Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > HD Talk
Reload this Page >

Star Trek: Nov 17

HD Talk The place to discuss Blu-ray, 4K and all other forms and formats of HD and HDTV.

Star Trek: Nov 17

Old 10-26-09, 01:57 PM
  #101  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Jumpman
For me, this film is very much in the same vain as Iron Man. The performances and slick directing mask the script problems. Differences between the two is that Abrams doesn't drop the ball in the third act the way Favreau did with Iron Man.
See, I actually thought Favreau's directing held back a better script. The action is directed very poorly in Iron Man, imo. The character moments are the highlights.

Originally Posted by Jumpman
You could easily rip into this script and into this movie almost as much as Revenge of the Fallen. (a film I know is completely horrendous at the script level, but like Abrams, Bay's direction and the fact that I like the cast save it. My guilty pleasure of 2009).
No, you can't. Star Trek isn't a perfect script, but it's so far beyond Revenge of the Fallen that it's not even funny. And Bay's direction ruined what few good elements of ROTF there were.
Old 10-26-09, 02:44 PM
  #102  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 43,751
Received 412 Likes on 292 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Suprmallet
No, you can't. Star Trek isn't a perfect script, but it's so far beyond Revenge of the Fallen that it's not even funny. And Bay's direction ruined what few good elements of ROTF there were.
Yeah, ST's script may have problems, it's not flat-out retarded like the Transformers script is. Which is weird since both films were written by Orci & Kurtzman. So maybe their actual scripts lay somewhere between clever and retarded, and it's the directors that push it in one direction or the other.
Old 10-26-09, 05:06 PM
  #103  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

I'm guessing they just cared way more about Star Trek than they did about Transformers.
Old 10-26-09, 05:13 PM
  #104  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Or maybe Michael Bay messed with the script for TF2? What does the commentary with the writers say about the film?
Old 10-26-09, 05:18 PM
  #105  
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

They subtly go at Bay in the commentary, yet contradict themselves in the "making of" documentary.

Honestly, they have the perfect excuse for the writing troubles on Revenge...the writer's strike. But, for some reason, they don't. They got at Bay a little bit.

Although, one of the writers(can't remember which one) defends Bay's use of the humor in the film. Go figure.
Old 10-26-09, 05:21 PM
  #106  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pa
Posts: 11,956
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Everything I have read about TF2 points at the production being rushed from day one. The creative team behind Star Trek certainly cared more for it than Michael Bay cares about Transformers. Looks like part 3 is being rushed for 2011 now instead of 2012.

The sad thing is that most of us had written off Trek as a dead franchise, while Transformers was seen as fairly easy material to translate into new cgi films.
Old 10-26-09, 05:42 PM
  #107  
2017 TOTY Winner
 
Save Ferris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 13,580
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Trek has so much more going for it, even if script flaws were equal to TF2 (I dont think they are by a long shot). I loved the characters, I enjoyed watching them act and interact regardless of the backdrop or context. The soundtrack was awesome and it was able to recall for me many of my favorite moments in Trek without copying them and without ruining a legacy.

TF2 was pretty much the opposite. The awful characters were thrown into my face (as well as ass, balls) repulsing and distracting me over and over again throughout the movie. The robots fighting robots was awesome but the bad characters got in the way and took me out of the film. This would remind me the plot was making no sense.

Last edited by Save Ferris; 10-26-09 at 05:45 PM.
Old 10-26-09, 07:26 PM
  #108  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: a mile high, give or take a few feet
Posts: 14,735
Received 183 Likes on 151 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

I didn't get bored during Trek, while I did during TF2. That alone makes it a better movie, to me.
Old 10-27-09, 12:59 AM
  #109  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 2,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by slop101
So maybe their actual scripts lay somewhere between clever and retarded, and it's the directors that push it in one direction or the other.
Having just picked up This Is Spinal Tap on BD last Friday night, seeing you write that above made me

"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever"
Old 10-27-09, 02:03 AM
  #110  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hollywood Ca
Posts: 2,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Well i for one am glad they did not just reboot it.
The way i look at this movie is that it is a sequal to the prior 10 star trek films, and thats one the things i love about it.

I might not have liked the movie as much if they had just said screw the 40 years of history this tv and film frachise has and lets make our own.

