Comments on: The Abrams Report http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/ What Goes On In Your Ed? Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:11:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: :: Mission:Impossible III :: seanobrien.org // OB1og http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-491 :: Mission:Impossible III :: seanobrien.org // OB1og Sat, 03 Jun 2006 06:38:40 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-491 [...] You might recall a nice commentation we had going on at The Ed Zone about his Abrams Report aside (I fixed the spelling so J.Po doesn’t have a fit) and I dropped the following quotable: For M:I-3, Abrams and PSH will get me in the door and I hope it turns out well. Based on the trailer, it looks very good to me, but then I thought that about Starsky and Hutch… [...] [...] You might recall a nice commentation we had going on at The Ed Zone about his Abrams Report aside (I fixed the spelling so J.Po doesn’t have a fit) and I dropped the following quotable: For M:I-3, Abrams and PSH will get me in the door and I hope it turns out well. Based on the trailer, it looks very good to me, but then I thought that about Starsky and Hutch… [...]

]]> By: Tim http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-341 Tim Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:12:50 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-341 MI 3 is going to be awful. Much like everything Tom Cruise does.....someone please run him over with a bus.... MI 3 is going to be awful. Much like everything Tom Cruise does…..someone please run him over with a bus….

]]> By: Jen http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-339 Jen Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:08:02 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-339 Yes, I am a spelling geek- true enough. I hate to admit it as well, but I think MI 3 looks pretty good. Actually the main reason is that Philip Seymour Hoffman will be awesome as the villain. He's usually the best part about any movie, as far as I'm concerned. Yes, I am a spelling geek- true enough.

I hate to admit it as well, but I think MI 3 looks pretty good. Actually the main reason is that Philip Seymour Hoffman will be awesome as the villain. He’s usually the best part about any movie, as far as I’m concerned.

]]> By: Sean http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-338 Sean Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:12:45 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-338 @Jen - Wait a minute... after all this geek talk all you have to add is a spelling correction? Man, you need to be poking fun at the dorks behind the glass. Like I just did... and lumped myself in there... more than a few times... @JFCC - I think everyone here is with you in the Cruise is a space cadet whack job, but as with anything he is in that could be good, you just have to grin and bear it. I think M:I had the team concept down pretty good and it was a lot like the show to me. M:I-2 got a way from that, like you said, but for me that one was all about John Woo. For M:I-3, Abrams and PSH will get me in the door and I hope it turns out well. Based on the trailer, it looks very good to me, but then I thought that about <em>Starsky and Hutch</em>... @Jen – Wait a minute… after all this geek talk all you have to add is a spelling correction? Man, you need to be poking fun at the dorks behind the glass. Like I just did… and lumped myself in there… more than a few times…

@JFCC – I think everyone here is with you in the Cruise is a space cadet whack job, but as with anything he is in that could be good, you just have to grin and bear it. I think M:I had the team concept down pretty good and it was a lot like the show to me. M:I-2 got a way from that, like you said, but for me that one was all about John Woo. For M:I-3, Abrams and PSH will get me in the door and I hope it turns out well. Based on the trailer, it looks very good to me, but then I thought that about Starsky and Hutch…

]]> By: Ed http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-337 Ed Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:33:46 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-337 You say tomato... You say tomato…

]]> By: Jen http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-336 Jen Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:56:27 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-336 @Spellcheck- it's JJ Abrams, not Abrahms: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0009190/ @Spellcheck- it’s JJ Abrams, not Abrahms:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0009190/

]]> By: JFCC http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-334 JFCC Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:12:53 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-334 Oh, don't worry--the man who can spend hours a day on Wikipedia when he should be looking for a job wasn't seriously mocking you for your television-watching. We all need our escapes. I was just getting back for the kissing crack... Oh, don’t worry–the man who can spend hours a day on Wikipedia when he should be looking for a job wasn’t seriously mocking you for your television-watching. We all need our escapes. I was just getting back for the kissing crack…

