Options
Has 'Star Trek' been spoiled by the 2009 reboot?
linkinpark875
Posts: 29,706
Forum Member
✭✭✭
At the time I watched it it was great cinema. I remember it got people to the cinema who weren't even fans of the series or movies. It was good action and modern cinema but looking back it for me feels too different to the original ones before it?
I have read people who have similar views wonder if the same thing will happen when J. J. Abrams writes the new Star Wars?
Also Star Trek 2 having 3D is a bit of a fad.
I have read people who have similar views wonder if the same thing will happen when J. J. Abrams writes the new Star Wars?
Also Star Trek 2 having 3D is a bit of a fad.
0
Comments
If this version of Trek doesn't do it for some people, there will be another one along at some point, with the previous ones still there for the taking. Whether induviduals like it or not, Abrams revived Trek for the timebeing. The floodgates were opened for new films, comics, games, crossovers and content dumps across various mediums.
The reboot made it difficult to nail it down to a familiar, comfortable format. 'Star Trek' was the first Trek film without any background (beyond older Spock). There wasn't a TV series to establish the new Universe and it's new take on the original characters. Ultimately it had to come back with a bang and as you say, attract new viewers.
I expected Star Trek Into Darkness to pull it back a little and settle down, but it looks like it's going far in the other direction. I'll be interested to see if it works.
tl;dr, J.J chose to go for attractive, flashy action as opposed to lots of walking and talking, and sitting and talking.
He's a great actor in his own type of own role movies but not ones like Mission Impossible.
09 though was fantastic and I was extremely surprised at just how good it was.
But that's not to say another series can't come along and undo all the damage done.
A really good Trek series will supercharge the viewing public and all the long-time fans will quickly return.
Enterprise weren't popular enough to merit movie versions. Abrams' way seemed like
the best way to dis-inter "Star Trek" and make it popular again.
i liked the reboot.
Paramount are now making Star Trek movies for an increasingly dwindling audience. Outside of Star Wars (if you can call Star Wars sci-fi) proper science fiction has always been a hard sell. I caught TWOK on CH4 yesterday just to remind myself what a proper Trek film should be. While I quite enjoyed Trek 2009, and am reserving judgement on In to Darkness, JJ can only dream about making a Trek film as good as TWOK. It's possible he could if someone gave him a good enough script, but the Early Learning Centre for Writers run by Kurtzman and Orci are never going to him that.
Seems you're in a wee minority considering how successful it was.
Paramount are canny enough to not let as well known a name as Star Trek to slip by in this age of franchise cinema - they know a certain audience will lap up big screen Trek in any iteration. But they'll want a significant improvement on the international figure for ST to be a true major player, because that's how it rolls these days.
The second film will be key to if it works in the long term.
The story felt a bit rushed and felt like they compromised plot for special effects (good old lens flare).
Granted, the reboot is fairly brainless, full of lens flares and explosions, but it seems to be what the audience wants these days.
Any business that didn't care where the money came from wouldn't be in business for very long.
After the previous two failures a new movie was a risk. But it was a risk worth taking, and whilst maybe not being the instant pot of gold they were hoping for as previously suggested, it did renew a spark and interest in the Trek universe, and in the long run that will pay dividends.
it'll be interesting to see how it pans out, and compare how each timeline measures up to each other, but one thing will be certain ..... IT WILL BE EXCITING!!!
I meant which country, not whether it came from illicit sources or not. I imagine they'll look and see where it came from, perhaps advertise more in countries where it took less money. But overall as long as it gets them loads of money I doubt they'll be too fussed about the international/domestic split