|
The priestess was written to be T'Pau until Harve Bennett realized that Celia Lovsky had died a few years prior.
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:49 |
|
|
The thing about pon farr which really gets me is that apparently both sexes have it. How do they reproduce? Are Vulcanoids only attracted to the ones in sync with them? Do couples sync up after a while?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
Was JJTrek was a good thing or bad thing?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 02:18
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Was JJTrek was a good thing or bad thing? It brought visibility the franchise hadn't seen since the heyday of The Next Generation, and I thoroughly enjoy all three movies, warts and all--yes, even Into Darkness. I generally like the overall production design and the starship design (with a few exceptions, like Brewery Engineering in '09). Honestly, their biggest sin is Quinto, who was cast solely because of how much he resembled a young Nimoy. He's painful in the movies. So, generally speaking, the reboot series was a good thing. I wish they'd get around to making a fourth, though; it becomes less and less likely with every passing month.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
Trek '09 was dumb but fun. Star Trek Into Darkness was horrible, horrible, horrible. The only time I'd use the trite phrase "aggressively mediocre" to describe a piece of media. And I remembered when I was one of the very few people in the Trek thread who hated it in the few weeks following its release. Star Trek Beyond was good. And I wouldn't even call it "JJTrek" because he had no hand with making it and deserves no credit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
It’s such a shame that Beyond came one movie too late to do anything for the series. Into Darkness and Paramount’s complete and utter lack of promotion really hosed everything up. I’m at the point where I’d honestly rather see them sell the franchise to someone else or have CBS take over everything because Paramount clearly does not give a gently caress about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:The thing about pon farr which really gets me is that apparently both sexes have it. How do they reproduce? Are Vulcanoids only attracted to the ones in sync with them? Do couples sync up after a while?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
And I'm still pissed how they cast Benedict Cumberbatch. And when it leaked that he's playing Khan, there were all these "Is this whitewashing?" thinkpieces. And then Paramount flat out lied and said he wasn't Khan, which got all the whitewashing critics to shut up. And the movie premiered without a huge cloud of controversy... besides sucking so bad. Too bad Beyond's box office suffered from Into Darkness crapping so much. I kind of felt like the JJTrek cast deserved a third part in the "Into Darkness Never Happened" trilogy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:The thing about pon farr which really gets me is that apparently both sexes have it. How do they reproduce? Are Vulcanoids only attracted to the ones in sync with them? Do couples sync up after a while? In universe explanation, blah blah blah, mind meld, blah, psychic link with their mate. Out of universe, you don't see Vulcan women in pon farr until T'Pol in Enterprise, and i think the writers just gave it to her because they were constantly doing stuff like that. Enterprise took any excuse to strip down Jolene Blaylock and try to turn her into Vulcan sex kitten.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Was JJTrek was a good thing or bad thing? JJTrek had a great cast but aside from the stylistic choices it fell directly into the same ruts as the TNG movies. I see it as a continuation from Insurrection and Nemesis rather than a break.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
I'm still pissed that Nimoy's last Star Trek part was that idiotic "Let's ring up old Spock so he can recap Wrath of Khan for us!" scene.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 03:46
|
|
|
Angry Salami posted:I'm still pissed that Nimoy's last Star Trek part was that idiotic "Let's ring up old Spock so he can recap Wrath of Khan for us!" scene. Conversely, it tickles me to no end that the photo of the Prime crew that Spock views at the end of Beyond is the official press photo from The Final Frontier.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:JJTrek had a great cast but aside from the stylistic choices it fell directly into the same ruts as the TNG movies. I see it as a continuation from Insurrection and Nemesis rather than a break. The older I get the more it feels like there are no defined eras and just a steady decline since Voyager was greenlit
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
Timby posted:Conversely, it tickles me to no end that the photo of the Prime crew that Spock views at the end of Beyond is the official press photo from The Final Frontier. I thought that was a touching moment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:I thought that was a touching moment. Oh, I teared up in the theater. It just amused me that it was from V of all movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Remember that goofy synth track at the end of the old ST3 soundtrack? Is there a definitive list somewhere of forgotten crappy Star Trek soundtrack releases? I think I remember hearing a disco "Ilea's Theme" at one point and some sort of new wave release on the STV soundtrack for example...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 04:35
|
|
|
Drink-Mix Man posted:Is there a definitive list somewhere of forgotten crappy Star Trek soundtrack releases? I think I remember hearing a disco "Ilea's Theme" at one point and some sort of new wave release on the STV soundtrack for example... The special editions of the TMP and TFF are interesting, to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 05:32
