Abrahams’ Trek was focused on action scenes and drama, while the legacy of Trek is very much focused on reflecting the problems of modern society, the hope for a better future for mankind, and using diplomacy even when it’s hard to do so.
They also made quite significant changes to the characters, which felt rather unnecessary to me. The recent Trek movies were fine (better than most older Trek movies, no time travel to talk to whales) but I didn’t think they were very Star Trek. I think the movies would’ve gone down better if he hadn’t used Trek as a basis for his movie.
It is a long road, getting from there to here. I say make your own way. I have opinions about Trek that the larger community seems to disagree with pretty strongly but meh.
My unsolicited lukewarm take/advice is; don’t let them tell you whats good and whats bad, decide for yourself. Just like Star Wars theres a lot to love, and sure a lot to criticize. Sometimes criticism is fun, but I’ve long since left behind fans who make their entire relationship with the franchise about how bad X or Y is. Its exhausting.
Um, Damien Lindleof has been in multiple interviews saying that Abrams involvement after season 1 was practically non-existent. I’m pretty sure I remember interviews and a production of that went over the creation of season 1 and he wrote the pilot and episode 3 and that was about the extent of what he did, Lindleof made up the rest with the other writer whose name I can’t remember.
From pretty much all accounts I am not seeing Abrams involvement with Lost past season 1? Where are you getting this?
![[SWSW] Clearly...](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/09343564-a72f-447b-92e4-0913d00c7ec6.jpeg){kind=link}
I still don’t understand why anybody lets J. J. Abrams make anything after the clusterfuck of Lost.
I appreciate that he managed to make both Star Trek and Star Wars fans very angry. That took serious skill.
I’m just watching Star Trek TOS for the first time, just became a new fan. Did ST fans actually hate his movies?
Abrahams’ Trek was focused on action scenes and drama, while the legacy of Trek is very much focused on reflecting the problems of modern society, the hope for a better future for mankind, and using diplomacy even when it’s hard to do so.
They also made quite significant changes to the characters, which felt rather unnecessary to me. The recent Trek movies were fine (better than most older Trek movies, no time travel to talk to whales) but I didn’t think they were very Star Trek. I think the movies would’ve gone down better if he hadn’t used Trek as a basis for his movie.
For sure. Nobody hates Star Trek more than Star Trek fans.
I think I have a long way to go then lol
It is a long road, getting from there to here. I say make your own way. I have opinions about Trek that the larger community seems to disagree with pretty strongly but meh.
My unsolicited lukewarm take/advice is; don’t let them tell you whats good and whats bad, decide for yourself. Just like Star Wars theres a lot to love, and sure a lot to criticize. Sometimes criticism is fun, but I’ve long since left behind fans who make their entire relationship with the franchise about how bad X or Y is. Its exhausting.
Abrams was only involved in the first episode of Lost.
Nope.
Um, Damien Lindleof has been in multiple interviews saying that Abrams involvement after season 1 was practically non-existent. I’m pretty sure I remember interviews and a production of that went over the creation of season 1 and he wrote the pilot and episode 3 and that was about the extent of what he did, Lindleof made up the rest with the other writer whose name I can’t remember.
From pretty much all accounts I am not seeing Abrams involvement with Lost past season 1? Where are you getting this?
So you’re already contradicted yourself?
I’d appreciate information rather than condescension.