• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

andPOP's review of the "screener footage"...decidedly mixed

D

darkwing_duck1

Vice Admiral
http://www.andpop.com/article/13053

Since in theory, people like this reviewer (the casual sci-fi and general audience fan) are the target audience, his lukewarm reaction sends up a big caution flag with me.

The other thing this review demonstrates is the general ignorance of and/or directly anti-Trek prejudice that is prevelant in the larger community. Statements that his preferred venue (Star Wars) routinely deals with questions of morality (implying that Star Trek does NOT) display a regrettable lack of knowledge about what Trek is and is not.
 
I have no doubt Abrams' take on Star Trek will be entertaining, and for most moviegoers, that will be enough; perhaps that's why Paramount held this non-screening. But as a sci-fi fan, I can't help but compare it to this season's other big science fiction release - the final episodes of Battlestar Galactica,
Click to expand...
Actually, yes it will be quite enough for me, if Star Trek is entertaining.

To compare Trek to BSG is like :rolleyes:
 
SalvorHardin said:
How is this review spoiler wise ? Did he see the whole thing or just some footage ?
Click to expand...
Typically, a screener is an advance copy of the whole movie. I haven't looked at the review yet, but I'd guess spoilers would be a distinct possibility.

EDIT: This review is based upon approximately 20 minutes of footage, including the theatrical trailer, and seems to be the same presentation (including segment intros by Abrams) which members of the press were invited to see back in November. If you've heard about those, then there probably isn't anything new here; if you haven't, they're very mild spoilers -- no big deal, IMO.
 
M'Sharak said:
SalvorHardin said:
How is this review spoiler wise ? Did he see the whole thing or just some footage ?
Click to expand...
Typically, a screener is an advance copy of the whole movie. I haven't looked at the review yet, but I'd guess spoilers would be a distinct possibility.
Click to expand...
There's nothing in the article, spoiler wise, that's any different from what we've heard up to this point. The reviewer is clearly not a fan of Abram's work and his cynicism is reflected as such. I still reserve my own judgement for when I actually see the film.

OTOH, comparing this new film to NuBSG shouldn't be such a horrible thing, given how NuBSG seems to be such a hit with nearly everyone around these parts.
 
Meh.

Kevin Smith loved his preview screening of the film and said it was one of the best films he'd seen since THE DARK KNIGHT. Silent Bob doesn't speak often, but when he does he tends to be right more often than not.
 
Reviews like this are bound to come out. He obviously didn't hate it, it was just mixed. Considering there was a great deal of praise from the majority of press at the other screenings, I don't think there is anything to worry about.
 
Yep, this guy's talking about the same footage that was shown months ago and commented upon by dozens of reporters online. So you can add this guy into the mix, read a dozen others of varying points-of-view and try to get your own sense of it all.
 
I didn't find this to be "alarming" or the such. This is probably the first review from film websites, etc, I have seen that really gave the movie any caution. So if you are getting really worried about 1 mixed review out of how many dozens of positive reviews from these screenings? Oh boy.
 
Samuel T. Cogley said:
I suspect that this information will soon be spun in a number of wildly conflicting ways.

And... GO!
Click to expand...

Starship Polaris said:
Yep, this guy's talking about the same footage that was shown months ago and commented upon by dozens of reporters online. So you can add this guy into the mix, read a dozen others of varying points-of-view and try to get your own sense of it all.
Click to expand...

Aaaaand...done.

Thank you folks, that's a wrap.
 
Meh. He didnt seem overly impressed. Im not overly concerned. Met a bunch of people who didn't see the heavens open up upon watching The Dark Knight or Wall-E. Different strokes for different folks.
 
darkwing_duck1 said:
The other thing this review demonstrates is the general ignorance of and/or directly anti-Trek prejudice that is prevelant in the larger community. Statements that his preferred venue (Star Wars) routinely deals with questions of morality (implying that Star Trek does NOT) display a regrettable lack of knowledge about what Trek is and is not.
Click to expand...
While Trek has dealt with such in the TV shows, the movies have shied away from that. Maybe they did some with it in The Undiscovered Country and Insurrection, but that's about all I can think of.

(Though on the other hand, Star Wars didn't really delve into those areas until the prequels, either, so it's not like SW is completely innocent.)
 
ATimson said:
darkwing_duck1 said:
The other thing this review demonstrates is the general ignorance of and/or directly anti-Trek prejudice that is prevelant in the larger community. Statements that his preferred venue (Star Wars) routinely deals with questions of morality (implying that Star Trek does NOT) display a regrettable lack of knowledge about what Trek is and is not.
Click to expand...
While Trek has dealt with such in the TV shows, the movies have shied away from that. Maybe they did some with it in The Undiscovered Country and Insurrection, but that's about all I can think of.
Click to expand...

As much as the last half disappoints, SFS is ALL about ethics/morals.
 
Sigh. It seems everyone's preferred venue is Star Wars.

Feh. I've always liked Trek more (shrugs). Guess I like rooting for the underdog.

I suspect a large portion of Abrams target audience is jaded Wars fans with nothing else to watch.
 
ATimson said:
While Trek has dealt with such in the TV shows, the movies have shied away from that. Maybe they did some with it in The Undiscovered Country and Insurrection, but that's about all I can think of.
Click to expand...

That's a fair, if debatable point.

Maybe I'm reading too much into the what the reviewer said, but I got the impression he was saying that Star Trek lacked any intellectual "depth" beyond what he called "an examination of group dynamics" (whatever the heck that is), and that Wars showcased more substantial fare.

That is what I was disagreeing with. Trek has always showcased ideals, albeit within a fictional format, even within the movies, from esoteric thoughts on the nature of logic vs humanity (TMP) to more "grounded" concepts like how a man deals with the passing of his years of life(TWoK, TSFS, Generations).
 
darkwing_duck1 said:
Maybe I'm reading too much into the what the reviewer said, but I got the impression he was saying that Star Trek lacked any intellectual "depth" beyond what he called "an examination of group dynamics" (whatever the heck that is), and that Wars showcased more substantial fare.

That is what I was disagreeing with.
Click to expand...
If he was disputing depth in general, that I'd agree with; I was only working from your summary/response here, and didn't read the original. :)
 
So out of all the people who saw the twenty minute preview, there's one who didn't like it? I don't think you could hope for a better response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top