J.J. Abrams Discusses STAR WARS & STAR TREK On The Daily Show

StarWars is gonna have soooooo much more lens-flare than StarTrek!, i can feel it in ma bones!.

i think abrams just admitted to not being a fan of sci-fi..

even tho he's helming 2 of their biggest franchises...

The difference between Trek and Wars? It's easy. Strip all the bs away and it is basically Logic vs faith

Simon Pegg's comments on giving JJ Abrams a hard time about lens flare -
"It’s become a sort of communal stick to have a crack at JJ with, mostly by people who didn’t know what the f*** lens flare was, until someone started sneering the term all over their blog. It demonstrates JJ’s supreme talent as a film maker that the main means of knocking him is to magnify a throw away artistic choice, into some sort of hilarious failing. Lens flare is essentially an anomaly caused by light hitting the lens and creating refracted shapes. Because it draws attention to the fact that we are looking at a filmed event, it actually creates a subliminal sense of documentary realism and makes the moment more vital and immediate. In the same way Spielberg spattered his shots with bloody seawater in Saving Private Ryan, JJ suggests that the moment we are in is so real and alive, there just isn’t time to frame out all the light and activity. The irony is by acknowledging the film’s artifice, you are enhancing the reality of the moment. It’s clever and I love it. On set we call it ‘best in show’ and our amazing director of photography, Dan Mindel has a special technique to achieve it. To the detractors, I offer a polite f*** you and suggest you find a new stick to beat us with, if being a huge, boring neggyballs is necessary for your personal happiness."

Simon Pegg has a very valid point about ppl's hate of Abrams and lens flares. I honestly think it's kinda cool and is a signature of his work. Good for him.

Ror, that picture makes absolutely no sense. Why is Picard on a pic with the Abrams Enterprise in the background?

There are two kinds of Star Trek fans..

1: Those who watch to enjoy Gene Roddenberry's utopian concept of human evolution and exploration past the state we are currently in, where the chain of command has purpose and also negotiation and problem solving are intelligently endeavored.

2: Those who don't understand the value of any of the above but will sit through 45 minutes of the show every week hoping they fail all those endeavors and regress to a space battle or fist fight instead like we do today.

JJ.Abrams falls into category 2 and he makes his Star Trek films lacking any continuity or common sense in order to give those knuckle-draggers the same shite they can see in any Hollywood action comedy with a template English speaking villain..but in space!

Its not Star Trek, it's just Hollywood action shite in Star Trek clothing.

@theboss117 - Freaking blew my mind away with that sh!t, never saw like that till u summed it up!

@ceejay - damn right, unfortunately most of movie going public fall under 2 - hence the success of transformers, etc... Even some cbms!

It is ABUNDANTLY clear that Abrams never was, nor is now, a fan of Star Trek.

STID is a stupid reboot of ST II...

And quoting Joss Whedon:

"This is a sad, sad reflection on our times when people must feed off the carcasses of beloved stories from their youths, just they can't think of an original idea of their own."