Re: Abrams Talks About Trek XI Movie

In article <Xns9A8A8D666FA71giselelarochenospamy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
"bc_gisele" <giselelaroche@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> "Wouter Valentijn" <liam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:4810c7e3$0
> $14343$e4fe514c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> > Anybody wrote:
> >> In article <68gq04h09ujmq0n3mknp7m8m6p8rhfq89l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Brian 
> Thorn
> >> <bthorn64@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:04:27 -0700, Anim8rFSK 
> <ANIM8Rfsk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> If abrams is suggesting that he's going to do the same
> >>>>> thing to Star Trek that he did to MI, i.e., turn a series
> >>>>> whose plots involved complex intrigue into a slam-
> >>>>> bang action pic with lots of big explosions, then this
> >>>>> is *really* not encouraging.
> >>>
> >>>> Nope.  MI3 was crap.
> >>>
> >>> Better than MI1 or MI2 though. MI1 made Jim Phelps the bad 
> >>> guy, and does anyone even remember what MI2 was about?
> >>
> >> Yep, it was about shovelling even more obscene amounts of 
> >> money into Tom Cruise's greedy pockets.   :-(
> 
> Nah, probably all went to Scientology.

Same difference since he's apparently one of the big cheeses of it.