recast the prequels — Page 2

I dont know. The Phantom Menace was fine excluding Jar Jar

Attack Of The Clones

Jar Jar Binx---------Tre Hardson (listen to this guy he talks so mellow)

Jango Fett----------Gary Oldman

Count Dooku-------Rutger Hauer

Anikan-------------Christian Kane

Director: SS

Music: Williams AND Zimmer

Kid Anakin: Haley Joel Osment or Scott Tera

Anakin: If only Joaquin Phoenix or Aaron Eckhart were younger, they'd be perfect!

Why not go with a teenage Anakin and then adult? Having Matt Long play them both? Being a 19 year old playing a 15 or 16 year old Anakin instead of a 9 year old Anakin. Then by AOTC he'd be 22 playing a 20 year old and then 25 playing a 22 year old.

Also don't show Jango's face and have his voice done by the guy who did Boba's voice.

Octorox said:

Okay I may just be high on Star Trek right now but....

 

I think this could have worked. Some things about Pine's performance as Kirk actually reminded me a lot of Hammil, particularly his laugh, but he can also be sort of a Han Solo badass without losing the Lukeish charm of a young Jedi trainee. I think Pine's Kirk is a lot closer to how Anakin should have been played than how Hayden played it as kind of a dark, foreboding, moody, angsty teenager. Of course at this point, I'm not sure if I'd want to see Kirk and Anakin as the same actor...

 

P.S. I also hated Ewan's Jedi Mullet

 NO FUCKING WAY!!!! Fuck Pine, Fuck Abrahms and Fuck that pile of shit movie!

Am I the only one who finds Chris Pine to be even more obnoxious and annoying than Hayden in Trek 2009?

Yeah they were going for the same James Dean thing Lucas wanted with Hayden.

Ironic that Chris Pine has a future in hollywood and Hayden pretty much peaked in popularity with the prequels and then since then he is a favorite of star wars oot fans to hate.

Hayden like Shatner is canadian.  If he was not in star wars and he could act he would not have been a bad Captain Kirk.lol.  Well he could have done the sullen and creepy act and whiny.  While Pine does the douchebag stuck up asshole jerk thing perfectly.  I mean was he was playing the Kirk ego a bit much over the top.  Was he playing Kirk or Shatner some would say.

The way he objectifies Uhura in the bar scene was discusting and sexist.  She should have kicked his ass this is the 23rd century not the early 20th century. 

They also saw fit to advertise Budweiser in the bar scene a bit too much like Michael Bay there.

This was the Trek cliffnotes version filtered through a fratboy sensibility, american pie and Kevin Smith and a load of horse shit imho.  A good action film.  But the dialogue in some scenes by Orci was plain out retarded.

Hopefully in the next movie the characters will have some depth and there will be a story without the not necessary infantile humor and jokes.

Abrams is a capable director if he would leave out the lens flares and shaky cam.  But the writers i feel should be someone other than the guys who wrote transformers.  They brought the same sensibility to Trek they did with that and i hate that.  I hate the overall stupid humor put in their for 12 year olds.  Just as much as the over the top sillyness was put in Crystal Skull .

TheBoost said:

AxiaEuxine said:

 

 NO FUCKING WAY!!!! Fuck Pine, Fuck Abrahms and Fuck that pile of shit movie!

Seriously. Star Trek needed more excellent material like Voyager, Enterprise, and Nemesis.

 

 I liked Voyager and Nemesis. That new movie isnt Star Trek

No if I hated the prequels and liked the new Star Trek then Id be a hypocrite as I would like the new Star Trek for almost the same reasons I hated the prequels IE they arent Star Wars. The Prequels are Star Wars, they were fucking made by Lucas while the new Trek is revisionist horseshit that has nothing to do with Star Trek. It wasnt made by any of its creators seeing as both Roddenberry's are dead now. I find it abhorrent that the new movie is SO much not Star Trek it makes me wish that ass Berman was back in charge.

ChainsawAsh said:

I think *you're* being the hypocrite here.  Just saying.

 How so, sir. Pray tell.

 TheBoost said...

Yeah, that movie made me long for the days of realistic doomsday weapons, like the Genesis Device, that could resurrect the dead.

And that lame time travel story made me long for the hard-science thinking man's time travel story like Star Trek 4. Black holes don't cause time travel. Flying around the sun really fast causes time travel.

And those horrific action sequences! Where were the Shatner-esque flying cross bodyblocks and double ax handles?!? And why was Star Fleet so competent? I like my Star Fleet so inept that they can't even keep track if planets explode (the main plot point in Wrath of Khan).

I hated how they used Chekov and Scotty for comic relief instead of having them do intelligent things like saying Cinderella is an old Russian fairy tale, or knock their heads on beams.

But the worst was how they made Kirk into some arrogant wonder boy, loved by women, admired by men, a maverick who does his own thing and saves the day, rules be damned. What a Mary Sue!

Seriously, why even CALL it Star Trek?

Your sarcasm aside... THIS is why it shouldnt be called Star Trek. This is a review I began writing of the film as I was watching it and never finished becuase I couldnt stand watching the movie anymore. So the review will end aburptly becuase I have no desire to subject myself any further to the film.

I used to be a hard core Trekkie. It started with the premiere of the Next Generation and it ended with the slow painful destruction of Star Trek at the hands of Rick Berman and Brandon Bragga. I now refer to myself somewhat jokingly as a recovering trekkie. Although I prefer the Next Generation to all I like all Star Trek to varying degrees, that is up until May 7^th, 2009. There is now Star Trek that I hate.

I prefer Roddenberry Star Trek to everything else. The Next Generation and The Original Series are far superior to anything else as Roddenberry’s vision of the future and of humanity are intact in those shows. (This started to change in The Next Generation following Roddenberry’s death) The other Star Trek shows fail to various degrees to live up to Roddenberry’s original concepts.

The biggest failure to be actual Star Trek now belongs to JJ Abrahms. I cant tell you how excited I was to see this movie. I haven’t been really excited to see a Star Trek movie since Star Trek VI, thanks to Berman and Bragga’s continual destruction of the Trek name.

I had high hopes for this film. I was hoping it would revitalize the Trekkie in me as I do miss the way it used to make me feel, now long ago. There were things that concerned me in the various footage I had seen before the movie but I was hoping everything would be all right in the end.

It was not.

First and foremost was JJ Abrahms assertion that he was not making a movie for Trekkies. Well JJ congratulations, you hit that goal out of the park because in no way is this a Star Trek film. Well done Sir.

Star Trek would not exist without the fans and I for one do not appreciate being dismissed.

One of the worst things about the movie is the complete disregard of some 40 years of Star Trek. The Trek we all know and love from The Original Series through the end of Voyager has been wiped out by this movie’s concept of a new timeline. I feel as if JJ and Paramount have all taken out their collective dicks and pissed all over what used to be Star Trek and finished up by wiping clean on my forehead.  How ANY Trekkie cannot feel this way when they watch this film I cannot fathom on any level. Any Trekkie that likes this film I do not understand. They have said that all of Star Trek has never happened with this film and you accept that? To put the eventual DVD of this film next to even the worst of other Star Trek is disgusting.

I was so looking forward to this film, I so wanted to be excited about Star Trek again. This movie makes the disappointment I had in Indy 4 and the Matrix sequels look like orgasmic celebrations in comparison.

I will now rip apart what I hated about this film in a free form bulleted list.

·         The soundtrack, Michael Giacchino should never be allowed near a musical instrument again. I’ve read online how much everybody enjoyed his music in this film. The soundtrack was one of the first things that annoyed the shit out of me. My wife leaned over to me during the film and said much the same thing. Its overly loud, overbearing swill and doesn’t feel like Star Trek at all. The music in this film was a EPIC FAIL. And new movie or no. You need to start a Star trek film with the theme they have been starting Trek films with forever. That was really jarring and the first sign of trouble that this was not a Trek film.

·         The villain Nero was a waste of film. He was not engaging,  uninteresting, vapid little pussy miner who lost his little wifey and now he’s all mad. He was really fucking boring. You relaunch Star Trek, destroy all of canon and give me this asshole? This is the guy that goes up against the legendary James T. Kirk for his relaunch? Remember JJ your film is only as good as your villain. Another Epic Fail.

·         Let’s talk about these Romulan miners. Why are they all bald and tattooed? Oh right, you forgot to write that into the movie. Yet no one seems to care about that. Piss poor writing there JJ.

