Discoprise won't have TOS "cardboard sets"

[Noname Given]

fans of TOS hated the first two movies and liked "Beyond" where they were back to their "traditional" selves, while fans of the Kelvin movies mostly felt the exact opposite, and "Beyond" as a step back for the characters.

Funny I'm a TOS fan (saw it first run on NBC at age 6 in 1969) - and I enjoyed STO9 - liked ST: Into Darkness MORE than ST09; and also enjoyed ST: Beyond (but overall it's the weakest of thew three in many areas; and if I have one complaint of the JJ Verse it's having the 1701 get it's ass handed to it in ALL 3 films.

I didn't think ST: B was a 'step back' for the characters per se; I was honestly just a bity annoyed the 1701 was trashed almost immediately once they were into the 'main mission'. I loved the character interplay and the visuals of the Starbase were neat too. I also loved the casting of Shohreh Aghdashloo as the Admiral on the Starbase.

I get really tired of primarily TNG fans discussing how TOS fans felt (and feel) about the JJ Verse films and ST: D. As a TOS fan I was more disappointed in the run and wholesale retconning TNG and the 24th century era in general did to TOS - an d the TNG feature films (unlike the TOS feature films and JJ Verse films - with the sole exception of ST: FC are honestly unwatchable for me (especially Generations) because they come off as BAD TNG episodes. Hell, the TNG series finale "All Good Things" would have been the better feature film story to do than ST: Gen).

Again, as for ST: D I do have issues with it - and I don't think doing similar sets to TOS (IE maintaining the look of them) for the 1701 would be an issue (as it's NOT the main ship); and I do wish they'd kept the exterior design of the 1701 as overall the Starship/Constitution Class model worked fine for ENT's "In A Mirror Darkly" <--- as did the sets (IE no viewer was saying "OMG I can't watch this because of the set design!" or "My God! How dare they use the original 'Constitution' look for the Defiant <--- and that was a modern CGI model for 2005) - yes, they could have done the same thing here for the 1701 and I doubt anyone would have screamed beyond TNG fans who think any change to to 'modernize' TOS is great.

In fact, I love the fact that Alec Kurtzman will probably do the same for the TNG look once the Picard series is in production as hey, that look is 30 years old, and the art deco 1701-D (which I didn't ever care for watching TNG in 1987 anyway) would probably 'turn off' modern millennials too,

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Funny I'm a TOS fan (saw it first run on NBC at age 6 in 1969) - and I enjoyed STO9 - liked ST: Into Darkness MORE than ST09; and also enjoyed ST: Beyond (but overall it's the weakest of thew three in many areas; and if I have one complaint of the JJ Verse it's having the 1701 get it's ass handed to it in ALL 3 films.

I don’t agree with you about the JJ films overall here - for me it goes Beyond > 09 >>>> STID. But, I do agree wholeheartedly with your point about the enterprise. She’s so damn flimsy in the Kelvin universe.

Hell, the TNG series finale "All Good Things" would have been the better feature film story to do than ST: Gen).

Agreed. Even Ron Moore has said this too iirc.

Again, as for STY: D I do have issues with it - and I don't think doing similar sets to TOS (IE maintaining the look of them) for the 1701 would be an issue (as it's NOT the main ship); and I do wish they'd kept the exterior design of the 1701 as overall tegh Starship/Constitution Class model worked fine for ENT's "In A Mirror Darkly" <--- as did the sets (IE no viewer was saying "OMG I can't watch this because of the set design!" or "My God! How dare they use the original 'Constitution' look for the Defiant <--- and that was a modern CGI model for 2005) - yes, they could have done the same thing here for the 1701

Totally agree with this. Sadly I doubt the “mirror darkly” treatment would have gone down well with many people (or critics for that matter - they love DSC if Rotten Tomatoes is anything to go by).

I doubt anyone would have screamed beyond TNG fans who think any change to to 'modernize' TOS is great.

As a huge TNG fan (brought up on it) I would debate that changes to modernise TOS are great. Personally I’d have loved DSC to look just like the Cage. But... the original production values wouldn’t have held up in HD. A little update here and there wouldn’t have hurt and the overall aesthetic could have easily been maintained in my opinion. I think they’ve gone way off the deep end with the visual update here.

the art deco 1701-D (which I didn't ever care for watching TNG in 1987 anyway) would probably 'turn off' modern millennials too,

Don’t forget that much of the 1701-D sets reused TMP sets...

And speaking as an elder (1984) millennial, I’d love it if Star Trek: Picard looked like a reasonable projection forward from Nemesis (which we’ve already seen in TNG and VOY) so it should look like AGT and the voyager finale.

