LeVar Burton "disappointed" in JJ Abrams's movie

By Rappy
in The Media Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Rappy Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

levarburton.jpg

LeVar Burton has expressed disappointment in director JJ Abrams's Star Trek film series.

Abrams's new Star Trek franchise exists in an alternate reality of the original television series and films, although the appearance by Leonard Nimoy in the 2009 movie ties the universes together.

Burton ? who played Geordi La Forge in Star Trek: The Next Generation ? has now admitted to ET Online that he has problems with Abrams's series.

"JJ [Abrams] [is] a very good director, he really is," Burton stressed. "He directed the hell out of the first movie. I'm really interested to see what he wants to talk about in his upcoming movie."

The actor continued: "I'm disappointed, quite frankly, that his timeline negates the existence of Next Gen. I think that's silly."

Abrams was also recently criticised by original series star William Shatner for agreeing to direct Star Wars Episode 7 in addition to his work with Star Trek.

"He's probably the most talented director of that ilk that we have, but he's gone too far this time," Shatner said earlier this week.

His Star Trek co-star George Takei previously offered a more favorable reaction to Abrams's work, saying: "I showed the path to JJ. [He] came and thought out of the box [with 2009's Star Trek]."

Star Trek into Darkness opens on May 17 in the UK and the US.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a460676/star-trek-levar-burton-disappointed-in-jj-abramss-movie.html

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

I can certainly understand the criticism but for me it was a good idea, as it gave them the freedom to do something new without having to worry about existing canon. It's not as if time-travel hasn't featured significantly in the Star Trek universe. It also presents new possibilities, like visiting the prime universe in a similar way to TOS, DS9, ENT did with the mirror universe. I certainly don't think it negates TNG timeline, as without that the new timeline wouldn't exist. Both timelines can coexist without one threatening the other.

  • ClassicTrekker and thomastmc
  • Like 2
Grand Master

George P Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

The new movie doesn't kill anything, it's a alternate timeline or a parallel universe depending on how you think time travel to the past effects things. I personally think that going back in time like Nero did automatically split the original universe into two, parallel, one we already know where he doesn't show up and the new one he did. That means the other is still there as is, it's not wiped out. Of course this is how I view it.

  • ahhell, theyarecomingforyou, Yusuf M. and 1 other
  • Like 4
Mentor

_dandy_

Posted
Posted

J.J. Abram's Star Trek movie was a great action flick, but that's all it is and nothing more; it completely missed what Gene Roddenberry was trying to do, and judging by what we already know about the second one, he's definitely continuing down that road.

The mistake LeVar is making is linking anything JJ does with what's already been established.

Grand Master

The Laughing Man

Posted
Posted

While a fan of NextGen and Voyager I am certainly no expert... but why does the reboot "kill" them?

I didn't actually mean Kill, I wont edit my post but It opens new opportunities but does alter the timeline possibly killing potential characters considering a certain planet and its people (not all) are gone .
Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

Kills, Next Gen, DS9 and Voyager to be honest. Yeah so pretty much everything, I'd be upset too.

It does nothing of the sort. The prime timeline continues on as before, minus Spock and the planet Romulus. The new timeline is independent of the prime timeline, as explored in Star Trek Online. In fact if anything Abram's film contributes to the prime timeline by destroying Romulus and dramatically shifting the balance of power in the alpha quadrant - that really opens up the possibilities.

Grand Master

Chicane-UK Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

As a pretty diehard fan of TNG I have to agree - however isn't that sort of the point of a reboot? To kind of pick and choose whatever you want or reimagine it in whatever way you want.

But I can totally understand where LeVar is coming from.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
As a pretty diehard fan of TNG I have to agree - however isn't that sort of the point of a reboot? To kind of pick and choose whatever you want or reimagine it in whatever way you want.

That's what makes what J.J. Abram's did so clever, in that he rebooted the franchise while keeping it canonical. He didn't negate what came before but instead used that to shape the new timeline, combining TOS (Spock) with the TNG / VOY / DS9 timeline. If he had opted for a traditional reboot then fans would have been up in arms. I'm a huge Star Trek fan and I loved the new direction but it really all depends on where he takes things. What I really want to see is a new series in the TOS-alternate timeline.

Grand Master

patseguin Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

Who ever said he was tossing out the next gen timeline? All of this is 78 years before Jean Luc Picard and co. If anything, he should be mad at how Paramount ended the NextGen franchise with Nemesis. They deserved a way better send off than that.

Grand Master

The Laughing Man

Posted
Posted

It does nothing of the sort. The prime timeline continues on as before, minus Spock and the planet Romulus. The new timeline is independent of the prime timeline, as explored in Star Trek Online. In fact if anything Abram's film contributes to the prime timeline by destroying Romulus and dramatically shifting the balance of power in the alpha quadrant - that really opens up the possibilities.

