If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Recast

[Santa Kang]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

The TOS films had their fair share of fisticuffs, pew pew and 'sploshuns. My Dinner With Andre they were not. TOS is an action adventure show. TNG for all it's speechifying, was too.

 

[Christmas Canon Spock]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

The "action franchise era" really started with First Contact.

I'd bet the original TOS films likely would have been more action oriented if the principal actors hadn't been in their 50s/60s.

I agree.

I think the argument could be made that TOS was a bit of an action adventure to, for its time, though GR wanted to weave a morality tale within the adventure. The political commentary certainly cannot be ignored, but it there is more than just the commentary, and the format reflects that.

Also, what Nerys Myk said

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Don't most movies have some kind of moral, message or commentary? I mean, the Rambo series (one of the action-iest action series ever) always attacked a political issue. Most of TOS and TNG's peers (like I Spy, Miami Vice, Bonanza etc) tended to preach life lessons, and of course they were all predated by Twilight Zone, Outer Limits, etc.

I'm not saying that somehow drags Star Trek down, but I just have a hard time seeing how simply having a message in nearly every episode makes it special.

 

[Santa Kang]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

It doesn't. Star Trek wasn't a lone voice crying in the wilderness or on the cutting edge edge of forward thinking television.

 

[Mk_Sn]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

The "action franchise era" really started with First Contact.

Well, if you just mean any films with action in them, it started with Star Trek 2, which is an action film. But 2 and First Contact (IMO anyway) blend action with Trek style sci fi elements successfully, while the new Abrams films are just low rent Star Wars rip offs, and are just pure boring popcorn action.

Even the most bland and mediocre and actiony parts of Trek before Abrams felt like "Star Trek", these films don't. And they're just poorly done action films in and out of themselves.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Yet neither FC or TWOK 'feel' anything like each other, nor do either have anything in common with TMP except the characters. I'm starting to think the supposed unified 'feel' of preAbrams Star Trek was simply 'familiarity.'

Doesn't help I was already hearing that exact same phrase in the 90's, when I first got into Trek. No doubt it's been doing the rounds since the initial airing of TOS Season 3. At least you're way of saying it was a lot shorter than the raging magnum opus's people were sending into fanzines about TWOK.

As for what you think of Abrams merits as an action director, you're entitled to your opinion. I disagree obviously, and would point out that the professional critics (who are very predisposed to automatically hate anything hinting at a Star Wars knock off, tend to be highly cynical of action films, and see more of both in a year than most of us do in our lifetime) obviously didint to agree.

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Even the most bland and mediocre and actiony parts of Trek before Abrams felt like "Star Trek", these films don't.

Outside of TOS, the action parts of Trek were incredibly dull.

And they're just poorly done action films in and out of themselves.

Which isn't true as millions of people rate the films quite highly. JJ Abrams showed why Paramount handed him the reins to Trek. Because he was able to update it in a way that actually made people care about it again.

 

[Mk_Sn]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Outside of TOS, the action parts of Trek were incredibly dull.

Well, not really, TOS is a corny and dull show that you have to be very forgiving to even watch, especially because of the super hammy fight scenes. It hasn't aged well at all, esp. the action scenes. Just try watching these "action sciences" in HD :P But it's a 60s television show, so what do you expect? It's a series I almost never sit down and watch unless I'm in a really forgiving mood.

Which isn't true as millions of people rate the films quite highly. JJ Abrams showed why Paramount handed him the reins to Trek. Because he was able to update it in a way that actually made people care about it again.

It doesn't matter if people like them or not. This is my opinion, which I don't shape due to consensus. The first film is one of the most overrated films in a long time. Even then, the second Abrams one was widely panned and considered a really stupid film even by its most generous critics.

Yet neither FC or TWOK 'feel' anything like each other

FC is just TWOK with roles reversed. Both are ripping off Moby Dick. Both are great though, at least IMO.

nor do either have anything in common with TMP except the characters. I'm starting to think the supposed unified 'feel' of preAbrams Star Trek was simply 'familiarity.'

Yeah, Star Trek 1 is a totally different film from everything else in Trek. It was Roddenberry trying to rip off 2001. Didn't work out as well, and almost killed interest in the franchise I believe.

As for what you think of Abrams merits as an action director, you're entitled to your opinion. I disagree obviously, and would point out that the professional critics (who are very predisposed to automatically hate anything hinting at a Star Wars knock off, tend to be highly cynical of action films, and see more of both in a year than most of us do in our lifetime) obviously didint to agree.