]]> By: Ed http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-333 Ed Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:13:14 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-333 @JFCC - The whole snogging record thing is simply me paraphrasing Bill Shatner from a classic late 80's SNL sketch. This was during the Dana Carvey - Phil Hartman years. In the sketch, Shatner is at a Trek convention being inundated with all these very detailed questions (i.e. "In Season 2, Episode 2:12, entitled <em>The Trouble with Tribbles</em>, what is written on the Third Ensign's clipboard that he hands to Uhara?") Anyway - Shatner loses it and starts telling the Trekkies to 'get a life.' He points at John Lovitz - a fat, balding Vulcan - and says "You there, I bet you've never even kissed a girl." So relax, I'm not calling your snogging, smooching or macking record into question. I was just using this as another spot for me to drop a pop-culture reference. We all know you get mad play. It's legendary. As for <em>MI-3</em>, I've read a couple early reviews and the one thing they point out is that this one puts the focus on the team. In fact - the review I read said they could see them launching a series of <em>MI-3</em> movies without Cruise or with Cruise serving as the team leader, etc... So - give it a try. You really should check out <em>Lost</em> or <em>Alias</em> at some point. That's some quality television right there. Oh - on this last part: <blockquote>"Anyway, I think you’re getting a little defensive about Abrahms there. I know it’s important to you to believe you haven’t wasted precious hours of this all-too-brief human existence watching television..."</blockquote> I have so much stress in my life - from the rigors of the nine-to-five to raising two children to maintaining a successful marriage to keeping up with the care and maintenance of owning a home and land (including keeping the foliage at bay) to trying to stay in touch with friends and family to nagging health issues that crop up from time to time to trying to find some small slice of time to exercise my creative bones and the beat goes on... that if I can sail away to another world and just escape reality for a few precious hours (be it on television, the movies, a video game or novel) - then I am glad to spend that time. Time wasted? Nope! Those hours keep me alive. @JFCC – The whole snogging record thing is simply me paraphrasing Bill Shatner from a classic late 80’s SNL sketch. This was during the Dana Carvey – Phil Hartman years. In the sketch, Shatner is at a Trek convention being inundated with all these very detailed questions (i.e. “In Season 2, Episode 2:12, entitled The Trouble with Tribbles, what is written on the Third Ensign’s clipboard that he hands to Uhara?”) Anyway – Shatner loses it and starts telling the Trekkies to ‘get a life.’ He points at John Lovitz – a fat, balding Vulcan – and says “You there, I bet you’ve never even kissed a girl.” So relax, I’m not calling your snogging, smooching or macking record into question. I was just using this as another spot for me to drop a pop-culture reference. We all know you get mad play. It’s legendary.

As for MI-3, I’ve read a couple early reviews and the one thing they point out is that this one puts the focus on the team. In fact – the review I read said they could see them launching a series of MI-3 movies without Cruise or with Cruise serving as the team leader, etc… So – give it a try. You really should check out Lost or Alias at some point. That’s some quality television right there.

Oh – on this last part:

“Anyway, I think you’re getting a little defensive about Abrahms there. I know it’s important to you to believe you haven’t wasted precious hours of this all-too-brief human existence watching television…”

I have so much stress in my life – from the rigors of the nine-to-five to raising two children to maintaining a successful marriage to keeping up with the care and maintenance of owning a home and land (including keeping the foliage at bay) to trying to stay in touch with friends and family to nagging health issues that crop up from time to time to trying to find some small slice of time to exercise my creative bones and the beat goes on… that if I can sail away to another world and just escape reality for a few precious hours (be it on television, the movies, a video game or novel) – then I am glad to spend that time. Time wasted?

Nope!

Those hours keep me alive.

]]> By: JFCC http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-332 JFCC Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:22:11 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-332 @Ed—As Sean pointed out, we weren't harping on Abrahms. I have no qualms with Abrahms. I probably won't see <em>Mission Impossible 3</em> in the theater, but that's primarily because I hardly ever get out to the theater anyway, plus I wasn't particularly enchanted with <em>Mission: Impossible 2</em>, and finally, I don't like Tom Cruise much <em>and never did</em>, even before his recent shenanigans. The first <em>Mission: Impossible</em> was pretty good, though it would be nice if they'd make a <em>M:I</em> film that was actually based on the television show (which was team-based) instead of these thinly-veiled Bond rip-offs, which is mostly what the second one was. Anyway, I think you're getting a <em>little</em> defensive about Abrahms there. I know it's important to you to believe you haven't wasted precious hours of this all-too-brief human existence watching television, but I think it's a little cheap to resort to calling into question my snogging record. My beef is with the prequel concept, not the director, and if Abrahms pulls it off I'll be the first to congratulate him. @Ed—As Sean pointed out, we weren’t harping on Abrahms. I have no qualms with Abrahms. I probably won’t see Mission Impossible 3 in the theater, but that’s primarily because I hardly ever get out to the theater anyway, plus I wasn’t particularly enchanted with Mission: Impossible 2, and finally, I don’t like Tom Cruise much and never did, even before his recent shenanigans.

The first Mission: Impossible was pretty good, though it would be nice if they’d make a M:I film that was actually based on the television show (which was team-based) instead of these thinly-veiled Bond rip-offs, which is mostly what the second one was.

Anyway, I think you’re getting a little defensive about Abrahms there. I know it’s important to you to believe you haven’t wasted precious hours of this all-too-brief human existence watching television, but I think it’s a little cheap to resort to calling into question my snogging record.

My beef is with the prequel concept, not the director, and if Abrahms pulls it off I’ll be the first to congratulate him.

]]> By: Sean http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-331 Sean Mon, 24 Apr 2006 05:21:03 +0000 http://www.edhumphries.com/2006/04/the-abrahms-report/#comment-331 Well, my commentary was more on the plot and less on Abrahms' creative ability and my snarky comment was intentionally stupid for the sake of a chuckle. I count all his shows as some of my favorites ever and I am eagerly awaiting the release of M:I-3. That said, I just think that the plot described is going to turn out lame. I don't really want to see a young James T. Kirk and Spock chasing skirts at Starfleet Academy. It's great that Paramount is handing the keys of the car to some new blood, but it should do so with the directive of also infusing new blood into the series itself. Abrahms should invent a new corner of that universe rather than falling back on fleshing out its back history, whether previously written or not. I don't think doing Kirk or Spock without Shatner and Nimoy will come off right, so why are they going to try? Remember <em>Dumb and Dumberer</em>? Neither do I because it's the same concept and I don't want to see that! Paramount has the right idea and probably one of the right guys, they just don't have the right story. PS - The argument for fanboys not having kissed girls is over on my blog in the <a href="http://www.seanobrien.org/2006/04/sam-and-max.html" title="read Sam and Max on OB1og" rel="nofollow">Sam & Max</a> comments. Talk of drawing comic book women is all the proof you need that I haven't kissed enough girls in my life... ;) Well, my commentary was more on the plot and less on Abrahms’ creative ability and my snarky comment was intentionally stupid for the sake of a chuckle. I count all his shows as some of my favorites ever and I am eagerly awaiting the release of M:I-3. That said, I just think that the plot described is going to turn out lame. I don’t really want to see a young James T. Kirk and Spock chasing skirts at Starfleet Academy.

It’s great that Paramount is handing the keys of the car to some new blood, but it should do so with the directive of also infusing new blood into the series itself. Abrahms should invent a new corner of that universe rather than falling back on fleshing out its back history, whether previously written or not. I don’t think doing Kirk or Spock without Shatner and Nimoy will come off right, so why are they going to try? Remember Dumb and Dumberer? Neither do I because it’s the same concept and I don’t want to see that!

Paramount has the right idea and probably one of the right guys, they just don’t have the right story.

PS – The argument for fanboys not having kissed girls is over on my blog in the Sam & Max comments. Talk of drawing comic book women is all the proof you need that I haven’t kissed enough girls in my life… ;)

]]>