clearspira wrote: ↑Sat Apr 11, 2020 10:43 pm
Orel wrote: ↑Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:01 pm
"Destroy the Death Star once, it's thrilling. Destroy it twice, it's diminished. Destroy it a third time but now we've made it bigger, and now it's just something to check off the to-do list, isn't it?"
A subtle dig at Abrams' other work, I take it.
This is my favorite of the Kelvin-verse movies, and it's a pity that this wasn't the second movie instead of Into Darkness. The first one was a mindless action flick, but I can let it slide for much the same reason I can forgive that other Abrams movie for being a shot-for-shot remake--rebooting a franchise can be risky and it's understandable that the studio wants to play it safe. But once it makes money, that should be a sign to let the creative staff be more adventurous. They have a whole Alpha Quadrant of possibilities, and it's good to see the crew doing something new instead of hanging out in the walk-in trophy closet.
As to the motorcycle, I kind of wonder why it wasn't some kind of futuristic electric motorcycle. Surely a recharge from the ship's power supply is more reasonable than hauling gasoline around.
One of the other things I like about this movie is the larger alien presence on the ship. Into Darkness was almost entirely human (augmented or otherwise), and even [2009] wasn't all that galaxy-spanning. It's good to see them acknowledge the Federation's size and really play with the possibilities the budget allows.
I hadn't thought of the parallels Chuck notes between Edison and main-timeline Kirk, but they make a lot of sense. And I wonder whether the lines Elba asked to redact might have helped flesh him out more. I agree that the villain is the weakest point of this story, though IMO he's still stronger than Nero.
The main question that the deconstruction and reconstruction asks, according to Chuck, is whether there is still a point to Star Trek. IMO, the film answers with a definitive "yes." It shows that there's still potential in this property and these characters, still new stories to tell and new ideas to plumb, and that they don't have to revisit the same old things to be good. Which makes it all the more of a shame and a waste that the Kelvin-verse stories got kneecapped just when they were getting good.
Serious question: has Abrams ever had an original idea? Because I am only familiar with him from Trek and Wars, and from what I can see..,
09 - TOS repackaged.
Into Darkness - The Wrath of Kahn
The Force Awakens - A New Hope
The Rise of Skywalker - The Return of the Jedi
He seems to be great at copying other peoples' work - and doing so poorly yet making lots of money. Kind of like Michael Bay.
He took a lot more for TFA than you might think. Rey is Jaina Solo. Kylo Ren is Ben Skywalker grafted to Jacen Solo. Though others see Xanatos and Brakiss, or Revan. The First Order is the Imperial Remnant. For TROS, it wasn't just ROTJ. It was also Dark Empire and the Thrawn books - in fact, we got a Reddit post where one of the writers, I can't recall who, had one of the Legends books nearby - and it was one of the Thrawn books, so the Death Star Destroyers are the World Devastators meet the Katana Fleet. And while it's cool seeing them on the big screen, I just wish they didn't seem to have fully embraced the "let the past die and kill it if you have to!" management they got now.
Back to point, that is just a minor example to the tip of the iceberg. But it is really hard to say how much Mr. Abrams has taken from existing lore, or is told to by the studio overlords. With ST and SW, there is a lot of money on the line, since those are considered the two main-line franchises for SF and space fantasy. We also hear insider rumors that Disney meddled with the reshoots to TROS because they wanted to kill his chances for working at DC, but so far, that is unsubstantiated. Got all this from my favorite YouTubers rather than MSM.
I was never a fan of Mr. Abrams' ST work, but I enjoy his SW work far more. I think his style of writing/directing works more for that world than ST. Plus I find his comments to be a double standard. He said he couldn't bring Shatner back in 2009, but... you could literally create a parallel universe, bring in the older Kirk, and there you go. And yet he did bring back Palpatine for TROS, and it's not like he was the first to come up with the idea. But give Mr. Abrams credit. He also admitted he could see why some people would just flat-up dislike TROS, and Mr. Filoni kind of took ownership over the failures of TCW on the featureless. It's not all I'd hope for, but it's something. Especially since, you know, with how narcissistic these big Hollywood types are, that's kinda rare now.
