74 thoughts on ““reinventing?” uh-oh. i’m not sure how i feel about this”

1. If the rumors floating around are true, then we can easily assume he is pulling the “I am JJ and I can do what I want” thing.
   I just honestly have to ask…if he is not making a movie for Trekkies, and is making a movie for the general movie person, is there really an audience there? Is the general movie going public going to care about this?

2. After Lt. Commander Locke has a crisis of faith and locks himself in engineering, he deliberately fails to input the correct sequence in the main computer. This almost causes a warp core breach, but ensign Hume saves the day at the last moment when he puts his life in peril while attempting to engage the failsafe.

3. Ramble away, Wil. It’s not the price of being a geek. It’s darned near your duty as a geek to ramble on and on about such things when the situation calls for it, as this one obviously did.

4. Heh – I’m having a bit of a chuckle here over you worrying about someone “reinventing” Star Trek. I remember a time…oh, about 21-22 years ago (egads, was it really that long?) when another group of people announced that they were going to reinvent Star Trek and make it more relevant for new viewers. My first thought was “Oh man, this is going to suck! They’re going to ruin Star Trek forever.” (Hey, it was the 80’s. That was a reasonable fear.)
   Of course, that didn’t stop me from dropping everything to watch the first episode, and when it was over, my initial response was, “Okay, that didn’t suck.” (It took a few more episodes to get to “pretty darn good, actually”.)
   Hmm, come to think of it, though, Gene Roddenberry was still alive then. Maybe we should be worried after all…

5. We need WW reviews of said Trek movies. And perhaps the 6 Star Wars films. And maybe a few other scifi/fantasy films that are important to Wil. Then he should put them in a book and trade them to us for shiny gold rocks. [MrBurns]Yess, Exxcellent![/MrBurns]

6. In some ways TNG was Gene’s way to reinvent Star Trek but in some ways it was the way he wanted to do it from the beginning. TNG seems to have more in common with the original pilot than the official series. Star Wars itself was a reinvention of the original Sat. morning serials that were seen in the 30’s and 40’s and Indiana Jones the same thing.
   Personally I’m looking forward to see what JJ does with it. “Reinventions” have been done a lot before in other mediums like plays for example. We seem to have no problem seeing plays done by other actors or done in a different setting. i.e. Shakespeare done in a WW setting, etc. It seems as if Trek’s canon has been taken too seriously to a point that it has stifled storytelling. Let’s see what’s out there!

7. Would anyone other than JJ be able to get away with this?
   I still don’t understand why anyone thinks he is even remotely capable of creating anything with a plot. Or simply anything with a beginning and an ending.
   I honestly think he’s a total hack who got lucky.

8. Me and a lot of my Trek-loving compadres are definitely awaiting to see what JJ is able to do with this. We all have our doubts as well. So far, I’m totally loving Sylar as Spock. It’s a great cast choice. I would like to feel secure in the fact that he’s hired him a Trekkie, but we will see. If this Trekkie is a douche, everyone loses.

9. The most encouraging aspect of the whole enterprise (ahem) is that ST is still well-respected enough, as a franchise, to warrant a studio throwing some bucks at it for another go.
   Hollywood, there still may be hope for ye yet.

10. Most of the TNG films are unwatchable (“First Contact” being the exception). Most of the TOS films are watchable (“The Final Frontier” aside), even if as you said only two of them are accessible to mainstream audiences.
    I think the new film will either be awesome or a disaster, with no room in-between.
    Though in some ways it feels like Trek is going in the wrong direction. I’d rather see the fictional universe moved forward instead of rehashing TOS.

11. If I could be a pedantic dick for a moment: It’s not Sylar as Spock. It’s Zachary Quinto playing Spock. There’s a pretty significant difference, that I always feel compelled to point out.

12. I think you’re right on here, Wil, and as soon as you linked to the story in your tweet, I was hoping you’d talk more about it. Reinventing is certainly a double-edged sword, and there’s something about the way JJ is talking about it that is a little off-putting. If he can pull it off, though, more power to him.

13. Also, JJ has to talk about it as a filmmaker who is responsible for hundreds of millions of studio dollars, while we can talk about it as fans. I think it’s unavoidable that when he talks about it, it’s going to be a little off-putting to us.
    Of course, I don’t think I ever recall being put off by Peter Jackson or Jon Favreau, so take that for what it’s worth.

