BTW as cool as it is, the shirts with the little badge-deltas in them ... it's not even a new idea. Power looms have been doing that stuff for 500 years
The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Ten years on it has that zeerust sheen on it. Now that we have passed the age of peak iPhone, the neo-retro look itself has become retro.
BTW as cool as it is, the shirts with the little badge-deltas in them ... it's not even a new idea. Power looms have been doing that stuff for 500 years
BTW as cool as it is, the shirts with the little badge-deltas in them ... it's not even a new idea. Power looms have been doing that stuff for 500 years
UGxlYXNlIHByb3ZpZGUgeW91ciBjaGFsbGVuZ2UgcmVzcG9uc2UgZm9yIFJFRCA5NC4K
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
I agree with the OP about the uniforms (though Admiral X makes a good point about the female ones), but not about the Enterprise. The Enterprise is an ugly, wonky-looking thing that looks like it came from a big-budget parody starring Will Farrel as Kirk.
Which is odd to me, as I really like most of the other Starfleet ship designs in the films. The Kelvin was awesome, and IMO very believable as a pre-TOS ship made to look good in modern film. Likewise the background Starfleet ships, the shuttles, and the space stations are all great alt-TOS designs that click perfectly with the TOS aesthetic while also looking good for a modern movie.
...But the Enterprise,and later the Vengeance, look like they're designed by a different artist for a different movie, in a bad way.
I'm half-and-half on the sets. I like the bright white bridge and the tubular cross-section hallways. Though I still don't get why JJ thought the viewscreen needed to be or even made any sense as a window (chalk it up to his consistent inability to comprehend basic scale, I guess), and why anyone involved thought those checkout bar-code scanners would look like anything other than is a mystery for the ages. The engineering "set" is some real Space Mutiny-style bullshit that takes me right out of the films every time it's shown. I like the shuttlebay, even though it's obviously way too big for the ship's outside.
I like pretty much all of the actors. They're all over the place in terms of fidelity to the originals, but most of them do a good enough job making the characters their own, and the ones that don't are at least likable/charismatic.
I'll probably ruffle some feathers by saying this, but :Chris Pine is OK, and Karl Urban is actually kind of bad. WAIT, wait: hear me out before slamming the "quote" button...
Pine is IMO an unremarkable actor, but there is enough Kirk in his features to make me buy him in the role (albeit as a much less mature, more D-bag version of Kirk). He's undoubtedly not the best Kirk they could have found, but he's serviceable. The real problems with JJ-Kirk are in the script.
Urban is technically kind of a bad actor, but he's an extremely likable one, and I think that get's people mixed up. His performances are always just a wee bit "community theater" (just a bit, but more so than you'd expect at his level), but have an endearing unselfconscious earnestness that sort of shortcuts past the part of one's brain that might otherwise notice the faults. His McCoy is basically a comedy impression you might do at parties, but unlike when you do it, when he does it it's cool. His Dredd is as fake as Bale's bat-voice, only we like him, so it's fun when he does it instead of lame/goofy.
Anyway, back to the visuals. I like both the Romulans and the Klingons.
The Romulan makeup is IMO a much better and subtler evolution of the TNG makeup. The shaved heads & tats don't bug me in the slightest because honestly it's REALLY nice to see at least SOME cultural depth and variety for once. I feel like the tight costume budgets of TNG and DS9 have maybe trained some people to treat Trek aliens as such ridiculously narrow mono-cultures that ANYTHING outside of those exact costumes is somehow unrealistic.
Similarly, I've no idea why people have such a hate-on for the Klingon designs in these films. The makup is only a slight polishing up of the familiar design, with the only remarkable addition being the piercings some have on their ridges, and TBH, those seem like a cool and very Klingon detail to me (look at the Klingon costuming in the 80s movies, and tell me I'm wrong). The costumes are different, but I still very much buy them as things Klingons would wear, so again this feels like unimaginative fans having an "all Klingons MUST dress identically B/C the TV shows could only afford to keep reusing the same 5 costumes" fit. The architecture doesn't look like the familiar pagodas, but it's clearly a heavy industrial area (and we know how heavy Klingon industry gets. Remember Praxis?) wheras the pagoda architecture from the shows was in civic areas, so that actually makes sense. Unless, like the costumes, you're expecting all Klingon architecture to look the same, regardless of purpose, location, or anything else.
