Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Star Trek MOBILE
Byrne Robotics | Star Trek Page of 3 Next >>
Topic: Star Trek Into Darkness Pitch Meeting Post Reply | Post New Topic
Author
Message
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 15615
Posted: 18 November 2020 at 1:15pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

LINK 


It really was a stupid movie, and having it laid out in the comedic video above really illustrates that point. 


Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Rick Senger
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8842
Posted: 18 November 2020 at 1:36pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

That was so much more clever than the movie.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne

Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 122361
Posted: 18 November 2020 at 1:43pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

sigh
Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6667
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 7:26am | IP Logged | 4 post reply


Further proof (if any was needed) that I will never watch this movie.

(I tried the first 5 minutes, a few years back, when it was on Amazon Prime... just so much wrong, crammed into those first minutes...)




Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne

Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 122361
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 7:37am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

If there was even the whisper of a chance I might watch this movie, it went down in flames (flaming whisper?) with the scene in the trailer where Benedict Cumberbatch identifies his character as "KHAN!"

Granted, Ricardo Montalban wasn't a Sikh either, but couldn't they have found someone a little less WHITE than Cumberbund?

(And that's even skipping the fact that his self-identification was the equivalent to HRH Charles Windsor introducing himself by saying "My name is Prince." Khan, after all, is a TITLE.)

Back to Top profile | search
 
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6190
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 8:14am | IP Logged | 6 post reply

I only managed to watch it once, on cable, in a fit of masochism. 
It wasn't worth it.
And it almost (deservedly) derailed this whole incarnation of Star Trek.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne

Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 122361
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 8:22am | IP Logged | 7 post reply

The depth of ignorance revealed in this "pitch meeting" (not on the part of the satirists, obviously) underscores everything wrong with the STAR TREK "reboot". Like so many such projects, it seems the "brains" in Hollywood think the title and some character names are all that is needed.

And sometimes, reading the current audience to know just how much contempt needs to be shown for the original property.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2063
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 8:41am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

The thing that baffled me utterly about ST:ID was how much LESS sense the story made than the first Abrams film.  And I was surprised by that because the first film was made during the writer's strike, so they (supposedly) couldn't make any modifications to the script during filming.  Without a doubt, the first film had some real logical inconsistencies throughout and a 'fuck it' treatment of science, but it was zippy and entertaining, with most of the problems being of the fridge logic variety.  So on Into Darkness, where they had all the time in the world to polish the script and really plug all the holes, why did it get stupider, louder, fattier, and more non-sensical? 
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6667
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 10:14am | IP Logged | 9 post reply


After seeing more J.J. Abrams movies than I care to admit (but having sworn off his work from now on), I can safely say he's a perfect example of a modern film director as a fan-turned-pro.  All flash, no substance.



Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne

Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 122361
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 10:21am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Abrams has demonstrated himself to be a keen adherent to the “Because the Script Says So” school of filmmaking.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2063
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 10:42am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

It was "Into Darkness" that revealed the void in Abrams's storytelling to me - the only work of his I'd seen previous to the 2009 Star Trek was his MI film, which was so high-octane and streamlined that no real story issues leapt out (it also helps that the MI film franchise already had a really low bar for coincidence and story non-sequiturs).  His Star Wars trilogy is kind of the endgame for that.  Shit happens because it happens.  I wish it didn't aggravate me so, but it does.  These are two of my favorite fictional universes, and they're both now defined by the aesthetic of one guy who was an ill fit for both of them (though, again, I still do like his first Trek film).
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 27817
Posted: 20 November 2020 at 11:06am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Remember how adamant he was when he told us Cumberbatch
WASN'T playing Khan?

Abrams has proven to me he is unable to have any real original story
ideas. This movie was a prime example. Hell, he even shot the same
end scene. Different outcome, but...
Back to Top profile | search
 

Page of 3 Next >>
  Post Reply | Post New Topic |

Forum Jump

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login

You are currently viewing the MOBILE version of the site.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FULL SITE