Also, I wouldn't expect Abrams to stick with Star Wars long. I'd say 3 movies, tops, probably 2. Disney wants to turn it into a James Bond type franchise, and as with long series like James Bond and Harry Potter, you can expect the director to change every couple of movies, even if the previous director did an awesome job.

Maybe Disney won't be a cheap piece of crap, and will pay a good director enough money to direct 7 or 8 of 'em. Pipe dream, I suppose...

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.

Abrams will move on after two movies indeed, but it won't be just because of Disney keeping the rotation fresh. Abrams has ADD and can't stay focused on any one project for long. Leaves a trail of unfinished projects in his wake ("What About Brian", "Six Degrees", "Undercovers", "Alcatraz") and his successful ones get taken on by others.

And "Trek" was horribly forced writing and sheeny melodrama. I cannot fathom how so many smart media consumers on this board enjoyed that movie. It's like a body-snatchers conspiracy.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

Montana right now in this thread:

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.

You, on the other hand...

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

I've not even seen the Star Trek movie, nor do I know more than a tiny bit about Star Trek. Since I haven't claimed to, I'm not sure how I can have my head up there in this thread?

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.

OK, fine, I'll change the victims of recto-cranial inversion to Pehawk and Kearly.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

That works! Though, I don't know how much merit there is in that accusation. I'm serious when I say I know nothing about Star Trek, lol. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt!

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.

I'm not even going to argue. I don't have to. Based on what critics and audiences thought (95%, one of the highest Rotten Tomato scores of 2009, and one of the highest rated summer blockbusters ever), you might as well be Baghdad Bob on this one Brandon.

Montana's new nickname should be Baghdad Bob, for awhile at least.

All that shows is that 95% of critics don't understand what Trek is. There were plenty of critics, FWIW, who admitted as an aside that XI showed little depth or greater purpose and had a swiss cheese plot, but were apparently fine with that since it was a reboot. Curiosity, the suck of "Nemesis", and its reboot nature helped it a lot.

Once XII proves just as stupidly written and it starts sinking in with people that Abrams has little on his mind besides typical popcorn action and cheap emotion, I'll bet the critical honeymoon will die down considerably. Abrams might manage to keep the box office bubble going with the whole tired "it is Khan?" shtick, though you'll probably see more critics take shots at the movie purely out of annoyance over it.

If you want a more insightful review, read [url]http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997]Roger Ebert's dissenting opinion[/url]. Gives it a fair shake.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

Montanahawk05, you must realize Star Trek has the most ubercritical fans in every culture on the planet and you are telling all 999 gagillion of them that they are wrong? At this point all i can think of is that your expectations were completely unrealistic. Saying that your opinion is in the minority is a massive understatement.

Shy.

_________________
Just remember, football is 80% mental and 40% physical.
Little Giants (1994) – Steve Emtman

I know my opinion is in the minority. And I don't often go "screw everyone else, they're wrong" on things. But since we're talking about something that doesn't matter much, then I feel pretty comfortable in my opinion even if it is in the minority.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

Montana, you are the you're wrong guy, that's you.

I'm curious, can you rank the films? Or top 5 so we have context?

Wrath of Khan (2)
First Contact (8)
Undiscovered Country (6)
Voyage Home (4)
Search for Spock (3)

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

I'd go;

Kahn
Abrams
Galaxy Quest (unofficial)
Undiscovered Country
Search for Spock
First Contact

Galaxy Quest was a way smarter movie than XI.

Just got done watching the "Lost" pilot, which Abrams wrote AND directed, and remembered how awesome it was on every level. So it's not like he can't do great work. He just didn't do it here.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

Well, Abrams was also assigned with reenergizing the base AND bringing in new audiences. Have to factor that in. That was accomplished. I think his 2nd one will be a lil more aligned with what we're accustom too.

I'm hoping its darker than the other ones.

I don't think we'll know if he REALLY brought in new audiences until we see the box office returns for XII, and see how much of XI's success was just curiosity. Of course, like I said, JJ's stupid "is it Khan?" campaign will probably keep the returns inflated.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power