New Star Trek Page 160

  • Page

    of 179 First / Last

  • mcmonkeyplc 30 Apr 2013 13:47:52 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    varsas wrote:
    the buzz coming out of the film was something I hadn't felt in a long time, it just needs to come back a bit now to what ST is about.
    Yes this exactly! I don't mind what they did to the reboot. It needed to be done but the fact that it looks like they've done the same thing again this time round is what I have a problem with.

    They need to start to bring it back towards what Star Trek is now or risk losing the old fans and eventually the mainstream will get bored of it and we'll be back to square 1 again.

    What is Star Trek?

    It's a peace keeping force and humanitarian fleet obviously. :p

    A reflection of modern life and an optimistic view of how we can fix our problems in the future.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • CosmicFuzz 30 Apr 2013 13:48:08 23,382 posts
    Seen 38 seconds ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Scurrminator wrote:
    @CosmicFuzz or it wasn't in 3D and you should have removed the glasses!
    Haha you mean the final film won't be as dark?!

    Can video games be a force for good? My latest article says yes!

  • varsas 30 Apr 2013 14:04:54 2,401 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    It's because FF is just a decent action film with lot's of action. No need to think.
    I thought the FF was meant to be decent action but I thought it was just dire. I didn't find the action engaging at all; the mildly diverting part was the main race and only due to the way it was filmed. Perhaps I was expecting too much; for anime fans I was thought there'd be tense races like Initial D.
  • beastmaster 30 Apr 2013 14:04:54 11,201 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    Let's just face it. This is just going to be a by the numbers action sequel.

    BIGGER EXPLOSIONS
    BIGGER SHIPS
    BIGGER MILD PERIL
    BIGGER TITS

    It's going to be shit and I don't mean that in an anti-hype kind of way. I mean it's just another watchable action film now. It's probably going to end up like a space version of fast and furious. Which is ok, but it's not the star trek we all loved.

    I hope I'm wrong but the trailers do make it seem like just another action film now.

    Edited by mcmonkeyplc at 09:59:12 30-04-2013
    Who loved? All the under 12s who thought it was the best film ever? We are no longer the target audience. Yes, there are lots of Trek fans who are adults. They probably took their kids to see it. I make the assumption that the huge amount of money made was because a lot of these adults enjoyed it too.

    Reboots have to be different. Yes, Hollywood is all out of ideas yadda yadda, gimmie the money etc. but for better or worse, most of them have to tell the story in their own way. If it's "flash,bang, whoosh" then so be it.

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • mcmonkeyplc 30 Apr 2013 14:34:22 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Not just flash bang whoosh damn it! It needs to have a proper story!

    Give it a decent story and I will forgive ALL the lens flare they throw at it! :)

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • bad09 30 Apr 2013 15:33:32 5,650 posts
    Seen 2 seconds ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    Not just flash bang whoosh damn it! It needs to have a proper story!

    Give it a decent story and I will forgive ALL the lens flare they throw at it! :)
    Stop wishing and just move on. "Star Trek" is not Star Trek anymore we were told that by lens flare himself BEFORE the first one shat out. Don't wish for what you have no chance of getting watch it for the dumb shit it is, we have our Star Trek and we've had all we'll get on the big screen and probably small one to if we ever see a new TV show.
  • Steve_Perry 30 Apr 2013 15:34:32 3,655 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I don't see why it can't have a good story and effects. Just hire better writers instead of proven hacks.

    VIVA STEFANSEN

  • bad09 30 Apr 2013 15:44:11 5,650 posts
    Seen 2 seconds ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Steve_Perry wrote:
    I don't see why it can't have a good story and effects. Just hire better writers instead of proven hacks.
    Why should hire new people? The last one did well and it seems people are up for more. It's like Transformers films, they are fucking terrible but rake in a fortune so why change it?
  • Steve_Perry 30 Apr 2013 15:47:50 3,655 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Yeah can't argue with that really.

    VIVA STEFANSEN

  • CharlieStCloud 1 May 2013 08:10:00 5,122 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Star Trek Into Darkness - review | The Guardian

    Iron Man 3 also got a four star (review) and that was ...

    ... okay.
  • Steve_Perry 1 May 2013 10:25:52 3,655 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    A good review I think.

    I would warn you all off the empire review. It reads like a wikipedia plot synopsis. They love spoiling a movie.

