Star Trek Movies

Page 7 of 9 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  rivki8699 on Mon May 20, 2013 3:25 pm

I saw the new Star Trek yesterday, and I liked it. But the more I think about it, the more annoyed I am.

Spoiler:
First, the whitewashing. That was just...mindboggling. I mean, what year is it? And it just made me snort when Benedict Cumberbatch said "I am Kahn" because, really, he isn't. I can't wait to hear people flat out ask both JJ and Benedict what the fuck they were thinking. Because, yeah, JJ decided to cast a white guy, instead of a POC, but Benedict auditioned for and took the role. Super fucked up.

Second, the use of women in the movie was just awful. I mean, I adore Uhura like no one else, but did they really need to have her conduct an emotional discussion with Spock a) in the presence of their Captain and two other members of their crew and b) as they were embarking on a seriously dangerous mission? It was just so immature, and so unlike her. We saw what she's like when she's annoyed with Spock in the 2009 movie, she makes her case clearly, unemotionally, and appropriately. This Uhura is out of nowhere. And then Carol Marcus was such a non-entity, I hated both her underwear scene and the fact that she's only relevant as her father's daughter. After the movie I just kept thinking that it'd have been way more awesome if Gaila had taken over engineering with Scotty off the ship, instead of Chekov. And it would have been nice to actually see Nurse Chapel (as she was in the 2009 movie) rather than hear that she'd apparently left the Enterprise because Captain Kirk is now all about the sexual harrasment. I know it would have been crazy, to have four whole women in a Star Trek film, two of whom aren't even there because of their relationships with men, but I think the audience could have handled it.

And most of the emotional stuff fell fairly flat with me. I mean, I'm always a sucker for a captain sacrificing himself for his ship (and I loved Kirk's "I'm sorry" to the crew because he is so obviously gutted by his failure to save everyone, but also 100% not at fault for the clusterfuck), but the Kirk/Spock stuff is so unearned. They've only known each other for what, a year? They don't have a deep and abiding friendship, at least not yet. And honestly, they're still so young.

Ugh, and the call to New Vulcan was just so off. I mean, I love me some Nimoy, but it just felt like Spock was calling his dad to give him a cheat code.

And ugh, the plot holes. After thinking about this movie for twenty minutes it makes about as much sense as Skyfall - in other words, not very much.
avatar
rivki8699

Posts : 162
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 35
Location : NYC

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  RiverThames on Mon May 20, 2013 3:37 pm

Indeed, the
Spoiler:
underwear scene was another thing that felt like studio mandate: You will show Alice Eve in her underwear. There was nothing in that scene that was also covered by the scene immediately following it: namely, that Carol and Bones were going to the planetoid to open up the bomb, and given that McCoy wasn't even there yet and they hadn't solidified a plan, there was no pressing need for Carol to change into the mission uniform RIGHT AWAY. It could have been slightly less absurd had they at least had the scene play like Carol doesn't give a damn. She changes right then and there and doesn't care because that's what needs to be done. But it didn't, and she was all fake-coy, and the whole scene was dumb and removable.
avatar
RiverThames

Posts : 854
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 44
Location : Austin, TX

http://www.mrmaresca.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  rivki8699 on Mon May 20, 2013 3:40 pm

Oh, and here's the best take I've seen so far on the Spoiler.
avatar
rivki8699

Posts : 162
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 35
Location : NYC

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  laddical on Mon May 20, 2013 4:04 pm

Just going off that pic, no other info, I'd say Paddy Joe is playing Evil Mirror Data. SO PALE.
avatar
laddical

Posts : 1607
Join date : 2011-10-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Shadowlass on Mon May 20, 2013 4:11 pm

It wasn't terrible, but it was a disappointment--
Spoiler:
the whitewashing and the overall movie both. The writing and direction both felt much less focused on this one. Kirk is removed from command only to receive it back five minutes later. And casting grossness aside, it felt like a waste of Bumbersnatch Bandercoot, who was throwing off genuinely frightening glints of malice and intellectual power. Yet half the movie was dealing with Peter Weller, who can convey sleaze like no one else, but so much so that I dislike watching him. If they're going to go ahead and cast a pasty white but very scary guy as Khan, why didn't they focus more on him?

