CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › STAR TREK BEYOND Post-Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

STAR TREK BEYOND Post-Release - Page 13

post #601 of 1383
Plinkett's favorite Trek moment.

post #602 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by wd40 View Post

No way. That song is already dated, generic and unmemorable. They picked much older references in things like TNG because those were proven to be timeless. Not a single thing about that song is timeless. Star Trek doesn't need modern, it needs something that will last.

That's why we have "Sabotage" instead of "Moon Over Rigel VII".
post #603 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by wd40 View Post
 

No way. That song is already dated, generic and unmemorable. They picked much older references in things like TNG because those were proven to be timeless. Not a single thing about that song is timeless. Star Trek doesn't need modern, it needs something that will last.

Which leads us back around to the dystopian future that is Trek where all culture stagnated and DIED sometime in the early 1900's OH MY GAWWWWWD.


Relatability matters more than timeless.  Let me direct you to gorn.  Or, ANYTHING else about Trek.  

post #604 of 1383
It's not a one-or-the-other choice between hip, trendy, insta-dated music and bland generic sterile wallpaper music, though. There's tons of truly timeless stuff that has all the emotion and relatability you could ask for.
post #605 of 1383
I agree with Freeman, but I do think it's more ideal if what music you put up turns out timeless. Win win. It's just very delicate, and I get why Trek has been hesitant.

post #606 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

It's not a one-or-the-other choice between hip, trendy, insta-dated music and bland generic sterile wallpaper music, though. There's tons of truly timeless stuff that has all the emotion and relatability you could ask for.

 

?

post #607 of 1383

I've heard that the crew of Star Trek Discovery are going to be Nickelback fans. 

post #608 of 1383
*hits Saxon. Really fucking hard*
post #609 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

*hits Saxon. Really fucking hard*

That actually sounds like a lyric from a Nickelback song. 

post #610 of 1383

Look at this photoGRAPH.  Every time I do I bitch slap Sax...

 

*smack*

post #611 of 1383
It's a little-known fact that the Eugenics Wars actually started as an attempt to eliminate the Nickelback-listening trait from the human population.
post #612 of 1383
Khan.jpg
"Daft Punk. Clearly superior."
post #613 of 1383
Khan's from the 90s, right? They should've had Cumberbatch blasting Nirvana as he crashed into San Francisco. 
post #614 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by wd40 View Post
 

 

I already know that I'm going to see this in my nightmares tonight.

 

No sleep for me, I guess! 

post #615 of 1383

 Yes, God forbid music date Star Trek, in which WORLD WAR 3 happened in the 90's!

 

Give it up you silly bastards!

post #616 of 1383

The hidden subtext from the first NuTrek movies was that Vulcan was storing all the Nickelback back catalog.

 

 

Moral of the story....Worth it!

post #617 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

 Yes, God forbid music date Star Trek, in which WORLD WAR 3 happened in the 90's!

Give it up you silly bastards!

WWIII was in the 21st century. The Eugenics Wars was the 90s.

Cadet.
post #618 of 1383

Oh mer gerd your nerd stench!

post #619 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Oh mer gerd your nerd stench!

post #620 of 1383

That is the funniest punch I have ever seen.  It's the shuffle that sells it.  

post #621 of 1383

It's those dead eyes. Picard don't give a fuck.

post #622 of 1383
200w.gif
post #623 of 1383

If only he actually shouted "Picard Punch!" as he did it, like a Streetfighter character calling out the name of their special move whilst performing it.

post #624 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

That is the funniest punch I have ever seen.  It's the shuffle that sells it.  

It's not the stunt-Picard?

post #625 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by wd40 View Post
 

It's not the stunt-Picard?

OH!  HAHAHAHAHA!

post #626 of 1383
Looking at the struggling box office performance of this film so far, unadjusted, BEYOND may be able to catch up with THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY and GENERATIONS, which were one million apart in their domestic gross. Ahead of those two is FIRST CONTACT, which may be difficult to reach, and THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK is just under the $200 million barrier, which now looks impossible.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

Either Paramount folds with this film or they proceed with the announced Thor guest starring Trek 4. I'm betting the latter, just to give nuTrek a definitive finish run, but with a considerably reduced budget. Trek is never going to become a billion dollar film franchise, so they have to be realistic and consider going mid-budget like they did back in the 80s. After that it's all up in the air. I think nuTOS is done for good by then (if not, sooner), so Paramount only have these options: 1) Put the franchise on ice for awhile until the timing seems right to bring Trek back to the big screen and go whatever direction seems feasible. 2) Take a chance with a new cast of characters in whatever setting or 3) Go the safer route of rebooting TNG. Heck, if they do 3, it would probably be more assuring for them to get Tom Hardy as Picard to really generate interest.
post #627 of 1383
They'll do it. Time travel is a hook that appeals to non-geeks too. There wasn't one for this movie.
post #628 of 1383

UGH. Enough fucking time travel. 

 

Just let Trek go back to the home screens. It's much better suited for long form storytelling.

post #629 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Its a punch? I could swear Picard elbows the guy in the face.

Its a good Patrick Stewart moment, but its not this:

 

 

I have a personal rule of never bothering an actor or celebrety if i ever see one on the street, but I will break it if i ever see either David Lynch or Patrick Stewart to ask them about this moment.

I mean, its Patrick Stewart leading a charge in a sci-fi movie while holding the world's most confused pug (and thats one hell of an achievement).

Ive seen Dune two times in my life and this is the one moment I cant never forget from the damn movie.

post #630 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

UGH. Enough fucking time travel. 

Just let Trek go back to the home screens. It's much better suited for long form storytelling.

CBS is happy to oblige.

Since the franchise rights have been split, the movies are all Paramount have of Trek. They can only sit on it or try to make something out of it and not much else. They probably thought having the movie rights was an advantage, but in retrospective they got the raw deal.

Meanwhile, CBS has all the TV shows that are making profit, especially from streaming rights. Before DISCOVERY has even shot a single frame, it's already become profitable just from the streaming deals that were made for it.
post #631 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Looking at the struggling box office performance of this film so far, unadjusted, BEYOND may be able to catch up with THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY and GENERATIONS, which were one million apart in their domestic gross. Ahead of those two is FIRST CONTACT, which may be difficult to reach, and THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK is just under the $200 million barrier, which now looks impossible.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

Either Paramount folds with this film or they proceed with the announced Thor guest starring Trek 4. I'm betting the latter, just to give nuTrek a definitive finish run, but with a considerably reduced budget. Trek is never going to become a billion dollar film franchise, so they have to be realistic and consider going mid-budget like they did back in the 80s. After that it's all up in the air. I think nuTOS is done for good by then (if not, sooner), so Paramount only have these options: 1) Put the franchise on ice for awhile until the timing seems right to bring Trek back to the big screen and go whatever direction seems feasible. 2) Take a chance with a new cast of characters in whatever setting or 3) Go the safer route of rebooting TNG. Heck, if they do 3, it would probably be more assuring for them to get Tom Hardy as Picard to really generate interest.

 

 

From what I heard Paramount only green-lighted this film as a desperate attempt to cash-in on the Guardians of the Galaxy wave. From those numbers it doesn't seem to have paid off. Domestic is going to end up nearly 50M under the production budget, and international will only cover a small portion of an average blockbuster advertising campaign. Has it not opened in key international countries or is Star Trek just a weak global brand? 

 

I also don't understand how putting Chris Hemsworth, a charismatic void, in the sequel is supposed to revitalize interest in this series.

post #632 of 1383

The first NuTrek had a TNG cross-over in one of the comic books released to promote the movie. They had the TNG crew, Prime Picard and Prime Riker etc meet up with the Klingons (who were cut from the first movie).

 

They should go that route for this sequel. Picard would put more butts in seats than Thor. No doubt about it.

 

edit:

 

It was called Star Trek: Countdown

 

Here's a couple of panels:

 

post #633 of 1383
I can't conceive of a reality where Tom Hardy is in a Star Trek movie again.

And it's a shame this movie hasn't found a bigger audience. I really think this cast deserves another film - and not one with a shoestring budget.
post #634 of 1383
THE WRATH OF KHAN managed fine with a shoestring budget. Challenge the writers without giving them a ridiculously big budget at their disposal. Trek has always been known more for its strengths in storytelling than hundred million dollar budgets.
post #635 of 1383
I was just reading earlier about Paramount already having signed Pine and Quinto for a 4th film, and of course their salaries have increased. So some of the costs of part 4 are already baked in. I just don't want the film to suffer or look cheap. I think these guys deserve to go out on a high note. Though some moves have been controversial, these recent films have shown a sense of pride in the franchise that I haven't detected since TNG's last season. And the cast members have really given their all.
post #636 of 1383
And Bill--it's interesting you posting that about the tie-in comic. I was just looking at my copy the other night. Hadn't read it in years. Was surprised I had forgotten a beloved character has something really traumatic happen to him near the end of the book--almost as a throwaway moment. But it was a neat and almost critical backstory to the first Abrams film. And it suggests the two controversial screenwriters did put at least some thought into what they were doing, even if it doesn't always translate to the screen.
post #637 of 1383
Wasn't COUNTDOWN by other writers that basically had access to the 2009 script and expanded on Nero's background themselves?
post #638 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Wasn't COUNTDOWN by other writers that basically had access to the 2009 script and expanded on Nero's background themselves?
Not only that...the brought back Data.
post #639 of 1383

They want something new?

 

They want something that bridges the different Trek series?

 

They want something that can be filmed affordably?

 

They want something interesting to attract actors?

 

They want Shatner (*sigh*) involved?

 

They want Hemsworth back?

 

 

 

Mirror universe time, baby. 

post #640 of 1383
Here's a question, why not make movies or a TV show that are the next generation to the next generation? Why place Discovery backwards?
post #641 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Here's a question, why not make movies or a TV show that are the next generation to the next generation? Why place Discovery backwards?

 

The question isn't "why place Discovery backwards," the question is: "why can't we back Discovery in forwards?" 

post #642 of 1383
*kills self*
post #643 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Here's a question, why not make movies or a TV show that are the next generation to the next generation? Why place Discovery backwards?
The question isn't "why place Discovery backwards," the question is: "why can't we back Discovery in forwards?"
Clearly, they're only going forwards 'cause they can't find reverse.
post #644 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Here's a question, why not make movies or a TV show that are the next generation to the next generation? Why place Discovery backwards?

We'll probably find out when it all comes together. I too would like a "clean slate" where you set it a hundred years after the most recent chronological series and just move forward. Since this is Bryan Fuller, I'm very confident that he has a good hook.
post #645 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

THE WRATH OF KHAN managed fine with a shoestring budget. Challenge the writers without giving them a ridiculously big budget at their disposal. Trek has always been known more for its strengths in storytelling than hundred million dollar budgets.

 

Yep. Even thought it was because of forced budget and tech limitations, Trek's always been more about the story than the flashbang. "Balance of Terror" is rightly considered a classic Trek episode, and it's effectively told entirely on the two ship's decks. 

post #646 of 1383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post


We'll probably find out when it all comes together. I too would like a "clean slate" where you set it a hundred years after the most recent chronological series and just move forward. Since this is Bryan Fuller, I'm very confident that he has a good hook.

Suuuuuure!  I'm just wary of nostalgia porning Trek even further.  It's been nostalgia porned enough.  

post #647 of 1383
If the story is great, does it matter?

Regarding shoestring budgets, if the hook they have is something like "The City on the Edge of Forever" and "Yesterday's Enterprise", even more perfect. Those are great hours of storytelling, and adding $150 million on top of them is needless. Would love to see Pine and his cast tackle a real morality tale, weighing the stakes, the personal sacrifices that have to be made for a better tomorrow (or yesterday). This will be the last of nuTOS, take chances! Give this cast a great finale. Their own epic "All Good Things...".

I would have doubted this to happen in 2013, but after BEYOND, I think they could pull it off, especially if Pegg has a hand in it.

Again, thank goodness the four horsemen are gone! Ugh, and to think of all the stupid shit Abrams was talking a month ago about Takei, just adding unneeded bad vibes to the film.
post #648 of 1383

One thing watching the best TNG episodes has taught me is that the enjoyment of Trek is very very very rarely explodey big scale massive BigMcLargeHuge action.  The best stories in this universe are almost always science fiction mysteries exploring complicated morality issues.  Bigger is not really better when it comes to the strengths of the show, it's just nice icing. 

 

The problem is the style of the modern blockbuster dictates that our thrills must be big big big big big and everything has to matter like nothing has ever mattered before!  It's antithetical to what I like about Trek.  Even Beyond is balanced fairly heavily on the adventure side of the equation.  If it was an episode of the show it would be the coolest most action packed episode ever that didn't really feel like Trek.  I just want ONE misunderstood alien race.  

post #649 of 1383
That's why Trek is best on TV! That's why the best film of these happens to be the lowest budget of them all! Trek film is better off in mid-range budget not just because that has a better chance at making a profit but that it pushes these filmmakers for better hooks as they rely less on 'splosionz. Stupid shit like the Vengeance or Nero's mining ship could be a reflection on how bigger budget doesn't necessarily mean better. TOS Khan only needed a lesser ship like Reliant to give Kirk a bloody nose, not a star destroyer.

And really, only HALF of these films could be said to be above average.
post #650 of 1383

If anyone liked this movie and hasn't yet listened to the Empire podcast with Lin and Pegg, I very much recommend it. Haven't gotten to the Pegg interview yet but Linn's is very interesting. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › STAR TREK BEYOND Post-Release