The big problem with the Kelvinverse films is the scripts. Even the designs I don't like I could have been OK with if the writing had been better. The first two films are textbook examples of the "nothing has to make sense as long as we keep jangling our shiny keys in the audiences faces" school of screenwriting that rose to power in the late aughts. The first is at least fun on a first watch, but does not weather re-watching once you're familiar enough with the beats to not be distracted anymore. The second is garbage even on first watch. The third is the best both as a film (how sad is it that "the plot basically makes sense" is now high praise instead of the lowest bar?) and as a Trek film, but is still VERY light fare.
All 3 are shot and edited with a really bad case of ADHD. The first two have jank AF pacing structure. The third is the fastest paced, and suffers from a lack of downtime beats, but there is coherent structure.
Y'know how the action scenes in the Hobbit movies sort of feel like the story just stops so the movie can extrude an unbroken line of mechanically-separated action paste for what feels like 10 minutes at a time? ST:B suffers from a slightly better version of that feeling: the action paste is more coarsely ground, and is more overlayed with the story, but the lines are three times as long, and extruded at a faster rate. It's one of those action movies that wants to be so awesome so hard that it overshoots into pummeling and exhausting... but it's one of the less bad examples of that sort of thing.
Which is odd to me, as I really like most of the other Starfleet ship designs in the films. The Kelvin was awesome, and IMO very believable as a pre-TOS ship made to look good in modern film. Likewise the background Starfleet ships, the shuttles, and the space stations are all great alt-TOS designs that click perfectly with the TOS aesthetic while also looking good for a modern movie.
...But the Enterprise,and later the Vengeance, look like they're designed by a different artist for a different movie, in a bad way.
I'm half-and-half on the sets. I like the bright white bridge and the tubular cross-section hallways. Though I still don't get why JJ thought the viewscreen needed to be or even made any sense as a window (chalk it up to his consistent inability to comprehend basic scale, I guess), and why anyone involved thought those checkout bar-code scanners would look like anything other than is a mystery for the ages. The engineering "set" is some real Space Mutiny-style bullshit that takes me right out of the films every time it's shown. I like the shuttlebay, even though it's obviously way too big for the ship's outside.
I like pretty much all of the actors. They're all over the place in terms of fidelity to the originals, but most of them do a good enough job making the characters their own, and the ones that don't are at least likable/charismatic.
I'll probably ruffle some feathers by saying this, but :Chris Pine is OK, and Karl Urban is actually kind of bad. WAIT, wait: hear me out before slamming the "quote" button...
Pine is IMO an unremarkable actor, but there is enough Kirk in his features to make me buy him in the role (albeit as a much less mature, more D-bag version of Kirk). He's undoubtedly not the best Kirk they could have found, but he's serviceable. The real problems with JJ-Kirk are in the script.
Urban is technically kind of a bad actor, but he's an extremely likable one, and I think that get's people mixed up. His performances are always just a wee bit "community theater" (just a bit, but more so than you'd expect at his level), but have an endearing unselfconscious earnestness that sort of shortcuts past the part of one's brain that might otherwise notice the faults. His McCoy is basically a comedy impression you might do at parties, but unlike when you do it, when he does it it's cool. His Dredd is as fake as Bale's bat-voice, only we like him, so it's fun when he does it instead of lame/goofy.
Anyway, back to the visuals. I like both the Romulans and the Klingons.
The Romulan makeup is IMO a much better and subtler evolution of the TNG makeup. The shaved heads & tats don't bug me in the slightest because honestly it's REALLY nice to see at least SOME cultural depth and variety for once. I feel like the tight costume budgets of TNG and DS9 have maybe trained some people to treat Trek aliens as such ridiculously narrow mono-cultures that ANYTHING outside of those exact costumes is somehow unrealistic.
Similarly, I've no idea why people have such a hate-on for the Klingon designs in these films. The makup is only a slight polishing up of the familiar design, with the only remarkable addition being the piercings some have on their ridges, and TBH, those seem like a cool and very Klingon detail to me (look at the Klingon costuming in the 80s movies, and tell me I'm wrong). The costumes are different, but I still very much buy them as things Klingons would wear, so again this feels like unimaginative fans having an "all Klingons MUST dress identically B/C the TV shows could only afford to keep reusing the same 5 costumes" fit. The architecture doesn't look like the familiar pagodas, but it's clearly a heavy industrial area (and we know how heavy Klingon industry gets. Remember Praxis?) wheras the pagoda architecture from the shows was in civic areas, so that actually makes sense. Unless, like the costumes, you're expecting all Klingon architecture to look the same, regardless of purpose, location, or anything else.
