noknobs Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 5 hours ago, shayhiri said: A lot of recent positive reviews claim that the biggest thing going for this is how "close it feels to the spirit of the original series". That is definitely NOT a plus for me. I would never watch the disgusting old TV junk. I liked STID so much because it is pure JJ - nothing else - and if this is different, I'm out. It wasn't really a plus for me either. Fortunately I think it finds a balance. Yes it's closer in spirit to the original series, but the action and set pieces are great and make the original series look like... well, the original series. Production value, spectacle, great cast, humor, it's still in there. It just has the feeling that it could be a very long episode from the original and touches on themes from the originals. So if you're like me, never a trekkie and loved the last two rebooted movies much more than any Star Trek prior, then odds are you'll still love this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Was Wrath of Khan about pre-emptive warfare too ? Because STID had a lots on its mind about this so thas was very treky to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadAtGender Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Nerd culture doesn't exist. Nostalgia culture does, though, and it has an extreme fixation on being true and honest to the things that one remembers fondly from the younger years. The problem with nostalgia is that it's entirely subjective. The aspects of some old property that appeal to one person can be completely different than a second person. Thus it can't be said that there's one true vision that can be applied to an update of a property so that it's paying the correct amount of respect. So there's no way to truly "deliver what the fans want". Being a fan is entirely a self-defined label. There are no requirements or limitations to becoming one. There are no prescribed and proscribed activities. Someone could have watched every episode of Doctor Who and someone else could have only watched "Blink" and both of them could call themselves fans and be perfectly correct. Neither is a better or worse or more or less true fan than the other. Nostaltia culture is bullshit. If you're so concerned about the loss of "future stories" that feed into the feelings and expectations you had long ago, well, I feel bad for you. There are so many new things to see and get interested in. Why limit yourself? Few things are as cool as talking to someone who has discovered something and found that they really like it. That fresh enthusiasm is far better for MY nostalgia than to see people try to fit things into specific molds of when I was a kid. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 2 hours ago, Telemachos said: Back in the day, you simply couldn't do lots of sci-fi action on a TV budget. You needed ideas, stories, and characters. Roddenberry took the basic concept from WAGON TRAIN and his writing team did what written SF had been doing for decades: use the classic SF question "what it?" as a hook to explore contemporary philosophical, moral, and ethical questions in an adventurous setting. And, for what it's worth, TOS did take a fairly progressive approach (women in command positions, the first interracial kiss on TV, an ethnically diverse cast --including a Russian, which was a bigger deal back then than now), and all of this annoyed some people. A movie without those questions isn't inherently better or worse than one with them, but their absence does make it feel less Trek-y. If the new movie manages to mix in some basic Philosophy or Ethics 101 in between the action scenes, that'd be rad. of course you could do action, a huge part of TOS has action elements. it just couldn't be elaborate, compare a gun fight from bonanza to a gun fight in the most recent larger scale western, to show the difference in not so much having action, but how much larger and visual your action can be How manny episodes does the crew have fight scenes in, how many times did we see the Enterprise under fire or returning fire, how many hand held passer fights happened, how many short fights happened, how home many out and out brawls did we see. I mean seriously TNG a much more successful in its time, with larger budget, a library of high end models and stock shots, the ability to create and often need exterior ships shots in 178 episodes had fewer fist fights, fewer ship battles, fewer crew Brawls and fewer hand held phaser fights then what dos produced in the 78 episodes that aired As of the rest most of it is spot on, but Westerns and SciFI had long been doing period pieces with morality stories centered on more modern issues. Two points on Treks progressive history, Only the failed pilot had a women in the command structure for a Starfleet Ship. And was absolutely a no go with the studio, who said that the character tested extremely poorly (both with men and women). The only female written for the show has it was picked up by NBC is a Romulan Commander who is of course defeated or outmatched, because she fails for Spock, who is out an out playing her. So not a great example for the only female we see in command. The ranking female character that we see on the show is never given the big chair, or ever leads a landing party. We see even ensign checkoff and random engineer DeSalle (ok i think he's in a few episodes, but this was the first on the bridge i believe). We are also told I believe that there are no female captains in either Starfleet or the Federation, we hear something like the tin the very last episode of the show. So while we see Uhura as a bridge officer, we never see her in command. And I hate that the first kiss shown and referenced between two races in a fact a