyond. He was a little busy with this tiny film called Force Awakens.

Which was the best movie he could manage, that is a pretty average film because he's a hack director that gets way more credit than he deserves.

[Dagonet 7,246]

The ticket sales were also hampered by other blockbusters released around it. And trailers that focused way too much on the action.

[jmswood 2,706]

Other blockbusters might have chipped away at Star Trek: Beyond ticket sales, but they didn't have to try very hard. Star Trek: Beyond is its own worst enemy. Not many people went back for repeat viewing of the worst movie in Star Trek history. It could have been the only movie showing and people would have found something else to do.

[Revanchist 1,063]

It was still way better than Into Darkness, I must say.

[patox 2,020]

I'm no Abrams apologists.

 

But if you're running a studio it's hard to argue with all those zeros that accompany his name when it's on the marquee.

[Jo Jo 4,808]

Other blockbusters might have chipped away at Star Trek: Beyond ticket sales, but they didn't have to try very hard. Star Trek: Beyond is its own worst enemy. Not many people went back for repeat viewing of the worst movie in Star Trek history. It could have been the only movie showing and people would have found something else to do.

 

 

Worst? Have you not seen any of the Next Generation films? The only decent one of the lot was First Contact and even that was "okay".

Edited January 11, 2017 by Jo Jo

[Sbloom141 751]

I didn't like beyond. Really liked Into Darkness though.

[YwingAce 2,546]

Other blockbusters might have chipped away at Star Trek: Beyond ticket sales, but they didn't have to try very hard. Star Trek: Beyond is its own worst enemy. Not many people went back for repeat viewing of the worst movie in Star Trek history. It could have been the only movie showing and people would have found something else to do.

 

 

Worst? Have you not seen any of the Next Generation films? The only decent one of the lot was First Contact and even that was "okay".

You're insane, First Contact is easily the best Star Trek film made. Generations isn't anything great but it's alright, Insurrection is a solid pass, but it's not horrible. Nemesis was bad, but it certainly wasn't worse then the JJ Movies. Or Star Trek 5 for that matter.

[YwingAce 2,546]

Try fact checking. JJ didn't direct Star Trek Beyond. He was a little busy with this tiny film called Force Awakens.

He still was a producer however.

[Toqtamish 3,643]

Try fact checking. JJ didn't direct Star Trek Beyond. He was a little busy with this tiny film called Force Awakens.

He still was a producer however.

Sure but the OP was complaining about the direction. Which again was not JJ.

And the worst Star Trek movie is Star Trek the motion picture.

[Jfitz1431 336]

Try fact checking. JJ didn't direct Star Trek Beyond. He was a little busy with this tiny film called Force Awakens.

He still was a producer however.

Sure but the OP was complaining about the direction. Which again was not JJ.

And the worst Star Trek movie is Star Trek the motion picture.

Aw I love The Motion Picture! I think the worst is either Generations, or Nemesis. I really dislike all of The Next Generation films actually.

[YwingAce 2,546]

Try fact checking. JJ didn't direct Star Trek Beyond. He was a little busy with this tiny film called Force Awakens.

He still was a producer however.

Sure but the OP was complaining about the direction. Which again was not JJ.

And the worst Star Trek movie is Star Trek the motion picture.

How can you say the worst is The Motion Picture when The Final Frontier exists.

The only movie that is worse then Star Trek 5 is Into Darkness.

Also he was complaining about the first two movies as well.

[Bojanglez 2,158]

I watched it and gave it a 6/10 but they almost lost me at the glue-shitting bike.  Simon Pegg really hammed it up and it was horrible, and I say that as a huge fan.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Bojanglez

[flyboymb 1,068]

Ok, mea culpa on him directing (if anything his producing makes my arguments stronger), but my complaint still stands as it is still his baby. Beyond has taken a firm place FAR below The Final Frontier in my list of Star Trek films. Considering all three movies have followed pretty much the same basic plot I doubt anybody can argue that this is not at heart an Abrams movie. 

 

TFF was a jumbled mess, but at least it was a character centered jumbled mess and had a plot that explored a facet of human life.

 

TMP lasted forever like it was trying to draw off of 2001, but it once again was trying to explore a part of the human experience.

 

Tell me one overriding philosophical question addressed by Beyond? Whether Beastie Boys will have the staying power to be used as a weapon centuries from now? Whether somebody should leave their girlfriend to stud themselves out for their species? To use a Red Letter Media trope, this movie was just a big dollop of cake frosting without any cake. You're binge fed all these action scenes sprinkled with stuff drawn from former movies and expected to draw a movie out of it.

 

Want to talk about the zeros that Abram's creation drew in? Star Trek made a little less than double its production budget at the domestic box office. Into Darkness barely edged above budget by 30 million. Beyond lost money domestically; the only Star Trek movie to do so besides Nemesis. In comparison, the new Ghostbusters movie made 10 million dollars more when comparing those two factors. Worldwide ticket sales for Beyond made up for that deficit, but were the lowest of the 3 reboot movies and a $130,000,000 drop from Into Darkness. That's nearly equal to the entire worldwide sales of TMP. That's not a trend that points to a successful series.

 

So yeah, I'm really failing to see the genius of this man when it comes to series like Star Trek or even Star Wars. He's in his own when it comes to character shallow pieces like Cloverfield or action centered movies like MI, but who is going to argue that this talent extends to series that demand a deeper script than a Godzilla monster or gunfire scenes?

