I think everyone is reading too much into the reshoots thing.
Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
The movie's dead, DEAD I tell you!
hmm. maybe that mean he was in it but didn't get a freebie bag (unlike the primary cast who all got freebies bags)?
Star Trek series, behind the scenes!
http://www.trekbrasilis.org/2016/03/16/primeiras-imagens-de-gravacao-da-serie-star-trek/
http://www.trekbrasilis.org/2016/03/16/primeiras-imagens-de-gravacao-da-serie-star-trek/
Cool!
You might also want to post a link to that over in the Future of Trek thread, where much of the discussion of the new series is taking place.
Yeah, it doesn't seem like that big of deal. I don't really buy the whole "test audiences HATED it" thing. It just doesn't seem like a very credible rumor from start to finish. The reshoots themselves don't necessarily have to be that extensive, even if that were the case. Just a few shots with Shohreh Aghdashloo appearing on a monitor somewhere, some CUT TO's for Saldana, Taslim, and whoever else being added.
Yes, if there's any truth to the story, it's probably about a screening of what they call an "assembly cut", which is where they put everything they've got into a very long version, before they start to shape it into a proper movie. I doubt the movie is in any shape for test screenings yet (possibly in a month or two).
I don't think a general audience would care much about these things.
If that test screening rumour is true, the production process behind this film is sounding eerily similar to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.
Rushed script as a result of poor first drafts from scrapped writers, new director coming in, new production design, late filming schedule, negative reactions to ending in early screenings, late reshoots ordered by studio to possibly modify and fix ending...
Let's just hope it results in a film as good as The Wrath of Khan!
Rushed script as a result of poor first drafts from scrapped writers, new director coming in, new production design, late filming schedule, negative reactions to ending in early screenings, late reshoots ordered by studio to possibly modify and fix ending...
Let's just hope it results in a film as good as The Wrath of Khan!
Trying to imagine what would be in a Star Trek Cast Members Freebie Bag...
Travel 3-D Chess?
Vulcan Mouth Harp?
A Tribble?
Reproduction VISOR?
Emotion Chip!
Genuine Riker Beard Kit?
Katarian Eggs?
Autographed Picture of Shat?...ah, of course, no...
The list could be endless!
Agreed, but all prejudices (and the trailer) aside the reshoots combined with the late sacking of Orci, seemingly perfunctory hiring of Lin (let's not kid ourselves, motivated solely by the desire to capitalize on the Guardians of the Galaxy and F&F audience), resultant shortened pre-production time, and rushed principal photography and post-production schedules (not only for the 50th anniversary, but this thing has to premiere internationally on July 8!) do not bode well for the final product. Everything I've read objectively points to a very rushed, if not chaotic production.
If Lin, Pegg, et al. are able to pull this together I'm prepared to be pleasantly surprised, but I'm personally sitting out the premiere pending some reviews.
Let's not kid ourselves. Every company on this planet makes decisions based on what it can do to sell its product to consumers.
Nope.
That's really the only way to use reviews by critics. Know what you like, and be familiar with what they like and look for in a movie. Even if your tastes tend to run completely opposite those of the critic (Mick LaSalle of the San Francisco Chronicle used to work like this for me) you should be able to gauge pretty well from their opinions whether a particular movie is one you'll want to see.If I sat out every movie I wanted to see until I saw good reviews, I'd never see any movies.I've noticed a lot of the movies I really enjoy are always given like C or Ds by critics. I guess I could use them as a barometer, but just backwards.
Being familiar with what they like is the problem. I don't see enough films in theater to really pay any attention to any one critic.Or any of them for that matter. I just always notice afterward that the reviews given for ones I do see and enjoy are usually bad. I see about one film a year in theater, sometimes less. I have to really be looking forward to something to see it in theater and by that point I pretty much figure I know I'll enjoy it unless they screw it up beyond all imagining.
This is kinda what I'm talking about, but not necessarily critics. I'll also be looking at viewer reactions -- many of them here -- and from that I'll know if it's something I want to spend $8-15 and 2 hours on. I've been around long enough to know when reactions are genuinely enthusiastic or simply apologetic, conformist, or acquiescent (i.e. "It was good enough." or "What did you expect?"). To each their own, but for the first time since TWOK (really!) I'm not running out on opening day simply because Paramount put the Star Trek (TM) name on a strip of celluloid or DCP.
Again, this is just me, but I'm passionate about movies, and I hate seeing a bad movie -- and not because of the wasted money or time. I hate it even more when a mediocre or poor film is due to industry machinations rather than a misguided but well-intentioned effort to create quality entertainment. These days I'm well-served by waiting a week or two for the hype to die, the theaters to empty, and make an informed choice from the many, many entertainment options out there. And it only takes a few minutes online to make the determination.
Similar threads
