New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Trek 2 - Page 9

post #241 of 355
12/28/12 at 12:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

Current 3-D technology is still stuck in the Viewmaster era. It's a fad, brought to you by people whose primary motivation is not artistic but designed to persuade you to spend more money on theater tickets and consumer electronics. As I've said before, wake me when they have true holographic projection - then we'll finally have 3-D worth talking about. I'm much more interested in higher resolution display technologies like 4K, Ultra-HD, and HFR that make the 2-D image sharper, clearer, and brighter.

Seen Prometheus? Avatar?

It has it's uses. Unfortunately, like Hollywood, 90% / 10% - Dreck to Art ratio.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #242 of 355
3/10/13 at 8:39pm
Latest teaser:

Reply
Reply
post #243 of 355
3/10/13 at 10:40pm
Lookin' good.
Reply
Reply
post #244 of 355
3/10/13 at 10:53pm
Yeah, it's back to the old rule-breakin' trouble-makin' Kirk of the original TV show.
Reply
Reply
post #245 of 355
3/11/13 at 5:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

Lookin' good.

I agree, can't wait.
Reply
Reply
post #246 of 355
3/11/13 at 11:42am
Between this, and Iron Man 3, and the new Superman, I am really stoked about this year's movies! All seem to be pretty spectacular.
Reply
Reply
post #247 of 355
3/14/13 at 3:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Seen Prometheus? Avatar?

It has it's uses. Unfortunately, like Hollywood, 90% / 10% - Dreck to Art ratio.

Art Drecko?

wink.gif
Reply
Reply
post #248 of 355
3/24/13 at 7:14pm
New international trailer was released a few days ago:

Reply
Reply
post #249 of 355
3/25/13 at 7:05am
That this looks awesome is elementary, my dear Kirk.

Of course, all trailers look awesome. But I do love me some Trek. Let's face it, it would have to totally suck for me not to buy a ticket.
Reply
Reply
post #250 of 355
3/25/13 at 9:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

Let's face it, it would have to totally suck for me not to buy a ticket.
REAL Trekkies buy first, bitch later.tongue.gif
Reply
Reply
post #251 of 355
3/26/13 at 4:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

REAL Trekkies buy first, bitch later.tongue.gif

No, not always. Some Trekkies read AVS, decide that TNG isn't worth the bother and save their money... biggrin.giftongue.gif

Seggers
Reply
Reply
post #252 of 355
3/26/13 at 4:55am
Trailers make it look more like a super hero movie than a Star Trek movie. Not a surprise, I guess.

larry
Reply
Reply
post #253 of 355
3/26/13 at 5:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PooperScooper View Post

Trailers make it look more like a super hero movie than a Star Trek movie. Not a surprise, I guess.

larry

I had a similar response. I get a Mission Impossible, The Dark Knight Rises, or Bourne vibe.

With the exception of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (Star Trek: The Motion Picture doesn’t count. The real series didn’t start until The Wrath of Khan), they have all been about battles in space, so I’m not sure I like the idea of being “Earthbound.” I need me some space.
Reply
Reply
post #254 of 355
3/26/13 at 8:05am
The studio wants a Star Wars like movie. They will market it that way to get the kids in theaters. As successful as the reboot was, it still only made 385 million worldwide on a 150 million budget. That is not a huge number. Overseas it earned 128 million so the studio wants that dumber doubled and is hoping kids will now think Star Trek is cool and not wait for the DVD (or illegal download).

Anything less than half a billion will be considered a disappointment.
Reply
Reply
post #255 of 355
3/26/13 at 11:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

The studio wants a Star Wars like movie. They will market it that way to get the kids in theaters. As successful as the reboot was, it still only made 385 million worldwide on a 150 million budget. That is not a huge number. Overseas it earned 128 million so the studio wants that dumber doubled and is hoping kids will now think Star Trek is cool and not wait for the DVD (or illegal download).

Anything less than half a billion will be considered a disappointment.

Not being cynical, but all studios want a Star Wars like movie. While I don't doubt the studio wanting to attract a younger fan base there is no way they'll risk alienating the existing "Trek Army" that built and still maintains the franchise. Nor do I think Abrams would allow that to happen nor does he need to succumb to such pressure. I seriously doubt Paramount is upset over this movie generating a $234MM profit at a 156% return. Not to mention another $101MM in dvd sales. Paramount won't see anything small about that performance. That being said, I think we film goers have set that "half billion dollars" as the benchmark for success not so much the studios. However, I do believe they feel certain productions have that capability but not viewed as a barometer for "success or failure".
Reply
Reply
post #256 of 355
3/26/13 at 2:18pm
Whatever figure it earned, cut it in half. That is what the studio received. Yes, it was profitable, but they expected it to earn more. I am sure this time around it will surpass 400 million (if it's good and I hope it is).

Just please, no villains saying, "Hi, I'm So and So" just for a laugh. God that was bad. Stupid. Idiotic.
Reply
Reply
post #257 of 355
3/27/13 at 2:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

While I don't doubt the studio wanting to attract a younger fan base there is no way they'll risk alienating the existing "Trek Army" that built and still maintains the franchise. Nor do I think Abrams would allow that to happen nor does he need to succumb to such pressure.

Abrams' first movie alienated plenty of the "Trek Army" already.
Reply
Reply
post #258 of 355
3/27/13 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Abrams' first movie alienated plenty of the "Trek Army" already.

Well, every Trek fan I personally know loved the movie. And most of what I read followed suit. The only true gripes I ever heard were about the use of flares and I'm really not trying to get that conversation started. Continuing, I have yet to hear anyone say "Star Trek 2? I'll wait for Redbox.". I'm actually LMAO after even typing that.

Generally speaking, there are always going to be Trek fans that don't like Trek something. But the vast majority enjoy the franchise and support it pretty much regardless. They might bitch and moan about something but at the end of the day they always say "The next one better be better than the last one.".

I expect this next one to be bigger than the first for a variety of reasons. And if this one makes "only" a 150% return like the last one, I can pretty much guarantee that they won't shutter the sound stage and pack it in. They'll make a third. And it won't be "kiddie-fied" to appeal to children.
Reply
Reply
post #259 of 355
3/27/13 at 4:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

The only true gripes I ever heard were about the use of flares and I'm really not trying to get that conversation started.
Yeah, I noticed in the new trailer ALFS hasn't been cured.rolleyes.gif

Quote:
Generally speaking, there are always going to be Trek fans that don't like Trek something. But the vast majority enjoy the franchise and support it pretty much regardless. They might bitch and moan about something but at the end of the day they always say "The next one better be better than the last one.".
The problem with prequels is the difficulty in connecting to the original source seamlessly.
It is almost never done well.

The Shatner movies are laid out in a logical progression and so were the TNG films.
The Abrams prequels must be convincing as pre-1966 Star Trek, or they simply can't be called "prequels."
Labeling them as a "re-imagining" would be more appropriate IMO.
Reply
Reply
post #260 of 355
3/27/13 at 4:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Abrams' first movie alienated plenty of the "Trek Army" already.

Not as much as 'Voyager' or 'Enterprise', I'd wager. I'd watch the Abrams movie again before even an hour of one of those series.
Reply
Reply
post #261 of 355
3/27/13 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

New international trailer was released a few days ago:


This looks excellent IMO! Loved the first one and looking forward to this one!
Reply
Reply
post #262 of 355
3/27/13 at 6:33pm
I always wish for a more cerebral sci-fi so I have to be prepared to lower my expectations in that regard. I did enjoy the first Abrams Trek.

The visuals in this look simply awesome in terms of eye-candy, cinematography, production design, FX.
Reply
Reply
post #263 of 355
3/28/13 at 12:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

Not as much as 'Voyager' or 'Enterprise', I'd wager. I'd watch the Abrams movie again before even an hour of one of those series.
+1000000
Reply
Reply
post #264 of 355
3/28/13 at 12:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

This looks excellent IMO! Loved the first one and looking forward to this one!

Same I can't wait!!
Reply
Reply
post #265 of 355
3/28/13 at 8:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Abrams' first movie alienated plenty of the "Trek Army" already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

Well, every Trek fan I personally know loved the movie. And most of what I read followed suit. The only true gripes I ever heard were about the use of flares and I'm really not trying to get that conversation started. Continuing, I have yet to hear anyone say "Star Trek 2? I'll wait for Redbox.". I'm actually LMAO after even typing that.

Generally speaking, there are always going to be Trek fans that don't like Trek something. But the vast majority enjoy the franchise and support it pretty much regardless. They might bitch and moan about something but at the end of the day they always say "The next one better be better than the last one.".

I expect this next one to be bigger than the first for a variety of reasons. And if this one makes "only" a 150% return like the last one, I can pretty much guarantee that they won't shutter the sound stage and pack it in. They'll make a third. And it won't be "kiddie-fied" to appeal to children.

Yeah, by most accounts, Star Trek (2009) is a great, or at least a near great, film. I'm really looking forward to the next chapter. I love Abrams' stuff so much, even his overuse of lens flare doesn't bother me any more, and anything Benedict Cumberbatch appears in is elevated by his presence.
Reply
Reply
post #266 of 355
3/28/13 at 10:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

Well, every Trek fan I personally know loved the movie. And most of what I read followed suit. The only true gripes I ever heard were about the use of flares and I'm really not trying to get that conversation started. Continuing, I have yet to hear anyone say "Star Trek 2? I'll wait for Redbox.". I'm actually LMAO after even typing that.

Generally speaking, there are always going to be Trek fans that don't like Trek something. But the vast majority enjoy the franchise and support it pretty much regardless. They might bitch and moan about something but at the end of the day they always say "The next one better be better than the last one.".

That will depend on what forums and blogs you frequent, I suppose. I read some sites where Abrams' movie is referred to as "NuTrek" with comtempt. A good chunk of the Trek fan base didn't care for his mucking with franchise canon, his lens flares, or his restyling of the Enterprise bridge to look like an Apple Store, among other things.

I liked the movie, personally, but it has several significant flaws that I hope get rectified in the sequel. The plotting is very sloppy and it relies too heavily on goofy humor.

I haven't been enthused by the trailers for Trek 2. It looks more like Star Wars than Star Trek. Again, I like Star Wars well enough, but that's just not what I want from this franchise.
Reply
Reply
post #267 of 355
3/28/13 at 12:01pm
It does look a bit like it should be called Earth Trek.
Reply
Reply
post #268 of 355
3/28/13 at 3:13pm
I enjoyed both the "original" Trek all the way thru to Abrams reboot. F**k what the "trekkers" think. At least I know I have gotten laid far more than most of them.
Reply
Reply
post #269 of 355
3/28/13 at 3:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwebb1970 View Post

I enjoyed both the "original" Trek all the way thru to Abrams reboot. F**k what the "trekkers" think. At least I know I have gotten laid far more than most of them.
Hey, some of those "trekkies" are hot babes!
Oh, wait.....biggrin.gif
Reply
Reply
post #270 of 355
3/29/13 at 7:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwebb1970 View Post

I enjoyed both the "original" Trek all the way thru to Abrams reboot. F**k what the "trekkers" think. At least I know I have gotten laid far more than most of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Hey, some of those "trekkies" are hot babes!
Oh, wait.....biggrin.gif

Indeed! When I think of the typical Trekkie, I am reminded of Galaxy Quest.smile.gif
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

AVS Top Picks