Star Trek

A general discussion forum, plus hauls and silly games.

Re: Star Trek

Postby JediTricks » Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:49 am

andersonh1 wrote:I was in the mood to watch some Trek over the Thanksgiving weekend, and ended up watching The Motion Picture and the Wrath of Khan. It's interesting to me how I've reevaluated TMP over the years. As I told my daughter, it's a "sci-fi film from another era". I used to think it was too slow, but I've grown to appreciate how this movie takes its time in telling the story. It's not all big flashy CGI action scenes that go by so quickly you can't appreciate the world being created on screen. I love the five minutes or so where it's just Scotty flying Kirk around showing off the refitted Enterprise. I enjoy the long flight through the Vger cloud where so much of what we see is never explained.... we never learn just what all that is for. It feels like we're in the shoes of the crew, exploring the great unknown. And despite the poor uniforms, I do enjoy seeing the crew look not all that much older than they did in the original series, reconnecting after going their separate ways. Poor Doctor McCoy doesn't get a lot to do in the middle of the film other than walk on to the bridge and off again, sadly, and it's clear in hindsight that the Decker/Ilia story was re-used for Riker and Troi on TNG. It's not a bad movie, and I enjoy it more than I used to. Like "The Cage", it's the sole example from the time period in Trek history that it's set in, and that too renders it a bit more interesting.

Isn't TMP supposed to be about 2 and a half years after the five year mission ended? And then there's another ten years before Wrath of Khan? The fictional timeframe doesn't match the real life time frame for TMP, while TWOK does (Kirk speaking of it being roughly 15 years since he last saw Khan).
TMP is indeed 2.5 years after the 5 year mission based on the dialogue in the film (and the Enterprise has spent 18 months of that being refit). Wrath of Khan is apparently 12 years after TMP.

TMP is a great film, it's a tragedy that the director's edition was never rendered in HD as it solves some of the issues the theatrical cut suffers. But even the theatrical cut, I was watching it with friends recently and the lead-up to V'ger is shocking how engrossing that material is.

Sparky Prime wrote:
andersonh1 wrote:I love the five minutes or so where it's just Scotty flying Kirk around showing off the refitted Enterprise.

Honestly, that has always been my favorite part of the movie. The refit Enterprise just looks amazing, and I've always appreciated that they took the time to show it off in the film and even helps to give the ship itself some character.

Really wish the JJfilms had done something like this. They never did the Enterprise any service with how easily it got blasted in each movie and never really gave a great look at the ship.
Someone pointed out to me recently that Scotty's trip around the Enterprise isn't just model-gazing, it is giving the audience a sense of scale so when we see tiny humans next to this massive ship, we understand later in the film that the tiny ship next to the massive V'ger. Those senses of scale do reverberate, I think.

The New Coke Trek films don't give a shit about the Enterprise, which is why it's so ugly and poorly-designed (the way the giant nacelles are barely attached to the pylons, for example). They weren't even sure how big their ship was going to be in the first one, giving multiple vastly different scales, ultimately deciding it should be larger than the 1701-D.
Image
See, that one's a camcorder, that one's a camera, that one's a phone, and they're doing "Speak no evil, See no evil, Hear no evil", get it?
User avatar
JediTricks
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3599
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: LA, CA, USA

Re: Star Trek

Postby Sparky Prime » Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:20 am

JediTricks wrote:Someone pointed out to me recently that Scotty's trip around the Enterprise isn't just model-gazing, it is giving the audience a sense of scale so when we see tiny humans next to this massive ship, we understand later in the film that the tiny ship next to the massive V'ger. Those senses of scale do reverberate, I think.

That's a good point, and it's something the movie reminds us about several times with scenes like Spock's EVA or when they depart the Enterprise to meet the Voyager 6 probe.

The New Coke Trek films don't give a shit about the Enterprise, which is why it's so ugly and poorly-designed (the way the giant nacelles are barely attached to the pylons, for example). They weren't even sure how big their ship was going to be in the first one, giving multiple vastly different scales, ultimately deciding it should be larger than the 1701-D.

Yeah, that's what I meant by how easily it got blasted in the three films. They made the Enterprise pathetic. Bad design, and it stood no chance against any of the threats it went up against in all three films. Why did they name the Enterprise-A in its honor in this timeline? It didn't have the distinguished history like it did in the original timeline. It's apparent the JJprise was designed with the scale of the original ship in mind, but then, they really didn't care that much about anything making sense in those films.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Star Trek

Postby andersonh1 » Mon Dec 31, 2018 2:34 pm

JediTricks wrote:TMP is a great film, it's a tragedy that the director's edition was never rendered in HD as it solves some of the issues the theatrical cut suffers. But even the theatrical cut, I was watching it with friends recently and the lead-up to V'ger is shocking how engrossing that material is.


I haven't seen the theatrical cut in years. The 2 disc director's cut is the one I own and have watched the last few times I've been in the mood to see it again. But I agree, the music, the pacing and the largely dialogue free sequences as the Enterprise flies into this massive cloud are well done.

The New Coke Trek films don't give a shit about the Enterprise, which is why it's so ugly and poorly-designed (the way the giant nacelles are barely attached to the pylons, for example). They weren't even sure how big their ship was going to be in the first one, giving multiple vastly different scales, ultimately deciding it should be larger than the 1701-D.


They're modern popcorn action flicks: lots of blurry CGI and spectacle, very little substance or depth. I don't hate them, but they're certainly inferior to the original series and movies.

I've been watching TOS lately since it's been a few years, and I'm reminded of just how much I enjoy that show, and how well done it really is on so many levels. Shatner gets a lot of flack for some of his acting choices, but he's very good as Kirk in those early episodes, and capable of a good deal of quiet and subtle acting when required. Spock's court martial during "The Menagerie" is a prime example of a very restrained William Shatner, calmly involved in proceedings and working out just what Spock is trying to do and trying to say. And Spock smiles, or half smiles, a lot more than I remembered in the early episodes. You can tell the actors are just learning their characters, but they're already putting a lot into the parts and producing some good performances.

There's a reason that show thrived for so long. I've seen every episode a dozen times growing up, and I still enjoy going back and re-watching every few years.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
 
Posts: 4930
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Star Trek

Postby Sparky Prime » Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:53 pm

So I just got the Star Trek art of John Eaves book, and several of the Hero Collector books... And I just have to say, these are amazing.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Star Trek

Postby Sparky Prime » Wed Jan 09, 2019 12:17 am

Star Trek 4 has reportedly been shelved by Paramount.

Looks like the Kelvin timeline is dead.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Star Trek

Postby andersonh1 » Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:35 am

I think the biggest loss with the Kelvin timeline is that so much potential was squandered. I finally watched Beyond and it was not bad, all things considered. But so much about the Kelvin timeline Trek movies was just retreading old material without a lot of new ideas added to the mix. There are some good ideas in all the movies, and then there are all the dumb, thoughtless plot devices and mindless action movie cliches that just bring them down. The intelligent writing that the best of the old series had is just not there.

This is the Star Trek I'm looking forward to: https://www.cbr.com/picards-life-radica ... ek-series/

With pre-production continuing on the new Star Trek series featuring Patrick Stewart's Jean-Luc Picard, executive producer Alex Kurtzman has shed some light on the upcoming CBS All Access series.

Kurtzman, who oversees all new Star Trek programming on the premium streaming service, has revealed that the planned series will take place after the events in the prime timeline of 2009's Star Trek, which saw the destruction of Romulus and subsequent demise of the Romulan Empire after Spock failed to stop a supernova from consuming the Romulan homeworld.

"Picard's life was radically altered by the dissolution of the Romulan Empire," Kurtzman revealed in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter.

Kurtzman, who co-wrote the J.J. Abrams-helmed reboot, also co-wrote the tie-in comic book miniseries Star Trek: Countdown leading to the events of Romulus' destruction. Taking place several years after Picard's most recent on-screen appearance in Star Trek: Nemesis, the miniseries saw Picard leave the Enterprise to begin a career as a diplomat. Whether this career change will remain canon and how the destruction of Romulus will impact Picard has yet to be seen, but it confirms that the new series will chronologically be the latest in the franchise's prime timeline.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
 
Posts: 4930
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Star Trek

Postby andersonh1 » Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:41 am

More detail on the Picard series:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live- ... ls-1174452

The only problem: The actor was rumored to be uninterested in revisiting Picard, whom he played for seven seasons on Star Trek: The Next Generation from 1987-94 and in four feature films. Kurtzman wasn't sure of the response he'd get when he called Stewart's agent and asked for a meeting.

"To our amazement and delight, the agent called back and said he was curious to know what we had in mind," Kurtzman says.

Kurtzman, along with then-Star Trek: Discovery producer Akiva Goldsman and writer Kirsten Beyer, met with Stewart to pitch their vision.

"What we tried to convey in that meeting was how desperately we loved him and the character and how much we wanted to see what happened to Picard," says Kurtzman.

Stewart asked them to prepare a three-page document outlining their ideas. By this point, novelist and screenwriter Michael Chabon had joined the team to pitch a Picard-centric show, and they soon realized they could not fit their ideas into just three pages.

"It turned into a 34-page document — with no way to shorten it," says Kurtzman. "We were going on all in and he was going to read it or not read it, love it or hate it. It was our best attempt at trying to get him to say yes."

Fortunately, Stewart liked what he read. Kurtzman got the call that the actor would be in Los Angeles during Oscars weekend and wanted to meet.

"He walked into the room and he had a huge smile on his face and said, 'This is wonderful,'" recalls Kurtzman of that March 2018 meeting with Stewart." What he understood at that point … was that he was with people who desperately wanted to collaborate with him, that we weren't trying to exploit him. He knew if he was going to go back to Picard, it needed to be for the greatest reason ever."
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
 
Posts: 4930
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Star Trek

Postby Sparky Prime » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:26 am

I'm not sure how to feel about the Picard series... I mean, I'm happy they're FINALLY returning to the 24th century of Star Trek. I feel like with how they keep trying to modernize Star Trek and do something different with it with prequels that just serves to screw up everything, that this should have been a "no duh" move on the creators part. What better way to modernize Star Trek, and do something new with it, than with something set in the modern era of Star Trek at a point in the story we haven't seen?

But on the other hand... It's Kurtzman in charge of this, who is largely responsible for the 2009 films and Discovery. Doesn't exactly inspire much confidence they'll get it right anymore than they have with the prequels. And I'm not a big fan of the Romulan Empire being destroyed.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Star Trek

Postby Sparky Prime » Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:31 pm

A Section 31 series starring Michelle Yeoh as the mirrorverse Philippa Georgiou has been announced.

A Star Trek series about a black ops organization lead by a character from the mirror universe... I can't think of a series that'd be more anti-Star Trek than that.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Star Trek

Postby andersonh1 » Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:44 pm

Sparky Prime wrote:A Section 31 series starring Michelle Yeoh as the mirrorverse Philippa Georgiou has been announced.

A Star Trek series about a black ops organization lead by a character from the mirror universe... I can't think of a series that'd be more anti-Star Trek than that.


Yeah, that doesn't appeal at all. I can't see Roddenberry signing off on it, if he was still around. With all these different series, it really does seem as though they're trying every idea they can think of to see what might stick.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
 
Posts: 4930
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

PreviousNext

Return to Talk Here Suckas!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests