Star Trek

A subforum for discussions about Film, TV, and Videos.

Moderators: New Moderators, Board Staff

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8121
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:56 pm

My favorite aspect of WoK is that it's Moby Dick from the perspective of the whale.

Sachi
Oh Daddy!
Oh Daddy!
User avatar
Age: 24
Posts: 9532
Joined: Aug 29, 2006
Location: Hollywoo
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Sachi » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:18 pm

View Original PostRay wrote:Stranding the crew on an alien world, taking away the enterprise? That kindve goes against the Star Trek formula.

My take on the trailer is that, while doing their normal space frontier exploration, the Enterprise gets shot down or captured by some alien world. The crew has been taken prisoner, and it's up to the main team to figure a way out of it and then somehow prevail over the alien antagonists.

Seems pretty appropriate for Star Trek to me.
"Chaos is merely a human construct. The world only knows its own natural law of harmony and order."
"So you are saying it's the human heart that throws the world into confusion."

Reichu
Space-Time Teratoma
Space-Time Teratoma
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 22499
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
Location: 高地園、新槍ノ島
Gender: Female

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Reichu » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:05 pm

View Original PostChuckman wrote:My favorite aspect of WoK is that it's Moby Dick from the perspective of the whale.

Insert "William Shatner is fat" joke here.
Avatar: Guu is uncertain...
Crying Man
(Or, How Dr. Katsuragi Found God): Read at AO3 & Discuss Here.
Status: First Draft. Chapter 10: Idle Hands released 5/24/2017.

"Fighting idiocy is like fighting a hydra. Cut off one head, two more grow back and need to tell you their uninformed opinion." - PeeJee, Something*Positive

A.T. Fish
Pilot
Pilot
User avatar
Age: 29
Posts: 2015
Joined: Jan 02, 2011
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby A.T. Fish » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:28 pm

View Original PostReichu wrote:Implying that a blockbuster has to be Grade A disposable dreck. Are you being a Hollywood apologist, Fish?


I wouldn't put it in such harsh words. I see no problem in a movie that aspires to nothing more than delivering a fun viewing experience to the audience, and I didn't even expect anything else from Star Trek given the two previous movies.

Edit: Here's something I think a lot of people would consider an improvement of the soundtrack. Of course that specific song probably wouldn't fit but you get the idea, something dramatic sounding that paints the movie as an epic. I love the fact that the trailer simply embraced the movie's "for fun" atmosphere and went with an appropriate soundtrack.

FreakyFilmFan4ever
(In)Sufficient Director
(In)Sufficient Director
User avatar
Age: 29
Posts: 7359
Joined: Jun 09, 2009
Location: Playing amongst the stars
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby FreakyFilmFan4ever » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:51 pm

Disposable "epic" music is just as trite as what they've got in the trailer now, it's just a different kind of trite. As I've said before, the issue I have with the trailer is genre recognition and tone. There's nothing about the "Sabotage" song that indicates anything recognizable to or meaningful in the known Star Trek legacy. If the trailer had shots of fast moving colorful cars instead of Enterprises and aliens, I'd have been down with the trailer.

I'm not against ST being "fun" either. In fact, I like a good helping of fun with my sci-fi. But this feels more like a drunken college fraternity party movie than any other brand of fun more appropriate for a mission to seek out new life and new civilization.
The Sequels to Emmanuel God With Us
I AM
Part 1 | Part 2
Coming 2016
Watch Announcement Here

Reichu
Space-Time Teratoma
Space-Time Teratoma
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 22499
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
Location: 高地園、新槍ノ島
Gender: Female

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Reichu » Wed Dec 16, 2015 8:50 pm

View Original PostFreakyFilmFan4ever wrote:I'm not against ST being "fun" either. In fact, I like a good helping of fun with my sci-fi. (snip)

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home executed this combination really well. It's a pity we don't have more like it.
Avatar: Guu is uncertain...
Crying Man
(Or, How Dr. Katsuragi Found God): Read at AO3 & Discuss Here.
Status: First Draft. Chapter 10: Idle Hands released 5/24/2017.

"Fighting idiocy is like fighting a hydra. Cut off one head, two more grow back and need to tell you their uninformed opinion." - PeeJee, Something*Positive

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8121
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:51 pm

This trailer is basically, "Look! Star Trek is hip and cool, it's like Guardians of the Galaxy! It even has the same lady in it! Sorry nerds, it's not yours anymore!"

cyharding
Our Man in Tokyo 3
Our Man in Tokyo 3
User avatar
Age: 35
Posts: 1378
Joined: Jun 08, 2007
Location: In Glorious Technicolor
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby cyharding » Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:59 pm

View Original PostSachi wrote:Sabatoge worked so well for the first film, that it won't seem tired at all when we use the same exact song again, right? RIGHT? Even if it's canon that Kirk likes and listens to that song, they could have at least picked a different Beastie Boys song.


