I've started hating the word "rehash"...

[M'Sharak]

I think Orci and Kurzman balance him. He seems to come up with all the whack ideas, and they rein him in.

And then mess it up themselves.

Do you ever have anything positive to say ?

Nope, he's a sniper.

Waste of bandwidth really.

Shazam!'s post did have the virtue of being a comment at least tangentially about the movie.

Yours, on the other hand, is a clear swipe at another poster and can in no way be mistaken for anything else. You've been asked on more than one occasion previously to refrain from taking swipes of that sort, so this time it will earn you a warning.

Post, not poster. Comments to PM.


And Belz..., every once in a while, I think you may find that Shazam! does have something positive to say. And when he doesn't, it's simple enough to let those pass without comment.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

The other side of the coin is Lex Luthor ALWAYS being used in Superman movies. The Man of Steel film is breaking that trend. However when you use and reuse the same villain or plots over and over it makes the franchise seem stagnant and uninteresting.

Nah Man of Steel is a total REHASH. General Zod was in Supes I and II and was on Smallville and a ton of animated films and it a ton of comic books.

It is still a rehash. In fact I am starting to wonder if Superman actually has any other villains.

To be fair most comic movies are adaptaions of comic stories, Hell Nolan's Batman comics you can trace from successful issues from the 90's. Man Of Steel is more of an adaptation of the 2004 comic Superman Birthrright. A relaunch origin story about a faux Kryptonian invasion. While the MoS movies will really be a Kryptonian invasion. I don't consider it a rehash because it's like taking a book and bringing it to life on the screen for millions to see.

Being a big fan of Superman myself I can count the times Zod's been used in the last 25 years.
1989 Supergirl Saga Man Of Steel comics
1999 comic Our World at War
2005 comic For Tomorrow
2008 Last Son
and 2010 New Krypton
He wasn't in the animated series of the 90's or the Justice League Series of the early 2000's. You add the 1980 Superman movie and Smallville and that's all he's been in thus far.

Unlike like Batman's Joker who is WAY overexposed. When people think Batman they instant think The Joker. Not Mr Freeze, Mad Hatter, Maxie Zeus, or Scarecrow. When people think Superman they instantly think Lex Luthor. Not Zod, Brainiac, Metallo, Parasite, or Darkseid.

Just like when general audiences hear star trek they instantly think klingons by association. Not Jem Ha'dar, Kazon, Borg, Xindi or Augments.

 

[Enterprise is Great]

Why "luckily" ? He seemed to be doing a good job with the other two.

Lindelof only worked on the script for STiD.

My mistake, then.

I still wonder what's so wrong with him, according to some.

Most likely it's coming from people who hated the way Lindelof ended Lost. And people who disliked Prometheus.

 

[Franklin]

Come on, guys. Q wasn't just playful. He had a bit of a mean streak, too.

He could be more petulant than downright mean, I'd say.

But he wasn't just fun and games either. Crew members died because of him, most notably in "Q Who?"

True. He certainly wasn't benign. He was dangerous, and the stakes associated with his acts were real. But in "Q Who?" propelling the Enterprise into Borg occupied space was still more of an impetuous act than one that was mean-spirited. Picard's foolish arrogance provoked Q, and for what it's worth, Picard is as much to blame as Q for how events unfolded after that. At the same time, the lives lost probably meant nothing to Q compared to the lesson he believes he taught Picard. And if he simply hit the reset button after Picard was humbled, then what was learned? It had to hurt. Wanna make an omelet? You gotta break some eggs.

 

[ralfy]

Definitely a rehash. And if they try to do the same as they did for the recent movie, the result will be poor once more.

 

[AdmiralSteven]

I'm done with the Borg. If they bring the Borg back I'm done with Star Trek! Q as well. The Enterprise is starting its 5 year mission, and since we all know that the galaxy is a big place, surely they can come with a new villain to fight. Please no Borg, or Q.

 

[Shazam!]

I think Orci and Kurzman balance him. He seems to come up with all the whack ideas, and they rein him in.

And then mess it up themselves.

Do you ever have anything positive to say ?

About things I'm positive about, sure.

 

[CorporalClegg]

A Borg movie should be a full-on alien invasion movie. They're in right now. And so are zombie movies.

It's too bad Abrams isn't likely to direct the next one. I know he tends to be derivative of his hero Spielberg, but Abrams's more robust style lends itself well to this type of film. I think he would have made a better War of the Worlds.

For it to work, they'd pretty much have to turn the Borg up to eleven. Make the cubes truly massive, for example.

