Abrams said it himself-”Star Trek was too philosophical for me.” Drain all the intellectual content out of Trek, and you get a decent, entertaining, but ultimately merely serviceable movie, not a great one.

Yeah it seems like even the biggest name director would be on a tight leash here. Makes sense too-it’s Star Wars. You want to direct it, you put on the collar.

Lost was entertaining, although he had Carlton Cuse and a team of writers to balance out the suck. Plus my favorite episodes were mostly the few Brian K. Vaughan was involved with. So...yeah.

If we’re gonna play pick your poison, I’d rather have a competent movie than the bullshit Lucas blew out his asshole a decade plus ago now. Even if it doesn’t fit in perfectly with the originals-I’d rather see a creative new take than a shit movie. And we’ll always have the originals, and the expanded universe-no one…

As long as it’s not about intergalactic trade embargoes, or midochlorians, or inarticulate children and pod races...I think it’ll easily be better than the prequels.

The first one wasn’t great either. It was essentially lets take all the Trek out of Trek and paste what’s left over a stupid action film. Serviceable, but not the source material.

I wouldn’t be too worried. JJ is a longtime Star Wars fan, while Star Trek was more of a career advancement thing.

I blame Into Darkness totally on Damon Lindelof. Literally everything he is involved with is crap.

I’m just bitter over Star Trek. They weren’t bad movies or even bad scifi, they just didn’t FEEL like Trek. And for all of his faults, Lucas made the prequels fit right in with the originals, they were just crap scripts.

I’d say I’m 70% Stoked 30% terrified it might end up being as bad or worse then the prequels.