It also felt like they were trying to hit a bunch of points from the first movie. Bar scene! Girl in underwear! Kirk zooming through space! Kirk + cliff! Scotty running through engineering! Original Spock!

I love the cast. But this movie was way too diffuse.

Shadowlass

Posts : 437
Join date : 2011-10-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  rivki8699 on Mon May 20, 2013 4:19 pm

laddical wrote:Just going off that pic, no other info, I'd say Paddy Joe is playing Evil Mirror Data. SO PALE.

He could totally have been Lore.
avatar
rivki8699

Posts : 162
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 35
Location : NYC

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  bookworm on Mon May 20, 2013 4:53 pm

YES.

Spoiler:
Also if one more person says "Khan was played by a Mexican in the original series. Why is this so different?" to me one more time I may have to smack someone.
avatar
bookworm

Posts : 1082
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 37
Location : Georgia

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  RiverThames on Mon May 20, 2013 5:09 pm

This article hits it pretty square, in saying that
Spoiler:
in order to have "spoiler surprise" of Khan, they had to strip everything out from the character that makes him Khan. The "mystery box" is important for being a mystery box, rather than something at the core of character.

Also: the io9 movie FAQ is pure gold.

Spoiler:

Brilliant strategist, eh?

He was a little excited. Also, he still had Peter Weller’s skull juice all over his hands; that would distract anybody.

So we’re done?

By no means. The Enterprise is pretty much dead and has entered Earth’s orbit, meaning it's falling really, really fast. The problem is that the warp drive is misaligned, so —

Wait a minute. I know what’s happening here.

— so the ship can’t stop falling, but the warp drive room is full of radiation and —

Goddammit. GODDAMMIT


— so Kirk runs into the Warp Drive room and kicks it back into place —

OH GOD IT’S KIRK THIS TIME THAT’S EVEN WORSE
avatar
RiverThames

Posts : 854
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 44
Location : Austin, TX

http://www.mrmaresca.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  rivki8699 on Mon May 20, 2013 6:04 pm

RiverThames wrote:This article hits it pretty square, in saying that
Spoiler:
in order to have "spoiler surprise" of Khan, they had to strip everything out from the character that makes him Khan. The "mystery box" is important for being a mystery box, rather than something at the core of character.

In general, I have a problem with the idea wthat this needed to be a surprise, because the surprise is so meta. I get hiding a plot twist from the audience when it's necessary to make the plot work (i.e. if the characters had known they would have acted differently), or if it's necessary to keep the audience in suspense (everytime the audience doesn't hear the plan, because they need to be surprised by it). But this didn't fit either of those categories.
avatar
rivki8699

Posts : 162
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 35
Location : NYC

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Putli Bai on Mon May 20, 2013 6:18 pm

I liked the movie, even though I agree with what everyone is say. I'd like to add something to the discussion, but ever since cutebutpsycho suggested casting Oded Fehr, I've had a different movie playing in my head.

A naughty movie.
avatar
Putli Bai

Posts : 671
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Cutebutpsycho on Mon May 20, 2013 6:33 pm

RiverThames wrote:This article hits it pretty square, in saying that
Spoiler:
in order to have "spoiler surprise" of Khan, they had to strip everything out from the character that makes him Khan. The "mystery box" is important for being a mystery box, rather than something at the core of character.

Also: the io9 movie FAQ is pure gold.

Spoiler:

Brilliant strategist, eh?

He was a little excited. Also, he still had Peter Weller’s skull juice all over his hands; that would distract anybody.

So we’re done?

