Topic: ST3 drives itself backwards.

[Sirgod]

With the new director.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30586774

Film-maker Justin Lin is to direct the next instalment of the Star Trek movie franchise, it has been confirmed.

Lin, whose previous credits include four instalments of the Fast and Furious series, replaces Roberto Orci, who recently pulled out of the role.

JJ Abrams, who made the first two reboots of the sci-fi series, stepped down to make the new Star Wars film.

A release for the third Star Trek prequel - or "threequel" - has not been set by Hollywood film studio Paramount.

However, there has been speculation that it will come out in 2016 to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the launch of the Star Trek television series.

Casting details are not confirmed, but actors who starred in the first two outings, including Chris Pine as Kirk and Zachary Quinto as Spock, are expected to return.

Star Trek Into Darkness, released in 2013, made more than $467m (£278m) worldwide. It co-starred Benedict Cumberbatch as villain Khan.

The first prequel, looking at the younger lives of its famous characters, was released in 2009.

Orci, who was due to make his directorial debut on the project, is co-writing the script.

Orci, along with Abrams, will continue to be on board as producers.

------------

I may be alone here, but ST is not solely an action movie, but always always had social commentary that while we may not all agree, it was always at the front of things. That is a lot of what made Trek, Trek.

I fear that we are gonna see overblown action sequences replacing the Lens Flare (which will now be a new Jedi Power).

I was disappointed by the first two films, but always thought, at least it is keeping the franchise going. Now I think , just let it die in peace.

Stephen

[EschelonOfJudgemnt]

Things like Axanar keep my faith in the franchise/brand.  Yeah, Axanar is technically a fan franchise, but it has some pretty good star power.

I recently showed Prelude to Axanar to a fellow Trek fan, and she said it gave her goose bumps...

That being said, so far nothing in the press release above has rekindled my faith in the latest Paramount effort.  And yeah, Star Trek should be more in depth and not just about flashy action sequences.

Franchise films shouldn't always be about the lowest common denominator.  Unfortunately, the bean counters don't agree with that assessment, and brave directors that 'own' their projects and push back hard against stuido influences are fewer and farther between.  At least in the movie world.

[Sirgod]

I agree 100% + with every thing you just said there.

[TarMinyatur]

I may be alone here, but ST is not solely an action movie, but always always had social commentary that while we may not all agree, it was always at the front of things. That is a lot of what made Trek, Trek...

I was disappointed by the first two films, but always thought, at least it is keeping the franchise going. Now I think , just let it die in peace.

Stephen

Yes. Rest in Peace real Trek.

Star Trek surely had moments of action...but Trek, to me, is built upon compassion and a "respect for sentient life" as a pricipled (and subordinate) Spock once said to a determined Kirk (who had ordered the destruction of the Gorn vessel). The Horta episode also comes to mind: images of broken silicon eggs, No Kill I. The hearty laughter of Kor and Kirk at the whirly-gig entity that thrived on hate and vengeance, yet defeated through peace. What saved the Earth? It wasn't slow-motion 3-D panning martial arts, nor high-speed chases, nor sword fights, nope, it was just one beautiful singing whale.

[Age]

I see my links and shared posts are helping you out here.JJ go home.

[Nemesis]

The hearty laughter of Kor and Kirk at the whirly-gig entity that thrived on hate and vengeance, yet defeated through peace.

Kang and Kirk.  Kor was on Organia.

Making Trek for non Trek fans.     Morons.

[TarMinyatur]

Oops. Right. Too many K's! Actually, Kor would have been the Klingon Commander in that episode if the actor were available. Kang was an excellent substitute indeed.

[Tulwar]

Hopefully, Lin will retire JJ's models and sets.  As horrible as ST TMP was, the new Enterprise was everything it should have been, and despite the over-abundance of gimblies, the Klingon BC model was quite beautiful.  These beautiful models would not have been created without the film, so, "so what" if it sucked?  Since we're talking about a movie, you can't expect much, but hopefully, Lin will do something cool.

To give the devil his due, JJ Abrams is an excellent director.  The films flowed perfectly, and the actors did quite well.  It's virtually every creative decision that was hopelessly wrong.  From the design of the Enterprise to the destruction of the planet Vulcan, everything seemed to be a deliberate act of vandalism on the ST franchise.  I hope they hurry up, and get the last of Paramount's ST movies out of the way, so CBS can take a serious stab at a new series.  There hasn't been a good spaceship show since SG1, Farscape, and Firefly!

[Age]

Hopefully, Lin will retire JJ's models and sets.  As horrible as ST TMP was, the new Enterprise was everything it should have been, and despite the over-abundance of gimblies, the Klingon BC model was quite beautiful.  These beautiful models would not have been created without the film, so, "so what" if it sucked?  Since we're talking about a movie, you can't expect much, but hopefully, Lin will do something cool.

To give the devil his due, JJ Abrams is an excellent director.  The films flowed perfectly, and the actors did quite well.  It's virtually every creative decision that was hopelessly wrong.  From the design of the Enterprise to the destruction of the planet Vulcan, everything seemed to be a deliberate act of vandalism on the ST franchise.  I hope they hurry up, and get the last of Paramount's ST movies out of the way, so CBS can take a serious stab at a new series.  There hasn't been a good spaceship show since SG1, Farscape, and Firefly!

I wouldn't say TMP looked bad I didn't like those uniforms as much as I liked TOS and 2 thru 6.The ship was just fine and I was impressed by it not that I didn't like the TV version.