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Was JJTrek was a good thing or bad thing? ST09 did a lot of things right, but it had issues. STID was a total mess once they did the Khan reveal. Prior to that it wasn't that bad. But once we go straight into the WoK rehash, it's painful. Beyond was pretty good overall, but I do think that blowing up the Enterprise was a mistake (especially since the 1701-A is not that radically different looking), and Idris Elba's villain was very poorly handled. We don't even get his backstory and motivations until right as the crew is heading for the final confrontation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
There was nothing good about STID after the first ten minutes besides Giacchino's score. I only go to the cinema if I'm fairly sure I'll at least enjoy a movie enough, and I was quite caught off guard just how bad STID was. Since I don't usually roll the dice when going to the theater, STID managed to be the worst movie that I've seen on the big screen for at least the past ten years. I'm having a hard time thinking of a movie I saw at the theater that I disliked more than STID. It's that bad. I'm talking about its general merits as a film, not as a "Star Trek movie". I have no clue how it even got its Rotten Tomatoes score. The system failed, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 05:49
|
|
|
TheCenturion posted:Besides, in the original TOS, Kirk explicitly mentions that he can run the ship himself, as long as nothing really weird happens, I think it was the episode on the super overcrowded planet. It sounds like you might be thinking of This Side of Paradise. The entire crew beams to the planet in search of paradise, and Kirk says in a Captain's Log that "I can't pilot her alone". Now that I think about it, though, it could also be The Mark of Gideon. Star Trek was often inconsistent about the level of automation on the ship.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Beyond was pretty good overall, but I do think that blowing up the Enterprise was a mistake (especially since the 1701-A is not that radically different looking), and Idris Elba's villain was very poorly handled. We don't even get his backstory and motivations until right as the crew is heading for the final confrontation. Edison's identity should have been known to the crew and the audience by the end of the second act and he should have been fully human by the time he and Kirk have their fight. I don't understand why you'd hire someone like Idris Elba and then hamstring their performance with thick prosthetics. Even in his last few scenes where he's 90% human, his facial makeup is still clearly affecting his dialogue. The tacked-on video reveal as they're leaving the Franklin is just bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
Timby posted:Honestly, their biggest sin is Quinto, who was cast solely because of how much he resembled a young Nimoy. He's painful in the movies. I also still maintain Pine should have Shatner'd his performance up like he did in the Spocko sketch. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:07
|
|
|
Pine takes all the better parts of Shatner's performance without chewing the scenery too badly. He's one of the best parts of Beyond.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:09
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:Edison's identity should have been known to the crew and the audience by the end of the second act and he should have been fully human by the time he and Kirk have their fight. I don't understand why you'd hire someone like Idris Elba and then hamstring their performance with thick prosthetics. Even in his last few scenes where he's 90% human, his facial makeup is still clearly affecting his dialogue. The tacked-on video reveal as they're leaving the Franklin is just bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
One thing Beyond did right was minimizing Spock's role. It's unfortunate, and maybe it just comes across this way because he had the biggest shoes to fill, but Quinto is the worst actor of the new crew. One of the many things STID suffered from was the heavy focus on him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:34
|
|
|
He was an absolute waste of a character. "Federation is your weakness" or whatever he growled: what does that mean? "You guys suck because you trust each other?" He wants to blow up the Yorktown and the rest of the Federation because they forgot about him? Weak. I know he's just a stock TOS crazy captain but if you're going to run your PR campaign with a tagline like "this is where the frontier pushes back" maybe let the villain be an opponent of Federation cultural imperialism or whatever. You could even keep the Enterprise tie-in by making him a member of some alien species hosed over by early Starfleet intervention.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
Beyond is good though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Man, now i want an official 80s video game for search for Spock. How official do you mean by "official?"  I spent ages fighting with my Atari 800 emulator only to find you can play it online right here: https://archive.org/details/a8b_Star_Trek_III_1981_Adventure_International_US_BASIC Yes, I know the "III" is in reference to revisions of the old mainframe fan-made Star Trek game and not the third official movie, just give me this, will ya?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:39
|
|
|
Beyond is just continuing the theme of poorly characterized superhuman villains who show up out of nowhere with a generic desire for revenge on the main characters or their organization. I get that they want to bottle the lightning of Wrath of Khan, but that works because it's a story about aging and accepting the past. Khan isn't just a good antagonist, he's an extension of Kirk's conflict with himself. Khan isn't even on screen with Kirk or Spock and doesn't have that many lines, but he's memorable because his character and the mistakes that character causes him to make are important parts of the plot, and he's thematically important as a foil to Kirk. The villains of every Trek movie since Nemesis are a jumbled up mess of cartoon characters who end up in fistfights with the main character at the end. The fist fight is de rigeur; in fact, the last Star Trek movie where the main character does not fist fight the bad guy at the end came out in 1996. For 22 years Star Trek movies have ended in the same scene. It's awful. The characterization isn't much better. Shinzon, Nero, and Edison are so poorly sketched it's not clear why they decided to do what they're doing, even after they tell their story directly to the camera. Ruafo and Khan from Into Darkness are the most three dimensional villains the franchise has seen in the last 20 years. Star Trek I and IV don't even have villains. Star Trek II has the best villain in the movie franchise. Star Trek III's only memorable character is the villain. (Notably III is the first and last time in the movies where the villain fights Kirk. Genesis does not count.) Star Trek V's villain is a cult leader who had good intentions and never needed to fist fight anyone. Star Trek VI's villain is far too powerful and capable to end up in a fist fight with anybody.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 07:16
|
|
|
You don't need villains that are on the verge of destroying the planet/universe/multiverse to make a good Sci-Fi movie, but Hollywood forgot this so you see the same terrible poo poo over and over and over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 07:27
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Beyond is just continuing the theme of poorly characterized superhuman villains who show up out of nowhere with a generic desire for revenge on the main characters or their organization. What's frustrating with Beyond is that this could have easily worked as Edison's motivation without feeling like a Khan retread. He's a former marine who came to prominence in an era defined by wars, shuffled off to a minor ship by a new government that was suddenly ashamed of its warhawk past, and ultimately forgotten and marooned on an alien planet by that same indifferent government. That's a really compelling set of motivations for a villain and there are tons of ways it could have served as a mirror to Kirk's ennui and listlessness with Starfleet. Unfortunately we get a watered-down afterthought version of that motivation delivered by an expository video 90 minutes into the movie and 2 minutes before Kirk and Edison have a meaningless fistfight over an ill-defined macguffin. Beyond is great, but its few flaws are pretty egregious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
Timby posted:Honestly, their biggest sin is Quinto, who was cast solely because of how much he resembled a young Nimoy. He's painful in the movies. Oh, don't forget he was also on Heroes, which was doing pretty well at the time if I remember right. Is it actually true that Tarantino might direct the next one, or is that just internet bullshit?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 08:26
|
|
|
It sounds like one of those things that a director mentions offhand and then Latino Review or Ain’t It Cool hears it and spins some giant rumor out of nothing. I can’t imagine it actually happening, especially with the current story floating around about how he almost killed Uma Thurman through negligence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 08:28
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Oh, don't forget he was also on Heroes, which was doing pretty well at the time if I remember right. He pitched a story idea to Abrams/Paramount that they like, there's nothing set that he's actually directing it though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 08:36
|
|
|
Frankly I'm surprised Paramount would make another Star Trek movie after their apparent disinterest in marketing Beyond. I figured that was a sign they were giving up on the series.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 08:47
|
|
|
I just don't think any of the three major characters in the ST reboot were recast well or could be recast well. But you kinda have to forget old stuff and dig into something new, because they're never going to make another Star Trek movie with three white male leads and all the minority characters relegated to comedy roles that barely have speaking parts. Well, Michael Bay might if he gets his hands on it. But absent that, no, and to be clear, that's good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 11:49
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:and to be clear, that's good. Thanks for clarifying that. For a second I thought you might be in favor of white males.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 12:01
|
|
|
Astroman posted:Thanks for clarifying that. For a second I thought you might be in favor of white males. Judging by polling we're quite poo poo, really
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 12:04
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:Judging by polling we're quite poo poo, really *Poles
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:49 |
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Is it actually true that Tarantino might direct the next one, or is that just internet bullshit? Tarantino's pitch was enough to get Paramount to fork out the cash for him to set up a writers' room under Abrams' direction to develop the idea. They had like a half-dozen guys working on their own treatments. Ultimately, Mark L. Smith's (The Revenant) treatment was chosen by Abrams, Tarantino and Paramount, and it's now being developed into a full script. If all parties like it, then Tarantino is likely to direct it after he wraps on Helter Skelter. FlamingLiberal posted:STID was a total mess once they did the Khan reveal. Prior to that it wasn't that bad. But once we go straight into the WoK rehash, it's painful. The only real rehash from Wrath of Khan is the role reversal for the engineering room sequence. You want a real "WoK reheated in the microwave" movie, watch loving Nemesis (which, to be fair, also cribs from Undiscovered Country, Best of Both Worlds, Excalibur and a bunch of other, better poo poo, too). Timby fucked around with this message at 14:47 on Feb 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 14:45
|
|