By no means. The Enterprise is pretty much dead and has entered Earth’s orbit, meaning it's falling really, really fast. The problem is that the warp drive is misaligned, so —

Wait a minute. I know what’s happening here.

— so the ship can’t stop falling, but the warp drive room is full of radiation and —

Goddammit. GODDAMMIT


— so Kirk runs into the Warp Drive room and kicks it back into place —

OH GOD IT’S KIRK THIS TIME THAT’S EVEN WORSE

I can't stop laughing at that article. It's I wrote the faq. And Putli Bai, you're welcome.
avatar
Cutebutpsycho

Posts : 710
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  naughty zoot on Mon May 20, 2013 6:50 pm

Aside from the stupidity of THE SPOILER I also have an issue with the opening Indiana Jones-like scene - actually with the entire Nibiru sequence. How many ways can they violate the Primne Directive on one mission?
avatar
naughty zoot

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : Western Mass

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  rivki8699 on Tue May 21, 2013 11:58 am

naughty zoot wrote:Aside from the stupidity of THE SPOILER I also have an issue with the opening Indiana Jones-like scene - actually with the entire Nibiru sequence. How many ways can they violate the Primne Directive on one mission?

I thought the set-up could actually have been really interesting, if that had been the focus of the movie. Because they violated the Prime Directive not just by letting the indigenous people see them rescue Spock, but also by stopping the volcano in the first place. And Spock was clearly on board for stopping the volcano. Which makes sense, and could be quite touching, since it would call back to his inability to save Vulcan. Of course, a movie that actually delved into the Prime Directive and ethics and where the lines are would probably make JJ Abram's brain explode. I mean, someone has to be taking revenge for something, right? What other motivations could anyone have?
avatar
rivki8699

Posts : 162
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 35
Location : NYC

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  sagitare on Tue May 21, 2013 3:59 pm

rivki8699 wrote:
naughty zoot wrote:Aside from the stupidity of THE SPOILER I also have an issue with the opening Indiana Jones-like scene - actually with the entire Nibiru sequence. How many ways can they violate the Primne Directive on one mission?
I thought the set-up could actually have been really interesting, if that had been the focus of the movie. Because they violated the Prime Directive not just by letting the indigenous people see them rescue Spock, but also by stopping the volcano in the first place.
This is the bit that annoyed me, that he was on board with violating it with stopping the volcano but gets his undies in a twist over letting the locals see them. As you say, there was probably a better way to handle that but it just didn't make sense. It was annoying that Spock kept nattering on about it, you know?
avatar
sagitare

Posts : 477
Join date : 2011-10-22
Location : Canada's Wet Coast

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  RiverThames on Tue May 21, 2013 4:13 pm

In theory, saving the planet without getting noticed would not be a Prime Directive violation, in that you're not interfering with their societal development. (Since "letting them all die" gives them zero societal development.) But if you save the planet and the natives never knew anything happened, they aren't going to change because you interfered. But since they were spotted, the natives would then make the Cult of the Enterprise, and that's a problem.

At some point, I should stop doing these, but ONE MORE THING:

Spoiler:
Clearly, communications are working on Enterprise, even if little else is, because they call Old Spock on New Vulcan. Fine. But given that they're RIGHT BY EARTH where MUCH OF THE REST OF STARFLEET IS LOCATED then WHY IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT'S HOLY did they NOT call out, "Hey, someone, for the love of God, help us! Either shoot the unfrozen dictator's ship or, I don't know, throw a tractor beam on hus before we crash into Starfleet HQ. Thanks."
avatar
RiverThames

Posts : 854
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 44
Location : Austin, TX

http://www.mrmaresca.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  laddical on Tue May 21, 2013 5:21 pm

The natives seeing them was definitely a burr in Pike's saddle, but my takeaway overall was that he was annoyed by everything about the mission, including the volcano stoppage. As he's laying into Kirk he says that their mission was scientific observation. I can't remember if he said anything more specific, but I feel like even stopping the volcano is a violation of the Prime Directive, it just wasn't the most serious breach in this situation.
avatar
laddical

