Why JJ Abrams will kill Star Trek’s Spirit!
I am a self-proclaimed fan of JJ Abrams. I enjoy everything he has ever done. I certainly enjoy his grasp of mystery and suspense but also his ability to intrigue fans and bring them into the world’s he has created. However, much can be said about his ability to “flake out” on running his projects or handling the material well, mainly his produced TV shows. The thing is I am not opposed to him getting a chance to take on the most heavy fan laden project Hollywood has ever known, Star Trek. If anyone has deserved a chance to take Trek and reboot it it’s him and his creative fellows consisting of: Damon Lindelof, Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci.
That being said, it’s the way we have heard this project being talked about by Abrams from the start allowing you to make the case that he will kill the Star Trek spirit. Many of you reading this are probably saying, what do you mean? What I mean is, I believe Abrams will sacrifice fanboy/fangirl happiness over pleasing the mass audiences. No longer will Trek fans be able to look back and say we are the first group of cult fans to drive a show back into existence and bring a series of films and TV spin-offs like none other. No longer are we a spirit that defined people learning the Klingon language and dressing like a Vulcan on a Sunday afternoon. However, it isn’t just the fanatics it is also the men and women who simply watched the broadcasts in their easy chairs to see this multi-cultural crew take on a 5 year mission and explore the galaxy, people like my father, who then extended the rite to me as a child. That spirit of Trek will be gone and will be replaced by Abrams taking classic, iconic characters and ushering in new young and “hot” faces to carry them in this “new” take on the Star Trek story.
Actor’s like Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto have no idea the type of “hearthrobness” they will receive after the release of Trek. Eric Bana plays a villain where some people will say its, “Eric Bana he is so hot! Even as a bad guy!” Trek isn’t about a journey to the stars commenting on our society anymore but rather a journey to redefine Trek with “pretty” people, “pretty” effects and “pretty” environments. I am torn with this issue being a fan who was indoctrinated from birth into 3 things, Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Star Trek and if you look at their reboots, prequels, revisits, they have all been bad. Lucas killed Star Wars for me with the awful prequels. Lucas and Spielberg succeeded in ruining the greatest adventurer the screen has ever known with the Indy and the Crystal Skull garbage that came out earlier this year. Star Trek’s spirit has been waning since Berman and Co. couldn’t get Enterprise running and the fact the Nemesis was a box office disaster. Arguably this is why Abrams and crew were brought in, to take the franchise that was waning and rebuild it. But as I aforementioned it’s how he has stated his direction for doing so that bothers me. At some point in the news cycle of the project Abrams came out and said that,
“The whole point was to try to make this movie for fans of movies, not fans of `Star Trek,’ necessarily,’” Abrams said
“But we are not making the movie for that contingent alone,” said Abrams. “It was an opportunity to take what I think has been a maligned world - to sound crass, a franchise - and treat it in a way that made it something that I wanted to see. To take the characters, the thoughtfulness, the personalities, the sense of adventure, the idea of humanity working together, the sense of social commentary and innovation, all that stuff. To take it and apply it in a way that felt genuinely thrilling.”
In response to these comments it is very apparent the fans are considered but that isn’t the drive of his direction. Abrams says that he wants to make a film he would “want to see.” To understand this fully I think you have to look at Abrams history of movies and TV, which is “pretty” people, love triangles, character driven material. Look at Alias, LOST, Felicity, Cloverfield and Armageddon, all of these feature pretty faces and lots sex appeal combined with action driven stories. None of this is bad but I see Star Trek becoming something that without his name, the Star Trek name and the budget could be something that might easily appear on the CW after One Tree Hill and re-runs of Felicity. I have no doubt there will be thrills, action and endless fun but Trek is more than that. It is about social commentary and while Abrams will honor that I think that spirit will be overshadowed by the marketing of these young pretty actors dressed in new Starfleet garb, likely to feature girls in tight body suits to highlight curves and guys wearing tight body suits to highlight muscle tone. This is no different then the original Trek but in this day in age you can bet there will be some “sexing” up.
Abrams says that,
“I feel like this is so unlike what you expect, so unlike the `Star Trek’ you’ve seen. At the same time, it’s being true to what’s come before, honoring it,” Abrams said. “I can say the effects for `Star Trek’ have never, ever been done like this. … I can only tell you the idea of the universe of `Star Trek’ has never been given this kind of treatment.”
