|
|
Post by rick on Jan 31, 2013 12:57:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jan 31, 2013 15:32:25 GMT -5
I'm afraid the Star Wars series has worn out its welcome. At least it has for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by rick on Mar 8, 2013 1:18:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Mar 9, 2013 4:45:20 GMT -5
I'm afraid the Star Wars series has worn out its welcome. At least it has for me. J.J. Abrams has worn out his welcome for me, I didn't like his "Star Trek" reboot or any of the actors he hired to play the Enterprise gang. The "ST: Academy" story line had been around for over a decade before Abrams got around to making it. Paramount was keen on doing it, as was Abrams but no one else in the ST universe was. Paramount and Abrams simply bided their time to wait everyone out and then produce the worst ST film ever. Abrams has produced or is producing a sequel to his ST, but I truly wish Paramount would just deep six the whole idea as he has his very unlikable cast back to reprise their roles. And now Abrams will reboot "Star Wars" to his vision. The question is, can he make it suck any worse than he made "Star Trek" suck? I'd really like to see both tank, so there wouldn't be any further possibility of sequels, but both film franchises have a built in audience, so there's likely to be more sequels to come for both. I've always been a Trek fan and after the later ST:Next Gen movies almost did me in as a fan, I gave the Abrams-produced film a chance, hoping he'd raise the bar. Instead, he bombed big time. For the role of Captain Kirk, he hired an actor who looked more like the actor who played Eddie Haskell. And all the other actors were just as dismal or worse. I think if Abrams wants to take on a challenge, he should leave science fiction alone and take on something that would truly be worth making and worth his time: "My Mother the Car!" |
|
|
|
Post by erik on Mar 9, 2013 19:16:25 GMT -5
Beyond the obvious ($$$), I have no idea why George Lucas even had to resurrect the Star Wars series with a trilogy of films that were markedly inferior to the trilogy he had originally given us between 1977 and 1983. I mean, let's face it...Jar-Jar Binks?! To me, the only thing worthwhile about that second trilogy was that at least Lucas had the good sense to maintain John Williams to do the scores.
As for Star Trek--I avoided the reboot that Abrams did like the plague. Absent Shatner, Nimoy, and company (though, granted, DeForest Kelley and James Doohan are no longer with us), it really isn't Star Trek per se. You just have a lot of young actors pretending to be Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock, and that isn't interesting.
P.S.: I know some will do double-takes when I say this, but I really do think that the original 1979 big-screen translation, though very lengthy and slow, and having as much in common with 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY as it did with the original TV series, was the one that remained the most faithful to the concept Gene Roddenberry always had for the series.
|
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Mar 10, 2013 14:30:45 GMT -5
Beyond the obvious ($$$), I have no idea why George Lucas even had to resurrect the Star Wars series with a trilogy of films that were markedly inferior to the trilogy he had originally given us between 1977 and 1983. I mean, let's face it...Jar-Jar Binks?! To me, the only thing worthwhile about that second trilogy was that at least Lucas had the good sense to maintain John Williams to do the scores.
I think the movie studio could've had something to do with the numerous sequels. They want the $$$, more likely than Lucas, and they know how to run something good and successful into the ground by keeping the sequels coming until the public tires of them. But, the thing here is, they should know when to end it and not keep dragging it out until the public really gets sick of them. It's like the Harry Potter books. J.K. Rowling's publisher would probably prefer that she keep writing Potter books to the end of her days, but I believe she has said she is done with the character for now and doesn't have anything planned. And at least she hasn't authorized the publisher to let other writers take a crack at the characters, which the publisher probably would do if they could get away with it.
As for Star Trek--I avoided the reboot that Abrams did like the plague. Absent Shatner, Nimoy, and company (though, granted, DeForest Kelley and James Doohan are no longer with us), it really isn't Star Trek per se. You just have a lot of young actors pretending to be Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock, and that isn't interesting.
Part of my problem with the ST reboot was and is my fondness for the character portrayals by the original actors from the series. William Shatner may have been the biggest ham in the business but at least he was believable as Captain Kirk. Chris Pike doesn't have the same believability. Neither does any of the other actors. They all pale in comparison to the original actors and that's something that shouldn't happen if it is to succeed. Reboots (or remakes) are inevitable in Hollywood and sadly, Hollywood gets it wrong more often than they get it right.
P.S.: I know some will do double-takes when I say this, but I really do think that the original 1979 big-screen translation, though very lengthy and slow, and having as much in common with 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY as it did with the original TV series, was the one that remained the most faithful to the concept Gene Roddenberry always had for the series.
I liked the first movie although I did think it was taken more seriously than the movies that followed, and maybe that was part of the problem. It was missing some of the humor from the original series, and other than Shatner, Nimoy and Kelley, the other original ST actors didn't have a lot to do. I couldn't understand why those had some resentment towards Shatner, as I always thought that was more the fault of the director and the people writing the scripts. If Shatner took some of their scenes or lines (as some alleged), it was still up to the director to go along with it. And it had to make sense for that to be done. One change in the original series that sort of became immortal was an episode in which McCoy tells Kirk, "He's dead, Jim!" That line was originally meant to be spoken by Leonard Nimoy but Nimoy felt it was a line more appropriate for the line to be coming from Dr. McCoy than from Spock. I'm not sure it really was more appropriate, or if Nimoy simply didn't want to say it or he just wanted to give Kelley the scene and dialogue. True, a doctor is usually the one who makes such a pronouncement, but it's not that hard for others to state something that's obvious.
|
|
