|
Gatts posted:I hate the new Star Trek mostly and also the designs. Ugly rear end ships and choices. Why would you set yourself up to watch Insurrection again 
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:50 |
|
|
alg posted:Why would you set yourself up to watch Insurrection again You'd have the certain knowledge Tom Hardy would go on to better things I suupose.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:That sure does look old and boring. Much like you I imagine. Laddy, don't you think you should rephrase that? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
Pobama posted:Phasers at high noon, gentlemen? Please. Real men duel with neuronic whips.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
echoplex posted:It DOES look like the Enterprise E. loving John Eaves. Yeah that was going to be my comment. I loved the Galaxy, the E and the like. Comedy option, go into the future, go to the mirror universe, grab the E, come back and be like "Bitches, leave!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Tsk, all those fools who think the bad guy is really going to be Khan or whoever have clearly been suckered in by Abrams' campaign of disinformation. It's plainly obvious from that trailer that Cumberbatch is playing an evil, time-displaced, mirror universe Picard in command of the Evilprise E. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
I really like the Bizarro-Enterprise in the new trailer. Seeing more of Earth is something I can do without because just go to loving space already, I can go outside and see that poo poo. My dad always told me the Enterprise was built in space, and could never land on Earth because it is too fragile for the gravity(or something), I was really young at the time. Now JJ is ruining Dad-Cannon and I don't appreciate it one bit. EDIT: I forgot about the motorcycle scene in the last movie where you can see cranes building the thing. bring back old gbs fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Apr 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:You'd have the certain knowledge Tom Hardy would go on to better things I suupose. Tom Hardy was in Nemesis. No one in Insurrection went on to be a star. In fact I think they all killed themselves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
FrensaGeran posted:Tom Hardy was in Nemesis. No one in Insurrection went on to be a star. In fact I think they all killed themselves. In fact, I feel like Insurrection was about the last time F. Murray Abraham tried to undo the Oscar jinx. It's all SyFy Channel original movies and the like now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
Jesus christ thats depressing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Jesus christ thats depressing. Apparently Salieri takes it in stride: Wikipedia posted:Abraham's relatively low-profile film career subsequent to his Academy Award has been widely considered an example of the "Oscar jinx". According to film critic Leonard Maltin, professional failure following an early success is referred to in Hollywood circles as the "F. Murray Abraham syndrome".[11] Abraham rejected this notion and told Maltin:
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Oh I forgot that he was in a couple episodes of Homeland this season, so I suppose it's not all terrible shows.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 22:21
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:Uh, Eaves didn't design the JJ-Enterprise. That was Ryan Church; he probably did this Dreadnaught ship too. Uh, Eaves did design the E-E, whose grim lineage and influence appears to live on in that shape. That was the point of my post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
Also, Eaves did design work on ST09. Not sure if he was involved in Into Darkness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
My Rogue Section 31 agent mad about getting intel from Alpha Spock seems to be bearing out. The Dreadnought or whatever is built based on all the information from Spock's squidship.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
Honestly Cumberbatch's character seems more like Javier Bardem's character in Skyfall than he does Khan or anything related to Khan. Former elite Starfleet operative out looking for revenge because of [macguffin], our plucky hero struggles to beat someone who is better/more seasoned/ahead at every step? Much more plausible than trying to tie in some Augments poo poo that nobody cares about. I'm really not sure that the shot of the "cryo pods" in the trailers is even that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
McDowell posted:My Rogue Section 31 agent mad about getting intel from Alpha Spock seems to be bearing out. The Dreadnought or whatever is built based on all the information from Spock's squidship. That'd be kind of neat. He steals poo poo from Nimoy-Spock's future and goes rogue. I'd like it if they incorporated Section 31, there's actually a good avenue to explore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Plus Section 31 is definitely something from the Prime timeline that would feel more at home in the super duper serious JJUniverse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Bringing in the Klingons even makes sense. Benedict brings them the information from Nimoy-Spock because he's an augment who is all spergy about the Temporal Prime Directive. See you guys on the 17th 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
