"KirkyV" (KirkyV)
03/03/2016 at 14:12 • Filed to: None
2
18|
"KirkyV" (KirkyV)
03/03/2016 at 14:12 • Filed to: None | 2
| 18 |
This post has been brought to you by a resurgence of the intense anger I feel whenever I think about JJ Abrams’ take on ‘Star Trek’. Now, go look at that Blackbird post.
TheHondaBro
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 14:16 |
|
The 2009 movie was pretty good. Into Darkness, not so much.
|
KirkyV
> TheHondaBro
03/03/2016 at 14:24 |
|
2009's a well put-together, fun little sci-fi action film that’s about as close to ‘Star Trek’ as any given Star Wars film.
Into Darkness is, honestly, much the same in my approximation, but I don’t really have the ability to objectively assess these films—from the moment I saw Kirk hang up on his deadbeat stepdad with a Nokia carphone while joyriding in a 300 year-old Corvette to the tune of the Beastie Boys, I’ve been too angry about them to form a coherent opinion beyond, ‘Why, WHY?’
(To be clear, I like the original Corvette Stingray, I really like the Beastie Boys, and my first ever phone was a Nokia. However, none of these things belong within several light years of Star Trek.)
PS9
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 14:28 |
|
Because eight tracks and hydrocarbon era technology are too awesome to die. It’s why a 150 year old motorcycle can survive a fall from orbit and still be in functioning condition to do a sick jump in the new Star Trek trailer. Totally rad bro!...
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
wiffleballtony
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 14:29 |
|
IMHO the original Star Trek films were pretty crap.
|
KirkyV
> PS9
03/03/2016 at 14:36 |
|
EXACTLY. AND IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE THAT FUCKING BUDWEISER WOULD MANAGE TO SURVIVE A NUCLEAR WAR, CONTACT WITH ALIEN LIFE, AND THE RISE OF A SOCIALIST UTOPIA.
OH, AND STARFLEET’S CLEARLY A ‘PEACEKEEPING AND HUMANITARIAN ARMADA’ . YUP. WHAT ELSE WOULD THEY BE DOING? CERTAINLY NOT SPACE EXPLORATION! THAT’D BE RIDICULOUS.
|
KirkyV
> wiffleballtony
03/03/2016 at 14:39 |
|
I like about half of them, but honestly, film’s never been Star Trek’s home.
Besides, the old Star Trek films I dislike, I dislike for being bad movies. The new Star Trek films I hate with the passion of several burning suns for not even trying to be Star Trek.
|
wiffleballtony
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 14:42 |
|
Ironically I liked the new ones because they realized that real Star Trek doesn’t convey to the big screen and thus made an action film. I say this as a huge TNG fan. Hell I even watched most of Voyager.
|
KirkyV
> wiffleballtony
03/03/2016 at 14:45 |
|
All of what makes Star Trek so fantastic on television may not transfer well to the big screen, but I like enough of the old films to believe that a good amount of it can—and certainly more than the new films managed, or even tried for.
|
wiffleballtony
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 14:51 |
|
Personal opinion. Star Trek relies heavily on character development and relationships being established on a related TV series in order to do the movie. This reboot did not have the privilege of a running series to give it traction. As such they went lowest common demoninator, action flick.
MrDakka
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 14:59 |
|
This sounds like extra heresy. As a loyal servant to the God Emperor of Nerdkind, JJ Abrams, hallowed be His name, let me administer the Emperor’s Peace. :)
Crazy thought: JJ Abrams is turning Star Trek into Wh40k’s Dark Age of Technology
|
KirkyV
> wiffleballtony
03/03/2016 at 15:01 |
|
Why make something that clearly isn’t Star Trek wear Star Trek’s skin, when clearly the film you wanted to make would’ve been better served by a science fiction setting that you didn’t have to utterly destroy to make your generic, putrid excuse for an action movie work? (That’s unfair: as I’ve said, it’s a good sci-fi action movie. I just hate it.)
The answer - at least, in my approximation - is reboot-itis, money, and JJ Abrams’ need for a sacrificial lamb with which to make his Star Wars audition tape. And I accept that. I just hate it.
|
KirkyV
> MrDakka
03/03/2016 at 15:04 |
|
I think we’re gonna end up in a slightly different take on the mirror universe, ultimately. All the building blocks are there.
|
wiffleballtony
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 15:45 |
|
Would it help if we added more lens flare?
|
KirkyV
> wiffleballtony
03/03/2016 at 15:46 |
|
I think even Abrams has realised that it was a little much at this point, thankfully. Star Wars was mercifully lens-flare free.
|
wiffleballtony
> KirkyV
03/03/2016 at 15:46 |
|
That’s actually the sub title and twist for the next one. Return of the Lens Flare.
|
KirkyV
> wiffleballtony
03/03/2016 at 15:49 |
|
|
MrDakka
> KirkyV
03/04/2016 at 16:12 |
|
That would be pretty cool
Tohru
> MrDakka
03/05/2016 at 18:01 |
|
In the name of the Emperor, let none survive.