Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by TrekToday, Jan 22, 2013.
I think Abrams just wants us all to think someone may die. It's a red herring.
Don't you mean, "redshirt herring"?
I don't really think the concept of the Big Three in TOS exists in these movies. To me it seems more like it's now just a Big Two with Kirk and Spock, and then there's everyone else.
...which is a shame.
I generally liked ST2009, but I always found that triumvirate to be a great part of TOS...
...rather than having ONE main character go through the mental exercise of considering all sides of a situation -- which would require either (1) having the audience hear that character's thoughts so we can be privy to his thought process, or (2) having that character to talk to himself and voice his thoughts. Both of those options are clunky and trite story-telling devices.
The genius solution is to have three main characters all discuss/argue a situation from the three sides (action/intellect/moral), each generally taking one of the three sides.
It worked very well for TOS, I thought. I missed that in ST2009, and was sort of expecting it.
I have no doubt it will be a tearjerker.... the only question is will these tears be tragedy or farce?
I don't know about anybody else, but I was stirred by the 'signing off' at the end of The Undiscovered Country.
And in the next movie, Chapel gets Spock on the rebound.
I'm on the record several times on this board saying I teared up at the end of TUC. It was on SyFy this week, and I came across the last 20 minutes while channel surfing. I watched it, and I STILL teared up twenty years later. It usually starts when Spock says Kirk should tell Starfleet Command to go to hell.
Bathing in the tears of the butthurt. Best punk album ever!
The Big Three are Kirk, Spock and Uhura.
"You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss twelve bucks goodbye!"
I'm a big boohooer, but originally on seeing TWOK, I held on until Kirk got that hitch in his throat...then it was all over.
I teared up when the Enterprise went down in flames in STIII.
Someone (I think it was Pine) said a while ago in an interview that had no idea how Star Trek was supposed to continue after the end of STID, or at least it was something to that effect. But he said he was sure that the writers would think of something.
I can't find that snippet anymore, it was over on Trekweb months ago ... does anyone remember?
That was another moment that was hard to witness. But SO epic!
Or maybe bye Abrams.
The only Star Trek movie that ever made me cry was The Wrath of Kahn, don't bet on it. These characters have been in one movie together, why should I care what happens to them when I have not had any time to develop any emotional attachment to them? It doesn't help when I can only see them as a pale imitation of the original TOS crew.
So you've never cried (or felt some sort of sadness) for the fate of any character in a film where it was your first ever encounter with that character? Wow. I can understand not caring about a set of characters because you didn't like a movie (Trek or otherwise), but do you really need repeated and prolonged exposure, over several films, to "care" about any character at all?
Yeah, but we know that Kirk and Spock etc are running around doing just fine in the Prime Universe, so I give as much of a shit about these new guys as I do that Riker who got blown up in that Borg war universe in Parallels
George Kirk's suicide run and Amanda's death left huge lumps in my throat. No other Trek has had that effect on me, with the exception of crying over Tasha's death when I was 5.
I didn't believe for a second that it was really the end. And indeed, most of the characters popped up again here and there in TNG and others. Chekov and Uhura were back as recently as a few years ago in the fan film Of Gods and Men!
We met Shabby Riker about one minute before his Enterprise blew up. We have seen a 2 hour film of these new guys, and will get another 2 hour film to get better acquanited with them.
Using your logic, we can't care about any original movie character (any original character in any original movie) simply because that the character is not someone we already know or have cared about before the movie. I have seen plenty of films that featured original characters whom I grew to care about during the film.
I think Abrams and company did a decent job making me care about most of the characters in the first film -- although being an origin film, the creative didn't have a lot of time to do so. I think I will care even more about them in this second film as I learn more about them and watch them interact.
Separate names with a comma.