Unhappy about new Star Trek movie

Josh Bass · May 8th, 2006, 11:08 AM

"the acting was poor". You guys have been behind the lens long enough to know that only with new talent do you have bad acting. Experienced talent can act badly (phone it in), but it is the director's fault if it makes it to the screen. The director is the one who allows any acting to be bad

Oh really? So Keanu Reeves is new talent?

Keith Loh · May 8th, 2006, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Carney

Micheal, Keith, just what are we waiting for? We don't actually need Paromounts permission to do an original work based on Section 31. I know Keith has the writing chops to create a great script.
Finally use Celtx for what it's designed for, hehehe.

What say? Any other takers?

I have a personal rule. No fan-fiction.

Why expend energy on someone else's intellectual property?

If you search for 'rant' and 'fan fiction' I believe I've ranted about it here some years in the past.

Joe Carney · May 8th, 2006, 02:05 PM

Keith, I understand. Thats sort of why I wanted to explore Section 31, to get away from the stranglehold the ST canon has on things. To boldly go where no ST fan film has gone before.....I met some strippers at the vegas conf last year very eager to get some more air time, (just kidding).

Maybe an entirely new scfi series set in the same or alternate universe? Free from Paramount IP? They don't own the word 'Federation' as long as we don't use their props and logos from the show.

I would love to do an original low budget SciFi movie. Would you be up for something like that?

Keith Loh · May 8th, 2006, 02:53 PM

Send me an email. I'm actually in the middle of another writing project that is taking up all of my creative time. Eventually we can build it up until we are one of those craigslist projects that get highlighted in Josh Bass' thread.

Josh Bass · May 8th, 2006, 03:00 PM

I like how it's MY thread now. I'll be a good daddy to it, and nuture it with many ridiculous submissions. Maybe I'll even fake a few to make myself look better.

Kelly Goden · May 18th, 2006, 11:34 AM

Less is more. Too many trips to the well. They really should try to do something fresh instead of digging up the body over and over again.

Shatner and company own the roles--they created them--its dumb to try and replace them.
My assessment of the shows:

TOS: cheap sets, some hokey costumes--however they tackled controversial subjects and had a good dynamic cast of characters that you cared about. I didnt feel any of the OS movies captured the spirit of the series. The only ones to delve into any sort of political content were the Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country. Although funny enough, Star Trek 5 had elements that reminded me the most of the old show(the alien horses, the God figure, the cocktail party ending). The OS was like classical theatre with a sci-fi setting.

TNG: sets were better..-but they didnt delve into the controversial subjects of the original(no thinly disguised parables about the Gulf War for example) and because they wanted to show a better vision of the future--they made the human characters be nice with each other all the time--which killed the dramatic opportunities. Cast wise--they just didnt have the charisma of Shatner, Nimoy and Kelley--which is one reason why they couldnt carry the NG movies. The best remembered episode remains the season 3 cliffhanger Borg one because of the villains--not Picard and crew, and the same is true for the NG movies. Worst thing about NG was that they often used technology cop out endings to solve problems--especially those created by technology--which was almost never criticized or seen as a fault. You can only emit a tachion field so many times! The OS wasnt like that--they used human interaction to solve problems most of the time. The science fiction was a backdrop metaphor on the OS--but on the newer shows it was taken too seriously.

DS9--a stronger cast--more dynamic characters to care about(with flaws--although the aliens were the ones with the most conflict). I liked the show until they made Odo get romantic and it ended poorly(Odo mindmelds with the Founders' leader and everyone was lovey dovey as he descends wearing a tuxedo into the slime lake).

Voyager--too much of a copy of the other shows(another vulcan?)--plus they killed the tension they had set up with the Starfleet-Maquis crew--Chakotay became a completely wasted character.
They did have a couple of neat scary villains--the Vidians(organ stealers who got cured rather abruptly) and Species 8472--had a great intro-but screwed up when they had Chakotay get romantic with a human one(and they said Kirk was having all the affairs).

I bailed out of Enterprise early(another vulcan?).

The post-OS shows eventually became like soap operas--but unlike Babylon 5, they didnt have it clearly planned out from start to finish.

I say let Star Trek rest.

He's dead Jim.

David Jimerson · May 20th, 2006, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Lohman

Usually I have trouble finding other people who really liked DS9, guess there are
plenty here. Good!

DS9 was the best of the Berman-era series.

Probably mostly because Berman (and Braga) had little to do with it.

Rob Gregory-Browne · May 26th, 2006, 03:41 PM

Trek blew from the very beginning. Without Nimoy they would've had nothing. The movies weren't much better, although, again, the one directed by Nimoy about the whale was pretty good for its time.

I've never understood this obsession with Trek anymore than I've understood the obsession with Star Wars.

Josh Bass · May 26th, 2006, 03:57 PM

So. . .not a big fan of sci-fi, then?

Rob Gregory-Browne · May 26th, 2006, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

So. . .not a big fan of sci-fi, then?

Actually, I'm a huge fan of sci-fi. Which is why I think Star Trek blows.

David Jimerson · May 26th, 2006, 05:42 PM

Good to know.

Frank Granovski · May 26th, 2006, 07:33 PM

Quote:

I've never understood this obsession with Trek anymore than I've understood the obsession with Star Wars.

The best sci-fi is found in books. :-)

Josh Bass · May 27th, 2006, 08:52 PM

Can I assume you like a different type of Sci-fi than what trek offers, namely, a type more based on real science rather than "fantasy set in space?"

I don't really care for real science. I dig outlandishness over a story about two guys stranded 'cause their moon rover broke an axle, or something.

Authors I dig---

Robert J. Sawyer, Alistair Reynolds. . .well crap, I guess that's it for novels.

