NEW STAR TREK MOVIE
- Thread starter Del
- Start date
Benedict Cumberbatch, Chris Pine and JJ Abrams talking about the film (apparently translated into Japanese and back).
http://trekmovie.com/2012/12/04/abrams- ... nt-photos/
I'm really looking forward to it.
Really liked the first one.
http://trekmovie.com/2012/12/04/abrams- ... nt-photos/
I'm really looking forward to it.
Really liked the first one.
Should we have a poll in another thread to speculate who Benedict Cumberbatch is going to be? Most people say Khan, but I heard another theory somewhere that he may actually be Gary Mitchell (the former friend of Kirk's who gets psychic powers from Where No Man Has Gone Before), and I even considered Charlie Evans (From Charlie X. Okay, he's too old to play the Charlie from the TV series, but who's to say that he hasn't had a different life in this timeline?). Any other suggestions?
I'll probably get this on DVD at some stage, but I can't get excited by it after seeing the other movie. To me it's almost as if they made a film of Discworld but set it on a square world carried on the backs of three hippos that stood on the back of a whale. I love Star Trek, but just can't get over the way they've basically thrown the years and years of back-story away and just kept the names.
I also find J.J. Abrams to be totally unlikeable and the sycophancy in the special features of his first Star Trek movie of all the people who thought he was the greatest thing in Hollywood history, was nauseating.
I don't like the guy playing Kirk and I don't like the way he plays him. That is not the James Kirk I know. The whole thing about - well he had a different upbringing because of the events in the first film, I find unsatisfactory. It's like someone who has never seen Star Trek before just decided that everything created before was just rubbish and they were going to use a sci-fi plot device to allow them carte blanche to rewrite the whole thing the way they wanted to.
You might have guessed that I'm pretty miffed by it all. And before anyone says: it's just a film, then stop and think of David Jason as Rincewind and say it's just a film. :snooty: :snooty: :snooty:
I also find J.J. Abrams to be totally unlikeable and the sycophancy in the special features of his first Star Trek movie of all the people who thought he was the greatest thing in Hollywood history, was nauseating.
I don't like the guy playing Kirk and I don't like the way he plays him. That is not the James Kirk I know. The whole thing about - well he had a different upbringing because of the events in the first film, I find unsatisfactory. It's like someone who has never seen Star Trek before just decided that everything created before was just rubbish and they were going to use a sci-fi plot device to allow them carte blanche to rewrite the whole thing the way they wanted to.
You might have guessed that I'm pretty miffed by it all. And before anyone says: it's just a film, then stop and think of David Jason as Rincewind and say it's just a film. :snooty: :snooty: :snooty:
Tonyblack said:
I just looked up what else Abrams had done and there's nothing note worthy. Indeed, it seems he wrote Armageddon. Which just gives me a whole extra reason to hate him. 
And there are some advantages to throwing established continuity out the window. To wit, Doctor Who: Unbound
And yes, I can stop and think of David Jason as Rincewind. His only disadvantage was that he was too old. He had a good interpretation of Rincewind otherwise.
It bothers me a little that on the face of it the new time line has arguably destroyed the previous time line so all those other series 'never happened', but I think the official position they are taking is that the time travel incident created an alternative reality and that the original time line still exists. I know that doesn't necessarily fit in with the way time travel has worked in Star Trek stories, but maybe it works differently in some circumstances than others. And Doctor Who is hardly consistent in the way it handles the 'rules' of time travel either.
So all that back story still happened, kind of thing.
Well, there's no getting around the fact that he's a new character, who happened to have been exactly the same unborn baby as the Kirk in the 'Prime' reality... I don't mind that myself, but we're all different.
I really don't think that was the inttention. I think it's meant to be kind of set 'after' everything that's gone before, triggered by Romulus getting destroyed in the future of the Prime reality.
I can certainly detect an air of miffedness. Well, I thought The Colour Of Magic adaptation was all right. Not great though. And I like the 'snooty' emoticon code.
So all that back story still happened, kind of thing.
Well, there's no getting around the fact that he's a new character, who happened to have been exactly the same unborn baby as the Kirk in the 'Prime' reality... I don't mind that myself, but we're all different.
I really don't think that was the inttention. I think it's meant to be kind of set 'after' everything that's gone before, triggered by Romulus getting destroyed in the future of the Prime reality.
I can certainly detect an air of miffedness.
Well, I thought The Colour Of Magic adaptation was all right. Not great though. And I like the 'snooty' emoticon code.
Tonyblack said:
I just looked up what else Abrams had done and there's nothing note worthy. Indeed, it seems he wrote Armageddon. Which just gives me a whole extra reason to hate him.
I will think of Armageddon as Abrams' Alien: Resurrection.
Star Trek was pretty much dead in the water, after Enterprise failed and those last two TNG movies. I'm a big fan of TOS, Shatner, Nimoy et al but I've got no problem with the re-vamp. Kirk is different, but then he would be wouldn't he; different upbringing, no father. I'm interested to see how they develop the series.
I loved the original series (my favourite of all of them), and I loved the reboot. As far as I'm concerned, the backstory still stands anyway - since neither timeline has actually happened yet, there's no right or wrong. Maybe the major events will all find their way in there somehow, even if we don't get to witness them (there's always room for tribbles).
I love Chris Pine as much as Shatner, because they're both Captain Kirk, who I luurrrve
I love Chris Pine as much as Shatner, because they're both Captain Kirk, who I luurrrve