See my above post.
Grand Master

Scorbing

Posted
Posted

He's just ****ed off because TNG films were a flop, except for First Contact, and the fact that JJ doesn't give him a cameo in the film.

The one character that can be on one of the JJ new Trek films is T'Pol. Vulcans live over 300 years so she can be brought back for a cameo.

  • Matthew_Thepc
  • Like 1
Grand Master

+primortal Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

The one character that can be on one of the JJ new Trek films is T'Pol. Vulcans live over 300 years so she can be brought back for a cameo.

That's if T'Pol wasn't on Vulcan when it imploded ;)

Yes Star Trek needed a reboot. But there's gotta be enough wiggle room in Kirk's early life to create stories where you don't have to destroy the cannon.

Community Regular

trip21

Posted
Posted

J.J. Abram's Star Trek movie was a great action flick, but that's all it is and nothing more; it completely missed what Gene Roddenberry was trying to do, and judging by what we already know about the second one, he's definitely continuing down that road.

100% correct. Star Trek should never by Die Hard in space. If they wanted to "reboot" Star Trek they chould have gone with a different time period; Robert April's command of the Enterprise, Pike's 10 years, even the period between TOS/TAS and the original movie but to re-write Kirk was BS of the highest order.

Abrams Trek is certainly the "alternate" timeline given Riker and Troi were viewing Archer's mission in the last episode of Enterprise (who would have thunk it the biggest hack piece of wiriting from Berman and Braga is usefull for something).

The one character that can be on one of the JJ new Trek films is T'Pol. Vulcans live over 300 years so she can be brought back for a cameo.

Why? Are you saying the movie's are so poor they need to fall back on "established Trek" for validation. The little in jokes about the "admirals beagle" for example.

Mentor

ncc50446

Posted
Posted

Star Trek has turned into Star Wars...All about special effects...What would be funny is if Star Wars turned into Star Trek, and actually followed Gene Roddenberry's dream lol But, of course with JJ at the helm of both, that has no chance of happening (And Shatner is right, it's total BS. Focus on one).

We just need Star Trek back on the small screen where it belongs. The movies were ok, but I much prefer the series to the movies. Only good movies are 2,4,6,8,9.

Grand Master

Scorbing

Posted
Posted

100% correct. Star Trek should never by Die Hard in space. If they wanted to "reboot" Star Trek they chould have gone with a different time period; Robert April's command of the Enterprise, Pike's 10 years, even the period between TOS/TAS and the original movie but to re-write Kirk was BS of the highest order.

Abrams Trek is certainly the "alternate" timeline given Riker and Troi were viewing Archer's mission in the last episode of Enterprise (who would have thunk it the biggest hack piece of wiriting from Berman and Braga is usefull for something).

Why? Are you saying the movie's are so poor they need to fall back on "established Trek" for validation. The little in jokes about the "admirals beagle" for example.

I did not say that. You are saying that. I believe JJ Abrahams has done a superb, fantastic job resurrecting Star Trek.

Star Trek has turned into Star Wars...All about special effects...What would be funny is if Star Wars turned into Star Trek, and actually followed Gene Roddenberry's dream lol But, of course with JJ at the helm of both, that has no chance of happening (And Shatner is right, it's total BS. Focus on one).

We just need Star Trek back on the small screen where it belongs. The movies were ok, but I much prefer the series to the movies. Only good movies are 2,4,6,8,9.

Sorry but Star Trek needed and deserves Star Wars-Quality visual effects. Why not? I was very tired of seeing computer-generated cheap effects. Hell, Star Trek Enterprise had better effects than all Star Trek movies before JJs and all Star Trek series before it combined. The effects on Enterprise were awesome.

This is the modern age, a younger generation that was born with internet and computers and video games and they like visual effects. We old timers like the old classic Trek, with hardly any visual effects, but this generation does not. They want to see quality effects, action, adventure and young people playing the characters. It's all about making money and if giving the new Star Trek high quality sets and effects is going to bring cash to the studios, then that is what they will do no matter what you or anyone says.

Mentor

Skin

Posted
Posted

yeah, i have to say that the blending of the reboot of star trek has moved into star wars battles and appeals to the quick pace and action loving generations that are out now.

graphics are one thing... but the new star trek while funny, fails to really capture the humanity that gene rod wanted... it really does.

I like the new movie, but it is a far far far thing from what I watched as a kid many years ago.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
yeah, i have to say that the blending of the reboot of star trek has moved into star wars battles and appeals to the quick pace and action loving generations that are out now.

Hardly. DS9 had more large-scale space battles and action, especially in the later series. The problem was that?as with any reinvention? it had to spend a lot of time establishing the characters, which didn't give them a huge amount of time to expand on the narrative in the way that the series or TNG films could. That said it did a very good job and I'm really interested to see where they take things. Films have to be different to a TV series, that's just the nature of the format. It shouldn't be forgotten that most of the TNG films didn't live up to the quality of the series, with the obvious exception of First Contact - heck, many of the TOS films weren't much good either.

