Jump to content


Photo

The Kelvin Movies - Were They All That Bad?


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 06 March 2018 - 04:31 PM

I was recently watching all three of the Kelvin movies and Ive come to the conclusion that the 2009 movie was the best.

Not just the best of the three Kelvin movies, but one of the best Star Trek movies and to add; much like Star Trek II, an event that had to happen to ensure Star Trek was still relevant and important to a wider audience.

For me I think Into Darkness was a lazy mess and Beyond kind of suffers from being irrelevant and forgettable. The 2009 movie though is an excellent example of what needed to be done to Star Trek in order for it to survive and to be seen as something interesting and relevant to audiences new and old as well as something the studio could still profit from.

It wasnt just that, Ive been unfairly hard on the Abrams movies of late and in some respects justifiably so. In Star Trek 2009 though, its a great Star Trek movie. The story was one that had purpose and relevance. The respectful to Star Trek canon idea that this was an alternate timeline giving a reason to all the visual changes in the movie, the addition of a Star Trek legend justifying its place within Star Trek lore and the destruction of Vulcan being the big shock moment Star Trek had lacked since Picard was turned into Locutus all gave rise to a really promising brave new feature film future.

Yes the movie had its problems; Kirks ascension to Captain felt rushed in order to get the TOS bridge crew together when actually all three Kelvin Timeline Movies would of benefitted in telling the tale of how Kirk climbed to the top to become Captain of the Enterprise in the final film.

Ending 09 with Bruce Greenwood still as the Captain of the Enterprise would of been just as satisfying a conclusion. Of course the red matter gobbledygook was annoying as was the little fan-nitpicking moments; Delta Vega being nextdoor to Vulcan and all of the unidentifiable aliens replacing the more iconic looking Andorrans and Tellerites.

But when put up against the likes of Final Frontier, Generations, Nemesis and Search for Spock... Star Trek was heads and shoulders above them in terms of its storytelling.

It redefined what Star Trek was for a new audience and for a modern world. The look of the movie is what I had always wished Star Trek had looked like and what I imagine the future will look like, bright, colourful, optimistic and run by Apple and Elon Musk.

So yeah. Whilst Into Darkness and Beyond are in my opinion, easily forgettable. That 2009 movie was probably one of the greates moments in Star Trek. Its influence on not just Star Trek but indeed movies in general (anyone notice how much lens flare is in films these days) including Star Wars; of which is just starting to feel the wrath of its fan base for doing something different hasnt gone unnoticed.

Anyway, watching these movies again made me realise just how right I am to criticise them, but also how much enjoyment I get from watching the 2009 movie. That was something special, a movie that touched me when it was released and continues to touch me today in the same way seminal movie Jurassic Park influenced my childhood 25 years ago.

This all got me thinking... its easy to criticise and hate the JJ Abrams movies, but do we actually owe at least the first one some respect and gratitude for keeping Star Trek alive and well?

#2 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 06 March 2018 - 07:15 PM

Oh man. Should we be worried about you 1701D? you sound like your having a bit of a crisis! You can't falter in your faith in the JJ-Verse... thats just wrong!

 

I can't re-watch 2009 or ITD, Beyond is actually the most coherent of the 3 to me... but we've discussed all this to death... for me... the movies were always a nice bonus... and the reality is most of them are pretty forgettable. 

 

Have they ever made a Dr Who movie? If so how did it fair? How come Dr Who... the longest running sci-fi show ever anywhere... doesn't have lots of movies? 

 

I think the answer is maybe some material is just better on TV. If the price to pay for getting good trek on TV... and for all its faults... I do think DISCO is better than any of the JJ-Verse movies... was that they never make another Trek Movie... I'd be fine with that. 



#3 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 06 March 2018 - 07:19 PM

Doctor Who does have a movie, we Americans made it and it wasnt great.

The 8th Doctor was pretty awesome though.

As for the Kelvin Films, I enjoy them, and think Beyond is my favorite.

They did their job and brought some new fans and new life into the franchise.

I still think the opening to the 2009 movie is one of the best moments in any Trek movie.

#4 MisterPL

MisterPL

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 March 2018 - 06:10 AM

I really enjoy the 2009 Star Trek. It was a brilliant solution to a challenging problem; how do you jumpstart a franchise without erasing it altogether? My only criticism is that it wasn't a TV pilot. Just eight or nine years later and it would have been a great way to launch a Netflix series but then we wouldn't have had Leonard Nimoy to pass the torch.

 

Into Darkness was classic JJ "Now what do I do?" Abrams. Plenty of fans insisted on wanting to see Khan, just like fans wanted more action after X-Men 2 and Venom in Spider-Man 3. These are great examples of why studios should not listen to fans. Had they kept Benedict Cumberbatch's character as John Harrison, I'd have been content to see Khan still in his cryotube at the end of the movie. As it was, it came off as an overblown prologue to "Space Seed" and a weak knockoff of The Wrath of Khan.

 

Beyond was Trekkers' Trek. It was a solid standalone film that didn't rely so much on the first two or prior encyclopedic knowledge of Trek to get it. It was fun and beautiful and it lost money, probably because of Into Darkness.

 

The next Trek film needs to be another crossover, this time with an Away Team from the Prime universe led by Picard on a rescue mission to retrieve Ambassador Spock. Too many fans seem to be hung up on the false notion that their TNG era has been written over and that's not necessarily the case. Whether the films continue to be told from the perspective of the Kelvin universe or not can be up to audience reaction.

 

Personally I wouldn't mind the introduction of Cadet Picard but I'm just as interested in moving forward. Either way, I just want good Trek.

 

Oh, and it better be free because I'm not paying to see Star Trek! Greedy Paramount!

 

:rolleyes: 



#5 Damon1984

Damon1984

    I know what a Pog is.

  • Members
  • 116 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 March 2018 - 07:31 AM

I take them as what they are: big pew-pew blockbuster movies. Star Trek belongs to the TV screen, so I can live with a fun rollercoaster-ride every couple of years. Still, I don't like the fact that they choose an alternate timeline. I don't know, I just don't care about alternate Kirks and Spocks. Wasn't the reasoning for this whole venture to show us "how Kirk and Spock met"? Well, I still don't know how they met. I know how alternate versions of them met. And I don't care about that.

Don't destroy vulcan, destroy a colony (Star Trek09). Don't use Kahn (Into Darkness). Don't destroy the Enterprise, just cripple her (Beyond).

There. A few minor tweaks here more and the whole ordeal would fit into the prime timeline.

 

Star Trek09 is a strange experience. I like the first half of the movie (though, I'm not a fan of most of the characterization), but everything after the destruction of vulcan just falls flat. The actors are still fun, the soundtrack is still great, the camera work is still engaging, but the story goes either bonkers (Delta Vega) or is pretty by the (blockbuster-)book (destroying the Narada). The whole Kirk goes from Cadet to Captain thing... well, the less said about it, the better. ;)

 

Into Darkness is annoying, because, with a few changes, it could have been a REALLY great movie. Just leave Kahn out of it (and the dying-scene. And Damon Lindeloff). Let John Harrison be John Harrison - an agent, gone rogue, doing terrible things (killing Pike) to stop his shady boss Admiral Marcus. And the Enterprise, initially on the hunt for him, comes around to help him. So just change the last half hour or so. Especially the finale. I'm really NOT okay with the Vengeance crashing into a populated city, while the Enterprise Crew only cares about their own survival. The moment the Vengance fell past Enterprise Kirk should have immediately ordered: "Pursuit! Tractor beam ready!"

"She's too heavy and too fast, Captain! We won't be able to lift her"

"Than we'll drown her. Push her down into the bay. We can't allow her to crash into the city!"

They are trying, Enterprise is moaning and crying in pain.

Scott, panicking: "Enterprise is not strong enough!"

"She is!"

Something like that. They could still have a crash - just into the water (and Enterprise immediately trying to gain altitude, scrapping the roof of a large building or something like that. These are minor changes to the script. They would cost the same, they would still produce spectacular scenes. But... they would be so much more... in character?

(I mean... the writers wanted to make a point about how bad drone-killings are, right? So Kirk decides against it (rightfully so) and as a "reward" half of San Francisco gets destroyed? That... doesn't make sense. That's not helping the story they wanted to tell at all! Quite the contrary. I can understand writers having problems "getting" and writing Star Trek. But writing a coherent story? Come on. That should be a basic requirement.)

 

Beyond is great. It's a fun movie and it oozes a certain TOS-charme. The destruction of the Enterprise however is so... bleh. I felt nothing. The ship means nothing to me. She did nothing special. She got shot to pieces in 09, she got shot to pieces in Into Darkness and here she got shot to pieces and destroyed. Uh... okay? The soundtrack during her crash tells me to be sad. Why? She's not a Character. She's just a special effect and a boring one at that. (Discovery is the same). But all in all, Pegg did a great job. He only had three month or so to cobble together a script. And he still managed to make it more Star Trek than the two predeessors. Two thumbs up!

 

So, yeah. A few changes here and there and these movies could have been really good. As they are they are still kinda fun but in the grand scheme of things pretty forgettable. If they make a fourth one - okay. If not - okay. I'm kinda indifferent. *shrugs*

 

The next Trek film needs to be another crossover, this time with an Away Team from the Prime universe led by Picard on a rescue mission to retrieve Ambassador Spock.

 

Oh god, no. Please, no. The writers/producers of current Trek can barely handle TOS. I really don't want to see them meddling with the 24th century. :(



#6 MisterPL

MisterPL

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 March 2018 - 07:56 AM

 Oh god, no. Please, no. The writers/producers of current Trek can barely handle TOS. I really don't want to see them meddling with the 24th century. :(

 

It's okay. I'll do it.  B)



#7 Whirlygig

Whirlygig

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,431 posts

Posted 12 March 2018 - 08:46 AM

Everybody was saying, at the time, how brilliant the whole reboot thing as done by Star Trek 2009 was.  It was sort of the era of the word "reboot" gaining widespread traction --- but it was toward the very end of that era.  There had been many great reboots already.  I didn't understand why the media acted like the world was still having apprehension about reboots...everyone had already gotten over it and accepted it.  Batman Begins, anyone?  That movie grabbed "reboot" by the cajones and showed how it was done...  Nobody ever needed to make a case for a "reboot" after that again, but they kept acting like it was such a scary concept.

 

I personally never found the Trek reboot mechanics to be brilliant.  *Hand waving* time travel *hand waving* multiverse....  What about that is unique from things we had already seen in Star Trek, and/or not entirely 100% predictable and a total cop-out?  Trek fans could have crapped the entire plot for that movie out onto a whiteboard in their post-burrito sleep...



#8 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 12 March 2018 - 10:16 AM

It was the Star Trek equivelant of the Star Wars prequels. I think in time it will be looked at as an embarrassment to the franchise. Also I think its possible Discovery may be lumped in with it eventually. Hopefully one day well all just look back on it as a dark time for Star Trek and better things are ahead. I just hope that one day we dont look at it as the beginning of the end.

#9 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 12 March 2018 - 11:01 AM

It was the Star Trek equivelant of the Star Wars prequels. I think in time it will be looked at as an embarrassment to the franchise. Also I think its possible Discovery may be lumped in with it eventually. Hopefully one day well all just look back on it as a dark time for Star Trek and better things are ahead. I just hope that one day we dont look at it as the beginning of the end.

An embarrassment? Hardly. 

 

j6xfiVe.png

4D8CZ5B.png

aKcDYLp.png

CXROtz1.png

vFHOEIY.png

oDOa48K.png

 

The newer Trek movies are significantly better movies than the Star Wars Prequels. Even they are getting more positive talk now with the sequels coming out. 



#10 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 12 March 2018 - 11:42 AM

An embarrassment? Hardly. 

 

 

The newer Trek movies are significantly better movies than the Star Wars Prequels. Even they are getting more positive talk now with the sequels coming out. 

The SW prequels were met with a good amount of praise when they came out and it slowly over time faded to what it is today. I'm simply saying I see the same trend with the Abrams movies. In hind sight 10-20 years from now I think we may be looking at them in the same way.



#11 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 12 March 2018 - 03:23 PM

while it does happen... I think is this electronic day and age it will be pretty difficult to see those reviews change...

 

Blade Runner, and Solaris are both examples of films that, when re-examined years later, got appreciable better reviews and critics and fans alike have come to appreciate more.