14. I agree with your comments and assessments. Personally, I’m just going to wait until it comes out or until more substantial public visual components exist to decide if I’m all for this movie or not. I think some of the casting is great and it sounds like it’s going to be a good movie and I think he could go a great job reinventing Star Trek. Or, no matter how good the cast, it could blow. However, I remember thinking when I heard about this for the first time I was wary of anyone trying to “remake” the original cast. I wish they’d make new Trek that is set after the TNG/DS9/VOY timeframe. I like stories that advance the world into the future, not keep plugging away at the past.
    Without a lot of context, it’s tough to puzzle out exactly what this means for guys like us who’ve loved Trek forever and ever.
    Hey! I believe you mean, “Without a lot of context, it’s tough to puzzle out exactly what this means for guys AND GALS like us who’ve loved Trek forever and ever.” 🙂 (I know your use of “guys” is meant to be inclusive of both sexes but I had to correct that sentence. :))
    P.S. Coyote Seven FTW!

15. Mainstream:
    IV, VIII
    Great for fans:
    II, VI
    Bad:
    I, III, X
    Awful:
    V, VII (I refuse to accept this is even canon), IX
    Right?

16. May the Fourth be with you. Heh. Anne rocks.
    Now thats out of my system. Reinvention of anythings immediately makes me groan. Sure, he could pull a BSG (never seen it before, so I dont know) and make it awesome as everyone seems to claim…but more than likely? No. The previews dont say much yet, and I dread to see what he’s done. Mostly

17. @angiek: “guys” is a non-gender specific word for me. Always has been, always will be.

18. Well, now I’m curious how Wil rates the various movies.

19. I quote my own Twitter post:
    If J.J. Abrams fucks up Star Trek, the wrath of a million Trekkies will fall upon him! That, and we’ll all kick him in the shins. 😀

20. Is it just me, or does it bother anyone that he called his Star Trek expert a Trekker and not a Trekkie?
    Doesn’t bode well that he’s actually listening to said Trekker/ie…

21. I had one of those “only in Hollywood” moments a couple of months ago when I ran into Zachary Quinto at a friend’s party. After the initial “holy crap, it’s Sylar and he’s going to laserfinger my skull in half and eat my brain” reaction, I had a chance to talk to him casually, but at length about the new Trek.
    According to him, it’s going to be really, really awesome. He wasn’t forthcoming with a whole lot of details (and I didn’t ask), but there was something about the excitement in his eyes when he described the work environment on the set that was contagious. It made me feel like maybe we’re all in for something special with this film. Between that and the fact that it’s J.J. at the helm, I have faith that it really will be. Shit, if I can get through three-ish seasons of Enterprise, I’m up for just about anything even close to good.
    (No offense Scott Bakula)
    Plus, as much as fans fear change, sometimes it’s just what a franchise needs as long as it doesn’t invalidate or compromise the mythos.

22. Other recent “reinventions” that come to mind as having conspicuously not sucked: Warren Ellis’s Iron Man, which, though it was not adapted directly into the excellent film, certainly influenced it heavily, and Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins.
    Our heroes are our myths: we are constantly reinventing them because we care, because we love them, because we want to keep them relevant.
    This is not to say that Abrams’ reinvention is destined to be good, just that reinvention isn’t a dirty word. But you knew that.

23. The problem, as I see it is that one cannot make everybody happy with ‘re-invent”. The practice alienates both communities initially. But, time will tell if it is successful or not, a la BSG or the aborted Nic Cage Superman movie…

24. i09 wants to reinvent Star Trek and CSI…with YOU as Grissom.
    IN SPACE!!!

25. I’ll be honest with you, the only Trek movies I really don’t like are V, IX, and X. I’m really pretty okay with them, and I’m honestly still a little pissed that there will never be a DS9 movie.
    That said, I’m concerned about the new movie simply because it’s futzing with the old characters as a prequel. I mean, J.J. is seriously putting himself in the crouched, ready-to-shit-on-the-fans position just on that fact alone. And the only franchise of his that I’m interested in is Lost. So… Yeah. Apprehension, I haz it.
    Is it my imagination, or has the Star Trek franchise backed itself into a corner and it doesn’t know how the fuck to get out? And it thinks that, in order to get out, it has to keep walking towards the corner. With its eyes closed. And it’s duct-taping itself to the wall. With nails. And glue. I’m done.

