Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 9:47 AM   
 By:   Accidental Genius   (Member)

Are you sure that you watched the movie? They explained the reasoning what you call "idiocy" just fine.

Are you sure you watched the movie? Because nothing in the film adequately explains why Khan: a) is white with a British accent and b) was awakened so much earlier than the Khan of "Space Seed."

Yes, they "explained" it. My point was that it was a lame reason, entirely inconsistent with even rudimentary time travel rules and just flimsy, with no clever thought behind it.

Not trying to talk anyone out of their love of this film, but I also think calling people "old farts" because they see flaws you don't is a bit pedestrian and not in any way a strong argument. There are plenty of news ways of doing things that I gravitate toward. Again, I loved the 2009 film and wanted to love this film. IF they hadn't touched the Khan story they would have been in a better place. If they had to touch the Khan story, for God's sake give it some actual gravitas and try to keep some of the rules intact. Some of them, mind you.

The cast in these films is excellent. They're what keep me interested. They've done an exceptional job of replacing what for me are iconic characters AND actors. This is a "family" I've grown up with and watched for over 40 years, so that's not an easy feat, but these very talented, dedicated actors have done the impossible.

My problem is with the very flimsy, very manipulative, very crass sense of story the film pulls out of its warp-driven arse. Plain and simple. And rest assured... that's just my opinion. wink

 
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 5:09 PM   
 By:   JJH   (Member)

Are you sure that you watched the movie? They explained the reasoning what you call "idiocy" just fine.

Are you sure you watched the movie? Because nothing in the film adequately explains why Khan: a) is white with a British accent and b) was awakened so much earlier than the Khan of "Space Seed."





Khan Noonien Singh. from India.

Where NO BRITS HAVE GONE BEFORE. EVER.


 
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 8:01 PM   
 By:   Sigerson Holmes   (Member)

At least, in this next five-year mission, when they run across the Botany Bay again, Kirk will know better than to wake Khan up again, right? So now "Space Seed" goes the way of "Amok Time" and "Journey to Babel."

 
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 9:57 PM   
 By:   ZapBrannigan   (Member)

I think JJ should have started in 2009 with a crew and ship we'd never seen before, the way ST:VOYAGER and ST:ENTERPRISE did. Have them fall through a black hole (or whatever gimmick) into an alternate universe. Then he could make his own way, start his own continuity, implode any planet he wanted, and not be trampling on our heritage. Then Kirk and Spock would still be in the prime universe, unmolested.

Short of that, I wish the JJ story logic was better (the Enterprise has to "hide" from barefoot natives? And hide WHERE?), the emotional component was less of a hasty, superficial afterthought, and the films were less inclined to repeat what we've seen in previous films. I mean, 2009 was the third ST film in a row to have a villain with a gigantic spaceship hover over a planet and deploy a devastating weapon. And in 2013 we're repeating old dialogue from the past.

ST:ID is not total junk, it has many good moments. But if certain aspects can be so good, why couldn't it get the other stuff right?

 
 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 9:11 AM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

I think JJ should have started in 2009 with a crew and ship we'd never seen before, the way ST:VOYAGER and ST:ENTERPRISE did.


Heh-heh. I'll go you one better and say JJ should have considered the job offer carefully, realized he had no emotional connection to the show's values or it's heritage, and then WALKED AWAY from the whole thing!
big grinbig grin

 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 10:12 AM   
 By:   JJH   (Member)

I think JJ should have started in 2009 with a crew and ship we'd never seen before, the way ST:VOYAGER and ST:ENTERPRISE did.


Heh-heh. I'll go you one better and say JJ should have considered the job offer carefully, realized he had no emotional connection to the show's values or it's heritage, and then WALKED AWAY from the whole thing!
big grinbig grin



nah, cuz then Michael Bay might've had it.

 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 10:47 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

I think JJ should have started in 2009 with a crew and ship we'd never seen before, the way ST:VOYAGER and ST:ENTERPRISE did.


Heh-heh. I'll go you one better and say JJ should have considered the job offer carefully, realized he had no emotional connection to the show's values or it's heritage, and then WALKED AWAY from the whole thing!
big grinbig grin


Ironically he can do no harm to the Star Wars franchise, than has already been done to it! big grin

 
 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 1:28 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

nah, cuz then Michael Bay might've had it.


Ha! I probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference!

(Not that there isn't a place for that style of film-making. I admit it has its fans, God bless 'em.)

 
 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 9:29 PM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

Just back from the second viewing, well, I think of it more highly than I did the first time. The first viewing there is too much to take in, the second time you get the small bits of dialogue and moral points better, and the action makes a little more sense.

Then, why are the cityscape shots of SF gray all the time in these pictures, I do not get it, the rest of the picture is color?

Finally I think TWOK or TVHOME is better trek, but ID is still a pretty good popcorn if you can give some allowance to the JJ isms - like I am still not really totally clear what this KHAN is so mad about really?

 
 Posted:   May 25, 2013 - 9:12 AM   
 By:   Dyfrynt   (Member)

....... like I am still not really totally clear what this KHAN is so mad about really?

He is FURIOUS at how Abrams ruined his character in the Nu timeline.

 
 Posted:   May 25, 2013 - 3:48 PM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)

Brilliant. Loved 2009, this one is better!

Ditto, I enjoyed this one much more because it had less time travel mumbo jumbo -anyone else found the appearance of Nimoy out of place in this one?- also the dieing scene, meh, "oh my" had ten times more impact, but the villain this time around was excellent! Consider me a Cumberbitch.

 
 Posted:   May 28, 2013 - 6:37 AM   
 By:   jackfu   (Member)

I grew up with TOS, watched all the original broadcasts, then watched them every afternoon in syndication, etc., yet I thoroughly enjoyed this film and its predecessor without being offended at the new look and feel or lack thereof, in regards to faithfulness to the spirit of the original. Let’s face it; ST:ID and most other general-public action films are pretty much doomed to appeal to the crowd that goes for eye-candy casts and non-stop action. Pine, Quinto, Saldana, Cho, etc., are not cast for their abilities to portray deep, multi-layered characters; not that they are incapable, and I enjoyed their acting in this one; it’s just not what is expected of them for these films. ST TOS started with mostly unknowns - cast, story, and effects-wise, so there is little hope in replicating that for today’s audiences. If a new TV series was to be put together with the current cast, perhaps more in-depth stories and characters could be fleshed out, but I doubt it will happen on that sort of level in two-hour movies. I’m an optimist and a realist, so I came away with a glimmer of hope that the end left open the possibility of future ST films more oriented toward space exploration, but has that well already dried up?

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.