Tales of the Parodyverse >> View Post
·
Post By
HH

In Reply To
Visionary 
Moderator

Member Since: Sat Jan 03, 2004
Posts: 2,131
Subj: Re: I just saw it myself...
Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 at 06:24:06 am EDT (Viewed 6 times)
Reply Subj: I just saw it myself...
Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 at 01:16:39 am EDT (Viewed 574 times)



    Quote:

    It didn't do much for me. It was obviously well made, and showed the benefits of a budget higher than any Trek movie has ever seen before, but overall it was bright, shiny, loud, energetic and... just kind of there.


The problem was that many of the things which were once distinctive about Trek have been copied and even improved by lots of other movies. The big fight on the gantry has become quite hackneyed (the last good one I saw was in Serenity). Two starships shooting lights at each other or even crashing into each other has become de rigeur. To make those things work now requires some serious choreography and some great plotting, not just an FX budget. The final Khan fight in Trek II works after all this time because it does that. No one will remember the finale in this latest movie.


    Quote:
    The villain was a muddled, uninteresting antagonist. I too had trouble following his reasoning, and found him lacking in all menace. And you're right... the interior of his ship was just plain goofy, the ridiculousness of it overwhelmingly shown when, during the climax, he gets an announcement and has to leap to another platform in order to do anything about it.


I liked the idea that a mining ship from the future was advanced enough to do all that damage. The concept should have allowed for some great interior visuals, but even the external design didn't make sense. Why build a mining ship to look like Cthulhu?


    Quote:
    Really, the whole movie had a bunch of those kinds of moments... ones that were (sorry) "highly illogical". Is it really Star Fleet regulations to launch insubordinate crewmembers onto nearby planets? Why on earth (or not) do people carry around unfolding melee weapons hundreds of years from now? Wouldn't a gun be far more practical? (For that matter, since when is "fencing" at all the same as using a katana?) When a giant ship starts drilling to the Earth's core, there's not a single ship that can shoot the cord like Spock did, or even try? And that goes for Vulcan too? (What kind of culture would send a captain into space with the codes to shut down all of your defenses?) And Kirk happening to be rescued by elder Spock (from a beast that was chasing him for no discernible reason, what with much bigger prey already dead and waiting to be eaten) beats any of the goofy coincidences that sunk "Spider-man 3".


Sulu's always been a blade enthusiast; hence his choice for a personal sidearm. All defending ships were kept at bay by the weapons capable of disabling a starship; only an advanced future-ship could avoid them. Pike had the defence codes because he wasn't due to go into space but was instead teaching at Academy until the crisis required him to set forth. Clearly future Spock was influencing the reactions of present Spock. No-prize please?


    Quote:
    In other words, it was pretty aggressively dumb, without much in the way of plot or really any big sci-fi ideas. The "Transformers"-esque shaky cam action scenes really annoyed me too.


That's a technique that will cause many current movies to be criticised in years tio come.


    Quote:
    All that said, I'd rate it a "B" or a "B-"... Most of these annoyances were countered by some really nice touches. And certainly, it's far superior than many of the other Trek movie offerings.


I've enjoyed quite a few of the other Trek movies. This ranks somewhere around the middle.






Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows 2000
On Topic™ © 2003-2024 Powermad Software
Copyright © 2003-2024 by Powermad Software