The big problem with the Kelvinverse films is the scripts. Even the designs I don't like I could have been OK with if the writing had been better. The first two films are textbook examples of the "nothing has to make sense as long as we keep jangling our shiny keys in the audiences faces" school of screenwriting that rose to power in the late aughts. The first is at least fun on a first watch, but does not weather re-watching once you're familiar enough with the beats to not be distracted anymore. The second is garbage even on first watch. The third is the best both as a film (how sad is it that "the plot basically makes sense" is now high praise instead of the lowest bar?) and as a Trek film, but is still VERY light fare.
All 3 are shot and edited with a really bad case of ADHD. The first two have jank AF pacing structure. The third is the fastest paced, and suffers from a lack of downtime beats, but there is coherent structure.
Y'know how the action scenes in the Hobbit movies sort of feel like the story just stops so the movie can extrude an unbroken line of mechanically-separated action paste for what feels like 10 minutes at a time? ST:B suffers from a slightly better version of that feeling: the action paste is more coarsely ground, and is more overlayed with the story, but the lines are three times as long, and extruded at a faster rate. It's one of those action movies that wants to be so awesome so hard that it overshoots into pummeling and exhausting... but it's one of the less bad examples of that sort of thing.
-
Yukaphile
- Overlord
- Posts: 8778
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
- Location: Rabid Posting World
- Contact:
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
I agree with you about the Enterprise design. They really pushed in that refit design when it made no sense. And it's so simple to solve with just a few seconds of dialogue.
On Romulans and Klingons: I'd have preferred if Nero had a bumpy head. His head was too smooth to be considered a "Romulan," but then, we've seen Romulans in the TOS era (the legitimate TOS era, not the reboot era) with smooth foreheads, so... eh? I really wish they'd explain that, because at least the Klingons have gotten some explanation, and speaking of them, it's just... bad for one reason. How would you feel if they took the Jem'Hadar, took those spikes around their head and curved them up and elongated them, swept their heads back, and changed the texture of their skin? Star Trek is a very racial show in some respects, and I don't like altering an alien race's look without explanation. There's unfortunate implications, and it's breaking continuity. Yes, it happened in TMP, but that was before I was even born, and they did sort of... kind of? Address it with stuff like Enterprise and, I hear, STD as well. I mean, STD stuck with the original reboot look at first, which there's no excuse for and is why I feel it belongs in the Kelvin Timeline, but hey, they did address it. People want consistency. Hardcore nerds want consistency, especially in things like speculative fiction, and I can guarantee you those hardcore nerds have also read things like The Culture books and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series and Stephen Baxter's Xeelee Sequence and many more. I'm a hardcore nerd. I intend to check them out.
Well, are you shocked? Look who was writing for them, Kurtzman and Orci. We've had debates on this very subject. Kurtzman thinks big corporations still exist in TOS, that they're just "nationalized" given the "socialist" nature of the Federation given so that, I hear, they could slap in a product placement. Because we gotta milk that cash cow, huh? I see even TOS being post-scarcity, as I've said elsewhere, because even in the TNG era, we see them hauling cargo and stuff that can't be replicated, so perhaps the synthesizers would have limits. And there's no reason to assume those synthesizers would be limited to just food. Furthermore, we see just 20 years after TOS in one of the films Kirk spout the same stuff Picard would in Season 1, only with less smug, namely that "We don't use money in the 24th century." Make that 23rd century in this case. So yes, TOS is post-scarcity and Kurtzman? I don't think he's smart enough to understand that. Nuff said.
On Romulans and Klingons: I'd have preferred if Nero had a bumpy head. His head was too smooth to be considered a "Romulan," but then, we've seen Romulans in the TOS era (the legitimate TOS era, not the reboot era) with smooth foreheads, so... eh? I really wish they'd explain that, because at least the Klingons have gotten some explanation, and speaking of them, it's just... bad for one reason. How would you feel if they took the Jem'Hadar, took those spikes around their head and curved them up and elongated them, swept their heads back, and changed the texture of their skin? Star Trek is a very racial show in some respects, and I don't like altering an alien race's look without explanation. There's unfortunate implications, and it's breaking continuity. Yes, it happened in TMP, but that was before I was even born, and they did sort of... kind of? Address it with stuff like Enterprise and, I hear, STD as well. I mean, STD stuck with the original reboot look at first, which there's no excuse for and is why I feel it belongs in the Kelvin Timeline, but hey, they did address it. People want consistency. Hardcore nerds want consistency, especially in things like speculative fiction, and I can guarantee you those hardcore nerds have also read things like The Culture books and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series and Stephen Baxter's Xeelee Sequence and many more. I'm a hardcore nerd. I intend to check them out.
Well, are you shocked? Look who was writing for them, Kurtzman and Orci. We've had debates on this very subject. Kurtzman thinks big corporations still exist in TOS, that they're just "nationalized" given the "socialist" nature of the Federation given so that, I hear, they could slap in a product placement. Because we gotta milk that cash cow, huh? I see even TOS being post-scarcity, as I've said elsewhere, because even in the TNG era, we see them hauling cargo and stuff that can't be replicated, so perhaps the synthesizers would have limits. And there's no reason to assume those synthesizers would be limited to just food. Furthermore, we see just 20 years after TOS in one of the films Kirk spout the same stuff Picard would in Season 1, only with less smug, namely that "We don't use money in the 24th century." Make that 23rd century in this case. So yes, TOS is post-scarcity and Kurtzman? I don't think he's smart enough to understand that. Nuff said.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Well, it doesn't make no sense, it merely isn't explicitly explained. On the one hand, not every detail needs to be spelled out, especially not story-irrelevant background bits, so I'm kinda fine with it. But on the other hand, I definitely get the sense the producers were not thinking or caring about what did or didn't make sense regardless of whether we might happen to be able to think of an explanation, so they don't get credit for it either.
But my issue with the Enterprise is not its consistency or lack thereof. I just think it's all wonky and ungainly in shape and line. It's unpleasantly proportionally unbalanced all over and is full of awkwardly interrupted lines. It's the spaceship design equivalent of McMansion architecture, or possibly some sort of deformed albino cave frog. It offends mine eyes, and I want it plucked out.
There are some technical consistency details that bug me. The stupid bay-window viewscreen, the stupid giant physical propeller blades in the Bussard caps, and the stupid rocket exhausts at the backs of the nacelles. All details that point to JJ not understanding, caring, or respecting how that stuff has been established to work. That's the kind of cartoon parody design details that make me half expect to see Will Farrel sitting in the captain's chair.
Note that some of those are features shared by the other ships I do like, so they're really minor complaints next to the the thing just looking fucking ugly. Good design can redeem or excuse them.
Well, I never cared for the ridges in the first place, as it conflicted with the whole "lost Vulcan colony that can still be physically confused with regular Vulcans" thing that was a plot point in TOS. If you really want that sweet, buttery consistency, then either the Vulcans should've gotten ridges too, or the Romulans shouldn't have gotten them at all.Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:19 pm I'd have preferred if Nero had a bumpy head. His head was too smooth to be considered a "Romulan," but then, we've seen Romulans in the TOS era (the legitimate TOS era, not the reboot era) with smooth foreheads, so... eh? I really wish they'd explain that...
For you that would seem to describe a no-win scenario (since you like the ridges), but for me, removing the ridges was restoring consistency.
I think you're getting the Kelvinverse Klingons mixed up with the Discovery Klingons. Apart from the top ridges extending further back on the scalp they don't look at all the same.
Hell, we already had examples of widely varying ridges going back to the 80s movies. Those movies basically established that forehead ridges were like fingerprints, and the only reason TNG was more limited was because they couldn't afford to make unique appliances for every bit part and extra like they could for the movies. The guys we see in ST:ID could be explained simply as individuals of the same design, only on the opposite end of the forehead bell curve from General Chang, with guys like Worf, Martok, Kruge, et-al being in the middle.
