Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND

[JD]

As to Justin Lin's directorial qualities one can't but wonder, wtf !!!


http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0510912/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

His credits include directing Better Luck Tomorrow, a critically-acclaimed crime film (Peter Travers of Rolling Stone wrote "Lin is a talent to watch. There's a sting to this film that gets to you." Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times wrote that the film was a "disturbing and skillfully-told parable about growing up in today's America" and that Lin "reveals himself as a skilled and sure director."), as well as two of the best and actually good films in the Fast & Furious franchise. He revitalized the series from your usual street racing shlock to fun heist films.

I'll take the word of actual critics over some guy who made up his mind after reading his film credits on IMDb.

I guess you could say, his "directorial qualities" seem to be *ahem* Beyond you

Exactly. I remember hearing a lot about how the F&F movies improved a lot when Lin took over. That's why I've never been that worried about Beyond, and now after reading the post trailer interviews I'm thinking there is a chance this could be the best reboot movie yet, and could possibly even rank up there with Wrath of Kahn and First Contact.

If you're going to write a story set in Paris, you don't make up random architecture and geography and language and culture. You don't claim that the Eiffel Tower is ten miles tall and made of pasta and located on the banks of the Nile River, just across from Antarctica. You do the homework to find out what Paris is really like and you use that in your story.

Well, yes...because Paris is a real place. Warp drives are not. It's science-fiction. You seem to be forgetting or willfully ignoring the fiction part because of some vendetta against fun.

Star Trek isn't a scientific journal. It's not peer reviewed. It's drama. Drama takes license all the time with inconsequential stuff like the shielding of the warp core because it doesn't fucking matter.

Here's other things that would be accurate but would also ruin the plots.

Jack Bauer stuck in traffic on the 405.
Han Solo getting a headache.
Dr. Frankenstein getting his license revoked because of serious ethical concerns.
Don Draper getting herpes.
Walter White getting arrested in the third episode of Breaking Bad.

Hell, even when writing about real places authors will fudge the architecture and geography if they have to to tell their story.

 

[Christopher]

'Cuz if not, you should. Instead of telling us about how things should be in the movies and stuff.

I'm talking about how they could be. There's a difference. And I'm talking about what they are increasingly starting to be. This is actually happening, and I'm pleased with that.

 

[urbandefault]

'Cuz if not, you should. Instead of telling us about how things should be in the movies and stuff.

I'm talking about how they could be. There's a difference. And I'm talking about what they are increasingly starting to be. This is actually happening, and I'm pleased with that.

This makes no sense to me.

 

[OpenMaw]

This makes no sense to me.

Perhaps reading his post instead of recounting "TL;DR" might help.

I believe I can summarize this one point though. We're seeing harder Science Fiction in film and on television in the form of movies like The Martian, Interstellar, and shows like The Expanse. Showing that you can do hard(er) Science Fiction, have it be true to form and appealing to a wider audience.

 

[Kemaiku]

Star Trek never did that, it was junk science to tell an action story in space.

 

[urbandefault]

This makes no sense to me.

Perhaps reading his post instead of recounting "TL;DR" might help.

I believe I can summarize this one point though. We're seeing harder Science Fiction in film and on television in the form of movies like The Martian, Interstellar, and shows like The Expanse. Showing that you can do hard(er) Science Fiction, have it be true to form and appealing to a wider audience.

I read it. The "tl;dr" was tongue-in-cheek. Don't condescend. :P

I'm suggesting to a professional writer that instead of lecturing us about plot points and physics on a fan forum he could write the things he's talking about and get them on the silver screen. It's like tough love.

But if I have to explain that to you, maybe I could better spend my time digging holes in the yard.

That's sarcasm, if you didn't know. Thinking about digging holes makes my old arthritic knees hurt.

 

[mic of orion]

Clearly you'll watch the next Star Trek film no matter what, and than day later bitch how bad it was. I guess if you like simple and sterile plots, than yeah you'll love this one, however don't expect all fans of star trek to spend their money on this piece of trash.

Clearly you are not familiar with my posting history. I don't really do the bitching thing. Nor do I expect all Trek fans to like what I like. Yes, I'm willing to give any new Trek product a chance. I'm not going to dismiss it outright based on one 90 second teaser.

As to Justin Lin's directorial qualities one can't but wonder, wtf !!!


http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0510912/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

So you've seen these films and can tell me why they don't work? Care to share?

I wouldn't let this director direct Tesco's Xmas Ad let alone a $150 million film. Perhaps he is Asian and this might open Asian market was the thinking, however many fans won't bother seeing this film, me included.

And this is based on what? Are you going to articulate why or continue give vague answers. Yes Lin is Asian, but I doubt they are going to turn over a "$150 million film" that's studio tent pole, to him based on race. The fact his films have been very profitable are probably why they have confidence in him. Studios like Paramount are in the business of making money.

Every person I spoke to in RL, hates this film and its not even out, calling it Fast & Furious in space. Even on this forum most won't see it. I mean if you like pointless directionless plots and all action, most likely to include race in space or two, be my guest, don't expect me to spend £12-15 on this film.

I've given enough latitude to JJ and his Star Trek reboots, the last one was beyond appalling in my book, barely watchable. As to directors who made a flops in recent times after they were given massive budget, film history is littered with them.

As I've said I won't be watching this no matter what you say about this film, I had enough of badly scripted and rehashed story plots. However Star Trek TV series might be of interest indeed.

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films. Save my sanity and money. Should these films be shown on TV, I won't say no to them, JJ however is persona non grata in my book.

 

[Shalashaska]

Clearly you'll watch the next Star Trek film no matter what, and than day later bitch how bad it was. I guess if you like simple and sterile plots, than yeah you'll love this one, however don't expect all fans of star trek to spend their money on this piece of trash.

Clearly you are not familiar with my posting history. I don't really do the bitching thing. Nor do I expect all Trek fans to like what I like. Yes, I'm willing to give any new Trek product a chance. I'm not going to dismiss it outright based on one 90 second teaser.

So you've seen these films and can tell me why they don't work? Care to share?

I wouldn't let this director direct Tesco's Xmas Ad let alone a $150 million film. Perhaps he is Asian and this might open Asian market was the thinking, however many fans won't bother seeing this film, me included.

And this is based on what? Are you going to articulate why or continue give vague answers. Yes Lin is Asian, but I doubt they are going to turn over a "$150 million film" that's studio tent pole, to him based on race. The fact his films have been very profitable are probably why they have confidence in him. Studios like Paramount are in the business of making money.

Every person I spoke to in RL, hates this film and its not even out, calling it Fast & Furious in space. Even on this forum most won't see it. I mean if you like pointless directionless plots and all action, most likely to include race in space or two, be my guest, don't expect me to spend £12-15 on this film.

I've given enough latitude to JJ and his Star Trek reboots, the last one was beyond appalling in my book, barely watchable. As to directors who made a flops in recent times after they were given massive budget, film history is littered with them.

As I've said I won't be watching this no matter what you say about this film, I had enough of badly scripted and rehashed story plots. However Star Trek TV series might be of interest indeed.

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films. Save my sanity and money. Should these films be shown on TV, I won't say no to them, JJ however is persona non grata in my book.

I don't think there's any point in replying to this. He's definitely trolling.

Most people you've talked to "hate this film" after watching a trailer? Yeah, okay...

 

[Christopher]

Star Trek never did that, it was junk science to tell an action story in space.

I wouldn't say "never." It depended on the creator. Roddenberry himself did make a sincere effort to ground Star Trek in plausible science, consulting with scientists and engineers and think tanks and striving to achieve a healthy balance between a realistic grounding and dramatic license. He was one of the first SFTV producers who ever bothered to try researching the science; before Star Trek, the only TV series I know of that had really attempted for any kind of scientific literacy were Tom Corbett, Space Cadet (which had rocket scientist Willy Ley as its technical consultant) and Men into Space. On ST:TMP, Roddenberry consulted with another rocket scientist, NASA's Dr. Jesco von Puttkamer, to consult on the science, and Puttkamer's memo on the physics of warp drive was so solid that it anticipated Miguel Alcubierre's famous 1994 warp equations (a subject of serious study by theoretical physicists, and directly inspired by Star Trek) by some 16 years, lacking only the specific math. He also got astronaut Rusty Schweickart to consult on the spacewalk scenes to ensure their authenticity. And on TNG, he used Rick Sternbach and Mike Okuda as technical consultants, and in the early seasons, the show did a pretty good job of being grounded in real science. (For instance, the periodic binary nova in "Evolution" is such a good representation of the real phenomenon that you could practically use it in a classroom.)

