STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Agent Richard07, Apr 18, 2013.

?

Grade the movie...

  1. A+

    18.7%
  2. A

    20.7%
  3. A-

    13.1%
  4. B+

    11.1%
  5. B

    8.0%
  6. B-

    4.2%
  7. C+

    5.4%
  8. C

    5.1%
  9. C-

    3.5%
  10. D+

    1.5%
  11. D

    1.6%
  12. D-

    1.3%
  13. F

    5.7%
  1. Tom Servo

    Tom Servo Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Hold on a second though. As a VFX artist, who works every day with other VFX artists, we're all excited to see this film, despite what is going on in our industry. Don't make this a JJ Abrams or a Trek problem, this is an industry wide issue that has to do with every major VFX film. Ya, we're the craftsmen doing this stuff (granted I did it for After Earth and not Star Trek), but we're also part of the audience. Don't sit there and try to blame the issues of the industry on us the movie goer who likes this film. I agree it's a fucked up system, hell I work inside it everyday, but it's not like if everyone smartened up and liked supposedly more intelligent and small budgeted films that all of a sudden this would fix a problem. It wouldn't.

    If this was a $180 Million version of Trek that you wanted to see, would you still be making this argument? It's not what you want to see, so somehow you're trying to take the fact that we enjoy these films and use it as the blame for an entirely different issue. And as someone who sees it from both the person who makes their living from this, and as a fan, I think you're wrong.
     
  2. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    I think it is absolutely indicative of a bad trend, and to address one of your points, I can't imagine a circumstance where I'd be wanting to see a 180 million dollar trek movie, because it doesn't need that much money. Maybe if Nolan was making it, because he spends the money wisely, but I don't think he'd be a good fit creatively, though I like damned near everything he does.

    Making more smaller shows definitely impacts the VFX community in a better way, because it gives the boutiques a chance to survive. And I've heard that repeatedly, not just in my own interviews with VFXsfolk but in the occasional thread on cgtalk and elsewhere.

    One stop shopping for vfx can work (look at Dneg, they can handle a lot of different stuff with taste) but it shouldn't be a default. Going to ILM when it means you're really getting ILM and ILM/Singapore isn't really what ILM used to mean, not entirely. VFX facilities have rarely if ever been going concerns, but if you can't change the system or unionize, then to retain the artists, you need to do something, and if improving -- sorry, altering the frequency of relying on vfx to shore up shitty movies would do that, then you're impvoing stuff on two fronts.

    HAVE A FEELING THIS IS GOING TO BE TOLD TO GET ITS OWN THREAD ELSEWHERE ...
     
  3. lurok

    lurok Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Location:
    Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
    By far the funniest thing read so far...


    This. What I loved about 09 was that all the actors played the characters, rather than just 'doing' the originals. That's main reason looking forward to this. Though a bit sad Cho and Yelchin seem to be missing out on the publicity junkets.
     
  4. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    donners22, I thank you!
     
  5. DarthTom

    DarthTom Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Apparently Zoe had a little problem with her dress yesterday in London, LOL. Her co-stars rushed into help.


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    On the Grand Tour
    Hollywood Reporter review by Todd McCarthy (BEWARE: VERY, VERY FULL OF SPOILERS):

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie/star-trek-darkness/review/451154?utm_source=feedly

    He doesn't like the movie because:
    -- The 3D "looks surprisingly flat," and is "bordering on cheesy."
    -- The images are "pale and thin."
    -- The visual quality "takes a few steps backwards," compared to the quality of previous big-budget releases.
    -- A "rampantly hectic opening action sequence."
    -- The moral issues are "marginally more engaging" than the "cranked-up action sequences" that seem to come every ten or fifteen minutes. They have a "rote, push-button feeling to them."
    -- He says Abrams is less imaginative in this movie than he was in ST09. There is little sense of style or grace.
    -- Overall, he says it's a "professionally capable but creatively humdrum outing."

    He says very little about the performances other than the returning actors fit into their roles comfortably and the other actors fill their roles well.
     
  7. throwback

    throwback Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    There is I think another factor to consider when evaluating films nowadays. Many of the films made today are geared for an international audience. Two-thirds of the revenues generated are from this audience.

    - Tomas Jegeus, Co-President of 20th Century Fox International Theatric (http://entertainment.inquirer.net/1687/hollywood-tailoring-movies-for-overseas-audiences)

    So, Hollywood can justify making a film up close to $200 million, because they know that the amount needed to coup revenue - $600 million, two-thirds of it will come from overseas.

    Here is another quote that I think reflects on what I have seen in the last decade or so.

    - John Truby (http://www.writersstore.com/5-keys-to-writing-a-summer-blockbuster/)
     
  8. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001

    This is true.

    The videogame stuff...meh.
     
  9. RogueFive

    RogueFive Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Location:
    Mach5
    On this I agree. I never liked what they did with Romulans in TNG. Those V-shaped ridges were unnecessary and plain stupid.
     
  10. indranee

    indranee Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    well said.
     
  11. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    It is if you want sequels.
     
  12. ConRefit79

    ConRefit79 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Some of us fans may want that. If JJ Trek fails early, it will mean no Star Trek for awhile. But eventually the studio will try again, cause it makes them money. And hopfully they will see Star Trek's original formula has more staying power than JJ Trek and go back to it.
     
  13. Captrek

    Captrek Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Location:
    Captrek
  14. Flake

    Flake Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    If STID fails to get the $$$ Paramount want then it will still make another one but I would imagine they would reduce the production budget and the advertising budget and simply move the movie to different time of the year where it has more time to itself.
     
  15. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    More to the point, it's the only quantifiable measure of success. When one debates claims about "quality" it's just a matter of bashing one's subjective notions and prejudices against someone else's, and getting into pissing contests over that kind of thing with people who are biased against a movie is just a waste of one's breath and an unnecessary test of one's patience. Let them masturbate on their own.

    Not to mention that it's convenient not to "talk about box office" when the numbers don't favor one's own opinion.

    As for what "we should be addressing" - unless you've got a mouse in your pocket, the first person singular is more appropriate. ;)
     
  16. Opus

    Opus Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bloom County
    How's that workin' out for 'Flash Gordon' and 'Buck Rogers'?
     
  17. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    On the Grand Tour
    Two very negative reviews:

    http://www.comingsoon.net/news/reviewsnews.php?id=103724 (no spoilers)

    and

    http://www.aintitcool.com/node/62238 (spoilers)

    Lesnick at Comingsoon is brutal, not even liking Cumberbatch. He believes the plot is a nearly beat-for-beat remake of "Nemesis". He ends his review with, "Diehard fans -- and the moviegoing public in general -- deserve better than this shameful franchise entry."

    It seemed as if Mr. Beaks at Ain't It Cool News would've wanted to like the movie, but couldn't. He's hard on it, too, saying the movie is so misguided that it makes ST09 look like a lightning caught in a bottle accident.
     
  18. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Abrams's movies are the foundation for the next twenty to thirty years of Star Trek whether he even makes a third one or not. They represent a bright line of demarcation between the past - in which every new Trek production was required to fit into an increasingly ungainly, outdated and narrow continuity reaching back to the mid-1960s - and a future in which the studio and their hired producers will evaluate and develop every Trek project on the basis of how they believe it maximizes the value of the Franchise to them at that time.

    The first question from now on will be "can you achieve the same level of commercial success with Trek that Abrams did?"

    Some projects - most likely, any tv versions - may resemble oldTrek more than Abrams's movie in terms of story content (though certainly not visually). They won't be forced to fit into pre-Abrams continuity or style, though, and producers will be free to recast and use older characters and story material as they think best.

    oldTrek as such is dead, forever. It died with Star Trek: Enterprise in 2005. It's highly doubtful that there's anyone in a position of responsibility at Paramount now who really regrets that or misses it.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2013
  19. ConRefit79

    ConRefit79 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    I don't remember how many times I saw the 80's Flash Gordon film as a kid. But I was surprised there wasn't a sequel.

    Only saw the 80's Buck Rogers on TV. I would be interested in a new series for TV.
     
  20. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    I don't doubt that you were. :lol:

    Here's a hint: it bombed.