Star Trek (2009) was the most successful film in the history of the franchise. Sure there were elements I didn't like, that I thought could be better or that were underdeveloped but overall I thought it was a very strong film and certainly deserving of the Star Trek name. I just hope it's enough to get a new series commissioned, which is what I really care about.

PS - Don't forget that Star Trek (2009) was an odd-numbered film; the great films are usually reserved for the even-numbers.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States

      By WaltC · Posted

      (Topic to get the juices flowing this Sunday morning!...) Actually, the situation has almost nothing to do with "lack of skills", especially since assembly-line skills can be taught to anyone, including Americans, certainly. Rather, the inadequacy-to-impossibility of large-scale tech manufacturing in America today, and the reasons why America finds tech manufacturing completely onerous in the 21st century, has to do with politically driven laws amid a plethora of non-scientific, utterly politicized "science-fact" that is patently false, punitive business taxation at every turn, an array of judicial fines of unimaginable scope and complexity, and, last but not least, American unionization strictures that serve to actually slay job creation and hobble all such manufacturing endeavors in America before they can get off the ground. Globalism emerged, they tell us, as the needed answer to American hubris and an unholy American drive to excel. Unless one is buried under mounds of political propaganda, it's easy to see the absurdity of labeling the employees of SpaceX, for instance, as "unskilled labor"... Etc. ad infinitum. At one time in the recent past, American manufacturing prowess was the envy of the world in a wide variety of technical fields! The current federal and state government roadblocks against America becoming competitive globally in tech manufacturing are considerable, it's true, as anyone with a working brain knows. But remarkably, that is only half the story! The other half of the story is, of course, the corporations themselves... Chinese tech manufacturing is simply unassailable in terms of profits, because the Chinese government wants to see its tech manufacturing second-to-none globally so that no companies/nations can compete in terms of ROI, and China has completely succeeded in that goal. Let's tic-off a few things: *Chinese tariff policies are set according to what is considered best for Chinese business, Chinese employees, and the Chinese people. Huge difference with how things are done with tariffs in the US--as the US government (SCOTUS in this case, Congress in others) plainly feels that tariffs are "unfair" for the limited number of citizens who may pay them, whereas nothing is "unfair" when Congress considers the Personal Income Tax rates to be infinitely hike-able, along with infinitely enlarging annual budget deficits. *The Chinese government boldly subsidizes Chinese companies to artificially amplify their profits. *The Chinese government deliberately refuses to avidly demonize Chinese businesses and does not consider Chinese businesses "the enemy", so very unlike American (D)s these days. *Chinese labor laws and businesses are allowed to set their own labor policies according to what Chinese companies consider is best for companies and their employees... Simply put, American workers in tech manufacturing are not allowed to set their own labor policies! It is the height of hypocrisy for Americans to decry working conditions in China while simultaneously ensuring that American products are manufactured in China, not in the US, simply to maximize profits. There is nothing wrong with making a profit, of course, absolutely nothing. But there is plenty wrong with attempts to normalize hypocrisy of this kind! But rank hypocrisy and the (D) party in the US are longtime bedfellows... The current government in Washington is working overtime to see if it can toss out the horribly poor, failed economic policies of the past, while the (D)s still in Washington work very hard to bring back the stupidity whenever possible. With the right policies in place, America can be an infinitely competitive manufacturer.
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By +Edouard · Posted

    • The official Funny Pictures thread

      By +Edouard · Posted

    • eSound Music 3.0.0

      By Copernic · Posted

      eSound Music 3.0.0 by Razvan Serea eSound Music is a free music streaming app that gives you access to over 150 million tracks from all genres. It allows you to search and listen to your favorite songs, create personalized playlists, and explore trending music. With an intuitive interface and smart search, discovering new artists and hits is fast and easy. You can even stream music in the background while using other apps. One of eSound’s standout features is its offline mode, letting you download and listen without internet access. eSound is widely compatible, working seamlessly across Windows, macOS, Linux, iPhone, iPad, Android, HarmonyOS, Amazon Fire devices, CarPlay, Android Auto, and more. eSound Music key features: Over 150 million tracks available Smart search for songs, artists, albums, and playlists Personalized song recommendations Continuous playback with auto-generated playlists Offline mode with song and playlist downloads Daily-updated trending charts and top songs Sleep timer to auto-stop playback High-quality audio support Customizable playlists and favorites Support for Apple CarPlay and Android Auto Works on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android, HarmonyOS, Amazon Fire, and more Cross-device sync via account login Background playback while using other apps Download: eSound Music 64-bit | Portable | ~160.0 MB (Free, paid upgrade available) Download: ARM64 | 116.0 MB Links: eSound Music Website | Screenshot | Web Player | Other OSes Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Ford execs say they made a mistake when they replaced human engineers with AI

      By Cenata8bit · Posted

      All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      508
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      152
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      73
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!