It won’t look like that, mind you, because there is this *expectation* that viewers want things to look a certain way on tv now. I think there’s a lot of people who aren’t in a certain age group thinking that they know what a certain age group wants.

Now you must excuse me, I promised a group of young millennials that I’d regale them with a tale of dial up internet. They didn’t live through it like what I did, you see.

 

[Rahul]

Funny I'm a TOS fan (saw it first run on NBC at age 6 in 1969) - and I enjoyed STO9 - liked ST: Into Darkness MORE than ST09; and also enjoyed ST: Beyond (but overall it's the weakest of thew three in many areas; o 1701-D (which I didn't ever care for watching TNG in 1987 anyway) would probably 'turn off' modern millennials too,

I don’t agree with you about the JJ films overall here - for me it goes Beyond > 09 >>>> STID. But, I do agree wholeheartedly with your point about the enterprise. She’s so damn flimsy in the Kelvin universe.

Yeah, that's essentially what I meant. I guess I shouldn't have used the word "hated" - that was WAY too strong and not deserved.

But overall I have clearly noticed the trend of people saying that either "Beyond" is the best of the Kelvin Trek movies for having the characters resemble their original ounterparts more (usually the same people that aren't really fond of "Into Darkness"), while the people that are bigger fans of the Kelvin timeline movies overall usually like it the least.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Yeah, that's essentially what I meant. I guess I shouldn't have used the word "hated" - that was WAY too strong and not deserved.

But overall I have clearly noticed the trend of people saying that either "Beyond" is the best of the Kelvin Trek movies for having the characters resemble their original ounterparts more (usually the same people that aren't really fond of "Into Darkness"), while the people that are bigger fans of the Kelvin timeline movies overall usually like it the least.

To be fair to Into Darkness, it’s not a bad movie. The main reason I didn’t like it was the fact that khan was there. That just irked me. To the point where I nearly walked out of the theatre at the midnight showing of it when it premiered.

If Cumberbatch had been just another augment (and there’s still time for the whole “my name is Khan” thing to have been a lie) then the story itself isn’t that bad (transwarp beaming nonsense notwithstanding - but I can live with that - it was just a plot device to get Augmento to Qo’Nos).

The actual film itself is ok. Scotty is ace in it - particularly when he calls Kirk a “mad bastard” that still makes me laugh now!

 

[Rahul]

To be fair to Into Darkness, it’s not a bad movie. The main reason I didn’t like it was the fact that khan was there. That just irked me. To the point where I nearly walked out of the theatre at the midnight showing of it when it premiered.

If Cumberbatch had been just another augment (and there’s still time for the whole “my name is Khan” thing to have been a lie) then the story itself isn’t that bad (transwarp beaming nonsense notwithstanding - but I can live with that - it was just a plot device to get Augmento to Qo’Nos).

The actual film itself is ok. Scotty is ace in it - particularly when he calls Kirk a “mad bastard” that still makes me laugh now!

See, for me it's a bit different. I knew it was going to be Khan the second I read on the Internet that Benicio del Toro declined the role, way before Cumberbatch was even cast. So the whole "is he/isn't he" really left me cold because I knew it was him before I even saw the first trailer, and was only interested in how they'd pull him off the Botany Bay.

For me it was the death-scene-in-warp-reactor-behind-glasses that broke the movie for me. When the movie started, I really enjoyed the beginning. Even though I was annoyed at the transwarp beaming right there in the cinema - that was IMO just a plot hole. Most movies have one or two of them. But the more the movie progressed, the more I was asking myself when the "main plot" will actually start (I kinda' liked the detour to Kronos, but that was IMO as unimportant to the main story like Finn and Rose travelling to the Casino planet in "Last Jedi"). Thought the big black starship dwarfing the Enterprie was ridiculous, liked the Kirk-Khan team-up moment (that was a fresh idea!), but overall felt the movie was merely "okay", very entertaining, but not actually "good" either.

And then they copied the TWOK scene. The emotional climax of the movie. To serve as the very same emotional climax again. This felt like a parody. It completely took me out of the movie. In a way no movie has ever done before. Right then and there he could have said "We'll always have Paris", "Rosebud" and "I'm your father", and it would have been equally convincing. When Spock suddenly started yelling "KHAAAAAN" I was actually bursting out laughing. In the theater. At the movie. That is something that has never happened before in my life, and never since. Even in way worse movies.

When it became obvious they weren't even sticking with it, and instead pulled that "superblood" out of their collective asses, and undid Kirks heroic sacrifice just then and there, I was just completely done with this movie.

It is not a bad movie. It has it's moments, and lots of interesting scenes. But overall, I can't think of it as anything else but the biggest artistical failure I've ever seen in a blockbuster movie. Even movies that are generally way worse (the Transformers movies) or that I personally like even less (Disney Star Wars), even they have never stooped this low.

 

[Jadeb]

Yeah, I laughed at Spock's KHAAAAN too. Literally laughed out loud. I still wonder what they were thinking.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

See, for me it's a bit different. I knew it was going to be Khan the second I read on the Internet that Benicio del Toro declined the role, way before Cumberbatch was cast. So the whole "is he/isn't he" really left me cold because I knew it was him before I even saw the first trailer.

I was the opposite - perhaps naively - I thought “no they won’t do Khan that’s silly” and was then really annoyed in the theatre when he announced his name.

For me it was the death-scene-in-warp-reactor-behind-glasses that broke the movie for me.

See I didn’t mind that scene. I thought it was derivative (obviously) but it wasn’t a deal breaker for me.

Thought the big black starship dwarfing the Enterprie was ridiculous,

Totally agree. And the vengeance looks ridiculous to boot.

liked the Kirk-Khan team-up moment (that was a fresh idea!),

Yes - that was a nice “reboot” idea. Turning what happened before on its head - before Khan went nuts and squished a guy’s head.

When Spock suddenly started yelling "KHAAAAAN" I was actually bursting out laughing. In the theater. At the movie.

Man alive that has to be the most embarrassing Star Trek moment ever. That was a reference too far.

When it became obvious they weren't even sticking with it, and instead pulled that "superblood" out of their collective asses, and undid Kirks heroic sacrifice just then and there, I was just completely done with it as a movie.

True. It would have been more interesting if they’d left Kirk dead and Beyond had been “the search for Kirk” and they had to do time travel or something.

Yeah, I laughed at Spock's KHAAAAN too. Literally laughed out loud. I still wonder what they were thinking.

Probably Seinfeld (since they did the same gag there iirc). Or were memes a thing when ID came out? The Shatner version is a Star Trek meme isn’t it? It was just a bad idea all round

 

[Rahul]

I was the opposite - perhaps naively - I thought “no they won’t do Khan that’s silly” and was then really annoyed in the theatre when he announced his name.

J.J. Abrams early in his career had a big crush on Christopher Nolan, and wanted the same recognition for having both big budget commercial success while also having artistic and critical success at the same time. He even structured his contract with Paramount the same way, to be allowed to make one big franchise movie - then a personal one - then a franchise movie alternating. (Nolan did that with "Batman" - though he was a faster worker, and delivered the sequel "The Dark Knight" and "The Prestige" in 3 years instead of Abrams 4 to "Into Darkness". Normally you'd follow up a franchise film directly with a sequel not more than 2 years later).

It was obvious he saw KHAN as Star Treks' Joker, and thus wanted to have the second movie be the biggest villain (that's probably also why Klingons are in it as well).

IMO they could have made a very interesting movie:
Imagine Kirk having to catch Khan, persue him into klingon territory. Khan still wanting to destroy Kirk/take over the Federation, but being trapped on the Enterprise as well. Wheras the Klingons just want to blow them up both. And then Kirk and Khan have to team-up for the majority of the movie! Where Khan is actually the bigger and more personal threats than the klingons, but the klingons are the more immediate threat. That could have been a great thriller, with both big space battles, but also cat-and-mouse games and battles of the wits.

But alas, we got big dumb black spaceship and mad Admiral yelling and TWOK-references gone wild instead...

 

[Tuskin38]

IIRC Abrams had nothing to do with bringing in Khan, it was the other writers.

Obviously he probably approved it, but it didn’t originate from him

Now I could be completely wrong, that was a long time ago.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Yeah, I laughed at Spock's KHAAAAN too. Literally laughed out loud. I still wonder what they were thinking.

I cringed in a way I have only done few times in a movie theater. It was painful. Worse, I thought Pine and Quinto were effective in the scene when they weren’t just reciting TWOK “I’m scared, Spock”. I thought they might pull it off. And then Spock screaming just ruined it.

 

[fireproof78]

When it became obvious they weren't even sticking with it, and instead pulled that "superblood" out of their collective asses, and undid Kirks heroic sacrifice just then and there, I was just completely done with this movie.

I'll never understand this objection. Kirk's sacrifice carries meaning because he had no way of knowing he was going to survive.

Also, "superblood" is more realistic than the transporter.

I still wonder what they were thinking.

They were thinking that TWOK is the greatest film ever and that it must be recreated. Similarly, it was used for First Contact, for Nemesis and Star Trek has never escaped its shadow, tragically.

I want to scream "Khan" for entirely different reasons now, thinking of that film

 

[Noname Given]

Yeah, I laughed at Spock's KHAAAAN too. Literally laughed out loud. I still wonder what they were thinking.

It was meant both as an homage; and as it's a parallel universe, the writers felt it would be interesting to see the roles reversed. I don't consider it a 'rip off' at all because with what Spock experienced in Mind melding with Adm. Pike earlier in the film; and the effect that had on him, the reaction did make some sense. ST: B was a lot of things, but a direct rip off of STII:TWoK it wasn't. It HAD elements of both TOS - "Space Seed" and STII:TWoK in it, but it was it's own story and Khan was getting revenge on Adm. Marcus. Kirk and Co. were there because Marcus placed them there, and Kirk wanted revenge on Khan for Khan killing Pike.

 

[Jadeb]

It was meant both as an homage; and as it's a parallel universe, the writers felt it would be interesting to see the roles reversed. I don't consider it a 'rip off' at all because with what Spock experienced in Mind melding with Adm. Pike earlier in the film; and the effect that had on him, the reaction did make some sense. ST: B was a lot of things, but a direct rip off of STII:TWoK it wasn't. It HAD elements of both TOS - "Space Seed" and STII:TWoK in it, but it was it's own story and Khan was getting revenge on Adm. Marcus. Kirk and Co. were there because Marcus placed them there, and Kirk wanted revenge on Khan for Khan killing Pike.

That's right up there with the decision to make Superman Returns a direct sequel to Superman II from 26 years earlier.

 

[XCV330]

That's right up there with the decision to make Superman Returns a direct sequel to Superman II from 26 years earlier.

I actually liked that aspect of Superman Returns. I just didn't like the rest of the movie all that much.


on the previous subject. I like Into Darkness, but I kind of mentally skip the Khaaaaan! yell.

 

[Kor]

I guess I missed that memo. This TOS fan likes all three. And I don't think I'm alone.

Yeah, it seemed to me that the Kelvinverse movies always got more grief from hardcore TNG fans because of too much action-adventure.

That's right up there with the decision to make Superman Returns a direct sequel to Superman II from 26 years earlier.

Trying to make sense of SR as a literal direct sequel is a headache. To me, it's more of a vague, "broad strokes" thematic follow-up to Superman The Movie and Superman II.

Kor

 

[Noname Given]

Trying to make sense of SR as a literal direct sequel is a headache. To me, it's more of a vague, "broad strokes" thematic follow-up to Superman The Movie and Superman II.

Kor

As to SR - I always saw that aspect of the film as: "Hey remember Superman III and Superman IV? Yeah, we don't want to either, but we liked the Supes continuity from I and II so here - we're saying he went to look at Krypton himself after Superman II and just got back...enjoy.

 

[Rahul]

Yeah, it seemed to me that the Kelvinverse movies always got more grief from hardcore TNG fans because of too much action-adventure.

I have never seen it being criticised for being an "action-adventure" anywhere.

I have seen it criticised for being a dumb action movie - and that is certainly partly true. At least the villain plots made very little sense most of the time, and where usually solved by hitting the badguy in the face, instead of some clever thinking. But the criticism definitely was on the 'dumb' part, not the 'action/adventure' part - I have only ever seen praise for that, the energy and adventurous tone those movies have. Deservedly so IMO!

 

[pst]

I have never seen it being criticised for being an "action-adventure" anywhere.

i'm reminded of this headline from the onion in 2009: Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'

 

[Jadeb]

As to SR - I always saw that aspect of the film as: "Hey remember Superman III and Superman IV? Yeah, we don't want to either, but we liked the Supes continuity from I and II so here - we're saying he went to look at Krypton himself after Superman II and just got back...enjoy.

Superman III is pretty awesome. Terrible at times, but pretty awesome. Love the junkyard fight, and the bit where the villain lady gets roboticized scared the daylights out of me as a kid.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

It might be my favorite superhero movie. It's so Silver Age I can't help but love it.

 

[fireproof78]

It was meant both as an homage; and as it's a parallel universe, the writers felt it would be interesting to see the roles reversed. I don't consider it a 'rip off' at all because with what Spock experienced in Mind melding with Adm. Pike earlier in the film; and the effect that had on him, the reaction did make some sense. ST: B was a lot of things, but a direct rip off of STII:TWoK it wasn't. It HAD elements of both TOS - "Space Seed" and STII:TWoK in it, but it was it's own story and Khan was getting revenge on Adm. Marcus. Kirk and Co. were there because Marcus placed them there, and Kirk wanted revenge on Khan for Khan killing Pike.

That's a nice take on it.

Yeah, it seemed to me that the Kelvinverse movies always got more grief from hardcore TNG fans because of too much action-adventure.

That's what I have seen as well.