Revision3.com Shows Schedule Inside Revision3 Store


Go Back   Revision3 Forums > Shows > Totally Rad Show

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

  #11  
Old 01-28-2013, 07:28 PM
darth-ed's Avatar
darth-ed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Alderaan
Posts: 780
Status: Online
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stubadub View Post
JJ's Star Trek was much different but I think it's far more successful that Star Trek 3,5(god that was terrible), 7, 9 and 10. I welcomed the new direction.
I'm not saying there weren't bad Star Trek movies before Abrams took over, certainly. (I agree with much of your list, but, for the record, I think Star Trek III is underrated and better than most people remember.) I think Star Trek movies have been bad for so long that people were looking were looking for something different, but that doesn't make it good. I could dissect all the myriad problems I have with J.J. Abrams' Star Trek, but it basically boils down to Star Trek is supposed to be science fiction. J.J. Abrams clearly doesn't get that because he made an action movie. And if the 9-minute IMAX preview of Into Darkness is any indication, it's even more of an action movie than the previous one. And if he doesn't get Star Trek, then that makes me extremely worried that he doesn't get Star Wars either.
__________________
Twitter: @darthed
PSN: Darth_Ed_77
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-29-2013, 03:43 AM
stubadub's Avatar
stubadub
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,830
Status: Offline
Default

I've rewatched III recently and I think it is one of the least problematic of the odds, but it's still awkward and unevenly paced. I don't feel so strongly about it that I can't comprehend why you appreciate it though.

I think the first movie is better than it gets credit for. Its slow, but I feel like its a longer bigger budget episode of the original series. I really liked the director's cut update they did about 10 years back or so.

I get that the Star Trek update focused on action more than the other movies did, but I don't think that means it isn't science fiction too, and I don't have a problem with a slightly different take. I don't think losing the nautical vibe and increasing the action does a disservice to the original series and movies. After years of Star Trek's descent into mediocrity it was great to see life breathed into the property again.
__________________
Last.fm Twitter
XBL = stubadubb
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-29-2013, 02:37 PM
jtv's Avatar
jtv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Boston
Posts: 910
Status: Offline
Default

I think a big problem JJ faced with Star Trek, specifically among ST fans, is that there's no current ST show on tv. The movie has been the only new ST material for years since Enterprise ended.

I certainly don't have a problem with movies being more action-y, and I think a lot of ST fans would feel the same if there was a tv series to fall back on if they didn't care for the direction the movies take.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-31-2013, 06:42 PM
darth-ed's Avatar
darth-ed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Alderaan
Posts: 780
Status: Online
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stubadub View Post
I think the first movie is better than it gets credit for. Its slow, but I feel like its a longer bigger budget episode of the original series. I really liked the director's cut update they did about 10 years back or so.
I agree. And what I appreciate most about The Motion Picture is that it's the most science fiction-y of all the Star Trek movies and the most like a really good episode of the classic Star Trek TV show. The main problem with that movie is that the pace is just glacially slow in spots, but if you have a Blu-ray or DVD player that can play smoothly at 1.5x to get through some of the slower parts, it's close to perfect.
__________________
Twitter: @darthed
PSN: Darth_Ed_77
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-31-2013, 07:01 PM
gm_wil's Avatar
gm_wil
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,608
Status: Online
Send a message via AIM to gm_wil Send a message via MSN to gm_wil
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darth-ed View Post
I agree. And what I appreciate most about The Motion Picture is that it's the most science fiction-y of all the Star Trek movies and the most like a really good episode of the classic Star Trek TV show. The main problem with that movie is that the pace is just glacially slow in spots, but if you have a Blu-ray or DVD player that can play smoothly at 1.5x to get through some of the slower parts, it's close to perfect.
Star Trek the Motion Pictures is the only movie I've ever fallen asleep to. I don't know what it is, but I fight sleep throughout like I got hit by a tranquilizer and as soon Spock is in the jetpack and goes outside the ship and starts drifting towards the bright . . . . *zzzzzzzzzzz*

-
__________________
"Here's to the Army and Navy and the battles they have won; here's to America's colors, the colors that never run."
"May the wings of liberty never lose a feather." -Jack Burton
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-01-2013, 12:33 AM
damnedeyez's Avatar
damnedeyez
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,389
Status: Offline
Default

Apparently I need to rewatch the TOS movies...then again, I really should watch TOS start to finish someday as well.

I hadn't realized I'd seen the first 6 movies...
__________________
...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-01-2013, 01:04 AM
trunolimit's Avatar
trunolimit
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,024
Status: Offline
Default

I was listening to this week in tech and they made a good point. JJ was and is a huge star wars fan. He never got into star trek. He came into that without having been a fan. So we can expect him to handle the star wars property with a little more care and thoughtfulness.
__________________
http://card.mygamercard.net/TheTruNolimit.png

"Typing google into google will break the internet"
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-01-2013, 05:09 AM
tsmith15's Avatar
tsmith15
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,671
Status: Online
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trunolimit View Post
I was listening to this week in tech and they made a good point. JJ was and is a huge star wars fan. He never got into star trek. He came into that without having been a fan. So we can expect him to handle the star wars property with a little more care and thoughtfulness.
Star Trek was one of my favorite Star Trek movies and I thought he did a fantastic job of calling back to the original series while still being new and awesome. Considering he wasn't a big fan that's really surprising.

The more I think about JJ + Star Wars the less sense it makes. How will he differentiate it from Star Trek? Will he try to imitate another director like he did with Super 8? Will he try to imitate Spielberg again? If he is, why didn't they just hire Spielberg? Is he going to try to imitate Lucas? If he is, fuck. Are they not going to let him have a lot of control and try to make it a "studio movie" as similar to IV-V-VI as possible? If so, why hire a big name?

I just don't understand why they want him, and why he would do it. I can't imagine he'll do a 3rd Star Trek movie now though, that's for sure.
__________________
Xbox Live: Yellow Fruit15
PSN: I_Like_Bees
Vacation Blog: http://goodeatsgreatseats.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-01-2013, 11:12 AM
trunolimit's Avatar
trunolimit
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,024
Status: Offline
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmith15 View Post
Star Trek was one of my favorite Star Trek movies and I thought he did a fantastic job of calling back to the original series while still being new and awesome. Considering he wasn't a big fan that's really surprising.

The more I think about JJ + Star Wars the less sense it makes. How will he differentiate it from Star Trek? Will he try to imitate another director like he did with Super 8? Will he try to imitate Spielberg again? If he is, why didn't they just hire Spielberg? Is he going to try to imitate Lucas? If he is, fuck. Are they not going to let him have a lot of control and try to make it a "studio movie" as similar to IV-V-VI as possible? If so, why hire a big name?

I just don't understand why they want him, and why he would do it. I can't imagine he'll do a 3rd Star Trek movie now though, that's for sure.
They also said the only reason he did super 8 was to kiss Spielberg's butt and gain Spielberg as a friend.
__________________
http://card.mygamercard.net/TheTruNolimit.png

"Typing google into google will break the internet"

Last edited by trunolimit : 02-01-2013 at 11:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:28 PM.

Rev3 Forum RSS


© 2005-2010 Revision3 Corporation