I don't know much about comics but the last Countdown issue wasn't for sale in the app like two days ago but is available today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
Whatever they do I hope they continue to have Prime Spock and his presence continue to have repercussions rather than just shunt him off to apocrypha.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
I think Spock would just look at how everything is hosed from the Narada anyway and decide it's more logical to just overtly work to prepare the Federation for coming threats. So maybe he'll pop up in another film meddling with events on purpose and accidentally cause a crisis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
To this day I'm impressed but surprised that they bothered to explain the whole parallel universe thing. I mean, they could have just made a Star Trek movie with the TOS characters but not explained anything about it being a different timeline and I think people still would have eaten it up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 03:26
|
|
|
Let's be fair. Star Trek nerds are a special breed who would shred poo poo up, did anyway, etc. and Execs probably decided "Eh, let's try to bring them on board so do this parallel universe poo poo. Mo money." They'd be all "NOT MY KIRK!" Hell, I'm a Trek fan and loving hate Trek 09 anyway outside of the cast. Although I don't care for parallel universe or my childhood murdered type poo poo too much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
jivjov posted:To this day I'm impressed but surprised that they bothered to explain the whole parallel universe thing. I mean, they could have just made a Star Trek movie with the TOS characters but not explained anything about it being a different timeline and I think people still would have eaten it up. Red letter Media talks about this. Nerds wouldn't have accepted it at all. DEATH OF MY TREKS 09 was actually the beginning of my Trekiness. I immediately recognized that alternate timelines are a plot device one would expect in the series and liked the idea of using it to reboot the franchise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Honestly Cumberbatch's character seems more like Javier Bardem's character in Skyfall than he does Khan or anything related to Khan. Former elite Starfleet operative out looking for revenge because of [macguffin], our plucky hero struggles to beat someone who is better/more seasoned/ahead at every step? Much more plausible than trying to tie in some Augments poo poo that nobody cares about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
I don't think the trek nerds were the intended audience though...are we really that big of a force that a plot point had to be scripted and Nimoy brought on in order to secure our dollars? The group that would have decried the film if the had been no mention of parallel timeline can't be that massive...can it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
jivjov posted:I don't think the trek nerds were the intended audience though...are we really that big of a force that a plot point had to be scripted and Nimoy brought on in order to secure our dollars? To be fair at that time I think with Trek waning and dormant as it was they probably wanted as much potential dollars as possible. Trek did get to nerdcore levels after TNG since the audiences dwindled. Did they really have to? No. But I think a bone was tossed. I'm disappointed they remade it into a forced actionfest without any substance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:30
|
|
|
I think the alternate timeline thing was more to say to non-fans who were aware of the previous films and shows "no, you don't need to watch any of the previous stuff, none of it matters here", not so much for the generic hardcore Trekkie who would probably have just rolled with the punches on that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:30
|
|
|
Gatts posted:I'm disappointed they remade it into a forced actionfest without any substance. Well I suppose you can be disappointed, but Star Trek killed itself in the TV realm. Without a film with popular appeal the Trek brand was a dead duck, because no one was going to risk any money on a new TV series. The built in viewer base for Trek loves to bitch and viewership for the last 2 series turned to poo poo and there's no guarantee that even with the best intentions a new series wouldn't blow donkey chunks. Having a turret blasty lens flare blockbuster pulled Trek out of the morgue and drastically increased the chances of future investment in a tv series. Also, totally dug the blaster fest, both on a generic level and a "Better than the TNG movies" level. It may not be hardcore Trek, but it wasn't Insurrection or Nemesis.. and was a hell of a lot better than spending a few hours watching Enterprise or... ugh.. Voyager.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
I like how the time travel stuff kind of turned Trek 09 into a movie about remakes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 13:25
