I'm a fan on the new movies, and its cast. I think casting wise they did a damn good job.
I don't join fan clubs though.
Posted 24 March 2017 - 11:20 AM
I'm a fan on the new movies, and its cast. I think casting wise they did a damn good job.
I don't join fan clubs though.
Posted 24 March 2017 - 01:29 PM
I think most of the people buying tickets to these movies (after subtracting people who just go to movies because it's something to do and more or less forget about it a week later).
This is probably true of most action based movies. They are meant to be an "enjoy and forget" kind of thing. Of course, I'm sure they would like to tap into some zeitgeist and become a cultural phenomena, but seriously not many can make that accession.
I doubt any Star Trek film to-date would make any list of best 100 movies of all time. Not that some aren't a truly good effort... and lots of fun... but there is just so much better... even if you limit it to just Sci-Fi... IMO... its tough to say Star Trek should break the top 25. So... yeah... I think I can name 25 Sci-Fi films better than any Star Trek movie... and I really like most of the trek movies!
Posted 24 March 2017 - 03:25 PM
Agree 100% Gothneo. I wouldn't put any Trek movie on the top 10 sci-fi movies of all time from a purely artistic/historic importance perspective, but maybe by the time we got to 25 I could squeeze one on there. Now, on my *personal* top 10, I would definitely probably be able to fit at least one of them.
Posted 07 April 2017 - 09:35 PM
Totally fine if another movie with this cast doesn't get made. Tired of having to look past completely ridiculous premises and cartoonish sequences, as well as some pretty serious plot holes.
As somebody who grew up on TNG, DS9 and VOY it's just hard to watch and rationalize this stuff -- the first few times I saw the first JJ Abrams film it gave me ADD for not one but two days afterward. I keep having to remind myself that it's supposed to compete with these superhero flicks studios churn out on autopilot because they're (mostly) flop-proof.
It's like: 1 part Galaxy Quest, 1 part Marvel, 1 part Michael Bay filming an old TOS/X-Men comic book turned into storyboards.
#notsorry
Posted 08 April 2017 - 04:07 AM
I think I was actually a but confused at my first viewing of ST 2009. I came away from it wondering why I didn't just love it and want to watch it again and again.... I really wanted that to be the case... but it just wasn't.
I think the real truth is that truly incredible sci-fi movies that also become blockbusters are very very rare. For the most part the entire Star Wars Franchise has coasted on the power and success of the 1st two movies, and we keep going back hoping to re-ignite that kind of magic.
Then Hollywood takes movies like BladeRunner and decides to make a sequel because you know that people will go to see it hoping it catches that lightning in a bottle that they loved about the original. I know I want to go back to that world... but some things are best left as is... and I suspect this is the case for Bladerunner.
I'm also starting to think this is the case for Trek, Kirk / Spock / McCoy. We know their story... and what we don't know is best left to the imagination... To me this is why TNG or DS9 worked... we got to hear someone else story.
Posted 08 April 2017 - 05:22 AM
Posted 04 December 2017 - 08:38 PM
Posted 04 December 2017 - 08:50 PM
I assume this will be like a reboot of a reboot. At this point it's so far removed from Star Trek it probably doesn't really matter. I really like Tarantino. This seems like a really bad mix, but it couldn't be any worse than the last three movies.
Posted 05 December 2017 - 08:40 AM
Now this is interesting.
Of course the trick will be giving Tarantino the creative freedom he wants. He's certainly proven to be successful directing an ensemble. Hopefully the writers can turn his pitch into a solid screenplay.
Optimism!
Posted 05 December 2017 - 10:48 AM
Posted 05 December 2017 - 11:08 AM
Its possibly going to be a retelling of a classic episode? A moder adaptation of City on the Edge of Forever perhaps? Or Doomsday Machine?
That would be cool.
Or here's an idea, maybe something completely new and original. Star Trek is a vast world with so much potential. It's been so disappointing over the past several years watching the studios fall back on what they think is safe and comfortable rather than giving a new story a shot.
Posted 05 December 2017 - 11:39 AM
I cant see them carrying on with the Kelvin Timeline storyline, I think for all intents and purpose that ship has sailed.
Its possibly going to be a retelling of a classic episode? A moder adaptation of City on the Edge of Forever perhaps? Or Doomsday Machine?
The Kelvin Universe cast in a Prime Universe remake?
I don't see that going over well. We already got "Space Seed" 2.0 with Star Trek Into Darkness.
Posted 05 December 2017 - 02:58 PM
I refuse to comment on the bonkers QT ST4 news until enough time has passed to determine whether the spaghetti has stuck to the wall. Because I fully expect this to never materialize, and am praying to the Great Bird of the Galaxy that it does not. I like QT films (generally) but I don't like the thought of a QT-verse AKA Trekantino.
Posted 05 December 2017 - 05:14 PM
No I think itll be a new cast. I dont see anyone from the Kelvin Timeline being involved.
The Kelvin Universe cast in a Prime Universe remake?
I don't see that going over well. We already got "Space Seed" 2.0 with Star Trek Into Darkness.
Posted 05 December 2017 - 06:23 PM
Posted 05 December 2017 - 11:39 PM
1701D - Try spelling his name again,I dare ya! LOL!!!!!
Just gimme some new Trek movies,don't care who makes'em!
Posted 06 December 2017 - 04:20 AM
Posted 06 December 2017 - 04:29 AM
Posted 06 December 2017 - 08:22 AM
This is what Tarantino said about Star Trek;
https://youtu.be/rzNnfKT6IrM
This gives you some flavour at what he may do with Star Trek and honestly, I think its the course correction the Star Trek movie universe needs. Cummerbund was not Khan...
Cumberbatch should have stayed John Harrison with Khan revealed in a cryo-tube at the end of the picture.
According to that interview, Tarantino likes the new cast so it's pretty doubtful he'd replace them. I sincerely doubt Paramount would choose to replace them either (with the obvious exception of Anton Yelchin). The whole point of creating a different timeline was to be able to use characters from TOS. The groundwork for what you want to see has already been laid. Unfortunately, thanks to Into Darkness, it's also proven to have its drawbacks.
I'm fine seeing the current cast have new adventures. I was pretty happy with Star Trek Beyond. Had Into Darkness not driven away general audiences and had Beyond cost a bit less to produce, it would have been more profitable.
Another note of interest; Tarantino seems to want to move away from an ensemble cast. This is a guy who has made his mark with ensemble films but when he talks Star Trek, he implies he want to make a Kirk & Spock movie. That seemed to be the downfall of the Next Generation films, a focus on Picard and Data. Hopefully the writers can do each character justice anyway.
The obvious question about a Tarantino Star Trek film is who would Samuel L. Jackson play?
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users