I hope for more traditional space battles

[Squiggy]

Come on, you don't want to see Cumberbatch respond, "Everything" to Kirk's query?

Cumberbatch is why I hold out hope. It's no secret that I fucking hate Nero. I think he's the worst villain in the history of Star Trek. His motives are non-existent ("A Vulcan risked his life to save my wife in time but he was slightly too late so I'm gonna blow up Earth!" WTF!), Eric Bana's performance was Razzie worthy ("FIYUHHH!") and why exactly was he chilling around for 25 years doing nothing?

There is no way but up from Nero as far as I'm concerned and Cumberbatch seems to be delivering as far as the performance goes.

You've also described Soran, the Sona, and Shinzon.

"I'm crazy for some reason and will kill millions of people to get what I want" has been the MO for Star Trek for the past 20 years. You're complaining because it's the same way it's always been...it's just that cinematography has changed since the 80s and gfx have gotten better.

 

[M'Sharak]

I cringe at the militant JJ Abrams fawners' posts generally ("Trek should be as much like Mission: Impossible III as it can be!" ) but I'd agree the opening attack on the Kelvin in 2009 is a good sequence. It's a shame the final act of the movie is insanely forgettable and hard to follow in comparison.

<snip>

I'd say your five least favorite things are:

5. Lawrence Miles
4. Yourself
3. RTD
2. Generations
1. Nero

Lawrence Miles wrote at least 3 good Doctor Who books so I wouldn't lump him in there. Replace him with George Takei. I fucking hate George Takei.

DS9 was a pretentious bore most of the time, which probably had something to do with its continually declining ratings for seven years; it was the first Trek series to exhibit that pattern.

If you think Star Trek should be as cookie cutter simplistic as possible, it stands to reason you'd hate DS9.

I'm so sorry about how low your standards have gotten.

Your posts contain more substance than drooling all over JJ Abrams and declaring every piece of Star Trek before his movie shit, so you win by default.

Who thinks that Modern Trek was a flop?

My Name Is Legion has repeatedly expressed the belief that audiences refuse to accept anybody other than Kirk and Spock and brings up the other show's declining viewing figures. Even though TOS was the quickest live-action Trek show to be cancelled and TNG was a genuine pop culture phenomena. It's an argument that is utterly sound, provided you don't think about it and instead focus on JJ Abrams' lush features.

Warning for trolling; comments to PM.

 

[Shazam!]

So this isn't an open conversation about Trek

No, it's a business meeting apparently.

I'm not the one trying to tell people what they can and cannot discuss.

No, but you're doing a great job of discouraging certain avenues.

We know what's likely to be successful / non-successful. It doesn't need spelling out every time someone makes a "You know what I'd like to see..." post.

 

[Franklin]

I'm not sure a film like that would be a big hit in the current market, much like TMP would flounder in the current market.

And as yours is the deciding voice, what with you working in a high ranking position in the film industry, that's the end of that discussion.

Do you really think films like The Motion Picture or The Voyage Home would do as well in today's market? It's not a commentary on quality, but more about what today's audience is looking for in a sci-fi film.

In the current comic-action craze, I'd even wonder how well movies like "ET", "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", or "Back to the Future" would do, right now.

 

[DalekJim]

You're complaining because it's the same way it's always been...it's just that cinematography has changed since the 80s and gfx have gotten better.

Am I? OK then, thanks for telling me .

 

[Dukhat]

No, it's a business meeting apparently.

I'm not the one trying to tell people what they can and cannot discuss.

No, but you're doing a great job of discouraging certain avenues.

We know what's likely to be successful / non-successful. It doesn't need spelling out every time someone makes a "You know what I'd like to see..." post.

Why not? If people can't handle realistic criticism every time they post that they want to see a "post-24th-century Trek with Borg, Romulans, etc.", then they shouldn't bother posting, because that's how people are going to respond.

 

[Ovation]

And as yours is the deciding voice, what with you working in a high ranking position in the film industry, that's the end of that discussion.

Do you really think films like The Motion Picture or The Voyage Home would do as well in today's market? It's not a commentary on quality, but more about what today's audience is looking for in a sci-fi film.

In the current comic-action craze, I'd even wonder how well movies like "ET", "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", or "Back to the Future" would do, right now.

About as well as Super 8, decent but not spectacular, I'd wager (as Super 8 is the closest thing to those--especially Close Encounters--that's been released recently).

 

[F. King Daniel]

Even though TOS was the quickest live-action Trek show to be cancelled and TNG was a genuine pop culture phenomena

You truly don't comprehend what an impact the original Star Trek had?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm not the one trying to tell people what they can and cannot discuss.

No, but you're doing a great job of discouraging certain avenues.

We know what's likely to be successful / non-successful. It doesn't need spelling out every time someone makes a "You know what I'd like to see..." post.

Why not? If people can't handle realistic criticism every time they post that they want to see a "post-24th-century Trek with Borg, Romulans, etc.", then they shouldn't bother posting, because that's how people are going to respond.

Yep. If being disagreed with discourages people, that's unfortunate.

 

[BillJ]

No, it's a business meeting apparently.

I'm not the one trying to tell people what they can and cannot discuss.

No, but you're doing a great job of discouraging certain avenues.

We know what's likely to be successful / non-successful. It doesn't need spelling out every time someone makes a "You know what I'd like to see..." post.

I think it does for certain people who can't let go of the past.

I too would love a new film that was like The Motion Picture, but I'm not going to delude myself into thinking it'll happen anytime soon. Or that because I like movies like that, I'm above people who like the Abramsverse. Or that my taste in entertainment is somehow more worthy.

 

[Shazam!]

