Abrams is Destroying Star Trek like Lucas has Destroyed Star Wars — Page 20

skyjedi2005 said:

Then again Simon Pegg as Scotty... his scottish accent is real

No it's not.  Pegg is English.

Just saying.

So trekmovie confirms the planet destroyed in this movie.  It proves the break they are making from continuity.

The new trailers look like a action movie that hollywood regularly puts out in the summer and completely generic.  Generic and expensive. 

Star Trek is supposed to be so much more than just a movie of the week or month, or a dumb action flick for guys who like naked chicks and football.  I like those things too, but star trek is supposed to make you wonder and be thinking mans science fiction when it is done right.

JJ Abrams promised an updated Trek that was a realised future with plausible science in its science fiction,  Instead we get water pipes in engineering straight out of the early 20th century.  This is supposed to be the 23rd century.  Will they have apple stores and itunes and ipods in the twenty third century, how about bad actors who look like they are from a teen soap drama.

Naval Vessels and submarines in the nineties look far more high tech than what is shown in pictures of this movie.

This is a dumb action flick like Independence Day, Or Starship Troopers.  And it does not even have the heart of First Contact that was also an action flick.

Still That would be as laughable as comparing the acting Talents of Patrick Stewart to Chris Pine.

I'm not paying to go to the theaters anymore until hollywood starts making films again and not some bizarre concoction of cgi toons and videogames videos put on screen as a movie.

It is an insult to call a movie shot on HDVideo a film, it is an insult to true cinematographers everywhere and a joke when you look at the films produced on 35mm film versus the garbage they sell these days.

When you create whole sets, characters, locales, and models all in the computer why even bother.  Is it just lazyness on there part to see how an art form should not been replaced with something else because it is newer and flashier.

This ADD, video game , music video generation with zero attention spans results in bad cgi blockbusters with explosions and no character development.

DarkGryphon2048 said:

I'm going to go see this film and just have a good time watching it.

Typical Star Whores-fanboyism saying "LUCAS DESTROYED STAR WARS! BAWWWWWWWWWWW!" Get the fuck over it.

You are on an original trilogy forum saying how you don't care about the original star wars trilogy.  That makes as much sense as going on a nintendo forum and flaming people there like a troll because you are a sony fanboy.

And for the record Lucas destroyed more than star wars.  He also destroyed indiana jones, thx 1138 and american graffiti.  If you have the old indy boxsets on dvd you better hold onto them because god knows what kind of tinkering will make it into the blu ray release. 

When i can watch THX 1138, American Graffiti and Star Wars how they are supposed to be in good anamorphic quality like every other joe smo in hollywood does, maybe i will cut lucas a little slack.  But come one man dvd is now older than 12 years old now and still no quality releases.  and I would be willing to bet he makes people wait for the blu rays for a few years rather than giving consumers what they fucking want.  Lucash loves to jerk peoples chains.  He is even getting saga fans of the 2004 dvd sets angry by no blu ray release.

Lucasfilms dvd release scheme and treatment of these classic films is an absolute joke.  I remember when they were all about quality releases back in the THX laserdisc program days.

Oh yeah i forgot to mention he recut young indiana jones for the dvd versions, dude cannot leave wll enough alone. Because he did that and had the audacity to charge over a hundred dollars a set i refuse to buy those dvds until the broadcast versions and movie versions are both available together.

Next thing he will ask if he can go back to his student films at USC and insert Jar Jar in THX 1138:4EB.  Holy shit they need to fit his original vision lets add cgi german troops and explosions to freiheit, replace the car in a man and his car with a cgi one. Replace the Jazz music in Herbie (as in Herbie hancock) with Jedi rocks.

http://www.trekyourself.com/?mId=29946480.3

Have fun with this

HotRod said:

http://www.trekyourself.com/?mId=29946480.3

 

Have fun with this

LOL...Someone needs to learn how to spell (look at red circle)

So...how do you light someone 'evely' anyway?

Hunter6 said:

A picture is worth a million words.

Is Kirk employing "The Vulcan Bitch Slap"?

Hunter6 said:

Very Lame

Star trek 2009 on ET:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5O4GatMTm2Y&eurl

ET is just a hollywood meat-market.

That clip sums up every reason I gave up my T.V. service 3 years ago. *gag*

Sort of reminds me of all the hoopla that went on before the release of Episode I...and not in a good way. That's why (to myself) I call 'Entertainment Tonite' "Hyper-tainment Tonite".

Hunter6 said:

ET is just a hollywood meat-market.

BE WARNED.  THERE ARE POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN THIS ARTICLE.

It's no secret that Star Trek has been off mission for a long time. On May 8, Paramount will jump-start its most valuable franchise with a new movie titled simply Star Trek, from director J.J. Abrams, abetted by his longtime collaborators and writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman.

They have boldly gone and remade Trek for a new century, and on balance it's a souped-up, streamlined, energized version of the old clunker, full of wit and speed and action and heart. And it works more often than it doesn't.

(Spoilers ahead!)

The story, both a sequel and a prequel, begins when the Romulan villain, Nero (Eric Bana), brings his massive ship the Narada back in time to 2233 from the 24th century, attacking the hapless Federation starship the U.S.S. Kelvin. While the stalwart if ill-fated Capt. Robau (Faran Tahir) beams over, the ship is left in the hands of George Kirk (Chris Hemsworth), whose very pregnant wife, Winona (Jennifer Morrison), is about to give birth. Their son, James Tiberius Kirk, is born as a massive battle rages.

Flash forward as the narrative splits between Kirk's childhood and that of Spock (played as a boy by Jacob Kogan), the tormented half-human child of Vulcan.

At Starfleet Academy, young adult Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto) find themselves at odds when an emergency arises: Vulcan is in danger. As the Federation rushes to deal with the trouble, Kirk finds himself on board the newly commissioned Enterprise alongside Spock, Capt. Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) and the rest of the crew. What they encounter forces each to deal with his or her innermost fears while finding the courage to overcome them, the wisdom to reach out to each other and the hope to forge ahead.

There are two ways to consider Abrams' Trek: As a Star Trek movie and as a work of cinema.

On the first point, I think Abrams et al. have made a movie that feels like Star Trek in its broad strokes and at its heart, even if many of the details have been changed. The interactions of the key characters—particularly Kirk, Spock and Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy (Karl Urban)—feel true, even if it takes the entire movie to get them where they're supposed to be.

Similarly, the movie finds what is essential in each of the supporting characters of Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Sulu (John Cho), Chekov (Anton Yelchin) and Scotty (Simon Pegg), while depicting them realistically as the competent, brilliant scientists they are meant to be.

Mostly, Abrams' Trek understands that the original series was only nominally about space adventure and social commentary: It is really a story of hope and humanity and the comradeship among people we ultimately wish we could become. In this, Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman have captured the spirit of Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek.

The only thing missing is some kind of larger social message, one of the hallmarks of earlier Trek films: I expect that shortcoming will be redressed in future installments. This film necessarily deals with personal arcs: the becoming, so to speak, of the main characters into the people we recognize.

Fans will no doubt quibble about the film's wholesale revision of canon (explained in part by the plot device of the time incursion), including a particularly surprising new romantic relationship (!) and Abrams' 23rd-century version of Earth, which looks a heck of a lot more like ours and not so much like Roddenberry's utopia (they even use Nokia cell phones and drink Budweiser. And when was the last time the Beastie Boys appeared on a Star Trek soundtrack?) And there's no reset button: We are in completely uncharted territory by the film's end.

Of bigger concern is the movie's architecture, which brings us to an evaluation of Star Trek as a work of cinema.

Here, the movie has definite problems. The storyline is built on a series of coincidences and improbable events (why did Nero's ship appear right near the Kelvin? How does Kirk find Spock on Delta Vega?), unexplained situations (where has Nero been for 25 years? Why is his mining ship so advanced?) and implausible circumstances (why is cadet Kirk so quickly promoted to first officer when there's an entire ship full of junior officers around?).

Another shortcoming: Nero is not a particularly interesting villain, with a barely-touched-on backstory and a crew of inexplicably devoted and interchangeable acolytes. He is motivated by simple revenge, but we never feel his anguish or his wrath, Bana's quirky performance notwithstanding. And without a strong, charismatic villain, there's not much for our heroes to play off of.

But those issues aside, Abrams shows a much surer hand with the material than he did in his first feature film, Mission: Impossible III, which often played more like an expanded episode of his Alias than a big, epic movie.

Not so this time. Star Trek is big, epic and sweeping: not just the biggest Trek movie ever, but as huge as any popcorn extravaganza. The film's pacing is brilliant, the action staged imaginatively and with great verve, the visual effects thrilling (with a clear debt to the shaky-cam stylings of Firefly andBattlestar Galactica). It's every bit the blockbuster adventure ride Star Trek should be, as much Star Wars in its visual energy as old-school Trek. Did we mention fun? Something Trek lost sight of a while back.

A word about the performances: Pine manages the task of inhabiting the character of Kirk without doing a William Shatner impersonation, though a mannerism or two act as an homage, such as when he swaggers onto the bridge, pauses, then utters "Bones" before taking his seat in the captain's chair. He nevertheless finds the core of the character: the charismatic, fearless man of action with the heart and soul of a philosopher.

Urban nails McCoy from his first utterance, and his performance is one of the delights of the film.

It takes a while to see Quinto as Spock, an issue having to do more with the long emotional (yes, emotional) journey he has to travel and less with Quinto's measured performance. It still works, aided by Quinto's uncanny resemblance to Leonard Nimoy, who has a small but key role as "Spock Prime." Nimoy's welcome presence links old and new Trek. The rest of the cast, particularly Saldana and Cho, are terrific.

As the ads say, this isn't your father's Star Trek. And, as far as I'm concerned, that's great.

I don't venture over in this forum often, but thought I'd share my experience with the just released blu-ray of the Season One of TOS.

It really is an example of how SW should (but never will) be released on blu. The restoration of the old 35mm masters is beautiful (not mangled color alterations). And, thank god they kept the original 4:3 aspect ratio. It includes not only the new special effects "Remastered" versions but through the use of seamless branching gives us the choice of viewing the original versions as well. So, in HD I can watch new special effects versions with 7.1 audio or my beloved authentic versions with the original mono audio. I don't particularly care for the new effects and shots (although they are infinitely more tasteful than anything GL puked up). But the great thing is that you have the CHOICE! The star trek camp understands this and is why the blu-ray of TOS is really nice. $65 at Best Buy for 29 episodes is a great deal as well. Can't wait for the 2nd and 3rd seasons.

Yeah the original series season 1 blu ray is great.  But the movie set is an abomination.  They bumped the contrast way up on the motion picture and applied harsh digital noise reduction to remove the grain therefore removing almost the entire top layer of the image and smoothing it out causing lack of sharp detail.

I have only seen screen grabs for the first film but I hope their extensive restoration of the wrath of khan is not digital noise reductioned to hell. 

The set is not out here yet.  But reviewers copies have been sent out.  The pal uk set in BD is out however.

I guess I should have specifically stated that CBS TV (owners of TOS) "gets it". I'm not surprised to hear that Paramount's efforts are different. The TOS Blu-ray is an example of how to not f**k something up and please a wide variety of audience...

generalfrevious said:

Unfortunately, when the SW Blu-Ray finally shows up (I'm guessing 2-3 years from now) they will make you pine for the 04 versions. And when, if they ever, decide to release the OOT on Blu-Ray, it will most certainly be the same LD port we have now. To think the SW Blu-Ray will be any good is asking for the impossible. I am certain that even in 2020 when Blu-Ray itself bites the dust the GOUT will still be the standard.

On the Abrams Star Trek, I honestly think it will be horrid at best. I've chosen to see it simply because it appears to so bad it worth wasting $10 to see yet another franchise bite the dust. Which is sad because it is now certain that every single fucking franchise that was adored in the last 35 years will be pulverized into pure unadulterated garbage by their own creators (as Lucas with the PT and Indy 4), or by some outsider (Bay with Transformers or Abrams with Star Trek). Eventually each summer just brings another destroyed franchise limping into the theaters, and it is our unfortunate duty to watch it all burn away. I just can't wait to see what 80s franchise they'll maul in 2010.

You don't have to wait til 2010 for another eighties property to be ruined.  It might turn out to be good or very very bad but gi joe is coming out this year.

Spielberg sat in the screening room for Bay and watched Revenge of the Fallen.  He said it was like the greatest thing he ever saw or something.  Too bad its the same Spielberg who directed Indiana Jones IV and who thought the star wars prequels were good movies.

He actually directed the pre viz of the mustafar lightsaber duel in revenge of the sith uncredited.  Designed some of the quick cuts in the scenes.  Though i don't doubt the sillyness is all George.