Thsoe weren't the last of space TV series as the Last was SG Universe,Atlantis,Andromeda and BSG04 which were all filmed in BC.

If there is another TV series it should take place between 2230 to 2360 to clear up the indescrepanses.

These people want to see a series that takes place after Nemsis.I would say we have sen enough TNG for now.

http://youtu.be/INBomjDrUSQ

http://youtu.be/Ipiq-Px5yzo

[knightstorm]

Hopefully, Lin will retire JJ's models and sets.  As horrible as ST TMP was, the new Enterprise was everything it should have been, and despite the over-abundance of gimblies, the Klingon BC model was quite beautiful.  These beautiful models would not have been created without the film, so, "so what" if it sucked?  Since we're talking about a movie, you can't expect much, but hopefully, Lin will do something cool.

To give the devil his due, JJ Abrams is an excellent director.  The films flowed perfectly, and the actors did quite well.  It's virtually every creative decision that was hopelessly wrong.  From the design of the Enterprise to the destruction of the planet Vulcan, everything seemed to be a deliberate act of vandalism on the ST franchise.  I hope they hurry up, and get the last of Paramount's ST movies out of the way, so CBS can take a serious stab at a new series.  There hasn't been a good spaceship show since SG1, Farscape, and Firefly!

I thought the acting sucked.  In particular outside of the bad writing, Zachary Quinto's acting defiled Spock even more.  I also don't want another Trek series.  If they did one right now, it would probably be set in the same continuity as the Abrams films.

[Tulwar]

I don't think any group of actors could have made anything of the JJ scripts, so I won't tarnish the actor's reputations.  We all got to make a living.

The models of the Enterprise and the Klingon BC were the highlights of ST TMP, otherwise, the costumes and sets left much to be desired.  As for the storyline, characterizations, and the like, the producers had to work very hard to come up with something that lousy.  Still, a good model is enough to redeem any sci-fi movie, and ST TMP had not one but two.  By that standard, it was the only good ST film.

My list of sci-fi from the 1990's was limitted to my favorites.  I could have included BSG and STU, but found those just too depressing.  SGA was only watchable because of my enormous appetite for sci-fi.  SG1 and Firefly were truly quality productions.

As far as a new ST series goes, the one thing that JJ Abrams got right is that the Paramount paradigm is rather long in the tooth.  While there are people that want a post Nexus program, there really is a limit to the imagination.  How can you present a TV franchise where people live hundreds of years, while retaining a youthful appearance?  This is going to happen before the timeline of Enterprise, let alone Nexis.  As far as the appearance of the ST series and movies, the appearance of the visual effects date from the 1970's and 80's.  Next week, it will be 2015!

When TOS aired, Sci-fi was very different than what we are presented with today.  TOS was produced when not just the dreamers, but the doers were thinking big thoughts.  Project Orion had only been cancelled a few years before, and the moon missions started while the series was in production.  The 1960's was a time when sci-fi writers were thinking in terms of atomic hand guns, while real soldiers were joking about atomic hand grenades.  The series was fanciful, because people's minds were open to the possiblities ST explored.

Today, are only open to space ships and ray-guns, because of all the decades they've been in the most popular TV shows and movies.  We're used to them.  They're just conventions we've come to accept, like every other hum-drum genera.

Some say that ST should just die.  It might be better if the fans had the ST world all to themselves, before people like Abrams make any more horrible films, but that isn't in the cards.  CBS didn't buy the rights just to keep anybody else from doing ST.  They probably already had contracts with a production company to create a new series when they bought the franchise.

Now that JJ Abrams has vandalized the ST universe, CBS is free to do whatever they want.  I don't want to see anything that remotely smells like any ST I've already seen.  What would really set it off is giving it the feel of hard sci-fi.  I know, that's asking for a lot.

[Sirgod]

I didn't mind Zach Q so much as Spock, or eve Chris Pine or Urban.

On the Spock part, I never got into saving cheerleaders, so Zach was a new comer to me, and I thought he pulled it off well, until ST2 the wrath of bad writing.

Urban nails it 100%.

I love that scrawny English feller from Hot Fuzz and Shawn of the Dead, but he just doesn't quite live up to Scotty and his burly rumble.

Read an article the other day on Forbes, and man they where happy with the director choice.  I just can not be.

as for the Motion Picture, I think one had to be there in the moment. right at 10 years with no new trek, even the costumes where a nice slap in the face to the Disco clothes I was sick of seeing as a kid. and seeing the Big E on the screen for the first time. For a lot of us, in that special age bracket, it was a dream come true.

Of course, rose tinted glasses and all of that.

stephen

[Lieutenant_Q]

I still get the chills everytime I see the drydock scene from TMP.  And ST:IV was actually my first Star Trek anything, I was six at the time.  So I never had the 'Transistion' from the TOS Enterprise to the TMP Enterprise.

My three favorite scenes were the Drydock (and leaving the drydock) scene from TMP. the Mutara Nebula Battle in ST2, and Stealing the Enterprise in ST3.

[Age]

This is what the fans will think of it.
http://whatculture.com/film/star-trek-3-10-reasons-why-we-already-know-it-will-suck.php

[Tulwar]

Here I was getting happy, because I thought JJ was taking his hands off the wheel.  Oh well.

There are reasons that movies have been getting worse over the decades.  Sci-fi seems to be the babyfied genera around.  The emerging markets around the world don't have serious space programs, so serious sci-fi does not appeal to their cultures.  When the Communist Party decides it's time to make Americans look like idiots, and invest serious money in their space program, the People's Republic of China will build heavy lift rockets on assembly lines and do some real space exploration.  Over night, the Chinese film and television will begin exporting their science fiction franchises to America.

