quote:Paramount does indeed plan to release all four seasons of Star Trek: Enterprise on DVD next year. They've sniffed out the tentative release schedule for the series, which currently calls for Season One in May, Season Two in mid Summer (around July), Season Three in early Fall and the just underway Season Four right before Thanksgiving.
Does that imply that Season 4 will be the last one?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
No, not all.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Soon, we'll just buy seasons released once a year instead of them even airing weekly....
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
That's how I watch "The Sopranos".
Speaking of which - I just got "Kingdom Hospital" on DVD from Amazon. Going to sit down tomorrow and watch the first disk. Fun stuff.
I also can't wait for "Lost" to come out on DVD. Yay!
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Soon, we'll just buy seasons released once a year instead of them even airing weekly....
Well that's how Australians had to watch all of DS9 and all of Voyager (unless you wanted to wait another year or two or three to see it aired on TV).
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I've heard enough good things about "Lost" that I'll probably buy the first season on DVD sight unseen. I'm not goign to try and catch up at this point, but I would like to see it. I'm going to try and avoid hearing any more about it so has not to be all spoiled like.
I also need to get my hands on season 2 of 24 to make way for buying season 3. Season 4 starts in January.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
There's going to be a season *4*!?!
How many more storylines are going to work for that show... how many more times can Kim Bauer fuck up!?! Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
As long as she continues to wear tight/low cut blouses, my suspension of disbelief will remain happily in tact.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Keifer Sutherland is the only returning actor, from what I understand. Of course, I read that a few months ago, so things may have changed ...
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
God, I hate '24'. Why the hell does EVERY episode need a 180 degree plot-twist? And why are ALL the women in 24 so annoying? Either they're so ignorant they should be locked up in an institution, or they're manipulative, power-hungry hellspawn.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
You're a very *up* person.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Not AT all, I meant, of course.
Oh, and, the rumored release date for the first season of Enterprise is now narrowed down to May 3.
And a First Contact special edition on March 15. It is a pipe dream, but I'd enjoy a Braga/Moore commentary track.
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Oh, and, the rumored release date for the first season of Enterprise is now narrowed down to May 3.
Happy Birthday to ME! Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: And a First Contact special edition on March 15. It is a pipe dream, but I'd enjoy a Braga/Moore commentary track.
I'll be happy with some ship-related behind the scenes stuff. Mabye an Alex Jeager interview....
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Was there not deleted scenes from the battle with the Bjorg?
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Rumor has it there was a scene that was shot having Sisko order Worf to take the Defiant in order to engage the Borg. We'll see if Frakes is generous enough to include deleted scenes including that one.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Time perhaps for my canned rant on why Sisko really ought to have been on the Defiant instead (or at least in addition to) Worf. (Well, from a, you know, internal consistancy perspective. I don't think the character would be willing to let someone else take his ship into the battle he designed it for. But I don't think you could have the same movie had that happened, without some really arbitrary way of getting Worf on the Enterprise while leaving Sisko off it. Now, on the other hand, if it had been a crossover movie, and Sisko had taken on some of the Lily Sloane moments in the plot. . . ((Well, not the "Hey, let's explain where the Borg fit into this story thematically" moments, obviously, but some of the conflict about how best to stop them.)) "OK, Picard has been gone for five minutes and frankly I don't trust him anyway. Now, here's what we do.")
Alas.
I seem to recall that the existence of the Sisko cutscene was debunked, though, or at least strongly called into question.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
We saw Worf take command of the Defiant often enough during his first couple of seasons on the show. I think the most likely explanation is that Worf was out on patrol when the Borg made their move. Heading to DS9 to pick up Sisko would have prevented the Defiant from reaching Earth before it was too late.
Alternatively, Starfleet may have ordered Sisko to remain at DS9 fearing that the Cardassians or the Klingons would seek to take advantage of the Borg crisis. Sisko being the senior most commander in the area, his presence would be neccessary.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
F that noise.
(Obviously, we can imagine all sorts of reasonable explanations for why he wasn't there, but they do not make me happy.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Sisko's not there because he'd have done a far superior job in Picard's place. Besides, we cant have a TNG movie without catering to the egos of "the big three" now can we?
We, we could, but only if we really wanted something better than Nemesis. Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Er, who's the third?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Stewart, Spiner and Spiner's ego.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Well, back on TNG, it was Worf.....they kinda let it go in the last movie though (though the screentime for the other characters is still far far less than his).
I dont believe there was ever a scene with Sisko written to be added back into a FC: SE. Much as I'd love to see DS9 on the bigscreen....
