New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Trek 2 - Page 4

post #91 of 378
12/6/11 at 9:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

That was what I said right before Robocop 2.

You got me there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

Of course it's Khan. Del Toro has the Khan look. Paramount wants Khan. The fans all think this film will be Khan. The villain is Khan.

I just hope that they don't kill him off. Set it up so that in twenty years, we can have another WRATH of KHAN.

This is, of course, pure speculation. However, it is really awesome pure speculation. I'd rather they go on with this series with new enemies and all I can think is that if we get Khan it will be met with massive disappointment. If Khan is confirmed, I'm setting my expectations extremely low.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #92 of 378
12/6/11 at 10:25am
Star Trek 2: Khan - The Battle over Corinthian Leather
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 378
12/6/11 at 12:40pm
Someone somewhere opined, wouldn't it be cool if JJ went against the grain on Khan and he ended up being an ally to Kirk and the Federation against another big villain, so throughout the film the entire audience expects him to turn on Kirk, but never does. Then, in the 3rd film, fireworks.

Now that is a damn fine idea. And it will never happen.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 378
12/6/11 at 2:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliens View Post

Star Trek 2: Khan - The Battle over Corinthian Leather

Nice one!
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 378
12/20/11 at 5:53pm
Thread Starter 
Looks like it will be shot on film, and converted to 3D in post. Also, there will be no cameos from original cast members.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-trek-s...-cast-members/
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 378
12/21/11 at 8:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

Looks like it will be shot on film, and converted to 3D in post. Also, there will be no cameos from original cast members.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-trek-s...-cast-members/

Means I'll be saving a few bucks & seeing the 2D edition, most likely. THen again, I did not see the last Harry Potter flick....anyone here with opinions on that movie's 3D post-conversion? What am I saying...of course there are!
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 378
12/21/11 at 8:15am
I HATE 3D!

Just saying.
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 378
12/21/11 at 8:42am
I LOVE 3D!!

Just saying
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 378
12/21/11 at 8:44am
I'M INDIFFERENT TO 3D!

Just saying.
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 378
12/21/11 at 8:54am
Thread Starter 
As long as they continue to offer the 2D alternative, who really cares if they release a 3D version? Even if its a post-conversion cash grab? Choices are the foundation of healthy consumerism.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 378
12/21/11 at 9:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

I'M INDIFFERENT TO 3D!

Just saying.

I'M AGNOSTIC TO 3D!
Just saying....


Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

As long as they continue to offer the 2D alternative, who really cares if they release a 3D version? Even if its a post-conversion cash grab? Choices are the foundation of healthy consumerism.

+1
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 378
12/21/11 at 9:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I'M AGNOSTIC TO 3D!
Just saying....

Does that mean you're unsure whether 3D exists?
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 378
12/21/11 at 9:35am
3D sucks
Reply
Reply
post #104 of 378
12/21/11 at 9:49am
I'm fine enough with DD's... no wait.

How much principle photography have they done yet? You'd think they would have the time and resources to film it in 3d if they want to actually release it in 3d. Lame. Lazy.
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 378
12/21/11 at 10:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

Does that mean you're unsure whether 3D exists?

Not at all....I'm sure it exists....I think.
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 378
12/21/11 at 1:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

As long as they continue to offer the 2D alternative, who really cares if they release a 3D version? Even if its a post-conversion cash grab? Choices are the foundation of healthy consumerism.

I care because 3D is destroying 2D projection. Check out my post in the girl with the dragon tattoo thread to find out what i mean.
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 378
1/5/12 at 8:29am
Benedict Cumberbatch Lands Villain Role in 'Star Trek 2'
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 378
1/5/12 at 9:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliens View Post

Benedict Cumberbatch Lands Villain Role in 'Star Trek 2'

Iteresting. I really hope this is shot in 3D. I love 3D, but not when it's converted.
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 378
1/5/12 at 9:07am
Thread Starter 
Look further up, it'll be a post-conversion.
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 378
1/5/12 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliens View Post

Benedict Cumberbatch Lands Villain Role in 'Star Trek 2'

I hope he gets to say "Elementary, my dear Kirk."
Reply
Reply
post #111 of 378
1/5/12 at 9:14am
Thread Starter 
Another casting: http://www.slashfilm.com/noel-clarke...r-trek-sequel/
Reply
Reply
post #112 of 378
1/5/12 at 9:16am
oh they're doing a 3D version? GGGGRRRREAT! 2D it is for me then!!!
iirc Pirates 4 wasn't huge in 3D compared to the 2D version... Maybe if Avatar 2 flops then studios will understand...
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 378
1/5/12 at 9:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

Look further up, it'll be a post-conversion.

I know. I'm just hoping he changes his mind.
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 378
1/5/12 at 3:52pm
Yes me to I have not seen a 3D Post-conversion that worked.
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 378
1/5/12 at 4:37pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbr View Post

Yes me to I have not seen a 3D Post-conversion that worked.

Only animated films work well with post-conversion.
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 378
1/6/12 at 8:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Maybe if Avatar 2 flops then studios will understand...

That's a BIG Maybe...
Reply
Reply
post #117 of 378
1/6/12 at 8:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

That's a BIG Maybe...

I'll delete my post after the first billion...


A good movie doesn't need 3D to make money... yesterday we saw Alvin 3 (yeah I know lol) and my daughter was so happy it wasn't 3D, she always ends up with a headache... Besides I hate conversions, the only one I'll be seeing this year is most likely Titanic, but only because I love the movie. Even Star Wars I won't bother.
Reply
Reply
post #118 of 378
1/6/12 at 9:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

A good movie doesn't need 3D to make money...

You're missing what I think is the point of Avatar - it's a 3D showcase tour of an imaginary world. I found it to be spectacular and if he can do as good a job with the next one I'll be very happy.
Reply
Reply
post #119 of 378
1/6/12 at 9:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Nelson View Post

You're missing what I think is the point of Avatar - it's a 3D showcase tour of an imaginary world. I found it to be spectacular and if he can do as good a job with the next one I'll be very happy.

Don't get me wrong I did enjoy Avatar (or Tron: Legacy) in 3D... While I'm not a 3D fan I admit, I can appreciate the effect when it works and is appropriate. It's the conversions I can't stand.
Reply
Reply
post #120 of 378
1/6/12 at 9:40am
Personally I think when the 3D is used to create a sense of depth( Avatar?), if done right it does add to the experience. Can't stand the cheap 'pop-out' 3D trickery though....
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

AVS Top Picks