I didn't know the song was already used (again, haven't seen the recent movies). To me, that was one of the things that stood out to me the first time I saw it. Perhaps Intergalatic might be better.


View Original PostNemZ wrote:Magic blood that cures death! Transporters that render starships meaningless!


Repeat, I haven't seen the movies, but those are plot points? :cringe: Is it wrong of me to think I could have written a better movie?

View Original PostReichu wrote:Insert "William Shatner is fat" joke here.


done.

View Original PostChuckman wrote:This trailer is basically, "Look! Star Trek is hip and cool, it's like Guardians of the Galaxy! It even has the same lady in it! Sorry nerds, it's not yours anymore!"


Again, I haven't seen that movie, so I don't understand the negative comparison.
Last edited by cyharding on Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Rosenakahara
Evangelion
Evangelion
User avatar
Age: 20
Posts: 3319
Joined: May 20, 2014
Gender: Female

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Rosenakahara » Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:01 pm

@chuckman I agree with that assessment and I find it incredibly ironic because guardians is a very nerdy film full of comic and 80's references in every corner.
This looks so removed from anything trek related (are we forgetting her star WARS was the action oriented one and trek was mostly talking and character interactions for most of the show?) that I wonder why this is even a thing.
"She had better march back here and try again! I only send people off on my terms! ...Or in a casket."
I don't need a scabbard to sheathe my mind
What is going on is a concerted effort from anti-progressives to silence anyone who disagrees with them.-Bagheera 2016
The Twelve Kingdoms discussion thread

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8121
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:09 pm

View Original Postcyharding wrote:
Again, I haven't seen that movie, so I don't understand the negative comparison.


Star Trek is tragically unhip so they're marketing it (and probably made it) to be more like a charming space adventure movie that came out last year in hopes of snagging a wide audience.

Honestly, the whole point of ST09 continuity is to take Star Trek, which was always always niche and never had the cultural penetration or mass appeal of Star Wars, and update it to be marketable.

Star Trek as a series is more serious sci-fi than Star Wars and a lot of it, especially the most popular iteration of the TV series, is the adventures of a space diplomat and his crew of people exploring the human condition in a gigantic heavily armed TFL minivan. ST09 turned the series into a campy parody/action update of the classic TV show.

Abrams' first entry is basically an essay on why nerds ruin things.

movieartman
Lilin
Lilin
Age: 26
Posts: 1790
Joined: Feb 24, 2014
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby movieartman » Sat May 21, 2016 12:25 am

2nd trailer for Beyond, much better then the first IMO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzWIGFiGrlA
Elba's fully head piece still looks iffy, but the shot of him speaking in Zoe's face looks pretty good.

TheFriskyIan
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mar 24, 2011
Location: The Holocharts
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby TheFriskyIan » Sat May 21, 2016 8:04 pm

View Original PostChuckman wrote:Abrams' first entry is basically an essay on why nerds ruin things.

I'll agree the ST09 wasn't all that great but Into Darkness was literally awesome and renewed my waning interest in the series. I don't agree with this comment on Abram's trying to bully nerds.

The criticism against Abrams is a bit silly considering how fucking perfect Into Darkness was. It seems the old school ST fans wont be satisfied until Gene Roddenberry crawls out of the grave and writes the new stuff himself. Keep in mind that one of the more popular movies Wrath of Khan was in the same boat as Into Darkness in that the creator(s) hasn't seen the original work prior to their movies.
Please just call me Ian, "TheFrisky" is more of a title.

Bagheera
Banned
User avatar
Posts: 18626
Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Bagheera » Sat May 21, 2016 9:01 pm

View Original PostTheFriskyIan wrote:I'll agree the ST09 wasn't all that great but Into Darkness was literally awesome and renewed my waning interest in the series. I don't agree with this comment on Abram's trying to bully nerds.


Into Darkness was terrible. There's a good summary of the why of it here, but the main problem is that Abrams just doesn't respect his audience. I mean, the whole bit at the end, with Spock fighting Khan? That was supposedly because they needed Khan's blood to save Kirk. The only problem was that they had 72 other people just like Khan sitting in storage on that very ship. This is just one of the many obvious problems with the movie (you can see plenty more in the Everything Wrong With . . . and the Honest Movie Trailers videos).

The criticism against Abrams is a bit silly considering how fucking perfect Into Darkness was.


