Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:06 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 199 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS 
Author Message
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Whoa man! Sounds like you're about to burst a blood vessel over this film! :lol:


Last edited by Vexer on Tue May 28, 2013 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue May 28, 2013 3:47 am
Profile
Gaffer
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:17 pm
Posts: 29
Location: United States
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
nologo wrote:
...<excised by me due to length. -J.W.>...


That post is a mess, and what is it with you and talking about everybody laughing? I can say that if I'm doing anything, it's expressing concern over the tone of your reply. You seem quite angry about something that shouldn't anger you, and your response is too vehement for me to even attempt parsing, let alone answering questions. I know when I can't get through to someone because of their level of zeal, and this is one of those times. To slightly paraphrase my favorite film critics, "It's just a show; you should really just relax."

_________________
"I would be delighted to offer any advice I can on understanding women. When I have some, I’ll let you know." - Picard to Data, “In Theory


Tue May 28, 2013 5:11 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:11 pm
Posts: 394
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Quote:
It honestly isn't that complicated. 2 biggest? You named a bunch there....It might be a tad complex in its stupidity though...


I have to give the slow clap that builds into a standing ovation to nologo as that was the funniest post I have seen in a long time. It is so funny because it is all true when you sit down and actually think about it. Thanks for a great post. Reading it gave me a question about Kirk and Khan in future films

[Reveal] Spoiler:
If Khan is more or less like Wolverine in the X-men then by giving Kirk his blood does that make Kirk augmented with superhuman strength and Wolverinelike super healing in future movies?


Tue May 28, 2013 6:25 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Well, I enjoyed this movie tremendously. So far, only three wide releases this year have hit home for me, and Star Trek Into Darkness is my second favorite of 2013 so far.

For the record, here is my order:

1. Side Effects - ImageImageImageImage
2. Star Trek Into Darkness - ImageImageImageImage
3. Fast & Furious 6 - ImageImageImageImage

Of course, I've seen quite a lot of other movies this year, but these are the only major releases that have truly impressed me.


Tue May 28, 2013 5:12 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Nobody's going to argue that Into Darkness has much of a brain, but if there's a lesson to learn from both Into Darkness and The Motion Picture, it's that Star Trek with heart but not much of a brain is much more appealing than Star Trek with a brain but not much of a heart.

Neither is ideal, but it couldn't hurt to keep that in perspective.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue May 28, 2013 5:29 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Ken wrote:
Nobody's going to argue that Into Darkness has much of a brain, but if there's a lesson to learn from both Into Darkness and The Motion Picture, it's that Star Trek with heart but not much of a brain is much more appealing than Star Trek with a brain but not much of a heart.

Neither is ideal, but it couldn't hurt to keep that in perspective.

One other thing: since when does science make a Star Trek film good? The Motion Picture, The Search for Spock, The Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis were much more rooted in the Trek of old, but they were lousy.

I have no problem with Abrams updating Trek for today's audiences, as long as he does it the right way. I would much rather watch a solid Star Wars-esque Trek film than a lousy, albeit more traditional, Trek film. As long as the Abrams formula isn't here to stay from now until forever, I'm good.

Into Darkness might be this year's Avengers, but there's still time for a brainier summer blockbuster. Grown Ups 2, perhaps? :D


Tue May 28, 2013 5:41 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
And I think that all of us can agree that Episode VII is in safe hands. J.J. Abrams off-handedness about his love of Trek ("I always thought that it was too philosophical") still frustrates me, even though I still admire what he has done with the series. His films aren't brain-dead; they just happen to be very competent summer blockbusters which are torn apart by audiences looking for the next Star Wars prequel trilogy. That being said, his style seems much more suited to Star Wars; if critics love what he did in re-imagining Star Trek, then they will probably be astounded by the course he takes with Episode VII. Then again, I'm just speculating.


Tue May 28, 2013 5:45 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
None of those films is particularly rooted in old Star Trek (with the possible exception of ST5--haven't seen it, not particularly interested in it), because at the very least, old Star Trek had a basic mixture of adventure, camaraderie, and social allegory. I think each of those movies is missing at least one of those crucial elements that ties the whole thing together and makes it a Star Trek story.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue May 28, 2013 5:54 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Hence, one of my complaints. Many of the films I lasted where lambasted by fans when they were released. Why should Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness be treated with any more indifference if they are actually much better movies?


Tue May 28, 2013 5:57 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 288
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
More proof that there's no pleasing everyone: I've seen the films Sean didn't list disparaged by Trekkies too. The Wrath of Khan and First Contact for being Revenge Trek, The Voyage Home for being Comedy Trek, The Undiscovered Country for being Political Trek or Star Trek does Shakespeare, etc. As in, they're not Real Trek(^TM). For some people, if you don't do exactly what they expect when the movie is entitled Star Trek, they don't like it. Abrams is certainly not alone among Trek directors in having viewers who disliked his film(s).

Ken, don't see ST V. I only saw it because of my completist side, and I hate that side of me for making that decision.


Last edited by Gwaihir on Tue May 28, 2013 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue May 28, 2013 6:15 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Gwaihir wrote:
More proof that there's no pleasing everyone: I've seen the films Sean didn't list disparaged by Trekkies too. The Wrath of Khan and First Contact for being Revenge Trek, The Voyage Home for being Comedy Trek, The Undiscovered Country for being Political Trek or Star Trek does Shakespeare, etc. As in, they're not Real Trek(^tm). For some people, if you don't do exactly what they expect when the movie is entitled Star Trek, they don't like it. Abrams is certainly not alone among Trek directors in having viewers who disliked his film(s).

Perfectly stated.

In the same way that Skyfall failed to please die-hard Bond fans, the newer Trek films are being unfairly disparaged by old-school Trekkies. There's just no pleasing everyone.

For the record, Abrams Trek is nowhere near as bad as the Star Wars prequels. Not even close. People should stop comparing them.

What are your thoughts on Abrams' attitude towards the Trek series? Frustrating or refreshing?

"It always felt too philosophical for me." -J.J. Abrams


Tue May 28, 2013 6:20 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 288
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Sean wrote:
What are your thoughts on Abrams' attitude towards the Trek series? Frustrating or refreshing?

"It always felt too philosophical for me." -J.J. Abrams


I don't find it frustrating or refreshing, it's his opinion.

I loved his interview on The Daily Show. He mentioned that, but he also admitted that he always liked Star Wars more, and that he's not as smart as Trek fans like Jon Stewart. :lol: One other statement he made was that the writers and producers knew Trek, and he directed it more like a film he'd want to see. I guess that means that the details like what a Vulcan is, what traits are associated with the characters, and the language of Trek he deferred to them, but the pacing, rhythm, look, etc. is his vision. It's an interesting approach, and one that Paramount is likely pleased with, given the last two films' success.


Tue May 28, 2013 6:33 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Gwaihir wrote:
Sean wrote:
What are your thoughts on Abrams' attitude towards the Trek series? Frustrating or refreshing?

"It always felt too philosophical for me." -J.J. Abrams


I don't find it frustrating or refreshing, it's his opinion.

I loved his interview on The Daily Show. He mentioned that, but he also admitted that he always liked Star Wars more, and that he's not as smart as Trek fans like Jon Stewart. :lol: One other statement he made was that the writers and producers knew Trek, and he directed it more like a film he'd want to see. I guess that means that the details like what a Vulcan is, what traits are associated with the characters, and the language of Trek he deferred to them, but the pacing, rhythm, look, etc. is his vision. It's an interesting approach, and one that Paramount is likely pleased with, given the last two films' success.

Perhaps I should have worded that differently.

Do you think that Trek fans who hate him for holding this opinions are justified, or do they just need to hop off the nostalgia train? That is, should they come to the realization that the director's opinion doesn't matter, provided that the final product just works?


Tue May 28, 2013 6:38 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
That's a loaded question, and the two choices are hardly mutually exclusive.

It is not nostalgia to suspect that a director's negative or ambivalent attitude toward the source material might have something to do with the perceived drawbacks in the end product. I think that's a legit criticism.

I think that if I have any problem with Abrams, it's that it isn't enough to come in as a disinterested party and just shake things up however you want. Even if you had no cogent position on the source material going in, you still have to develop one before you start the work. You have to find something in the original material that you can understand and appreciate, rather than simply grafting on other stuff just to make it interesting for yourself. I don't think Abrams is quite there.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue May 28, 2013 7:17 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:11 pm
Posts: 394
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Quote:
Do you think that Trek fans who hate him for holding this opinions are justified, or do they just need to hop off the nostalgia train? That is, should they come to the realization that the director's opinion doesn't matter, provided that the final product just works?


