View Single Post
Old July 26 2013, 10:34 PM   #4539
Fleet Captain
Location: Planet Carcazed

trevanian wrote: View Post
Noname Given wrote: View Post
Dantrek wrote: View Post
I give it a D-. I thought visually it was nice. The story was unoriginal. There were so many plot holes I don't know where to begin. It was a good action sci fi film but it wasn't Star Trek even with its little homages to prime universe Trek. I just think JJ Abrams is more suited for Star Wars type films. I cannot get used to that beer factory engine room or the bridge with a window/view screen with light glares bouncing off it. Sorry, as much as I love Trek I cannot get into this version.
So, I suppose ST:TMP (being unoriginal as it was a remake of the perevious episode "The Changeling"; as well as being full of p[lot holes) "wasn't Star Trek" either?
Well, if you peeled the bad art direction & moronic splitfocus diopters off TMP it was still something resembling TREK underneath, just that the characters were in a different place in their lives.

But if you stopped aiming every light at the camera in the Abrams, and also discarded the ludicrous brewery and the rest of the contemporary welds, you'd STILL have something that didn't resemble trek underneath.

So I would not concur.
Filmmaking is art.

Those who produce the films we pay our hard earned money to see make artistic decisions all the time, from start to finish. If you don't like their choices, fine.

What artistic choices would you have made if you were making films in the 1970s? In the 1980s? The 90s, or 2000s, or today?

I see things in movies that I wouldn't do the same way, but that doesn't mean that I can't appreciate the choices that were made in the process of putting a film together.

It's easy to criticize. Not so easy to do.
marksound is offline   Reply With Quote