Certainly Roddenberry made plenty of concessions for dramatic license or budgetary necessity (notably the absurd parallel-Earth premise built into the series' original pitch, which was the only way to make the show affordable by reusing existing props, costumes, etc.), and there were things he just misunderstood, but at least he tried. The problem is that few other Trek showrunners or filmmakers have ever made the attempt.

Every person I spoke to in RL, hates this film and its not even out, calling it Fast & Furious in space.

They can't hate a film they haven't seen. What they hate is their preconception of the film. I'm sure that a lot of people who are raving over The Force Awakens now were convinced they hated it 12 months ago, when all they had to go on was the first teaser.

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films.

I think that when one person "boycotts" something, it's just called "not seeing it."

 

[M'Sharak]

I don't think there's any point in replying to this. He's definitely trolling.

Whether he is or not, that's a thing you definitely shouldn't say in-thread. If you see what you think is a rule violation and want to call attention to it, the thing to do is to make use of the Notify Moderator (

) button on the post in question.

 

[Shalashaska]

I don't think there's any point in replying to this. He's definitely trolling.

Whether he is or not, that's a thing you definitely shouldn't say in-thread. If you see what you think is a rule violation and want to call attention to it, the thing to do is to make use of the Notify Moderator (

) button on the post in question.

Sorry about that, I'm new here. Will try to remember in future.

 

[Kemaiku]

Star Trek never did that, it was junk science to tell an action story in space.

I wouldn't say "never."

"Not often" then.

 

[M'Sharak]

Sorry about that, I'm new here. Will try to remember in future.

 

[Squiggy]

Even on this forum most won't see it.

Oh really?

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films. Save my sanity and money. Should these films be shown on TV, I won't say no to them, JJ however is persona non grata in my book.

Have fun being morally superior. The rest of the planet will be watching.

ETA: Current TFA box office, $890,295,329. I don't think JJ will miss your 15 quid.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

It's amusing what a short memory fandom has. Just over a year ago, Tor.com posted an articled called "You Cannot Tell if Star Wars: Episode VII is Good or Bad from 90 Seconds of Footage." This was in response to the kneejerk reactions of people who were assuming The Force Awakens would be terrible based on the first teaser trailer, because they made the mistake of forgetting that it was just a tiny fraction of the actual film and thus couldn't reveal all that much of substance about it. In the months that followed, we saw more trailers and interviews and articles that let us learn more about the film, and opinions changed for the better. And now the film itself is earning mostly positive reviews. But here we are, just fifty-some weeks later, and fans are rushing to judgment all over again about the Trek teaser. It's like fans have the memory of the proverbial goldfish. They're making the same unreasonable assumption that a tiny sliver of the film's content tells them everything about it. (Even though we already have a couple of great interviews from Lin and Pegg that make the film sound much richer and deeper than the trailer suggested.)

We've built this whole culture around movie trailers as big events, to the point that we now have promos for teasers for trailers for movies. But what we need to remember is that, bottom line, trailers are just commercials. And commercials should never be taken too seriously or too literally.

DaddlerTheDalek likes this post from Christopher.

 

[Paradise City]

Clearly you'll watch the next Star Trek film no matter what, and than day later bitch how bad it was. I guess if you like simple and sterile plots, than yeah you'll love this one, however don't expect all fans of star trek to spend their money on this piece of trash.

Clearly you are not familiar with my posting history. I don't really do the bitching thing. Nor do I expect all Trek fans to like what I like. Yes, I'm willing to give any new Trek product a chance. I'm not going to dismiss it outright based on one 90 second teaser.

So you've seen these films and can tell me why they don't work? Care to share?

I wouldn't let this director direct Tesco's Xmas Ad let alone a $150 million film. Perhaps he is Asian and this might open Asian market was the thinking, however many fans won't bother seeing this film, me included.

