Can Fox takes the rights instead?
I want to see a Star trek/X-Men live action crossover.
The First Trailer
- Thread starter Squiggy
- Start date
Can Fox takes the rights instead?
I want to see a Star trek/X-Men live action crossover.
Again with the "popular culture" disconnect. And the "But... but... Dickens! Shakespeare!"
Pro tip: they were also pop culture.
Pro tip: they were also pop culture.
And I will admit that this possibility intrigues me.Elba's voiceover suggests another possibility - the Federation has run into a civilization that has zero interest in providing a "final frontier" and room for colonial expansion and is capable of smacking them down hard.
You still managed to surprise me Dennis... I made the erroneous assumption you'd be at the front of the line pooh-poohing (or throwing pooh-pooh at) this trailer. I'm not used to you being the voice of optimism.
Certainly no previous Trek movie has come close.
If you put trailers edited to show the kind of story content of trailers for TWOK or TUC in front of a theatrical movie now you'd be doing the audience a minor service by providing a brief pee break before the feature.
This trailer did nothing for me, and that's fine. I haven't given up on the movie itself yet. There have been plenty of Trek trailers that have blown worse than this one over the years, but the movies were still pretty good. And likewise, there have been some trailers that have made me super excited which led to extreme disappointment with the actual film.
But I'm confused about why people are so upset about the music selection? First, I'm sure there will be a few additional trailers, and I would be shocked if at least one of them isn't orch-heavy. But putting that aside, this was the song kid-Kirk was listening to as he drove his dad's car off the cliff. So the song is actually perfect and nostalgic for fans of '09 (if it's possible to feel nostalgia for something that recent). But it's also fitting because Kirk appears to be driving the Enterprise to its destruction (or close to it) here. So I have no problem with the music choice. I think it's great.
The trailer itself overall is what's mostly meh, and only because action sequences don't really do it for me without a good story. And there wasn't enough story exposure here to make me interested in the action I was seeing. I don't need a lot, just enough - and this one was severely lacking for me. Fortunately, marketing isn't the be-all and end-all. I'm sure I'll watch the film anyway.
But I'm confused about why people are so upset about the music selection? First, I'm sure there will be a few additional trailers, and I would be shocked if at least one of them isn't orch-heavy. But putting that aside, this was the song kid-Kirk was listening to as he drove his dad's car off the cliff. So the song is actually perfect and nostalgic for fans of '09 (if it's possible to feel nostalgia for something that recent). But it's also fitting because Kirk appears to be driving the Enterprise to its destruction (or close to it) here. So I have no problem with the music choice. I think it's great.
The trailer itself overall is what's mostly meh, and only because action sequences don't really do it for me without a good story. And there wasn't enough story exposure here to make me interested in the action I was seeing. I don't need a lot, just enough - and this one was severely lacking for me. Fortunately, marketing isn't the be-all and end-all. I'm sure I'll watch the film anyway.
I can actually see that working with the nuCrew.
Get a good screenwriter and a good director and we're set.
I'm taking odds that the film and new series will have nothing to do with one and another.
Well Guardians of the Galaxy take place "today".
But I'm not talking about how movie will be viewed 20 years from now, but how it comes off today. Star Trek is supposed to be about the future, but when you have a guy jumping on a cross-bike blasting the Beastie Boys that's not very futurey.
BTW can anyone honestly say they could picture Shatner's Kirk blasting any music over the PA?
They aren't now, nor is anyone alive from the time they were.
Sabotage is 20 years old. That's ancient history in this day and age.
Chances are 300 years from now people are more likely to sill be listening to popular music and riding some kind of motorcycle derivative than actually vanishing into thin air and instantly reappearing 100s of miles away--and not getting paid while doing it.
The problem with (newer) Star Trek is, by having the people act and doing things so different than how we do them now doesn't make them seem like they're from the future; it makes them seem less human.
Never mind I could list all the things people do as hobbies now that people did 300 years ago, but I can't be bothered.
He probably listens to that guy who did those bizarre "artistic" covers of Lucy in the Sky and Rocket Man.
Wow.
Not sure I really see the problem. Tom Paris had an interest in 20th century stuff and it didn't kill the show.
I'm not saying it's not believable, I'm saying it's not necessary, even counterproductive.
Generally what attracts people to SF is to see stuff they don't usually see around them everyday.
Which was played for laughs, and not that often on a 7 season show.
Now we have one movie every couple of years. I just don't think "Kirk is into 20th century stuff" is a note that's very relevant to the character for the limited screentime he gets.
^It's a scene that probably won't last more than 30 seconds before they move on. I don't think it will be an issue either way.
Watching this trailer, my first instinct was, "Wow, this is TOS". Crew stranded on an alien planet, struggling to figure a way to survive? Definitely TOS. It's a welcome change of pace from the space opera heavy past two movies (which I loved) and explores another common dimension of Star Trek.
While I liked the trailer a lot, I don't think it is perfect in the way it is presented, or at least not to my sensibilities. But I understand, it's simply to play up the action aspect. I feel that you can actually see a different kind of movie under the spectacle, and hints of a more thoughtful movie. In that, I mean that both action and thoughtful Trek fans should get their due, if they keep an open mind.
One thing I did notice was that the movie actually seems to offer more breathing room for character moments, compared to the previous two. I expect we'll see a lot more of McCoy, in particular, especially in relation to Spock. I appreciate that.
It's a promising trailer. I look forward to the movie.
While I liked the trailer a lot, I don't think it is perfect in the way it is presented, or at least not to my sensibilities. But I understand, it's simply to play up the action aspect. I feel that you can actually see a different kind of movie under the spectacle, and hints of a more thoughtful movie. In that, I mean that both action and thoughtful Trek fans should get their due, if they keep an open mind.
One thing I did notice was that the movie actually seems to offer more breathing room for character moments, compared to the previous two. I expect we'll see a lot more of McCoy, in particular, especially in relation to Spock. I appreciate that.
It's a promising trailer. I look forward to the movie.
If you watched the first Star Trek in '09 then you'd know that Shatner's Kirk has nothing to do with this universe as Pine's Kirk was brought up completely differently.
Yeah, I liked that line from McCoy:
"At least I won't die alone".
He sees Spock has been beamed away.
"Well, that's just typical".
Similar threads