Why not? If people can't handle realistic criticism every time they post that they want to see a "post-24th-century Trek with Borg, Romulans, etc.", then they shouldn't bother posting.

Yes, they should not post and not the Buzz Killingtons whose sole contribution references markets, budgets, cinema climate, ticket sales and audience figures...

I agree that would be a much more entertaining to read.

 

[M'Sharak]

Well, I'd say Deep Space 9 did everything better than Star Trek 2009, what with it being the best Star Trek series. And I'd be far from alone .

Holla!

In the other we have... Nero.

I'd say your five least favorite things are:

5. Lawrence Miles
4. Yourself
3. RTD
2. Generations
1. Nero

I'd say your five least favorite things are:

5. Lawrence Miles
4. Yourself
3. RTD
2. Generations
1. Nero

Lawrence Miles wrote at least 3 good Doctor Who books so I wouldn't lump him in there. Replace him with George Takei. I fucking hate George Takei.

Oh my!

DS9 is a quality series. Going through it for the first time and it's a show that definitely holds up. Although it may not be The Wire or Breaking Bad in terms of having an arc and an ongoing story, or even Babylon 5, but it does have a couple of them, and some good ones at that, and allow me to sit through it on a marathon in a way I could never do with Voyager, where it's just standalone after standalone.

Basically you have no rational reasoning behind defending bland battle scenes over what works in today's audience, other than your mid 1990's TV sentimental bias.

LMAO, I'm watching DS9 for the first time in 2013, started on New Year's Day. No bias to it, dude.

LMAO, I'm watching DS9 for the first time in 2013, started on New Year's Day. No bias to it, dude.

You give me hope for humanity.

I'm so sorry about how low your standards have gotten.

None of this is on topic - most of it amounts to little more than you tagging around after DalekJim, cheerleading. If there had been more substance to your posts, you might have been warned for trolling instead, but as it is...

Warning for spamming; comments to PM.

 

[Squiggy]

You're complaining because it's the same way it's always been...it's just that cinematography has changed since the 80s and gfx have gotten better.

Am I? OK then, thanks for telling me .

You're welcome. Glad I could enlighten you and nuTrek isn't that much different than old Trek. It's just shinier.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re-opening after I've got caught up on my reading.

Let's have one more try at getting back to discussing a topic which isn't other posters and/or their supposed shortcomings.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I loved the Kelvin battle, I want more like that. We've had over 40 years of traditional space battles on Trek, its time to retire it.

 

[BillJ]

Yes, they should not post and not the Buzz Killingtons whose sole contribution references markets, budgets, cinema climate, ticket sales and audience figures...

I agree that would be a much more entertaining to read.

Why can't we all post? Why can't we all offer our observations and facts in a thread? I'm pretty sure we're all big boys and girls here.

One of the reasons some folks have a hard time here is because they come in with an air of superiority and this notion that you can't like Star Trek 2009 and the other series and movies.

As far as traditional space battles go: I liked the battles in Star Trek, TNG, DS9, Voyager the Prime universe movies and the 2009 movie.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I loved the Kelvin battle, I want more like that. We've had over 40 years of traditional space battles on Trek, its time to retire it.

This goes to the "Mom's macaroni and cheese" aspect of fandom - most any fandom. There's always a strong demand for the familiar simply because it is familiar...and fans can tell you all the reasons that "familiar" is in fact "better quality."

After all, if some folks didn't like something just the way it is they wouldn't be fans of it.

The problem is that movies, stories and so forth can't actually continue to succeed and be creative while primarily feeding the demands of the fan base for more of the same. There's a point at which the owners and creators of the things have to take the risk of alienating the fans, if those owners and creators intend to go on with the franchise.

 

[Ovation]

The ST09 battles are part of a larger trend towards a kind of stylized realism (I know it sounds contradictory, but it is Hollywood). People complained about the fight scenes in Batman Begins, the Bourne movies and in a bunch of other films. It goes back as far as Saving Pvt. Ryan, where people complained they had trouble following the action during the landing at Normandy (unfavourably comparing it to The Longest Day).

The fact that such fights and battle scenes are difficult to follow is precisely the point. Real life conflict is chaotic and disorienting. It wasn't until the past two decades or so that filmmaking technology could convey that sense of chaos. Fights and battles were highly staged because that's what technology allowed for. And like all changes in aesthetic standards, there will always be resistance from some and admiration from others. Staged battles and fights were once a requirement. Now they are a stylistic choice. I expect they will return (some filmmakers never abandoned them) in greater numbers but the more frenetic style is here to stay.

 

[DarthTom]

As far as traditional space battles go: I liked the battles in Star Trek, TNG, DS9, Voyager the Prime universe movies and the 2009 movie.

Here is a great compilation of a whole bunch of them:

Trek Space Battles

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The ST09 battles are part of a larger trend towards a kind of stylized realism (I know it sounds contradictory, but it is Hollywood). People complained about the fight scenes in Batman Begins, the Bourne movies and in a bunch of other films. It goes back as far as Saving Pvt. Ryan, where people complained they had trouble following the action during the landing at Normandy (unfavourably comparing it to The Longest Day).

The fact that such fights and battle scenes are difficult to follow is precisely the point. Real life conflict is chaotic and disorienting. It wasn't until the past two decades or so that filmmaking technology could convey that sense of chaos. Fights and battles were highly staged because that's what technology allowed for. And like all changes in aesthetic standards, there will always be resistance from some and admiration from others. Staged battles and fights were once a requirement. Now they are a stylistic choice. I expect they will return (some filmmakers never abandoned them) in greater numbers but the more frenetic style is here to stay.

Exactly so.