It's only perfect if you lack any capacity whatsoever for critical thinking. If you are capable of that it becomes physically painful to watch.
For my post-3I fic, go here.
The law doesn't protect people. People protect the law. -- Akane Tsunemori, Psycho-Pass
People's deaths are to be mourned. The ability to save people should be celebrated. Life itself should be exalted. -- Volken Macmani, Tatakau Shisho: The Book of Bantorra
I hate myself. But maybe I can learn to love myself. Maybe it's okay for me to be here! That's right! I'm me, nothing more, nothing less! I'm me. I want to be me! I want to be here! And it's okay for me to be here! -- Shinji Ikari, Neon Genesis Evangelion
Yes, I know. You thought it would be something about Asuka. You're such idiots.

FreakyFilmFan4ever
(In)Sufficient Director
(In)Sufficient Director
User avatar
Age: 29
Posts: 7359
Joined: Jun 09, 2009
Location: Playing amongst the stars
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby FreakyFilmFan4ever » Sat May 21, 2016 9:47 pm

Mission Impossible III remains JJ's best work to date. His Star Trek movies didn't change that fact at all. I'm not even sure if I can land the blame on the failings of JJ's ST films on his directing, but rather it's just the failings of the film in general. Curing death would have been an amazing plot element in the hands of filmmakers that would remember that continuity into the next film installment and explored the adventure opportunities and philosophical questions it all raises up. But in the hands of the new ST franchise holders, it's just a cheap cop-out from Kurt staying dead between films.
The Sequels to Emmanuel God With Us
I AM
Part 1 | Part 2
Coming 2016
Watch Announcement Here

TheFriskyIan
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mar 24, 2011
Location: The Holocharts
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby TheFriskyIan » Sun May 22, 2016 5:02 am

View Original PostBagheera wrote:Into Darkness was terrible. There's a good summary of the why of it here, but the main problem is that Abrams just doesn't respect his audience. I mean, the whole bit at the end, with Spock fighting Khan? That was supposedly because they needed Khan's blood to save Kirk. The only problem was that they had 72 other people just like Khan sitting in storage on that very ship. This is just one of the many obvious problems with the movie (you can see plenty more in the Everything Wrong With . . . and the Honest Movie Trailers videos).

I'm subscribed to Cinema Sins and Honest Trailers, if I'm supposed to go by what these two channels tell me, I guess Empire Strikes Back and Inside Out were also terrible movies. Looked over plot points exists in every movie, I don't why understand why Into Darkness is terrible just because it has the same problems as every movie ever is going to have. As for Khan's reveal, the name may not register to Kirk or the crew but if they just kept his name to Khan originally, fans would instantly be saying "Well why didn't Spock just go to old Spock earlier and ask about him?" People are just trying to find flaws with this movie, specifically older fans of Star Trek and I already addressed why.

Also:

I'm not even sure if I can land the blame on the failings of JJ's ST films on his directing

They didn't fail though. These complaints are from a vocal minority that's treating the new Star Trek movies like the new Ghostbusters.
Please just call me Ian, "TheFrisky" is more of a title.

FreakyFilmFan4ever
(In)Sufficient Director
(In)Sufficient Director
User avatar
Age: 29
Posts: 7359
Joined: Jun 09, 2009
Location: Playing amongst the stars
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby FreakyFilmFan4ever » Sun May 22, 2016 7:48 am

View Original PostTheFriskyIan wrote:They didn't fail though. These complaints are from a vocal minority that's treating the new Star Trek movies like the new Ghostbusters.

I use the term loosely. When it comes down to it, the new ST movies are fun, short-lived action romps who's individual installments will be forgotten in about 10 years unless they really step up their game. ST3 looks like another fun-and-forgettable sic-fi decorated action romp, and probably won't have any quality of merit beyond that just like the past two films were.
The Sequels to Emmanuel God With Us
I AM
Part 1 | Part 2
Coming 2016
Watch Announcement Here

Bagheera
Banned
User avatar
Posts: 18626
Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Bagheera » Sun May 22, 2016 9:10 am

View Original PostTheFriskyIan wrote:People are just trying to find flaws with this movie, specifically older fans of Star Trek and I already addressed why.


I'm not an older fan of ST, and your reasons don't apply to me. I'm not trying to find flaws with the movie, they're leaping into my face and screaming "here I am!" at the top of their lungs. If you refuse to see them that's your business, but don't assume ill intent on my part just because I have a working brain.

They didn't fail though. These complaints are from a vocal minority that's treating the new Star Trek movies like the new Ghostbusters.


