On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
Yeah, looking it up you're right, got plenty of good reviews. I guess I'm in enough of a nerd/feminist/liberal-elite/cinemasnob bubble and most folks I know have my opinion that I misjudged the reaction. 8 points worse than Star Trek and middle of the pack for the decent Star Trek movies. Honestly I'll admit part of my thing is being salty about Cumberbatch (to play a guy named Khan Noonien Singh), a supposedly important female character whose only memorable scene was in her underwear, and the 9/11 horror memory shit casually played as destruction porn (not as bad as Superman because no screaming people falling, but worse on body count.) If it had ended on a down note I do think I would have given it a lot more credit, with Kirk actually dead or at least some feeling that Earth/Starfleet is devastated. You can bring him back later, but not in all of five minutes please.
And damn, is TL really that young now... I still have to correct myself when I call it a "Starcraft site" but damn. I thought I remember one from not so long ago when it was more like 22-25 or some shit. + Show Spoiler +
[Old man voice]Back in my day, when a Marine took damage, he had to live with that shit...
Edit: Do you have a link? My search turned up a two year old thread with about 150 responses that had a median of 22.
On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
Yeah, looking it up you're right, got plenty of good reviews. I guess I'm in enough of a nerd/feminist/liberal-elite/cinemasnob bubble and most folks I know have my opinion that I misjudged the reaction. 8 points worse than Star Trek and middle of the pack for the decent Star Trek movies. Honestly I'll admit part of my thing is being salty about Cumberbatch (to play a guy named Khan Noonien Singh), a supposedly important female character whose only memorable scene was in her underwear, and the 9/11 horror memory shit casually played as destruction porn (not as bad as Superman because no screaming people falling, but worse on body count.) If it had ended on a down note I do think I would have given it a lot more credit, with Kirk actually dead or at least some feeling that Earth/Starfleet is devastated. You can bring him back later, but not in all of five minutes please.
And damn, is TL really that young now... I still have to correct myself when I call it a "Starcraft site" but damn. I thought I remember one from not so long ago when it was more like 22-25 or some shit. + Show Spoiler +
[Old man voice]Back in my day, when a Marine took damage, he had to live with that shit...
Edit: Do you have a link? My search turned up a two year old thread with about 150 responses that had a median of 22.
I mean, the introduction of Khan Noonien Singh as a character, I don't think there has every been an effort to make him actually Indian. Whether that is a result of the experiments leading to the Genetic Wars or not is a matter that has not been settled as cannon to my knowledge. Even the female bit, which is news to me if you are right, is just Star Trek bias.The comics that were spawned from Into Darkness were entertaining if nothing else, highly suggest looking at Comixology if you've not already, entertaining if nothing else.
On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
I wouldn't consider myself a trekkie, but I did grow up watching syndicated episodes of the original series when I came home after school, while The Next Generation, Deep Space 9, and Voyager were airing live around my dinner time through out the course of my youth. I've seen all the movies at least once, though some of them were when I was far too young to understand what was going on and I can't say I've seen any of the pre-JJ movies recently enough to speak critically about them.
That said, I think the one thing that is CRITICAL to defining the Star Trek experience is that the story provokes your imagination and makes you question the limits of what will be possible in the future.
'Star Trek' (11) did that with the red matter stuff, the after effects of time travel, etc. Into Darkness never really inspires the viewer's imagination. It had action, cool CGI, a hot chick in her underwear, Benedict Cumberflavorofthemonth, and all those things are actually pretty cool. Its not a bad sci-fi action flick at all. But to me, it failed to deliver the most important aspect of the franchise.
Put it this way... What if Game of Thrones had a season that didn't feature political intrigue and extreme emotional highs and lows. Maybe it had other great strengths that made it a fine piece of fiction in a vacuum where it is rated solely on its own merits, but it still fails to deliver on the expectation of that franchise. To me, that is why Into Darkness didn't really hit the mark.
On the other hand, I think the goal of the Star Wars franchise is really more straight forward. The core expectation is simply a sci-fi hero adventure story, which I think is something JJ Abrams has proven over and over again he can do well.
Welp there are a lot of cool closeups of some in the movie models/props here. I closeup of the lightsaber should help end the viability debate there as well. Cool look at the new Flametrooper in there as well!
On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
I wouldn't consider myself a trekkie, but I did grow up watching syndicated episodes of the original series when I came home after school, while The Next Generation, Deep Space 9, and Voyager were airing live around my dinner time through out the course of my youth. I've seen all the movies at least once, though some of them were when I was far too young to understand what was going on and I can't say I've seen any of the pre-JJ movies recently enough to speak critically about them.
