JJ Abrams On More Star Trek Sequels + Talks “Overusing” Lens Flares & Super 8

We have already heard this week from JJ Abrams on how he won’t rush the Star Trek sequel to meet it’s June 29, 2012 release date. Now in a new interview, Abrams talks about Star Trek beyond the next Star Trek movie. We also have a few video clips of Abrams talking about possible delay, lens flares and Super 8.    


Abrams on future of Star Trek beyond the next movie

Speaking to Aint It Cool about Super 8, JJ Abrams spoke about the future of Star Trek beyond the currently planned sequel

AICN: One last question: what’s the status of the next STAR TREK film, and how many more do you think are possible with this cast?
Abrams: Um, I have no idea. Hopefully one more, at least.

AICN: Is that all you’ve planned so far? Is that as far as you can see?
Abrams: We’re not writing… which I know a lot of people have done, [filming] two sequels in a row or planning a trilogy. We’ve of course talked about a lot of different things, but in terms of specific planning for a film, there’s only one movie on the horizon that we’re talking about.

JJ Abrams directing "Super 8" – not planning to shoot back to back sequels for "Star Trek"


JJ Abrams on possible Star Trek sequel delay

The following comments from Abrams (to a gaggle of reporters from the Super 8 press junket) were mostly reported here over the weekend, but now you can see the full comment on video (via Fox).

JJ Abrams on lens flares

Much has been said about JJ Abrams love of lens flares, especially in the Star Trek movie. In this interview with bdkreviews.com, Abrams talks about the flares in Super 8 (and Star Trek). [Video below should cue to discussion of lens flares at 6:58]

JJ on Super 8

And here is some of the generic Paramount press video of JJ talking about Super 8.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I love J.J. and think he’s a shining star in Hollywood, but I hope this lens flare kick is a fad because it gets a bit tiresome. But, what do I know…I don’t make the movies, I just watch ’em.

Guilty, overusing lens flares. Least he’s honest. Not sure I agree that anamorphic looks great.

i like the flares, as his “trademark” and i do feel that jj has the potential to be the next spielberg(sp) because of his love for the process. he knows how to show characters on film and pick up little bits here and there that tell stories about who they are. felicity was a great show that dealt with people and their interactions with each other (until the…well…i dont know what you’d call that time traveling finale). and i like seeing where he’s progressed to, and besides all of that, he seems like a cool guy in general.
funny side note, i was playing mass effect and mass effect 2 and noticed major lense flares lol….

Every director has their thing, from Spike’s floating dollies to Bay’s slo-mo swirl cam. I don’t mind the flares so much, but I do think he should ease up some.

There was a time, when I put an effect like the “lens flares” on all my photo edits… I love the effect supernova… I understand JJ Abrams… LOL

And it’s obvious he is not ready (willing) to talk about Star Trek Sequel for now… but I ‘m waiting for the statement about it “SOONER” … Forget “LATER”, Mr. director! …LOL

:-) :-)

I understand the desire to have a distinctive “look”…but as far as distinctive “looks” go, annoying lens flares that wash-out 80% of the frames used in the film is NOT a good direction to take.

If you put in any lens flares in this movie, I will shove a road flare up your !@#$%^&. It makes the movie look like it was filmed by an amateur. I also thought you had too much camera shake as well. I like movies to look clean smooth and solid. Star trek didn’t look like that at all.

@7: Wow, that is frikkin’ harsh. I, too, agree the lens flares are overdone. (I’ve been watching season one of Fringe on DVD, and they distract me on that show like they didn’t even do in Star Trek.) At least the guy’s owned up to it. Cut him some friggin’ slack, because the movie was otherwise great.

get a brain morans. who gives a rat’s ass about lens flare. get over yourselves.

I quite liked the lens flares, actually. He probably knows not to use them as heavily, but I wouldn’t mind there being some in the next one.

Is it just me who thinks that JJ could easily be cast as a Vorta?

Yes to lens flare by the way!!!

That’s morons, you moron.

@#12 our friend #9 did mean Moran. He was referring to Erin Moran who Played Jonie “Shortcake” Cunningham. Ms Moran is famous for her hatred of lens flares. Remember the lights were always on the Fonz to make him look cool.

JJ is great but Trek should be a priority. It was his breakthrough film. Um, and I don’t want a “cool” Trek, I want an awe inspiring Trek. I can go to a Phish concert for “cool”.

Lens flares look terrible. They make me want to put on sunglasses and they distract from other parts of the movie that you could either be seeing, or can’t see because they’re literally in the way.

And much less shaky cam would be great as well. Smooth and steady always looks better to me.

Two suggestions, less or no lense flares and starship sets that actually look like 23rd century starships and not a modern day brewery.

Give me the Dark Knight of Star Trek Films as the sequel !!!!!

That’s JJs style. I wouldn’t think of telling somebody how they should express themselves in their films. JJ does things I wouldn’t do, but then that’s because I’m me and JJ is himself. There’s nothing technically unsound about lens flares, and to me the basis of a legitimate criticism has to be some technical gaffe, some ostensible mechanical reason why a work doesn’t perform better.

12. Lol, okay. It’s a basic meme u pitiful noob. Now begone before I become belligerent.


sorry, that was harsh. i get pissed off like this every seven years or so.

The next movie will be called. Star Trek Attack of the LEns Flares.
ok. Maybe not. Some lens falres are ok. The Wrath of Khan had a few lens flares and they were ok. But. Not to many.

Oh and J.J. Real Engine room please.

Does the word “Prolific” mean anything anymore?
Warp speed with Trek, and good luck, JJ. .

#20. Is it Pon Far time for you.

Dude,really?! Are lens flares ‘this’ big of a deal?! To me they are not. If J.J. likes that as his mark,then thats cool with me;I mean,I love J.J.,I think hes awesome and would love to meet him some day,(like that would happen!!) But hopefully Trek12 will become his new love soon. We all hope!!

#20,LOL!! :)

#27. Yes. I love ABBA. I have 10 of there songs on my I Pod Interface. I also own 6 of the Star Trek Movies CDs as well.

I am the only fan worth listening to! Do only what I say! Plus, I’m not over 40, so I still matter.

Well if thats JJ’s thing then screw him. JJ didn’t make 2009 good, in fact he ruined what was other wise a near flawless film. Just get the same cast and writers (and a real engine room) and your all set for a perfect star trek 2012. JJ can go back to his road flares.

I love the lens flares! That, along with the shaky camera and his use of film over digital makes for a very distinctive and classy look.


I completely disagree. In my opinion J J is the only thing that saved a mediocre script.

the day will come, and not long from now, when the sort of camera movement and flare use will have become a common as cross-dissovles and fades.

as always, different artists will improve upon it and edit it differently. form ‘citizen kane’ to ‘the bourne thing”, this is true. flares and whip pans are just tools in the box. the artists will use them well, and the hacks make it lame.

Allen Williams
You need to tone it down. Your posts are way too personal and/or violent and either mellow out or move on

J.J and the court are the ones who saved Trek and brought Trek back for us. I thought Trek 09 was great and I have seen it at the movies 8 times and could not tell you how many times I have seen it on Blu Rey.

When the rest of the movie is so amazing, like Star Trek was, he can put in as many flares as he wants!

The idea that Abrams is waiting to get the script in his hands before he decides to direct or not is nonsense at this point.

You should have heard me when I found out that enterprise was canceled. Star trek is VERY personal to me. Having someone like JJ trying to turn it into some stupid form of art (which to me JJ’s deal is just as bad as smearing random paint on canvas) is almost as bad as someone else taking it away from me in the first place. If I had my way enterprise would have gotten its 7 seasons. There would be some kind of DS9 and VGR movies even if they were direct to blu-ray. It means so much to me that I would be willing to pay way beyond the normal price of a regular show’s seasons to get all 28 seasons on blu-ray.
Don’t get me wrong I like the movie in spite of JJ not because of it, and I do have all 11 movies on blu-ray.

The irony is i actually liked alias, and I don’t recall that having any lame lens flares. I would be willing to pay extra for that on blu-ray as well.

I calculate a 99.999% chance will direct again, and that the sequel will have lens flares to some extent.

Though too many of them will NOT be a good thing.

Eleven minutes talking about Lens Flares? Sorry, but I have a life!

16. Ted C –
I agree with you completely about the brewery! I can’t believe there’s so much talk about lens flares when Enterprise’s engineering section is obviously earthbound inside a 20th century brewery! I can’t imagine whining about a lens flare and NOT mentioning computer consoles placed in front of giant fermenting tanks at a Budweiser facility. It’s ghastly amateurish. I had no problem with the flares, barely noticed them, in fact, but I crapped my pants when I saw engineering. I had to leave the movie to clean myself, and the next time I went I wore Depends® just in case. Luckily I was prepared this time and the diaper wasn’t necessary, but it’s good to be safe.

But I say do one more movie, two more if you must, and then put Trek back on TV where it belongs! They’ll have the uniforms and sets (hopefully not the brewery) already made, so just use them!

Just got home from the premiere screening of Super 8 at the Mann Village errr i mean Regency Village theatre (old habits die hard , to me it will always be the Mann VillageTheatre) in west wood, got a last minute call asking if i wanted to attend from an old co worker.

All i can say is this if Star Trek xII is pushed back cause of This sappy love letter to the classic films of Spielberg,Dante, Donner and Howard. I am going to be royally ticked off. Dont get me wrong there are some great performances in there such as Kyle Chandler and Jessica Tuck and the kids are pretty decent. But as a whole the movie comes off as expensive retread mixing The Goonies, with Cocoon, Close encounters, and E.T. and the Explorers with a slight dash of space camp(which just so happend to star Spielbergs wife lol) for good measure.Its almost like JJ takes the best elements of those films and repurposes it into a mishmash of a sci fi coming of age movie.
The biggest influences of Course come from spielberg, but there scenes that weigh heavily with influences of Joe Dante, Richard Donner, and Ron Howard

I will see it again at some point and give it another chance like i do with ALL movies, but man oh man there is no way this movie opens as big as star trek, it will be lucky do better than MI:III or cloverfield this weekend.
It might have a so so friday. I am sure it will be very polarizing your either going to love it or hate it. there is no middle ground with this film inspite of the decent performances from some of the cast.
definately doesnt live up to the hype at all.

Comming out of the theatre was a very mixed reaction from others around me, the theatre seats roughly 1300 people.

well thats my take on it.

I’ve just seen Super 8 at our local cinema. It opened today in all the major cinemas here in NZ (Thursday, 9 June).

Fortunately, I have not been exposed (or indeed allowed myself to be exposed – like watching all the trailers etc) to all the hype, so my knowledge was minimal. I enjoyed the movie. I suppose it could be a mixture of previous sci-fi dramas (what films aren’t in some way similar to that which has gone before within the same genre?), but frankly I couldn’t care less about all of that stuff.

One comment made to me was that it had a kind of strange, surreal quality. The pacing was good. The kids were, well, kids, which meant that one or two of them could be damned annoying at times, but I liked that about the film. I could relate to that, having three kids of my own. The main characters were generally likable and well acted. There were a few lens flares but they were not overdone. JJ Abrams seems to be getting the hang of his lens flare fascination (and gimmick).

Great kiddult sci-fi/horror/conspiracy movie!

Three and a half stars out of five.

One thing about lens flares that I found interesting is that when I brought them up to my sister and brother after they had seen the movie, they hadn’t even noticed them! They are not film buffs (or Trekkies, for that matter). They are part of that larger “general audience” that JJ was aiming at. Bottom line is that they simply enjoyed the film for what it was. I don’t think many folks outside this narrow community are roiled about or even aware of lens flares!

I hope Super 8 is good. Gonna check it out.

Im going to check out Super 8 for sure. The funny thing is, I “think” I’ve watched ET one time thru period, thats it. And I’m not even sure I watched it all the way.

I dont know what it is about that movie but its just never is able to grab my attention. And yes I may be one of the few people on the planet that can say that. Same goes for Goonies, Coocon, batteries not included ect.

Those movies just werent my cup of tea. But maybe one day, bored, I’ll check em out and realize I missed something special..or not. :]

“I don’t think many folks outside this narrow community are roiled about or even aware of lens flares!”

I discovered lens flares ( amongst other “controversial” aspects of the movie, here ) were a problem, only after reading about them on the internet.

Oh goody, more spazzing over lens flares and breweries. Is this a good place for me to re-introduce the Shat/No Shat debate?

In all seriousness, I’d like to toss this out to Mr. Allen (#37, etc): Please chill. All of us take Star Trek personally. It’s safe to say that everyone here is totally, nerdishly committed to the Trekiverse. Why else would we post?

“Star Trek” has always inspired passionate debate — and I think it’s a good sign that Abrams’ reboot inspires the same. But we can be civil about it.

#47,Aurore,hi! Getting away from lens flares for a moment,what do you think about Super 8? Are you going to see it?

How many KoolAid drinkers can you fit on one webpage?

JJ destroyed Star Trek … or at best, took a bad project and kept it terrible. Who gives this guy control over films? Star Trek 2009 was horrible, in every aspect. The “science fiction” had NO science in it — the Star Trek cannon was erased — Vulcan, a planet well in advance over Earth, had no defenses employed against the Romulans — no massive attack was deployed to protect anyone — and we once again use time travel to make everything work out in a script that would otherwise never resolve. Just like it does in every high school student’s film project — like I never saw that coming. I expect Super 8 to go also go where EVERYONE has gone before, et nausea.