Star Trek Beyond

[gravy]

All the Trek films are typical of the era that made them. The first one was full-on 70s slow-burn stuff, the eighties ones became progressively cheesier, the 90s ones had all the trappings of the TV series and the '02 film was a post-Matrix thing that was about as wank as most sci-fi efforts of the time. The reboots have been no less typical of their zippier, more knowing era and this look like a bunch of stuff out at the moment. Every now and again, a dead good one comes along. Just like Star Wars, Marvel and the rest.

It's all entirely normal and if Star trek nerds weren't pissed off about it, I'd probably not feel a great urgency to watch it. Meanwhile, looking forward to Trek films reflecting current cinematic narrative, production and stylistic trends for years to come. It's a bit of folklore now, same as Rings, Star Wars etc... no matter how much some want there to be a definitive canon. The retelling has begin and will continue endlessly, like Robin Hood. For every "Robin of Sherwood", there's a "Men in Tights" and thank fuck for that.

It's not that. It just looks like a shit contemporary movie unlike the first reboot which was a great contemporary movie.

[Dio]

Mmmm, it was an OK contemporary movie, for me.

It's hurt a lot by the impersonations, no matter how good a couple of them (Urban and Quinto) are, it gives it the feel of a fan film far too often. The whole thing is a little too busy concentrating on getting all the callbacks right to really deliver. If it had had the bollocks to stand on its own a bit more it could have been better, I think.

[gumboot]

I can't tell contemporary movies apart.

[Darkflame]

Just saw the trailer. Looks comic booky indeed. Specifically like its trying to be Guardians of the Galaxy.

But you know, I am ok with that. The Trek films have always been hugely different to the show. And, arguably, the one that felt tonely most like a typical tv episode ("Insurrection") was the worst.
So, yeah, we wont have the "high brow" of TNGs best. But this is kirk era anyway. Quality swashbuckling with a bit of humor is probably more fitting. And, relatively speaking, I trust Simon Pegg to be able to do that.

Also remember; Film trailers are made to cookie-cutter templates. Things will look more generic in trailers.

I liked the new Trek trailer. It looks a lot of fun mostly, much more than their last outing. The Independence Day trailer on the other hand looked like a mess. Of the two I know which has got me more interested.

The new Independence Day one made me want a X-com film.

This isn't Star Trek. This is Hunger Games, Fast & Furious, Battleship, Transformers, that atrocious Gundam-inspired abomination, Battle LA, etc. None of which are bad (except for that atrocious Gundam-inspired abomination) because they're good old-fashioned "disengage brain and say ooooh" action FX blockbusters.

bollocks to that. Transforms IS bad.
(also, does Hunger Games really belong in the same category? I haven't seen the films, but I read the books and if the films are even vaguely close to the books its hard to argue its just spectical-based. I'm not even a big fan of the books or anything...there ok....but certainly there is more going on then mindless action)

But they're not what Star Trek is all about. Star Trek has always told a story, made you think, shown you that the muscle between your ears is the important one. Anyone can blow stuff up. Star Trek makes you want to build things.

They tried making a film with that idea recently. It was called Tommorowland and everyone but me hated it

[anon76235]

Don't worry it will be quality, I bet they get a brand new enterprise at the end EPIC

[Governmentyard]

I should clarify: as a lifelong Trekkie, all Trek is inherently good, even if it's not actually good. Nemesis, though deeply flawed, had some interesting facets that pushed the franchise forward. Hell, even The Final Frontier had some good SFX and some interesting McCoy backstory (though most of that never got off the page on to the screen, alas).

I'm not disappointed that Beyond isn't currently fulfilling my requirements for a Star Trek movie because it in some way contravenes some minor (or major) canon point, or rewrites the entire timeline, or breaks some other nerdy lore/law that forces hundreds of virgins to ragequit cinemas the world over. No. I am disappointed that it's looking like a generic 201x ensemble-cast action movie that could be in ANY setting. Blink when the Enterprise is in shot, and this is indistinguishable from all the other teen/tween-culture movies that specialise in jump cuts, fight scenes, bromances, motorbike/car stunts, rapid-fire-dialogue, and effects-led story-telling.

This isn't Star Trek. This is Hunger Games, Fast & Furious, Battleship, Transformers, that atrocious Gundam-inspired abomination, Battle LA, etc. None of which are bad (except for that atrocious Gundam-inspired abomination) because they're good old-fashioned "disengage brain and say ooooh" action FX blockbusters.

But they're not what Star Trek is all about. Star Trek has always told a story, made you think, shown you that the muscle between your ears is the important one. Anyone can blow stuff up. Star Trek makes you want to build things.

Don't panic! http://io9.gizmodo.com/how-star-trek-be ... 1748217974

[Ollie]

They tried making a film with that idea recently. It was called Tommorowland and everyone but me hated it

I liked Tomorrowland. It reminded me of the sort of films I used to enjoy when I was younger that aren't really made any more. So I was glad they'd made one more, at least.

[anon76235]

STAR TREK - THE FORCE AWAKENS

[guythp]

STAR TREK - THE FORCE AWAKENS

MASHITUP

[OochyKoochy]

Was at a Q and A session with Mike Banks (UR) once, he'd just been to see the last Star Trek film, he laid into it bemoaning the choice of orchestral violins for the battle scenes. "I don't want no violins, a space movie needs some electronic music" - later that evening when UR played live (in Poland) I shouted "Violins!" in my embarassing state again and again. So let's hope no violins in this one otherwise Mad Mike gonna be pissed.

[Baggypants]

They tried making a film with that idea recently. It was called Tommorowland and everyone but me hated it

I liked Tomorrowland. It reminded me of the sort of films I used to enjoy when I was younger that aren't really made any more. So I was glad they'd made one more, at least.

I saw the youtube thing, The Rave Cave look s good.

[Purple Grapefruit]

[pogo]

[Istar]

OK, if Pegg is being 'cautious' in his endorsement of the trailer then I'm prepared to reserve judgement - I was really happy when he took-up the writing challenge, as he's a lifelong trekkie, so if he's calling this "standard marketing bollox that doesn't actually accurately represent the movie I wrote and appeared in" then there may yet be hope.

[gravy]

Outside of his collaborations with Edgar Wright, he's made some awful movies. I don't think he has fantastic judgement. YMMV.

If I could wave a magic wand it'd be for JJ Abrams to be back on Star Trek.