Movies are a lost cause.  Television, on the other hand, is changing in a big way.  Broadcasters are going to be driven out of buisness, and the cable monopolies are only going to hold on to their buisness model, because they can control the politicians.  After all, they control nearly all the political information the American People have access to, so no politician will dare threaten them.

Still, there is competition for content.  ST is a proven winner.  If a studio should invest a large amount of money into a ST series, they know the money will not be wasted.  As the usual financial model of selling advertising time during a time slot fails, CBS will be able to make money by selling redistribution rights and merchandising.  This means the studio will have to produce a product distinct from what has been done by Paramount.

Perhaps, it was part of the deal, when CBS bought the rights that Paramount end by making the most offensive ST movies imaginable.  I couldn't think of any better way to hand CBS a clean slate than encouraging Abrams to vandalise the franchise.

[Age]

Tulwar

Broadcasters are going to be driven out of buisness, and the cable monopolies are only going to hold on to their buisness

I hate to say but I would say Data got it right " As that form of entertainment never lasted beyond 2040"

I don't see the quality of and writting that the 20 century had on TV.Networks don't wan't to make sci fi /fantasy Tv as it is to expensive.You can get 10 CSI for the price of 1 TNG.

[Nemesis]

I don't see the quality of and writting that the 20 century had on TV.Networks don't wan't to make sci fi /fantasy Tv as it is to expensive.You can get 10 CSI for the price of 1 TNG.

It goes in cycles. From 1970 until Star Wars was a run away success there was little sci fi on TV.  It was fading from the book stores too.  Star Wars revitalized it.   BSG capitalized on it.  That revitalizing has faded away and needs another shot in the arm to restore it. 

[Corbomite]

Unfortunately, Star Wars isn't sci-fi, it's fantasy space opera. There is no science about it at all, but since it is set mostly in space, people confuse it for sci-fi and that leads to the whiz-bang approach studios take for "sci-fi" these days, hence the new BSG which wasn't really sci-fi either, just a drama with a space backdrop. The real sci-fi that is being put out nowadays is the dystopian future stuff, but most of that is geared toward adolecent girls (who'd have thought that thirty years ago?), so it's about as palatable as a porcupine sundae.

[Nemesis]

So long as it is a SciFi setting that is all the execs see.  To them there is no difference between the Star Wars novel and the novel Rocheworld both are Sci Fi to them.  (Rocheworld is hard sci fi written by an actual space scientist with relevant patents to his name.)

[Corbomite]

The book, and now the film, The Martian looks to have some promise, that is if Ridley Scott doesn't screw it up.

[Sirgod]

Gonna change the tempo, and say Screw Orci! right in the ear!

www.cinemablend.com/new/Roberto-Orci-Continues-Attack-Star-Trek-Fans-Online-Over-His-Reboot-Choices-68854.html

Stop blaming BR (Bad Robot) [for the idea to reset the timeline]. It was my idea so that you would not know what was gonna happen next. Nothing more or less. I Stand behind it. And it, again, is the reason why I make movies and you don’t.  ~Orci.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/09/01/star-trek-is-broken-here-are-ideas-on-how-to-fix-it/

It's official, we now have Trolls making movies.

Stephen

[Nemesis]

There are lots of ways to keep the fans from knowing what is coming next.  I've suggested some right here.  They could have ended Voyager for example with the ship going down on a 20th century level planet and when someone complained how they would never get home the new captain could have said "If we can't get to the Federation we will build another one here".  Follow that into a new future. 

If you don't want to do Trek DON'T.  Make your own universe or adopt another one more to your taste. Don't pretend to do Trek then bitch at fans who object to your butchery of anothers work. 

[knightstorm]

Gonna change the tempo, and say Screw Orci! right in the ear!

www.cinemablend.com/new/Roberto-Orci-Continues-Attack-Star-Trek-Fans-Online-Over-His-Reboot-Choices-68854.html

Stop blaming BR (Bad Robot) [for the idea to reset the timeline]. It was my idea so that you would not know what was gonna happen next. Nothing more or less. I Stand behind it. And it, again, is the reason why I make movies and you don’t.  ~Orci.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/09/01/star-trek-is-broken-here-are-ideas-on-how-to-fix-it/

It's official, we now have Trolls making movies.

Stephen

Which is why in addition to boycotting Abrams, I've made it a point to also avoid films if I know that Orci is the screenwriter.

[Sirgod]

Indeed knightstorm. I read through the comments and was shocked at how many Orci supporters there where, let alone, those who love the new trek.

Don't get me wrong, I watched them, laughed here and there , but it was not Trek.

I thought B&B where bad, and praised Mani Cotto, but this Orci guy is really ticking me off.

[Corbomite]

His attitude basically seems to be "I get paid a lot of money, therefore I must be right!". There are plenty of movies that make a lot of cash and still suck. I didn't see the Academy Awards (or any other respectable award presenters) lavishing praise on his "masterpieces". At least Peter Jackson mangaged to get some love for a genre that is consistantly nixed from the running at every turn, but they wised up and his second grand opus has been (so far) mostly ignored except for the obligatory visual effects categories and the like (and rightly so).

[knightstorm]

Indeed knightstorm. I read through the comments and was shocked at how many Orci supporters there where, let alone, those who love the new trek.