Thinkfast: what was your first reaction to Tuvok, the first black Vulcan? It's okay: you don't actually have to tie yourself in a knot trying to reconcile that. Just relax, and realize that when it comes to fictitious aliens diversity can be a matter of makeup as well as casting. There's no reason why Klingons can't have ethnicities, or why that can't manifest in the relative prominence of their bumpy bits.
If humans get to come in different shapes, colors, and cultures, then it's only realistic (and fair) for this to be true of aliens as well. And well, they're alien, so their ethnicities don't have to limited to the kinds of differences you might see between humans either.
Not sure what you mean about the implications (Tuvokeyebrow.gif). Deffos not breaking continuity though. It's expanding it.
Saying it's breaking continuity is like a Vulcan who's only encountered humans wearing Starfleet a uniforms landing on earth and being confused by people wearing saris and jorts and bowler hats and bikinis (I mean, not all at the same time, but you get the idea).
Oh, well that's grand. Stuff that happen before you were born doesn't count, since It only happened to other people.Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:19 pmYes, it happened in TMP, but that was before I was even born, and they did sort of... kind of? Address it with stuff like Enterprise and, I hear, STD as well. I mean, STD stuck with the original reboot look at first, which there's no excuse for and is why I feel it belongs in the Kelvin Timeline, but hey, they did address it.
Also again with the mixing up of Kelvin and Disco Klinks.
Most people on this forum probably identify as "hardcore nerds", meself included. Website like this kinda actively selects for that crowd. Probably a bit presumptuous to mansplain to them what they like. Just FYI.Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:19 pmPeople want consistency. Hardcore nerds want consistency, especially in things like speculative fiction, and I can guarantee you those hardcore nerds have also read things like The Culture books and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series and Stephen Baxter's Xeelee Sequence and many more. I'm a hardcore nerd. I intend to check them out.
I was a bit at the time the first one came out, 'cause IIRC back then those doofs were still mostly only known for "Lost" (which I hadn't watched). The Trek films are part of what earned them their rep for bloated nonsensical writing in the first place, so sarcastically asking if people were surprised seems a bit of a "Texas sharpshooter" thing.
-
Yukaphile
- Overlord
- Posts: 8778
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
- Location: Rabid Posting World
- Contact:
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Initially, I was a bit surprised about Tuvok being black, I won't lie, but I was equally weirded out by a seemingly white Klingon (Torres), so call that a wash. These days, I'm happy for the extra diversity. Of course, that was a loooooooooong time ago. Decade ago or so.
Mansplain? How am I mansplaining instead of being condescending? Are you a girl? Though your words just reinforce what clearspira and me believe. Hardcore nerds aren't the majority, and most people probably have their expectations far lower than those hardcore nerds I identify with when it comes to sci-fi.
Mansplain? How am I mansplaining instead of being condescending? Are you a girl? Though your words just reinforce what clearspira and me believe. Hardcore nerds aren't the majority, and most people probably have their expectations far lower than those hardcore nerds I identify with when it comes to sci-fi.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Really? Seems weird given nearly all the Klingons in the original crew movies and half the Klingons in TNG/DS9 were white, but maybe those were before your time and therefore don't really count?Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:13 pmInitially, I was a bit surprised about Tuvok being black, I won't lie, but I was equally weirded out by a seemingly white Klingon (Torres), so call that a wash. These days, I'm happy for the extra diversity. Of course, that was a loooooooooong time ago. Decade ago or so.
Also Torres was a latina Klingon but ANYWAAAAYYY...
Does the distinction actually matter if you don't know?
If you didn't have a preconceived notion, would the question matter? And by corollary, if you didn't actually already know, wouldn't the very act of asking be predicated on a preconceived assumption?
Riiiiight. So you're the gatekeeper of whether or not I or anyone else is a hardcore nerd? Based on your own personal arbitrary priority set? Good to know!
No, really: criticizing other people for not being in line with your personal headcanon idea of continuity WHILE admitting said headcanon doesn't admit things that happened before your time (i.e. only your experience is "real")... you don't see the ironic egocentrism in that?
-
Yukaphile
- Overlord
- Posts: 8778
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
- Location: Rabid Posting World
- Contact:
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Okay, you wanna do this? Very well.Really? Seems weird given nearly all the Klingons in the original crew movies and half the Klingons in TNG/DS9 were white, but maybe those were before your time and therefore don't really count?
Also Torres was a latina Klingon but ANYWAAAAYYY...
I meant in terms of on screen looks, skin tone after the makeup is done, because no matter how... white an actor is, once the TNG/DS9 Klingon makeup is on, you look like an alien that's the way lots of black people look in terms of skin tone. I mean, that's common sense. SF Debris has even joked about it. And I don't say that to offend, because I find women with a brown skin tone to be exceptionally gorgeous in a lot of cases. Though take that however you wish.
That's my bad. I didn't know Dawson was a Latina. I apologize for that.
Not really, but I fail to see the difference. I think mansplaining is a real thing, but I didn't assume your gender was female, thus it would come off as normal condescension if I was being a wee bit arrogant, and not an attack on your gender.Does the distinction actually matter if you don't know?
If you didn't have a preconceived notion, would the question matter? And by corollary, if you didn't actually already know, wouldn't the very act of asking be predicated on a preconceived assumption?
I'll say again, look at the kind of movies and TV shows and anime and even books that lots of people buy that sell huge amounts of money despite being trashy? I think most people are far stupider than most people think and that's something the great minds of a century ago were saying. And we're seeing that played out today.Riiiiight. So you're the gatekeeper of whether or not I or anyone else is a hardcore nerd? Based on your own personal arbitrary priority set? Good to know!
No, really: criticizing other people for not being in line with your personal headcanon idea of continuity WHILE admitting said headcanon doesn't admit things that happened before your time (i.e. only your experience is "real")... you don't see the ironic egocentrism in that?
Could just be my interpretation is different. That's probably why so many people like STD, in that they're more willing to accept continuity errors than I am, because their interpretation is in a different place than mine is. Though "headcanon" can be a harsh word in some specific cases: Like making a Mirror Universe character sensitive to light is retcon, plain and simple, same as it is with the twin junk, and other stuff. People bend over backwards to defend this, but it's the truth. Stuff like the VISOR may be in a more gray area, which I think does boil down more towards personal view. And yes, there is a strain of egocentrism there, probably more than you might be willing to admit. But I'm an arrogant hypocrite and will tell you. That flavor of vice and flaw is in all red-blooded human beings, so what other human being will you get that will flat-up admit that to your face?
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
I was not bothered at all by Tuvok being black, because it made sense to me that they would have similar diversity in skin color to our own, for the same reasons we have it. He had the eyebrows and the ears, was pretty big on the whole logic thing, so he was Vulcan. In contrast, I was really bothered by the fact T'Pol didn't have the traditional Vulcan eyebrows and that the ENT Vulcans were such huge assholes.
"Black care rarely sits behind a rider whose pace is fast enough."
-TR
-TR
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
It was definitely the best, and finally really started to show the potential of the reboots to do something better. But Into Darkness killed it so hard that Beyond wasn't able to save it. I'd really like to see a fourth film building on Beyond (and improving the parts it still had that needed work), but this seems unlikely to occur.MixedDrops wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 2:57 am IMO Beyond was easily the best Kelvin film. It was written by Simon Pegg, who has a pretty good track record as a writer.
It was nothing special, it had its problems and it still had the tired "grr i want revenge" villain, but there was just something about it that felt more TOS-ish than the other 2. I'm actually pretty sad the Kelvin films are pretty much dead now after Beyond showed some marked improvement for me.
-
BridgeConsoleMasher
- Overlord
- Posts: 11633
- Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am
Re: The Aesthetics of Abramstrek
Christopher Plummer probably looks like the most non-Klingon Klingon, though the costuming there gives the most consistency between TOS and the changes thereafter (until Into Darkness / Discovery).
I thought the movie was fine, but I didn't think it did much for lore or world building.
When I saw the trailer for Beyond I thought it looked like a sensible call back to TOS away missions.MixedDrops wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 2:57 am IMO Beyond was easily the best Kelvin film. It was written by Simon Pegg, who has a pretty good track record as a writer.
It was nothing special, it had its problems and it still had the tired "grr i want revenge" villain, but there was just something about it that felt more TOS-ish than the other 2. I'm actually pretty sad the Kelvin films are pretty much dead now after Beyond showed some marked improvement for me.
I thought the movie was fine, but I didn't think it did much for lore or world building.
Last edited by BridgeConsoleMasher on Wed Apr 10, 2019 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
..What mirror universe?