    VIVA STEFANSEN

  • nickthegun 1 May 2013 10:31:53 58,935 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    A good review in that it almost wilfully spoils the identity of John Harrisson.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • Deleted user 1 May 2013 10:49:12
    bad09 wrote:
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    Not just flash bang whoosh damn it! It needs to have a proper story!

    Give it a decent story and I will forgive ALL the lens flare they throw at it! :)
    Stop wishing and just move on. "Star Trek" is not Star Trek anymore we were told that by lens flare himself BEFORE the first one shat out. Don't wish for what you have no chance of getting watch it for the dumb shit it is, we have our Star Trek and we've had all we'll get on the big screen and probably small one to if we ever see a new TV show.
    Old trek was never smart, it was the same as the new trek only much slower and more dull politics.
  • mcmonkeyplc 1 May 2013 11:05:25 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I like politics!

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • GiarcYekrub 1 May 2013 11:15:12 3,667 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Star Trek needs to return to TV.
  • nickthegun 1 May 2013 11:18:59 58,935 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Which it will never do unless idiots like you get over yourselves and watch the movie.

    If you want a show, the films need to be a success.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • Steve_Perry 1 May 2013 11:20:02 3,655 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    GiarcYekrub wrote:
    Star Trek needs to return to TV.
    Why? It would be shit. The old shows have aged terribly, and if they did a series in the vein of the new films, or Lost, or BSG, it would make your brain explode.

    VIVA STEFANSEN

  • mcmonkeyplc 1 May 2013 11:23:43 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    GiarcYekrub wrote:
    Star Trek needs to return to TV.
    You think being stubborn about the new films is going to get you a new tv series?

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • nickthegun 1 May 2013 11:24:06 58,935 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Its too expensive to do full 20+ episode series. I reckon a mini series every year would fly, though.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • mcmonkeyplc 1 May 2013 11:25:57 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    That'd make a fuck ton and finance a proper series!

    MAKE IT SO!

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Scurrminator 1 May 2013 13:36:40 8,387 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    @GiarcYekrub

    1) it will only do so if the films are a success
    2) it would be set in the same universe as the new films to capitalise on point 1

    So either way you'd still be fucking moaning.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • DFawkes 1 May 2013 13:48:06 22,619 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    You could still do a Prime Universe TV show, but given the events of the last film still lead to massive changes there as well, there'd still be moaning. For what it's worth, I love where STO went with that story. A lot of the stuff in STO could make for great TV if they expanded it.

    I'd kick the living daylights out of the producers of Tipping Point - Ghandi

  • GiarcYekrub 1 May 2013 13:52:33 3,667 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Scurrminator wrote:
    @GiarcYekrub

    1) it will only do so if the films are a success
    2) it would be set in the same universe as the new films to capitalise on point 1

    So either way you'd still be fucking moaning.
    Then Star Trek is dead :( and all that is left is this rotting zombie corpse that the studio likes hump for cash
  • LeoliansBro 1 May 2013 13:54:02 43,318 posts
    Seen 43 seconds ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    That was the case as far back as Voyager.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • mcmonkeyplc 1 May 2013 14:11:39 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Diana Vickers is still alive though. So you still have that.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • LeoliansBro 1 May 2013 14:13:35 43,318 posts
    Seen 43 seconds ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    Diana Vickers is still alive though. So you still have that.
    Nope he's killed her and all.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • mcmonkeyplc 1 May 2013 14:17:26 39,388 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    There is only 1 thing left for it then.

    TOTAL GLOBAL DOMINATION!:chatty:

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Deleted user 1 May 2013 14:24:52
    Lets have a debate about the prime directive. Make it so number one.

    Zzzzz.

    There's a reason TV doesn't give a shit anymore.
  • nickthegun 1 May 2013 14:27:29 58,935 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    DFawkes wrote:
    You could still do a Prime Universe TV show
    You could but no one would watch it.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • GiarcYekrub 1 May 2013 14:41:05 3,667 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    DFawkes wrote:
    You could still do a Prime Universe TV show
    You could but no one would watch it.
    I would, alot of people would, just because alot of people watch something doesn't mean its good, look at the endless stream of reality shows that get stupid ratings. A good solid Star Trek show would I think work well on a service like Netflix. TV gives Star Trek the space to explore issues in more depth than a 2 hour film can.
  • Page

    of 179 First / Last

Log in or register to reply