Don't get me wrong, I watched them, laughed here and there , but it was not Trek.

I thought B&B where bad, and praised Mani Cotto, but this Orci guy is really ticking me off.

Well Berman oversaw what was probably the best decade in the franchises history.  As for Orci trying to give Abrams a pass.  Orci wouldn't have been able to sell that POS to the studio on his own.  He needed Abrams to push that cr*p.

[Tulwar]

If you don't want to do Trek DON'T.  Make your own universe or adopt another one more to your taste. Don't pretend to do Trek then bitch at fans who object to your butchery of anothers work.

Exactly.  If Abrams, Orchi, and company were into Trek, and wanted to redo everything, then they would have come up with something that didn't suck.  They might not have done it the way I would have done it, but it would have been would have engendered something other than scorn.

The reason they diserve scorn is that these movies are simply an ugly take on the story setting.  The command crew of the Enterprise cannot be taken seriously on an level, no matter how forgiving and non-military your background.  The new Enterprise and sets look less realistic than those of TOS.  Blowing up planet Vulcan has to be the epitome of ugliness.

How can anybody pay attention to how well the scenes flow the next, and how well crafted the film is, went they are assailed with ugly images and an ugly story?

[EschelonOfJudgemnt]

I vote for the Dallas/Bob Newhart ending. 

Make sure that whichever director worth their salt that takes on the ST franchise after presumably another failed attempt at ST3 starts out the 'back to basics' franchise with someone awakening from a bad dream...



Was pretty awesome how Craig Ferguson borrowed that for his last night at the helm of The Late Late Show...
 

The new guy might do OK, but based on the quotes I've seen from ya'll, yeah he needs to move on NOW!

[Nemesis]

Exactly.  If Abrams, Orchi, and company were into Trek, and wanted to redo everything, then they would have come up with something that didn't suck.  They might not have done it the way I would have done it, but it would have been would have engendered something other than scorn.

The reason they diserve scorn is that these movies are simply an ugly take on the story setting.  The command crew of the Enterprise cannot be taken seriously on an level, no matter how forgiving and non-military your background.  The new Enterprise and sets look less realistic than those of TOS.  Blowing up planet Vulcan has to be the epitome of ugliness.

How can anybody pay attention to how well the scenes flow the next, and how well crafted the film is, went they are assailed with ugly images and an ugly story?

Last summer I read the novel Fuzzy Nation.  It is a rewrite of the 1960s novel Little Fuzzy.  The novel can definitely use updating (and the setting would make an excellent Trek competitor) but he decide to "make it his".  The main character in both is Jack Holloway in the original he is elderly (at least late 60s more likely 70s or 80s) a prospector who has kicked around many new planets over his working life.  A good guy to his friends but still a lethally fast and accurate draw with his gun (a thief who tried to rob him before the novel started was considered by the judge to have committed suicide).    In the remake he is in his 30s a disbarred lawyer and not someone you would want as a friend (he was disbarred for purposefully for a large payoff causing a real scum bag client to get a mistrial).  The whole story is twisted away from the original that way.  Needless to say I'm not really inclined to read more of his works and dislike seeing one blogger suggest him as a writer for a "truer" Trek sequel.    (John Scalzi)

Like Abrams he doesn't treat with respect the creation which he wants to ride on the shirt tails of and therefore from me at least he gets no respect either.  Like with the new Trek I WANTED to like it.  But like the new Trek it isn't what it claims to be.  Scalzi Like Abrams (and B&B) need to treat the work with respect or create their own. 

[Nemesis]

I vote for the Dallas/Bob Newhart ending. 

Make sure that whichever director worth their salt that takes on the ST franchise after presumably another failed attempt at ST3 starts out the 'back to basics' franchise with someone awakening from a bad dream...



Was pretty awesome how Craig Ferguson borrowed that for his last night at the helm of The Late Late Show...
 

The new guy might do OK, but based on the quotes I've seen from ya'll, yeah he needs to move on NOW!

Barclay leaving the Holodeck slams the control panel and says "Still malfunctioning" and then tries once more to repair it. 

[Sirgod]

LOL, that is awesome, between Newhart and Barclay.

 Here's the rub though. I love those old Buster Crabbe, Flash Gordon serials. Right now, I'm even watching the later versions made in Germany , and starring Steve Holland. the thing is, they get it . No rewrite of the character, just new actors and actresses , continuing the adventures of Flash, Dale, and Dr. Zarkov, with filming done in West Berlin.

It was still good stuff.

The point is, if they would have done this , with the actors here, and I do like many of them, then I think we would have been a lot happier with the movies. Continue the stories, Sure, some back ground is cool and all, and having the back ground story is fine, but there is a whole Galaxy out there. Capt. Quantum showed us this, so why the need to base both movies around Earth.

Get them out there on that five year mission, with no black holes, no red matter, no time /Dimension BS, and have them boldly going forward blah blah blah.

[EschelonOfJudgemnt]

Sirgod's comment had a thought pop into my head, that is that we really don't know a lot of the backstory of the various characters, when you think about it.

Kirk we probably learned the most about in the original series (he has siblings, some snippets of his early career, etc.), but even then a lot is left to the imagination.

So rather than reinventing the wheel, you can leave the wheel alone and tackle the fertile ground.

A really good example of the fertile ground from the original series is Amok Time.  In this episode, we learn Spock has a wife, about Ponn Farr, and we get a glimpse into Vulcan culture.  Yeah, there is a LOT of leftover untapped potential, even in TOS. 

A thought might be to follow Scotty's early career, and his path to the Enterprise.  Other characters could be addressed as well.  Really, you could follow multiple backstories simultaneously (not too many though, otherwise it just gets disjointed) and end these arcs with their assignment to the Enterprise.

Lots of conflicts happened before TOS, and I'm sure several characters had interesting careers that 'earned' them a spot on the Enterprise.

In fact, Axanar jumped right into this fertile ground, and I applaud them for it!  Amazing what a couple of quick lines about Captain Garth's backstory as mentioned in TOS can be developed into...

Several fan made series continue to explore the TOS setting (as well as a couple of others), which is even more proof of the untapped potential.


I suppose we could boycott the current ST franchise, but we saw how that worked out with Battlestar Galactica.  Fortunately, the writers for the reimagined BG actually did a pretty good job going their own route, and I continue to love how they (mostly) didn't ignore Newton when mapping out the CG space stuff.   BG made flip & burn look awesome!  (So did Babylon 5 - I have fond memories of the Star Furies in action).

Sure the sweeping turns we see in Star Trek look cool, but if I was going to make one change to the franchise going forward, that'd be putting Newton back in the driver's seat.  We've had at least two major franchises now that have kept Newtonian movement at the heart of their space battles (Babylon 5 being the second).

But I digress.  At the very least, if enough fans could beat Paramount over the head with a petition saying 'we want the old Trek back - new actors are fine but stay true to the original please!' maaaaybe the bean counters might take notice.  Myself, I'm hopeful that Axanar gets a full release, does well, and THEN the powers that be take notice...

[Nemesis]

Commodore Mendez leaves the simulator: Mendez to Kirk. 

Kirk:  Yes sir?

Commodore Mendez leaves the simulator:  Get your damn hacks out of the simulator NOW Cadet.

[Sirgod]

Damn EoJ, if only we could get paramount to read that. Good stuff old friend.

Stephen

[knightstorm]

Before Abrams took over, the plan was to do a film about the beginning of the Romulan war.  I'd still like to see that.

[Corbomite]

They should do the Captain Pike years as a TV/Web series.

[Tulwar]

I think that ST has had so many fingers in it that everything feels very forced as it is.  Prequils exaservate that problem, leaving no room to suspend disbelief.  That's what happens when you as the audience to swallow one convention too many.  About the only thing that Abrams and Co. got right is that ST should start over with a clean slate.  Unfortunately, to that crew, that didn't mean making something more solid to build on.

[Don Karnage]

A Star Trek Enterprise movie would have been interesting. But with what they did with the last episode, I just don't want to think about it. 

[Sirgod]

there is a ton of books out there, that I would love to see on the big screen also. Many of them tell better stories than even some of the older movies.

Stephen

[Tulwar]

there is a ton of books out there, that I would love to see on the big screen also. Many of them tell better stories than even some of the older movies.

Stephen

Why in the crap have the screenwriters never used this source of plot material?  None of the ST movies were very good.  Worse, they indroduced broken ideas into the ST universe.  Books are usually well thought out, and stay within the limits of the story setting.

The problem is that movies are not created to please the fan base.  Like just about everything else in the world, movie-making is a game for very rich men.  Half the time, a movie is just an excuse to try a new lighting arrangement.  Bond movies were not about adapting the old novels to modern times as much as the producers filming stunt men who had come up with a good act.  Scripts are usually written just to set up a shot.

What most of us want is somebody to use film to tell a story.  The people who can get ahold of the capital to make movies are interested in something else.

[knightstorm]

there is a ton of books out there, that I would love to see on the big screen also. Many of them tell better stories than even some of the older movies.

Stephen

Why in the crap have the screenwriters never used this source of plot material?  None of the ST movies were very good.  Worse, they indroduced broken ideas into the ST universe.  Books are usually well thought out, and stay within the limits of the story setting.

The problem is that movies are not created to please the fan base.  Like just about everything else in the world, movie-making is a game for very rich men.  Half the time, a movie is just an excuse to try a new lighting arrangement.  Bond movies were not about adapting the old novels to modern times as much as the producers filming stunt men who had come up with a good act.  Scripts are usually written just to set up a shot.

What most of us want is somebody to use film to tell a story.  The people who can get ahold of the capital to make movies are interested in something else.

Orci did take some source material from the books.  That's why it sucks.

[Tulwar]

Who wrote a book where Vulcan was destroyed?  No, novelist simply do not screw with a setting that isn't their property.

[knightstorm]

The concept of Kirk's father having been in starfleet, and Kirk being a juvenile delinquent were from the books.

[Sirgod]

That was about it though. Those two books , involved Kirk as a Teenager, going with his dad, and April, on a test cruise.  Where as his dad was dead the moment Kirk sprang to life.

Stephen

[Tulwar]

The concept of Kirk's father having been in starfleet, and Kirk being a juvenile delinquent were from the books.

These are perfectly cool concepts.  A man following in the footsteps of his father tracks in any fictional setting.  A kid who causes trouble, because he is too aggressive and too intelligent for his highschool just might be the type of person that could become the youngest starship commander in the fleet.  I have no problem with this.

What I have a problem with is Kirk continuing to be a juvenile delinquent even as he stands on the bridge of the Enterprise.  An instructor had to challenge him to cheat his way out of the Kobiashi Maru, because the way he cheated in JJ Trek was unforgivable.  In military academies, cadets are forbidden to use sarcasm, yet suddenly, he becomes the skipper of the Big E!  Bull manure!  The script wasn't simply bad, but insulting!

