First photos of Zachary Quinto as Young Spock!
#1
Posted 12 November 2007 - 11:30 PM
#2
Posted 13 November 2007 - 05:07 AM
#3
Posted 13 November 2007 - 07:06 AM
#4
Posted 13 November 2007 - 07:29 AM
#5
Posted 13 November 2007 - 08:30 AM
I am delighted that the posts coming in are postiive and not negative and bashing a movie in its infant stages. Keep the open minds open, people!!!
#6
Posted 13 November 2007 - 08:47 AM
#7
Posted 13 November 2007 - 09:53 AM
Here's a thought that I had. It would make sense to me that a Vulcan would marry a young earth girl since they live so much longer.
I'll bet this movie is going to be PACKED on it's premier.
#8
Posted 13 November 2007 - 11:22 AM
Uh...yes. Casting does make a movie you know. How do you judge a movie?!
#9
Posted 13 November 2007 - 11:58 AM
Uh...yes. Casting does make a movie you know. How do you judge a movie?!
How about by story, direction, special effects, and acting?
Now, I don't know anything about Pine, so I've decided to reserve judgement until I see the movie. Same goes for Quinto, since I've never seen Heroes. But it bugs me when people dislike a movie based on casting, because, frankly, that undermines all the work that the writers, the producers, the directors, and the art team have done. It's not just Pine or Ryder standing still in front of a wall for two hours.
It bugged me last year when I had a friend who refused to see Mission Impossible III because "that crazy" Tom Cruise was in it. Now, I don't agree with Cruise's religious beliefs, but that's not going to stop me from going to see a movie he's in. Because, despite his personal life, he's entertaining to see onscreen, and that's what movies are all about. Turns out she missed out on what I thought was the best movie of the summer that year (definitely better than the story-less X3 and the borefest of Superman).
For instance, I don't like Angelina Jolie because I just find her...creepy. Both Physically and Mentally. But that's not going to stop me from seeing Beowulf, a story I've loved for years (Of course, her creepiness makes her perfect for the role of Grendel's mother).
Casting is important, I agree. But in my mind you have to see the whole picture before you pass judgment.
#10
Posted 13 November 2007 - 12:00 PM
#11
Posted 13 November 2007 - 01:59 PM
Can't stop thinking this though; "Save the space cheerleader, save the world."
#12
Posted 13 November 2007 - 02:57 PM
Now, I don't know anything about Pine, so I've decided to reserve judgement until I see the movie. Same goes for Quinto, since I've never seen Heroes. But it bugs me when people dislike a movie based on casting, because, frankly, that undermines all the work that the writers, the producers, the directors, and the art team have done. It's not just Pine or Ryder standing still in front of a wall for two hours.
Casting is important, I agree. But in my mind you have to see the whole picture before you pass judgment.
Ahhh... it is nice to have a voice of reason 'round here!
#13
Posted 13 November 2007 - 10:25 PM
Uh...yes. Casting does make a movie you know. How do you judge a movie?!
When I leave the theater, does it make me feel happy or sad or like jumping ect.. I remember watching the first Rocky movie in the theater. I remember thinking that the guy that played Rocky was not that good of an actor. However, I remember that the movie as a whole made want to pretend that I was Rocky taking that one last chance to be more then the average Joe walking the street. As I looked around the parking lot I could see others sort of acting like they were working a punching bag, or their best friend! The movie as a whole took me somewhere were as Sylvester Stallone, has never made me rush to a theater as an actor. If I had only judged going to the movie Rocky from seeing Sylvester Stallone in the movie Death Race 2000, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072856/ , I would never have set a foot in the theater.
Also, a great director can pull an average actor to great heights or drag a great one below the waves and drown them.
I will leave judgment for the movie until after I watched it no matter who they stick in it. In the case of Stallone, they might not be a great actor, but maybe this was they role they were made to play and they blow us all away in it.
#14
Posted 13 November 2007 - 10:33 PM
Now, I don't know anything about Pine, so I've decided to reserve judgement until I see the movie. Same goes for Quinto, since I've never seen Heroes. But it bugs me when people dislike a movie based on casting, because, frankly, that undermines all the work that the writers, the producers, the directors, and the art team have done. It's not just Pine or Ryder standing still in front of a wall for two hours.
It bugged me last year when I had a friend who refused to see Mission Impossible III because "that crazy" Tom Cruise was in it. Now, I don't agree with Cruise's religious beliefs, but that's not going to stop me from going to see a movie he's in. Because, despite his personal life, he's entertaining to see onscreen, and that's what movies are all about. Turns out she missed out on what I thought was the best movie of the summer that year (definitely better than the story-less X3 and the borefest of Superman).
For instance, I don't like Angelina Jolie because I just find her...creepy. Both Physically and Mentally. But that's not going to stop me from seeing Beowulf, a story I've loved for years (Of course, her creepiness makes her perfect for the role of Grendel's mother).
Casting is important, I agree. But in my mind you have to see the whole picture before you pass judgment.
It always comes down to acting. Good acting can make a mediocre script amazing (such as Gladiator), A good actor can make a not so great director look better (think Ewan McGregor in the Star Wars prequels). An actor who can say bad writing in a convincing manner can help sell a script to the audience (Alec Guiness and Harrison Ford in the Star Wars Trilogy). The actors need to believe it and sell it, without that a movie can bomb. Look at Batman and Robin-horrible script, horrible director and an actor (Clooney) who didn't stand up to Schumacher. Val Kilmer took an equally bad script in Batman Forever and sold it. Then let's look at Tombstone and Wyatt Earp. Wyatt Earp had a better overall story, a better name director and a better script. The acting was not top notch in that film and the director didn't really weave an emotional piece as was done with the lesser budgeted, weaker script, but stronger acted Tombstone. The end result was Tombstone was a bigger hit and more entertaining and enduring film.
So you either see the point or you don't. There are some people out there who are genuinely interested in giving this movie a chance for a variety of reasons-some valid and other invalid in my opinion. However I really don't have a lot of patience for people who can't see the weakness of alot of this casting. I think if they can't see the reasons why Pine was casted and how weak those reasons are then they are really missing something and basically just don't want to see it. There are some Star Trek fans who are so used to having some kind of Star Trek around they can't accept that a long break may in fact be needed. Having something to stimulate your senses isn't always necessarily a good thing, especially if your board and the only thing around is junk food. Star Trek isn't going away it will always be around like the Little Rascals are or The Honeymooners or a variety of other shows which have become Legend. However going for so many materialistic and vain choices in the casting is something that I think can lessen what Star Trek was about and in fact bring about that burying that so many Star Trek fans seem to be afraid of.
Do I get an acknowledgement of "reason" on that one Chalksquared?
#15
Posted 15 November 2007 - 03:46 PM
And you're right that Quinto does look a lot like Nimoy. I'm also excited about Uhura...I can't wait to see what shee looks like. (The others, I'm keeping an open mind until I see them ).
#16
Posted 15 November 2007 - 04:42 PM
#17
Posted 15 November 2007 - 05:41 PM
So you either see the point or you don't. There are some people out there who are genuinely interested in giving this movie a chance for a variety of reasons-some valid and other invalid in my opinion. However I really don't have a lot of patience for people who can't see the weakness of alot of this casting. I think if they can't see the reasons why Pine was casted and how weak those reasons are then they are really missing something and basically just don't want to see it.
Do I get an acknowledgement of "reason" on that one Chalksquared?
I don't know, DavAnthony.
While you have some valid points, I think what we are missing is that perhaps, just perhaps, this was the role that this Pine fellow was born to play and he might be amazing in it! I don't think it is fair to judge the entire film on some of the cast's previous work. Trust me when I tell you that a director can really take a great actor and make him look horrible. So though I know none of this Pine guy's work, perhaps the movies in which so many say he is bad in can be attributed to the director. It is possible.
So, AFTER the movie comes out then we can say if he was a bad choice or not.
And for some that might be hard because they are dead set against even giving it a chance, and for them I feel sorry.
#18
Posted 15 November 2007 - 07:54 PM
#19
Posted 15 November 2007 - 09:31 PM
While you have some valid points, I think what we are missing is that perhaps, just perhaps, this was the role that this Pine fellow was born to play and he might be amazing in it! I don't think it is fair to judge the entire film on some of the cast's previous work. Trust me when I tell you that a director can really take a great actor and make him look horrible. So though I know none of this Pine guy's work, perhaps the movies in which so many say he is bad in can be attributed to the director. It is possible.
So, AFTER the movie comes out then we can say if he was a bad choice or not.
And for some that might be hard because they are dead set against even giving it a chance, and for them I feel sorry.
Valid points as well my friend. I really don't think this guy was born to play this role though. I think personally I would of had a bit more "faith" in the choice if the kid hadn't grown up in hollywood and his family wasn't in the "the biz". I liked his casting better then Vogel but when I heard that he's a hollywood kid he has to really prove himself in order for me to buy it.
#20
Posted 16 November 2007 - 05:26 AM
Charlie Sheen
Emilio Est
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users