What's keeping me out of the theatre....
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Additionally I'm rather intrigued with the forthcoming T4.
McG is directing. That gives me pause.
Well put. I wholeheartedly agree with Warped9. Nothing I've seen or heard so far, makes me want to see Abrams' Trek. I can't tell whether it's a "good" or a "bad" film, and I don't care. All I know for sure is that I'm not interested in seeing this special treatment of the "holy cow". This is my personal opinion, and for me, it's sufficiently valid.
There are always any number of shows or films in circulation that can be considered good and they still don't do anything for you.
ER has had a long run, has won awards and has enjoyed great popularity. It is a good show, and I couldn't care less.
The West Wing was a good show that just couldn't hold me.
The Lord Of The Rings trilogy was excellently adapted from the original. For today's audiences it may even be better than the original books. But I just don't care for fantasy and sword and sorcery stuff (I read the original thirty years ago). After seeing the first film on rental I judged it very good even though I later never bothered to see the following two films.
TOS happened to have that just right formula that worked for me. It somewhat set the pattern for how I like science fiction to be done. If something strays too far away from that then it risks losing my interest.
In some respects TOS has moved into the similar realm of classic SF literature. We can quibble about the dated terminology and even social mores within the stories, but if something is well done then the ideas and much of the storytelling still manage to stand the test of time. When I look at much of TOS there really is very little that would have to be changed to to work as a contemporary television series.
Here's a small example. They were referred to as record tapes (those little coloured squares of wood), but for all intents and purposes they are equivalent to today's USB flash drives. Some of the way computer technology and the related terminology in TOS is dated, but much of the essential ideas are still reasonably sound I think.
In "Courtmartial" we hear reference to someone possibly reprogramming the ship's memory banks, and that sounds dated, but the essential idea is still valid. Interesting to note, though, that Kirk is one of the few aboard who purportedly has the ability to do that. My view on this, though, is that Kirk is one of the few with authorized access to the ship's memory banks, or in our perspective the ship's secured hard drive memory. We've seen that the TOS computers are voice interactive so it's quite possible that few people would have to actually write new programming code but rather just vocally direct what they want changed. Of course, in real terms you'd have to have someone aboard who understood computer programming in-and-out just in case the interactive access became unavailable.
We may find it odd looking at TOS computer terminals with so few controls and no keyboard, but if you have proven interactive access (voice recognition) then what would you need a keyboard for except if the interactive access were disabled? Now I have a very limited voice recognition application on my eMac and I've played with it in the beginning. But it is limited and I tired of it. I have to say, though, that part of what inhibited greater use of the application is generational and perhaps cultural. The practice of speaking aloud to a machine that didn't reply back felt strange and I became somewhat selfconcious about it. But if voice recognition is perfected and particularly in tandem with artificial computer intelligence then future generations might not feel any similar inhibition.
Here's another example, and this has more to do with f/x actually. When we see a view of space on the bridge viewscreen while the ship is at warp the view doesn't look that dramatic other than a few stars moving by (as opposed to the streaking effect we see in later films and series). But here's an interesting note: I have an astronomy program called Celestial that allows you to show what traveling through space looks like, and you can accelerate it up to hundreds and even thousands of times the speed of light. It looks exactly like what we see on TOS. One could ratonalize that a view of pure warp space may be generally unsettling to humans and so the ship's viewscreen projects a view of what it would like if traveling at warp in normal space. It must be said, though, that this feature in Celestial is partly wrong because if showing space travel at relativistic speeds up to the speed of light then we should be seeing the Lorenz contraction effect at work. But even on that point one could rationalize that some could find the relativistic distortion effect unsettling and thus the computer opts to show a view of normal space.
Part of TOS' appeal is its dated f/x, or to be more specific the more limited use of f/x as compared to what is possible today. I find much the same in older films. The more limited f/x often come across as more real and believable to me than the somewhat hyper enhanced or hyperactive f/x of today. For me f/x should support and enhance a story as and never distract you from it, something pretty much most producers can't seem to resist. It's why I really like the new King Kong--I know it's CGI, but I'm not hit in the face with it because it's seamless with the live-action and it's not the main focus of the story.
ER has had a long run, has won awards and has enjoyed great popularity. It is a good show, and I couldn't care less.
The West Wing was a good show that just couldn't hold me.
The Lord Of The Rings trilogy was excellently adapted from the original. For today's audiences it may even be better than the original books. But I just don't care for fantasy and sword and sorcery stuff (I read the original thirty years ago). After seeing the first film on rental I judged it very good even though I later never bothered to see the following two films.
TOS happened to have that just right formula that worked for me. It somewhat set the pattern for how I like science fiction to be done. If something strays too far away from that then it risks losing my interest.
In some respects TOS has moved into the similar realm of classic SF literature. We can quibble about the dated terminology and even social mores within the stories, but if something is well done then the ideas and much of the storytelling still manage to stand the test of time. When I look at much of TOS there really is very little that would have to be changed to to work as a contemporary television series.
Here's a small example. They were referred to as record tapes (those little coloured squares of wood), but for all intents and purposes they are equivalent to today's USB flash drives. Some of the way computer technology and the related terminology in TOS is dated, but much of the essential ideas are still reasonably sound I think.
In "Courtmartial" we hear reference to someone possibly reprogramming the ship's memory banks, and that sounds dated, but the essential idea is still valid. Interesting to note, though, that Kirk is one of the few aboard who purportedly has the ability to do that. My view on this, though, is that Kirk is one of the few with authorized access to the ship's memory banks, or in our perspective the ship's secured hard drive memory. We've seen that the TOS computers are voice interactive so it's quite possible that few people would have to actually write new programming code but rather just vocally direct what they want changed. Of course, in real terms you'd have to have someone aboard who understood computer programming in-and-out just in case the interactive access became unavailable.
We may find it odd looking at TOS computer terminals with so few controls and no keyboard, but if you have proven interactive access (voice recognition) then what would you need a keyboard for except if the interactive access were disabled? Now I have a very limited voice recognition application on my eMac and I've played with it in the beginning. But it is limited and I tired of it. I have to say, though, that part of what inhibited greater use of the application is generational and perhaps cultural. The practice of speaking aloud to a machine that didn't reply back felt strange and I became somewhat selfconcious about it. But if voice recognition is perfected and particularly in tandem with artificial computer intelligence then future generations might not feel any similar inhibition.
Here's another example, and this has more to do with f/x actually. When we see a view of space on the bridge viewscreen while the ship is at warp the view doesn't look that dramatic other than a few stars moving by (as opposed to the streaking effect we see in later films and series). But here's an interesting note: I have an astronomy program called Celestial that allows you to show what traveling through space looks like, and you can accelerate it up to hundreds and even thousands of times the speed of light. It looks exactly like what we see on TOS. One could ratonalize that a view of pure warp space may be generally unsettling to humans and so the ship's viewscreen projects a view of what it would like if traveling at warp in normal space. It must be said, though, that this feature in Celestial is partly wrong because if showing space travel at relativistic speeds up to the speed of light then we should be seeing the Lorenz contraction effect at work. But even on that point one could rationalize that some could find the relativistic distortion effect unsettling and thus the computer opts to show a view of normal space.
Part of TOS' appeal is its dated f/x, or to be more specific the more limited use of f/x as compared to what is possible today. I find much the same in older films. The more limited f/x often come across as more real and believable to me than the somewhat hyper enhanced or hyperactive f/x of today. For me f/x should support and enhance a story as and never distract you from it, something pretty much most producers can't seem to resist. It's why I really like the new King Kong--I know it's CGI, but I'm not hit in the face with it because it's seamless with the live-action and it's not the main focus of the story.
Last edited:
Well there is the following movie you can see ...It was released at the Cannes Film Festival so it's gotta be good..http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi3499361049/
Who the hell is that Scott Spellman guy??? Quite the looker he is..Now he woulda made a REAL Kirk...nice and manly and not shooting any puppy water. But alas he's too old...born in 75, so he would of been out of the running... but my goodness gracious is he attractive! Someone like him would of been perfect for the role...Yum-o!
Wolverine will only be in its second week...
I tend to see the Wolverine film as a geeky team-up comic issue. Though the origin story has some legs. But I think Star Trek can have a wider appeal with this young cast and great PR.
I've been a Trekkie since I was 6 in the 70s, I find this Trek sweet revenge over the TNG kids, personally.
Our trek-fu is the best.
The problem with the new film set in the TOS era is it it has been well established in people's memories for those who are old enough to remember for over the last 40 years. I stated it before and I will state it again I think Abrams was a terrible choice for director. I went to the screening of the Menagerie in the theater here in Toronto just over a year ago and I was surprised at how great the Enterprise looked as it slowly moved accross the big screen. I don't give a crap for this new ship design, and there is no way in all hell it will ever replace the beauty of the original. Abrams could have visually given us the original exterior of the ship with a few interior updates but instead he has given us a big apple inspired design that pays no respect to the TOS era. I just have no respect for a guy (Abrams) who openly admits he is not making this film for the fans. Perhaps if more fans decided they will sit this one out, Paramount will get a better director the next time around.
I'll only see it as a download. My hard earned cash is too little and too precious to throw away.You know you're going to see it, Warped9. You're going to be way too curious, especially when you start seeing the postings of people raving about it.
It's still "Star Trek"... resistance is futile.
Great. You're a crook.
A lot of people worked very fuckin' hard to make that movie. Even if you don't want to spend your own hard earned cash to see it don't steal the cash out of pockets of people who've harmed you not at all. If you have any integrity you'll wait for it to air on TV. At least the goddamn commercials will pay for the entertainment even if you're not willing to.
WE HAVE A WINNAH!!
I am so sick and tired of hearing fans bitching about how we're being openly disrespected and then turning right around and saying how they're gonna still be there opening night out of some misguided sense of duty.
WHY IN THE FLYING FUCK DO YOU THINK WE'VE BEEN GETTING PISS-POOR CRAP WITH A STAR TREK LABEL ON IT FOR THE PAST TEN YEARS!?! LOOK IN THE GODDAMN MIRROR!!
The one time we finally got their attention was when our not showing up in droves cut Nemesis off at the knees. It's pretty clear that they didn't quite learn the lesson, namely to stop shoveling crap at us and expecting us to lap it up like good little drones, but frankly, I'm beginning to believe that we didn't quite learn the lesson either, that however much they bitch and moan about our obsessive little asses, they still need us old farts, and we'd better start doing a better job at making ourselves, not just heard, but listened to.
Because so many of us are right back with the abusive spouse, because this time he said he was really really sorry and just look at the big pretty bouquet of flowers he bought us?
It's sickening.
Great. You're a crook.
Oh, get over yourself. Everyone on that set got paid, and if Paramount's stupid enough to throw $150 million on this turkey, they deserved to get stiffed.
I'm not one to go after downloaded films myself, but I have an acquaintance at work who does sometimes. When something comes my way after the films been released a few weeks earlier then I say what the hell if I'm at least intrigued.
CRA is right. These guys have been paid. And downloads are a rather small percentage of the viewing audience. And I still see plenty of films legitimately over the course of a year.
Here's an irony. TOS wasn't made for fans because they didn't exist yet. It was made for a general audience and perhaps a certain demographic of that audience. And so it isn't about making a film for fans, but respecting what came before and what has already been established.
But in fairness that's somewhat thrown out the window when you're doing a reboot.
But an interesting point has been raised. TOS isn't an obscure and barely remembered '60s TV show. It's a widely recognized property that been in constant circulation for over forty years and that different generations are familiar with. You tamper with that at your own risk.
And on the flip side I saw Iron Man and Daredevil the Director's Cut as downloads and liked them both enough to buy the DVDs.
CRA is right. These guys have been paid. And downloads are a rather small percentage of the viewing audience. And I still see plenty of films legitimately over the course of a year.
Here's an irony. TOS wasn't made for fans because they didn't exist yet. It was made for a general audience and perhaps a certain demographic of that audience. And so it isn't about making a film for fans, but respecting what came before and what has already been established.
But in fairness that's somewhat thrown out the window when you're doing a reboot.
But an interesting point has been raised. TOS isn't an obscure and barely remembered '60s TV show. It's a widely recognized property that been in constant circulation for over forty years and that different generations are familiar with. You tamper with that at your own risk.
And on the flip side I saw Iron Man and Daredevil the Director's Cut as downloads and liked them both enough to buy the DVDs.
Last edited:
^^ I may be, but I'm the best damned asshole around here. 
Besides, before downloads I'd just wait for the rental version or for the film to come on TV if I didn't deem the thing worth paying for.
And I've been offered downloads for films I intended to see at the cinema. I've turned the offers down and paid to see the films.
Besides, before downloads I'd just wait for the rental version or for the film to come on TV if I didn't deem the thing worth paying for.
And I've been offered downloads for films I intended to see at the cinema. I've turned the offers down and paid to see the films.
^^ I may be, but I'm the best damned asshole around here.
Hey you said it partner..not me!!