I can't help but picture the trailer:

A ground shot looking up (or perhaps across New York harbor) and seeing the silhouettes of these massive cubes poking through the distant sky.

With a bombastic modular panning effect (like a louder version of Spock's meld from ST09), as if it were bouncing off the Earth, we hear:

"We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.

Resistance is futile."

It's haunting and chilling and makes the Borg awesome again.

It's certainly a bit cheap, and probably a little trite, but it's guaranteed to put butts in seats.

People can scoff and say it's the wrong reason to do something, but it is why Hollywood exists in the first place. That's one thing the "something original" crowd doesn't quite get. Those types of films aren't guaranteed to be successful. the modern market is so much different than the one 25 years ago. A TVH isn't likely to be as big of a success as it was.

Frankly, neither film has been the "tent pole" Paramount was hoping for. Certainly they've been hugely successful, but, going by the other threads, I'm sure most would agree that's due mostly to the "older" audience. The kids all went to FF6.

Suffice it to say, STO9 put the canvas down, and STiD pounded the stakes, but we still need the uber-mega blockbuster to pitch it up.

Zombie space invaders who sling a pop culture catch phrase can be that.

When that's done, people can start thinking about more "intimate" films, side projects, or a series.

 

[ichab]

Rehash is a fair criticism because it makes the franchise seem one note. Yes Nolan's use of the Joker was amazing even though it had been done in 1989. The other side of the coin is Lex Luthor ALWAYS being used in Superman movies. The Man of Steel film is breaking that trend. However when you use and reuse the same villain or plots over and over it makes the franchise seem stagnant and uninteresting. Batman and Superman have many other villains, but the Joker and Luthor are both the most recognizable. The same thing can be said about Trek. The Borg, Klingons, Romulans are Trek's most recognizable villains. So the idea to capitalize on their notoriety is what drives the decisions to use them to get patrons in seats in theatres.

With STID we have a third movie in a row that is thematically similar to the TWOK. The other two being ST 2009 and NEM. The fans asking "can't you do something else?" is a fair question.

Thank you. I'm getting a little tired of recycled stories. It seems to be an epidemic in Hollywood as of late. Star Trek is a story that takes place in outer space. If a writer can't come up with something original with a whole universe for a playground then he should give up the profession.

At least do something we haven't seen much of like the Gorn. Please no more Borg or Ferengi. And if they HAVE to rehash a Star Trek story, do something different. Khan wasn't the only good story told in the original Star Trek.

 

[Ryan8bit]

we still need the uber-mega blockbuster to pitch it up.

Who is "we"?

I think that JJ Abrams has done a pretty good job so far with what he has, and honestly I just don't think the Star Trek brand can really do any better. I don't think it matters what kind of zombies or action you throw at it, a certain group of people just aren't willing to go see it. Star Trek is not and never will be that kind of blockbuster, no matter how much they try and amp it.

 

[Cinema Geekly]

At least do something we haven't seen much of like the Gorn. Please no more Borg or Ferengi. And if they HAVE to rehash a Star Trek story, do something different. Khan wasn't the only good story told in the original Star Trek.

No, but outside of Klingons and Borg Khan is the most well known character, and he is one that hadn't already been done to death in other incarnations.

Everyone knows when you get a box full of toys you've never played with before you always play with the best ones right away, with the exception of Batman Begins but I think that has more to do with Nolan thinking every Batman villain was silly and wanted something that felt more "real".

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

A Borg movie should be a full-on alien invasion movie. They're in right now. And so are zombie movies.

It's too bad Abrams isn't likely to direct the next one. I know he tends to be derivative of his hero Spielberg, but Abrams's more robust style lends itself well to this type of film. I think he would have made a better War of the Worlds.

For it to work, they'd pretty much have to turn the Borg up to eleven. Make the cubes truly massive, for example.

I can't help but picture the trailer:

A ground shot looking up (or perhaps across New York harbor) and seeing the silhouettes of these massive cubes poking through the distant sky.

With a bombastic modular panning effect (like a louder version of Spock's meld from ST09), as if it were bouncing off the Earth, we hear:

"We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.

Resistance is futile."

It's haunting and chilling and makes the Borg awesome again.

It's certainly a bit cheap, and probably a little trite, but it's guaranteed to put butts in seats.

People can scoff and say it's the wrong reason to do something, but it is why Hollywood exists in the first place. That's one thing the "something original" crowd doesn't quite get. Those types of films aren't guaranteed to be successful. the modern market is so much different than the one 25 years ago. A TVH isn't likely to be as big of a success as it was.

I think this might be a fantastic blockbuster, and with the budget to show the Borg as horrifying as we know they are.. yeah it could end up sci fi horror.

And it would be interesting if they developed a virus to wipe them out and Kirk had to make the same choice Picard did and he chose differently.

 

[RoJoHen]

Yeah, honestly, if they're going to do the Borg, they need to do them differently than we've ever seen them. A full-on Alpha Quadrant invasion sound like just the thing to make the Borg awesome again.

Dammit, now I kind of want them to do a Borg movie.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

The books have a full on invasion. I kind of want to see this now too.

I'd love it though if the focal point of the invasion was another planet. Too much time spent on Earth already.

 

[Mr. B]

God, I hate that word, REHASH...

Don't hate on words.
Re-imagine, rehash, same difference.

Off all those, rehash is the most appropriate since it has a derogatory streak.

Bringing back another old villain would be quite pathetic for a series set in the entire Milky Way galaxy... but if they do, it's gotta be the borg. They have some name recognition among the general public, whereas Q does not.

There would be a sort of brilliant laziness to picking Q, though. You get your character and reset button in a package deal.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Star Trek is not and never will be that kind of blockbuster

Nonsense.

There is absolutely no evidence that this is at all true. However, similar trends indicate that, given the right circumstances, Star Trek can be a mega blockbuster. If sparkly vampires can rake-in nearly $900 million, then there's no reason Trek can't double ST09's take if it really wanted to.

The fact of the matter is, nuTrek really isn't that much different from old Trek. It's more flashy and hip, but it's still very derivative. It's essentially old Trek in a sexy new wrapper--err lingerie as it were.

Trek has pretty much shed the stigma. This is due to myriad reasons but mostly just because science-fiction/fantasy is way more popular than it used to be. I mean, cons used to just be something for Trekkies. Now everyone goes to cons. I'm sure things like BBT have had an impact as well. And no doubt, the Abrams films helped a lot. In any case, Trek is way more hip than it's ever been.

People didn't opt out of STiD because it was Trek but because it didn't appeal to enough to make it a "must see" over the big stuff out last month. I suspect for most people it was a "I'll wait for the Blu-ray/On Demand/Netflix" thing.

A super-spectacle changes things. Because, for a lot of people, it does put Trek in the "must see" column.

The other thing it does, which is huge, is it appeals to a younger audience. If Trek can grab the kids, then the sky's the limit.

I don't know if there are any metrics on it, but I have to think the median Trekkie age is at least 40. The franchise needs some new blood. And that's all that's missing.

ST09 made Trek whole again. STiD has made amazing inroads internationally. Bring the kids in, and there's no reason a Trek movie can't pass $500m if not $600m.

And the high-school college crowd loves sci-fi/horror stuff.

 

[Belz...]

I think that JJ Abrams has done a pretty good job so far with what he has

Trek movies have never been this popular. Not as much as I'd like for STID, but a very good pair of outings.

Star Trek is not and never will be that kind of blockbuster, no matter how much they try and amp it.

I think the "stigma" can be eventually reversed, myself.

Yeah, honestly, if they're going to do the Borg, they need to do them differently than we've ever seen them. A full-on Alpha Quadrant invasion sound like just the thing to make the Borg awesome again.

Yeah. No queen, scary borg (hell, they were more scary in "Q Who" than in First Contact), large-scale threat. Throw in Klingon and romulan cooperation. Could be exciting if done well.

 

[gabby_j]

If they did use the Borg, I really wouldn't mind. I think that a lot of people are mad because they were so secretive about the villain and then it turned out to be the one everyone already speculated it was. That said, they need to leave the secrecy stuff alone.

 

[starbuck]

So Lindelof has suggested Q and the Borg might be used in Trek XIII... I think it would be like 'the coolest idea ever', but I see fans everywhere shouting and screaming things like: 'Why can't we have a new villain instead of REHASHING old ones?!' God, I hate that word, REHASH...

Were people screaming things like that about the Joker when people learned he would be in The Dark Knight..? The way Nolan reimagined the Joker was so brilliant, and I think The Borg, Q, even the Pakleds could be reimagined in a brilliant way... It's not a REHASH...

Rehash suggests that NEW villains are always better... Shinzon anyone..? Ru'afo..? Soran..? Nero..? All NEW villains... Personally, I'd rather see the Borg..!

I hope they stay with Classic time frame,yes its changed but we don,t need to use tng villiains,maybe they can fill in the two yrs of the 5 yr mission with new aliens we just never got to see new worlds that have not been seen ,just as long as we have another good story .

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I feel like hipster sentiment for the past has condemned us to no new villains.