you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 175 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

J. J. Abrams is a hack and I hate that he keeps getting work

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 82 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

    Eh, he’s done some decent work he just isn’t always the right fit for the properties he’s given.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 100 points 4 weeks ago* (3 children)

    Sorry I can't read your comment. The 20 lens flares he put on screen still have me blinded

    Edit: to be clear. I don't think his movies are bad per say. They're just painfully mediocre.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 76 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)
  • [–] 8 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    The JJ lens flare then made it into DISCO although I think they toned it down a bit for SNW. I checked out of SFA after 3 episodes so I don't know if they continued to be flare happy there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    For better and worse, Discovery took a lot of cues from the Abrams films, being more action focused, with flashier effects and cinematography, for example.

    It got toned down as time went on, but there were parts here and there in Discovery where you can tell they were trying to replicate the films.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago

    Yeah, the Disco premiere was very action-oriented, very JJ coded. I was like, ok, they're trying to draw in viewers with a flashy beginning, but hopefully they'll start being a proper Star Trek show soon. Oh, well. Happily, some people liked the show, but it wasn't my cup of tea.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    DISCO? SNW? SFA? I guess with concerted effort I can use context clues to figure it out but like, how often are you typing these things?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    We're in a Star Trek community. I think most people are going to understand those without an issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    Most /= all but thanks for sharing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Not all people speak English. What's your point?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Wouldn’t that exact point lend itself to the idea that spelling out obscure acronyms would be beneficial for people passingly curious to the conversation? Or is this some s-tier wagyu elite topic gatekeeping that must separate itself? I don’t think that’s very Federation of you, bud.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago*

    Not everything needs to be explained every time it's said. Language would be ridiculous if we had to define every word every time it's used. Its pretty easy to search "Star Trek Disco" for example and learn what it means if you don't understand it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    He's always the wrong choice for anything that calls for the bare minimum planning and substance, but that's what they keep giving him. He has good instincts for cinematography but shouldn't be trusted with anything that requires an actual plot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    Now I kinda want to see him make an Avatar movie.

    (Blue skinned aliens, not ATLA. Although his ATLA would probably be better than what we got.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 weeks ago

    He would probably announce a trilogy, spend the first movie setting up some mystery in Pandora's core and then would never follow up.

    spoilerAnd somehow Quaritch would return, but Cameron has that covered already.

  • source
  • parent