Edited January 12, 2017 by flyboymb

[Hobojebus 11,341]

I'm no Abrams apologists.

 

But if you're running a studio it's hard to argue with all those zeros that accompany his name when it's on the marquee.

Bay makes money but he's still a racist chauvinist pig that cant direct to save his life, the fact the lowest common denominator go to watch these films is not an indicator of quality just people's bad taste.

[YwingAce 2,546]

Ok, mea culpa on him directing (if anything his producing makes my arguments stronger), but my complaint still stands as it is still his baby. Beyond has taken a firm place FAR below The Final Frontier in my list of Star Trek films. Considering all three movies have followed pretty much the same basic plot I doubt anybody can argue that this is not at heart an Abrams movie. 

 

TFF was a jumbled mess, but at least it was a character centered jumbled mess and had a plot that explored a facet of human life.

 

TMP lasted forever like it was trying to draw off of 2001, but it once again was trying to explore a part of the human experience.

 

Tell me one overriding philosophical question addressed by Beyond? Whether Beastie Boys will have the staying power to be used as a weapon centuries from now? Whether somebody should leave their girlfriend to stud themselves out for their species? To use a Red Letter Media trope, this movie was just a big dollop of cake frosting without any cake. You're binge fed all these action scenes sprinkled with stuff drawn from former movies and expected to draw a movie out of it.

 

Want to talk about the zeros that Abram's creation drew in? Star Trek made a little less than double its production budget at the domestic box office. Into Darkness barely edged above budget by 30 million. Beyond lost money domestically; the only Star Trek movie to do so besides Nemesis. In comparison, the new Ghostbusters movie made 10 million dollars more when comparing those two factors. Worldwide ticket sales for Beyond made up for that deficit, but were the lowest of the 3 reboot movies and a $130,000,000 drop from Into Darkness. That's nearly equal to the entire worldwide sales of TMP. That's not a trend that points to a successful series.

 

So yeah, I'm really failing to see the genius of this man when it comes to series like Star Trek or even Star Wars. He's in his own when it comes to character shallow pieces like Cloverfield or action centered movies like MI, but who is going to argue that this talent extends to series that demand a deeper script than a Godzilla monster or gunfire scenes?

I haven't seen Beyond yet, but I certainly can believe it was worse then 5 after seeing Into Darkness.

[incinerator950 387]

Fact Check: the new movies aren't that good.

[Robin Graves 6,054]

 

They weaponised the beasty boys. Sigh. I wonder if it works with all their songs? Would "body movin'" work just as well? Would using justin bieber be considered a violation of the prime directive? I still think they should have used metal.

 

This. This is where I call it quits with the new star trek. Srsly? Ok It's kinda cool. If you are twelve!, no wait... If you were twelve, in the 90s!

 

You know I can see this working in an episode of Farscape but for star trek, No. Just NO.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Robin Graves

[BlodVargarna 4,041]

Other blockbusters might have chipped away at Star Trek: Beyond ticket sales, but they didn't have to try very hard. Star Trek: Beyond is its own worst enemy. Not many people went back for repeat viewing of the worst movie in Star Trek history. It could have been the only movie showing and people would have found something else to do.

 

Other blockbusters might have chipped away at Star Trek: Beyond ticket sales, but they didn't have to try very hard. Star Trek: Beyond is its own worst enemy. Not many people went back for repeat viewing of the worst movie in Star Trek history. It could have been the only movie showing and people would have found something else to do.

Insurrection was abysmal.

[Biophysical 15,761]

I liked Beyond, but I'm pretty sure that was because my expectations were so incredibly low that any good aspect seemed really good. I also think I just gave up on it being a Star Trek movie.

[Astech 1,540]

Well at least he didn't do this with his Star Wars movie right? I mean that'd make him pretty much a serial plagiarist.

 

 

 

Hah...He does seem to be ripping off the previous successes in every franchise he jumps onto. The Force Awakens was a mockery of plot-holes, characters so shallow they contradict themselves on-screen within seconds, blatant rip-offs of previous plot devices ("it's not like the Death Star at all - It's slightly larger!!!"), not to mention the astoundingly bad physics (you can't tell me Maz Kanata's hideout was in visible range of the entire New Rupublic, or that Poe and Finn's fall didn't break a single bone of either one).

 

When I compare Beyond to JJ's other work, I am pleasantly surprise that he's learned from some of his mistakes.

 

So yeah, I'm really failing to see the genius of this man when it comes to series like Star Trek or even Star Wars. He's in his own when it comes to character shallow pieces like Cloverfield or action centered movies like MI, but who is going to argue that this talent extends to series that demand a deeper script than a Godzilla monster or gunfire scenes?

 

 

And don't forget Lost! I watched the whole thing and was repeatedly blown away by exactly how irrational every character was in nearly every decision they make. I only kept watching because I... had to know... what... the... bases all... were...

 

Its funny how they gave two of the most successful film series of all time (Star trek and Star Wars) to someone who had directed five or so mediocre films in his career.

[Sithborg 11,644]

Interesting, because he only had 1 movie, 11 tv episodes, and 1 tv movie he had directed before getting Star Trek. It is interesting to see how people like to blow up his filmography. And assign him movies to stuff he wasn't involved with. 

 

He is not a perfect director. His strengths are in casting, getting entertaining performances out of his cast, and he has a distinct visual style. 

 

And Bay is a talented director, even if what he makes isn't something I like. 

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

It was still way better than Into Darkness, I must say.

This X 1000.