Star Trek is not BSG, it has to great and rich of history that when you decide to try and get a wider audience, you cant just stick it to the fans who have stayed loyal to the series for over 4 decades. Star Trek did a great job of paying respect to the fans and bringing something new to the table to get the average public on board.

by having the story occur cause Nero and Spock get sent back intime, its given the diehard fans away to be more willing to embrace changes to these characters be it how they are acted how they are written etc... take kirk for example, one of reasons kirk is the man he is in the original series is cause he had his father there with him as he grew, where as the differences that chris pine brings(whom i thought was excellent by the way) are acceptable to us diehards because due to the events at the start of the film pine's kirk doesnt grow up with his father there, and from the looks of it has a jerk of a stepfather, so in many ways its a different character.
if it had been done as a straight reboot you might have gotten additional fans but it would have been a big slap in the face for those of us who have been loyal trek fans either from the time we were born or when the show first began.
Originally Posted by Jumpman
The writers should've just gone with a straight reboot. Having this film in continuity with the overall series created some lazy writing on their part. It's the script that almost kills the direction of JJ Abrams and the wonderful cast he assembled.

For me, this film is very much in the same vain as Iron Man. The performances and slick directing mask the script problems. Differences between the two is that Abrams doesn't drop the ball in the third act the way Favreau did with Iron Man.

I'm still baffled by the "red matter" science. Hell, with Nero's drill, why not use that instead of imploring this "red matter."

You could easily rip into this script and into this movie almost as much as Revenge of the Fallen. (a film I know is completely horrendous at the script level, but like Abrams, Bay's direction and the fact that I like the cast save it. My guilty pleasure of 2009).
Old 10-27-09, 02:06 PM
  #111  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Boston
Posts: 11,698
Received 211 Likes on 156 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by DthRdrX
Everything I have read about TF2 points at the production being rushed from day one.
Transformers started production with only a 13-page outline completed. That tells you pretty much everything you need to know. The rest of the script was cranked out in a franctic race to beat the writer's strike. There was only one draft, no revisions or polish.

Most of the juvenile humor in the film was added by Bay during production. He can be seen in the supplements instructing the VFX artists to give Devastator testicles, and proudly takes credit in the commentary for the little robot humping Megan Fox's leg. However, he does claim that it was John Turturro's own idea to bare his hairy ass on camera.
Old 10-27-09, 08:16 PM
  #112  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 21.3114 N, 157.7964 W
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by AmityBoatTours

*snip*

by having the story occur cause Nero and Spock get sent back intime, its given the diehard fans away to be more willing to embrace changes to these characters be it how they are acted how they are written etc... take kirk for example, one of reasons kirk is the man he is in the original series is cause he had his father there with him as he grew, where as the differences that chris pine brings(whom i thought was excellent by the way) are acceptable to us diehards because due to the events at the start of the film pine's kirk doesnt grow up with his father there, and from the looks of it has a jerk of a stepfather, so in many ways its a different character.

*snip*
Technically, it's an alternate universe, no changes were made with the Original Series, everything that has happen in the past 40 years is still canon. The MMO Star Trek Online actually has a timeline chart between the series and the movie, let me see if I can get to that link... http://www.startrekonline.com/startrek_xi
Old 10-27-09, 08:26 PM
  #113  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 3,364
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

There's no technically about it, that's exactly what happened. Things have changed, and the storyline actually allowed it. I was pretty impressed.
Old 10-28-09, 12:47 AM
  #114  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hollywood Ca
Posts: 2,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

yes i know its alternate universe. there is dialogue in the film that even states this. geesh
i would have thought the fact that i said i consider the film a sequal was one of the reasons why i love it would have indicated that. plus the fact that i even said its appreciated that they choose to not simply ignore 4 decades of star trek history and came up with a story that is not a remake.

see highlighted portions from my post below


Originally Posted by AmityBoatTours
Well i for one am glad they did not just reboot it.
The way i look at this movie is that it is a sequal to the prior 10 star trek films, and thats one the things i love about it.

I might not have liked the movie as much if they had just said screw the 40 years of history this tv and film frachise has and lets make our own.

Star Trek is not BSG, it has to great and rich of history that when you decide to try and get a wider audience, you cant just stick it to the fans who have stayed loyal to the series for over 4 decades. Star Trek did a great job of paying respect to the fans and bringing something new to the table to get the average public on board.


by having the story occur cause Nero and Spock get sent back intime, its given the diehard fans away to be more willing to embrace changes to these characters be it how they are acted how they are written etc... .
Originally Posted by tronmaster
Technically, it's an alternate universe, no changes were made with the Original Series, everything that has happen in the past 40 years is still canon. The MMO Star Trek Online actually has a timeline chart between the series and the movie, let me see if I can get to that link... http://www.startrekonline.com/startrek_xi

Last edited by AmityBoatTours; 10-28-09 at 12:51 AM.
Old 10-31-09, 10:15 AM
  #115  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 2,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Wolf359
The only thing I could never get was what Nero and his crew did? Were they just sitting there in the ship for twenty odd years?
Originally Posted by WMAangel
There was a whole deleted subplot where Nero was imprisoned by Klingons, which will supposedly show up in the deleted scenes on the upcoming BD/DVD release....
One of the deleted scenes from the upcoming release that I mentioned was shown during the Spike TV 2009 Scream Awards and is now available online here:

http://www.spike.com/video/star-trek-dvd-bonus/3278137

I like the helmets the Klingons are wearing, it let's you know who they are without them needing to go the full prosthetic makeup route....
Old 10-31-09, 10:40 AM
  #116  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: behind the eight ball
Posts: 19,856
Received 195 Likes on 130 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by WMAangel
I like the helmets the Klingons are wearing, it let's you know who they are without them needing to go the full prosthetic makeup route....
And leaves you wondering if they're really crab heads, or if they're from that period that is "not discussed".

Maybe Abrams could explore that in the next movie.
Old 10-31-09, 02:11 PM
  #117  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 2,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Jason
And leaves you wondering if they're really crab heads, or if they're from that period that is "not discussed".

Maybe Abrams could explore that in the next movie.
Well, now we are in an alternate timeline, so all bets are off.....
Old 10-31-09, 08:57 PM
  #118  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

So wait...if that whole subplot scene is there (which I've know seen)...I'm assuming there's much more to that than just that scene. I mean...if anything..as much as I loved the film I still wanted to know wtf Nero was doing during all that time.
Old 10-31-09, 09:46 PM
  #119  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 5,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

I believe that scene with the klingons above is just part of whats on the BD/DVD. Still not sure if i dig the new look or not yet.
Old 11-01-09, 12:43 PM
  #120  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,330
Received 172 Likes on 130 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

If you want to see more backstory for Nero and Spock before the film, you can check out a prequel comic book (though I don't think it counts as canon). It takes place in the old timeline with Nero interacting with the Federation members we know from TNG(Riker and Picard) . It also has a neat scene where Old Spock talks to the rebooted Data about resurrection. However,
Spoiler:
it also has a bit where Worf and a Klingon team try to raid Nero's ship and Worf gets killed. I doubt that would sit well with many people.
Old 11-01-09, 12:56 PM
  #121  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Shazam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 10,027
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Save Ferris
TF2 was pretty much the opposite. The awful characters were thrown into my face (as well as ass, balls) repulsing and distracting me over and over again throughout the movie. The robots fighting robots was awesome but the bad characters got in the way and took me out of the film. This would remind me the plot was making no sense.
Is there a part in ST where someone's mom eats a pot brownie and goes nuts? Because if there isn't, then ST is already way better.
Old 11-01-09, 02:45 PM
  #122  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Larryville, GA
Posts: 2,200
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Dr. DVD
If you want to see more backstory for Nero and Spock before the film, you can check out a prequel comic book (though I don't think it counts as canon). It takes place in the old timeline with Nero interacting with the Federation members we know from TNG(Riker and Picard) . It also has a neat scene where Old Spock talks to the rebooted Data about resurrection. However,
Spoiler:
it also has a bit where Worf and a Klingon team try to raid Nero's ship and Worf gets killed. I doubt that would sit well with many people.
Well actually
Spoiler:
The dialogue specifies that Worf WASN'T killed. He was just very badly wounded : )
Old 11-01-09, 03:05 PM
  #123  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,330
Received 172 Likes on 130 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Originally Posted by Cartload
Well actually
Spoiler:
The dialogue specifies that Worf WASN'T killed. He was just very badly wounded : )
Nice to know. I was just skimming the comic. That was a pretty nasty wound though.
Old 11-01-09, 04:48 PM
  #124  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

I think prequel comics are just a bad way to further develop the story for a film that takes place afterwards. If it's not in the film or the main series it doesn't count.
Old 11-02-09, 08:30 PM
  #125  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,881
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Star Trek: Nov 17

Does anyone know of a rundown on all the different editions that will be out on the 17th?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.