·         Red matter…where the fuck did this ULTRAPOWERFUL shit come from… Oh right, you forgot to write that into the movie. Yet no one seems to care about that. Piss poor writing there JJ. I seem to be repeating myself.

·         Lens flares, did you put enough of them in here? FUCK!

·         So Nero goes back and time and this is why the timeline gets fucked up. Hardly an orginal idea in Star Trek but a staple of the universe so okay. Kirks dad gets killed and sends him on a different path in life. Wait a minute? Why the fuck is George Kirk’s family onboard a Starship in the 23^rd century? Families were not onboard starships until the 24^th century. Failure. The whole altered timeline nonsense is based on a failure

·         Why would altering George Kirk’s life make it so Uhura was getting boned by Spock? A horrible horrible idea. Also spock would NEVER make out with someone on the transporter. NEVER. You know it and I know it. Yeah yeah his planet blew up. So Spock isn’t Spock anymore? He almost kills Kirk? (He did the same thing in This side of paradise and was able to get control of himself and there were even insults about his mom as in this film) That isn’t Spock. Agreeing to blow up Nero when the reason isn’t based in logic? That isn’t Spock.

·         And why are Chekov and Uhura suddenly these much more competent involved officers? Is this a good thing, sure. Does it make sense? No.

·         Spock. Zachary Quintos did a great job delivering Spock mannerisms but as I already stated overall he was not Spock. This I blame on the writer/director

·         Kirk was ok, he didn’t do Shatner which although I love Shatner’s  portrayal as Kirk it was the right decision to not mimic that. However, why was Kirk getting his ass handed to him in every fucking fight?  Lame

·         Uhura. DAMN SHES FINE! And that’s exactly what paramount want you to think. You’ll look at how fine, hip and beautiful these people are and not care about the other shit. I’ve already stated what I thought of her character.

·         Chekov, the whole Russian accent thing was WAAAY overdone and cheap humor.

·         Scotty, I didn’t like his portrayal at all. I thought he was too goofy. Transporting into a fucking watertube anyone?

·         Sulu… Sulu was bad-ass except for that stupid leaving the parking break on scene. Yeah they had to get to fight at Vulcan late but they should have done something else. Sulu would NEVER make a mistake like that.

·         McCoy. Dead-on. My favorite of the portrayals by the new cast.

·         Meat freezer curtain in the shuttles. What the hell for?

·         The flippy bit on the Phasers. So the stun setting fires through the kill setting and vice-versa? That’s asinine. Not to mention they are the fucking ugliest phaser design ever! Id rather have those ugly ass dustbusters from the first season of The Next Generation.

·         But let’s talk about the ugliest redesign in the film. The new Enterprise. This thing is so ungaingly and ugly it defies imagination. I HATE HATE HATE the design. Almost every little tweak they made took the classic design and moved it in a less graceful, fugly way. I hate the new ship. Visual design is VERY important to me. Ill forgive a lot for a cool design but you have to overcome a lot for an ugly one and this film did not. The Enterprise IS Star Trek and to make it as ugly as this ship is a crime. So in that regard the new Enterprise actually matches the new Trek quite well

·         I hate the new engineering. It looks like an industrial complex, its fugly. I HATE IT. And when they eject the core, whats with the multiple stages being ejected? That’s not a warp core. And why are there tubes of water in the ship? Is that what they are using for coolant? If so that’s retarded.

·         Why is the miner ship so powerful? Why would a mining ship be able to wipe out 5 or 6 starfleet ships so quickly? Oh right, you forgot to write that into the movie. Yet no one seems to care about that. Piss poor writing there JJ. Echo, echo, echo…

·         Why are there are those platforms with no railings over a chasm of death in the mining ship? Lame.

·         Since when can’t you lock on to a moving target? Lame.

·         Why is Leonard Nimoy Spock so frigging emotional in this movie? Yes he has found a balance between human and Vulcan later in his life but he is still much more Vulcan than the sentimental human he appears to be in this film.

·         All the homages to classic Trek in this film don’t seem to me to be honoring trek but rather something to hopefully placate classic Star Trek fans. I was NOT placated.

·         Why are the uniforms/ship designs not from established canon when Nero’s ship first shows up?

·         Dramatic music only over the scenes of George ramming Nero is annoying. I like my SFX thank you very much, Especially with music as awful as in this movie

·         The turning chevron behind the Title thing was overdone and ridiculous. And the Music during that made me wish to be deaf

·         Beastie boys and product placement with the fucking Nokia ringtone, damn whores. Beastie Boys?? THE FUCKING BEASTIE BOYS IN A DAMN STAR TREK MOVIE?!?!!? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

·         The car young Kirk is driving and the song he is listening to is 300 years old! COME ON!

·         Whats with Amanda’s Cone breast thing?

·         The accidental grabbing of Uhura’s breasts by Kirk, give me a break

·         How did Nero know where Spock was going to show up 25 years after he did.

·         Orion Slave Starfleet girl and Uhura in their underwear? Give me a break.

·         Uhura has mutant hearing?

·         Spock and Kirk are at odds for damn near the whole movie? Oh yeah, that’s Star Trek and don’t give me that how they first met shit

·         The whole medical comedy routine? I hate that shit.

·         The panels on the bridge standing up in the middle of everything that crew members have to walk around all the time. I like the bridge and the main corridors, the sickbay and transporter room but the industrial complex feel to the rest of the ship was a poor choice.

·         They destroyed Vulcan. Let me retype that. They…destroyed…Vulcan and yet people are ok with that?

Why did the transporters take so fucking long when being Spock and company, which ended up killing his mommy?

and thats where I stopped writing, just couldnt take it anymore

Well, Chainsaw, I could totally see how people would think this would erase the original timeline.  Other Trek time travel stories seemed to go on the history-changing theory rather than the alternate-timeline theory, like in the episode "Tomorrow is Yesterday" when they were afraid that sending Christopher back to earth with future technology would alter history, or "The City on the Edge of Forever" when the non-death of Edith Keeler caused the Nazis to take over.  So, yeah, based on that, it does seem logical that the new Trek timeline overwrote the previous one.

Axia, I just have one question about your complaints.  While I wasn't too fond of the score either, I was confused by this statement:    You need to start a Star trek film with the theme they have been starting Trek films with forever.

Which Trek theme are you talking about?  Nearly every movie had its own theme:  the Courage TV theme, the Goldsmith theme, the Horner theme, and so on.  The one musical thing I was impressed with in this movie was how the end credits liberally utilized the original TV theme, which was only used as an afterthought in every other Trek movie.

ChainsawAsh said:

Here's the thing.

You didn't like the new Trek movie.  That's fine.  You say, "It's not Star Trek."  That's fine.

Then you say that the only reason that's okay but us saying the exact same thing about the Star Wars prequels isn't is because George Lucas made the prequels, but Roddenberry didn't make the new Trek movie.  Therefore, everything Lucas makes in relation to Star Wars must be okay because he made it, and everything not made by Roddenberry in relation to Star Trek must be shit.

But what of the tons of episodes of Trek that Roddenberry didn't write?  What of Wrath of Khan?  Roddenberry was forced out of creative control of the films after the first one because of its failures and shortcomings.  But Wrath is widely considered to be the greatest Star Trek of them all.

George Lucas didn't write or direct The Empire Strikes Back, and has gone on record saying it's his least favorite of the six films ... yet it's widely considered the best of the series.

People aren't infallible.  Just because Lucas made the prequels doesn't mean they're good.  They aren't.  Lucas started to lose what made Star Wars great after he saw Empire and decided he needed to have more control over the next ones, and overcompensated for what he saw as Empire's shortcomings.

You're being hypocritical because you give us shit for disliking the prequels, but won't hear a good word for the new Star Trek movie because you think it goes against what made Star Trek good.  How is that any different from us disliking the prequels because we think they went against what made Star Wars good?  Who made either one is irrelevant.

--addendum--

And for fuck's sake, the movie did not wipe away 40 years of Star Trek canon - it created an alternate timeline.  The original still exists.  Why is that so hard for people to understand?

Well the only true Star Trek was the Original Series its movies and the Next Generation. I enjoyed parts of DS9 and Voyager but they werent Star Trek. Enterprise was just garbage. TOS and TNG were made by Roddenberry, his creation so they were Star Trek.

As far as George Lucas saying that Empire is his least favorite. Since when does any one believe what Lucas says anymore? People are always complaining about Lucas contradicting himself. You cant have it both ways. either what he says is admissable or its not.

Whether or not the Prequels are good is a matter of opinion. Whether you like them or not they ARE Star Wars becuase the creator of Star Wars made them. Star Wars is his. He worte the prequels, they are canon, it's Star Wars. Star Trek has not been Star Trek since The Next Generation. However I would take a 1000 seasons of that Enterprise tripe (forgive me for saying that Gene) over that movie. Im not arguing whether you liked it, its creator made it so its Star Wars. Just like the new Star Trek movie isnt Star Trek as well as DS9, Voyager and Enterprise werent Star Trek, However, compared to that new movie DS9 Enterprise and Voyager are perfect Star Trek....and we all know they werent.

And I really try not to give anyone shit about their opinions, I do. I try to understand opinions that are soo different from mine....mostly I just want to share my joy of Star Wars with people that enjoy it and there doesnt seem to be anyone that actually does anymore. It makes me sad.

And the movie DID wipe out 40 years of canon. Its not an alternate timeline. Its an altered timeline. I it was only an alternate timeline Spock (Nimoy real Spock) should be able to get back to his proper timeline but he cant. Its been altered. Paramount and Abrahms pissed all over Star Trek fans with this film.

I still maintain that the Klingon foreheads is by no means a continuity issue, but rather a simple evolution of technical abilities. Originally to make different aliens they just dressed them differently and gave them different ears. Some got masks, but they looked awful. By the time the Motion Picture came along, the money and technology was there. Why not take advantage of it?

You could easily say the Andorians are also a continuity issue, since they looked ridiculous on TOS and pretty damn good on Enterprise (even though I didn't like the show, Andorians looked good).

Axia, it is clearly explained as alternate and not altered. Spock couldn't go back because of the whole convoluted red matter thing. The time travel was an accident, he wouldn't be able to choose when and were he wound up. And ultimately, Volcans are an endangered species, so the "logical" thing to do would be to go back in time and prevent Volcan from being destroyed, and even stop Nero from going back in time in the first place, as well as prevent Romulous from being destroyed stay in the alternate future and help rebuild and preserve the culture.

I am not a big fan of this new Trek either, but I do find your reasoning on the matter interesting, Axia. This new Star Trek is a take it or leave it sort of thing. Sure, the half-assed "rebooted" story line completely changes forty years of ST history. But all that ST history is availble not only in beautiful, digitally remastered anamorphic DVD of the highest quality, made with true loveand care, but it is all also making its way to us in HD glory. Even if the contrived new films were to be bold enough to come out and say, "Forty years of Trek now means nothing! Mawhawhawhaw!" your DVD collection can boldly tell it to go screw itself while it continues to be an awesome collection.

The Star Wars prequels on the other hand do literally try to erase 30 years of Star Wars history, and are beyond a doubt revisionist bull shit. They very visibly and tangibly change parts of that history. Not only that, but these revisionist films also attempt to completely remove the original films form existence (because if any of us are dumb enough to still want them, we can kindly go watch them on obsolete equipment in an obsolete format). The only half way decent version of Star Wars on DVD, and likely the only version that will ever be on BD, is this revised version that effectively kicks aside 20 + years of Star Wars history. And even those three altered films in all their anamorphic restored glory are perfect examples of rushed and poorly done DVDs, while the prequels are quite honestly, to their credit, some of the finest, best value, two disc collections I have ever seen.

Imagine all the original ST stuff only existing on outdated formats, and the J.J. Trek being given a fantastic DVD/BD release. It would piss you off wouldn't it? Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

skyjedi2005 said:

Am I the only one who finds Chris Pine to be even more obnoxious and annoying than Hayden in Trek 2009?

Nope, right there with you pal. Couldn't have disliked Pine's Kirk more if I tried. And actually, Quinto's Spock really got on my nerves the second time I watched the film, while I didn't mind him so much the first time. Pine's Kirk was obnoxious and annoyed be the first time I watched the movie, but I could barely stand him the second time through.

I liked Pegg's Scotty quite a lot more the second time through though. I also didn't mind Chekov or Sulu the second time through either (still think Chekov's accent is over the top and unnecessary).