"STAR TREK Into Darkness" - 2013

Meds · November 24, 2011, 11:44:54 PM

I agree. It's easy to rip into TPM because of Jar Jar but TCW has some of the worst editing and acting (fields of love) I've ever seen. Of course the prequels have some amazing scenes but on a tech point the CGI looks very dated compared to say Lord of the Rings which still maintain a air of realism even though it's totally fantastical.

The last Trek movie's CGI kept with the Rings style in the way everything looked like you could touch it.

DrKankles · November 25, 2011, 03:02:42 AM

I think my main concern is with the writers and Abrams. Sometimes when you hit the big time and you suddenly have dozens of projects in front of you, your quality can suffer. I don't need JJ worried about the 31 other shows he producing or pre producing his next movie starring the Cloverfield Monster, I just need him to oversee a good star TREK, not star wars homage, film.
The same goes for the writers, the've been so busy writing everything under the sun since Lost ended they haven't had time for a minor little franchise like Star Trek. I feel like a bit of a worry wort, and I'm only on about a 3 of 10 of real worry, but if worrying and complaning weren't allowed, why would I be on the forum lol.

Jeff

ChrisMC · November 25, 2011, 03:35:40 AM

Quote from: DrKankles on November 25, 2011, 03:02:42 AM

The same goes for the writers, the've been so busy writing everything under the sun since Lost ended they haven't had time for a minor little franchise like Star Trek. I feel like a bit of a worry wort, and I'm only on about a 3 of 10 of real worry, but if worrying and complaning weren't allowed, why would I be on the forum lol.

Jeff

If you've read or heard interviews with the writers and producers, you know that they don't consider Star Trek a minor franchise. The longer wait is purely due to the fact that they wanted a great story and wanted to focus on Star Trek, and had to wait for JJ to be done with all his Super 8 stuff.

ChrisMC · November 25, 2011, 03:37:09 AM

Quote from: HawkeyeMeds on November 24, 2011, 11:44:54 PM
I agree. It's easy to rip into TPM because of Jar Jar but TCW has some of the worst editing and acting (fields of love) I've ever seen.

I wish I could just WISH my feelings away...*hork*

Meds · November 25, 2011, 06:23:09 AM

Blurghhhhhhhhhh

Bryancd · November 25, 2011, 06:32:14 AM

I'm not feeling particularly alarmed or concerned about the delay in getting this going, to be honest. I hope the finished product reflects the time and effort put in, that's what matters most at the end of the day. i would rather have great ST content every 5 years then bad content every 2 to 3.

Rico · November 25, 2011, 06:38:25 AM

I kinda of agree Bryan. But honestly the delay I think is really due to these guys all just having too much going on. I don't think it has anything to do with the quality of the end product. JJ and the writers have a ton of TV projects going this year, along with his work on "Super 8" and other film projects too. I'm not especially concerned either but I do feel they missed a great chance to build on the momentum of the 2009 film.

Bryancd · November 25, 2011, 06:53:31 AM

Oh, yeah I didn't mean to imply they have been spending all this time working exclusively on Trek, just that I am satisfied at this point that they are giving it the attention it deserves and rather then rush it they seem to be taking a more methodical approach.

Meds · November 25, 2011, 12:37:54 PM

Yeah I'm happy to wait. Remember what happened to Bond where they tried to keep bringing a new film every 2 to 3 years slowly the contents got crap which was a shame for Brosnan. If it takes them 5 years to get it right and get a solid script then fair play.

Ktrek · November 25, 2011, 04:01:08 PM

Quote from: HawkeyeMeds on November 25, 2011, 12:37:54 PM
Yeah I'm happy to wait. Remember what happened to Bond where they tried to keep bringing a new film every 2 to 3 years slowly the contents got crap which was a shame for Brosnan. If it takes them 5 years to get it right and get a solid script then fair play.

I would strongly STRONGLY disagree here! The Moore films were a breed of their own making and catered to Moore's talents. The Dalton films are two of the best films in the entire franchise history and are far more faithful to Fleming's Bond than any of the films that came before. The Brosnan films, although fun in their own right, are an actual step backwards to the Moore style and feel and not a step forward, or faithful, at all. The Craig films so far are the most faithful to the books and I hope that trend continues. I'm really looking forward to the fall of 2012 because I have great hopes that this will be the greatest Bond film ever made!

Kevin

Meds · November 26, 2011, 01:19:10 AM

Yeah Kevin do you actualy read the posts before you disagree. I don't think you do. I mention Brosnan films in my quote because I'm referring to his films so how can you disagree with me when you in your post knock Brosnan. Do I mention Moore? Do I mention Dalton or Craig? No.

If you want to know my thoughts on the Bond franchise them chose one of the many podcasts I've presented on the franchise including one I did here.

DrKankles · November 26, 2011, 03:12:47 AM

And Meds smashes one down the line for the point.
'
Anyway, I don't equate length of time between movies as any indicator of quality. Godfather 1 and 2, 2 years, 2 and 3, 20 years. I think the problem is if your forced to put out a movie, i.e. 90's Bond, every so many years. If it takes 5 years for a good script than I'm fine with that. Despite what they have said, I still feel they don't give Star Trek quite as might attention as they could... But there is the possiblity I'm entering whiny fanboy territory.

Jeff :usflag

Jobydrone · November 26, 2011, 04:41:39 AM

Quote from: DrKankles on November 26, 2011, 03:12:47 AM
And Meds smashes one down the line for the point.
'
Anyway, I don't equate length of time between movies as any indicator of quality. Godfather 1 and 2, 2 years, 2 and 3, 20 years. I think the problem is if your forced to put out a movie, i.e. 90's Bond, every so many years. If it takes 5 years for a good script than I'm fine with that. Despite what they have said, I still feel they don't give Star Trek quite as might attention as they could... But there is the possiblity I'm entering whiny fanboy territory.

Jeff :usflag

hey Jeff I just noticed your profile pic, and got a good laugh. I'm guessing that's from a local coffee shop where they have a SW fan on staff? Whats the story behind it?

Rico · November 26, 2011, 04:46:37 AM

I think the point we can all agree on is we want a quality, Trek film but maybe just a tiny bit quicker next time! :)

P.S. Hey JJ, less TV - more movie making!

Ktrek · November 26, 2011, 06:24:48 AM

Quote from: HawkeyeMeds on November 26, 2011, 01:19:10 AM
Yeah Kevin do you actualy read the posts before you disagree. I don't think you do. I mention Brosnan films in my quote because I'm referring to his films so how can you disagree with me when you in your post knock Brosnan. Do I mention Moore? Do I mention Dalton or Craig? No.

If you want to know my thoughts on the Bond franchise them chose one of the many podcasts I've presented on the franchise including one I did here.

I do read the posts Meds and I take offense at you saying I don't. I may have misread what you were intending. Having only had 4 hours of sleep in 48 hours can do that to a person. Sorry that I took you the wrong way.

Kevin