26. Forgive me…yes. Zachary Quinto. Thank you for correcting me. I have been known to be a pedantic dick about things as well…touche, WW.

27. Kill it with fire.
    That is all.

28. Who knows what he’ll actually come up with, but JJA has been saying the
    right things about respecting the history of trek. Plus, he’s been very
    careful on casting, which is a good sign.
    I wouldn’t say I’ve kept absolutely on top of things with respect to the
    JJA trek movie, but I’ve read a dozen or two JJA quotes on the topic over
    the last few months, not just the one you present here, and (as I said
    before) he has been saying the right things. The others balance out the
    few words in this one that could otherwise be considered worrying.

29. I’m hoping “reinvent” and “make the movie accessible for non-franchise people” means something along the lines of what Goldeneye and Casino Royale did for Bond. Those movies aren’t just good Bond movies, they’re good movies in their own right and just happen to be Bond movies. I’d like to see something like that for Star Trek. As you say (and I agree), most of the movies to date have been crap.

30. @queentess: Exactly. That’s what I was trying to say.
    @Shane Nickerson: Dude, that’s awesome.
    Regarding my ranking of the Trek movies: I’m going to keep that to myself.

31. I really hope that the focus is on telling a good, solid story which happens to be set in the Star Trek universe. If that’s ‘reinvent’? Rock on.
    What would the Trek equivalent of Jar-Jar be, anyway?

32. Re-imaginings can work. BSG and the rebooted Batman franchise among others.
    I trust JJ on this. I think he’ll make a fine movie and I think he wants to make it accessible to a wider audience. Go him. It may work, one never knows.

33. VT, I really, really don’t want to find out.
    I’m with you on this one, Wil, really hoping that it won’t suck, but totally afraid that it will.
    If they had made the TNG movies better, we wouldn’t be in this situation. But no, they had to try to turn Picard into Kirk, which he never was and was never meant to be. The only TNG movie that I like is First Contact, and even that has problems for me… I liked small bits of Insurrection. Nemesis was just a giant disappointment, unfortunately… despite your best efforts, Wil… but I don’t think even giving you a bigger part could’ve saved that storyline… it was just- too obvious is the word, I think… but, then again, as a life-long Trekkie, I approach the movies like Charlie Brown and the football… Ever hopeful, ever fearful, ever knowing, that you’re probably NOT gonna get the chance to kick it… but you always gotta try one more time…

34. Offtopic, do you want to go to the moon?
    http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/main/index.html
    My name is on the Mars Sojourner and I get the warm fuzzies whenever Mars is in the news.

35. I have to admit that the more I hear about the new movie, the more I fear it will be less like the Trek I know and love, and more like the shoddy classic-series-f*cked-up-film a la Charlies Angels and Dukes Of Hazzard.
    And do tend to agree, most of the Trek movies only get watched because they’re Trek.

36. Come, come Mr. Crusher – young minds, fresh ideas and all that.
    Seriously, though – I doubt that JJ at his worst could be more lethal to the whole Trek franchise than B&B were during their Voyager/ST:X/Enterprise crap-fest years.
    Honestly, how much worse could *anything* be than Enter-shit was?

37. Based on Lost and Alias, I am expecting a convoluted plot with a lot of surprise twists.
    Politics would provide a good backdrop.
    How about the story of how Earth transitioned from a fragmented set of independent and warring countries to a united planet ready to found an interplanetary Federation?
    Maybe the whole thing happens due to one man who orchestrates a takeover liek Peter Wiggin does in Ender’s Game.
    The crew of the Enterprise is a pawn in this game with much of the drama coming from difficult situations created when they lose contact and support from Earth. Maybe the destruction of the Enterprise is planned to unite Earth under the banner of war.
    Maybe the crew figures out what is going on and stops the would-be dictator from completely rising to power, but not preventing the uniting of humanity.
    Maybe this is the point where the dark mirror universe diverges from the good universe.

