TV/Movies Megathread

[Berkut]

Took the boy to the new Trek film tonight. Thought it was excellent.

[Syt]

At the start of the movie I had high hopes that it might be more than a decent popcorn action flick. They make Kirk face the consequences of his actions, and I thought, "Oh, that's an interesting set-up for personal drama." Then they switched gears and set up conflict between Kirk, his orders and his crew, and I thought, "Oh, that'll be interesting to see how it'll play out." Of course it was resolved almost immediately, so I sat back and decided to enjoy the movie on its merits as an action flick where it does very well (even though the finale is a bit underwhelming, considering the amounts of destruction).

On further reflection, Scottie remains my favorite character in the movie, because Simon Pegg's comedic talent is awesome. I asked my Scottish colleague how believable his accent was (Pegg is English), and he said it was actually pretty decent and that he sounded like someone from Eastern Scotland.

[Ideologue]

At the start of the movie I had high hopes that it might be more than a decent popcorn action flick. They make Kirk face the consequences of his actions, and I thought, "Oh, that's an interesting set-up for personal drama." Then they switched gears and set up conflict between Kirk, his orders and his crew, and I thought, "Oh, that'll be interesting to see how it'll play out." Of course it was resolved almost immediately, so I sat back and decided to enjoy the movie on its merits as an action flick where it does very well (even though the finale is a bit underwhelming, considering the amounts of destruction).

On further reflection, Scottie remains my favorite character in the movie, because Simon Pegg's comedic talent is awesome. I asked my Scottish colleague how believable his accent was (Pegg is English), and he said it was actually pretty decent and that he sounded like someone from Eastern Scotland.

I went back and read what you'd written under the spoiler tags.  It's pretty funny that we had almost entirely the same complaints.   But I think you liked it better than me, as I didn't even think it was a particularly decent popcorn action flick.

It was like everything that had any import was resolved within minutes, right?  This isn't really a spoiler but anyway [spoiler]a reviewer I heard today talking about it compared it to The Empire Strikes Back, if Han had been rescued and unfrozen ten minutes later.[/spoiler]

As for the other side of that scene, and this is a spoiler--[spoiler]I look forward to seeing Abrams' Star Wars, where it turns out Luke was Darth's father. [/spoiler]

[Ideologue]

And Beeb!  I didn't put any true spoilers in the open, but some arguable ones I covered or deleted.

Well, there's a spoiler for Star Trek 2009.

[Syt]

But I think you liked it better than me, as I didn't even think it was a particularly decent popcorn action flick.

I can be pretty forgiving when it comes to action schlock.

It was like everything that had any import was resolved within minutes, right?  This isn't really a spoiler but anyway [spoiler]a reviewer I heard today talking about it compared it to The Empire Strikes Back, if Han had been rescued and unfrozen ten minutes later.[/spoiler]

As for the other side of that scene, and this is a spoiler--[spoiler]I look forward to seeing Abrams' Star Wars, where it turns out Luke was Darth's father. [/spoiler]

I don't mind them trying to tackle that scene and examine how it plays out in an altered timeline. I agree with you that they totally missed what made the original scene work so well. It doesn't help that you know going in that there'll be no long term consequences.

[Ideologue]

But I think you liked it better than me, as I didn't even think it was a particularly decent popcorn action flick.

I can be pretty forgiving when it comes to action schlock.

Hell, I own Super Infra Man.

And now I'm wondering if Megaforce is on Blu Ray.

[Ideologue]

Oh, and Syt, what gets me is that it's not just that [spoiler]they misunderstood Star Trek II, but they misunderstood Star Trek III.  Now, that is a movie that not everyone, even Trek fans, even like, but it is my favorite of the whole series.  It's about what it costs Kirk to get his friend back.  It's a staggering journey and for a moment there, when Spock's looking at him like he has no idea who he is, you don't even know if he's really succeeded.  And that's what makes "Ship--out of danger?" such an meaningful line.  It's not so much in II, but it's everything in III.  It's brilliant.

Whereas here Spock resolves the loss of his friend with a fistfight in a few minutes.  No journey.  And as we've concluded, no suspense on our part as to whether he'll succeed.

There's also a lot of structural problems with how it all plays out so that the action's all over the place when it should be focusing on Kirk's dead body.  Khan's dead as an MRF in TWoK, so they can focus on the drama of that scene.

All that said, if they'd truly inverted the ending of TWoK, and Kirk died, and stayed dead because he's just a lame human, it maybe could've gone to like an A, you know?  You can even have the magic blood be a false hope.  That could've been something special.[/spoiler]

P.S. Star Trek V ain't all that bad, shoddy last-minute SFX notwithstanding.  They shoot God in the face.  What other movie does that happen in?

[Syt]

Star Trek V is a "Shatner is greater than God" vehicle where he gets to save the universe from evil while all the crew (who have mostly been turned into caricatures of themselves) people he's worked with for DECADES betray him. Spock and McCoy stay by his side only because Nimoy and Kelley famously threatened to walk out if that wasn't changed.

Fortunately, the original crew was redeemed in Star Trek VI. (Which was the first Star Trek movie I saw in theaters.)

[katmai]

Jesus fucking christ Ide... so full of fail.

[CountDeMoney]

the Dark Knight trilogy, which despite the softened heart I've developed for it, is problematic at best and produced only one movie worth praising without heaps of qualification.

What was problematic about it?  Please explain.

[frunk]

I liked Into Darkness a lot more than the first reboot movie.  Yes, there are gigantic plot holes, but that's nothing new for any Star Trek movie.  The plot is better written in this one than the first reboot, and they carried off the feel of the original Trek better.  I thought the villain and Kirk were the weak points as far as characters.  I like Cumberbatch as an actor but he wasn't used at all well.  This Kirk is way more of a jerk than the original, without any of the smarmy charm to offset it.  That's why I was quite happy when [spoiler]Kirk bravely saved the ship and died, but Spock revived him.  In this universe not only is Spock a better character but he can save jerky Kirk without taking a whole additional movie to do it.[/spoiler]

[Berkut]

Man, as a pretty much life long casual Trekkie, you guys think about this shit way too fucking much. The movie was very well done. It wasn't Star Trek II, but it was very good.

The characters simply are not developed enough to replicate the impact of what happened in ST2. I don't mind that they gave a nice nod to the structure of that movie though.

It gets 4/5 blown up Enterprises from me.

[Ideologue]

Star Trek V is a "Shatner is greater than God" vehicle where he gets to save the universe from evil while all the crew (who have mostly been turned into caricatures of themselves) people he's worked with for DECADES betray him. Spock and McCoy stay by his side only because Nimoy and Kelley famously threatened to walk out if that wasn't changed.

They got brainwashed by a man from a species with major telepathic powers, FFS.

[Ideologue]

the Dark Knight trilogy, which despite the softened heart I've developed for it, is problematic at best and produced only one movie worth praising without heaps of qualification.

What was problematic about it?  Please explain.

Batman Begins has a really goofy ending set-piece that undermines a lot of the pulpy but grounded material that came before.  A war on organized crime becomes a fight against a man with a train-mounted microwave gun and vapor-borne fear gas.  Why didn't they just use bombs, or chemical weapons that don't require a lot of hands-on assistance?  Because that would have probably worked?

Dark Knight's Joker wages a campaign against Gotham using what amounts to magic.  Dent's fall is not wholly believable (Dent walking around with half his face missing is also not wholly believable unless they deleted a scene where the Joker slipped him some PCP, which would explain an awful lot).

Dark Knight Rises uses class war as scenery, does almost nothing with it, but if it does have a political statement, it teaches us that rich people are the only ones who can save us from ourselves.  Also that's not how fusion works.  Also, and this is kind of a big thing and a problem it shared with fellow late-2012 big ticket, Skyfall, they make a major deal about Bruce Wayne being old and busted (as they do with James Bond) and then proceed to do nothing with that (again as they do with James Bond).  It's worse in DKR, because there is basically no long-term consequence to Batman having his back broken.  IT'S OK I DID A LOT OF PUSHUPS IN A HOLE.  Bane is brought down by Batman really wanting to punch him in the face repeatedly, which is all you really need to achieve victory over a man younger, faster, and stronger than you with an intact spine.

Still enjoyable movies though.  Like I said, I've softened on them.  But they are not the bestest of all blockbusters, or even the pinnacle of superhero movies,* which is what box office and critical response suggests.

Personal taste may play a role, too, as Batman is amongst my least favorite of the major superheroes.  He has a bad attitude.

*Though Dark Knight is indeed up there.  Plot goofiness aside, it's the one that is great, while the others are merely good.

[Syt]

Btw, I really liked Sulu's moment in the chair (not much spoiler in here):

"Attention: John Harrison. This is Captain Hikaru Sulu of he USS Enterprise. A shuttle of highly trained officers is on its way to your location. If you do not surrender to them immediately, I will unleash the entire payload of advanced long-range torpedoes currently locked on to your location. You have two minutes to confirm your compliance. Refusal to do so will result in your obliteration. And If you test me, you will fail."