Again…of course this is true and warranted… a lot of what he refers to stems from the special effects that this film will have which are literally twice as much as any Trek movie before and the budget can attest to that but I digress.
Kevin Smith recently came out and talked about the new Trek movie, after pre-viewing it. He went about saying that fans shouldn’t worry, the new Kirk shines and JJ and crew really out do themselves with this film. My analyzing of this is that [and I am a fan of Smith] I have never once heard him talk about Star Trek or mention he is a fan. It seems like he is more a comic book, Star Wars fan than anything so Abram’s film does exactly what is should which is appeal to a non-fan. Shatner is not in this film that is enough for fans to believe that he doesn’t take them seriously.
Ultimately, this long rant highlights a few things and here is my summary of them. Abrams will kill the spirit of Trek in order to make a massive general audience appeal work. This seems to be a movie where young girls can say “Chris Pine is so hot!” A film where guys can see an erotic, sexed-up, Ulhura, played by a young and sexy Zoe Saldana. This “new” take is all about toys and sex appeal and young actors promote both very easily. Ask yourself why does this movie have so many special effects? Because it can! But more effects also means more toys and sets for kids to buy. Young actors promote better and will go everywhere from the Oscars to Nickelodeon’s Kids Choice Awards and hit MTV and VH-1 in between. It’s smart that’s where the Next Generation movies failed because nobody except fans of the show want to see Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes or Marina Sirtis in tight body suits anymore and they said the same thing about the original cast too. [FYI - When they reignited the original cast in Star Trek: the Motion Picture - they changed the suits because the actors were fat and old but nobody minded.] This is because they both harnessed the spirit of Trek. Voyager did too but only for awhile. The key to a reboot is bringing in fresh storytelling, and talent — usually young talent. A young Kirk/Spock story is easier to tell and will have more appeal than a completely new Star Trek era with new characters and this may be JJ’s argument for honoring the fans. If he didn’t think the fans mattered then why bring back Kirk or Spock at all? Why not do something completely original and new?
I sincerely hope I eat my words and I am so wrong that I will spend the rest of life paying for it. This being said I think the case can be made that Abrams may destroy Trek in order to create a film where young heartthrobs persuade teen’s boys and girls to see a movie that once was referred to as geeky and un-cool. Star Trek has always had an association with nerds, geeks, Trekkies, fan boys but not with the masses and that is what makes it great, a cult classic that defined cult classic. Do you really want to walk that line JJ? After all Paramount and CBS do otherwise they would have left the film in the hands of Berman and Co. to keep spitting out a crappy series every 4 years until Trek conventions begin to get less and less attention and fans really don’t care anymore and the spirit of Trek dies on its own becoming an extinct part of pop culture like the pet rock and I love the 80s.
Before I dig into this, let me say one thing: I love Star Trek. When I was a kid, every weekend my Dad would take me to Blockbuster and for weeks at a time I would rent one Star Trek movie after another, limiting myself to one each weekend. I started with ‘Star Trek: The Motion Picture’, and fell in love when I saw ‘The Wrath of Khan’, and weekend after weekend I would rent the next installment and watch it over and over until I had to take it back to the store. After that I saw every movie that came out in theaters. I only watched the series sparingly, simply because I’ve never been much of a TV watcher, but Star Trek has always been something I love, with the Nicholas Meyer entries being my favorites.
Let me also say this: I don’t know a lot about J.J. Abrams. I know he worked on the script for ‘Armageddon’, I know he was behind shows like ‘Alias’ and ‘Lost’, but again, I’ve never been much of a TV watcher. It’s rare that I get into a TV series to the point where I buy the season sets. The only things I’ve seen with his name on them (not including ‘Armageddon’, since that wasn’t technically an Abrams creation) are the feature films he’s been involved in, mainly ‘Mission: Impossible III’ (which I enjoyed) and ‘Cloverfield’ (which I really enjoyed). Since reboots are fashionable today, when I heard he was going to be giving Star Trek the reboot/reset treatment, I thought it was a solid choice, and I still think he is.
Let’s face it: Star Trek is a tired property. I liked ‘Star Trek: Nemesis’ (at least I remember liking it), but Paramount’s decision to put it out to compete with ‘Lord of the Rings’ was an ill-concieved one, and spelled doom for the film financially. ‘Enterprise’ wasn’t well regarded (I only saw the pilot) and fell by the wayside earlier than Star Trek shows normally do, which doesn’t give the money men any reason to believe that enough people still like the show to where they are coming out and supporting it. Thus, Star Trek also lies in a coma in the medium of television, as well as in feature film. But like any coma victim, there is still life inside that body.
The idea of the reboot is something that is rampant in cinema right now, and studios are digging up as many dead and/or dying properties, giving them a facelift, and putting them back out there, often with great success. James Bond was a property that seemed to be going nowhere after ‘Die Another Day’, which ditched the organic stunts of its predecessors in favor of bad CGI. So what did producer Barbara Broccoli do? She brought in Martin Campbell, had the series take a new direction, brought Bond back down to Earth, and shook up the formula that made the franchise new and exciting again. It was a huge success, both creatively and financially. Remember what happened before ‘Casino Royale’ came out? Daniel Craig was announced as James Bond and fans threw a fit. “He’s not James Bond! He’s James BLONDE!” You heard all kinds of criticism and people getting upset about this decision before the film came out and people were willing to give it a chance. Broccoli and co. could have easily given in to fan outcry and fired Craig and replaced him with someone else, but they didn’t. They knew what they were doing, they stuck to their guns, and they released a film that silenced its critics. The internet was also abuzz when Heath Ledger signed on to take up the mantle of the Joker for ‘The Dark Knight’, and fan reaction ranged from angry to skeptical. A lot of commentary seemed to sound something like this: “Seriously? The pretty boy from ‘10 Things I Hate About You’ and ‘Brokeback Mountain’? What?!” Fans were hoping for someone like a Crispin Glover or a Tim Roth (a character actor good at playing crazy) to fill the shoes once owned by Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson, instead what they got was a guy who made the ladies swoon. But when those first teasers and trailers for ‘The Dark Knight’ came out, no one doubted that Ledger would not only make a great Joker, but that even in death he would own the role, lock, stock, and barrel. No one was fussing over Nolan’s casting decisions.
What I’m trying to say is this, and I’m going to quote D_Davis from the Genrebusters podcast, because he put this very well when describing fans and how they often react to things, better than I could anyway. “Fans have a hard time seeing past their own limited view, they don’t look at things objectively and are too blinded by their own ideals of what the perfect thing should be. I think fans do a lot to destroy creativity in the comic book, video game, and movie industry, because these industries feel like they need to pander to the fans and give them what they like. What fans need to realize is that they did not create the things they love, they do not own the things they love, and the creators really have no obligation to them beyond delivering the best possible creation they can.”
I know that last statement is a firebomb, especially here, but hear me out. I know fanboy/geek culture really well, because I was immersed in it in high school, and I know how fanboys (or, if you prefer, fanmen) like to wear their fanboy badge on their sleeve, and that’s great, I encourge that, because it’s really cool to gather with people that have similar tastes and love similar things and have fun conversations, Lord knows that’s why people come to this website and listen to the Fused Film Podcast. However, a lot fans feel that since they love the comics/films/video games they love, they feel they should have a say in what direction these properties go in, and while I feel it’s important for creators to at least listen to what the fans think, I don’t think they should feel any obligation to go along with what fans think should happen. I’m not saying that creators are always right and fans are always wrong, it’s certainly not that black and white, I don’t see how any could defend many of the decisions George Lucas has made in regards to the direction of ‘Star Wars’ (and believe me, there are some adamant Lucas defenders out there).
This idea that J.J. Abrams is going to destroy the spirit of Star Trek by ignoring the fans and instead opting for something completely populist and bland is worth listening to, because, in theory, it could happen. I won’t say it won’t, because anything’s possible. However I don’t think that is what’s going to happen. Kevin points to other Abram’s creations, which feature a cast of georgeous twenty-somethings that don’t exist anywhere but in New York and L.A. high society, and he has point. I strongly disagree with the statement about ‘Armageddon’ being among them, as Bruce Willis, Michael Clark Duncan, Will Patton, Owen Wilson, Steve Buscemi, Udo Kier, Peter Stormare and Billy Bob Thornton do not into pretty boy mold he’s describing, only Ben Affleck and Liv Tyler do, plus it’s not an Abrams creation, he merely did a pass on the script. That’s a film that belongs to its director, Michael Bay. But I’m getting off topic, I don’t think that Abrams is foolish enough to alienate the primary audience of Trekkies, nor do I think he will do so out of ignorance. I completely geeked out when I saw the teaser trailer for this movie, it’s not a teaser designed to get the mall crowd to come to the theater, it’s a teaser designed for fans of Star Trek, to get fans talking, to get them excited, and that’s what it does. Does anyone here honestly think that the jocks who beat them up in high school are going to see this movie and suddenly start showing up in their letterman’s jackets to DragonCon? Hell no. Nor do I think it will destroy Star Trek, because even if the movie is terrible, it will get rejected by fans and the public, and the property will again go into hibernation until another visionary producer/director comes along to revive it, and the old shows and movies featuring Shatner and Stewart that fans love are still out there to enjoy and for new fans to discover.
And speaking of Shatner, why all the fuss about him appearing in this film? Whenever an old TV property is adapted to the screen, people seem to feel like the TV actors need to have a cameo, but I personally feel it’s distracting and it cheapens it a bit. I’m not against Nimoy playing the part he’s playing given his role in the old series, but Shatner? I don’t think Abrams is going to use him and he’s probably wiser for it (if he does, he needs to tread carefully).
Abrams knows what he’s getting himself into, this guy has been around the block, he knows what he’s doing. But at the same time, he’s making the movie he wants to make, not the movie he feels like he should make in order to please certain people. If Star Trek is going to be rebooted, it needs to be reinvented the way Nolan reinvented Batman or the way Campbell reinvented Bond, and that is by doing something different with it and shaking things up to get people talking and buzzing again, not churn out the same old crap the way they were doing with ‘Enterprise’. If Abrams were making this movie for the Star Trek niche crowd, he would damn the film not only financially, but creatively as well. Abrams is a guy who knows what he’s doing, if anything we should wish him the best and go in with an open mind when the film comes out.
Wow! Hunter! I really appreciate your thoughts. This is an extremely well thought out comment. I agree. I think Abrams deserves a chance to take Star Trek and roll with it. I was merely pointing out what this movie could become if it isn’t treated right. I have no qualms with bringing his own take to the franchise and characters but if the mythology and the treatment isn’t taken up with caution then it is possible this movie will kill trek for a long time.
Yes, it is a herculean task for Abrams, since Star Trek is one of the most beloved TV/film properties out there. And I definitely see your concern, as my only complaint in regards to ‘Cloverfield’ was how the cast was made up of hot/sexy twentysomethings (the movie still kicked ass though). But I don’t think Abrams is casting based on looks alone, I’m sure he’s looking at what they can bring to the table as actors, which is why I’m glad he went with an obscure dude to play Kirk.
But yes, if this movie does in fact turn out to be crap, it will kill Trek for awhile (but someone will try to bring it back alive). But if it’s successful, we could get a new series, new fans, new life for everything. I hope it’s the latter.
I don’t think you’re wrong, but you have to remember that what Abrams is REALLY good at, more than anything, is getting you into your seat at the theater. Look at the way Cloverfield was merketed. It’s just that. I loved Cloverfield, I love LOST, Alias (for the first two seasons) were good, and Fringe (I saw a pre-screening of the pilot at Comic-Con) was okay…
I think this movie is really going to be fencey. The thing that people should be talking about and aren’t are Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. Those two will kill the movie. Those two are the ones who’ll make it about flash and no character and Michael Bay (really? Let’s market this and Fringe by calling them “Writers of Transformers”). That’s the bad thing. I think Abrams will do a good job of making it fan service, it’s the writing we really have to worry about.
And the Kevin Smith comment. You’re right. He likes comics and Star Wars, but he also likes the Trek movies (the even ones), so while he’s not the greatest of judges of a movie like this, it’s still a mark that it’ll be a good movie. And that’s at least something. If Star Trek isn’t a good movie, who gives a frak if it’s a good Trek film. A good movie is a good movie and a bad movie is a bad movie. I’ve never heard of a good [franchise] movie that was a bad movie. Doesn’t happen. The fact that it is a good movie is a step in the right direction….
And besides, who’s to say that Abrams making it more accessible or mainstream will make it bad… Like comics and that industry, the fans should be glad that people are being exposed to it. Look at The Dark Knight. Comics fans were elated that people were seeing people who aren’t necessarily comics readers experience the joy that they got from reading the comics. That’s what Abrams is trying to do. He’s trying to Dark Knight the Star Trek franchise, and while nothing might ever compare, it’s still a worthier goal than making another film that’s catering to only the fans, so much so that no one else can appreciate it.