Posts : 1607
Join date : 2011-10-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  RiverThames on Tue May 21, 2013 5:29 pm

But you have to admit, that's vintage Kirk. Breaking the letter of the PD to save lives or allow for a culture to continue freely is totally what he did in every other episode.
avatar
RiverThames

Posts : 854
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 44
Location : Austin, TX

http://www.mrmaresca.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  laddical on Tue May 21, 2013 7:47 pm

Oh definitely, no argument there.
avatar
laddical

Posts : 1607
Join date : 2011-10-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  RiverThames on Fri May 24, 2013 2:25 am

Sigh. Explains so much.
avatar
RiverThames

Posts : 854
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 44
Location : Austin, TX

http://www.mrmaresca.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Red Wolf on Fri May 24, 2013 3:13 am

If foreign viewers don't like the Trek elements, then why make a Trek movie? There's nothing wrong with a non-branded SF adventure movie. Otherwise you're getting into "kill it to save it" territory.

I speak here as a lifelong Trekkie, of course. But if this is what we're given, I'm not sure I want it at all. I just feel we're getting close to 'in name only'.

Red Wolf

Posts : 693
Join date : 2011-11-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  QueenSix on Fri May 24, 2013 7:42 am

I'm a 'foreign viewer' and I don't know who they were talking to but they certainly weren't talking to me or a lot of people I know, because it's the name Star Trek that draws me and all that is associated with it - Kirk, Spock, Uhura, the Enterprise, and the uniforms and the general Star Fleet-ness of it all.

This seems to me to be another case of the property being in the hands of people who really don't "get" it that much, which is a shame, and instead of building on the strengths of what's gone ahead and what people have responded to in the past and would respond to again now, they assume there's something wrong with what they have and try to fix it. That annoys me no end. Either go all out and believe in what you're doing or fuck off and make Random Sci-Fi Action Film 56426.

QueenSix

Posts : 1313
Join date : 2011-10-22
Location : City of the Tribes, West of Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Cutebutpsycho on Fri May 24, 2013 2:18 pm

I don't know a lot of Star Trek (I've seen some TNG movies, that's about it and I know of the characters), but that just seems bleah. I suspect they're keeping the name because it's a known brand, but this just doesn't feel like Star Trek to me right now and I have about as much knowledge as any other schmoe out there.

avatar
Cutebutpsycho

Posts : 710
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Binky on Fri May 24, 2013 3:13 pm

Well, that article explained why the Trek felt pasted on.

I enjoyed it overall, but also found it disappointing. And the writing to be kind of clumsy all over the place (which I guess IS a trekky characteristic but meh) and a lot of the dialogue (which was so great in the first movie) to be just outright bad.

I'm not going to touch the race stuff, and enjoyed Ferretface's performance, but Oded Fehr would have been AWESOME.

avatar
Binky

Posts : 1041
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Kiran on Fri May 24, 2013 7:33 pm

Oded Fehr is not the correct ethnicity either. I mean, at least hes not white but...while eventually that casting doesn't bother me as much (because I mean at least we are all the same general skin tone I guess), I always think it sends the message that minorities are interchangeable.

avatar
Kiran

Posts : 2583
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Miss Moneypenny on Fri May 24, 2013 7:52 pm

Kiran wrote:Oded Fehr is not the correct ethnicity either. I mean, at least hes not white but...while eventually that casting doesn't bother me as much (because I mean at least we are all the same general skin tone I guess), I always think it sends the message that minorities are interchangeable.


Well, John Cho is Korean and not Japanese, which I mainly know because JJ went on at length about calling George Takei to make sure it was okay to cast another ethnicity. Guess they decided they didn't give a fuck about even vaguely related ethnicity this time!
avatar
Miss Moneypenny

Posts : 885
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : fauxburbia, MA

http://daisyrazor.blogspot.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek Movies

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 9 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum