Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
Did anyone else see a trailer for Pete's Dragon? There was an unusual disclaimer about the following preview being shown by some kind of agreement with Disney. Then of course we saw the preview with Karl Urban. This was a Carmik theater. I thought it was a bit...odd.
My only negative about STB was how fast everything was, no room to catch your breath and the Star Trek message not really being rubbed in.
I enjoyed it but I think for a lot of people who went to see a Star Trek film, it didn't feel like 'home'.
As I said earlier, 2 hours just went so fast that I'd have preferred another 30 minutes of dialogue, maybe a short pro-logue (Edison backstory) and an epilogue (away mission) to close it out.
However, I fully realised how little time Lin had.
I was pleasantly surprised by how packed the theater was when I saw the movie. I just back from seeing it. I did not think the room would be full on a Sunday at 2:30pm showing but it was.
I read (and God help me, don't ask where, all the interviews run into one after a while and it'd take me an hour to find it -- but trust me) that Lin said Pegg and Jung had enough script for two movies. They had an extensive backstory for Edison. Of course, the main characters come first, and time was a factor, so a lot of that must've been what was taken out.
Yeah. The depth wasn't there. The message regarding Krall was not on as on point as it could've been. How everything related to Kirk apparently getting his groove back is also not easy to see. Was it something about Krall? Was this actually the best adventure he had been on in the three years (I hope not)?
But, I'm not sure if the movie wanted to be deep or not, which is also part of the problem. It was a nice romp that glossed over some potentially deeper moments.
Not to rewrite things (OK, I am), but get rid of the opening comic bit and make the first five or ten minutes Edison's backstory. A flashback prologue that maybe ends with him taping the message we hear late in the movie (ominous foreboding). OK, the surprise of the Franklin is gone for the audience, but that still doesn't take away from how it's used in the end. We still don't have to know Edison is Krall, either. Fast forward one hundred years to Kirk roaming the corridors. He hands off the rejected diplomatic gift to Spock (we need to establish that exists) and things go on from there.
And yes, maybe there should've been an epilogue where they discussed (no more than a couple of minutes) how tragic a character Edison really was -- that warriors who help create peace for all peoples should get help transitioning to be able to enjoy that peace, themselves. In other words, in a way, those he fought for used him then let him down. A comment on how vets were treated after Vietnam and even how some were treated after the Gulf Wars. Maybe Kirk realizes he has no business feeling bored by a world that allows him the luxury of star-hopping and not having to constantly be a peace keeper. Something like that.
Last edited:
I saw it for the 2nd time yesterday at a bigger cinema.
The screen was 25m wide (80ft).
So big that I felt I was moving if I focused completely on the screen.
The cinemas was quite full.
I think we do have to cut Lin some slack due to the compressed delivery schedule.
But, not every movie needs to be trimmed to the 'magical' 2 hour length nor be none stop.
The screen was 25m wide (80ft).
So big that I felt I was moving if I focused completely on the screen.
The cinemas was quite full.
I think we do have to cut Lin some slack due to the compressed delivery schedule.
But, not every movie needs to be trimmed to the 'magical' 2 hour length nor be none stop.
An important part of STB is Kirk's age compared to his father.
Kirk is now the same age George Kirk was when he died.
I've seen this movie twice now. Somehow, I don't think we watched the same film, my friend. Each of the items you complain about is clearly shown.
As a combat veteran, I understood clearly the message without a Picard-like sermon.
Much of the beginning is similar to Kirk questioning whether retirement or, (TMP) the Admiralty, is right for him in TOS films.
I think those who have said there is no substance... should, perhaps, watch it again.
Just got back from seeing it.
This is easily the best of the three, and arguably one of the best ever. A fun ride, clearly Pegg/Jung & Lin know how to make a Star Trek movie that just works.
This is easily the best of the three, and arguably one of the best ever. A fun ride, clearly Pegg/Jung & Lin know how to make a Star Trek movie that just works.
Well, the theaters are partners in these movies. They need to be able to show them multiple times a day. Hopefully, there is plenty of deleted scenes that can be added to the home release.
What I meant by that was movies can be longer and be successful like Avatar and Titanic.
If there needs to be an extra 5 or 10 or 15 minutes to flesh things out a bit, no harm to do so.
Though that means less daily showings. There is probably a behind-the-scenes push by theaters to keep these films around the two-hour mark.
He's now a year OLDER than Dad when he died. Kirk is now 30, George was 29 (so born in 2204).
There's for damn sure a push by me. Much over two hours and I gotta pee.
I wonder if the story line in STB cut too close to the mark?
Star Trek (I felt) always worked best when we look at aliens through the prism of human eyes with Spock providing the 'alien' perspective, Bones providing the heart on the sleeves human point of view and Kirk in the middle trying to pass judgement.
If Krall was indeed an alien, abandoned by his government and felt compelled to strike out, Star Trek's 50th anniversary message of unity and teamwork from the movie would have come across better with Kirk as arbiter.
The Enterprise and Yorktown would still have under attack by Krall, in the mistaken belief that the Federation was not on his side but under the direction of his government.
Star Trek (I felt) always worked best when we look at aliens through the prism of human eyes with Spock providing the 'alien' perspective, Bones providing the heart on the sleeves human point of view and Kirk in the middle trying to pass judgement.
If Krall was indeed an alien, abandoned by his government and felt compelled to strike out, Star Trek's 50th anniversary message of unity and teamwork from the movie would have come across better with Kirk as arbiter.
The Enterprise and Yorktown would still have under attack by Krall, in the mistaken belief that the Federation was not on his side but under the direction of his government.
I am going to see it again. I don't doubt I missed some things. I'll take what you've said under advisement.
The previous two movies were "events". Beyond suffers from being "another Star Trek movie". But hopefully positive word of mouth and reviews will mean less of a drop-off after opening weekend.
Similar threads
