Topic Closed

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Star Drek (Page 7)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12

Author Topic: Star Drek Greg Anderson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 766 From: Ogden Valley, Utah Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-02-2009 06:01 PM                        The faith of the people at Paramount is meaningless to me. They probably did a survey to predict that the opening weekend numbers will justify more Star Trek. But that certainly isn't a guarantee that this will be a good movie. (The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull had a huge opening weekend, of course.) I'll freely admit that I hope this movie is a bomb. Star Trek should have died 10 years ago and should have stayed dead. But some big-wigs at Paramount know there's more money to be milked from this franchise, so the rubbish continues to flow. But I just have to think about this: I haven't been pleased with the people in whom Paramount has put its "faith" to create Star Trek material during the past 10 years. Why should I trust them now?  |  IP: Logged Joe Tommassello Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 547 From: Coatesville, PA, USA Registered: Jan 2008 posted 04-07-2009 11:52 AM                  I agree with Greg for the most part. Star Trek to me means Shatner overacting, Nimoy underplaying, and DeForest Kelley saying "I'm a doctor...not a (insert profession here)!" TNG took a long time to grow on me...in fact it was only in the movies (#8) I came to appreciate it. How many films were there? Ten I think...and I liked all but 1, 5 and 7. For a franchise with that many sequels that's not bad!  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-07-2009 06:16 PM                     Link Make it so, No. 1 - Star Trek fans aflutter over film Emily Dunn Entertainment Writer April 8, 2009 IT WAS a film premiere, captain, but not as we know it. More than 1500 people filled the Concert Hall at the Sydney Opera House last night for the world premiere of Star Trek, a month before the film's Australian cinema release. Invited media may have been under a strict embargo from the production company Paramount Pictures - which has banned reviews of the film before April 21 to protect ticket sales for the film's release on May 7 - but that is not expected to deter the hundreds of fans, who paid $100 a ticket to attend the premiere and are expected to post their verdicts on websites and blogs today. One fan, Aurelia Cimino, 49, who had flown to Sydney from Melbourne with a group from the Austrek club,said fanclub ticket-holders had permission to publish opinions about the film but not plot spoilers. "I think people will start posting straight away," Mr Cimino said. Eric Bana, one of the film's stars, was unconcerned about the internet chatter - "I don't read that stuff" - including Paramount's controversial choice to hold the premiere in Australia. In Sydney yesterday with the director, J.J. Abrams, and the co-stars Zachary Quinto and Chris Pyne, Bana said he signed up to the prequel because "it was a fantastic script". "I liked the character. I thought: 'I can do something with this guy?"' Bana said of playing the film's baddie, the Romulan leader Nero. The 15th Star Trek film is Bana's first villain role since playing the real-life criminal Chopper Read in Chopper. While Bana's heavily tattooed Nero would not look out of place in a rebel motorcycle gang, he said working on Star Trek was more akin to working on the 1980s comedy sketch show Full Frontal. "What came into [Star Trek] was my time on Full Frontal. We used to spend a lot of time in prosthetics, playing with make-up … so it was like stepping back in time … I wanted to go for a walk down to the shopping centre as Nero."  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 04-08-2009 09:17 AM                     I grew up on the TOS since I was 6. I loved it. I still enjoy it in reruns. I thought the remastering and redoing of some of the FX of the TOS was done tastefully without ruining the original series. Having said that, I don't love most of the movies. The first one was pretentious. The second one kicked ass for Trek fans like me. The third one was OK filler. The 4th one, I liked better at the time. But it aged real fast for me. The 6th one was a decent farewell even if the acting by Uhura, Chekov, Sulu was wretched. (We have been used to hammy acting by Shatner, so I do not complain about his hamminess). It was very watchable, but no classic. So how could the new Star Trek be any worse? At first, I was resistant to the idea. But now, I am looking forward to it once I realized the spirit of the TOS was rarely there in the movies anyway.  |  IP: Logged Joe Tommassello Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 547 From: Coatesville, PA, USA Registered: Jan 2008 posted 04-08-2009 10:19 AM                  15th film? Did I miss four? Here are some interesting tidbits I gleaned from an article about last night's premiere in Australia (?) Chris Pine, 28, who plays Kirk said he watched TOS quite a bit. He then uttered this amazing pair of nearly unintelligible sentences: "All it was doing was making me think about what the best way I could do a William Shatner impersonation," Pine said. "It wasn't helping bringing this story to life." What an orator!!! Eric Bana -who plays the film's villain - said all the film's cast "did everything they could" to come up with something fresh this time around. I suppose that's what Paramount said about the Brady Bunch Movie too. As if TOS fans aren't disheartened enough by Bana's revelation, producer J.J. Abrams had this little dig to get in... "I was never a huge Star Trek fan growing up and so what I hope people will experience when they see the movie is one that stands on its own," Abrams said. "It's a huge action spectacle but at the core it is got a big heart." In other words "I hated that old shit so I am making some new, cooler shit!" Here's the link to the article: http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSTRE5366O520090407?feedType=RSS&feedName=entertainmentNews&rpc=22&sp=true [ 04-08-2009, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: Joe Tommassello ]  |  IP: Logged Kurt Zupin Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 989 From: Maricopa, Arizona Registered: Oct 2004 posted 04-08-2009 08:22 PM                     Wow Joe, wow...you really have a hard on to hate this movie with a passion. Have you tried searching for reviews of the screening that happened in Austin just before the World Premiere in Australia? Everyone in the audience was there to see Star Trek II and instead watched the new movie. Nobody in attendance knew that that was going to happen. Go over to Aintitcool.com and read some of the reviews from people who are just as big of Trek fans if not bigger then you. Open up your damn mind a little and think for just a second that this movie might just be good and you might enjoy it. If this movie makes a non Trek fan enjoy Trek and go back and watch TOS then I think its done its job.  |  IP: Logged Greg Anderson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 766 From: Ogden Valley, Utah Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-08-2009 10:14 PM                        In Joe's defense, I don't think it's a passion about hating this movie. It's a passion about the many, indisputable times that Paramount has disappointed long-time Star Trek fans in the past few years. And, I'm reluctant to give the Aint-it-Cool-News reviews much credence. After all, those guys were pumped up for an event which was only supposed to feature 10 minutes of the new movie. And then they got a lot more than they bargained for. They got to see the whole movie and get a personal appearance by Leonard Nimoy himself. Could this have made them more biased in their giddiness about the movie? I think so. Could their assessment of the movie be accurate anyway? Perhaps. It won't be long before we hear more objective reviews.  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-08-2009 10:52 PM                     How can you hate a movie you haven't seen? Watch it first and then hate it by all means, but the other way is just silly.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 04-08-2009 11:10 PM                     For what it's worth, here are a few more Abrams quotes that Trek Movie pulled out of SFX Magazine: "Star Trek of all things has got such a famous, vocal fan base, and if you don’t address them and make sure you’re honoring all that they know and love about the series, you’re completely screwed. You have to make sure the movie is not just aware of them, but working for them so that they’re not only able to continue embracing it but hopefully bring other people into the fold." "The approach to this whole movie in every detail was to take the inspiration from what was in The Original Series and then filter it through what is relevant and vital for now. Not to say the goal was to make it cool or to make it different, but to make it real. And with characters that feel true and emotional, and like there’s a piece missing for them and they’re up against something significant and the stakes are high, it was fun to figure out a way to do everything from bringing the Enterprise back to make the relationship between Spock Kirk and Bones come to life and to use these wonderful new actors in a way that allowed them to really do their thing and bring these characters to life. I feel like the key was to treat it as legitimate." "The themes that got me excited honestly had less to do with Star Trek and space and more to do with the optimism and humanity and of finding your purpose through unity. It ends up being a guiding principle of the movie - it needed to be faithful to the optimism that Gene Roddenberry wrote with during a time of fear and hate and suspicion. He was writing of our future where we were not just surviving it, but by cooperating and collaborating, we actually thrived. That to me, more than ever is a relevant idea."  |  IP: Logged Kurt Zupin Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 989 From: Maricopa, Arizona Registered: Oct 2004 posted 04-09-2009 08:00 AM                     quote: Greg Anderson In Joe's defense, I don't think it's a passion about hating this movie. It's a passion about the many, indisputable times that Paramount has disappointed long-time Star Trek fans in the past few years. But its not Paramount that Joe's pissed at, he's pissed at Abrams, Chris Pine, and everyone involved and how they are not the ORIGINAL actors, original creator, original anything. That is what bugs me, you haven't seen it unless you were in Austin or Australia last week. So give it a chance and see what pans out!  |  IP: Logged Joe Tommassello Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 547 From: Coatesville, PA, USA Registered: Jan 2008 posted 04-09-2009 08:39 AM                  Kurt - you can hardly compare the "wow" effect of being at that screening (apparently with Nimoy in attendance) with a common movie viewing. Besides - didn't the AintItCool crowd love Speed Racer? It's a fanboy site...what do you expect? Greg - I agree with you but it's even deeper than that...Paramount has no love for Star Trek. For them it's all bottom line. If the producers of this film really had enough talent and some faith in themselves they'd have the balls to create something original and perhaps start a new franchise. As for Abrams...I haven't heard anything about "Cloverfield 2" yet! John - I don't hate the movie...I hate that they are raping the concept yet another time for some fast bucks. I could, of course, be very surprised in a few weeks but there seems to be an attitude with all involved that they are actually doing something different and important. That just grates on me. Consider this: Abrams: "The approach to this whole movie in every detail was to take the inspiration from what was in The Original Series and then filter it through what is relevant and vital for now." Mike - that's the key sentence in the entire two paragraphs you referenced...the get out of jail free card for whatever alterations he may have chosen to make. Besides what does that mean? "...what is relevant and vital for now?" I can't conceive of anything that could possibly go into this film that is relevant and vital for now...unless it proposes a way to pay off the national debt. And back to Kurt: quote: Kurt Zupin they are not the ORIGINAL actors, original creator, original anything. Now you're gettin' the idea Kurt! They are not original ANYTHING!!! quote: Kurt Zupin read some of the reviews from people who are just as big of Trek fans if not bigger then you. That would be geeks in uniforms, with pointed ears or with antennae sticking out of their heads. They would like a turd if it said Star Trek on it...which is what this film just may be!  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 04-09-2009 08:48 AM                     quote: Joe Tommassello I can't conceive of anything that could possibly go into this film that is relevant and vital for now...unless it proposes a way to pay off the national debt. Really? Because I can't conceive of a STAR TREK movie worth watching that isn't relevant and vital for now. That was the whole point of the show back in 1966.  |  IP: Logged Joe Tommassello Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 547 From: Coatesville, PA, USA Registered: Jan 2008 posted 04-09-2009 10:17 AM                  Mike - You are not wrong...there were occasionally relevant themes on TOS in the 60s mixed in with some thought provoking science fiction. Star Trek is a phenomenon of the 60s...like Woodstock. The characters have since taken on an iconic stature. And like TOW - The Original Woodstock - no other likewise named entity or concern will ever live up to that name. Now I don't expect you to feel that way nor do I blame you for anything because you do not...but we are coming at this from two entirely different viewpoints and we can never agree because Star Trek has a different meaning - a different place in our lives - for each of us. And sometimes I am on what is in this case YOUR side of the argument. For example Claude and I were - in another thread - discussing a CD called "The Glenn Miller Orchestra: In The Digital Mood". It was recorded in 1982 by the top musicians of the day using Miller's original charts (arrangements). Being all digital it kicked the ass of those old original recordings...or so I believe. On good equipment you might swear there was a big band in the next room. My uncle - being 26 years older than me - thought the original recordings were much better in spite of the obvious advantages the "reboot" version had going for it. He heard minute differences in the musical nuances that I would not have picked up being only fractionally as invested in those old recordings compared to him and my dad - both of whom grew up with those muddy sounding old tracks. One day you will be the old guy and some young dude will be telling you that the NEW Joker kicks Heath Ledger's ass (hard to believe, I agree) and you'll understand why some of us remain skeptical about this newest attempt at Star Trek. I am taking a day off the week after ST opens to go see it in IMAX (film) with my dad and my uncle who were both dedicated ST fans from the start. I am intentionally not downplaying anything about the new film. I am most interested to hear their opinions after we have seen it.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 04-09-2009 11:15 AM                     Did your uncle talk to you for a few months before the album release to tell you how he heard what the guys were gonna be doing and how it was gonna crap on Glenn Miller's grave? Somehow I doubt it. And even when he heard it, it sounds like he enjoyed it but disliked some of the differences/nuances. Seriously, the less time you devoted to being angry about this the better it'll be for you.  |  IP: Logged Joe Tommassello Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 547 From: Coatesville, PA, USA Registered: Jan 2008 posted 04-09-2009 11:42 AM                  Actually Chris I am not angry at all. I love a good debate and if the film changes my mind I will be all too happy to admit it. This was never about if the new movie will be an enjoyable film. I started this thread because I am annoyed with the endless whoring of Star Trek and the way Paramount just beats it around like a red-headed stepchild and then tosses it to over to whomever is the "hot new talent" in their stable to try to squeeze a few more dollars out of it when they should have left it alone years - and incarnations - ago. Now lest you think I am one of those "the original is always the best" people I will tell you I am looking forward with much anticipation to the new "Wolf Man" and the proposed "Dark Shadows" remakes. Concerning the latter...having been a huge fan of the TV series I am having a tough time seeing Johnny Depp as Barnabas Collins - but I have enough faith in his work and the work of Tim Burton to think they could pull it off. Oh, and my uncle still listens to the original GM recordings. He doesn't have the new one in his collection.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.