I talk too much.
You are not the first or the last, but I am going to be YOUR FREAKIN HUCKLEBERRY. This is why fanboys are hypocrites. Right here. Look close now, or you miss it!
“What I’m trying to say is this, and I’m going to quote D_Davis from the Genrebusters podcast, because he put this very well when describing fans and how they often react to things, better than I could anyway. “’Fans have a hard time seeing past their own limited view, they don’t look at things objectively and are too blinded by their own ideals of what the perfect thing should be. I think fans do a lot to destroy creativity in the comic book, video game, and movie industry, because these industries feel like they need to pander to the fans and give them what they like. What fans need to realize is that they did not create the things they love, they do not own the things they love, and the creators really have no obligation to them beyond delivering the best possible creation they can.’
I know that last statement is a firebomb, especially here, but hear me out. I know fanboy/geek culture really well, because I was immersed in it in high school, and I know how fanboys (or, if you prefer, fanmen) like to wear their fanboy badge on their sleeve, and that’s great, I encourge that, because it’s really cool to gather with people that have similar tastes and love similar things and have fun conversations, Lord knows that’s why people come to this website and listen to the Fused Film Podcast. However, a lot fans feel that since they love the comics/films/video games they love, they feel they should have a say in what direction these properties go in, and while I feel it’s important for creators to at least listen to what the fans think, I don’t think they should feel any obligation to go along with what fans think should happen. I’m not saying that creators are always right and fans are always wrong, it’s certainly not that black and white, I don’t see how any could defend many of the decisions George Lucas has made in regards to the direction of ‘Star Wars’ (and believe me, there are some adamant Lucas defenders out there).”
Did you catch the hypocrite in action? Did you? It’s okay for everyone to not have a say in these properties unless Lucas is involved, then it’s okay. POPPYFUCKINGCOCK.
You are such a hypocritie, that you cannot even keep your own CODE right in one paragraph. It’s an all or nothing thing. Dale Davis (If he’s not named Dale… tough. Dale Davis ruled, and he gets some love) is right. Fans cannot see past their own bullshit. Sort of like the bullshit you have for Star Wars. Bullshit that’s almost entirely about the people WITH THE PROBLEM, then the movies themselves.
So realize that you are a part of a problem, that you are the problem, and that you have a problem. Once you realize that you are just a fanboy with irrational hatred for something due to your own whack ass bollocked biases like every other internet poster. You will be fine.
Until then, go find another street to play on, or try not to be such a damn hypocrite. I doubt it suits you very well.
I will keep this short and sweet because I pretty much said everything I wanted to say on the upcoming podcast. Lets not forget that “fans” saved Star Trek with conventions and being irrational. Also if JJ does not do a good job with catering to the “fans” this could be the death of Star Trek in our generation. I know that sounds crazy, but I make my argument on the pod cast. JJ needs to tread very carefully and not forget about the the base Star Trek fans.
Wow, take a chill pill GSOBR. I didn’t say that fans should have a say in Star Wars or that Lucas shouldn’t have a say. All I was saying is that it’s REALLY easy to make an argument against what he has done with Star Wars. And while I disagree with what he’s done with it, it’s his call to make, and NEVER did I say it WASN’T, because HE OWNS IT, and HE CREATED IT. I never said that he shouldn’t have a say in Star Wars and that the fans should. You pulled that conclusion completely out of thin air Huckleberry Finn, perhaps you better read what I wrote next time instead of just skimming it. My comments on Star Wars weren’t at all hateful (unlike your comments towards me), I was just saying that a lot of fans disagree with how Star Wars has been handled and I agree that where it’s gone has been ill-conceived, the only reason I brought that up was to make the point that fans vs. creators isn’t a black and white issue, I never said Lucas can’t or shouldn’t be involved with Star Wars. Lucas can do whatever he wants with it, it doesn’t mean I have to like it, but I never said he has no right to be involved or that he should relinquish control of the property or any such nonsense. It’s his baby, he can do what he wants, but like any consumer, I reserve the right to say “No thank you!” to ‘The Clone Wars’ when it comes out in theaters or on television.
And for the record, I don’t dislike everything Lucas has done with Star Wars lately, because I really enjoyed ‘Revenge of the Sith’. What I was mainly referring to (which I neglected to point out) was the changes he made to the original trilogy, as well as his decision to make the original cuts unavailable (which he has since given in on the latter…sort of).
I think the bigger question is who cares if there is anoth Star Trek movie or series. The first show was bad nobody chews through dialog like Shatner. The crap that has followed from the movies to the series has proven there is no place in the modern age for shotty sci fi. So let’s turn to the future and stop worrying about a tired old worn out franchaise that should have died out 40 years ago.
Shoddy sci-fi? TIRED AND WORN OUT? Someone here is smoking some daffy. Seriously; Star Trek is one of the better written and thoughtful sci-fi ever to be existed on this planet. Gene Rodenberry believed in humanity getting our shit together, and voyaging through the stars. Only to discover that we have to help other folks get their shit to gethers. THAT’S UTOPIAN MAN! Seriously though; you most likely like some sci-fi show that either has muppets, shit cgi, or evolves GATES of some kind. NONE OF THOSE EXIST without TREK. Remember this fact the next time you call something “SHODDY”.
That aside; I take your chill pill Coyote, and spit it right at you. You have no idea the fire, brimstone, and vitriol I can bring to your above post.
I will simply refrain and state this: find another father/brother figure instead of Han Solo, maybe then you will be able to get over the fact he never shot first.
I think Star Trek’s time has come and gone. I hope Abram’s Star Trek kills more than Star Trek’s spirt. The last good Sci-Fi show I saw was John Doe. I don’t think I see any of Rottenberries influence on that show. Every idea Rottenberry had he stole from someone else. Star Trek was hardly original. Rottenberry stole more ideas than Steven King. I do agree with Bonzaifan just let trek go man just let em go.
It’s funny how the anonymity internet gives people an excuse to act like complete jerks, troll around message boards, and suck everything fun, interesting, and engaging about having conversations with other folks in an online forum by replacig it with petty insults and worthless sophomoric remarks. I stand by my comments, you can take them and twist them into whatever you feel is appropriate to make yourself feel good. Have at it buddy, hope it gets you off.
Coyote: TROLL? Yeah… I post more than anyone else here… and that makes me a troll? Nah. You coming on here and stating what you did, then following it up with complete and utter hypocrisy is TROLLING in it’s highest forms.
The thing of it is: if you really believed in what you stated. You would not act like a little kid in response to someone stepping to you and your hypocrisy. It’s not like you are alone in this hypocrisy, but it does not change the fact it’s still hypocrisy.
It’s not like I am hard to find. Seriously, ask Kevin, and bring it. If you feel like bringing it.
Why are you so angry? All I’ve seen you do on the comments sections is attack people and treat them like idiots, insulting their arguments rather than engaging in an actual discussion. I wrote something, and you posted something shrill and loud that didn’t make any sense as a response to what I wrote. Why can’t you say something like “Hey man, I think what you said about Star Wars doesn’t jive with the rest of your argument” instead of cheapening your argument by swearing, calling me names, and acting like a jerk. I would’ve happily explained what I meant as I did earlier, probably not in such a defensive manner, had you taken the former approach. I never insulted you in my original post, I never insulted Kevin, I never insulted ANYONE, there was absolutely no mature or rational reason for you to act like that.
Also, just so we’re clear on the definition of the word “troll”:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Troll
Definitions 2 and/or 3 were the ones that go along pretty well with the context in which I used it.
Coyote: you stated something hypocritical. You stated something that goes like this; “All fans have the right to bitch, and they are usually wrong about their bitching. Unless it involves George Lucas, whose a cocksucker, and deserves are the slagging that he gets.” HYPOCRITE! HYPOCRITE! HYPOCRITE!
Again; you posted a bunch of nonsense, and you resort to the troll card. You also resort to being a big baby, and stating I am mean. I am not mean. I would do this TO YOUR FACE. If I ever meet you. I will do it TO YOUR FACE.
I state how I feel because how you feel OFFENDS ME. It’s the same insufferable garbage that has made me proud to be a Star Wars fan over the years, in no small part to the realization you are not a Star Wars fan. So stay on your side, I will stay on mine, but you have not earned kindness. You have only earned the scourn that a real fan gives a HATER anytime they run across one another.
Think what you will
[...] What do I think? Thats why you are reading right? Well I wrote an article months ago, saying that JJ would kill the Trek Spirit and I have to say - he has. I know I haven’t seen the movie nor have I seen much in the [...]