Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
The Golden Gael
Nov 12, 2011



That's one movie I'm glad we dodged. It's not really a realistic resolution to overcoming daddy issues if Q just shows up, snaps his fingers and daddy's back for you to have a fireside chat before he goes away again. And I doubt we would have gotten something on the level of Tapestry.

I think they did it proper with the ghost of George Kirk looming over Kirk's head especially as he moves into more and more directionless space missions long after his "save Earth" thing got old. Not literally of course, but maybe a Catspaw movie wouldn't be the worst idea to come out of the film franchise.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Timby
Dec 23, 2006

Your mother!



Mr. Apollo posted:

Wasn't the movie after Beyond supposed to be about that and (possibly) resolve them? The talks with Hemsworth and Pine broke down because the studio wouldn't agree to their prices.

I'm waiting for a haircut but yes. I'll expand when I get home.

Timby
Dec 23, 2006

Your mother!



Timby posted:

I'm waiting for a haircut but yes. I'll expand when I get home.

Almost forgot I promised this.

Anyway. The script for Star Trek 4 was essentially a recycled version of the script for 3 that got Bob Orci and his two bobos summarily fired. Some renegade Vulcans got their hands on some leftover red matter from the Narada (don't ask me how), and they intended to detonate it in an attempt to restore the original timeline and bring back Vulcan. The Enterprise is dispatched to intervene. Kirk has a crisis of conscience and thinks maybe it would be better that way, because then he'd know his dad. ShatnerKirk and HemsworthKirk show up to talk him through his bullshit, and through some weird time distortion fuckery, HemsworthKirk actually winds up fighting alongside PineKirk to stop the renegades.

Then Paramount lowballed Chris Hemsworth and the whole thing fell apart.

feedmyleg
Dec 25, 2004

EVERY FAIRY TALE NEEDS ITS HERO.

Sounds awful. The entire universe continuing to revolve around Kirk and Spock and the Enterprise is so loving lame. Despite my problems with Beyond, at least it just let the crew deal with a planetary-scale problem rather than a universe-scale problem.

Also, mods, can we get the thread's name changed to Stars Treks: The Motion Pictures?

Detective No. 27
Jun 7, 2006



I thought long and hard about pluralizing Treks or not and I stand by my decision.

Drunkboxer
Jun 30, 2007


feedmyleg posted:

Sounds awful. The entire universe continuing to revolve around Kirk and Spock and the Enterprise is so loving lame.

*chomps cigar producerishly*

But how can you have Star Track without Mister Spock???

Timby
Dec 23, 2006

Your mother!



Drunkboxer posted:

*chomps cigar producerishly*

But how can you have Star Track without Mister Spock???

That was actually one of the reasons The Motion Picture was held up for so long. Paramount was refusing to give a green light to the movie without Nimoy's involvement, but Nimoy was in the middle of a very nasty lawsuit against Gulf + Western and Gene Roddenberry, over the use of his likeness without getting any residuals (one of the big kickers was a series of Heineken ads that had Spock chugging beer).

Eventually, Bob Wise went over to Nimoy's house and made a plea to get him to do the movie. Nimoy thought about it and finally called his agent and said, "Don't do anything crazy. Just get me the same deal Shatner got." Hence the favored-nation clause that lasted through the movies.

Mr. Apollo
Nov 8, 2000



Oh yeah I forgot that Shatner was going to be in it. He made a huge deal about not being in any of the JJ Treks.

Gatts
Jan 2, 2001

Goodnight Moon


Nap Ghost

All the JJ Treks are terrible. Utterly terrible. They are offensive as is he as a director, extremely limited and half assed lazy product just made shiny without substance. He is poison to anything he touches.

All 6 original Trek movies hold value and contribute something to cinema or the franchise. The TNG Treks less so. I would have loved a DS9 movie series, it had more ripe ground to set something up and establish a wonderous setting aftermath of the Dominion War.

feedmyleg
Dec 25, 2004

EVERY FAIRY TALE NEEDS ITS HERO.

Upon recent rewatch '09 still works for me, but just barely. It's a collection of terrific moments thrown at you so breathlessly and with so much charm that it almost tricks you into not realizing that nothing makes sense or connects or is earned. Everything is a contrived screenwriting shortcut just getting from moment to moment. It's a Very Stupid Movie that has moments of brilliance but is extremely difficult to defend objectively.

davidspackage
May 16, 2007



Exciting Lemon

It also has a really great soundtrack. I still find it very fun to watch even though I'll readily admit it's a mess. On my first watch I was kind of confused because they entirely cut out what happens to Nero between the moment Kirk's dad rams his ship and when he returns.

Payndz
Sep 22, 2006

They smelled of pubs, and Wormwood Scrubs, and too many right-wing meetings.

So I twatted them with a magic yo-yo. Because, hell, why not?


The most stupid/aggravating thing about 09 was the whole "you have the conn, not-even-graduated Cadet Kirk"/"Woohoo! I'm in command forever! No take-backsies!" contrivance to put Kirk in the captain's chair, where he has to be at the end of the origin story. It'd be like the captain of the USS Nimitz putting the kid who brings his coffee in charge of a shift for a joke, then getting killed in a surprise attack and the kid now stays in command of a carrier strike group because nobody can remove him. It's almost aggressively insulting to the audience, but the filmmakers didn't care because they had no other way to get him there within their dumb hash of a story.

The second-most was Kirk and Spock actively loathing each other for most of the film, then suddenly becoming best buds for no reason because again, they have to be friends at the end to meet audience expectations.

There were things about 09 that worked, like the emotion of Kirk's father's sacrifice and the later echo when Spock loses his mother, but there was so much else overpowering these moments that was painfully forced and moronic.

Payndz fucked around with this message at 07:36 on Aug 8, 2020

VoodooXT
Feb 24, 2006
I want Tong Po! Give me Tong Po!

Timby posted:

At the time he was cast, it was Khan. The script was ready to go.

Without breaking some NDAs, I can tell you that this is not true.

The Golden Gael
Nov 12, 2011



Gatts posted:

All the JJ Treks are terrible. Utterly terrible. They are offensive as is he as a director, extremely limited and half assed lazy product just made shiny without substance. He is poison to anything he touches.

All 6 original Trek movies hold value and contribute something to cinema or the franchise. The TNG Treks less so. I would have loved a DS9 movie series, it had more ripe ground to set something up and establish a wonderous setting aftermath of the Dominion War.

JJ Treks are better than any of the TNG flicks because at the very least they move fast. It's like being on a car ride somewhere you don't want to go but at least the scenery goes by quick enough you don't have time to stop and think about why it sucks.

Beyond is good Star Trek. This thread got me rewatching TMP last night and god I love that movie.

Gatts
Jan 2, 2001

Goodnight Moon


Nap Ghost

All JJ movies go fast for the reasons you describe except the result is suck. It's his only gimmick to try to cover his flaws and create excitement and he knows nothing else. It's also forced.

The Golden Gael
Nov 12, 2011



JJ is a bad filmmaker and Kurtzman/Orci are bad writers. It's a wonder 2009 turned out as decent as it did.

That said, I can't find too much redeemable about the TNG movies because they try to be action-y but are just boring. I also realise the irony that my favourite Star Trek movie is the boring one, but it's a contemplative kind of boring for me and I enjoy the slice-of-life-esque moments like the chaos on the bridge when Kirk first arrives. Say what you will about the original six movies, but they're all totally unique from one another.

sponges
Sep 14, 2011



JJ makes perfectly entertaining movies. You just can’t think about them too much

Mr. Apollo
Nov 8, 2000



I liked the 09 movie and Darkness was OK. I was unreasonably annoyed with Beyond because of the use of Sabotage.

As previously mentioned, I liked them because they’re fast paced with decent action so you can just sit back and relax and watch the movie. If you think about them then yeah, they start to fall apart.

Detective No. 27
Jun 7, 2006



JJ Treks being fast works pretty well for them. But I do like the slowness of the previous movies, and shows. The biggest problem with modern Star Trek TV is that tv lengths are a good 10-15 minutes shorter than they used to be, so there's less time for the characters to just faff about.

sponges
Sep 14, 2011



09 and Into Darkness come across like they were written by someone who never watched Star Trek and gleaned everything about it from pop culture parody. They’re Star Wars movies with a Trek sheen. Entertaining enough because JJ can make a slick movie but man, talk about missing the point of the series.

feedmyleg
Dec 25, 2004

EVERY FAIRY TALE NEEDS ITS HERO.

Detective No. 27 posted:

The biggest problem with modern Star Trek TV is that

I think there are too many factors at play to point a finger at any single one, but ultimately they add up to the differences between highly-episodic and highly-serialized TV. So much of 90s Trek was able to be character-centric slice-of-life stuff because that's how episodic TV works—it's more "what are these characters up to this week?" than making sure that Everything Matters. Serialized TV, though, is crafted in such a way that everything is meant to point directly toward a specific end-goal (unless you're making it up on the fly like Picard). Because of this every moment on screen has to be moving toward a larger plot point and you don't have the time or space for any of that slice-of-life stuff, unless you have to write a bottle episode for budgetary reasons.

And this is actually where I feel like a lot of the Trek movies fail, too. Everything has to be Important and Weighty in the films because, well, someone spent a lot of money to get it on screen. There are moments in some Trek films that strike a remarkably good balance (like much of Voyage Home) but on the whole the films can't tap into what makes TV Trek great because so much of what we love about TV trek comes down to the strengths of episodic TV.

Cross-Section
Mar 18, 2009



I miss this warp effect:

https://twitter.com/ultrakillblast/...7727603712?s=20

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

sean10mm
Jun 29, 2005

Only dead doggos
follow the stream.




I like this Wrath of Khan one slightly more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8uR9A8TDaw

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply