[video]https://youtu.be/GTil0-smOJQ?t=50[/video]
Star Trek 4
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
Hammer3246
Sr Member
Oh. Okay. I have the problem You just keep dreaming your ST fantasy movie. I'll just move along.
Cheers
Sent from my SM-N915W8 using Tapatalk
Cheers
Sent from my SM-N915W8 using Tapatalk
Hammer3246
Sr Member
That's a great point. Perhaps you should follow it.
Sent from my SM-N915W8 using Tapatalk
Hammer3246
Sr Member
Is that because of your post count?
Hammer3246
Sr Member
Enlighten me . What am not getting?
brandomack
Sr Member
Hammer3246
Sr Member
That sure persuaded me .:thumbsup
Mola Rob
Sr Member
That and the fact that Paramount wanted a blockbuster franchise with movies that make far more than any Trek movie ever made in the past. All they had to do to achieve that was change everything that made Trek what it was and turn it into a generic special effects driven summer franchise with stories that are utterly forgetable.
And you know... the producers, writers and actors telling the fans to fu** off and that THEY'RE the ones who make movies.
Star Trek is my favorite franchise of all time, but I'm not so devoted to it that I won't acknowledge that a lot of stuff it's put out there is straight up bad. Insurrection followed up on what was a very promising start at a full TNG focused movie and squandered it into a below average mediocrity that has since drowned in irrelevancy. Nemesis was so horribly mishandled that nobody knew how to properly handle the characters. You want to emphasize how different Picard and Shinzon are? The movie could have been saved if you had only worked Picard's artificial heart into the story since that was such a crucial character developing moment for him in the series and it would have given Picard something TANGIBLE to show Shinzon that the events in one's life do have a lasting impact on who you are! GOD DANGIT! How could they have missed that opportunity?
And a lot of the problems I see in Nemesis I still see in these new movies. We have a need for a film to appeal to a greater audience, we have writers who really don't understand the characters, we have scenes written for pure self-indulgence and an almost complete lack of respect for the source material. I fear if I list how they mishandled Khan I'd be reported for spamming so I'll just leave it there.
Whatever good faith Trek09 brought to the entertainment industry, it did not carry over with Into Darkness. It was more of the same and didn't promise us anything new. If the next film doesn't have Carol Marcus or follow up on the whole Klingon schtick that was beaten into our heads, the film is completely skippable. Trek09 ends with their five year long mission and there was no 'Khan' incident. I mean, Kirk's death and resurrection was handled with all the grace of an episodic reset button rather than a moment that stuck with the characters long past the film.
Hammer3246
Sr Member
glunark
Sr Member
I am not going to say Darkness was as good as 09, although it did have some great visuals.
However none permanent deaths have been the staple of the original series.
Kirk's death in Amok Time, Scotty killed by Apollo and Nomad, most of the crew being turned into tetrahedrons, McCoy's fatal illness, suddenly cured by the end of the episode, Uhura's complete brain wipe, everything back to normal the next week.
And that is just TOS, you want to talk about reducing dramatic impact. Remember how terrible it was seeing the enterprise burn in star trek 3? And how it just wasn't the same in Generations?
That is because by the time generations came along we had already seen the enterprise D blow up seven times.
The sins of the JJ films are there, but to say they aren't true to the series that came before utilises a very selective memory.
However none permanent deaths have been the staple of the original series.
Kirk's death in Amok Time, Scotty killed by Apollo and Nomad, most of the crew being turned into tetrahedrons, McCoy's fatal illness, suddenly cured by the end of the episode, Uhura's complete brain wipe, everything back to normal the next week.
And that is just TOS, you want to talk about reducing dramatic impact. Remember how terrible it was seeing the enterprise burn in star trek 3? And how it just wasn't the same in Generations?
That is because by the time generations came along we had already seen the enterprise D blow up seven times.
The sins of the JJ films are there, but to say they aren't true to the series that came before utilises a very selective memory.
Similar threads