That said, I think the one thing that is CRITICAL to defining the Star Trek experience is that the story provokes your imagination and makes you question the limits of what will be possible in the future.
'Star Trek' (11) did that with the red matter stuff, the after effects of time travel, etc. Into Darkness never really inspires the viewer's imagination. It had action, cool CGI, a hot chick in her underwear, Benedict Cumberflavorofthemonth, and all those things are actually pretty cool. Its not a bad sci-fi action flick at all. But to me, it failed to deliver the most important aspect of the franchise.
Put it this way... What if Game of Thrones had a season that didn't feature political intrigue and extreme emotional highs and lows. Maybe it had other great strengths that made it a fine piece of fiction in a vacuum where it is rated solely on its own merits, but it still fails to deliver on the expectation of that franchise. To me, that is why Into Darkness didn't really hit the mark.
On the other hand, I think the goal of the Star Wars franchise is really more straight forward. The core expectation is simply a sci-fi hero adventure story, which I think is something JJ Abrams has proven over and over again he can do well.
Into Darkness though, makes the supposition that you are familiar with Wrath of Khan and would appreciate the re-imagining of the whole thing. It was an effort that clearly paid off to some, and didn't to others.
I thought ST:ID was a pretty nice parallel to WoK, retelling the story in a somewhat more paranoid world with a young and relatively inexperienced Enterprise crew instead of with aging characters. He almost started a war with his rash impulsiveness. The magic blood wasn't particularly interesting, but as far as technologies go, the Vengeance and the transwarp beaming device were pretty neat. Had its faults, certainly, but being highly flawed is a necessity in all Star Trek productions.
It seems to be that doing anything to WoK is taboo for any hardcore Trek fan. It shouldn't be.
As far as the SW prequels go: they weren't bad movies, and there was an excellent storyline in them somewhere. It simply suffered from poor execution. Take this rather impressive summary video for example: + Show Spoiler +
On April 23 2015 09:40 LegalLord wrote: I thought ST:ID was a pretty nice parallel to WoK, retelling the story in a somewhat more paranoid world with a young and relatively inexperienced Enterprise crew instead of with aging characters. He almost started a war with his rash impulsiveness. The magic blood wasn't particularly interesting, but as far as technologies go, the Vengeance and the transwarp beaming device were pretty neat. Had its faults, certainly, but being highly flawed is a necessity in all Star Trek productions.
It seems to be that doing anything to WoK is taboo for any hardcore Trek fan. It shouldn't be.
As far as the SW prequels go: they weren't bad movies, and there was an excellent storyline in them somewhere. It simply suffered from poor execution. Take this rather impressive summary video for example: + Show Spoiler +
Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off. You could even make the argument that all the bells and whistles was to keep the kids entertained because of the more subtle plot (especially Episode I, which is all about how Palpatine house-of-cards his way into the Chancellor's office).
On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
I wouldn't consider myself a trekkie, but I did grow up watching syndicated episodes of the original series when I came home after school, while The Next Generation, Deep Space 9, and Voyager were airing live around my dinner time through out the course of my youth. I've seen all the movies at least once, though some of them were when I was far too young to understand what was going on and I can't say I've seen any of the pre-JJ movies recently enough to speak critically about them.
That said, I think the one thing that is CRITICAL to defining the Star Trek experience is that the story provokes your imagination and makes you question the limits of what will be possible in the future.
'Star Trek' (11) did that with the red matter stuff, the after effects of time travel, etc. Into Darkness never really inspires the viewer's imagination. It had action, cool CGI, a hot chick in her underwear, Benedict Cumberflavorofthemonth, and all those things are actually pretty cool. Its not a bad sci-fi action flick at all. But to me, it failed to deliver the most important aspect of the franchise.
Put it this way... What if Game of Thrones had a season that didn't feature political intrigue and extreme emotional highs and lows. Maybe it had other great strengths that made it a fine piece of fiction in a vacuum where it is rated solely on its own merits, but it still fails to deliver on the expectation of that franchise. To me, that is why Into Darkness didn't really hit the mark.
On the other hand, I think the goal of the Star Wars franchise is really more straight forward. The core expectation is simply a sci-fi hero adventure story, which I think is something JJ Abrams has proven over and over again he can do well.
Into Darkness though, makes the supposition that you are familiar with Wrath of Khan and would appreciate the re-imagining of the whole thing. It was an effort that clearly paid off to some, and didn't to others.