[knightstorm]

The concept of Kirk's father having been in starfleet, and Kirk being a juvenile delinquent were from the books.

 A kid who causes trouble, because he is too aggressive and too intelligent for his highschool just might be the type of person that could become the youngest starship commander in the fleet.  I have no problem with this.

Not even.  Most of the cast just sucked.  Scotty was an abomination, Zachary Quinto might have looked the part physically but he was really poor in the role, and Anton Yelchin just sucked.

An actor has to have something to work with!  The part written for Uhura seemed to be a slap at Bill Shatner, and while he might deserve it, that distracted from the story. The film turned Kirk into a low-life punk.  They made out the Vulcans to be the epitome of racists.  We can go on with lousy story-line and bad parts, but where I have to give kudoes is the only thing the film got right:  McCoy.  The actor and the lines he read were absolutely perfect.  If you were to isolate his performance from the crumby sets and the rest of that sorry film, you'd have something to work with.

[Tulwar]

Knightstorm, I assume you're trying to point out an inconsistency in my opinion?  Kirk was not depicted as being anything but an adult, so his "juvenile deliquency" was not germaine to the discussion of the film.  When Kirk's back story is taken back to his teenage years, one must allow for other aspects of his character.

[knightstorm]

There was the scene where he stole his stepfather's car, got into a chase with the cops, and drove it off a cliff.

[Tulwar]

There was the scene where he stole his stepfather's car, got into a chase with the cops, and drove it off a cliff.

The Mustang scene only irritated me, because TOS Kirk couldn't drive.  When he pulls out an apple during the Kobiashi Maru simulation, it was too much for me.  Sure it was supposed to be funny, but the insults were already piling up.  By then Kirk, was way too wild and over-the-top to take seriously.

What is it with just about the whole command crew of the Enterprise going through the academy academy at the same time, anyway?

[knightstorm]

There was the scene where he stole his stepfather's car, got into a chase with the cops, and drove it off a cliff.

The Mustang scene only irritated me, because TOS Kirk couldn't drive.  When he pulls out an apple during the Kobiashi Maru simulation, it was too much for me.  Sure it was supposed to be funny, but the insults were already piling up.  By then Kirk, was way too wild and over-the-top to take seriously.

What is it with just about the whole command crew of the Enterprise going through the academy academy at the same time, anyway?

You don't need to tell me everything about the film that you hate.  Chances are I've probably already posted all the reasons a couple of hundred times already.

I'll even add another reason that you might not have thought of.  Eric Bana.  Seriously, every film I've ever seen him in sucks.  If he's a part of the cast, its a good bet that the film is going to be awful.

[Tulwar]

You don't need to tell me everything about the film that you hate.  Chances are I've probably already posted all the reasons a couple of hundred times already.

I'll even add another reason that you might not have thought of.  Eric Bana.  Seriously, every film I've ever seen him in sucks.  If he's a part of the cast, its a good bet that the film is going to be awful.

Why do you continue to discuss it, then?

[knightstorm]

To counter all of the fawning praise there is with people commenting on how "brilliant" Abrams is.

[Tulwar]

The fawning praise comes from the pulicists he and the studios pay to make him out as the greatest thing since sliced bread.  He's giving up on directing the next one, which means that he's out of the ST buisness, perminately.  I wouldn't say this means anything good for the next film.  After all, it's being done by the same writers and production companies.  You really can't expect them to write differently, or create whole new models and sets.

[Sirgod]

Here ya go men, how many lens flares did JJ use.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/How-Many-Lens-Flares-J-J-Abrams-Star-Trek-Movies-69062.html

tl;dr 721 first movie , 826 second movie

[Tulwar]

This thread has made me think deeply about these films, and I've come to realize that everything I find distasteful about the plot was done very deliberately.

Early in the film, we see the sun filter through a tender young Spocks ears.  There were no special effects, just beautiful photography and prosthetics, so Spock's ears were the color you'd expect of a boy.  Of course, those of us who grew up with ST knew that Spock was only half human and favored his Vulcan side, down to the color of his blood being green instead of red.  If you didn't follow ST, this wouldn't bother you at all.  At first blush, this would appear to be an innocent mistake, overlooked because it was such a beautiful shot, but as you watch more Abrams' ST, you see more wierd discontinuitous teasers.

In "A piece of the Action," the silly original series gangster episode, you could not have missed in almost 50 years of re-runs, we learned that Kirk couldn't drive a stick.  In Abrams' film, he seemed to handle the gears of a museum piece like he was born to it.

In the last film, were are teased with the mother of Kirk's son stripping in front of him for no reason at all, except to produce a publicity shot.  When you think deeper, you have to wonder how that even got into the script, except as an inside joke.  If I enjoyed watching these films, or were deeper into the ST story arc, I'm sure I could find a lot more of things that look like inside jokes.

Now, think of all the people that go to ST conventions and holloween parties as ST Vulcans.  These folks make up characters for themselves and live the fantasy beyond the show.  Could you think of a better way to tell these people that they are a bunch of losers than blowing up their fantasy world?

Abrams' ST is a mean spiritted joke.  This isn't somebody making a bad film, because they, "don't get 'Trek,'" or they are merely incompetent.  This is like some 13 year old menace walking up to a five year old and breaking his toy in front of him.  Abrams is laughing at all the trekkies.

I waited 2 years to see Star Trek Into Darkness.  I'll try to put off Star Wars VII for 7.  I didn't like Lost, or any other Abrams' production, so it has to suck.  Then again, has anybody seen Mel Brook's The Producers?

