Spielberg as Star Trek Director

Now that J.J.Abrams has committed to Star Wars over at Disney, it seems Paramount is left swinging in the wind with Star Trek. The suits at Paramount know that Abrams can’t put the effort into the project that is necessary to please fans of the first two movies, and assigning the task to underlings isn’t the same as doing it yourself. The solution: Reboot again. This time find someone with a passion for science fiction.

Abrams is perfect for the Star Wars directors chair. His style is more suited to the epic myth story than Scifi. Although Star Wars is considered science fiction by most, the reality is that Lucas intended it to be more like the Gilgamesh or King Arthur tales. He was greatly influence by Joseph Campbell and states that Star Wars was to be a “blend of mythology and technology” from the beginning. I think J.J.Abrams will make the best Star Wars ever.

Now for Star Trek. Think about it a few moments. Who is the best Scifi director of all time?  Who has the real passion and understands science fiction better than anyone else? Name   three of your favorite Scifi films, and I bet at least one was directed by Steven Spielberg. I know he has tons of money and many irons in the fire. However, Spielberg chooses his projects based on emotion. What could be more emotional than having the greatest Scifi director work on the greatest Scifi story. Sounds like a match made in heaven to me.

J.J.Abrams or Trekkers: Who Owns the Star Trek Franchise?

J.J.Abrams is a great Director, Producer, Screenwriter……..yada, yada, yada. OK, enough with the wikibullshit. He did a good job with his first Trek movie, not great, good. Lost was a great TV show in the beginning that lost (pun intended) its appeal as the years went by, culminating in a big disappointing finale. I felt like kicking in the screen when it turned out they were dead all along. What crap!………. OK, I’ve calmed down now.

I understand that Mr. Abrams wants to put his own brand on the Trek franchise. This is understandable; he is an artist, and that’s what they do. However, I think he is veering too far from the original Roddenberry concept.

For example, the Kirk character, in the first movie, is portrayed as  more of a reckless, seat of the pants, lucky idiot than the original thoughtful tactician like in Balance of Terror. Of course, the opening scene with Juvenal delinquent Kirk running from the law in his step fathers five hundred year old corvette, while listening to an equally old version of the Beastie Boys Sabotage is very (sarcasm) Trek worthy. Maybe you should have titled the movie Star Trek: Rebel without an Enterprise; your Jim Kirk is more like Jim Stark. By the way,  I like the Beasties, its just they have their place in my iPod, not in my Trek movie. Come on, I know you have to appeal to the 13-18 year old crowd. But, at the dignity of an institution that belongs to the fans.This brings me to the point of my rant.

Does Star Trek belong to people that put up big bucks and butcher a great piece of science fiction history or does Star Trek belong to the people that signed petitions, and fought to keep it on the air when network suits wanted to cancel it because it was too intellectual?  Their reasoning: viewers are too stupid to follow a story line more complicated than Lost in Space.  When Gene Roddenberry died it seems the Star Trek philosophy died with him. The Next Generation followed his vision because he was alive during most of production. Now you want to ignore the whole TNG timeline. Talk about arrogant!

Mr. Abrams, I know you will never see this. However, I am putting this in cyberspace hoping there are some people left that feel what you have done to a science fiction icon borders on criminal.

LeVar Burton Calls BS on J.J. Abrams ‘Star Trek’ Comments

LeVar Burton Calls BS on J.J. Abrams ‘Star Trek’ Comments.

I have to agree with LeVar on this one. TNG was probably the best in the series of Star Trek incarnations.