ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Media Center (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Movies and TV Star Trek 12 Gets Release Date (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=221538)

Hammock Parties 12-08-2012 09:54 AM

People are just pissed it was louder and more flash-bangy than the average Star Trek film.

It wasn't necessarily a bad thing, it was just different.

The core of Star Trek has always been the relationship between the characters. I am still somewhat concerned that's going to be lost. I guess we'll see.

I still would like to see a Star Trek film with a great plot like VI. That has always been my favorite. I don't know if Abrams is that kind of guy though.

Deberg_1990 12-08-2012 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Brooklyn (Post 9189445)
Well we could argue back and forth all day about how flawed or stupid some of the sequences might have been.

But I still don't understand the Star Wars comparison, nor how it was dumbed down. Whether it was flawed or not, the film was fairly complex and emotionally mature.

The pace, fighting and explosion factor were upped significantly for today's modern younger audience. I don't care, they made Trek entertaining again. It had grown stale.

Red Brooklyn 12-08-2012 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassel's Reckoning (Post 9189452)
The core of Star Trek has always been the relationship between the characters. I am still somewhat concerned that's going to be lost. I guess we'll see.

I still would like to see a Star Trek film with a great plot like VI. That has always been my favorite. I don't know if Abrams is that kind of guy though.

This is interesting to me because you seem to be implying that Abrams abandoned a more character driven story, but also that he didn't deliver a great plot. Those ideas seem like they could be in conflict. They aren't necessarily, but they could be.

Did you like the reboot? And what do you think Abrams & Co did well if not plot and character?

Would you say spectacle was his number one priority? Or at least, that he made a film where the spectacle was better executed than plot and character?

Because I don't think anyone could argue that the spectacle of the film was outstanding. The visuals are phenomenal.

I thought the plot was well executed, if a little straight forward. Unless we're considering the nature of the reboot as part of the plot. In which case, I'd say the plot was genius.

This is the first franchise reboot that I've ever seen that is a genuine reboot.

But, at it's core, it's the characters that elevated the movie, for me. If it had just been an action extravaganza with no substance, I wouldn't own it and watch it over and over again.

Red Brooklyn 12-08-2012 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 9189455)
The pace, fighting and explosion factor were upped significantly for today's modern younger audience. I don't care, they made Trek entertaining again. It had grown stale.

I completely agree.

But I would add that I think they did a great job with the character development. Especially since they were essentially reintroducing characters we already know and care about.

siberian khatru 12-08-2012 10:17 AM

Interesting conversation about the first one (the reboot).

I saw it in theaters and liked it a lot. This week, I rewatched it for the first time, on TV, and found I liked it a lot less. I was wincing at several scenes.

Deberg_1990 12-08-2012 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siberian khatru (Post 9189462)
Interesting conversation about the first one (the reboot).

I saw it in theaters and liked it a lot. This week, I rewatched it for the first time, on TV, and found I liked it a lot less. I was wincing at several scenes.

The story was pretty basic other than the time travel stuff.....but they absolutely nailed the characters and casting. It would never have worked without getting the characters and the right actors. Chris Pine was a major find.

Red Brooklyn 12-08-2012 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siberian khatru (Post 9189462)
Interesting conversation about the first one (the reboot).

I saw it in theaters and liked it a lot. This week, I rewatched it for the first time, on TV, and found I liked it a lot less. I was wincing at several scenes.

That's a bummer.

I seem to like it more and more each time I watch it. I've seen it well over a dozen times now and I just smile ear to ear. It hits all the right notes for me.

Hoping this next one continues the standards set in terms of spectacle and imagination, but with, perhaps, a darker bend.

Abrams & Co keep talking about TDK as a major influence, as a paradigm for what a franchise sequel should look/feel like. I hope they are able to achieve their version of The Dark Knight.

whoman69 12-08-2012 01:34 PM

If you want to get picky from things I didn't like about the reboot there are many. There are no cliffs like that in Iowa. If he had maybe driven to Dubuque he could have driven over the bluffs.

The really big thing was the way they got away from the black hole at the end. They ejected all the warp engine cores and blew them up so that the explosion would give them a push to get going. First off any explosion would have been swallowed by the black hole. Second, you've just expended the power cells that fuels your engines. How would they get away?

Hammock Parties 12-08-2012 02:35 PM

It's Star Trek, dude. Star Trek science is always full of bullshit.

Hammock Parties 12-08-2012 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Brooklyn (Post 9189458)
This is interesting to me because you seem to be implying that Abrams abandoned a more character driven story, but also that he didn't deliver a great plot. Those ideas seem like they could be in conflict. They aren't necessarily, but they could be.

Did you like the reboot? And what do you think Abrams & Co did well if not plot and character?

Would you say spectacle was his number one priority? Or at least, that he made a film where the spectacle was better executed than plot and character?

Because I don't think anyone could argue that the spectacle of the film was outstanding. The visuals are phenomenal.

I thought the plot was well executed, if a little straight forward. Unless we're considering the nature of the reboot as part of the plot. In which case, I'd say the plot was genius.

This is the first franchise reboot that I've ever seen that is a genuine reboot.

But, at it's core, it's the characters that elevated the movie, for me. If it had just been an action extravaganza with no substance, I wouldn't own it and watch it over and over again.

I liked the reboot but it was different than traditional Star Trek.

The characters were fine, but they still lacked the chemistry that the old cast had built up.

Plotwise it fell short...it was mostly about spectacle and building up a few key characters.

It'll be interesting to see how they proceed.

Frazod 12-08-2012 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoman69 (Post 9189733)
If you want to get picky from things I didn't like about the reboot there are many. There are no cliffs like that in Iowa. If he had maybe driven to Dubuque he could have driven over the bluffs.

The really big thing was the way they got away from the black hole at the end. They ejected all the warp engine cores and blew them up so that the explosion would give them a push to get going. First off any explosion would have been swallowed by the black hole. Second, you've just expended the power cells that fuels your engines. How would they get away?

It actually was a quarry, so that's semi-plausible. However, the area looked way too flat and barren to be eastern Iowa.

And the impulse engines aren't powered by the warp core. But yeah, the black hole would have swallowed the explosion. That was lame.

Hammock Parties 12-08-2012 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frazod (Post 9189952)
It actually was a quarry, so that's semi-plausible. However, the area looked way too flat and barren to be eastern Iowa.

And the impulse engines aren't powered by the warp core. But yeah, the black hole would have swallowed the explosion. That was lame.

Didn't they go to warp, though?

Frazod 12-08-2012 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassel's Reckoning (Post 9189954)
Didn't they go to warp, though?

No, the explosion blasted them clear (I assume they had the impulse engines on full).

007 12-08-2012 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frazod (Post 9189957)
No, the explosion blasted them clear (I assume they had the impulse engines on full).

They gave it all she had.

DaneMcCloud 12-08-2012 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoman69 (Post 9189733)
If you want to get picky from things I didn't like about the reboot there are many. There are no cliffs like that in Iowa. If he had maybe driven to Dubuque he could have driven over the bluffs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by frazod (Post 9189952)
It actually was a quarry, so that's semi-plausible. However, the area looked way too flat and barren to be eastern Iowa.

I figured that was due to the nuclear war in the early 21st century?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.