[knightstorm]

This thread has made me think deeply about these films, and I've come to realize that everything I find distasteful about the plot was done very deliberately.

Early in the film, we see the sun filter through a tender young Spocks ears.  There were no special effects, just beautiful photography and prosthetics, so Spock's ears were the color you'd expect of a boy.  Of course, those of us who grew up with ST knew that Spock was only half human and favored his Vulcan side, down to the color of his blood being green instead of red.  If you didn't follow ST, this wouldn't bother you at all.  At first blush, this would appear to be an innocent mistake, overlooked because it was such a beautiful shot, but as you watch more Abrams' ST, you see more wierd discontinuitous teasers.

Truthfully, I wouldn't fault him for that.  If you want to get technical, TOS got it wrong because if Spock's blood was green, his lips should have also been green.

[Tulwar]

Truthfully, I wouldn't fault him for that.  If you want to get technical, TOS got it wrong because if Spock's blood was green, his lips should have also been green.

While the character may have green blood, the actor's blood is quite red.  If there is no asthetically pleasing and practical method of making this work for the production, the audience can be asked to overlook the difference.  In theater, this is called a convention.  Drawing the audience's attention to a convention is considdered a mistake, unless it's a joke.  If I remember anything of this movie, then it has to be painfully obvious, so I doubt it could have been the former.

[Sirgod]

Honestly, the whole green blood thing was a matter of suspension of belief for me. What was the episode name, where they got an air force pilot beamed on board, and he mumbled something out of passing about green skinned martians, right before seeing Spock for the first time?

To me, that was just a good joke, but it wouldn't work in todays trek, what with the tech we have for movies. not that I want my Vulcans green mind you. I have came to used to them looking the way they are, and would dread them getting the Orion treatment this late in the game.

Stephen

[Tulwar]

The episode you mention had a good effect with a 20th Century human reacting to seeing an alien for the first time.  This isn't a matter of how Spock should be made up.  This is a matter of a director showing you that the character isn't and never has been depicted realisticly.  When you think of the JJ Abrams films as a parody, the stylistic choices suddenly make perfect sense.

[Sirgod]

The episode you mention had a good effect with a 20th Century human reacting to seeing an alien for the first time.  This isn't a matter of how Spock should be made up.  This is a matter of a director showing you that the character isn't and never has been depicted realisticly.  When you think of the JJ Abrams films as a parody, the stylistic choices suddenly make perfect sense.

I am forced (Happily even) to agree with that POV. I may have to do that the next time I watch the JJ Trek, think of them as a parody , like Star Wrek: The pinkering.

Heh, if it is one thing I have learned, through this thread, it is that we are all serious about Our Trek. even if we quibble over the minutiae , just the passion we have , shows me that even without film, Trek will live forever in our hearts and minds.

Stephen

[Tulwar]

I'm glad somebody sees my point.  The word "parody" wasn't quite accurate.  A parody is funny.  JJ Trek is a mockery.  Mocking is purely derisive and requires little original thinking.  This is why no 'trekkie' likes the Abrams movies.  After all, he's working for a company that just sold the rights to ST, and had the contempt to coin the word "trekkie" to begin with.

We all take our fantasy worlds seriously.  After all, where else can we take refuge from reality?  The ST setting shows us a future without any of the social problems we experience, while we invent exciting new ways to destroy other sentient beings!  (We come in peace.  Men, shoot to kill!)

What I find interresting is that I happened across a thread, http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163382152.0.html
and a conversation about TOS Romulan technology.  They were extrapolating from the underdeveloped ideas presented in the program, and thinking along the same lines I was.  The people that write the movie scripts never do this.  A television show will often do this, because the nature of a series.  It requires consistantcy.

I think this is because of the nature of copyrights and trademarks.  While the studios have their rights and merchandising routines, fans create a world that they have little control of.  I use a beautiful model of a FASA destoyer in SFC.  Can the studio use that model in a movie and then turn around and bill me for royalties?  Of course, not.  This is the wierd nature of the ST franchise.  Owning it is like trying to keep a firm grip on quick-sliver.  The movies have to do something completely different from a logical extrapolation to make sure whatever they have rights to hasn't been done before.

My question is, "Who wants the rights to use anything off of JJ Trek?"  OK, the girl in her underwear was cute.  No, come to think of it, I like girls with softer bellies....  I've had enough of Paramount's ST.  I hope they hurry up and finish their last film, so CBS can go ahead and rebuild the franchise.

[Corbomite]

Who's to say that CBS isn't going to run with the "astounding success" of JJ Trek and continue to produce crap? The key word in the term "show business" is business. Old fart Trek is seen as dead and no one is interested in "an optimistic future" right now. They will go where the money takes them.

[Corbomite]

Actually it isn't their intelligence that is in question, it's their imagination and education. Old Trek required a modicum of both to be fully appreciated, but it's real achievemet was to not be too preachy about it.

[Tulwar]

Who's to say that CBS isn't going to run with the "astounding success" of JJ Trek and continue to produce crap? The key word in the term "show business" is business. Old fart Trek is seen as dead and no one is interested in "an optimistic future" right now. They will go where the money takes them.

JJ Trek's "astounding success" is all hype.  Remember that just about everything you hear  about anything comes from a promotions company.  The first JJ Trek did fairly good, because so many people wanted to see a genuine reboot.  The sencond movie did not do so well, because the target audience knew it wasn't.  They didn't lose money, because you can't lose with a name as big as "Star Trek."  Just how bad the real numbers are we will never know.  Movies do not make their money at the box office.  Products sold under JJ Trek license will not sell as well as anything made for an earlier version of ST, because there is no love for these movies.  This type of success astounds nobody.

Show buisness may still be buisness, but movies and tv have starkly different models.  It's the difference between an event company and a night club.  To be a successful, event companies only have to get people to come to their party once.  A night club needs to have people come back night after night, year after year.

"Old Fart Trek" really is dead.  1960's production standards relates to today's standards like a Sopwith Camel compares to a Panavia Tornado.  ST TNG only comes as far as a Spitfire on that scale.

Where you are completely wrong is the need to see an optimistic future.  This isn't about what's cool and never has been.  When times are tough, the need to escape the present is even more vital.

The bar for a good ST really isn't that high.  TOS wasn't that good.  TNG had some good episodes, but really, not that many.  Only DS9 showed good episodes on a regular basis.  Voyager stank.  Enterprise ran down hill after the first season.  Should a big company put some resources behind it, without too much micro-management, there is no reason a new ST series won't knock your socks off.

[Corbomite]

"Old Fart Trek" really is dead.  1960's production standards relates to today's standards like a Sopwith Camel compares to a Panavia Tornado.  ST TNG only comes as far as a Spitfire on that scale.

Anybody who thinks ST has anything to do with visual effects and action has missed the entire point of the program and always will.

Where you are completely wrong is the need to see an optimistic future.  This isn't about what's cool and never has been.  When times are tough, the need to escape the present is even more vital.

I'm not wrong about anything. This is about one man's dream and vision of the future, not a product line. The problem is that, as with all things, the dream is only pure for the lifetime of the dreamer (and sometimes not even that long). Then others get involved that turn it into a commodity and it's all downhill from there. ST isn't about what people want to see at the time, it's about GR's vision/universe. If you aren't going to be true to it to the best of your ability, for whatever reason, just let it die like so many other great entertainments and move on.

The bar for a good ST really isn't that high.  TOS wasn't that good.  TNG had some good episodes, but really, not that many.  Only DS9 showed good episodes on a regular basis.  Voyager stank.  Enterprise ran down hill after the first season.

In your opinion. I found really good and really bad in all of them, and a lot of solid ones that I wished they could have done more. That's just TV. They have limited time frames and budgets to produce this stuff and sometimes you're going to get a stinker.

[Tulwar]

Anybody who thinks ST has anything to do with visual effects and action has missed the entire point of the program and always will.

Part of the 'bad' production standards in ST TNG was to use visual effects everywhere.  I mean everything involved in production: casting, direction,...  simply keeping the episodes in sequence!  Watch TOS, and then look at an episode of Stargate SG1.  The cameras alone are so much better.

Half of improving the visual effects would simply be just not using so many.

I'm not wrong about anything. This is about one man's dream and vision of the future, not a product line. The problem is that, as with all things, the dream is only pure for the lifetime of the dreamer (and sometimes not even that long). Then others get involved that turn it into a commodity and it's all downhill from there. ST isn't about what people want to see at the time, it's about GR's vision/universe. If you aren't going to be true to it to the best of your ability, for whatever reason, just let it die like so many other great entertainments and move on.

TOS was hardly a pure dream.  Much of what's wrong with ST is the effect of too many cooks, but this is easily dealt with by good studio management.  As far as letting ST go and moving on, that's just take a look in the mirror.  If there wasn't an aspect of ST you couldn't let go of, you wouldn't post to this forum.

In your opinion. I found really good and really bad in all of them, and a lot of solid ones that I wished they could have done more. That's just TV. They have limited time frames and budgets to produce this stuff and sometimes you're going to get a stinker.

Anything that doesn't have a limitted time frame and budget doesn't happen.  I've been really impressed with so much television over the last 20 years.  I really enjoyed the first season of Enterprise, despite hating the premise, the Vulcan chick, and the model of the Enterprise.  It would be really surprising if a new production team couldn't reimagine ST and make something absolutely fabulous.

[Corbomite]

I wasn't aware that having a formed opinion on what I find entertaining and what I don't constituted an inability to move on.

[Tulwar]

You're statement about letting ST die can be taken as hypocritical.  Since our conversation has taken an adversarial tone, I had to jump on it.

[Corbomite]

I'm not trying to be adversarial. If I seem that way I apologize. I just don't see any hypocrisy in knowing what I like, and I don't like people sh*tting in other people's backyards. Do the source material justice or leave it alone and make up your own stuff. It really has nothing to do with ST except that it happens to be the subject of this thread. I've felt this way about other reboots and "reimaginings" as well. I couldn't stand the new BSG simply because of the hyperactive ADD camera work. To me it was distracting and pointless.

[Tulwar]

Reimagining a subject is perfectly legitimate.  The producers of BSG made a number of choices I would with a reimagined show, but the deal-breaker was their whole hearted embrace of nihilism.  The show was simply too painful to watch.

As for JJ Trek, you're entirely right.  His movies are mockeries of ST.  They're not made for to reach a "whole new generation;" only an "old fart" trekkie could get the "jokes."  Red matter wasn't a poorly concieved MacGuffin; it was joke.  Imploding Vulcan was a joke.  These aren't jokes that could be understood by anyone that is new to ST.  They are simply insulting to anybody who follows ST.  All of it is Paramount's way of saying, "So long, suckers!"  It is not polite to insult your audience.  These movies should not have been made.