jj abrams for guyver (split from dvd covers)

[*guyverfan]

wow, i only just realized that dark hero was made over 22years ago, jeez, time to send a letter to jj abrams and hope he agrees on making a remake!

 

after seeing how he's brought back the star trek franchise to life with a great action flick, with a second one aswell almost finished, i think he'll be the best man for the job!

[LordSpleach]

Oh god, a Megasmasher with lens flares. I'm blind!

 

Ha ha ha, all kidding aside you might be right.

[*Jess♥]

wow, i only just realized that dark hero was made over 22years ago, jeez, time to send a letter to jj abrams and hope he agrees on making a remake!

 

after seeing how he's brought back the star trek franchise to life with a great action flick, with a second one aswell almost finished, i think he'll be the best man for the job!

jj abrams?

you just made me throw up.

 

how could you think that jumped up imbecile could treat the guyver franchise with ANY respect after what he did to the star trek franchise?

http://lunduke.com/?p=517

Don't get me wrong, if that was a standalone action flick and not meant to do justice to a franchise spanning 30 years, intended to address societal issues in a futuristic setting.... it would be just fine. I am sure many people like it. but when you consider that he was supposed to be doing justice to a much loved franchise, and he completely tore it to pieces, I don't even want to imagine what horrors that guy would do to guyver.

 

I'm sorry, that is off topic.

I just got very upset at the suggestion of THAT GUY touching something that is so precious to me.

[LordSpleach]

I liked what he did with his Star Trek movie. Sure it didn't address societal issues but usually most of the Trek movies don't. Plus I think it had some of the same campiness that the original series had, and at least he made an alternate timeline so he didn't bug Trekkie purists.

 

Ryuki, have you seen Super 8? He wrote that movie and I think that is pretty good. Awesome end credits by the way. I'm looking forward to Into Darkness. If he did produce a new Guyver movie, the Wang Brothers, and David Hayter should definitely be involved. And I don't think he would push it to be a kid friendly movie either. Just look at Cloverfield.

[*Jess♥]

Sure it didn't address societal issues but usually most of the Trek movies don't.

 

seriously?

first contact dealt very heavily with post traumatic stress.

insurrection dealt heavily with .... insurrection.

generations dealt with the lamentations of being a has-been and dealt more with the difficulties of dealing with emotions.

nemesis dealt with the issues surrounding cloning.

These issues were pretty heavily represented and explored in a fair amount of depth.

 

jj abrams has done none of this as far as I can tell. he has completely disrespected the franchise.

 

I don't blame you for liking it, lots of people do, but that is an aside to the issue of how he treated the franchise.

 

by the way, you mentioned that he made an alternate time line, but actually he didn't. he tagged it onto the original timeline and essentially nullified it all with the events of that movie. check the link I posted, that article talks about that issue.

[*Jess♥]

sorry, you asked me a question about super 8.

I haven't seen it, but I want to impress some very important factor.

that was his own creation. There is no issue of how faithful he was to the source material because the source was his own head.

I'm sure JJ Abrams is a genius at doing what he does, but my point was, how he treats a well established franchise.

 

what do you think guyver would be like if he made it?

what is the core of guyver?

one boy who simply wants to protect his close ones from a dangerous organisation.

if jjabrams made guyver, consider this core principal in serious danger of getting completely forgotten.

Even the first guyver movie by screaming mad george and steve wang, even that which is considered a pile of excrement by many people, that film stuck with the core principal, protecting mizky.

[LordSpleach]

Sure it didn't address societal issues but usually most of the Trek movies don't.

 

first contact dealt very heavily with post traumatic stress.

insurrection dealt heavily with .... insurrection.

generations dealt with the lamentations of being a has-been and dealt more with the difficulties of dealing with emotions.

nemesis dealt with the issues surrounding cloning.

by the way, you mentioned that he made an alternate time line, but actually he didn't. he tagged it onto the original timeline and essentially nullified it all with the events of that movie. check the link I posted, that article talks about that issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29

 

 

Star Trek is a 2009 American science fiction film directed by J. J. Abrams, written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman and distributed by Paramount Pictures. It is the eleventh film based on the Star Trek franchise and features the main characters of the original Star Trek television series, portrayed by a new cast. The film follows James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto) aboard the USS Enterprise as they combat Nero (Eric Bana), a Romulan from their future who threatens the United Federation of Planets. The story takes place in an alternate reality^[2][3] due to time travel by both Nero and the original Spock (Leonard Nimoy). The alternate timeline was created in an effort to free the film and the franchise from established continuity constraints while simultaneously preserving original story elements.

 

They've been saying alternate timeline all along. Even Star Trek Online says it's an alternate timeline. The event of Romulus blowing up is true, but the Online game continues in the original timeline. Look at http://www.stowiki.org/Chronology for research. If I remember right, they had Picard become the ambassador to Vulcan, and Data became the captain of the Enterprise. I do remember that Geordi was the one who designed Spock's ship in the film.

 

And you make a point with those movies which are Next Generation flicks and its 4 vs 6. Not most by traditional standards but it felt like the word fit. I know the original series dealt with the issues before, but not as well as the next generation did. Yes I'm Picard all the way. The original six movies only dealt with societal issues once in The Undiscovered Country which talked about peace vs racial hate. Okay, so half and half then.

 

Insurrection really only talked about force relocation, not an insurrection against a whole government, and Nemesis didn't really talk about the issues of cloning. It talked about how someone personality is affected by their environment.

sorry, you asked me a question about super 8.

I haven't seen it, but I want to impress some very important factor.

that was his own creation. There is no issue of how faithful he was to the source material because the source was his own head.

I'm sure JJ Abrams is a genius at doing what he does, but my point was, how he treats a well established franchise.

 

what do you think guyver would be like if he made it?

what is the core of guyver?

one boy who simply wants to protect his close ones from a dangerous organisation.

if jjabrams made guyver, consider this core principal in serious danger of getting completely forgotten.

Even the first guyver movie by screaming mad george and steve wang, even that which is considered a pile of excrement by many people, that film stuck with the core principal, protecting mizky.

Well that is something we see with Star Trek: Into Darkness. The first film was at it's heart, an introduction to those who never seen the series. Remember parents who grew up with the original were bring kids to see it. The next flick will allow them to expand the new timeline, and flesh it out more since they have the introductions out of the way. Now I'm not saying it's the best film in the franchise, since that's between The Wrath of Khan, and First Contact, but it's sure a hellva lot better than The Motion Picture. Which badly ripped off some of 2001: A Space Odyssey's man vs machine elements, and semi copied random trippy visuals. Hell, The Voyage Home made a better and more enjoyable version of that flick.

 

As far as how he would treat The Guyver series, I think he would do a good job. Now the first guyver movie does have the protecting Mizky plot, but the film does completely wiped out the fact that Chronos is a world wide corporation. Even the FBI was trying to investigate them, while in the manga no one had a clue. Yes, the end of the film had the revelation that Max's(Mark Hamill's) boss as their agent but that didn't allude to the larger scale at all. It was sequel bait. The whole campyness erased a serious point the movie could've had, and the original version of Sean was almost as bad as Shinji from Neon Genesis Evangelion. Come on, Sho had backbone!

 

I believe J.J. Abrams would address all those points, and wouldn't just flood the story with jokes. I think you should still see Super 8. Yes it's his own flick, but it does show what he can do as a writer, and a director.

 

I will say this however. Those lens flares do need to go. They were both in Star Trek(pretty bad especially in the first scene), and Super 8(not as bad but still noticable). They can look cool as long as they aren't everywhere.

Additional:

 

As long as we don't get Uwe Boll. I will be happy.

[*YoungGuyver]

with the notoriety of Guyver, Uwe Boll is unfortunetly what Guyver is likely to get.  realisticly speaking.

 

I liked the Abrams movie, because he brought FRESH BLOOD to the table.  The last few trek movies were getting stale.  Trek 6 and First Contact were the only ones that I truly enjoyed and wouldn't change a thing.  The others are as bad as trek 5, where it feels like they were ashamed to be making a trek movie, and were trying to reach a wider audience, all the while doing it on a shoestring budget.

[LordSpleach]

Personally, I like the even numbered Star Trek movies which has been an unofficial rule for most people. The expection of course for me is the new Star Trek. Funny how IMO that rule was broken by none other than Scotty(Simon Pegg).

(sorry, didn't want to post a whole episode but couldn't find a clip skipped to 2:00)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAfu1JJHoVo'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAfu1JJHoVo

[Cannibal]

Uwe Boll

  But to make that happen they need to make a Guyver Game first!

 

---

I watched jj's work many years after previously watched film/serial, so I was completely out of that universe already. So I just enjoyed it   Back on topic - it's a shame but I don't care who will make a Guyver movie, because I'm not watching movies often and + I know nothing about their directors, in most cases I don't even know actors names I can just hope that it will be good.

[*Jess♥]

So how would people feel if a guyver film was made, and it was made by jj abrams and the story went something like this:-

 

The guyver is an all powerful warrior that came from space. no one knows who he is, because one day he came out of a gian spaceship under a mountain. he battled his way out of the mountain and befriended a local woodcutter. their communication was strained at first because the guyver was an alien, but over time the guyver learnt how the woodcutter had been hurt by the cronos corporation when he was younger. now cronos are trying to hurt other woodcutters on other planets. so guyver decides to go on a revenge mission and travels from planet to planet, gaining allies called zoalords and waging a guerrilla war on cronos.

 

yeah I'm blowing it out of proportion a little bit, but do you see, this is what i am afraid of. since JJ abrams didn't seem to respect the important parts of the star trek franchise, it seems like he is the sort of person who has no interest in the franchise, is only interested in making HIS movie.

 

Of course  I have to use star trek as my measuring stick for this. I'm not a trekkie, but i have watched every episode of newer star trek. the original series is a bit harder to watch for me but I have watched a lot of them. I didn't list the first 6 star trek films because i'm not as familiar with them, but i'll give it a go... wrath of khan was of course about revenge.  undiscovered country was heavily political. the final frontier was about false idols. the voyage home was about conservation. the search for spock was.... i dunno I don't even remember that one well... was it about adolescence?

the motion picture... i don't even know if anything hapened in that other than a giant multicoloured cloud. but then i did last watch it when i was 6.

 

ok, so the star trek movies were not always the best movie anyone could make, but at least they kept to the core star trek principals. actually IMO the best star trek film is insurrection, because it concentrates less on action and more on the plot. but jj abrams does the opposite. if you watch that film, you might have no idea that there were 27 seasons and 10 films before it.

it's like taxidermy. he's killed star trek, then taken the corpse, ripped out the heart and stuffed the skin with a mannequin of his own design.

 

What I am trying to get across, is the fear that he would do the same to guyver and leave us with nothing that resembles the series we know and love.  It's not about making a film of guyver. any film as long as it has the name guyver. for me, that is not good enough. I'm not so desperate that i would want some punk director to take the franchise and tear it to pieces, just to get the name up in lights.

 

how would you feel if some noob guyver fan came up to you in the future and started saying, "have you seen the stupid manga the guyver was based on? that sho dude is such a wuss and doesn't deserve to be associated with the guyver."

because this is the kind of thing that can happen.

don't believe me? spock kisses uhura.  so some people who watched the newer film, will look at the original spock and accuse him of being dickless or frigid.

 

@lordspleach,

I see your wikipedia article, but I'm not talking about quotes from people, I'm talking about things that are clearly shown in the movie plot. Nero and Spock go back in time with advanced technology and pollute the time line. The time line is clearly not restored. Picard or Kirk or Janeway or Archer or Sisko, do not go back in time and fix the time line. The time line is changed, history is changed. It's not an alternate reality, it's an altered reality.  Since Spock is a major character, in narrative terms, we followed the time line of star trek along with him into this altered history. Since no attempt was made by anyone to un-pollute the time line, The original time line is closer and closer to complete obliteration. Each new movie in this altered time line does further damage and it becomes more and more difficult to restore the trek universe to what it should be. for all intents and purposes, the events of the first abrams trek film, annihilated ALL star trek. everything anyone has watched in those series over the years, no longer exists. you might say it doesn't exist anyway because it's fictional, but that's not what I mean. within the fictional universe, all those people and stories and events have been wiped out.

 

oh you said about nemesis, it was about cloning, but not only picards clone, don't forget about data. The whole thing you mentioned about environment effecting an individual, that is one of the issues surrounding cloning anyway. your clone would be different from you due to the difference in environment.

 

well at least I see we agree on the best films. wrath of khan and first contact it is. although I do feel insurrection was the most faithful to star trek in terms of pacing and balance of action vs plot.

 

what i think is very important is that we look at what the director does, what he focuses on. when criticising earlier star trek films, I think we can talk about teh plot elements and what the characters did, and how it effects them, and we can compare it to our modern day life etc.  but when criticising star trek 11, all I can really do is talk about how it has damaged the franchise, how the characters behave wrong (scotty not understanding the basic principal of warp theory)  insane issues with scale and unrealistic internals of a warp ship etc.

Scotty: [reads the equation] Imagine that! It never occurred to me to think of SPACE as the thing that was moving!

[LordSpleach]

Ryuki, everyone said it was an alternate timeline including the production crew. Remember even most animes uses a different timeline so to speak than the original mangas. This new movie series is a separate entity that is using the same license. You can ignore it if you wish, and still the enjoy the rest of the series. Like I said look at Star Trek Online.

Edited January 13, 2013 by LordSpleach

[*Jess♥]

ok, let us say we can put that issue aside for now, what about the other issues?

[LordSpleach]

Other issues.....besides getting some interested in the first place I can't think of any.

[*Jess♥]

but I wasn't asking for you to think of any issues, I was asking about the issues I brought up.

[LordSpleach]

What other issues? Cause I thought we were just arguing about J.J. Abrams.

[*Jess♥]

my post was over 1000 words long and you responded to one paragraph.

 

I'm a little bit confused by your response. I thought the other issues we were talking about were pretty clear.

 

If you don't want to address the other issues that is fine, that's your choice. I'm just really confused at your response as though we haven't been talking about anything other than whether or not it is an alternate universe.

[Larz Zahn]

I get what ryuki is saying. Since the original timeline's spock went back in time, the altered past isn't an alternate timeline.

I get that. To me an alternate timeline is a totally fresh look at well known storyline.

Like main stream marvel versus the ultimates marvel.

[*guyverfan]

i had no idea my little comment would start such a debate.hehehehe

i mentioned jj because i feel that he would probably be the only producer/director in hollywood that would even touch an idea such as guyver since he was the only one who would touch another trek movie. and who could maybe make something that would appeal to everyone and not just guyver purists, otherwise it would be just another straight to video/dvd low budget sequel.

my first thought was actually james cameron, but guyver is the wrong shade of blue for him!

then there's spielberg, but more than likely somehow all of cronos personell uniforms would resemble nazi ss.

micheal bays effort would just be something with alot of explosions and fireworks!

as for the star trek universe, all the previous movies and series have happened, next gen, deep space, voyager all roughly occured during the same time period(star dates)

the movie depicks an older, future spock that comes back with nero, who does mention that some 160years has past since kirks death.(vulcans have a long life span)
which would also mean that picard,janeway, etc wouldn't be able to come and reset the timeline because the're already dead of old age aswell.

hence why its said that this is an alternate timeline.

[Guyver0]

Honestly I don't really feel too comfortable with leaving any beloved series (Guyver or otherwise) to Hollywood alone.  I think regardless that the original copyright owners should have a very strong influential hand in the production of their creation.

 

Look at Godzilla for example; the 1998 release done by Emmerich didn't do it any justice and since then Toho has been very reluctant to let anyone outside of their studio make a movie about Godzilla again.  However now Edwards is directing a new Godzilla movie that will be released in 2014 and Toho is keeping all over it so I am hopeful that this new iteration of Godzilla will be a successful one.

 

So regardless what director gets Guyver, Yoshiki Takaya needs full rein over it as well.  I don't believe he'll ruin this beloved series like Dragon Ball Evolution did even with Akira Toriyama having full control. 

[*guyverfan]

that goes without saying, definately with you 100% guyver0.

 

input from the original creator is a must, thats worked for most of stan lee's anyway.

 

i'd love a direct movie adaption of guyver from the beginning, all 30+ parts!, although i'd probably die of old age before episode 15 reached the cinemas!

[*Jess♥]

@guyverfan

data would still be alive, but i guess that is neither here nor there.  oh yeah, also Tuvok and maybe seven, her implants may extend her lifespan perhaps.

i see what you're saying. this is beyond the timeline that we would even want to deal with anyway. That is something I can accept. hadn't seen it that way.

but still, I think it's important to take note of the stark lack of depth in star trek 11. but it could be as was said, there may be a focus on societal issues in the upcoming movie. I'm not sure, I feel like I've been burned by JJ abrams.

I still can't really have any faith in him at this point. I mean, I would have thought the first go-to director for guyver would be guillermo del toro?

I certainly agree with the things you said about spielberg et al.

 

@guyver0

I totally agree, I was thinking earlier about how I would feel if it were my franchise. I would want to have maximum control over who directs, the screenplay, art direction etc.

 

[durendal]

JJ Abrams Star Trek might not be made for True trekkies, but it certainly reached out to a lot of audiences. I would say that it was a success and might brand those complaining as an elitist. To be honest, I never really liked the Star Trek movies with the exception of the Original crew and First Contact. Generations, maybe, but that's stretching it a bit far. I hated Nemesis. I don't like my people dying even if they're not really alive. I enjoyed the JJ Abrams Star Trek because I was looking at Spock as Sylar. I was expecting him to use his fingers to telepathically cut off the brains of his enemies and mimic their skills. I never really looked at it to be faithful to the franchise in the beginning. Hell, even when Star Trek TNG was first aired, I was skeptical because it didn't have the original crew, but it grew on me.

Should a Guyver movie be made, they should leave all the executive producing and directing to the japanese, and use Hollywood studios and budgeting. That's probably about the only thing Hollywood is good for.

[*YoungGuyver]

What gets me is that Trek has had a huge problem with continuity under Berman and Steinberg.  The Enterprise series especially, where they only loosely listened to anything that was established about that time period (ie, using lasers, no subspace radio only regular radio, magnetic boots due to no grav plating, Horizon class starships).  They basically got stuck telling the same story techniques from Voyager, even had yet another Hologram episode.  What moral are they saying about holograms that they havn't said before?

 

If you want a point to Abrams, just take a look at 'established' recent history of the US.  A nongovernment terrorist took over a nonweapon item (a plane) and used it to destroy a major US icon (the world trade towers).  A dirty minor from Romulous, a world known for non-freedom regimes, uses a mining ship to destroy a major Federation icon (planet Vulcan).  This movie reflects what is going on in the general culture of America right now.  It is effectively a mirror of how they want to feel.  They want to be empowered to take on such perceived evil.

Oh, and Abrams is a star trek fan that doesn't know star wars.  Orci and Kurtzman are the star wars fans that don't know star trek.  This is a merger.  The ship still has warp engines, the bridge is still round, and the uniforms are at least the same.

 

I don't like Insurrection.  Sure, it had that thing about dislocating people from their homes, but that was played out so weak.  Instead of making a very good point about it, they sent everyone on a love escapade and cracked stupid jokes.  It was lame.  To make it seem scifi, they forced in a thing where these aliens can percieve time in slow motion, and Picards love interest (because he's an action hero in the movies) can actually teach it to him.  Lame.

 

Here's an idea, throw some mud on the walls of the village to show that these aliens actually have to work.  Make them a planet of a few million, and open it with Data firing phasers, just as before.  If you're going to have some plastic surgery, show some blood, otherwise toss the stretched skin idea from the script.  Force the Enterprise to take on a few Starfleet ships as well, so that it's a true no questions asked Insurrection.  Make some of the aliens really angry that they are being forced to leave the world, but make it confusing because others are perfectly fine with what's happening.  Something funky is happening on the planet, to help Picard drive home is preachy speach, these aliens actually live 4th dimensionally-it only seems like there's millions, but it's only a few hundred living the same days over and over again, which is why they are weird.

[*Jess♥]

Youngguyver, you make some great points.

The thing about the parallel to 9/11 ... I didn't see it because I'm not an american so I don't really totally get how that works, I mean, I don't feel the significance.

To be honest, it seems a little bit cheap as far as issues go, but I guess if he wants to bring in the most people, he has to go for the obvious.

 

can we bring it back to guyver?

 

I know I have made a big issue out of trek but I don't want us to forget that the reason for that is to imagine how he would approach guyver.