And this is based on what? Are you going to articulate why or continue give vague answers. Yes Lin is Asian, but I doubt they are going to turn over a "$150 million film" that's studio tent pole, to him based on race. The fact his films have been very profitable are probably why they have confidence in him. Studios like Paramount are in the business of making money.

Every person I spoke to in RL, hates this film and its not even out, calling it Fast & Furious in space. Even on this forum most won't see it. I mean if you like pointless directionless plots and all action, most likely to include race in space or two, be my guest, don't expect me to spend £12-15 on this film.

I've given enough latitude to JJ and his Star Trek reboots, the last one was beyond appalling in my book, barely watchable. As to directors who made a flops in recent times after they were given massive budget, film history is littered with them.

As I've said I won't be watching this no matter what you say about this film, I had enough of badly scripted and rehashed story plots. However Star Trek TV series might be of interest indeed.

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films. Save my sanity and money. Should these films be shown on TV, I won't say no to them, JJ however is persona non grata in my book.

Well, OK, but part of the JJ mafia is working on the series. So no rest for the wicked there. The third movie has better prospects I think. Maybe they'll go to the trouble of actually writing decent villains into this one.

I don't like the JJ mafia either. But I won't be "boycotting" either of these trek projects. I'll have fun seeing what they make of it and if the series doesn't strike a chord...well..I just won't watch it. Which is pretty much my attitude to anything really.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Clearly you'll watch the next Star Trek film no matter what, and than day later bitch how bad it was. I guess if you like simple and sterile plots, than yeah you'll love this one, however don't expect all fans of star trek to spend their money on this piece of trash.

Clearly you are not familiar with my posting history. I don't really do the bitching thing. Nor do I expect all Trek fans to like what I like. Yes, I'm willing to give any new Trek product a chance. I'm not going to dismiss it outright based on one 90 second teaser.

So you've seen these films and can tell me why they don't work? Care to share?

I wouldn't let this director direct Tesco's Xmas Ad let alone a $150 million film. Perhaps he is Asian and this might open Asian market was the thinking, however many fans won't bother seeing this film, me included.

And this is based on what? Are you going to articulate why or continue give vague answers. Yes Lin is Asian, but I doubt they are going to turn over a "$150 million film" that's studio tent pole, to him based on race. The fact his films have been very profitable are probably why they have confidence in him. Studios like Paramount are in the business of making money.

Every person I spoke to in RL, hates this film and its not even out, calling it Fast & Furious in space. Even on this forum most won't see it. I mean if you like pointless directionless plots and all action, most likely to include race in space or two, be my guest, don't expect me to spend £12-15 on this film.

I've given enough latitude to JJ and his Star Trek reboots, the last one was beyond appalling in my book, barely watchable. As to directors who made a flops in recent times after they were given massive budget, film history is littered with them.

As I've said I won't be watching this no matter what you say about this film, I had enough of badly scripted and rehashed story plots. However Star Trek TV series might be of interest indeed.

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films. Save my sanity and money. Should these films be shown on TV, I won't say no to them, JJ however is persona non grata in my book.

Since you basically repeated the same thing in three different posts and haven't answered any of my questions and requests, it pretty clear you're not interested in discussion.

 

[Trekkin]

The latest Star Trek trailer made me rethink something, and I've concluded any film JJ is director or a Producer off, I'll be boycotting it by a wide margin, this includes Star Wars films.

I think that when one person "boycotts" something, it's just called "not seeing it."

Unless he's going to try and organise a boycott. I sincerely hope he gets as many supporters as he did for his boycott of The Force Awakens.

I always liked Star Trek's approach to science - they basically quote-mine textbooks to make the plot work.

 

[RAMA]

She can move

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAI5qvpvwS8[/yt]

 

[mos6507]

Star Trek never did that, it was junk science to tell an action story in space.

This is an argument about a continuum. There is no duality between hard and soft sci-fi except in people's head.

Trek inhabits a mid-point where Star Wars is your space fantasy and something like Interstellar or The Martian is textbook hard sci-fi. But when Trek debuted, there was nothing like The Martian on TV. The closest were those Disney Man in Space documentaries. That is why it got the reputation it did back then, and it would not be fair to just retroactively bash it on this basis.