forced sexual encounter, on both characters. Neither character has any physical control over their form when it occurs, really does lesson the impact when you really think about it. And for example of modern Trek not forgetting morality plays, Into darkness absolutely continued that type of story telling with a very easy to see story about drone war fair something that was and is still a factor in modern life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 3 hours ago, The Futurist said: Was Wrath of Khan about pre-emptive warfare too ? Because STID had a lots on its mind about this so thas was very treky to me. Nope. Khan was very much a revenge tail. With perhaps the use of science in inadvertently creating a weapon of mass destruction, when its intended use is the complete opposite. Star Trek VI felt with the three primary powers (Federation, Klingon, and Romulans) having agents working to start an installer war to destroy the weakened Klingon Empire. Into Darkness is an absolute example of very Trek like morally play story telling. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somebody85 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Looks like this is going to end up in the mid to high 80s on RT. Can't wait. Also super excited for the Rogue One and TWD Season 7 trailer this week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Craig Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 For the GA and some others that it'll matter to the RT is 91% at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyGossamer Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Linsanity indeed. He gave us Furious 6 and Fast Five. Now, he's giving us a swashbuckling Trek adventure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikasa Ackerman Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Linsanity lasted only 10 games and then Jeremy has been a bum ever since. Not sure we want to associate Justin with that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayhawk the Hutt Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 3 minutes ago, Mikasa Ackerman said: Linsanity lasted only 10 games and then Jeremy has been a bum ever since. Not sure we want to associate Justin with that. ? Lin is an average NBA player, but far from a bum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikasa Ackerman Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Just now, Jayhawk said: ? Lin is an average NBA player, but far from a bum. Fair enough. But far below the level that Linsanity predicted. Still, those 10 games were glorious. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Moderation: Heads up -- please read: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPink Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 1 hour ago, Mikasa Ackerman said: Linsanity lasted only 10 games and then Jeremy has been a bum ever since. Not sure we want to associate Justin with that. The memories are all I need. I pretty much cried when he put 30+ on the Lakers 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyGossamer Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Lin was pretty good in the that one round the Hornets played in the playoffs this year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikasa Ackerman Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Yeah he wasn't bad for the Hornets in general actually, especially compared to his time in Houston and LA. What was up with that terrible cockatoo hairdo though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattW Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Not sure if I missed this being posted here, but there's a tv spot on the paramount youtube channel called "Be Ready" that you probably should avoid. I haven't seen the movie so I don't know if it's a bad spoiler or not but it's something that hasn't been in any trailer or video released so far and was not at all what I was expecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 I would absolutely encourage people not to watch that trailer. it is very much a spoiler heavy regarding the conflict of the film. When I saw it (it was linked within a an's non spoiler review...) and it is a veery big spoiler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Reynolds Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 http://deadline.com/2016/07/star-trek-beyond-ghostbusters-lights-out-box-office-comic-con-1201788846/ Quote Star Trek Beyond, Paramount has a couple fan activities planned, which will hopefully escalate the opening weekend for the Justin Lin movie from its current low $50M projection up to $60M. Star Trek Beyond cost a reported $185M, however, to Skydance and Bad Robot’s credit, they’ve truly raised the franchise’s worth at the overseas box office and in China. not much cheaper than STID afterall, maybe because of reshoots? looks to perform similar to last year's MI5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop54 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 $185M budget? Wow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonwo Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 The thing about Star Trek 09 was that the franchise was basically on life support after Nemesis had bombed and Enterprise had been cancelled and from Paramount and CBS' POV, a reboot was inevitable to bring in new fans and the casual audience after years of only appealing in Trekkies. Had they not rebooted, I doubt we'd be getting a new Star Trek series or another film One of the reasons I love Star Trek 09 was because it felt like a film and not like an extended TV episode that the previous Star Trek films felt like at times and also it was accessible to the casual audience who didn't need to watch past episodes. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