Sure it works Abrams turned Star Trek into Interstellar Pirates of the Caribbean with Captain Jason Bourne which is what Paramount wanted. I am just imagining Abrams pitch meeting right now to execs like a 30 Rock sketch. A dumb juvenile movie tailored made for juvenile audiences in English and Non English markets. Why would fans complain about something being bastardized to the point of being the most expensive, slick and empty fan fiction made by non fans. The small ray of hope is seeing Great Gatsby make $120 mil despite being surrounded by behemoths like Ironman,Star Trek and Fast and Furious. There is still a market for a movie that don't pander to the lowest common denominator that just wants to see the same dumb cliched stories that is solely used to link slick action set pieces that are illogical when you actually think about them.


Tue May 28, 2013 8:05 pm
Profile
Gaffer
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:17 pm
Posts: 29
Location: United States
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
oakenshield32 wrote:
Quote:
It honestly isn't that complicated. 2 biggest? You named a bunch there....It might be a tad complex in its stupidity though...


I have to give the slow clap that builds into a standing ovation to nologo as that was the funniest post I have seen in a long time. It is so funny because it is all true when you sit down and actually think about it. Thanks for a great post. Reading it gave me a question about Kirk and Khan in future films

[Reveal] Spoiler:
If Khan is more or less like Wolverine in the X-men then by giving Kirk his blood does that make Kirk augmented with superhuman strength and Wolverinelike super healing in future movies?


*watches as some guy stands and claps in an empty room*

_________________
"I would be delighted to offer any advice I can on understanding women. When I have some, I’ll let you know." - Picard to Data, “In Theory


Tue May 28, 2013 8:29 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:11 pm
Posts: 394
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Quote:
*watches as some guy stands and claps in an empty room*


Yawn. You just got owned in one of the most brilliant smackdowns I have seen in ages and this is your reply? Oh well I can now see why Star Trek looks so amazing to you. If only everyone had that kind of scrubbed faced simplicity the movie studios would never have to make another movie with originality or intelligence again.


Wed May 29, 2013 7:29 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
oakenshield32 wrote:
Quote:
*watches as some guy stands and claps in an empty room*


Yawn. You just got owned in one of the most brilliant smackdowns I have seen in ages and this is your reply? Oh well I can now see why Star Trek looks so amazing to you. If only everyone had that kind of scrubbed faced simplicity the movie studios would never have to make another movie with originality or intelligence again.

"Brilliant smackdown"? Seems somebody has quite the ego :lol:


Wed May 29, 2013 8:01 pm
Profile
Gaffer
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:17 pm
Posts: 29
Location: United States
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
oakenshield32 wrote:
Quote:
*watches as some guy stands and claps in an empty room*


Yawn. You just got owned in one of the most brilliant smackdowns I have seen in ages and this is your reply? Oh well I can now see why Star Trek looks so amazing to you. If only everyone had that kind of scrubbed faced simplicity the movie studios would never have to make another movie with originality or intelligence again.



Oh, my. You're too cute! :lol:
You honestly felt that was a "brilliant smackdown"? It was nothing more than a rant over the way things aren't how they used to be.

_________________
"I would be delighted to offer any advice I can on understanding women. When I have some, I’ll let you know." - Picard to Data, “In Theory


Wed May 29, 2013 8:14 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
J.W. Allen wrote:
oakenshield32 wrote:
Quote:
*watches as some guy stands and claps in an empty room*


Yawn. You just got owned in one of the most brilliant smackdowns I have seen in ages and this is your reply? Oh well I can now see why Star Trek looks so amazing to you. If only everyone had that kind of scrubbed faced simplicity the movie studios would never have to make another movie with originality or intelligence again.



Oh, my. You're too cute! :lol:
You honestly felt that was a "brilliant smackdown"? It was nothing more than a rant over the way things aren't how they used to be.

Yeah, it's perfectly fine if you don't like the film, but disparaging others for liking it is not cool.


Wed May 29, 2013 8:27 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 199 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot] and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr