It has a name: Star Trek: Into Darkness.

[Joelist]

Honestly, I think Trek 09 got far more right than it did wrong. To me, it is far more important to get the mood, feel, tone and characters right which the 09 film did in spades. Stuff like some of the ship appearances or a visual effect is not as high in my chain of importance, especially having seen "Trek" films that got the visuals okay but screwed up everything else (Nemesis being a prime example).

 

[Overmind One]

Honestly, I think Trek 09 got far more right than it did wrong. To me, it is far more important to get the mood, feel, tone and characters right which the 09 film did in spades. Stuff like some of the ship appearances or a visual effect is not as high in my chain of importance, especially having seen "Trek" films that got the visuals okay but screwed up everything else (Nemesis being a prime example).

Somebody here said once about SGU that Destiny was as much of a character in the show as the human characters. You cant just change Spock's ear shapes or make the warp core horizontal in the later ships and not change the character of the ship. Curved nacelles would not make sense in this design (if it were real). The curved pieces are harder to engineer and not as strong as a straight pylon. The curvy lighted "sport lines" are just a doodad which could have been omitted altogether.

I do agree that they got it MOSTLY right, however. I do not like the sound effects they are using, and I do not like the swirly transporter effect (makes no sense even in the trek fictional universe). What sort of device could create the swirl? The beaming effect channeld up when beaming up, and then down when beaming down. The swirly effect cannot do that.

 

[mzzz]

Wait 'til you see Abrams's Millennium Falcon.

Lens flare coming out of its ass, I mean rear...rear. I read somewhere Abrams had the effect of the lens flares to invoke the feel of the future being bright. Why not just depict the future as truly being bright in substance rather than some obscure superficial visual thing? To me it seemed a lot like people who dress smart to appear smart; congratulations, you only appear smart and that's if you think clothing gives off the appearance of intelligence. But are you truly smart?

 

[Overmind One]

Lens flare coming out of its ass, I mean rear...rear. I read somewhere Abrams had the effect of the lens flares to invoke the feel of the future being bright. Why not just depict the future as truly being bright in substance rather than some obscure superficial visual thing? To me it seemed a lot like people who dress smart to appear smart; congratulations, you only appear smart and that's if you think clothing gives off the appearance of intelligence. But are you truly smart?

Noticing the drool at the corners of the mouth is not a good sign. A brain dead idiot holding a torch is not necessarily "bright" is what I think you are trying to say. I agree!

 

[mzzz]

Noticing the drool at the corners of the mouth is not a good sign. A brain dead idiot holding a torch is not necessarily "bright" is what I think you are trying to say. I agree!

Yeah, I meant like showing the future of mankind and really all kinds in trek as being bright, that they have all grown in wisdom, intelligence, and that everyone can be more than what they are now and in a good way instead of a bright flash of light in a scene every now and then trying to give off the illusion of the future being bright.

 

[Overmind One]

Yeah, I meant like showing the future of mankind and really all kinds in trek as being bright, that they have all grown in wisdom, intelligence, and that everyone can be more than what they are now and in a good way instead of a bright flash of light in a scene every now and then trying to give off the illusion of the future being bright.

I got that. TNG and Voyager and DS9 Trek kinda did that well. This newer one is simplified somehow....

 

[Gatefan1976]

Here's the thing though, Trek at this time has the promise of being bright, moreso than Enterprise perhaps, but it's not "all rosy" really until TNG comes along. (something they broke in Insurection, but It's one of the reasons I like Insurection dispite the cheese on it)

 

[mzzz]

Yeah, has to be for the ever increasing 'add' crowd. Eh, maybe it'll generate enough interest to spawn a tv show of some form. (was directed at OM1)

 

[Gatefan1976]

I got that. TNG and Voyager and DS9 Trek kinda did that well. This newer one is simplified somehow....

It's an action flick, thats why. The original transformers cartoon has more substance then the 3 new movies, hell ST: TMP had more substance than Trek '09. Don't make it bad, just makes it an action flick.

 

[Joelist]

It's an action flick, thats why. The original transformers cartoon has more substance then the 3 new movies, hell ST: TMP had more substance than Trek '09. Don't make it bad, just makes it an action flick.

Of course it is.

Trek 09 is a two hour action movie. It does convey the underlying optimism of the TOS universe pretty well and not just thru use of brightness. That is part of what I referred to earlier about getting the mood and tone right. As to having a simplified story, I concur it is simplified and think that doing so goes back to the purpose of the film - to get Trek back out of the land of the dead. A complex plot would have bogged down what was really an origin story. As a result, they chose rather than making specific social commentary to be more general - the film upholds concepts like friendship, honor, duty and by showing a disparate group coming together into a cohesive team shows the concept that powerful foes can be overcome by working together. So there was commentary - just not specific commentary but rather more of a high level type.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Of course it is.

Trek 09 is a two hour action movie. It does convey the underlying optimism of the TOS universe pretty well and not just thru use of brightness. That is part of what I referred to earlier about getting the mood and tone right. As to having a simplified story, I concur it is simplified and think that doing so goes back to the purpose of the film - to get Trek back out of the land of the dead. A complex plot would have bogged down what was really an origin story. As a result, they chose rather than making specific social commentary to be more general - the film upholds concepts like friendship, honor, duty and by showing a disparate group coming together into a cohesive team shows the concept that powerful foes can be overcome by working together. So there was commentary - just not specific commentary but rather more of a high level type.

If thats "high level commentary" these days, I dispair. That's also the message of stuff like Captain Planet and Power Rangers.......

 

[shavedape]

Why do new producers think they can take artistic license with iconic ships like the Millenium Falcon or the Enterprise? Dont tbhey know that some enthusiastic fans actually pay attention to details and get upset when those details are changed? In the original series, fans caught scenes where the Enterprise would be flying in from the right or left and the window patterns on the saucer section would give it away if they simply flipped the images in reverse to give the illusion that the ship was moving in one direction or the other. They had to then make sure they turned the ship and filmed it ACTUALLY going the other direction. The sliders on the transporter panel had to be slid down when beaming down and up when beaming up. That was missed too. In TNG, more than a few fans knew the difference between a medical tricorder and a standard one.

Having said that, why would the Starfleet ship builders design swoopy curved lighted "sport lines" on the Enterprise, and have curved nacelle pylons? I will be glad to see it go. It was like seeing spoilers on an aircraft carrier to me.

OMG, can you imagine what they might do with CGI and the Millenium Falcon???

 

[Joelist]

If thats "high level commentary" these days, I dispair. That's also the message of stuff like Captain Planet and Power Rangers.......

High level means more abstract than specific. And when you're doing a two hour action film that is also an origin story trying to revive a basically dead franchise I can understand the decision to be more abstract in the commentary.

 

[Overmind One]

OMG, can you imagine what they might do with CGI and the Millenium Falcon???

Didnt they use a CGI Millenium Falcon somewhere? Im very okay with CGI but that does not mean they can just change everything and take artistic license. For instance, the CGI Yoda was way WAY better than the stupid muppet they used at first.

 

[shavedape]

Didnt they use a CGI Millenium Falcon somewhere? Im very okay with CGI but that does not mean they can just change everything and take artistic license. For instance, the CGI Yoda was way WAY better than the stupid muppet they used at first.

What scares me about CGI and the Millenium Falcon is the chance that they might streamline it and make it a sleek hot rod. The original appeal is that it's a grimy bucket of bolts that has something hot under the hood. It is perfect because of its imperfections if that makes sense. No need to mess with that by cleaning it up and making it all shiny.

 

[Joelist]

I wouldn't worry about that. They aren't going to do that as they know going on that the Star Wars universe should feel "lived in".

 

[shavedape]

I wouldn't worry about that. They aren't going to do that as they know going on that the Star Wars universe should feel "lived in".

I'd counter with what they did with ships (and Coruscant) in the prequel movies. Every ship they showed was a gleaming work of art. There was nothing realistic about them in terms of grittiness, wear and tear, exhaust marks, etc.

And don't get me going about Coruscant. Seriously, don't get me going on that one.

 

[Gatefan1976]

I'd counter with what they did with ships (and Coruscant) in the prequel movies. Every ship they showed was a gleaming work of art. There was nothing realistic about them in terms of grittiness, wear and tear, exhaust marks, etc.

And don't get me going about Coruscant. Seriously, don't get me going on that one.

Don't forget dude, the prequals are during the time of the Republic, where everything is supposed to be pretty and gleaming. It's not really till the time of the Empire when everything gets a bit darker and dirtier..............

 

[shavedape]

Don't forget dude, the prequals are during the time of the Republic, where everything is supposed to be pretty and gleaming. It's not really till the time of the Empire when everything gets a bit darker and dirtier..............

Yeah but no matter what time the story takes place in there would be some dirt somewhere. There would be some ships on Coruscant that had faded paint jobs and were scarred up a bit.

I'm not asking for Mos Eisley but just a touch of realism would have helped.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Yeah but no matter what time the story takes place in there would be some dirt somewhere. There would be some ships on Coruscant that had faded paint jobs and were scarred up a bit.

I'm not asking for Mos Eisley but just a touch of realism would have helped.

The underworld of Coruscant is dirty and stuff, but that shows far more in TCW than it does in the movies.
You should watch TCW dude, it is really good!!