View Single Post
Old September 29 2013, 05:18 AM   #127
plynch
Commodore
 
plynch's Avatar
 
Location: Outer Graceland
View plynch's Twitter Profile
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Khan444 wrote: View Post
plynch wrote: View Post
Judging the movie as a movie-goer: Meh. Not to my taste. But a decent big blockbustery effects-o-rama. It did well but not amazingly, as both articles mention, I believe.

As a Trek fan, I second both articles. Convoluted film, Spock on Skype (haha), some cold spy-ish dude named Khan. Spock yelling Khaaan, ridiculous. I saw it once in theater, won't buy it, and might not see the next, based on the first two. I'm not into all the "kewl," so it was lame to me. Make an original star trek movie next time: exploration, action, and philosophical. Some of the movies have done it. Many episodes have done it. Can the present production team do it? I have my doubts.

Maybe space exploration is not a good topic for the 2010s. It's not 1967.

Maybe the problem is "Trek" is now just a franchise owned by a corporation which wants to spin it into money. So it hires some currently "hot" producer/writers. There doesn't seem to be a human truly at the center (like GR or Berman) invested in this concept, desiring to use it to tell stories. Now it seems like, "Well, we have to make a third movie that grosses $XYZ, let's get it done and over with. YMMV
No, NONE of the MOVIES were focused on exploration, sorry to disappoint you. TMP came closest, and it was a failure both critically and financially. The TV SHOWS were about exploration and discovery. You can do that in a twenty plus episode season better than a two hour movie. The films have always been geared more towards a mass audience, so this is nothing new.
Probably why I rarely rewatch the movies. I would argue TMP does. IV is not exploration per se, but a sci-fi concept (the probe) and dealing with the unknown rather than a kewl-bad-guy; TFF was venturing out and dealing with a mystery even if it was executed weirdly; INS had a mustache-stretching bad guy, but an interesting premise and a moral dilemma.

Also, even if it were "nothing new," I don't think that makes it ok.

At least with me.

I'm just hard-pressed why -- even if you like big effects-y, smash-mouth, ephemeral blockbuster movies -- you would give STID more than like a B-. Or why you would take issue with those who can't love it. It just seems that flawed to me.

(And I love TWOK by the way -- I'm not opposed to action.)
__________________
Author of Live Like Louis! Inspirational Stories from the Life of Louis Armstrong, http://livelikelouis.com
plynch is offline   Reply With Quote