As a modeler, I'm just praying for some more ship footage and mabye alittle design commantary on them.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I can't believe that scene was ever shot either. It would have involved sprucing up the DS9 model or sets to be shot for the big screen, paying Brooks for being in the movie, and most aboninable of all, risking confusion to the audience by introducing a new character.
I have always thought, though, that FC would've have started off far more dramatically had it started with such a scene, then followed the Defiant into battle in the Typhon sector. We would then see the Enterprise for the first time as it swoops in to save Worf's butt.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Easy the Defiant was damaged early in the battle and Sisko was injured, Worf took over. Aboard the Enterprise Sisko was in Sickbay the entire time--- out of camera sight.
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Then the Borg came into sickbay and he cried.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Well, back on TNG, it was Worf.....they kinda let it go in the last movie though (though the screentime for the other characters is still far far less than his).
I never got the impression that Worf was more of a "main player" character than, say, Riker. Or Geordi. Parallels wasn't even written for him, originally.
(In fact, you could argue that on TNG, no-one character was more important than another. Sure, people may have liked Data more, but I don't think he got significantly more episodes than anyone else.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Kidding right?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Well, not quite. Certainly by the time the series was half-way through, someone like Crusher was getting her 2 or so episodes a season, like everyone else. They might have been a bit rubbish, but they were there. Spiner didn't stick his head in saying "I like this episode where Crusher is told off for doing an autopsy on a Ferengi because of stuff with shields that make ships fly into suns, but wouldn't it be better if we stuck in a bit about Data becoming fascinated by 20th century sitcoms and shouting "Norm!" everytime Riker walks onto the bridge?"
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I see your point but there's the episodes that obviously cater to one character (Parralells, Data's Day, Inner Light) where you may not see anyone else for the episode at all nad then there's a large number of episodes that revolve almost as heavily around "the big three" and leave Crusher, LaForge, Welshy and Riker in the cold.
The lion's share of these good secondary episodes are for Worf, Data or Picard.... Mabye they just never figured out how to make Geordi intresting aside from his abortive lovelife. That poor guy never got laid. Tortured, brainwashed, beaten, shot: Yes. Laid? No. Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Troi got a bit of the shaft, almost any dedicated Troi episode almost always involved her mother as well.
Worf also did have the continuing ...vs. Duras/Gowron arc going, which the concept of any sort of arc over TNG/DS9 which was pretty much unique to him.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I feel a need to point out that neither Marina Sertis or Gates McFadden had much acting ability whatsoever, so I'm glad that they weren't focused on too much. Whenever they were, the results were not good IMO.
Personally, I'm fine with the fact that particular members of the cast showed better ability than others, and were recognized for it. But I did like the fact that they started out on more or less equal ground.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I'm not convinced that Picard always had a huge amount to do in episodes that didn't directly involve him. In "Tin Man", say, he seemed to do a lot in his capacity as Captain, but story and plot wise, he didn't do much outside those boundaries. Certainly I wouldn't say that he did more than Riker.
Likewise "Paralles" was a Worf story, but if any characters got interesting things to do as well, it was Troi in her capacity as Worf's friend/close friend/lover/wife, and Riker as the Captain of the Enterprise.
Geordi was maybe a bit sidelines, but he had lots of scenes with Data, so that gave him plenty of airtime. And Riker was certainly nowhere near sidelined.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
But unless there's been a massive cover-up, they were all very happy with the division of screen-time and genuinely seemed to enjoy working together; and did so even during the making of the films when there was an obvious inequality in what people got to do.
But this blatantly wasn't the case in VOY, and might well not be the case in ENT (they're all trying to be as positive as they can, but read one or two interviews with whatsisface, Mayweather, and a very good recent one with Billingsley, and you see some resentment - and a certain degree of resignation - under the surface). As fro what the Ds9 cast thought, I don't know. I know Brooks was regarded as stand-off-ish by some.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I got to bullshit with Aaron Eisenberg for a couple of hours at a convention a few years back and he had only the best things to say about everyone on DS9: he's a very cool guy to just speak with about sci fi stuff.
The actor (who's name escapes me) that played Damar is very cool as well and really sounds like that in real life....I walked right past him before hearing his voice. I was'nt expectimg him to have blonde hair, I guess. Both him and Eisenberg were really happy to have had their chracters so throughly developed.
Strangly, I feel I know far more about Dammar or Nog than Dr. Crusher or even Geordi.
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: The actor (who's name escapes me) that played Damar
That's Casey Biggs, IIRC, and IM(NS)HO he's a charismatic actor. At one time after DS9 ended, he was supposed to play Ben Cartwright on a "Bonanza" prequel titled "Ponderosa", but I haven't heard if that actually happened...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
ah! Thanks. THe show I attended with him also had Virginia Hey, that alien bounty hunter withbthe thick neck from X-Files (he was cool- kinda short though) nad Nana Visitor. I had to go to work before I could meet her but I did hold open the door for her as I was leaving the hotel.
She's much thinner (and platinum-blonde) than she was on DS9.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
"that alien bounty hunter withbthe thick neck from X-Files"
BRIAN THOMPSON ELLENSBURG'S FAVORITE SON
(I have given serious thought to proposing a film festival at my former university, the first ((likely only)) of which would hopefully have Mr. Thompson as the keynote speaker, with, ideally, a bunch of his films screened. Such as they are. I mean, there are film festivals in Seattle, of course, and possibly in Spokane, but none here in central Washington, and I know at least one amatuer filmmaker personally. But what would be the hook? I though, maybe, that you could gather the only three actors that I know of from the area together: Thompson, Kyle MacLachlan and Yakima Canutt. ((OK, Yakima Canutt is dead, but I'm sure somewhere there's an expert on him or people like him who would be willing to speak and maybe show a few films. ))
The theme would be outsiders, and these three guys sort of represent three different kinds of Hollywood outsiderism: MacLachlan as the weird yet critically respected ((ala Blue Velvet)), Thompson as embodiment of the modern B movie, and Canutt as a literal cultural outsider ((cue discussions of representations of Native Americans v. reality)). And, I don't know, so on and so forth. Plus, you know, neat student films.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
yeah. Him. Good guy: hands like hamhocks when I shook with him.
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
two words: "man crush".
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Er.....No. Though, he could have potentially crushed me, I suppose.
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
so what you're saying is that you are a wee man...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yes, I am a tiny wisp of a person that often falls through sewer grates and is blown down by gusts of wind....
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well the character of Morn was developed more than Crusher or La Forge! Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Yes, I am a tiny wisp of a person that often falls through sewer grates and is blown down by gusts of wind....
Hmmm... sort of reminds me of a friend who's in 1/72 scale (according to everyone else, that is) Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Sweet: he can fit into the Finemolds Star Wars vehicles!
[ November 21, 2004, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
Posted by Mighty Blogger Snay (Member # 411) on :
You can find tentative release dates, as well as box-set images, on my blog. Also: Star Trek First Contact Special Edition on 3/15, and Star Wars Clone Wars Vol. I on March 22nd.
Or, click here. Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
No.
Posted by Mighty Blogger Snay (Member # 411) on :
I said "or", not "or say 'no' and risk a painful death although your brave and courageous stand against the forces of evil will earn you a place in heaven."
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Yeah, so how come when older, more well-established members post links like this, it's ok, but when newbies do it, it's spam?
[EDIT]: Nevermind, you clever sonofabitch. Forget it.
Posted by Mighty Blogger Snay (Member # 411) on :
I would venture to say that its because we're older, well established members that we're allowed more leeway than a newbie.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Not particularly egalitarian...
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
There is in my mind a vast and obvious difference between some informative (and on topic) news and a pitch, out of the blue, to go visit some personal project somewhere.
I mean, it's a little like complaining that this forum is filled with suspicious ads for this "Star Trek" show. But, I guess these are strange times. Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Yes, but what of that new guy in the ENT forum who linked to his review of the latest episode? He was shut down for spamming, but surely that's on-topic? If he had copied and pasted the text of his review instead of linked to it then no one would have said anything, so why the double standard?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Coming to a discussion forum and discussing something is, to me, self-evidently different than "click here!"
I'll admit that a "smell test" for spam seems arbitrary, but I really don't see any satisfactory way to generate a better definition that isn't full of loopholes, and what's more, I think what we've got works.
So anyway, I can see how one might disagree with the decision in the linked thread, but I really don't see any connection to this one.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
The other post was on topic, but was also by a complete stranger. If one of your friends came up to you constantly trying to get you to watch a certain film, it would be annoying, but tolerable. If a complete stranger came up to you and tried to get you to see a certain film, then you'd be legally entitled to tell him to piss off.
If the other lad had actually posted, well, anything before getting to the "click here" message, then it would have been ignored. Even something like "Hi, I've got a review of the last Enterprise episode, do you mind if I post a link here?" would have worked.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
What you're essentially saying is that a new member's first post is not allowed to contain a link to an internet document. Which I must say is ridiculous. Unless there's some insidious content on the other end of that link, or it's sole purpose is to aid in the personal gain of the individual in question, it isn't and shouldn't be considered spam.