I've read any number of anthologies of stuff from the 30's til now. I gotta say, the 80s, in my opinion, took a real downturn in quality. I don't know if, in the short form world, it's "recovered".

Frank Granovski · May 28th, 2006, 06:30 AM

There's a whole bunch of good sci-fi books I read, just can't remember their titles. There were some good sci-fi movies too, can't remember their titles either---and they never seem to reappear on basic cable.

Josh Bass · May 28th, 2006, 08:41 AM

Examples, please?

May 8th, 2006, 11:08 AM	#76
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	"the acting was poor". You guys have been behind the lens long enough to know that only with new talent do you have bad acting. Experienced talent can act badly (phone it in), but it is the director's fault if it makes it to the screen. The director is the one who allows any acting to be bad Oh really? So Keanu Reeves is new talent? __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

May 8th, 2006, 02:05 PM	#78
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	Keith, I understand. Thats sort of why I wanted to explore Section 31, to get away from the stranglehold the ST canon has on things. To boldly go where no ST fan film has gone before.....I met some strippers at the vegas conf last year very eager to get some more air time, (just kidding). Maybe an entirely new scfi series set in the same or alternate universe? Free from Paramount IP? They don't own the word 'Federation' as long as we don't use their props and logos from the show. I would love to do an original low budget SciFi movie. Would you be up for something like that? __________________ Boycott Guinness, bring back the pint!!!

May 8th, 2006, 02:53 PM	#79
Keith Loh Air China Pilot Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Posts: 2,389	Send me an email. I'm actually in the middle of another writing project that is taking up all of my creative time. Eventually we can build it up until we are one of those craigslist projects that get highlighted in Josh Bass' thread. __________________ -- Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com \| stuff about living in Vancouver \| My Flickr photo gallery

May 8th, 2006, 03:00 PM	#80
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	I like how it's MY thread now. I'll be a good daddy to it, and nuture it with many ridiculous submissions. Maybe I'll even fake a few to make myself look better. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

May 26th, 2006, 03:57 PM	#84
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	So. . .not a big fan of sci-fi, then? __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

May 18th, 2006, 11:34 AM	#81
Kelly Goden Major Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Surrey BC Posts: 259	Less is more. Too many trips to the well. They really should try to do something fresh instead of digging up the body over and over again. Shatner and company own the roles--they created them--its dumb to try and replace them. My assessment of the shows: TOS: cheap sets, some hokey costumes--however they tackled controversial subjects and had a good dynamic cast of characters that you cared about. I didnt feel any of the OS movies captured the spirit of the series. The only ones to delve into any sort of political content were the Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country. Although funny enough, Star Trek 5 had elements that reminded me the most of the old show(the alien horses, the God figure, the cocktail party ending). The OS was like classical theatre with a sci-fi setting. TNG: sets were better..-but they didnt delve into the controversial subjects of the original(no thinly disguised parables about the Gulf War for example) and because they wanted to show a better vision of the future--they made the human characters be nice with each other all the time--which killed the dramatic opportunities. Cast wise--they just didnt have the charisma of Shatner, Nimoy and Kelley--which is one reason why they couldnt carry the NG movies. The best remembered episode remains the season 3 cliffhanger Borg one because of the villains--not Picard and crew, and the same is true for the NG movies. Worst thing about NG was that they often used technology cop out endings to solve problems--especially those created by technology--which was almost never criticized or seen as a fault. You can only emit a tachion field so many times! The OS wasnt like that--they used human interaction to solve problems most of the time. The science fiction was a backdrop metaphor on the OS--but on the newer shows it was taken too seriously. DS9--a stronger cast--more dynamic characters to care about(with flaws--although the aliens were the ones with the most conflict). I liked the show until they made Odo get romantic and it ended poorly(Odo mindmelds with the Founders' leader and everyone was lovey dovey as he descends wearing a tuxedo into the slime lake). Voyager--too much of a copy of the other shows(another vulcan?)--plus they killed the tension they had set up with the Starfleet-Maquis crew--Chakotay became a completely wasted character. They did have a couple of neat scary villains--the Vidians(organ stealers who got cured rather abruptly) and Species 8472--had a great intro-but screwed up when they had Chakotay get romantic with a human one(and they said Kirk was having all the affairs). I bailed out of Enterprise early(another vulcan?). The post-OS shows eventually became like soap operas--but unlike Babylon 5, they didnt have it clearly planned out from start to finish. I say let Star Trek rest. He's dead Jim.

May 26th, 2006, 03:41 PM	#83
Rob Gregory-Browne Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 107	Trek blew from the very beginning. Without Nimoy they would've had nothing. The movies weren't much better, although, again, the one directed by Nimoy about the whale was pretty good for its time. I've never understood this obsession with Trek anymore than I've understood the obsession with Star Wars.

May 26th, 2006, 05:42 PM	#86
David Jimerson Jubal 28 Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Wilmington, NC Posts: 872	Good to know. __________________ www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com

May 27th, 2006, 08:52 PM	#88
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Can I assume you like a different type of Sci-fi than what trek offers, namely, a type more based on real science rather than "fantasy set in space?" I don't really care for real science. I dig outlandishness over a story about two guys stranded 'cause their moon rover broke an axle, or something. Authors I dig--- Robert J. Sawyer, Alistair Reynolds. . .well crap, I guess that's it for novels. I've read any number of anthologies of stuff from the 30's til now. I gotta say, the 80s, in my opinion, took a real downturn in quality. I don't know if, in the short form world, it's "recovered". __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

May 28th, 2006, 06:30 AM	#89
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	There's a whole bunch of good sci-fi books I read, just can't remember their titles. There were some good sci-fi movies too, can't remember their titles either---and they never seem to reappear on basic cable.

May 28th, 2006, 08:41 AM	#90
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Examples, please? __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB