startrekrcks
Fleet Captain
but is the movie pure Star Trek because I was watching the original series and there was a more sensible,more grown up approach
I don't quite like Abrams' attitude
- Thread starter shadowedgalaxy
- Start date
- Status
Who was asking for that? I want to punch them in the face.
So if Trek is classical music, and Star Wars is rock, then may I submit that Doctor Who is opera?
(on the Gilbert and Sullivan tip, yo !!)
(on the Gilbert and Sullivan tip, yo !!)
I prefer classical music to rock. I prefer Star Trek to Star Wars. I prefer most (not all) of old Trek to the new film. There were some moments in the new film I thought "yes, this to me is Star Trek", and I loved the first 15 minutes, but sadly much of it felt too distanced from the fictional universe I love.
Nemesis made 2 cents at the box office. JJ is doing something right.
Truth be told, probably the execs at NBC asked him to change it as they didn't want to deal with a lawsuit from the authors of "Forbidden Planet."
And let's admit it, "The Cage" aint exactly "great."A criticism which blows back up in their face, a long with the "flashy movie for the ADHD generation" comments, at which point they turn around and ask people to answer questions about the film for them that they could have answered themselves by paying attention to the film.
Kurt Vonnagut put it best...
Any reviewer who express rage and loathing for a novel is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae.
I prefer classical music also, but I did get a kick out of the rock'n'roll elements in this film. Spock telling the Vulcan Science Academy to fuck off via saying 'Live long and prosper'? The affable fratboy Kirk? Fun, fun takes on the characters.
Sure I also love stodgy old Picard, but heck, I've got range.
I'd also agree to the general umbrage about Abrams' dismissing of Star Trek's traditionally more cerebral bent, but also to Brutal Strudel's excellently written observation that he nonetheless did a good (if very Star Warsish) job.
Since Orci and co. have been vaguely intimating that the next movie is some sort of 'idea' film, I'll be interested to see in whether or not that pans out - or we just get another movie where Chris Pine smirks, Quinto arches an eyebrow and stuff gets blown up (which wouldn't be too bad, not at all.)
I get the impression I'd be a heck of a lot more indignant if I didn't enjoy myself so damn much, well, I am what I am.
The whole 'too cerebral' observation is a very old one. If it isn't true, I've never seen a case of it being challenged, though I'd be curious to see an example of that.
The, er, 'influence' of Forbidden Planet is undisputed, naturally, but that's also true of the series proper.
Sure I also love stodgy old Picard, but heck, I've got range.
I'd also agree to the general umbrage about Abrams' dismissing of Star Trek's traditionally more cerebral bent, but also to Brutal Strudel's excellently written observation that he nonetheless did a good (if very Star Warsish) job.
Since Orci and co. have been vaguely intimating that the next movie is some sort of 'idea' film, I'll be interested to see in whether or not that pans out - or we just get another movie where Chris Pine smirks, Quinto arches an eyebrow and stuff gets blown up (which wouldn't be too bad, not at all.)
I get the impression I'd be a heck of a lot more indignant if I didn't enjoy myself so damn much, well, I am what I am.
Truth be told probably?Truth be told, probably the execs at NBC asked him to change it as they didn't want to deal with a lawsuit from the authors of "Forbidden Planet."
The whole 'too cerebral' observation is a very old one. If it isn't true, I've never seen a case of it being challenged, though I'd be curious to see an example of that.
The, er, 'influence' of Forbidden Planet is undisputed, naturally, but that's also true of the series proper.
I'll admit to no such thing! "The Cage" is a damn good Trek episoe. Nyaaah.
Even tho Star Trek is generally far superior to Star Wars, as an entertainment experience, ESB is better than any of the Trek movies. In that regards, Abrams has a perfectly valid point. Trek XI demonstrated that fears about Abrams "turning Star Trek into Star Wars" were completely unfounded. It felt very much in line with the traditions and approach of Star Trek, and was competently molded into a fast-paced, satisfying entertainment experience, just like Star Wars has been, thirty percent of the time, which interestingly enough is about the same success rate for TOS on TV and Star Trek in movies. 
I always said that Vortas should be running Star Trek.
Movies (that are intended to rake in the big bucks) don't work when they're cerebral. Star Trek does need the cerebral element, but that can be explored adequately only on TV, which is where Star Trek belongs most of the time. The movies can be slam-bang punctuation, every couple of years, but the narrative drive needs to be on TV, which is the only place where Star Trek can really be Star Trek. Relying only on movies is like making a dinner only of dessert. It's fun for a while but sooner or later, it will make you sick.
Since I don't like opera, works for me.
Another thing I dislike about Abrams is the smug aura that surrounds him. He reminds me a bit of Weyoun. But I guess that's normal for dem dere Hollywood types.
And he looks like Weyoun too.
I always said that Vortas should be running Star Trek.
Movies (that are intended to rake in the big bucks) don't work when they're cerebral. Star Trek does need the cerebral element, but that can be explored adequately only on TV, which is where Star Trek belongs most of the time. The movies can be slam-bang punctuation, every couple of years, but the narrative drive needs to be on TV, which is the only place where Star Trek can really be Star Trek. Relying only on movies is like making a dinner only of dessert. It's fun for a while but sooner or later, it will make you sick.
Well, 'cerebral' for lack of a better term. I'm not trying to tout up Star Trek as forty years of sci-fi masterpiece theatre or anything, I just needed a nice, good sounding word for precisely that quality it had before which the Abrams picture noticably lacked (or was better for its absence, whichever.)
I mean the sort of cerebral that would allow for something like First Contact, which is a monster hunt akin to Aliens. It may be a movie where stuff gets blown up real good but it's also a movie where some guy is solemnly quoting Moby Dick as he has a personal epiphany.
Despite it being action packed, I think this movie did offer enough deepness to do Trek service. It had the whole Kelvin sequence, the dialogue between Pike and Kirk in the bar, the dialogue between Spock Prime and Kirk, Spock dealing with the loss of his mother, and Spock's culture conflict (even though the Federation is diverse with humans and aliens Spock still seemed like an outsider that didn't fit into either group). Kirk started out an asshole/jerk but towards the end of the film we saw him growing into the Kirk we know. I hope the growth will continue in the next movie.
Another thing I dislike about Abrams is the smug aura that surrounds him. He reminds me a bit of Weyoun. But I guess that's normal for dem dere Hollywood types.
And he looks like Weyoun too.
Comparing Abrams to Weyoun is nothing new.
Hey, there's a "Rick Berman's an asshole" thread.
I was watching one of the documentary thingies on the two-disc DVD, and J.J.'s always saying that Star Trek was "a geeky talkfest", and "Star Trek is classical music, while Star Wars is rock n' roll. Star Trek needed some of that", as well as "Empire Strikes Back had a fast pace. Star Trek needed that too."
Um... excuse me? Yes ESB has action scenes, but it's pretty slow-paced IMO.
Also, if Rick Berman said such things about THE TREK, he'd be dead.
Discuss.
I agree. The man has an all-out SW fetish, which is why he hired Ryan Church to work on the film. Thank God some of his concepts were dropped from the final film... in the art book, it shows that Sarek was originally going to have a speederbike... I shit you not... an actual frakking SW speederbike... ugh. And an early concept for the space drill was a total rip-off of a SW attack droid... ugh.
Trek is Trek... that's what makes it special, and why we love it. If we want SW, we'll watch a SW film.
This is what pisses me off so much about the fan reaction to this film... people embraced it just because it's shiny (literally) and new, and worship JJ like some great prophet, while at the same time, they now begin to put down Star Trek as being boring, stale, and so on, while it is Star Trek that they have loved so much all this time. It must have been real shitty being a Trekker then, huh? Just because this film may have been enjoyed by people doesn't mean that Trek as it was was lame or boring. If you people who love JJ so much hate the Treks that started it all, then just say so, and admit you never liked Trek in the first place. Otherwise, shut up. You can enjoy this new film, without putting down the Trek of the past.
I don't believe anyone that calls themselves a "Trekker" or "fan" hated and/or disliked all the Trek that came before, but likely much of the Trek of the recent past. i.e, ENT, VOY, NEM and INS.
Trek was become very boring and stale. TNG was fresh and new, but VOY doing a TNG imitation was no longer new. INS and NEM were weak entires in the film franchise, and the TNG characters never acted much like themsleves anyway. And then there was ENT....snore fest.
We were all getting sick and tired of the Hermann Zimmerman sets and Michael Westmore aliens that we had been seeing since TNG started in 1987. People wanted something different and honestly I don't believe Trek XI is that much different, but it changed itself enough. Trek had to change or go away forever.
I agree 100%.
I agree with this.
The new film did not evoke in me the same emotions as "old" Trek. Maybe it's cool and fast-paced and glitzy and pretty, but I don't feel anything for the characters. As such, it really felt like a SW film - a fun romp, nothing more.
I never saw this happening. I saw people saying some old Trek being boring and stale, which I agree with. Insurrection was abysmal. Nemesis made me want to shot vodka thru my nose just to forget. And while Enterprise or Voyager was pretty to look at and had some enjoyable moments, they usually mostly drifted around dullness. You may disagree, but having a bad opinion is not bashing.
number6
Vice Admiral
I don't think JJ Abrams is smug about Star Trek. It needed to change and it was talky and preachy, especially TNG. This film comes closer to the spirit of TOS than the last several films have, and that is no small feat. The idea of bringing in new fans to Star Trek is hardly a new one and the fact that Abrams isn't a dyed in the wool fan gives the new film a fresher perspective. He wanted to make a movie he'd want to see and he did.
TOS had a lot of heart, action and sex appeal. There is no reason that this film should try the same.
Abrams made a great Star Trek film for fan and non fan alike and has every right to be proud of his accomplishment.
TOS had a lot of heart, action and sex appeal. There is no reason that this film should try the same.
Abrams made a great Star Trek film for fan and non fan alike and has every right to be proud of his accomplishment.
I love classical music (and rock) and I resent the heck outa the notion that classical = stuffy, slow and/or preachy. Onlt someone who doesn't know much about music would say that. And I don't think Abrams used the comparison in a negative sense anyway, merely pointing out the contrast in styles.
However, while I'm a TOS fan from the first ep that aired...I'll have to say that I thought ST:XI ROCKED big time. I loved it.
I don't care what Abrams thinks of Berman (I have conflicted feelings about Berman myself). I do care about what Abrams does with ST in XII but I'm not nearly as worried about the sequel as I was about XI a year ago. I don't care how big a SW fan Abrams is...he brought energy and excitement to the Trek franchise and preserved what I lovde best about TOS (the characters and their relationships) so I'm absolutely fine with Abrams, whatever the heck he says in the supplements. All the proof I need is up there on the screen.
However, while I'm a TOS fan from the first ep that aired...I'll have to say that I thought ST:XI ROCKED big time. I loved it.
I don't care what Abrams thinks of Berman (I have conflicted feelings about Berman myself). I do care about what Abrams does with ST in XII but I'm not nearly as worried about the sequel as I was about XI a year ago. I don't care how big a SW fan Abrams is...he brought energy and excitement to the Trek franchise and preserved what I lovde best about TOS (the characters and their relationships) so I'm absolutely fine with Abrams, whatever the heck he says in the supplements. All the proof I need is up there on the screen.
I agree. There ARE personal moments and scenes in the film, it's not all space battles, etc. A good portion of the movie is devoted to the backstory of Kirk and Spock, and it takes a break to show us the touching encounter on Delta-Vega, before Young Jim is back aboard ship, and even then, the bigger action comes only after Spock has reached a tipping point in how to move forward with his life after the dual tradgedy, with a nice scene with Sarek. So, to me the movie has both aspects...
There's a big difference between being mature -- or cerebral -- and being boring and passionless, which is what Star Trek under Berman far too often fell into.
- Status