38. You know, I was going to get all uppity and demand Wil put his money where his mouth is and name the two “great” Star Trek movies. But, first I figure I better read the comments. Be right back.
    Okay, so he didn’t come out and say which is what. However, I have to admit I hated the first TOS movie. It was horrible. TROK managed to salvage the series. TSFS actually is a better movie than most give it credit for. IV is the shits. As in great. V, watched once, thanked God Shatner was never given another chance at directing. VI. Never really watched it a second time. Generations….WTF? First Contact, I should have it in the library, but don’t. Insurrection was insufferable. Never watched the last movie.

39. While I won’t judge until we actually see the movie, I recall how Harve Bennett “reinvented” Star Trek after the disaster that was The Motion Picture, and the result was Wrath of Khan and a revitalized franchise. (Said revitalized franchise leading to a new series called TNG and a regular paycheck for a certain young actor of our acquaintance.)
    As one of the geezer fans that have watched since 1966, I’ll only observe that reinvention isn’t necessarily teh evil and that the franchise is tougher than you think – if it can survive the likes of He Who Shall Not Be Named, it can survive anything.

40. Everyone is making outstanding, thought-provoking points here, both for and against.
    I remain as ambivalent as ever, but I’m thoroughly enjoying the conversation.

41. I’ve already made my feelings known on Twitter (summary: it’s about 10 months too early to be freaking out over this), so I’ll add content here by giving my capsule reviews of the ten ST movies:
    01: An inventive 48-minute TV episode wrapped in a monotonous screen saver. Very beautiful (especially in the newest DVD edition), but when you can skip entire chapters of the DVD and not miss ANY of the story, something’s wrong.
    02: Practically perfect. ‘Nuff said.
    03: I like this a lot more than some people seem to. Sure, it had its flaws, but it treated the characters right, and that’s sadly rare.
    04: I used to rank this very high on my list. Last time I watched it, I realized it hadn’t grown on me. I don’t have any real desire to watch it yet again.
    05: I’m sorry, was there a fifth movie?
    06: Like 04, this one seemed a lot cooler on first viewing than on a revisit. The allegory is so thick you can cut it with a bat’leth, and the attempts at humor were drastically uneven.
    07: I really wanted to like this one, but the plot doesn’t hang together and it sets the pattern for the rest of the TNG movies: they’re about Picard and Data with the rest of the crew along for the ride.
    08: Very cool, but not 02 cool. (Best opening scene EVER, though.)
    09: I don’t own this one. ‘Nuff said.
    10: I think the idea was interesting, but…there are just too many things that don’t work for me, starting with Hardy’s acting.

42. I don’t really care if everything’s canon in the “reinvention”. I liked “Enterprise” and was sad to see it go so early before it was able to reach its prime.
    But I am really worried if JJ Abrams is able to extract the main ideas from Star Trek. And I don’t mean the “take 3 characters with a special relationship and write many funny scenes with them arguing” idea. I want an optimistic approach to the future. I am so sick of SF which circles around the “oh noes, mankind must defend itself against evil aliens and we are sooo weak and can only fight like rebels” idea. Most SF makes us look like we don’t have a single clue, are weak and quite stupid while all the other alien races are smarter, more advanced, stronger and have super powers that would make even Superman envious. And coincidentally those super aliens use their advantages only to make mince meat out of every life form they find, without the option for diplomacy. Star Trek is different. Enemies in Star Trek are hard to beat too, but most of the time it’s like a war between the USA and Imperial Japan or Nazi-Germany and Russia, not like a fight between a toddler and Mr Universe.
    I don’t want aliens to be evil or good just for the sake of the plot. Often Star Trek doesn’t allow painting everything in black and white because motives and beliefs must be taken into consideration. I think that’s important, although it might be a reason why Star Trek isn’t that interesting for many people who just want to hate the enemy on the screen.
    Sorry if my sentences are hard to understand, English isn’t my first language.