Eh, I really doubt that is what appeals to those who do love the movie... I think the appeal is more just the excitement and action, stunning visuals, characters/casting, etc. I think those are the true strengths of 'Star Trek' as well, but it just also delivers the core star trek experience in addition to these qualities.
On April 23 2015 09:44 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off.
Yeah, I read the article, but Imma stop you right there. How did it pay off? The prequels were panned by everyone. I guess it "paid" in the literal sense, but if they had been great there would have been a different ballgame with Lucas and Disney.
On April 23 2015 09:40 LegalLord wrote: I thought ST:ID was a pretty nice parallel to WoK, retelling the story in a somewhat more paranoid world with a young and relatively inexperienced Enterprise crew instead of with aging characters. He almost started a war with his rash impulsiveness. The magic blood wasn't particularly interesting, but as far as technologies go, the Vengeance and the transwarp beaming device were pretty neat. Had its faults, certainly, but being highly flawed is a necessity in all Star Trek productions.
It seems to be that doing anything to WoK is taboo for any hardcore Trek fan. It shouldn't be.
As far as the SW prequels go: they weren't bad movies, and there was an excellent storyline in them somewhere. It simply suffered from poor execution. Take this rather impressive summary video for example: + Show Spoiler +
Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off. You could even make the argument that all the bells and whistles was to keep the kids entertained because of the more subtle plot (especially Episode I, which is all about how Palpatine house-of-cards his way into the Chancellor's office).
The difference is, you don't HAVE to read theories or anything of the sort to see how good the original trilogy was. It's obvious from watching it.
In retrospect, #1-3 could have been just as good. But they weren't, and the reason is that there were too many scenes that were either cringeworthy, or worse, straight up boring. The podracing subplot and the Anakin/Padme "love scenes" were the two greatest offenders. Even Jar-Jar Binks could have been good, honestly.
On April 23 2015 06:22 ThomasjServo wrote: I think the Star Trek franchise on the whole through a very particular lens, especially given the vast majority of people on here were either not born or learning their ABCs when TNG and the series that followed were on the air. Objectively, the closest thing to a commercially appealing movie from the non-Trekkie perspective, pre JJ was Wrath of Khan. Even that has a line for me which I thought was lame which you'll find below, and it is the lynchpin to the final sequence.
I know some Trekkies, like Yoav and KBB have their issues with JJ's Star Treks, and they have their reasons which are valid I'm sure. Trekkies are nothing if not opinionated, but I am not hoping for something that matches the ground breaking, or awe inspiring feelings the original three evoked in me.
It isn't going to happen, it is like falling in love for the first time in high school. You experience everything so intensely it seems impossible. All I want is a respectful continuation story wise, that is faithful to the spirit of the first three with a story that isn't completely idiotic. If I have that, I'll be happy to shell out whatever I have to to see the movie, not in 3D.
To be clear, I think Star Trek (11) was the best one so far, so I have nothing against JJ. Hell, I'm a Star Wars fan above all (well, as far as fandoms go, excluding religions, countries and women) and the JJ movies were heavily Star Wars influenced. Cool. It was just Into Darkness that sucked. These are not senselessly contrarian opinions (I think actually my assessment of both movies is pretty critically mainstream).
And yeah, I'm agreed with you on what I want for Star Wars 7. I get that there are different fandoms for different ages... though I quibble with your numbers: Star Trek Voyager and DS9 were both still on the air when Starcraft was released, so I'm guessing there are plenty of people here who were around to see them on air (myself among them). But yeah, I wish no ill-will to the kids who loved the prequels or Clone Wars or Rebels. They're glorified fanfic in my book, but there's a place for that. This will be too. I kinda just hope it's fun fanfic so I can limit the number of Star Wars movies I'm going to have to hide the existence of from my kids.
My numbers were ballpark to be sure, I assume the median age of TL, not having looked at the last TL demo thread is closer to 18 than anything else, which is what born in 1997? Regardless, we are in the same boat I think. the movies are coming out, from what I've personally seen, I am optimistic, always room for error though. I don't think we'll see Jedi mediating trade negotiations.
Looking at Rotten Tomatoes thought Into Darkness seems very well received on the whole, not through an explicitly Trekkie viewpoint. Is your personal opinion based on the re-imagining of WoK? I am just curious. I took it at face value myself, so I am curious.
I wouldn't consider myself a trekkie, but I did grow up watching syndicated episodes of the original series when I came home after school, while The Next Generation, Deep Space 9, and Voyager were airing live around my dinner time through out the course of my youth. I've seen all the movies at least once, though some of them were when I was far too young to understand what was going on and I can't say I've seen any of the pre-JJ movies recently enough to speak critically about them.
That said, I think the one thing that is CRITICAL to defining the Star Trek experience is that the story provokes your imagination and makes you question the limits of what will be possible in the future.
'Star Trek' (11) did that with the red matter stuff, the after effects of time travel, etc. Into Darkness never really inspires the viewer's imagination. It had action, cool CGI, a hot chick in her underwear, Benedict Cumberflavorofthemonth, and all those things are actually pretty cool. Its not a bad sci-fi action flick at all. But to me, it failed to deliver the most important aspect of the franchise.
Put it this way... What if Game of Thrones had a season that didn't feature political intrigue and extreme emotional highs and lows. Maybe it had other great strengths that made it a fine piece of fiction in a vacuum where it is rated solely on its own merits, but it still fails to deliver on the expectation of that franchise. To me, that is why Into Darkness didn't really hit the mark.
On the other hand, I think the goal of the Star Wars franchise is really more straight forward. The core expectation is simply a sci-fi hero adventure story, which I think is something JJ Abrams has proven over and over again he can do well.
Into Darkness though, makes the supposition that you are familiar with Wrath of Khan and would appreciate the re-imagining of the whole thing. It was an effort that clearly paid off to some, and didn't to others.
Eh, I really doubt that is what appeals to those who do love the movie... I think the appeal is more just the excitement and action, stunning visuals, characters/casting, etc. I think those are the true strengths of 'Star Trek' as well, but it just also delivers the core star trek experience in addition to these qualities.
I am presupposing that you've seen WoK before, as a stand alone it is very entertaining.
On April 23 2015 09:44 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off.
Yeah, I read the article, but Imma stop you right there. How did it pay off? The prequels were panned by everyone. I guess it "paid" in the literal sense, but if they had been great there would have been a different ballgame with Lucas and Disney.
Transformers movies get panned hard, harder than the prequels (which were actually received well! Even TPM, by far the lowest, had 57% on Rotten Tomatoes, and it aged pretty well. By some metrics, including RT Sith did better than Jedi by 1%), but they still rake in the dough, which means there's more movies in their vein on the way. Lucas could've shat in a box and it still would've sold.
The Metacritic reviews really skew that perception too:
I - 51 II - 53 III - 68 IV - 91 V - 78 VI - 52
Which would indicate that the series bottomed out before Menace was even storyboarded (or dropped 1%).
The problem with prequels in general is that you can't "develop" quite properly. Going off the article, if III-IV is the nadir of the circle, then we're going to have three movies that show how everything regresses and fails their way into the shitty situation the galaxy is in during the beginning of the original trilogy. The end is already given away for those who started with the prequels, etc. In some sense, the only winning move to make "great" movies would've been to make sequels instead of prequels in the first place. There was no "if". The way he chose to frame the narrative, down to the open scene being a mirror of the sixth, ended up being by far the best thing Lucas could've chosen. Both for his money and for his narrative.
On April 23 2015 09:40 LegalLord wrote: I thought ST:ID was a pretty nice parallel to WoK, retelling the story in a somewhat more paranoid world with a young and relatively inexperienced Enterprise crew instead of with aging characters. He almost started a war with his rash impulsiveness. The magic blood wasn't particularly interesting, but as far as technologies go, the Vengeance and the transwarp beaming device were pretty neat. Had its faults, certainly, but being highly flawed is a necessity in all Star Trek productions.
It seems to be that doing anything to WoK is taboo for any hardcore Trek fan. It shouldn't be.
As far as the SW prequels go: they weren't bad movies, and there was an excellent storyline in them somewhere. It simply suffered from poor execution. Take this rather impressive summary video for example: + Show Spoiler +
Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off. You could even make the argument that all the bells and whistles was to keep the kids entertained because of the more subtle plot (especially Episode I, which is all about how Palpatine house-of-cards his way into the Chancellor's office).
The difference is, you don't HAVE to read theories or anything of the sort to see how good the original trilogy was. It's obvious from watching it.
In retrospect, #1-3 could have been just as good. But they weren't, and the reason is that there were too many scenes that were either cringeworthy, or worse, straight up boring. The podracing subplot and the Anakin/Padme "love scenes" were the two greatest offenders. Even Jar-Jar Binks could have been good, honestly.
It really wasn't. There was never any tension that Luke really could've turned evil. IV-VI told an amazing story, but it's nothing that special. The hero's journey from start to end, a fantastical adventure and a battle of good vs. evil.
That's why I love Anakin compared to Luke. It's not the hero's journey, it's the hero trying to make the journey and stumbling and faltering down the path. There's no good vs. evil either. Nearly every character in the prequels is delightfully grey, and even Palpatine, self-serving as he is, did have his good moments, namely taking a corrupt, old system incapable of administering its own rule and replacing it with an efficient and orderly society, oppressive as it may have become.
On April 23 2015 09:44 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off.
Yeah, I read the article, but Imma stop you right there. How did it pay off? The prequels were panned by everyone. I guess it "paid" in the literal sense, but if they had been great there would have been a different ballgame with Lucas and Disney.
Transformers movies get panned hard, harder than the prequels (which were actually received well! Even TPM, by far the lowest, had 57% on Rotten Tomatoes, and it aged pretty well. By some metrics, including RT Sith did better than Jedi by 1%), but they still rake in the dough, which means there's more movies in their vein on the way. Lucas could've shat in a box and it still would've sold.
The Metacritic reviews really skew that perception too:
I - 51 II - 53 III - 68 IV - 91 V - 78 VI - 52
Which would indicate that the series bottomed out before Menace was even storyboarded (or dropped 1%).
The problem with prequels in general is that you can't "develop" quite properly. Going off the article, if III-IV is the nadir of the circle, then we're going to have three movies that show how everything regresses and fails their way into the shitty situation the galaxy is in during the beginning of the original trilogy. The end is already given away for those who started with the prequels, etc. In some sense, the only winning move to make "great" movies would've been to make sequels instead of prequels in the first place. There was no "if". The way he chose to frame the narrative, down to the open scene being a mirror of the sixth, ended up being by far the best thing Lucas could've chosen. Both for his money and for his narrative.
Interesting that episode II and III were rated higher than VI.
I think the prequals get a little overdone on the hate train, but I liked episode 2/3. Obviously there are boring scenes and cringeworthy, but I don't hate them like a lot of you people do. I do hate I though, haven't watched it in like 14 years lol.
On April 23 2015 09:44 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Lucas knew exactly what he was doing with the prequels and it paid off.
Yeah, I read the article, but Imma stop you right there. How did it pay off? The prequels were panned by everyone. I guess it "paid" in the literal sense, but if they had been great there would have been a different ballgame with Lucas and Disney.
Transformers movies get panned hard, harder than the prequels (which were actually received well! Even TPM, by far the lowest, had 57% on Rotten Tomatoes, and it aged pretty well. By some metrics, including RT Sith did better than Jedi by 1%), but they still rake in the dough, which means there's more movies in their vein on the way. Lucas could've shat in a box and it still would've sold.
The Metacritic reviews really skew that perception too:
I - 51 II - 53 III - 68 IV - 91 V - 78 VI - 52
Which would indicate that the series bottomed out before Menace was even storyboarded (or dropped 1%).
The problem with prequels in general is that you can't "develop" quite properly. Going off the article, if III-IV is the nadir of the circle, then we're going to have three movies that show how everything regresses and fails their way into the shitty situation the galaxy is in during the beginning of the original trilogy. The end is already given away for those who started with the prequels, etc. In some sense, the only winning move to make "great" movies would've been to make sequels instead of prequels in the first place. There was no "if". The way he chose to frame the narrative, down to the open scene being a mirror of the sixth, ended up being by far the best thing Lucas could've chosen. Both for his money and for his narrative.
Interesting that episode II and III were rated higher than VI.
I think the prequals get a little overdone on the hate train, but I liked episode 2/3. Obviously there are boring scenes and cringeworthy, but I don't hate them like a lot of you people do. I do hate I though, haven't watched it in like 14 years lol.
Do give it a try. Personally I found it a lot more fun once I started treating it like a political thriller. If you still hate it, well, we've all got our own tastes, only a few hours out of your life
As far as the SW prequels go: they weren't bad movies, and there was an excellent storyline in them somewhere. It simply suffered from poor execution. Take this rather impressive summary video for example: + Show Spoiler +
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEOn_1wQJ5k
I definitely agree. There were some absolutely great concepts in the prequels that were downplayed due to some questionable writing and directing decisions. Palpatine's plan was subtle and well-thought-out, and the oft-criticized "trade negotiations" parts I thought were great because they added depth and background to the universe, actually giving reasons for conflict rather than just having flashy space battles.
EPT