Critics lambasted "Into Darkness" with even the most positive reviews calling it stupid, but yeah the first one is overrated, so what? It's not like my opinion is unheard of or uncommon anyway, not that it would matter.

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Well, not really, TOS is a corny and dull show that you have to be very forgiving to even watch...

That's why many people are still talking about it fifty years later. That's why they went back to it when Modern Trek ultimately failed.

Just try watching these "action sciences" in HD...

I own the original Star Trek on Blu-ray disc and own a 50" 4K TV. No issues watching the action scenes here.

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Critics lambasted "Into Darkness" with even the most positive reviews calling it stupid, but yeah the first one is overrated, so what? It's not like my opinion is unheard of or uncommon anyway, not that it would matter.

Funny.

An average of critics scores' (248) at Rotten Tomatoes gave Star Trek Into Darkness a 7.6 out of 10. Not exactly what I call being 'lambasted'.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_into_darkness/

But the Trekkie drumbeat goes on.

 

[Mk_Sn]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

That's why many people are still talking about it fifty years later. That's why they went back to it when Modern Trek ultimately failed.

Well, people are talking about the legacy of the franchise to this day mainly because people are still producing popular pieces of fiction surrounding it and the cultural legacy the franchise as left. However, most think of TOS as a very corny and unwatchable show for the most part in my experience. Other than Leonard Nimoy and Deforest Kelly, the acting is pretty lackluster from the main cast, the look and costumes utterly ridiculous (even for the time) and the plots even more so (space nazis, feminazis stealing peoples brains, Mudd, salt monsters who turn into girls in lame miniskirts, etc). A few episodes can be forgiven based on writing (Balance of Terror, Space Speed, stuff like that), but even then they're not so great given how primitive the show is. It's just not a show that aged well. In many ways it's my least favorite Trek, but then again Voyager always makes me fall asleep so I guess not.

Most fans of the Abram Trek films have little to exposure to anything before it, and the Abram films bare little resemblance to even TOS, which was about themes of the human condition, politics, breaking taboos like inter-racial barriers. The films are cheap action films for the summer for teenagers and bored movie goers to enjoy for a week.

Funny.

An average of critics scores' (248) at Rotten Tomatoes gave Star Trek Into Darkness a 7.6 out of 10. Not exactly what I call being 'lambasted'.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star...into_darkness/

But the Trekkie drumbeat goes on.

Not really reading the reviews I guess...

We’re now two films into this new, J.J. Abrams-rebooted Star Trek, and have yet to get even one good story out of it. Altman insists the two movies are “critically acclaimed”, but a quick perusal of the heavily qualified positive reviews for Star Trek Into Darkness on Rotten Tomatoes (“It's generally a lot of fun, but it’s exhausting” ... “a terminally perfunctory follow-up that just barely gets the job done” ... “a good deal of fun if you like things crashing violently into each other”) reveals “accolades” that won’t find their way onto a DVD back cover any time soon.

http://www.agonybooth.com/agonizer/Please_No_Star_Trek_Cinematic_Universe.aspx

Into Darkness is regarded as a dumb film. Some find it fun, others don't, myself included. I especially didn't like the magic blood. Wtf was with that?

I own the original Star Trek on Blu-ray disc and own a 50" 4K TV. No issues watching the action scenes here.

Not jarring to see it switch to obvious stunt doubles and see the strings and other really bad effects? To each their own.

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Into Darkness is regarded as a dumb film. Some find it fun, others don't, myself included. I especially didn't like the magic blood. Wtf was with that?

It really isn't regarded as a dumb film. The article you linked really wasn't a review, more of a rant.

Magic blood? Really? How little do you know about medical science? Seriously? We use blood to cure certain diseases, we can bring people back from being clinically dead in some cases.

http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask280

The transporter should've ended medical science a long time ago. I doubt you were pissing and moaning about that.

Not jarring to see it switch to obvious stunt doubles and see the strings and other really bad effects?

The stunt doubles were pretty noticeable in the 1970's on my family's 25" color floor model TV. So they're nothing new. As far as the effects go, they were great for the time in which they were made and fueled my imagination.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Okay, here's where I'm having issues with your posts:

I don't like Star Trek and TOS, and here why

That's fine

The movies were 'lambasted' by critics

and when that was called out, it was adjusted to

critics regarded it as dumb

Both of which are presented as facts and are demonstrably untrue. One review by Agony Booth does not the consensus make. Metacritic showed that a majority of critics weren't just scoring the film positively, they were giving it high ratings - again, something critics have a history of NOT just throwing around for genre action films.

And yes, I have read the reviews. There's a thread on here where we were keeping track of them as they came in (both positive and negative), had a poll of members ratings, and discussed and reviewed it ourselves. Guess which way opinions skewed even amongst some of the nitpickiest fans on the Internet?

Audiences haven't been exposed to TOS

Also presented as a fact, also provably untrue as some posters on this board can show. Some were/are, some weren't/still aren't.

If I was going for the Trek that's dated the most, I'd go for the first two seasons of TNG. It has all the dated aspects of TOS (some sexism, ridiculous plots, bad SFX and stuntwork), none of the positives (memorable stories, characters with any kind of charisma and charm), and some brand new flaws of its own (stilted leads, pointless naval gazing, beating us over the head with Gene's hypocritical politics, Wesley, 'drugs are bad, mmmkay?')

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Okay, here's where I'm having issues with your posts:

"I don't like Star Trek, and here why" - Fine

"The movies were 'lambasted' by critics" and when that was called out, it was adjusted to "critics regarded it as dumb" - Both of which are presented as facts and are demonstrably untrue. One review by Agony Booth does not the consensus make. Metacritic showed that a majority of critics weren't just scoring the film positively, they were giving it high ratings - again, something critics have a history of NOT just throwing around for genre action films. And yes, I have read the reviews. There's a thread on here where we were keeping track of them as they came in (both positive and negative), had a poll of members ratings, and discussed and reviewed it ourselves. Guess which way opinions skewed even amongst some of the nitpickiest fans on the Internet?

I don't like Star Trek: First Contact and rate it 11th out of the twelve films for reasons I won't get into here. But I would look foolish trying to argue that it wasn't a successful, well liked film.

The numbers simply aren't on my side.

On Rotten Tomatoes, the average score from both reviewers and movie watchers for First Contact is actually lower than it is for Into Darkness.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_first_contact/?search=star trek first

Into Darkness averages a 4.2/5 score among movie watchers and a 7.6/10 from critics. While First Contact gets a 3.6/5 and a 7.3/10, respectively.

So the anti-Abrams crowd try to hang their hats on "artistic quality" and "good writing", both terms that mean different things to different people. To attempt to give their arguments validity and still come out looking silly.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Maybe we need to find those TWOK reviews. They exist, so therefore TWOK must have been (1) widely panned, (2) simply a militaristic 'pew pew' film, (3) had no moral/message/ theme, and (4) killed the franchise, (5) IS NOT TRUE STAR TREK(tm)!!!

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Maybe we need to find those TWOK reviews. They exist, so therefore TWOK must have been (1) widely panned, (2) simply a militaristic 'pew pew' film, (3) had no moral/message/ theme, and (4) single handily killed the franchise.

Looking at Rotten Tomatoes, The Wrath of Khan (a movie with a problematic script itself, but a great film) rates 0.3 higher with critics (7.9 vs. 7.6) and .4 lower with movie watchers (3.8 vs. 4.2) when compared against Star Trek Into Darkness.

I know that we've had a heck of a lot more time to dissect these older films, so the numbers may not be completely fair. But, all three of the films I've listed had some script troubles but were still very popular among critics and movie watchers.

I think some people are looking at Trek through rose-tinted nostalgia glasses and it isn't the writing that is the issue, Trek has always had wildly inconsistent writing. It is about change and change is hard for some people to accept.

For fairness, here is what Rotten Tomatoes says about my favorite Star Trek movie...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_the_motion_picture/

Critics scores average 5.7/10 and movie watchers average 3.1/5.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Since 2013, TWOK's IMDB score has actually gone up. For some strange reason, a lot of new people started marking it as watched and giving it a pretty decent rating. Back when I voted on it around 2010, it was a 7.5. Now it's a 7.7.

Can't imagine why that happened.

 

[King Bob!]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Since 2013, TWOK's IMDB score has actually gone up. For some strange reason, a lot of new people started marking it as watched and giving it a pretty decent rating. Back when I voted on it around 2010, it was a 7.5. Now it's a 7.7.

Can't imagine why that happened.

Could be the strength of Into Darkness led people to check out TWOK.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

I had guessed as much and was asking somewhat sarcastically. Damn my inability to convey tone via writing.

I have given away two copies of TWOK (a DVD and a bluray) to people who had gotten interested in it via STID. And when I brought the bluray sets of TOS and TNG, my old DVDs were sold to a woman for her 10 year old movie-introduced grand-son. When I followed up to see if they'd received them (oh why does nobody ever leave feedback?), she told me that he'd loved them.

Turns out that with a little lens-flared inspiration, everything old can be new again.

 

[Mk_Sn]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

It really isn't regarded as a dumb film. The article you linked really wasn't a review, more of a rant.

Uh..yes it is. Beyond the fact that even the most positive reviews on your Rotten Tomatoes link say its dumb and exhausting, here's some other reviews:

http://io9.com/star-trek-into-dumbness-507058729

http://www.agonybooth.com/movies/Star_Trek_Into_Darkness_2013_Detailed_Review.aspx

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...even-the-most-committed-trekkies-8609801.html
www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/movies/lost_in_space_xoqlzpJ1zWW4E9uKZsJpfN

http://sequart.org/magazine/21469/star-trek-into-darkness-hostile-to-star-trek-intelligence/

http://fabiusmaximus.com/2015/03/29/review-star-trek-into-darkness-81291/

Remember, the guys who wrote this film also wrote the Transformers films...

Etc. As you can see, I'm not alone in calling it stupid, plenty of "professional critics" called it stupid and mundane.

Magic blood? Really? How little do you know about medical science? Seriously? We use blood to cure certain diseases, we can bring people back from being clinically dead in some cases.

Yeah because it's sound science to have genetically engineered blood that can bring you back from the dead. I mean, they found the cure to death (which makes no sense), and just abandoned it for centuries!

As the Agony Booth review pointed out:

And so, Kirk is brought back from the dead. Which means his big “sacrifice” ends up being more of a minor inconvenience. This also means that, sadly for the writers, they won’t be able to make the next movie The Search for Kirk. And as many others have noted, this also means Dr. McCoy has just invented the cure for death.

And then we get a generally upbeat finale, even though we just witnessed Khan causing the equivalent of about a dozen 9/11s by ramming the USS Vengeance into San Francisco. But hey, since they already cured death, bringing all those victims back should be a snap!

The transporter should've ended medical science a long time ago. I doubt you were pissing and moaning about that.

It would? It's just matter transportation, which is also unscientific, at least according to our current understanding. But magic blood? I don't understand how humans found the cure to death and then abandoned it and just...oh my god, this movie makes my brain hurt.

I thought the genetically engineered supermen, augments, whatever were super strong and intelligent and aggressive, not immortal with the cure to death in their bodies. That's too much of a stretch for even the silliest of Trek.

The stunt doubles were pretty noticeable in the 1970's on my family's 25" color floor model TV. So they're nothing new. As far as the effects go, they were great for the time in which they were made and fueled my imagination.

Well you have a far higher rate of tolerance of the cheese factor than I do.

and when that was called out, it was adjusted to

I'd say calling it dumb (literally one major review calls it "Into Dumbness") and the most positive reviews still emphasize how brainless it is, that's lambasting it. I don't think being called "dumb" is a compliment, but that's me.

One review by Agony Booth does not the consensus make.

No, just the quotes from Rotten Tomatoes and the other reviews, etc.

Metacritic showed that a majority of critics weren't just scoring the film positively, they were giving it high ratings - again, something critics have a history of NOT just throwing around for genre action films. And yes, I have read the reviews. There's a thread on here where we were keeping track of them as they came in (both positive and negative), had a poll of members ratings, and discussed and reviewed it ourselves. Guess which way opinions skewed even amongst some of the nitpickiest fans on the Internet?

Well,when I read the actual quotes from these reviewers, they weren't very praising, it was "well, this is stupid, but it's fun. Turn your brain off and enjoy it for the weekend". The same kind of response I see a lot are giving "Jurassic World". A far cry from "this film is an excellent tale of life and death and great science fiction" or whatever. Then again, that's what the makers of these films want, popcorn action films that will sell fast and make easy money, they're not looking to tell deep, intelligent stories or anything like that, so I guess the joke is on me for even criticizing them for this.

Also presented as a fact, also provably untrue as some posters on this board can show. Some were/are, some weren't/still aren't.

The vast majority of teenagers and young adults have never seen the show, and have little knowledge of it. If you think the original series is this hugely popular show with this generation, then you're just wrong. Most people who are exposed to Star Trek from the Abrams films would find TOS boring and beyond out of date. It'd be like going from a PS4 to an Atari 2600. Even I, who grew up on TNG and DS9 and love those shows, find TOS boring and corny.

Since 2013, TWOK's IMDB score has actually gone up. For some strange reason, a lot of new people started marking it as watched and giving it a pretty decent rating. Back when I voted on it around 2010, it was a 7.5. Now it's a 7.7.

Bah, it should be a 10.