43. This could be a good thing or really a bad thing. So far I’m not an Abrams fan. He tends to try to create mystery but the real mystery is to himself.
    I was disappointed when on Alias I had figured out the entire mystery of the show two years before it appeared that the characters had which felt anti-climatic.
    Lost feels exactly like Alias so I haven’t cared to watch it.
    And if Abrams does for Star Trek what Ron Moore did for BSG then maybe thats not a good thing.
    BSG has had ample opportunity to truly develop the cylons and yet who and what they are kept in subtext. And when Moore finally tells us that the cylons are really us and the human race living in harmony on Earth we will still not have a complete picture of the reinvention.
    Just my prediction hopefully I’m wrong and hopefully the full nature of the cylons will be revealed before the show ends.
    But will I go and watch the new Star Trek film more than likely I’m still a Trek Geek if anything.

44. JJ read the handbook on how to talk about movies based on movies and things people always love… step #1 reassure fans that the film will satisfy them … step #2 be sure to tell people who don’t know what the hell Star Trek is that they’ll like the film too….. I mean when was the last time you read an interview for this type of film and the director said “I made it for the fans, I don’t give a fuck if the rest of the people know what the hell is going on!”?
    We won’t know how it is until we see it.
    Ummm… I found the term “Trekker” reassuring… someone at least told him not to call them Trekkies… they hate that…
    And I agree, let’s move Trek forward, leave the past in the past…

45. Obviously the two that are mainstream are the two my mom saw: The Voyage Home and First Contact. One of the two greats is The Wrath of Khan. Nearly unwatchable (by cringe-inducing content) are Nemesis, Insurrection, Generations, The Final Frontier, and (in hindsight) The Undiscovered Country, so the parlor game is whether The Motion Picture or The Search for Spock is great or unwatchable. Could go either way!

46. My assessment of the movies that I’ve seen agrees almost exactly with Andrew’s above; I have a couple of minor additions.
    3: I have to say that I like Star Trek III. It had a good villian, interesting challenges, and it came right out and made the statement that the people are what’s important, not the ship, and the audience was too busy cheering for the good guys to notice.
    5: Pile of suck. However, it makes an interesting exersise in that it has some really good scenes–and thus illustrates that good scenes do not a good movie make.
    6: I think I like this one a bit more than Andrew. Not too bad for the last (real) outing for these characters.

47. As long as the re-inventors love and respect the existing franchise, everything should be OK. This is how is worked out so well for Russell T. Davies and Doctor Who in 2005 (everyone on the project grew up fans of the show), and this is a fan base at least as old and fanatical as that of Trek.
    [There’s a big discussion going on over at badastronomy.com about io9’s suggestion, btw.]

48. I must be the only ST fan who thinks that IV was…meh. It tried hard, but holy crap, it made so many of the characters look kinda lame.
    It was the third – worst in terms of Kirk, and I can’t think of any character that came out of that well.
    Still think that II was the best damned one of the bunch, followed by First Contact then Insurrection. I would have picked Insurrection over First Contact, but for the damned *JOYSTICK* for “Manual Control”.
    Um…no. No, no, no.
    The problem was that II was just such a damned great ST movie in so many little ways. Like the fact that they show people *cleaning up*. Or that little “I have GOT that superior bastard” smile Shatner has when Spock points out Khan is thinking in 2-D. It was…subtle. To get subtle out of *Shatner*? Damn dude.
    and the score ruled. Much better than anything Goldsmith ever came up with.

49. I’ve often been disappointed with ST films, especially TNG ones– it was like they took everything I liked about the show, and just shat on it, and topped the whole mess with this palpable feeling that the studio didn’t trust Trek fans to enjoy the movie unless they made it violent/fast/dark– and had characters doing all sorts of atypical things.
    Also, since this is my first time commenting here, (and I’ve seen over and over again that you actually read the comments)I want to let you know that I always got a big kick out of Wesley’s character– it was nice to see someone about my age getting to roam about the Enterprise! You must be a pretty good actor, too… I can still remember feeling sort of embarrassed for Wes in one episode where he was rather short with his mom. Ha! It’s amusing how we can become so emotionally invested with these characters, isn’t it?

50. I think we all have to take a deep breath and repeat after me: it couldn’t get any worse than it was. OK, so maybe it probably won’t get any worse than it was (or most especially V)
    BTW, I just rented and saw Clovefield. I REALLY hope the ST isn’t going to be filmed in shaky cam. And I don’t want to see any mystery hatches at Star Fleet Academy.
    Let’s hope for the best.
    BTW, maybe Abrams could re-invent Star Wars next 🙂

Comments are closed.