|
|
|
microwave casserole posted:I like how the time travel stuff kind of turned Trek 09 into a movie about remakes. Yeah, the meta aspect with Nero as an avatar of canon-obsessed rage was the best. I'm hoping Into Darkness has a similar consideration of the nature of the genre/cultural context/etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 14:50
|
|
|
epitasis posted:I don't know much about comics but the last Countdown issue wasn't for sale in the app like two days ago but is available today. You should buy them off comixology.com so they get the money and not Apple/Android. Also they are available whenever they are supposed to be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 15:00
|
|
|
jivjov posted:I don't think the trek nerds were the intended audience though...are we really that big of a force that a plot point had to be scripted and Nimoy brought on in order to secure our dollars? Trekkers weren't necessarily the primary intended audience, but they are a large and vocal group, and their good will would definitely help sell the reboot to its primary intended audience. Would Joe. Q. Moviegoer go see a Trek movie that even the Trekkers thought was bad? Gatts posted:I'm disappointed they remade it into a forced actionfest without any substance. There's a great deal of substance to ST09. Even if you disregard all the metacommentary on fandom, remakes and retcons, there's still all the stuff about how identity and destiny are formed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:I think the alternate timeline thing was more to say to non-fans who were aware of the previous films and shows "no, you don't need to watch any of the previous stuff, none of it matters here", not so much for the generic hardcore Trekkie who would probably have just rolled with the punches on that. This is how I look at it, too. It also paves the way for any kind of future reboots on TV if that route is ever considered.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Trekkers weren't necessarily the primary intended audience, but they are a large and vocal group, and their good will would definitely help sell the reboot to its primary intended audience. Would Joe. Q. Moviegoer go see a Trek movie that even the Trekkers thought was bad? Trekkers needed to be on board. They still comprised the bulk of the target audience. ST09 was a huge risk, IMO. Trek fans have split off into weird "factions" that are often extremely hostile to one another. Just look at TrekBBS. I cut my teeth with Next Gen, but I'm mildly curious when Trekkers began focusing on canon so narrowly. I could be wrong, but it's not a phenomenon I've noticed to this extent in other franchises. For instance, the size "discrepancy" of the NuPrise. How many other franchises have people rationalizing something like that instead of accepting it and moving on? Instead Trekkers have compiled volumes comparing the sizes and shapes of the various prime and nu timeline ships. Did people do that when The Motion Picture came out? It's virtually impossible that the Enterprise in TMP is a simple refit. It has similar components but they're completely different shapes. The ship would have had to be almost completely rebuilt from the keep up. tl;dr It was necessary to bring existing Trek fans on board for the built-in audience. The alt universe chicanery was necessary because Trekkers are almost neurotic when it comes to small details.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
ANYHOW, general-release IMAX tickets should be on sale now for May 15th at 8PM. Glad I don't have to stay up for a midnight release this time around!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
I believe a lot of the flak is a stark dislike for J.J.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 16:48
|
|
|
All of the films are about old people being old and slow and Star Trek 2009 was the first Star Trek film about a young crew having adventures and they changed up the pace to be more like Star Wars to accommodate that and I guess people don't like their Star Trek to be about young people having adventures.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:50 |
|
|
Great_Gerbil posted:Trekkers needed to be on board. They still comprised the bulk of the target audience. ST09 was a huge risk, IMO. Trek fans have split off into weird "factions" that are often extremely hostile to one another. Just look at TrekBBS. There are not many other franchises that have as much material spread out over as many years as Star Trek. And consider that from 1966 to 2005, 716 episodes in 30 seasons across 6 shows and 10 movies have all be a part of the same* continuity, for better or worse. 4 years later we get a reboot that is pretty drastically different than the original material. Of course it's going to polarizing. I have seen several people nitpick the size of the TOS Enterprise and the Enterprise Refit from the movies. It's one of those things that you just kind of have to accept, but nerds love to nitpick. * assuming that you consider The Animated Series to be part of the same continuity, which there is no real reason not to except that Richard H. Arnold said that it's not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 17:09
|
|
