Star Trek

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

Moderators: New Moderators, Board Staff

TheFriskyIan
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Posts: 1776
Joined: Mar 24, 2011
Location: The Holocharts
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby TheFriskyIan » Sun May 22, 2016 8:02 pm

View Original PostBagheera wrote: . . . 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.

And what flaws other than Khan's blood* is there? The big Khan reveal? The lens flare? Or just the fact that it's Abrams and not someone else?

*I'm sure Gene himself could find a way to give an explanation for why Khan is needed over a frozen person. This seems nit picky.
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 8:14 pm

View Original PostTheFriskyIan wrote:And what flaws other than Khan's blood* is there? The big Khan reveal? The lens flare? Or just the fact that it's Abrams and not someone else?


Did you read/view the links I provided? They cover both what the flaws are and why they're a 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.

TheFriskyIan
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Posts: 1776
Joined: Mar 24, 2011
Location: The Holocharts
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby TheFriskyIan » Sun May 22, 2016 8:32 pm

View Original PostBagheera wrote:Did you read/view the links I provided? They cover both what the flaws are and why they're a big deal.

Yes, and all he does is complain about the fact that Khan even exists. This point particularly irks me:

(“Holy shit, Khan got that guy to blow up that building! Holy shit, Khan killed Pike! Holy shit, Scotty just found something behind Jupiter! Holy shit, Khan just surrendered! Holy shit, Khan is Khan!”) Abrams crams in more rug-pulls than a going-out-of-business sale at a carpet warehouse.

Khan has always been known as super intelligent and easily able to manipulate people and plan twenty steps ahead, but Matt is surprised when Khan in the movie does all these things? I feel like he wasn't even contemplating giving the idea of Khan in the movie a chance.

He also mentions how Kirk goes through four different ranks in 33 minutes and how they should be life changing events but complains they happen too fast, well when unexpected events like Khan attack Starfleet, and the simple fact that these events don't occur in 33 minutes of the stories time, it doesn't hold much weight.
Please just call me Ian, "TheFrisky" is more of a title.

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4329
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 22, 2016 9:56 pm

Into Darkness is an ugly film because it heavily pushes Roberto Orci's Truther believes. Peter Weller's Evil "We Need to Get Those Klingon's Space Oil so We'll Use Benedict Cumberbund to Commit a Terrorist Act and Create a False Flag" Starfleet Captain may as well as been called Admiral George W. Bush. I'm genuinely surprised there wasn't a scene where the actors had to say "Super Sci-Fi Steel doesn't melt at those degrees! And did you see Engine 7 go down? Conspiracy!!!!"

The fact that the movie itself isn't all that fun either only helps make it more unpleasant.

Star Trek Beyond looks fun. Curious to see how Justin Lin handles a big blockbuster that isn't Fast & Furious.

NemZ
Token Misanthrope
Token Misanthrope
User avatar
Posts: 15804
Joined: Jun 28, 2008
Location: St. Louis
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby NemZ » Mon May 23, 2016 6:10 am

The bigger concern is that super transporters that are man-portable, can cross half the galaxy safely, and be combined with stealth nukes to instantly remove any and all obsticles have made the entire concept of starships obsolete, so why is a secret bigger ship the answer to anything?

And then they discovered the cure for death, because the new films weren't quite pointless enough yet.
Rest In Peace ~ 1978 - 2017
"I'd consider myself a realist, alright? but in philosophical terms I'm what's called a pessimist. It means I'm bad at parties." - Rust Cohle
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize that half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
"The internet: It's like a training camp for never amounting to anything." - Oglaf
"I think internet message boards and the like are dangerous." - Anno

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8187
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Mon May 23, 2016 8:54 pm

You know what would have been an awesome move? If they kept Khan in containment and created a new augment character. Imagine the oh shits when Spock has no idea what to tell them anymore.

NemZ: Not that they put this level of thought into this tepid movies, but you should know that to fight in space you're going to need capital ships and ground troops. The idea of winning a conflict entirely via force projection like bombing is a pipe dream, and the spread of such weapons leads to a mutually assured destruction scenario and takes them off the board again, bringing everyone back to square one: An old man's war and a young man's fight.

Not that this version of Star Trek cares about like, philosophy or historical parallels or boring shit like that. Cold war brooding is boring, here's some pew pew!

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

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Bagheera » Mon May 23, 2016 9:13 pm

No, transporter tech on that level makes capital ships (and virtually any ships apart from maybe supply hubs) utterly useless, particularly in a post-scarcity society like Trek. You need your air superiority, of course, but you get that via transported torpedoes. Soften up your foes to taste and then transport in your infantry to secure the area and be done with it. Vessels serve no purpose whatsoever at that point past initial exploration and mapping (so that you know where you need to go via transport later on).

You could of course argue that shields might put the kibosh on this idea, but then we didn't see that in the movie so . . . :shrug:
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.

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8187
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Mon May 23, 2016 9:25 pm

What exactly would be the point of that though? It's unlikely that anybody is going to be fighting a war purely to destroy the enemy and not to seize resources or defend themselves. Maybe against the Borg.

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

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Bagheera » Mon May 23, 2016 9:38 pm

View Original PostChuckman wrote:What exactly would be the point of that though? It's unlikely that anybody is going to be fighting a war purely to destroy the enemy and not to seize resources or defend themselves. Maybe against the Borg.


You use torpedoes to destroy C&C and infantry to put boots on the ground and take control. No need for ships at any point -- it's just like modern warfare, only you don't put the transports/jets/bombers at risk. Drones and infantry, basically, albeit with much simpler logistics.
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.

Ray
Elder God
Elder God
User avatar
Age: 24
Posts: 6171
Joined: Feb 10, 2014
Location: USA
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Ray » Thu Jul 07, 2016 1:26 am

In more weird Star Trek News. The first draft for the original Star Trek movie had Kirk literally punching out Jesus Christ!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/featur ... ain-906075

Just. . . How!? Why!?
I’ll escape now from this world, from the world of Jean Valjean, Jean Valjean is nothing now! Another story must begin!
Avatar: "There's a Starman, waiting in the sky. He'd like to come and meet me, but he thinks he'd blow my mind."
Phew, I’m not tense anymore… now I’m just miserable.
People say "be yourself" but that's bad advice, if we were all to "be ourselves" many of us would stop wearing clothes. -Chuckman

Ray
Elder God
Elder God
User avatar
Age: 24
Posts: 6171
Joined: Feb 10, 2014
Location: USA
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Ray » Thu Jul 07, 2016 8:21 pm

And Now we've come full circle. Sulu has gone from being played by a Gay man, to being actually gay. The only one who isn't a fan of the idea? George Takei himself.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movi ... /86799682/
George Takei wrote:"I’m delighted that there’s a gay character. Unfortunately, it’s a twisting of Gene’s creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it’s really unfortunate."
I’ll escape now from this world, from the world of Jean Valjean, Jean Valjean is nothing now! Another story must begin!
Avatar: "There's a Starman, waiting in the sky. He'd like to come and meet me, but he thinks he'd blow my mind."
Phew, I’m not tense anymore… now I’m just miserable.
People say "be yourself" but that's bad advice, if we were all to "be ourselves" many of us would stop wearing clothes. -Chuckman

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

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Bagheera » Thu Jul 07, 2016 8:36 pm

I'm actually kind of with him on that. The problem with the new ST movies is that they aren't a reboot; they're a reset, which is to say the same characters in the same setting, just in a different timeline. That means the characters should be the same as they always were, and the fact that they aren't is one of the biggest problems with the new movies. Sulu isn't gay, so he shouldn't be gay in the new movies. It would be different if his sexuality was never referenced in the original material, but it was. So, while I get the underlying sentiment (and even think it's rather cool in its way), I have to agree that it doesn't quite work.
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.

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8187
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Thu Jul 07, 2016 8:37 pm

View Original PostRay wrote:In more weird Star Trek News. The first draft for the original Star Trek movie had Kirk literally punching out Jesus Christ!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/featur ... ain-906075

Just. . . How!? Why!?


Have you seen Star Trek V? William Shatner really wants to hit God in the face for some reason.

Guy Nacks
Test Subject
Test Subject
User avatar
Posts: 2788
Joined: Nov 28, 2012
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Guy Nacks » Thu Jul 07, 2016 9:09 pm

View Original PostRay wrote:In more weird Star Trek News. The first draft for the original Star Trek movie had Kirk literally punching out Jesus Christ!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/featur ... ain-906075

Just. . . How!? Why!?


Cool your jets, man. This has been old news for quite some time.

I own Shatner's Star Trek: Movie Memories, which goes into behind the scenes detail about every entry in the series up until they decided to reshoot Kirk's death in Generations (the book was published in 1994) and he literally talks about this in the chapters leading up to his entry for TMP.


Roddenberry was an insanely liberal dude for his time and this is more than evident given some of the episodes that Trek produced. He was pro-gay rights (according to George Takei himself), got women and minorities more mainstream exposure on television than ever before in bigger and more important roles, proliferated a non-capitalist society in the Trek series that he personally ran, and was, by all accounts, at the very least, an agnostic given some of the episodes that Trek produced ("Who Watches the Watchers?" anyone?"), So, it should be by no means a surprise that he wanted to take a shot at organized religion in some form.

Shatner, on the other hand, claims to have been inspired by televangelists (namely Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker), and their legions of followers as he was working on his idea for V. And there was blowback from Roddenberry about possible plagiarism.

@Gay Sulu:

I mean, it's cool that they've finally gotten around to doing something like this (and not aborted it with Neil McDonough's character in First Contact)...but I'm kinda with Takei here in that it just feels shoehorned in there.


Personally, I'm WAY more excited for the new TV series, seeing as how they were able to get Bryan Fuller and Nick Meyer(!) involved.

When you have one of the more successful showrunners of the last 10 years (who began his career writing for DS9 and Voyager) and the guy who arguably penned and directed the best of the Trek films (wrote & directed II and VI, co-wrote IV), my formally low expectations for this series are now jacked up significantly.
Among the people who use the Internet, many are obtuse. Because they are locked in their rooms, they hang on to that vision which is spreading across the world. But this does not go beyond mere ‘data’. Data without analysis [thinking], which makes you think that you know everything. This complacency is nothing but a trap. Moreover, the sense of values that counters this notion is paralyzed by it.

And so we arrive at demagogy. - Hideaki Anno, 1996

movieartman
Lilin
Lilin
Age: 26
Posts: 1830
Joined: Feb 24, 2014
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby movieartman » Tue Jul 19, 2016 12:43 pm

New Tv Spot
WARNING, contains potential spoilers related to Idris Elba's Villain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=derB59I21Fw

Guy Nacks
Test Subject
Test Subject
User avatar
Posts: 2788
Joined: Nov 28, 2012
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Guy Nacks » Tue Jul 19, 2016 9:34 pm

View Original Postmovieartman wrote:New Tv Spot
WARNING, contains potential spoilers related to Idris Elba's Villain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=derB59I21Fw



Why would you want to put a spoiler for your film in the trailer? Like, honestly, what's the point in that other than ruining surprises in the film?

The way movies are marketed nowadays is borderline trolldom. It's infuriating.
Among the people who use the Internet, many are obtuse. Because they are locked in their rooms, they hang on to that vision which is spreading across the world. But this does not go beyond mere ‘data’. Data without analysis [thinking], which makes you think that you know everything. This complacency is nothing but a trap. Moreover, the sense of values that counters this notion is paralyzed by it.

And so we arrive at demagogy. - Hideaki Anno, 1996

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8187
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Tue Jul 19, 2016 9:39 pm

Having some marketing experience myself, most people actually want the entire story explained to them in the marketing materials. They do it because it works.

I'll use the most egregrious example I know of. If they marketed Terminator II to the moviegoing public and preserved the twist, they'd be reduced to "We made another Terminator movie, go see it".

TheFriskyIan
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Posts: 1776
Joined: Mar 24, 2011
Location: The Holocharts
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby TheFriskyIan » Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:06 pm

Just got back from seeing this, screw any haters, this movie was awesome. There seems to be less for the purists to whine about so any flaws would be the usual unlike last time with Khan. Still a damn fun movie though.
Please just call me Ian, "TheFrisky" is more of a title.

Guy Nacks
Test Subject
Test Subject
User avatar
Posts: 2788
Joined: Nov 28, 2012
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Guy Nacks » Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:33 pm

It was "meh" for me. Not as stupid and insulting as the second half of Into Darkness, though, so I have to give it props for that. The character interplay was also pretty good.
SPOILER: Show
I did get choked up when they showed the photo of the original cast.


It is the best of the three films, and it is a competent movie, but if the next one is gonna be another "villian seeking revenge" film, I'm not gonna bother anymore. They fucking need a different plot.
Among the people who use the Internet, many are obtuse. Because they are locked in their rooms, they hang on to that vision which is spreading across the world. But this does not go beyond mere ‘data’. Data without analysis [thinking], which makes you think that you know everything. This complacency is nothing but a trap. Moreover, the sense of values that counters this notion is paralyzed by it.

And so we arrive at demagogy. - Hideaki Anno, 1996

Sgt. Griff
Lilin
Lilin
User avatar
Age: 19
Posts: 1371
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
Location: Kiwiland
Gender: Male

Re: Star Trek

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Sgt. Griff » Mon Aug 01, 2016 4:18 am

Star Trek beyond was slow at the start, but was nicely paced for the rest.

There was one scene that made me yell 'yooooooo' in the cinema, those of you who've watched it probably know which one. I've liked all of these Star Trek movies quite a lot so far, and this is no exception.

Beastie Boys/10. Can't wait for the sequel.

I suppose I should also say I've never watched the original star trek so people can feel better about my opinion.
Bweep

Die Hoffnung, a psychological post 3I fic. I'll get back to it I swear.


Return to “Film and Video”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests