What's keeping me out of the theatre....
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Totally agree.
Original Battlestar Galactica was on the level of this film.
Indeed. But here's something I found interesting: my deep admiration for the BSG remake made me curious to revisit the old. I watched the first several episodes via Netflix on my PC and found my intelligence insulted, maybe--no, certainly, but I was very much entertained. That's exactly how I felt watching this movie, only with the added kick of an even deeper nostalgia, the likes of which I hadn't felt for Star Trek in a long time. In all my years as a Trekkie, I'd been looking at Trek as a gateway drug to real SF (and Napoleonic sea adventure as well--in high school, I read all of Horatio Hornblower, even did my junior year paper on him, because Trek had been described as Hornblower in Space) and good tv drama. But when I was a child--around 6 or 7, it was just another flashy space adventure. Indeed, I liked it considerably less than Lost in Space. Why? Because Trek was "talky," as Abrams described it. This movie bypassed all those years of accrued Trekkie self-seriousness and let me see Trek with the eyes of a simple child once again--that those eyes belonged to the film-makers hardly mattered. It was fun.
Here's something else I found interesting: I read Countdown today while sitting in Barnes & Noble and, in the afterword, Orci & Kurtzman identify themselves as fans of TNG primarily. I think this goes a way toward explaining their take on TOS. A lot of Trekkies who came in through TNG (though by no means all) focus on the campier aspects of TOS almost exclusively.
Here's something else I found interesting: I read Countdown today while sitting in Barnes & Noble and, in the afterword, Orci & Kurtzman identify themselves as fans of TNG primarily. I think this goes a way toward explaining their take on TOS. A lot of Trekkies who came in through TNG (though by no means all) focus on the campier aspects of TOS almost exclusively.
That makes sense.
Well, call me a discriminating soul, but when I was 6, it was all about Star Trek and not those other shows. There was just something meatier there, a more fun universe to romp in. And when I, as a kid, discovered TAS... bliss!!!
I watched Nu Trek expecting Starship Troopers. I was disappointed--and that's a feat.
I do really appreciate your thoughtful posts, however, Brutal.
Well, call me a discriminating soul, but when I was 6, it was all about Star Trek and not those other shows. There was just something meatier there, a more fun universe to romp in. And when I, as a kid, discovered TAS... bliss!!!
I watched Nu Trek expecting Starship Troopers. I was disappointed--and that's a feat.
I do really appreciate your thoughtful posts, however, Brutal.
I was a late bloomer. But thanks for the compliment. The trekkie in me--the guy who posts here--is much more of a mind with you and Warped9. My posts are largely a way for me to figure why it is I don't loathe this movie.
I agree. But this is no more the totality of Star Trek than Spock's Brain is. Even TOS had its stumbles and 'WTF?' moments.
It's hard to judge this film right now. I think so much of its' long term value (at least for me) hinges on the quality of the sequel. Is the Abramsverse just a detour or will itself be an entertaining slice of Trek?
I've seen the film three times and have been entertained all three times. My Mother-in-Law who watched TOS when it originally aired, loved it and my son who has never liked Star Trek has seen it twice (by choice). These alone speak to the entertainment value of the movie. Which I think should be the first thing any movie strives for.
I think that is an excellent point, I think that the film was entertaining as well. I have also noticed a few friends who are lack luster about Trek were going on about revisiting it.
I think if it does nothing else, The film is a success for the mass market and that will bring new fans looking up the old shows mostly TOS. I think they are going to rediscover a gem.
So aside from being entertaining, I think this film will keep the old show in people's minds.
Whaaaaat? Starship Troopers was one of the worst movies of any kind of the 90s, the new ST movie was so far superior in every way its almost not even even worth mentioning...almost.
RAMA
It's making money. We know. We don't care. I liked the movie and I don't care. Lotsa movies I hated raked it in, lotsa movies I've loved bombed. Conversely, lotsa movies I've adored have done boffo box office and lotsa movies I've despised sank like stones. It is entirely irrelevant.
I didn't say Starship Troopers was good. In fact, it's pretty awful. I expected Nu Trek to be on that level.
I was wrong. It was worse.
NEOPEIUS!!!!!
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Starship Troopers and Star Trek are not even on the same plane of existence.
The former is a political satire while the latter is a huge action-adventure.
I like them both for what they are.
Starship Troopers is a stitch, because Verhoeven had the life experience and good sense not to take Heinlein's propaganda novel seriously.
Verhoeven's brand of trash cinema is an art form all its own. I can always enjoy his movies, even the show-stopping repugnant ones (Showgirls, that Invisible Man remake), because they have this aesthetic quality that is distinctly his.
Yesterday morning after thinking about many other things as well as reflecting on what I've been reading pro and con about this film I popped in a disc from my 1st season TOS set and watched "Balance Of Terror."
Yes, I could see many of the sins that digitally remastered transfers make apparent. And, yes, I could see things that would have to be done differently today.
But in terms of acting and writing there's nothing that BoT has to apologize for. You could pretty much lift that script whole and use it again today, assuming you also had first-rate acting and deft f/x to support it and it would kick ass.
Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan, Takei, Nichols and Mark Lenard are all on the top of their game here with excellent nuanced performances that make the new incarnations look like a pack of amateurs.
This is what good Star Trek is for me. And it underlines pretty much everything I dislike about Trek XI.
I agree with some others who've stated that they think a large part of this film's appeal is the simple fact that we're revisting familiar characters and getting back to the era that hooked so many people. This film underlines the broadly caricatured idea of what many people think Star Trek is. And it has undeniable energy and exurburance.
But that just isn't nearly enough to hold me.
Yes, I could see many of the sins that digitally remastered transfers make apparent. And, yes, I could see things that would have to be done differently today.
But in terms of acting and writing there's nothing that BoT has to apologize for. You could pretty much lift that script whole and use it again today, assuming you also had first-rate acting and deft f/x to support it and it would kick ass.
Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan, Takei, Nichols and Mark Lenard are all on the top of their game here with excellent nuanced performances that make the new incarnations look like a pack of amateurs.
This is what good Star Trek is for me. And it underlines pretty much everything I dislike about Trek XI.
I agree with some others who've stated that they think a large part of this film's appeal is the simple fact that we're revisting familiar characters and getting back to the era that hooked so many people. This film underlines the broadly caricatured idea of what many people think Star Trek is. And it has undeniable energy and exurburance.
But that just isn't nearly enough to hold me.
Well, considering Balance of Terror was basically a redress of the folmed script for the film The Enemy Below; I find it interesting you'd choose what is overall pretty unoriginal (from the fact that the Romulans WERE first concieved as 'Romans in Space") since it did use an existiing script.
There were a lot of good and original stories in Star Trek's first season; but while this WAS a good episode, it was hardly original.