 

Blade runner has a really high rating because it predated the internet, while Solaris still languishes in the 60s. 

 

The JJ movies are fantastic for anyone that has no idea what Star Trek is supposed to be about... and I think if someone saw those and then watched most of the other TOS Movies... they would ask WTH is this??!!

 

The 2009 movie does what its supposed to which is to re-introduce the main characters in the franchise. The next two are solid action tent-pole fun.  

 

Any criticism I've ever had had nothing to to do with the product quality or the acting or even the overall coherence of the story as a standalone movie..., and thats what critics try to look at... their job isn't to judge them based on the 60 years of material that came before and to gauge how "trekie" they are...  they are supposed to look at each movie as its own thing. 

 

We don't, and we all have different expectations, and currently Trek has gone all liberal on my Fantasy scale. 



#12 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 12 March 2018 - 05:00 PM

The SW prequels were met with a good amount of praise when they came out and it slowly over time faded to what it is today. I'm simply saying I see the same trend with the Abrams movies. In hind sight 10-20 years from now I think we may be looking at them in the same way.

I think with time and space, the JJ Abrams movies will only gain more and more popularity.

Its funny how it seems the Star Wars franchise is going through a bit of an identity crisis with fans of that franchise longing for the days of Jar Jar Binks as they rebel against the leadership of Kathleen Kennedy. Whilst this has happened with Star Trek, its taken a far shorter time for Star Wars fans to back up over Ryan Johnson and Kennedy for their seemingly lack of interest in appeasing fans.

I think certainly Star Trek (2009) will be looked upon as a classic Star Trek movie in time and as a film that reinvigorated a dying franchise. In contrast I think The Force Awakens will be seen as a lazy rehash of a classic Star Wars film.

Its also worth noting that I feel as though Star Trek has more of a life span to it than Star Wars, I think were starting to see the fall of Star Wars and actually the rise of a new Star Trek, which began with the 2009 movie.

#13 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 12 March 2018 - 06:05 PM

The Star Wars Prequels are ridiculed because of their bad acting, bad writing, and iffy story.

I still like the Prequels more than the new movies. The Force Awakens was decent, but The Last Jedi was just not good.

The same cant be said about the Abrams movies. Into Darkness a bit more than the other two, but its still a more enjoyable movie to watch than the Prequels.

#14 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 12 March 2018 - 07:09 PM

I think the Kelvin Timeline could work better as an animated series rather than being continued as a movie series. I think the next movie is gonna be something different if Tarantino is to be involved at all.

I think theres a great opportunity though to really develop a new branch of Star Trek for a younger and more of a family audience with a well written, intelligent animated series that really can delve into the bright, futuristic Abrams universe. Its something that needs to happen and what better than using the Kelvin Timeline as a jumping off point for a really cool and expansive animated series.

I dont think that the idea of the Kelvin Timeline is a bad one, I think its a great one, it looks visually cool, modern and futuristic and it has jump started the franchise so to let it just fizzle when you could actually expand and legitimise its approach to Star Trek by gearing its appeal to a younger audience could be something really unique. Discovery and the next feature could be for the more older audiences and then the classic Star Treks; TOS - ENT & the first ten movies could be the connective tissue between a new Kelvin Animated show and Discovery and what comes next in terms of live action.

#15 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 12 March 2018 - 08:07 PM

I dont know if Id trust anyone with a proper Trek animated series.

Star Wars has Dave Filoni, who just gets Star Wars, and has made 2 absolutely amazing tv animated series.

Theyd have to find the right person, and I dont know who that would be or if CBS/Paramount would even be able to make the right choice.

#16 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 12 March 2018 - 08:44 PM

I wouldn't over think it...  Either people connect to a Trek Franchise or they don't. Some want more of the same from the past, others like the new stuff. Regardless, I'll give CBS/Paramount Credit for trying new directions... though in some regard I don't think they changed direction enough. An animated series might. be interesting... but just like any live action show... it needs a good story. 



#17 Whirlygig

Whirlygig

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,431 posts

Posted 13 March 2018 - 04:44 AM

Things don't gain in popularity anymore. Movies like Blade Runner gained in popularity over long periods of time in an era where a few key things were true:

- Movies were the primary form of escapism
- There were far, far fewer movies (and TV shows) at any one person's fingertips
- Far fewer sci-fi movies were being made with longer waits between them
- The Internet either largely did not exist or was more or less a useless novelty
- The way most people watched home video was by going to the video rental store and picking them out from what was on the racks

Today, the primary form of escapism has become video games and to some extent the Internet (social media). The mass consciousness moves along weekly...sometimes daily it seems...from one thing to the next. We can stream seemingly limitless content on a whim, more than one person could ever hope to experience entirely him/herself. Movies, particularly of this genre, and the books (young adult) which drive them, are being made, released, consumed, remembered, and forgotten at a relative breakneck pace...meanwhile they are also made to appeal to every nook and cranny of a diverse market, catering to every variety of person, dividing us and compartmentalizing our interests. We all get our opinions on these movies instantaneously from the Internet.

I don't see a world anymore where any movie has longer than a year (max) to get a good word of mouth snowball rolling and become a sensation anymore before we move on to the next 20 things coming down the pipe and forget about last year. We've even had 2nd wind on the ones we do like already within the year with a near immediate home video release...

It's sad...I remember those days when my friends and I would say to ourselves.... "well, we've watched just about everything in this dang video store...hmm, they have this one, let's see what this Blade Runner is all about"... and be in for a mind blowing treat that evening. Even if there is some form of that in the future, which I doubt given the current pace of media and the replacement of movies with video games, I would rather those future kids use their Friday night to discover the classics instead of JJTrek2009...

Back in the day of 3 major TV networks, movies and TV were a collective consciousness thing. Everybody could come together...literally everyone, not just "all geeks" or "all women" etc...EVERYone...and talk about what was going on with nearly every show. We are now too divided for that...the closest we come is when we still have some phenomenon like Game of Thrones to come along that somehow manages to grab everyone...but that gets rarer and rarer...and I can still think of a good many people who have not and will never see GoT. In the old days you couldn't avoid Star Trek, you'd have to work to avoid it. Now you have to work to find it...

#18 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 13 March 2018 - 06:41 AM

Whirlygig, unfortunately, for the most part I have to agree with you, though I will say I think there are really good movies out there that you have to hunt to find and can blow your mind, but yes so much is so easy and accessible. 

 

You hit the nail on the head for me w/respect to most movies... especially the big tent pole blockbusters, they are in and out so fast and for the most part forgettable. Heck by the time the year end awards come around it seems like some of the early releases where out years ago!  I get to November and my friends and I often struggle to remember a movie that made a memorable impact on us. 

 

Oddly, for me, Blade Runner 2049 was such a movie, mostly because it had more of a slow burn and a story.... and I watched the 1st couple seasons of GoT because of all the hype and buzz... and I was out... not interested in when, if ever winter or the dragons or whatever else is coming!

 

But I think this is the way it goes... the bulk of cinema has always been just mass consumption fodder... easily forgettable and lost as time progresses... as but like you say... people are missing out if they have never seen something that isn't necessarily on some list of 100 all time greatest movies ... like Cary Grant in "His Girl Friday". 



#19 Whirlygig

Whirlygig

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,431 posts

Posted 13 March 2018 - 08:03 AM

Part of it is me getting old, and sounding like an old person, unable to keep up with the new generation's fancies.  But that's just part of it -- things have most certainly changed and will continue to change.  Just like kids don't show as much interest in toys anymore, the same can be said of movies...and for the same reason in both cases: video games.

 

You are right, most movies over time we forget about, leaving only the classics to shine through to the future.  But we are forgetting about more movies/shows in a year's time now than we used to forget about in a decade's time, or so it is starting to feel like to me...



#20 MisterPL

MisterPL

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:33 AM

The economy has had a significant impact on the entertainment industry as well.

 

If you look at the top ten films over the past decade, it's largely a list of reboots, remakes, sequels, and prequels. It's not because Hollywood is creatively bankrupt. It's because audiences don't like to gamble with what little hard-earned disposable income they have. They'd rather a safe bet like Star Wars 8 than take a chance on The Shape of Water.

 

Since studios aren't charities, they want to make sure they get solid returns on their investments and if these recycled films and TV series are what people want, they'll satisfy that demand.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users