Author Topic: The new Star Trek movie  (Read 12408 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Loveshack

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • "I got me a Chrysler, it seats about 20..."
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2009, 11:45:31 PM »
I saw it.  If I wanted to watch Starship Troopers, I'd watch Starship Troopers.  I didn't want to watch that; I wanted to watch Star Trek, but they gave me Starship Troopers.

For starters, they tried way to hard to make society resemble 21st century earth.  Now I ask you, how many similarities are there between any facet of life in America today, and life in America in 1809?  So why does society in 23rd century act exactly like modern society?

It's already been established that there is no currency on earth in Kirk's time (Star Trek IV), so basically that whole bar scene is pretty moot.

And the product placement was too blatant.  I get why they do it, but when you make it OBVIOUS that's what you're doing, it fails miserably and just makes me roll my eyes.  "Ensign!  Those aren't Starfleet regulation Nikes; now go enjoy a SPACE Coca Cola!"

Okay, it's not THAT obvious, but if you ask me what I remember about the film, it's that Chevrolet makes some kick-ass cars, Nokia makes cellphones, Budweiser makes crappy beer, and at some point there's something about the Enterprise.  The ultimate eye-roll moment was when Uhura ordered something called Budweiser Classic.  Budweiser is the world's crummiest beer.  Somehow, I doubt that it will have a legacy lasting 200 years from now, nor will it's original recipe be considered "classic" any more than the Black Death is considered classic.

Still, Bug-Eyed Anime nurse at the beginning was kind of cute looking.
"Nice try Horrigan!  Now... TASTE THE FURY OF VIC'S PIPE RIFLE!"

Morb

  • Wasteland Denizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #16 on: May 24, 2009, 03:04:24 AM »
Hmm... Haven't seen it yet, but Star Trek posing as Starship Troopers...? Mmm. I'll buy that for a dollar... I actually brought a girlfriend at the time to see Starship Troopers. We didn't marry.

Sylvee Bee

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #17 on: May 24, 2009, 07:11:24 AM »
saw it, enjoyed it.

sometimes you gotta take these movies as what they are, and not look for the little annoying things. If I looked for the little annoying things in every movie, I'd never find one I liked.

....cept maybe the princess bride. Which is perfect in every little way. :D
"there are not many people who can live up to the standard set by goldfish."
~KGF

Xerxes

  • Wasteland Denizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
  • Wielder of the Xcutsel Widget
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #18 on: May 24, 2009, 09:53:23 PM »
Went to see it, and it was actually jolly good fun.
I am thinking of changing my title to "He who must only be mentioned in passing".

Loveshack

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • "I got me a Chrysler, it seats about 20..."
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #19 on: May 25, 2009, 02:01:41 PM »
sometimes you gotta take these movies as what they are, and not look for the little annoying things. If I looked for the little annoying things in every movie, I'd never find one I liked.

I agree with you there, (and about Princess Bride :D), but these were NOT "little things".

I can't overlook Kirk using his Chevy Stingray'sTM built-in Nokia HUDTM especially because the Nokia logo start-up screen was roughly 3/4 the size of the theater screen!  There aren't enough hot, green women in the Alpha Quadrant, Neutral Zone, and beyond the Great Barrier to make me feel okay about that!  (However, just one hot, green woman would be nice change of pace in Loveshack's Love LifeTM, so if you know one, send her my way.)  But I digress, I realize that Star Trek is a commercial entity in and of itself, but the society depicted within the franchise is shown have grown beyond these things, and furthermore those alien races on that show that haven't yet developed to that point, (the ferengis, various space pirates), are played for comic relief at best and at worst as contemptible villains.  So to me, it wrecks the vibe of the franchise to have blatant product placement. 

