Conversation(s) Heard After the Movie [spoilers, maybe]

[Joel_Kirk]

It's always interesting, at least for me, hearing the reactions or thoughts of moviegoers when the credits come up. [This is good for me as someone who plans on making/producing/acting in his own films for the big screen someday, as well as someone who is a writer]. With the 2009 film, I remember a kid whistling the catchy Michael Giacchino theme. With the 2013 film, I overheard today a man talking to his wife bringing out two interesting things: The U.S.S. Vengeance resembles the Enterprise-D, and the writer of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should have been credited in Star Trek Into Darkness.

I agreed with him.

I'm hoping that Part 3 gives us an original story with a strong screenplay. We're supposed to have a clean slate....so, we should be seeing 'new' things - or original takes on familiar situations, people, characters that come off as original.

 

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

Re: Conversation(s) Heard After the Movie

It's always interesting, at least for me, hearing the reactions or thoughts of moviegoers when the credits come up. [This is good for me as someone who plans on making/producing/acting in his own films for the big screen someday, as well as someone who is a writer]. With the 2009 film, I remember a kid whistling the catchy Michael Giacchino theme. With the 2013 film, I overheard today a man talking to his wife bringing out two interesting things: The U.S.S. Vengeance resembles the Enterprise-D, and the writer of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should have been credited in Star Trek Into Darkness.

I agreed with him.

I'm hoping that Part 3 gives us an original story with a strong screenplay. We're supposed to have a clean slate....so, we should be seeing 'new' things - or original takes on familiar situations, people, characters that come off as original.

That's not going to happen because TOS fan service requires that they stay stuck in the 1960's.

I just wanted to post before they close this thread...

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Re: Conversation(s) Heard After the Movie

It's always interesting, at least for me, hearing the reactions or thoughts of moviegoers when the credits come up. [This is good for me as someone who plans on making/producing/acting in his own films for the big screen someday, as well as someone who is a writer]. With the 2009 film, I remember a kid whistling the catchy Michael Giacchino theme. With the 2013 film, I overheard today a man talking to his wife bringing out two interesting things: The U.S.S. Vengeance resembles the Enterprise-D, and the writer of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should have been credited in Star Trek Into Darkness.

I agreed with him.

I'm hoping that Part 3 gives us an original story with a strong screenplay. We're supposed to have a clean slate....so, we should be seeing 'new' things - or original takes on familiar situations, people, characters that come off as original.

That's not going to happen because TOS fan service requires that they stay stuck in the 1960's.

I just wanted to post before they close this thread...

Well, I'm sure if there is a diplomatic conversation the thread won't be closed.

Anywho, I think the success of both films (despite their flaws) have shown there is a mainstream audience 'out there.' The films have already taken risks, they just need to work on their storytelling...and stay away from possible plagiarisms...

 

[serenitytrek1]

The TOS fan service definitely hurt into darkness box office earnings and what is worse you will hardly find a Trek fan that will say STiD was better than Wrath of Khan.


I was disappointed with into darkness rehash of WOK

I agree with the original post, Trek 3 should be original.

 

[Therin of Andor]

My favourite after-movie overheard conversation was in 2009. A young, enthusiastic family of five were sitting in the row in front of us. They'd had a great time watching it in IMAX and the Dad said, puzzled, "I thought Eric Bana was supposed to be in this movie?"

 

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

Re: Conversation(s) Heard After the Movie

It's always interesting, at least for me, hearing the reactions or thoughts of moviegoers when the credits come up. [This is good for me as someone who plans on making/producing/acting in his own films for the big screen someday, as well as someone who is a writer]. With the 2009 film, I remember a kid whistling the catchy Michael Giacchino theme. With the 2013 film, I overheard today a man talking to his wife bringing out two interesting things: The U.S.S. Vengeance resembles the Enterprise-D, and the writer of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should have been credited in Star Trek Into Darkness.

I agreed with him.

I'm hoping that Part 3 gives us an original story with a strong screenplay. We're supposed to have a clean slate....so, we should be seeing 'new' things - or original takes on familiar situations, people, characters that come off as original.

That's not going to happen because TOS fan service requires that they stay stuck in the 1960's.

I just wanted to post before they close this thread...

Well, I'm sure if there is a diplomatic conversation the thread won't be closed.

Let's hope so. I'm still looking at how the "Bechdel Thread" was closed. And a diplomatic conversation is like a tango; it takes two. Even if you try to be diplomatic, certain other people may not, and at least from most of what I've seen lately, their lack of diplomacy gets a pass...

But, we'll see. Getting back to the topic, though...

Anywho, I think the success of both films (despite their flaws) have shown there is a mainstream audience 'out there.' The films have already taken risks, they just need to work on their storytelling...and stay away from possible plagiarisms...

I think the first film proves it. I think the second film proves that the marketing worked over seas at the very least. It seems to me, at least domestically, that a lot of people watched STID because of how much they liked the '09 movie, but they didn't walk away having the same good feelings about it afterward. I'll have to count myself in that group.

It's hard to work on your "original" storytelling when you have TOS fans that basically want to see a recreation of the 1960s. I've even read where some have said that's "the only way" it can be or it's not Star Trek, hence my belief that IDIC is dead on arrival with that kind of thinking.

They'll do what they are going to do, though. I wish them success.

 

[Sector 7]

My brother (who made fun of me, in our youth, for being a Trekkie) saw STID in 3D. In front of us was a family of Trekkies. My brother walked out before the credits ended and I stayed. The other family split up, too.

When I caught up with my brother, he told me "If they keep making movies like this, I'll have to call myself a Trekkie!" He said he thought I was with him when he said it, but I had stayed behind.

On the walk out, I was talking to the other family, after my brother and I split up to get in our own trucks. I told them what my brother told me. One of them said, "That must have been your brother behind me. I heard him say that."

Now I get to tease my brother about being a Trekkie... mildly, of course, I don't want to turn him off Trek. He also likes "that Star Trek where they wear the NASA outfits", because he can never remember the name of the show [ENT].

==================
I think the marketing was more the problem with STID. It was marketed rather darkly. I would have preferred a more family friendly marketing campaign, at least here in the US. I know a few people who saw it without their children, because of the marketing.

 

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

I think the marketing was more the problem with STID. It was marketed rather darkly. I would have preferred a more family friendly marketing campaign, at least here in the US. I know a few people who saw it without their children, because of the marketing.

In addition to recreating TWOK, their objective was to model the film after The Dark Knight. I certainly wouldn't call that a "family friendly film." I also wouldn't call STID that either.

 

[donners22]

I certainly agree with the second point. Meyer deserves credit too, since they followed the scene as framed by him.

I didn't sit through all the credits - was there no acknowledgment all all?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Meyer deserves credit too, since they followed the scene as framed by him.

I didn't sit through all the credits - was there no acknowledgment all all?

"Based on 'Star Trek' created by Gene Roddenberry" was the only such credit required. And given.

Did Nick Meyer acknowledge Horatio Hornblower's creators in his credits? Or those movies with ships at sea, or planes in battle, passing each other the way he did the homage with Starfleet vessels in ST II?

 

[donners22]

Meyer deserves credit too, since they followed the scene as framed by him.

I didn't sit through all the credits - was there no acknowledgment all all?

"Based on 'Star Trek' created by Gene Roddenberry" was the only such credit required. And given.

Did Nick Meyer acknowledge Horatio Hornblower's creators in his credits? Or those movies with ships at sea, or planes in battle, passing each other the way he did the homage with Starfleet vessels in ST II?

Rather different to taking lines and images directly from a film in a non-parody sense. I recall Harlan Ellison successfully fighting for credit in The Terminator for being inspired by portions of his work.

It may not have been strictly required, but an acknowledgment wouldn't have been undeserved.

 

[Kruezerman]

But the engine room scene barely followed Wrath of Khan. Barely. They took three bits from two lines.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Rather different to taking lines and images directly from a film in a non-parody sense.

I would say it was homage. Others would actually call any of Orci & Kurtzman's take on ST to be "parody". How many lines were direct quotes? Two?

I recall Harlan Ellison successfully fighting for credit in The Terminator for being inspired by portions of his work.

Because the film's creator gave an interview where he specifically said he'd been watching an episode of an old "Outer Limits" by Harlan Ellison, "Soldier", based on the short story "Soldier from Tomorrow", and he decided it would make a great movie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_(The_Outer_Limits)

It may not have been strictly required, but an acknowledgment wouldn't have been undeserved.

For what? Two lines?

In Hollywood a screen credit for "story" or "script" has to be arbitrated. All version of scripts are submitted - and Meyer can always challenge, but he'd have absolutely no case.

 

[SonicRanger]

With the 2013 film, I overheard today a man talking to his wife bringing out two interesting things: The U.S.S. Vengeance resembles the Enterprise-D, and...

1) That does not qualify as "interesting."

2) I stopped reading at this point because this man would clearly fail at Concentration and hopefully will never be a crime witness who needs to identify the perpetrator.

 

[Maurice]

^^^Your tone is unnecessarily rude.

 

[BillJ]

The TOS fan service definitely hurt into darkness box office earnings...

Post proof or retract.

 

[Kruezerman]

The TOS fan service definitely hurt into darkness box office earnings...

Post proof or retract.

 

[trevanian]

Meyer deserves credit too, since they followed the scene as framed by him.

I didn't sit through all the credits - was there no acknowledgment all all?

"Based on 'Star Trek' created by Gene Roddenberry" was the only such credit required. And given.

Did Nick Meyer acknowledge Horatio Hornblower's creators in his credits? Or those movies with ships at sea, or planes in battle, passing each other the way he did the homage with Starfleet vessels in ST II?

No, but I still don't see why Meyer and the WGA weren't required to acknowledge the link to SPACE SEED in the form of mentioning Gene Coon and/or Carey Wilbur.

Moreso even than JM Lucas and THE CHANGELING for TMP, and that is saying something.

 

[Cinema Geekly]

Yay! Another "because STiD used Khan, and re-purposed a scene from another movie with a few copied lines of dialog means this movie is a shot for shot remake of WOK" thread......

 

[BillJ]

Yay! Another "because STiD used Khan, and re-purposed a scene from another movie with a few copied lines of dialog means this movie is a shot for shot remake of WOK" thread......

Don't forget that is also why the movie failed financially, only making $450 million dollars to date.