Star Trek Beyond - Part 1

[Lord]

So, been watching all the Pre-Abrams Star Trek films (aside from Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock, since i had already watched them) and i gotta say that i was mostly underwhelmed. Voyage Home for example has a golden reputation as that unlikely great film in the series that was a lot of fun, but it wasn't as entertaining or well made as i thought it would, kinda boring in some parts. Undiscovered Country was neat, even though it had some terrible looking CGI and cinematography. Didn't like any The Next Generation film, and am surprised First Contact has such a golden rating on Rotten tomattoes.

Anyway, watching the previous films gave me a newfound respect for Abrams's films. Aside from maybe Wrath of Khan (which i should probably rewatch some day, as last time i watched it was years ago, and wasn't very impressed at the time), most of Star Trek's best stories are on the tv shows. I'm surprised some Trekkies put Abrams's film at the very bottom, the route of being more like Star Wars and inserting more action had actualy started with Wrath of Khan, and while the scripts have been sub-par, the Directing in Abrams's Trek duology was the best in the entire series.

 

[Serpico Jones]

I have a split opinion on Abrams Trek and Star Trek in general. The early films have a bunch of overweight and middle-aged actors who can't act to save their lives standing on a bunch of cheap sets that look ridiculous. Most of them feel and look like glorified tv episodes and yet there is still a heart and charm there, it's weird. The Abrams movies actually look like feature films and have actors who can actually act but the storylines are lacking.

 

[roach]

So, been watching all the Pre-Abrams Star Trek films (aside from Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock, since i had already watched them) and i gotta say that i was mostly underwhelmed. Voyage Home for example has a golden reputation as that unlikely great film in the series that was a lot of fun, but it wasn't as entertaining or well made as i thought it would, kinda boring in some parts. Undiscovered Country was neat, even though it had some terrible looking CGI and cinematography. Didn't like any The Next Generation film, and am surprised First Contact has such a golden rating on Rotten tomattoes.

Anyway, watching the previous films gave me a newfound respect for Abrams's films. Aside from maybe Wrath of Khan (which i should probably rewatch some day, as last time i watched it was years ago, and wasn't very impressed at the time), most of Star Trek's best stories are on the tv shows. I'm surprised some Trekkies put Abrams's film at the very bottom, the route of being more like Star Wars and inserting more action had actualy started with Wrath of Khan, and while the scripts have been sub-par, the Directing in Abrams's Trek duology was the best in the entire series.

It's because most Trekkers have a short memory. We hate anything new. Many trekkers will try to convince you they loved The Next Generation from the start but that show was hated up until the two parter "Best of Both Worlds"...which is the third season. Most of the complaints that trekkers have against the reboot films can be leveled at the other films.
I am a fan of The Original Series and I like the new films. Star Trek 2009 felt like the original series. What many people fail to realize is that Star Trek changed from Star Trek to The Next Generation. Star Trek was pretty much an action show with Kirk getting into fist fights almost every episode. When TNG came along they changed it from that where the mostly sit in a room debating the prime directive. A lot of fans came in from TNG. So when they see how action-y the movies are compared to TNG...that's where they feel it' not Star Trek. Wrath of Khan was action-y, Search for Spock was action-y, Undiscovered Country was action-y...if you then look at TNG movies you see that Picard...who normally sits on the bridge while Riker goes down to the planet...takes on a very action hero quality...he's beaming to the planet, he's fist fighting the bad guy and he's getting the girl.

 

[Lord]

Unfortunately, i have yet to watch the Next Generation show, but the Original Series was what made me a fan. First Star Trek thing i ever watched was Abrams's first film, which didn't exactly impress me at the time. What made me a fan was seeing the crew going through weird adventures and Kirk learning some morality lesson in the end. The morality aspect is something i would like to see more in the film series, but seeing how the entire first 10 films went, i didn't realy find Abrams's entries sub-par in comparison, quite the oposite, actualy made me start liking the 2009 film much more than i previously did.

That element you mentioned being in Next Generation (the one about the stories being mostly about discussing the prime directive and other stuff) does sound very interesting, makes me very curious to try that show.

Going back to the topic of the new films, do i feel like their scripts could have been better and that they could have been more cerebral? Definitely. But i also feel that way regarding pretty much every single previous film in the series.

 

[Young Superman]

I love the ST: Beyond Uniforms.

 

[roach]

Unfortunately, i have yet to watch the Next Generation show, but the Original Series was what made me a fan. First Star Trek thing i ever watched was Abrams's first film, which didn't exactly impress me at the time. What made me a fan was seeing the crew going through weird adventures and Kirk learning some morality lesson in the end. The morality aspect is something i would like to see more in the film series, but seeing how the entire first 10 films went, i didn't realy find Abrams's entries sub-par in comparison, quite the oposite, actualy made me start liking the 2009 film much more than i previously did.

That element you mentioned being in Next Generation (the one about the stories being mostly about discussing the prime directive and other stuff) does sound very interesting, makes me very curious to try that show.

Going back to the topic of the new films, do i feel like their scripts could have been better and that they could have been more cerebral? Definitely. But i also feel that way regarding pretty much every single previous film in the series.

If you do watch TNG...you are going to have to power through two seasons of bad stories. It doesn't get good until Best of Both Worlds.

 

[DKDetective]

If you do watch TNG...you are going to have to power through two seasons of bad stories. It doesn't get good until Best of Both Worlds.

While I generally agree with what you are saying about TNG's first two seasons, it gets good well before The Best of Both Worlds (the season 3 finale). Season 3 is all around pretty solid and there are some real gems in season 2 like Elementary, Dear Data, Q Who, and especially The Measure of a Man.

On the discussion of Trek fan expectations, while I will fully admit to being a 20-something who was introduced to Trek through TNG and DS9, and that my tastes do skew that way, I think you are being unfair Trek fans who criticize the Abrams films. As Lord pointed out, while TOS was an action series, the moral dilemmas and social commentary were very much a part of TOS as well. There was balance, which obviously is easier with a TV show. You can have the straight up action episodes and the more philosophical episodes. A TV can be more things than a 2-hour movie.

The issue with confining Star Trek to feature film is that the films have always gravitated to the more straight-up action adventure films, which loses the balance if that is all you are getting. Star Trek 2009 is totally missing the commentary and morality play aspect and STID does it very badly and superficially (which I know you disagree about).

My other issue with the Abrams films is the world building and poor, hard science fiction. The world building has no internal consistency (things like transwarp beaming render interstellar travel by starship useless) and the horribly bad science (red matter, supernovas destroying galaxies, and magic blood) is inexcusable. Yes, TOS's science isn't perfect, but it tried harder and it was a different time and standard.

Yes, the new films are very well directed and acted and a lot of fun. I am glad that they brought the fun of TOS back, which is why I forgave a lot with Trek 2009 as it was a movie that had to bring the franchise back from life support, but I was really hoping they would fix the other obvious issues going forward. If they don't, I have no interest in the series. I get those same kicks from The Force Awakens and it is the series I am more interested in getting that sort of stuff from. For me, Trek is best when it is primarily about satisfying other cravings.

 

[psylockolussus]

So, been watching all the Pre-Abrams Star Trek films (aside from Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock, since i had already watched them) and i gotta say that i was mostly underwhelmed. Voyage Home for example has a golden reputation as that unlikely great film in the series that was a lot of fun, but it wasn't as entertaining or well made as i thought it would, kinda boring in some parts. Undiscovered Country was neat, even though it had some terrible looking CGI and cinematography. Didn't like any The Next Generation film, and am surprised First Contact has such a golden rating on Rotten tomattoes.

Anyway, watching the previous films gave me a newfound respect for Abrams's films. Aside from maybe Wrath of Khan (which i should probably rewatch some day, as last time i watched it was years ago, and wasn't very impressed at the time), most of Star Trek's best stories are on the tv shows. I'm surprised some Trekkies put Abrams's film at the very bottom, the route of being more like Star Wars and inserting more action had actualy started with Wrath of Khan, and while the scripts have been sub-par, the Directing in Abrams's Trek duology was the best in the entire series.

I saw the pre-Star Trek 2011 films on HBO and I was bored too with the films and don't think most of them are better than JJ's Star Trek films. Most of them just felt dated.

 

[roach]

While I generally agree with what you are saying about TNG's first two seasons, it gets good well before The Best of Both Worlds (the season 3 finale). Season 3 is all around pretty solid and there are some real gems in season 2 like Elementary, Dear Data, Q Who, and especially The Measure of a Man.

On the discussion of Trek fan expectations, while I will fully admit to being a 20-something who was introduced to Trek through TNG and DS9, and that my tastes do skew that way, I think you are being unfair Trek fans who criticize the Abrams films. As Lord pointed out, while TOS was an action series, the moral dilemmas and social commentary were very much a part of TOS as well. There was balance, which obviously is easier with a TV show. You can have the straight up action episodes and the more philosophical episodes. A TV can be more things than a 2-hour movie.

The issue with confining Star Trek to feature film is that the films have always gravitated to the more straight-up action adventure films, which loses the balance if that is all you are getting. Star Trek 2009 is totally missing the commentary and morality play aspect and STID does it very badly and superficially (which I know you disagree about).

My other issue with the Abrams films is the world building and poor, hard science fiction. The world building has no internal consistency (things like transwarp beaming render interstellar travel by starship useless) and the horribly bad science (red matter, supernovas destroying galaxies, and magic blood) is inexcusable. Yes, TOS's science isn't perfect, but it tried harder and it was a different time and standard.

Yes, the new films are very well directed and acted and a lot of fun. I am glad that they brought the fun of TOS back, which is why I forgave a lot with Trek 2009 as it was a movie that had to bring the franchise back from life support, but I was really hoping they would fix the other obvious issues going forward. If they don't, I have no interest in the series. I get those same kicks from The Force Awakens and it is the series I am more interested in getting that sort of stuff from. For me, Trek is best when it is primarily about satisfying other cravings.

I think what ruins most of TNG for me is most if the episodes problems are solved/caused by Deus Ex Wesley. BOBW is when IMO the show got better.

I am hard on Trekkies. When a group calls the reboot films worst than Final Frontier I call into question their objectivity.
How does transwarp beaming eliminate the use of Star Ships?
And while a majority of the episodes and movies had commentary and morality plays...not all of them did.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Did Simon lie to us?

http://io9.gizmodo.com/star-trek-beyond-is-reshooting-and-adding-an-entirely-n-1764347508

 

[Octoberist]

Lie about what?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That this is going to be good. A fast script, one that apparently needed to be fixed after shooting, doesn't give me much faith.

 

[Octoberist]

We don't know about that because the film making business is so complex.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

We don't know about that because the film making business is so complex.

Complex yes. But when you start rushing to the point that you need to do reshoots this late in the game, I don't have much confidence. Is this FF level? No. But it doesn't sound good either.

 

[Serpico Jones]

Yikes. Not good news at all.

 

[Dr. Love]

I still have faith, big fan of the new treks, big fan

 

[DyeLorean]

I just hope this doesn't turn into Fast & Furious in space.

 

[Marvolo]

Did Simon lie to us?

http://io9.gizmodo.com/star-trek-beyond-is-reshooting-and-adding-an-entirely-n-1764347508

This doesn't worry me.

As you know, reshoots are common and since Aghdashloo is playing the head of the Federation she might only have one or two scenes. Or they've decided to add her to a preexisting scene. It's probably some conference scene or Kirk having a conversation with her.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Doesn't worry me either. Still very excited for the movie and I think it's gonna be great.

 

[Dr. Love]

I agree

 

[Dark Raven]

Maybe they felt they needed an explanatory scene to show the head of the Federation. Don't all films require reshoots, particularly those in the MCU?

 

[KillerMcQueen]

This doesn't worry me.

As you know, reshoots are common and since Aghdashloo is playing the head of the Federation she might only have one or two scenes. Or they've decided to add her to a preexisting scene. It's probably some conference scene or Kirk having a conversation with her.

Yeah, we don't know the size of the role, no reason to panic, probably a small role which wouldn't make the re-shoot anything out of the ordinary, film's do re-shoots/pick-ups all the time, could be as simple as them deciding a single scene they cut from the script should go back in.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There is a big difference between re-shoots and pick ups.

This wouldn't worry me if I didn't know they rushed the script and saw that first trailer. At some point this starts adding up.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Marvel does reshoots almost all the time.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Panic of some people is really funny.