View Single Post
Old December 15 2013, 12:31 AM   #112
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: Joe Cornish To Direct STAR TREK 3?

LOKAI of CHERON wrote: View Post
MakeshiftPython wrote: View Post
Forget about "The Inner Light", I'm talking "The Visitor"! Kidding aside, I don't think the Michael Bay brand of relentless action with characters shouting "GO! GO! GO!" every five to ten minutes will work if they keep doing it over and over with nuTrek. You can only get away with that before audiences gets bored, and even though STID delivered on that, it still made less than the first film in the US, when many expected it to do much better (and hold your horses, I'm not calling it a failure at the box office, but domestically speaking it is a bit of a step down, and sequels generally do better). That being said, it doesn't need to keep doing the same kind of action spectacle. They can easily tone it down and still drawn in audiences if the story and characters are strong enough. A good example of a contemporary action film is SKYFALL, which probably only has a quarter of the action STID has and yet it did two times the box office that the latter ended up with. Why shouldn't Trek tone it down the action? Seeing Kirk fire a phaser at a bunch of Klingons isn't gonna drawn in more audiences, it's the story. Adjusted for inflation, THE VOYAGE HOME is still the biggest Trek has ever been and it's probably the most unconventional Trek film ever. And no, I'm not asking for more Whales, I'm just saying that a film series cannot sustain if it keeps doing the same thing over and over, as it will just get stale over time.

Still, the remark on "The Inner Light" is cute. It didn't win a Hugo Award because it "bored audiences to tears", heck, it certain moved people enough to get teary eyed. It isn't even my favorite episode, but I can't deny it's effective. Isn't that what we want audiences to feel about Trek anyway? To be surprised that a Trek movie actually engaged them that deeply? Would you think audiences would be bored to tears over watching "The City on the Edge of Forever" too?

But maybe you're right. Poor Gene. So much for your peaceful vision of the future, idiot. People don't want that crap anymore. People want shooting!
Why should they "tone it down"? Why should Trek be overtly focused on "character" and "philosophy"? Trek is many things - "The Doomsday Machine" is as much Star Trek as "The Inner Light", significantly more so IMO.

Action/Adventure Trek is far more suited to the big screen than watered down, over sentimental touchy-feely nonsense. STID got the balance just right.

In answer to your question, no, I don't think audiences would be bored by TCotEoF at all in one sense, as I regard it as one of Trek's greatest achievements. But, as much as I love it, I do think a cinematic rendering of City, or something like it, would be considerably less successful than the last two Bad Robot outings at the box office.

Certain fans rave about "The Inner Light" - so? I find it to be dull, boring and tedious - and doesn't deserve any kind of comparison to City - not even in the same league.

I wasn't being "cute" in this, or my antecedent post FYI. I am, however, getting really, really bored of the "too many 'splosions" or "too much action, no character" schtick routinely rolled out by those who dislike recent Trek output.

My point is that if they don't try something new and different down the line that audiences will get bored. Nimoy was smart to realize that with THE VOYAGE HOME and it paid off big time. Two big spectacles in a row so far, it would not harm the third film at all to do something unique. A good start would be to stop using a villain hellbent on revenge.
MakeshiftPython is offline   Reply With Quote