Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

April 19, 2024, 01:13:22 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Star Trek 3 with a script by Scotty

Started by Alberon, January 22, 2015, 11:09:20 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

biggytitbo

The magic of the original trek, and to an extent tng isn't the writing, the plots, the ethos or the philosophy, its the actors and their interplay. We'd already spent 4 years and countless reruns with those actors and there's a real warmth and investment in the characters that makes the original films work even when they aren't so great in themselves. The reboot can't get away with that, if the film itself isn't very strong the actors and their interplay isn't good enough to carry it, it just flops into an average noisy hollywood blockbuster.

Canted_Angle

Generations and First Contact are great movies.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

Quote from: checkoutgirl on January 26, 2015, 11:19:39 AM
I've always wondered about Pegg. Is he the real deal or does he just pretend to like skateboards and Zombies and Star Wars/Trek so that he can latch onto it and get success from it?
Spaced came along before geek culture was really mainstream. I suppose you could argue that Kevin Smith and the Playstation had paved the way some years earlier, but it wasn't like it would be a few years later - when Sam Raimi is a Hollywood bigshot and Dr Who is a ratings smash. Similarly, Shaun of the Dead seemed to be right on the cusp of the current zombie craze, rather than following the herd. It's a bit of a chicken or the egg situation, maybe.

I get the feeling from The World's End and promotional interviews he did for it that he's a bit ambivalent about it all. I think he still likes the nerd stuff but, as you say, he's got responsibilities and suchlike now.

SavageHedgehog

Quote from: greenman on January 26, 2015, 09:57:58 AM
On release it had a certain amount of good will simply because it was a better watch that the last couple of aweful TNG films.

I think there's also a lot of nerdphobia around Star Trek in a way there doesn't seem to be with anything else as high profile; before the Abrams films, and to some extent even since, it's assumed you can't just be a casual fan or viewer the way you can with Star Wars, Lord of the Rings or Doctor Who, all of which inspire "Trekkie" level fanaticism. Pretty much every compliment for the early trailers seemed to start with "I'm not a Tekkie, but...", and I think for a lot of people a Star Trek with a slick Bruckheimer-style makeover is the only kind they could admit to liking[nb]I know that a lot of Trekkies and such liked the Abrams movie too, but this honestly seemed to be a large part of its wider appeal to me[/nb].

Alberon

When it comes to the Trek films they are a mixed bag. The Motion Picture is a very good SF film but a rubbish Trek one.

TWOK is gold. I tend to prefer the third film over the fourth. The fifth is dire, but that isn't entirely Shatner's fault. But the sixth is a damn good finale to the original cast.

Generations is a film whose parts are somehow more than the whole.

First Contact is as good as TNG films get. Insurrection is like a two parter with a bigger budget. It's okay, which is damning it with faint praise.

Nemesis is just awful. Its an attempt at the greatest hits of the Trek movies up to and including the death of a beloved character. But they screw it up so badly no one cared about Data's death.

Whatever happens with the third rebooted Trek film I do think a new TV series will follow. It's where Trek belongs.

greenman

#35
Quote from: SavageHedgehog on January 26, 2015, 07:55:59 PM
I think there's also a lot of nerdphobia around Star Trek in a way there doesn't seem to be with anything else as high profile; before the Abrams films, and to some extent even since, it's assumed you can't just be a casual fan or viewer the way you can with Star Wars, Lord of the Rings or Doctor Who, all of which inspire "Trekkie" level fanaticism. Pretty much every compliment for the early trailers seemed to start with "I'm not a Tekkie, but...", and I think for a lot of people a Star Trek with a slick Bruckheimer-style makeover is the only kind they could admit to liking[nb]I know that a lot of Trekkies and such liked the Abrams movie too, but this honestly seemed to be a large part of its wider appeal to me[/nb].

I'm not sure you could say that the original cast films really had a great deal of stigma about them, Wrath of Khan and Voyage Home are both popular well beyond your typical Trekkie fanbase. I think the TNG films definitely did though and Trek as a whole had pushed much more in the direction of pleasing its own fanbase, successfully to start with the TNG series and early films plus DS9 but then increasingly to diminishing returns.

It was probably a combination of the removal of that stigma, the return to the original characters and the poor quality of Nemesis(and to a lesser degree Insurrection) that led to the kind of reaction Abrams first film got.

Quote from: The Region LegionThe first reboot is a flawless piece of big budget film-making. The opening 5 minutes are just about the most powerful, exciting and affecting scenes in Trek history

Really? I thought it was verging on(seemingly unintentional) comedy in its ridiculousness. Things picked up a bit after that and it was a decent blockbuster but I think it really needed to trade on the history of the franchise to get its emotional weight in destroying Vulcan.

Quote from: greenman on January 26, 2015, 11:59:25 PM
Really? I thought it was verging on(seemingly unintentional) comedy in its ridiculousness. Things picked up a bit after that and it was a decent blockbuster but I think it really needed to trade on the history of the franchise to get its emotional weight in destroying Vulcan.

What was ridiculous about it? Ship encounters huge, future ship. Captain beams over to discuss surrender, is killed. Man sacrifices himself to save his wife and soon-to-be-born son. Cue slow orchestral music over crazy space battle cliche to indict brave sacrifice. It's cliched but it works. There hadn't been anything that epic in Star Trek, ever.

greenman

Quote from: The Region Legion on January 27, 2015, 01:09:53 AM
What was ridiculous about it? Ship encounters huge, future ship. Captain beams over to discuss surrender, is killed. Man sacrifices himself to save his wife and soon-to-be-born son. Cue slow orchestral music over crazy space battle cliche to indict brave sacrifice. It's cliched but it works. There hadn't been anything that epic in Star Trek, ever.

All it needed was a giant robot and a few Ninja's and it would have been the best scene ever filmed.

Quote from: greenman on January 27, 2015, 05:47:22 AM
All it needed was a giant robot and a few Ninja's and it would have been the best scene ever filmed.

I'm not sure you know what you're saying, or what words are.

greenman

Quote from: The Region Legion on January 27, 2015, 11:36:22 AM
I'm not sure you know what you're saying, or what words are.

I'm saying that the scene seems ridiculous in its attempts to shoehorn as much drama as possible in, an officer takes control of a ship on a suicide mission as his evacuating wife gives birth? none of the characters of course having been given any weight at all so early into the film.

Abrams isn't even that effective at establishing any kind of atmosphere or tactics for this or indeed any of his space battles that was really the trademark of the original cast films, its just a mass of quick cut explosions and lens flare.

Blumf

Mah mate, it's pretty decent as film openings go. Turn off the lens flare and it'd be great.

I'm of the opinion that JJ doesn't 'get' Star Trek, but taken on it's own merits I think it works very well as a way to establish the universe and story. I'd be hard pressed to think of better realised space battles (the original Star Wars films and that's it I think, BG reboot maybe, but a bit too much in your face shakycam)

As for the tactics or space battles, I think there's room for the action heavy stuff he did and it worked well. It's always been a weak point of Star Trek, mainly for production limitations, they've rarely ever conveyed battles in an engaging or convincing way[nb]I'd like to see some proper treatment of ground based warfare for example, it's usually just people in standard uniforms, no armour, firing the odd phaser blast. Get a bunch of Trekkies and War Nerds together to mash out what'd really be possible/practical, I think the results would be cinematic enough for most blockbuster viewers[/nb]. The submarine style stuff when facing off against a cloaked ship are good, but the more general big battles tend to be a bit limp.

checkoutgirl

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 26, 2015, 06:34:09 PM
The magic of the original trek, and to an extent tng isn't the writing, the plots, the ethos or the philosophy, its the actors and their interplay. We'd already spent 4 years and countless reruns with those actors and there's a real warmth and investment in the characters that makes the original films work even when they aren't so great in themselves. The reboot can't get away with that, if the film itself isn't very strong the actors and their interplay isn't good enough to carry it, it just flops into an average noisy hollywood blockbuster.

So basically the original films were shite but I personally have watched hundreds of hours of Star Trek so I quite like Deforrest Kelly so that's alright.

But what about non sc fi nerds with a life Biggy? What are they supposed to do? You might be bald and like Doctor Who but what about people with hair and things to do?

checkoutgirl

Quote from: greenman on January 27, 2015, 11:53:47 AM
as his evacuating wife gives birth?

It's a well known CaB fact that birthing women shit themselves but I don't remember seeing that in the film.

Mister Six

Quote from: Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth on January 26, 2015, 06:41:22 PMSimilarly, Shaun of the Dead seemed to be right on the cusp of the current zombie craze, rather than following the herd. It's a bit of a chicken or the egg situation, maybe.

And it was in production for about four years before that, too.

Quote from: checkoutgirl on January 27, 2015, 04:02:23 PM
So basically the original films were shite but I personally have watched hundreds of hours of Star Trek so I quite like Deforrest Kelly so that's alright.

But what about non sc fi nerds with a life Biggy? What are they supposed to do? You might be bald and like Doctor Who but what about people with hair and things to do?

Oi, watch it. Replies will have your guts for garters if he sees you flirting with his man.

mothman

At this point, ny indfference/antipathy towards the reboot films is such, I think I prefer to just hibernate for a couple of years until no. 3 is out of the way and then see what happens TV-wise. I heard Seth Macfarlane express enthusiasm for having a crack at  a Trek TV show, likely a directly-post-TNG/DS9/Voy-era-or-shortly-after version. I imagine many here would not look kindly on such an idea but it can't be worse that what we've had (or have to look forward to) from the recent films.

Also, this is worth a read: http://trekmovie.com/2015/01/11/editorial-the-future-of-star-trek-its-the-story-stupid/

Quote from: mothman on February 01, 2015, 05:28:39 PM
I heard Seth Macfarlane express enthusiasm for having a crack at  a Trek TV show, likely a directly-post-TNG/DS9/Voy-era-or-shortly-after version.

Seth MacFarlane may get the keys given his ubiquity, but we'll never see a universe based on TNG/DS9/VOY ever again. More likely will be a re-cast TNG crew following on from these reboot films.

Alberon

Rumours say the producers are looking for a "Bryan Cranston-like" villain and are apparently talking to Bryan Cranston himself to see if he fits the brief.

Also rumoured are three new female characters for the film - The President of the UFP, a starship captain and Bones' ex-wife.

There are no indications yet if any of them will be stripping off in the middle of the film for no good reason.

greenman

Quote from: Alberon on February 04, 2015, 01:18:43 PM
Rumours say the producers are looking for a "Bryan Cranston-like" villain and are apparently talking to Bryan Cranston himself to see if he fits the brief.

Also rumoured are three new female characters for the film - The President of the UFP, a starship captain and Bones' ex-wife.

There are no indications yet if any of them will be stripping off in the middle of the film for no good reason.

Kirk to gatecrash the Betazoid UFP president's wedding?

Deanjam

Quote from: Alberon on February 04, 2015, 01:18:43 PM
There are no indications yet if any of them will be stripping off in the middle of the film for no good reason.

THAT WAS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE PLOT!!!!

Quote from: Alberon on February 04, 2015, 01:18:43 PM
Also rumoured are three new female characters for the film - The President of the UFP, a starship captain and Bones' ex-wife.

Potentially disappointing news because it suggests we might be getting yet another Earth-centric film. I suppose it's plausible that the President needs only to contact the Enterprise via subspace in a brief scene, while the other captain and Bones' ex-wife could be on another ship that they encounter in deep space, but given that Orci was the one originally saying that the 3rd film would deal with exploratory themes but has now been shit-canned from the project I'm not hopeful.

Or someone watched Into Darkness and said "fucks sake, we can definitely do better than this".