|
Some Other Guy posted:If they only remade the DS9 episode "The Visitor" into a movie, then THAT would be a good trek movie. Instead they go with whatever revenge plot blows up the most props Truthfully, I just want to see ships going to warp and shooting at each other.
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
OrganizedEntropy posted:Truthfully, I just want to see ships going to warp and shooting at each other. They could remake "Errand of Mercy". Middle of a Federation Klingon war, lots of ships shooting each other, lots of phaser fights on the planet. And the Organians could bring the war to a conclusion so that the next movie doesn't have to explain how the war stopped, or having it going on in the background. They seem hell-bent on recycling old Trek, so might as well go with something like that. That way we don't have ONE INSANE GUY trying to blow up Earth alone, but instead a ruthless Klingon commander doing his part against the Federation. I don't know if I'm alone here, but I've always wanted to see the Klingons and Federation duke it out on an even footing (no birds of prey please), and a with the exception of a few episodes of DS9, we havn't really seen this. I sort of feel that TNG "neutered" the Klingons by making them the Federation's ally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
The problem really wasn't in making the Klingons allies, but in how they did it. You can see Gene's finger-prints on the decision: See? The Federation is so noble and wise and perfect that they've even managed to get the Klingons (you know, those evil guys!) to become allies with them!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
Reading a bullet point list can make any movie sound dumb This sounds, like someone pointed out in this thread, like an episode in the spirit of TOS. I'm somewhat relieved really!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 12:33
|
|
|
Cellophane S posted:Reading a bullet point list can make any movie sound dumb Exactly. You could make a bullet point list of Shawshank Redemption if you wanted that would make it sound horrible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 13:10
|
|
|
Regardless of execution, dredging up Khan the whitest Indian alive is and always will be a creatively septic design choice. Not because Star Trek is serious, or because Khan is sacred, but because it's a retread of a story that could have been equally resonant at this point in the timeline if they used Gary Mitchell or some random Augment. What really weirds me out is that they used the villain and didn't plaster it everywhere on all their posters and merchandise as a way to get the Trekkie hive in a fury and entice non-fans into seeing what the butthurt was about. By leaving it up to the last minute is just, well, odd. Either this is some crazy marketing gambit I could never intuit from my layman's perspective, or the management of this one was hosed in the head.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 13:28
|
|
|
Blistex posted:I don't know if I'm alone here, but I've always wanted to see the Klingons and Federation duke it out on an even footing (no birds of prey please), and a with the exception of a few episodes of DS9, we havn't really seen this. I sort of feel that TNG "neutered" the Klingons by making them the Federation's ally. Watch the Klingon Academy videoclips.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Regardless of execution, dredging up Khan the whitest Indian alive is and always will be a creatively septic design choice. Not because Star Trek is serious, or because Khan is sacred, but because it's a retread of a story that could have been equally resonant at this point in the timeline if they used Gary Mitchell or some random Augment. Well, it has worked well for marketing. Drumming up a lot of talk and all. But, I feel like they wouldn't have gone that route unless it felt right. I think this could be interesting because it sounds like a thematic mirror to Wrath of Khan where a lot of the situations are reversed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 14:24
|
|
|
I kinda do wish instead of the retarded action schlock someone would go the Schumaker route and get a camp TOS thing going like he did with Batman. Arnold Schwarzenegger is Khan. EDIT: Ooooo! This might also open the door for Space Whale Probe! Gatts fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Great_Gerbil posted:I think this could be interesting because it sounds like a thematic mirror to Wrath of Khan where a lot of the situations are reversed. I'll agree to disagree there. I think it could be enjoyable in the same way 09 was, but I seriously doubt that mirroring situations from an old movie are going to be resonant as anything but callbacks. Sure, there's the fact that you're placing a young Kirk into no-win situations and forcing him to take a level of responsibility that he didn't at the same point in TOS is a cute sentiment, but again why the hell would you need Khan to do that? For the sake of thematic rhyming? I'm sure someone is going to try to stick their dick in my mouth over what I'm about to say next, but that's the kind of "style over substance" screenwriting mentality that makes for the lousier end of Star Trek like Insurrection and Nemesis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:I'll agree to disagree there. I think it could be enjoyable in the same way 09 was, but I seriously doubt that mirroring situations from an old movie are going to be resonant as anything but callbacks. Sure, there's the fact that you're placing a young Kirk into no-win situations and forcing him to take a level of responsibility that he didn't at the same point in TOS is a cute sentiment, but again why the hell would you need Khan to do that? For the sake of thematic rhyming? I'm sure someone is going to try to stick their dick in my mouth over what I'm about to say next, but that's the kind of "style over substance" screenwriting mentality that makes for the lousier end of Star Trek like Insurrection and Nemesis. On the other hand Insurrection and Nemesis didn't even have style.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
Woooowww... Remember how so many people said that the writing in the first movie was a complete abomination with practically no redeeming value and the excuse-makers were all, "No, no, it was the strike! It's a talented bunch!" Yeah, loving horrible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:Woooowww... Remember how so many people said that the writing in the first movie was a complete abomination with practically no redeeming value and the excuse-makers were all, "No, no, it was the strike! It's a talented bunch!" Oh did you see the premiere? What aspects of the writing were specifically bad this time around?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:Without even having to go into the spoilers, if you were thinking this movie would be smart or creative or reflect any of the deeper narratives of the show, well then, you were bound to be disappointed b/c it's not about that, it's action shlock you idiots. Trek '09 was smart AND creative and purposefully focused on the relationship between 'franchise' and viewer, and how narratives and meaning emerge. That synopsis sounds like it's a natural continuation of that theme and will most likely rule, I bet. Though it's still pretty lovely that they took a character portrayed iconic-ally by a non-white actor and filled the role with a white internet fan sensation. Especially since the dialogue seemed to go "Khan is white now, that's loving dumb" "No he's not Khan, don't worry". Danger fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
Danger posted:Trek '09 was smart AND creative... It was neither. It was derivative and full of holes. But it did have pretty people and effects. That being said, it's a fantastic movie and I watch it a couple times a year... But the story was atrocious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Oh did you see the premiere? What aspects of the writing were specifically bad this time around? Every single major story beat that's leaked is bad? With perhaps the exception of Kirk/Pike stuff? All of the bits that they "borrowed" from ST2 are used in horrible and hackneyed ways. Even if they somehow manage to reconstruct some of the emotional resonance(and the smart money says they won't) it won't count because we've SEEN it before. When ST2 came out and you watched SPOCK DIE, it was crushing and you felt it the same way Kirk did and all the themes hit you in a similar way. You can't have that here, we've already been there. All you feel now is, "Oh hey, it's like that one time in that other movie except backwards." Ugh. Also, the worst offense: Magic. Healing. Blood. MAGIC. HEALING. BLOOD. Tuxedo Jack posted:It was neither. It was derivative and full of holes. I was just thinking about this. For all it's faults, and they are legion, if you ignore the one visual flaw that will not be named, it's very pretty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:For all it's faults, and they are legion, if you ignore the one visual flaw that will not be named, it's very pretty. It took me a bit to think about what visual flaw you meant, then when I realized what you were talking about I was secure in my knowledge that you're literally a crazy person.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:I was just thinking about this. For all it's faults, and they are legion, if you ignore the one visual flaw that will not be named, it's very pretty. Ok, I'm stumped... edit: Oh. Well that never bothered me. Tuxedo Jack fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:It took me a bit to think about what visual flaw you meant, then when I realized what you were talking about I was secure in my knowledge that you're literally a crazy person. When the director himself literally uses the word "ridiculous" to describe how overwrought it was in some shots, I suppose that means we're both crazy. Oh well. And given that this sequel doesn't appear to use the same technique, I'd say it's pretty well borne out that it was silly the first time around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:When the director himself literally uses the word "ridiculous" to describe how overwrought it was in some shots, I suppose that means we're both crazy. Oh well. And given that this sequel doesn't appear to use the same technique, I'd say it's pretty well borne out that it was silly the first time around. Just because they're using a different style in this film doesn't mean the lens flare in the first one "silly the first time around". It looked fantastic and suited the movie. Maybe it didn't suit this one. I don't know, but I do know the lens flare was awesome and gently caress the haters. JJ Abrams literally ended his next movie on an iris-out of a lens flare. I like to consider that a "gently caress you" too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
(shrug) I guess. I can see what he was trying to do and convey, but I think that plus all the camera angles looked like poo poo. The bizarre flying shot of Spock in front of the science council that swings in from being rotated 90 degrees gets my vote as the worst shot I've seen in forever. But hey, subjective whatever. It wouldn't matter who shot this mess, it sounds worse than the first :|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:Every single major story beat that's leaked is bad? With perhaps the exception of Kirk/Pike stuff? All of the bits that they "borrowed" from ST2 are used in horrible and hackneyed ways. Even if they somehow manage to reconstruct some of the emotional resonance(and the smart money says they won't) it won't count because we've SEEN it before. When ST2 came out and you watched SPOCK DIE, it was crushing and you felt it the same way Kirk did and all the themes hit you in a similar way. You can't have that here, we've already been there. All you feel now is, "Oh hey, it's like that one time in that other movie except backwards." Ugh. So wait...you haven't actually seen the film? I mean, I know the leaked plot points sound questionable, but as someone said earlier, you can reduce practically any movie to a list of ridiculous sounding bullet points.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
-Monkeys have a bone fight -Spaceships engage in 15 minutes of foreplay, just get to boning already -Guy runs around in upside down circles -The robot goes crazy, but then the guy removes all of the cassette tapes and he turns off -There's an old guy in a room for a while, then he's a baby
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
Danger posted:-Monkeys have a bone fight Man, this isn't the right thread for it, but I'd love the poo poo out of a place to "reduce your favorite movie to 5 or fewer weird bullets". 2001 is pretty wacky when phrased that way. Star Trek: The Motion Picture is probably even worse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:all the camera angles looked like poo poo. The bizarre flying shot of Spock in front of the science council that swings in from being rotated 90 degrees gets my vote as the worst shot I've seen in forever. I like that stuff. We're in space! It should be a little wierd and disorientating. Also, from looking at that big bad evil ship from the trailer, this one looks to be continuing 09's theme of original Star Trek vs Nemesis/grimdark later Trek. Can't wait to see it. Forum Actuary fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Like the first film and Prometheus, it looks like Into Darkness will have a lot of elements that will be latched onto and cited as flaws ad nauseum by nerds without any kind of exploration of whether/why they're a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Like the first film and Prometheus, it looks like Into Darkness will have a lot of elements that will be latched onto and cited as flaws ad nauseum by nerds without any kind of exploration of whether/why they're a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Like the first film and Prometheus, it looks like Into Darkness will have a lot of elements that will be latched onto and cited as flaws ad nauseum by nerds without any kind of exploration of whether/why they're a problem. Trek 09 is a good movie. I enjoy it very much. That being said, it has a LOT of problems storywise. I will cite a few of them briefly (and try to stay out of super-picky nerd territory, and just in the bad writing zone), as an example: Why does Nero drill into the surface to drop the red stuff rather than just throw it at the planet? Kirk getting dropped on ice moon, where Spock Prime just so happens to be, then some cosmic nonsense about fate. Pike gives command of Prometheus is a bad movie, if you've seen the alien films. These are just my opinions. I don't think anyone is stupid for not sharing them with me, I just don't think we should applaud Trek 09 for having an amazing story, as it's full of plot holes and bad writing. The dialogue is good, but the story is bad. Everything else about the movie is good (all the characters, their motivations, etc). But the story isn't good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:as an example: Why does Nero drill into the surface to drop the red stuff rather than just throw it at the planet? To increase the rate of absorption. If you've seen the dynamite scene in Armageddon, same idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
computer parts posted:To increase the rate of absorption. Now that's a picky response. If a drop can hit a whole planet from the inside, two drops could do it from the surface. It's a silly plot device, to give our heroes time to respond, and it's bad writing. Again, just my opinion. Back to the new film, the stuff in those bulletpoints sounds far and beyond the level of  in the first film. I love Trek 09 (and I'll probably end up loving the new one just as much) - but come on... That poo poo sounds ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:Trek 09 is a good movie. I enjoy it very much. That being said, it has a LOT of problems storywise. I will cite a few of them briefly (and try to stay out of super-picky nerd territory, and just in the bad writing zone), as an example: Why does Nero drill into the surface to drop the red stuff rather than just throw it at the planet? Kirk getting dropped on ice moon, where Spock Prime just so happens to be, then some cosmic nonsense about fate. Pike gives command of I know you say you tried to avoid it, but a lot of that is the definition of 'super-picky nerd territory'. The drill is an act of deliberate penetration, just throwing the red stuff wouldn't do at all. Nu-Kirk gets dropped on a barren, violently inhospitable environment and finds it the home of the ancient icon of Trek canon dying alone and forgotten. Nu-Kirk, completely ignorant of the "Real Star Trek" history takes the helm against the embittered villain who has ruthlessly taken out his ire related to Trek canon on these new upstarts. It's all great. Plus the characters, their motivations, the dialogue, the visuals, and all those things that you find good ARE the story. Plot holes and "bad writing" are fundamental elements of a movie's story as well and shouldn't be hand waved. Also Prometheus is one of last year's best films, if not the best sci-fi genre film in the last 20. Get your poo poo straight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
Danger is correct. Star Trek 2009 is technically and conceptually flawless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Danger is correct. Star Trek 2009 is technically and conceptually flawless. Well, y'know, that's just like your opinion, man.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:Pike gives command of Think of it as good publicity for new recruits; because the whole of Starfleet Academy just died horribly and that might have put people off joining a bit. Kirk's a hero, the son of a famous hero, and proved he knew what he was doing by saving the Federation. He's a figurehead for a flagship.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
The only real complaint I have about Star Trek '09 is that the musical score is a little too dependent on a single theme. It's a decent theme, but it's used in too many different contexts without enough variation. Giacchino's done better. That's pretty much it, though!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Like the first film and Prometheus, it looks like Into Darkness will have a lot of elements that will be latched onto and cited as flaws ad nauseum by nerds without any kind of exploration of whether/why they're a problem. I love Prometheus mostly because it drew out nerds who typically poo poo on movies for hand-feeding the plot to viewers, and then left them confused and angered when it didn't provide them the answers to everything on a silver platter. This, of course, means the movie is flawed and full of holes. 'Plot hole' and 'deus ex machina' are probably the two most misused terms on this forum. mind the walrus posted:
Since pretty much every side of every argument on this forum takes this stance at one point or another, I figure "When in Rome..." applies by default. DFu4ever fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
There is so much  "God I love pissing off NERDS" in this thread, here, on the internet.... in a Star Trek discussion thread. A lot of y'all need to recall that "charcoal" is still a form of black and "cast-iron bowl" is still a form of pot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
Non-whiny non-pedantic nerds are exempt from my contempt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
mind the walrus posted:There is so much I know I'm the one most people are disagreeing with, but I'm not mad, FWIW. I don't like being called stupid for disliking something, but I'm settled with my opinions. I didn't like Prometheus and I think Trek 09 had lazy writing. Not looking to change anyone's mind about those movies, just explaining why I had issues with them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 19:01
|
|