I know that's how Hollywood makes money, but it doesn't feel natural in a Star Trek movie!  If it makes sense for a character to grab a pair of shoes that just happen to be Nikes, or be drinking a soda that just happens to be a Coke, fine, but when the movie is really obvious about it, it's not effective marketing, it just inspires a collective  ::) from the audience.  (See the infamous "Converse, vintage 2004" scene in I, Robot.)  Not to mention, it takes the viewers completely out of the story like Chewbacca's Tarzan yell and a flying R2-D2 did for me with the Star Wars movies.  They are essentially ripping the viewer out of the world they paid good money to briefly inhabit, and plunking them back into a dark theater with the jerk who won't stop coughing, the idiot newlyweds who brought their shrieking mutant child to the theater with them, and the violent gangbanger who won't quit yelling advice to the characters onscreen.  Not only do the ad companies try to make you buy products you don't want or need to condescendingly transparent methods, but they also vicariously rob you of your movie going experience and therefore rob you of the eight or ten dollars you paid to get into the movie in the first place!

I can't speak for the rest of the movie-going public, but when I see something so blatantly obvious shoehorned into a film, I am personally insulted that the advertising industry thinks so little of me as a consumer that they honestly expect me to be swayed by such thoughtless, blatant, and poorly-contrived advertising.  It makes me want to go out of my way to not buy their products because I don't want to give money to people who have essentially called me a slack-jawed hick by way of the methods they use to try to entice me.  I really feel bad for anyone who watched that movie and sincerely thought to themselves, "I want that there tell-O-phone like that one that there Cap'n Kirk feller' used!  H'yuk!"

It was like the THX sound system promo kicked on in the middle of the film, but it wasn't THX; it was Nokia!
« Last Edit: May 25, 2009, 02:23:35 PM by Loveshack »
"Nice try Horrigan!  Now... TASTE THE FURY OF VIC'S PIPE RIFLE!"

Doombot

  • Unwashed Addict
  • ******
  • Posts: 2474
  • Unwashed Photoshop Goddess
    • View Profile
    • Owl's Pals
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #20 on: May 25, 2009, 08:40:11 PM »
The Nokia placement seemed REALLY out of place. I was fine with the other placements. I didn't even notice the beer.

Yes... I Robot was horrible with the product placements.

Cut and pasted.

Quote
“Converse, vintage 2004.” Never before has one line sunk a movie so fast. The first ten minutes of Alex Proyas’ I, Robot contains more examples of product placement than any other film I’ve seen, and there are none more odious than the completely unnecessary scene in which Will Smith reveals he wears Chucks. How about you go fight some robots and stop trying to sell me trainers? Smith drives around town in an Audi (made exclusively for the movie, fact fans), listens to his music on a JVC CD player, has his mail delivered by Tom Hank’s FedEx and generally acts like a walking, talking billboard. I can barely remember anything from the movie aside from the heinous product placement; the experience was equivalent to bending over and getting roughly bummed by Mr. Corporation, and being charged £7 for the privilege. It’s so damn shameless in plugging its wares it defies belief, and in doing so, wastes the potential for a cracking little film; if it hadn’t spent its running time hawking shiny shit like a Cockney market trader, it might have figured out it was ruining one of the best sci-fi novels of all time. While the future displayed in I, Robot is clearly one grounded in fantasy, the future the film itself suggests is one of corporate greed and shameless peddling, and whether you’re wearing Vintage Converse trainers or not, it looks like there’ll be no escaping it.

But it could be worse...

Will I get Night Owl points for quitting but not as much for getting fired?
Will I still be a member of the Owl's Pals? I'd hate to turn in my card. It's got a real owl feather under the lamination and everything.


Night Owl: Oh, indeed. I quit many a job ...better than being fired. You can keep your card... in fact, you get double points for quitting!


Morb

  • Wasteland Denizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #21 on: May 26, 2009, 02:19:31 AM »
Agreed. The product placement is nowadays fairly ridiculous. Never would have thought that Wayne's World would become a reality...

Loveshack

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • "I got me a Chrysler, it seats about 20..."
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #22 on: May 26, 2009, 02:33:04 AM »
But it could be worse...

True, but at least there, it made sense for there to be a bunch of billboards around them, and the advertising was in the background, unobtrusive, and silent AS IT SHOULD BE.

If JJ Abrams and the studio execs were allowed to re-cut this movie, the Thing would have looked up and said, "Hey, I don't know about you guys, but I sure am thirsty from chasing Victor around, let's go grab a delicious, ice-cold Pepsi!"
"Nice try Horrigan!  Now... TASTE THE FURY OF VIC'S PIPE RIFLE!"

Morb

  • Wasteland Denizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2009, 11:37:00 PM »
Just saw it, and loved it. I thought it was actually quite clever how they managed to dump all the old Star Trek baggage to a black hole, because let's face it, some of the baggage (like mr. Spock in his cool rocket boots catching unsafely rock-climbing Kirk at the very last minute) reeked pretty bad at this point... I thought the casting was brilliant, and the actors took just enough, but not too much of the old mannerisms and ran with it. Then again, when Zachary Quinto and Leonard Nimoy had their scene together, there wasn't any doubt in my mind which one of them was the "real" Spock. I suppose, if they make any more of these, this distinction will eventually get muddled. Heh. The Nokia product placement was pretty weak, but that was the only one I noticed.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 11:39:02 PM by Morb »

Sylvee Bee

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2009, 11:58:09 PM »
I didn't even notice the Nokia add at all, or at least my mind has no memory stored of it 'annoying me' in it's placement. I went with 5 other people and have since questioned them about it, none of them were bothered by it either. What bugged me more in that situation was how ugly that kid was. Could that have cast an uglier child at all?

As for a PS about the casting - Karl Urban (Bones) is yummmmy. :D
"there are not many people who can live up to the standard set by goldfish."
~KGF

Morb

  • Wasteland Denizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #25 on: May 29, 2009, 12:20:43 AM »
Hmm. I'm not sure about the ugly, but I didn't like that kid. He didn't look like a Shatner.  :D

Loveshack

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • "I got me a Chrysler, it seats about 20..."
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #26 on: May 29, 2009, 12:24:26 AM »
As for a PS about the casting - Karl Urban (Bones) is yummmmy. :D

You've lost all street cred when it comes to men yummyness appraisal ever since you said the Silver Surfer was hot.  Plus, it's Doctor Freakin' McCoy!  That man has no love life. 
"Nice try Horrigan!  Now... TASTE THE FURY OF VIC'S PIPE RIFLE!"

Loveshack

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • "I got me a Chrysler, it seats about 20..."
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #27 on: May 29, 2009, 12:25:30 AM »
Hmm. I'm not sure about the ugly, but I didn't like that kid. He didn't look like a Shatner.  :D

Doomsie, here's your cue to photoshop a Shatner toupee on that kid!
"Nice try Horrigan!  Now... TASTE THE FURY OF VIC'S PIPE RIFLE!"

Sylvee Bee

  • Unwashed Journeyman
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
    • View Profile
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #28 on: May 29, 2009, 03:02:39 AM »
As for a PS about the casting - Karl Urban (Bones) is yummmmy. :D

You've lost all street cred when it comes to men yummyness appraisal ever since you said the Silver Surfer was hot.  Plus, it's Doctor Freakin' McCoy!  That man has no love life. 

Silver Surfer = perfect male body; with the added bonus of not having that creepy dangly thing between the legs.

McCoy  =  handsome, sarcastic and, dammit, a doctor! What's not to like? :D
"there are not many people who can live up to the standard set by goldfish."
~KGF

Doombot

  • Unwashed Addict
  • ******
  • Posts: 2474
  • Unwashed Photoshop Goddess
    • View Profile
    • Owl's Pals
Re: The new Star Trek movie
« Reply #29 on: May 29, 2009, 07:03:07 PM »

Silver Surfer = perfect male body; with the added bonus of not having that creepy dangly thing between the legs.


It has the Mr. Potatohead quality about it. Like Evolution, God, Odin, etc created man and went: "It needs something... I just stick this there." BLOP!

Kinda like when your neighbor adds a tool shed and doesn't factor in the aesthetics. Yeah it's functional but it's a eyesore.

=P

Will I get Night Owl points for quitting but not as much for getting fired?
Will I still be a member of the Owl's Pals? I'd hate to turn in my card. It's got a real owl feather under the lamination and everything.


Night Owl: Oh, indeed. I quit many a job ...better than being fired. You can keep your card... in fact, you get double points for quitting!