As the article I linked noted that's not at all true. Even Abrams has distanced himself from some aspects of Into Darkness, and he's not alone -- others among the cast and crew have done the same. It's not a good film, simple as that.
For my post-3I fic, go here.
The law doesn't protect people. People protect the law. -- Akane Tsunemori, Psycho-Pass
People's deaths are to be mourned. The ability to save people should be celebrated. Life itself should be exalted. -- Volken Macmani, Tatakau Shisho: The Book of Bantorra
I hate myself. But maybe I can learn to love myself. Maybe it's okay for me to be here! That's right! I'm me, nothing more, nothing less! I'm me. I want to be me! I want to be here! And it's okay for me to be here! -- Shinji Ikari, Neon Genesis Evangelion
Yes, I know. You thought it would be something about Asuka. You're such idiots.

TheFriskyIan
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mar 24, 2011
Location: The Holocharts
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby TheFriskyIan » Sun May 22, 2016 10:21 am

View Original PostBagheera wrote:I'm not an older fan of ST, and your reasons don't apply to me. I'm not trying to find flaws with the movie, they're leaping into my face and screaming "here I am!" at the top of their lungs. If you refuse to see them that's your business, but don't assume ill intent on my part just because I have a working brain.

None of the flaws with the story are hugely noticeable as you're saying. And it's Cinema Sins job to go and look for problems that were an oversight in making the story.

Also if you still want to bring up Khan's blood. Why would the Enterprise crew risk waking up a second person if Khan did this much damage alone?


As the article I linked noted that's not at all true. Even Abrams has distanced himself from some aspects of Into Darkness, and he's not alone -- others among the cast and crew have done the same. It's not a good film, simple as that.

So positive reviews and making an obvious profit means nothing and the movie is terrible because a vocal minority says so? This isn't BvS where the film is clearly lauded as being bad from everyone, Into Darkness will be looked at as a GOOD movie even if FFFF is right and isn't even remembered much. Articles pointing out minor flaws means little to all the reviewers and critics praising it.
Please just call me Ian, "TheFrisky" is more of a title.

Bagheera
Banned
User avatar
Posts: 18626
Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Bagheera » Sun May 22, 2016 10:41 am

View Original PostTheFriskyIan wrote:None of the flaws with the story are hugely noticeable as you're saying.


Maybe not to you, but they stuck out like a sore thumb to an awful lot of us.

Also if you still want to bring up Khan's blood. Why would the Enterprise crew risk waking up a second person if Khan did this much damage alone?


You don't have to wake someone up to get their blood.

So positive reviews and making an obvious profit means nothing and the movie is terrible because a vocal minority says so? This isn't BvS where the film is clearly lauded as being bad from everyone, Into Darkness will be looked at as a GOOD movie even if FFFF is right and isn't even remembered much. Articles pointing out minor flaws means little to all the reviewers and critics praising it.


. . . until they change their minds, as the article I linked noted. When the cast and crew are distancing themselves from it and critics are going "hey, wait a minute . . . " that should be a major clue. These are not minor flaws. They're huge, glaring flaws that people didn't notice on the first pass due to slick packaging, but in retrospect acknowledge as being a pretty big deal.
For my post-3I fic, go here.
The law doesn't protect people. People protect the law. -- Akane Tsunemori, Psycho-Pass
People's deaths are to be mourned. The ability to save people should be celebrated. Life itself should be exalted. -- Volken Macmani, Tatakau Shisho: The Book of Bantorra
I hate myself. But maybe I can learn to love myself. Maybe it's okay for me to be here! That's right! I'm me, nothing more, nothing less! I'm me. I want to be me! I want to be here! And it's okay for me to be here! -- Shinji Ikari, Neon Genesis Evangelion
Yes, I know. You thought it would be something about Asuka. You're such idiots.

Reichu
Space-Time Teratoma
Space-Time Teratoma
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 22499
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
Location: 高地園、新槍ノ島
Gender: Female

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Reichu » Sun May 22, 2016 2:15 pm

I'm the opposite of Ian. I thought the first Trek was okay (though it gets noticeably worse with repeat viewings...), and Into Darkness registered as an eye-rollingly, brow-raisingly terrible piece of crap right in the theater as I was watching it. Of course, the rest of my family with whom I had gone to see the film, mainly being the types of people who will readily say a film is "good" or "great" and then never think about it again, seemed to like it just fine. Ephemerally entertaining bombast just isn't all that special. There's so much glintzy overprocessed disposable committee shite that passes for entertainment, Into Darkness is hardly a hill worth dying on.
Avatar: Guu is uncertain...
Crying Man
(Or, How Dr. Katsuragi Found God): Read at AO3 & Discuss Here.
Status: First Draft. Chapter 10: Idle Hands released 5/24/2017.

"Fighting idiocy is like fighting a hydra. Cut off one head, two more grow back and need to tell you their uninformed opinion." - PeeJee, Something*Positive


Return to “Film and Video”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests