Star Trek Sequel - Part 1

[redhawk23]

There, I fixed it!

Joker was actually set up at the end of the first film as coming to Gotham as an organic result of Batman's actions, as part of a general escalation of the type of crime in the city.

Also Batman is not the same kind of figure or story or franchise as Star Trek. He's a vigilante. He is defined by those he opposes. The rogues gallery is a defining feature of the Batman franchise.

The crew of the enterprise are not space vigilantes. They're supposed to be explorers. Even if you want to make the argument that they are a military branch that still doesn't predicate bringing back singular villains just because they are popular.

 

[TX85]

I'd be totally fine with Khan..Depending on how a young Khan fits into the story and new universe created in the first films new time-line!!

But personally I'd also prefer a whole new villain!

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Well, if they totally broke free from the original universe then they ran the risk of it not being Star Trek anymore and alienating the fanbase. Remember, the Star Trek Universe is a integral part of American pop culture maybe even international pop culture. What JJ successfully did with Star Trek even though you and others may not like his approach, was to get the general audience to accept these new actors as the iconic characters that are closely associated with the original actors who played them. An almost impossible feat.

eh...I find that to be a weak argument.
Star Trek is a strong concept, and the leads from the original series are strong characters, sure, it is commendable that he found actors to slip into those roles that the trekkies accepted, but he could have also done the same with the universe, if he had just done it like a regular reboot, and trusted his own story ideas to be strong enough that the trekkies would have accepted it.
edit: and I don't think that recasting TOS characters was an almost impossible feat, that is giving him a bit too much kudos, imo, let's get real here.

He has cowtowed to fan reactions before. When he wrote that Superman script years ago, the fans were outraged at the changes, and he immediately scrapped the script.
Now, I don't recall what the script was about from memory, but it was quite a deviation from the Superman mythos....but....c'mon, what on Earth did he think was gonna happen? Of course there will be fan opposition to such changes, but if he thought he was onto something there in the first place, i don't think he should have crapped his pants from fan reaction, just as I don't think he should have cowtowed to the trekkies. I don't care how vocal they are, if you have confidence in your ideas, push forward with them.
So, y'know, either he was scared of the fans, or he couldn't think of a better new idea than the timeline plot for ST.

Hell, his Superman script/movie might have been better than SR, right? But, now we will never know, cause he was crapping his underpants that he was gonna get skid marked red underpants posted to his house every day. So, y'know, it might have been better for himself, *and* the fans, if he stuck to his guns, rather than his pants.

 

[cherokeesam]

Joker was actually set up at the end of the first film as coming to Gotham as an organic result of Batman's actions, as part of a general escalation of the type of crime in the city.

Also Batman is not the same kind of figure or story or franchise as Star Trek. He's a vigilante. He is defined by those he opposes. The rogues gallery is a defining feature of the Batman franchise.

The crew of the enterprise are not space vigilantes. They're supposed to be explorers. Even if you want to make the argument that they are a military branch that still doesn't predicate bringing back singular villains just because they are popular.

Exactly.
The whole mission of TOS is to "explore strange NEW worlds, to seek out NEW life and NEW civilizations, TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE...."

...and yet JJ is going back to the same old same old.
C'mon, where's the adventure and exploration? Where's the new....?

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

haha...I think JJ Abrams is smarter than that AND smarter than fanboys.

My sentiments exactly. I think haters just like to hate.

I meant to say something about this last night...there might actually be people who didn't think the story was that compelling.
I think what he did here has been blown way out of proportion, sure, it was not a bad idea, *if* you wanted to keep it linked to the old movies, but it didn't help the actual movie imo.

Now, if you guys are going to label critics of the movies as being stupid or 'haters', then I could just as easily label you guys as ass-kissers, who don't like hearing any criticism of the regime, who will label any critics as stupid or unreasonable.
I mean, it's like some people round here think they will skip to the front of the JJAbrahms queue for superpowers by adopting this policy.

 

[Panthro]

So I hear Robocop's gonna be in this. And by Robocop, I mean Peter Weller, AKA: Buckaroo Banzai.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

So I hear Robocop's gonna be in this. And by Robocop, I mean Peter Weller, AKA: Buckaroo Banzai.

Somehow I don't think Pete should get his hopes up for a career boost from that role. He has had a lot of time and opportunity for his career to make an impact, and has failed to do so.
He will keep trying, but there is no magical mixture he can concoct to make it so.
I don't think he is as superstitious as his 'fans' in regards to these types of things, but I do think he would be overconfident to think so.

 

[raybia]

Joker was actually set up at the end of the first film as coming to Gotham as an organic result of Batman's actions, as part of a general escalation of the type of crime in the city.

Also Batman is not the same kind of figure or story or franchise as Star Trek. He's a vigilante. He is defined by those he opposes. The rogues gallery is a defining feature of the Batman franchise.

The crew of the enterprise are not space vigilantes. They're supposed to be explorers. Even if you want to make the argument that they are a military branch that still doesn't predicate bringing back singular villains just because they are popular.

My comparison was merely to demonstrate that there were similar arguments directed at Nolan with both BB and TDK and of course it worked out pretty well.

Of course it may not workout the same with JJ but it still remains to be seen if it will be a major fail on his part.

 

[raybia]

I'd be totally fine with Khan..Depending on how a young Khan fits into the story and new universe created in the first films new time-line!!

But personally I'd also prefer a whole new villain!

I guess I essential feel the same way too but lets look at this objectively. The crew of the Enterprise are not superheroes or international spies; they are explorers.

So rather than each movie featuring the latest villain, it should focus on a story about the exploration of space, the final frontier. Certainly the prospect of exploring unknown reaches of space should allow enough creative freedom and imagination to the point it allows these movies to be more than merely a fight with this episode's guest villain.

 

[raybia]

eh...I find that to be a weak argument.

Regardless, I believe those were the concerns that the studio had which influenced the direction this latest movie took.

Star Trek is a strong concept, and the leads from the original series are strong characters, sure, it is commendable that he found actors to slip into those roles that the trekkies accepted, but he could have also done the same with the universe, if he had just done it like a regular reboot, and trusted his own story ideas to be strong enough that the trekkies would have accepted it.


edit: and I don't think that recasting TOS characters was an almost impossible feat, that is giving him a bit too much kudos, imo, let's get real here.

I think successfully recasting 7 legendary pop cultural icons who will forever be linked to the actors and actresses who played them is down right incredible and I agree that we should not give JJ too many kudos for this, as we should give a lot of credit as well to April Webster who was the casting director for Star Trek.

He has cowtowed to fan reactions before. When he wrote that Superman script years ago, the fans were outraged at the changes, and he immediately scrapped the script.

Now, I don't recall what the script was about from memory, but it was quite a deviation from the Superman mythos....but....c'mon, what on Earth did he think was gonna happen? Of course there will be fan opposition to such changes, but if he thought he was onto something there in the first place, i don't think he should have crapped his pants from fan reaction, just as I don't think he should have cowtowed to the trekkies. I don't care how vocal they are, if you have confidence in your ideas, push forward with them.

Well maybe the outcome of Superman Returns is what he feared what would have happened with his story. I also assume that he didn't have confidence in his ideas and thats why he ultimately abandoned the project. Only he knows for sure.

So, y'know, either he was scared of the fans, or he couldn't think of a better new idea than the timeline plot for ST.

Could be, but many people including critics liked the timeline plot so by no means is his ST considered a fail

Hell, his Superman script/movie might have been better than SR, right? But, now we will never know, cause he was crapping his underpants that he was gonna get skid marked red underpants posted to his house every day. So, y'know, it might have been better for himself, *and* the fans, if he stuck to his guns, rather than his pants.

What you are saying could be applied during the whole history of American cinema. Unfortunately more crap is put out by Hollywood than diamonds but that's what makes the diamonds so valuable.

 

[raybia]

Exactly.
The whole mission of TOS is to "explore strange NEW worlds, to seek out NEW life and NEW civilizations, TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE...."

...and yet JJ is going back to the same old same old.
C'mon, where's the adventure and exploration? Where's the new....?

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I actually have been waiting since the release of STII for the crew of the Enterprise to boldly go where no mission of the Enterprise has gone before.

If Khan is the antagonist in this movie then the likelihood of this happening is greatly reduced and for those who don't want Khan in this movie for that reason, I get it.

I also have hope (and I hope its not a false hope) that JJ Abrams is talented and innovative enough to not simply retread old ground and will give us a story worthy of the Star Trek mythos.

 

[Panthro]

Somehow I don't think Pete should get his hopes up for a career boost from that role. He has had a lot of time and opportunity for his career to make an impact, and has failed to do so.
He will keep trying, but there is no magical mixture he can concoct to make it so.
I don't think he is as superstitious as his 'fans' in regards to these types of things, but I do think he would be overconfident to think so.

Wasn't saying it would be that big of a boost to his career, but it's always nice to see him in something mainstream.

 

[raybia]

I meant to say something about this last night...there might actually be people who didn't think the story was that compelling.
I think what he did here has been blown way out of proportion, sure, it was not a bad idea, *if* you wanted to keep it linked to the old movies, but it didn't help the actual movie imo.

I just feel this approach has given JJ Carte Blanch to do anything he wants in terms of story without having to fit it into the establish canon of the original. Of course whether JJ and Co. takes advantage of this remains to be seen.

Now, if you guys are going to label critics of the movies as being stupid or 'haters', then I could just as easily label you guys as ass-kissers, who don't like hearing any criticism of the regime, who will label any critics as stupid or unreasonable.
I mean, it's like some people round here think they will skip to the front of the JJAbrahms queue for superpowers by adopting this policy.

Not every person who criticizes this new direction is stupid or a hater but when you hate without any clear explanation or based on incorrect assumptions then they open themselves to get called out on it.

Overall I enjoyed the first movie and thought it was the most entertaining Star Trek movie since ST6. It had its flaws but for me it re-introduced a crew that I really enjoy and care about to the extent that I want to follow their further adventures.

Now that JJ has our attention, its really in this corner to give us his version of the Empire strikes back or The Dark Knight.

Can that happen with Khan being re-introduced? Well, if he is in the next movie then I certainly hope so.

I'm not going to root for the movie to fail just because I don't like certain aspects of it.

 

[raybia]

Wasn't saying it would be that big of a boost to his career, but it's always nice to see him in something mainstream.

He's an actor so that is what actors do: they act. And why wouldn't an actor want to appear in a big budget Hollywood production?

 

[Panthro]

He's an actor so that is what actors do: they act. And why wouldn't an actor want to appear in a big budget Hollywood production?

Because some actors genuinely love those no-budget indie art house films that are shot in less than a week because they're oh so much more challenging & artistic than big summer tent-pole franchises.

 

[raybia]

Because some actors genuinely love those no-budget indie art house films that are shot in less than a week because they're oh so much more challenging & artistic than big summer tent-pole franchises.

Yeah probably but there is a difference between actors who have a choice and those who need to put food on the table. In other words beggars cannot be choosy.

 

[Panthro]

Yeah probably but there is a difference between actors who have a choice and those who need to put food on the table. In other words beggars cannot be choosy.

I never said he was. His career pretty much peaked at Robocop.

 

[raybia]

I never said he was. His career pretty much peaked at Robocop.

I know. I'm not specifically talking about Weller in regard to my earlier comments but I know there are actors who prefer the small indie movies to the Hollywood blockbusters. Johnny Depp use to be one of those and now he cannot seem to get enough of them.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

sorry for being a bit ranty in the thread this morning, had a bit of a sore head.
I still wish the ST reboot had been a clean reboot, if even just for the 1st movie to be a bit less cluttered with the concept, but, y'know, of course it's an interesting way of doing things.
and I don't blame him for immediately scrapping that Superman script after the fan reaction, maybe he was just a bit out of touch with that whole aspect of fandom and was shocked by the reaction. Because, you know how comic book fans are especially, he might not have at that point in time.

 

[Dark Knight]

If JJ can't get or doesn't like what Edgar Ramirez has to offer as Khan, they should go with Antonio Banderas. I think he would do a bang up job as Khan.

 

[cherokeesam]

If JJ can't get or doesn't like what Edgar Ramirez has to offer as Khan, they should go with Antonio Banderas. I think he would do a bang up job as Khan.

How about we just call the whole Khan thing what it is: a shot-down rumor? Abrams specifically said "not true" to the Khan rumor; and Simon Pegg says that Khan wasn't in the script at all. Some people are still clinging to the old fanboy adage that "when a filmmaker says 'no', he really means 'yes'" when it comes to wishgasm fantasies, but for now, it's the people INVOLVED with the film saying "no Khan" and just fanboy wishsites saying "yes Khan."

I know who *I'm* inclined to believe. How 'bout you-uns?

 

[Dark Knight]

Alternate realities are a standard trope of sci-fi and of Star Trek. It was a well done out to the problem they were facing, I will give them that, however.

But the story itself? Not a lot of new stuff going on. The threat could of been anything. Instead you just have another Villain ticked off at one of the main characters (this time Spock instead of Kirk), blaming them for their own loss, including their wives.

Essentially the archetype of the original film Kahn.


Now in the commentaries they mention that they thought about having some set up at the end or after the credits of ST09 showing the Botany Bay drifting through space.

This shows that at the very least the premise of the next film will be "Crew finds 21st century dictator floating through space, conflicts resulting from reviving said dictator occur." Now they may do some cool stuff with Kahn...but he's still Kahn, its still the premise of Space Seed.

As I've said they've yet to show the sort of imagination shown by the original writers of the show. These film makers have the capability to do so many more possible stories than the people writing 45 minute television episodes in the 60s, and yet they don't.

While the original Trek from time to time fell into the trap of "The crew encounters X themed planet/society" There were some fairly original threats, conflicts and antagonists.

Star Trek 4 has a probe threatening the planet, not for revenge or malignant purposes, or for territorial disputes...but by accident while trying to contact whales. That is the kind of imagination I'm talking about.

In recent times, the past decade or so, the threats in Star Trek have been so many derivatives of Kahn and now once again, Kahn himself.

It's also telling that the officially licensed comic series associated with these films are also just remaking episodes.

You speak of "fanboys" but you're just a fanboy of a different color.

Hmm....

Read this again:

Interesting. Didn't the first film do well at the BO along with it being well received by critics and most fans?

The writers and JJ came up with a nice way to reboot the franchise IMO. That in itself took imagination and some creativity IMO.

 

[Dark Knight]

How about we just call the whole Khan thing what it is: a shot-down rumor? Abrams specifically said "not true" to the Khan rumor; and Simon Pegg says that Khan wasn't in the script at all. Some people are still clinging to the old fanboy adage that "when a filmmaker says 'no', he really means 'yes'" when it comes to wishgasm fantasies, but for now, it's the people INVOLVED with the film saying "no Khan" and just fanboy wishsites saying "yes Khan."

I know who *I'm* inclined to believe. How 'bout you-uns?

Nothing is official yet and the Khan thing is just a strong rumor. JJ was saying Del Toro was not cast as Khan by the way....he wasn't saying Khan was not in the film.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

How about we just call the whole Khan thing what it is: a shot-down rumor? Abrams specifically said "not true" to the Khan rumor; and Simon Pegg says that Khan wasn't in the script at all. Some people are still clinging to the old fanboy adage that "when a filmmaker says 'no', he really means 'yes'" when it comes to wishgasm fantasies, but for now, it's the people INVOLVED with the film saying "no Khan" and just fanboy wishsites saying "yes Khan."

I know who *I'm* inclined to believe. How 'bout you-uns?

Did Pegg shoot down Khan as well? Interesting.

For the most part, people associated with a film have denied things that ended up being true (for various reasons). Last year, Zack Snyder shot down the "rumor" of Zod being the villain in Man of Steel.

For some reason though, I feel JJ was telling the truth about no Khan. Could be wrong but just a gut feeling.

We'll know soon enough...

 

[raybia]

How about we just call the whole Khan thing what it is: a shot-down rumor? Abrams specifically said "not true" to the Khan rumor; and Simon Pegg says that Khan wasn't in the script at all. Some people are still clinging to the old fanboy adage that "when a filmmaker says 'no', he really means 'yes'" when it comes to wishgasm fantasies, but for now, it's the people INVOLVED with the film saying "no Khan" and just fanboy wishsites saying "yes Khan."

I know who *I'm* inclined to believe. How 'bout you-uns?

People who want Khan will inclined to believe Khan will appear and vice versa. Who are we to crush people's dreams as the true will be revealed soon enough.

I, for one, can honestly say that I just want a kick-ass movie that is better that the last one and I thought the last one was great. A 3 out of 4 movie in fact. The 3 things that I will think will make this movie a success isn't the inclusion or exclusion of Khan, but 1. A great story, 2. A great story and 3. A great story.