Lighten the "fuck" up and chill the "fuck" out, y'all.
Respectfully.
-MMoM Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
No, it isn't "respectfully." This connection you've manufactured between this thread and that one exists only inside your head.
Posted by Mighty Blogger Snay (Member # 411) on :
More DVD news: package art and details and a final release date for the CE of Star Trek: First Contact. Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Apparently no featurette or other info on the battle sequence or the new starships. Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I hear the Animated Series is also up for release, for those who care. (Though I think that may have been mentioned earlier, in this thread or another.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Austin Powers: Apparently no featurette or other info on the battle sequence or the new starships.
Well....that sucks.
Is there anything added to the film?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Um, you mean added to the film itself? Because I don't think so. (Nor can I think of anything I'd particularly like to see put in it. But I'm a little bitter about that one extended shot in Wrath of Khan that featured a longer take at the expense of a better one. ((Specifically, Carol Marcus rallying her troops; I feel the delivery in the new version is a little flat compared to the original.)))
But if you mean, like, extra doodads and gimgaws elsewhere on the DVD, then sure. Whether they're of any interest or not I can't say. (I've liked the Okudan commentaries so far, at least.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I was actually hoping for some added footage being brought back in (or at least on the disk). No movie is ever without scenes that get edited out, after all and if there's a movie where I'd dearly love to see more of, it's First Contact.
I was also hoping for some behind the scenes stuff on the new ship designs and mabye an interview with the elusive Alex Jaeger.
I skipped the TWOK SE after I was hosed into buying the "no-fucking-nothing-extra" DVD.
Besides, I'd seen the damn movie (with extras added back in) on TV, video and cable at least twenty times.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I've found most deleted scenes were deleted for good reasons.
(Star Trek II is one of the top five best sf movies of the 1980s, and everyone needs to own it or face some sort of weak nerd scorn.)
Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
Just out of curiosity, what would you put in for the other four?
Marian
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I actually don't have a real list. You have caught me.
But give me some time to go through the IMDB. I guess what I have in mind are the other big commercial films of the era. Like, I think Khan is as well made as Aliens.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Hmmmm...probably. Plenty of goofiness in both movies though. At least Kahn's ship was not a giant rifle.
Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
I would put forth David Lynch's Dune, if only because long-haired Patrick Steward is the sexy.
Marian
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
2010. Empire. Blade Runner. 2010. They will be on your list, snob.
Posted by StarLord (Member # 1430) on :
It's hard to tell with Enterprise. I think the odds are this fourth season is the last. But you never know with CBS and Paramount.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Dune goes on the opposite end of the list. Or at least my list. Both Dune and Lynch are better when left to their own devices.
OK, the scene with the Guild Navigator was good.
I haven't seen 2010. Or, like, I've seen about twenty minutes of it. But, if it makes you feel better, I haven't seen any more of 2001.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
2010 is a better movie, IMHO.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Whatever, dude. Posted by Home Decor and Gardening (Member # 239) on :
They are both fairly awful.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
IT. IS. BETTER.
Better ending at any rate.
Plus: Roy Schieder! A Russian ship design that would be ripped off endlessly on B5! What's not to love?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Well, you also think Wrath of Khan is better than Star Trek: The Motion Picture...
In regards to the best science fiction films of all time, I think a listing of only 5 couldn't possibly cover it. 10 would be better, though still inadequate. I'd list 20 at least. And so, in chronological order:
Metropolis (1927) Frankenstein (1931) The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951) 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea (1954) Gojira (1954) 20 Million Miles to Earth (1957) Planet of the Apes (1968) 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) THX 1138 (1971)* Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) Star Wars (1977) and sequels, particularly The Empire Strikes Back (1980)** Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) Alien (1979) Blade Runner (1982) Back to the Future (1985) and sequels Jurassic Park (1993) Gattaca (1997) The Matrix (1999)*** Solaris (2002) Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)
*The original version, not the one with all the cocked-up CGI in it.
**Ditto. Also, I would like to point out, as I have before, that SW is not truly science fiction in the strictest sense, but the same might be said of some others on there as well.
***Dear God, not the sequels!
GENERAL NOTE: As I said, this is a minimal listing. There are at least a dozen other great films I've seen that I could have put, but I had to draw the line somewhere. And yes, let it also be noted that I am limited to the films that I have actually seen, though I freely admit that I retain a shocking ignorance where some widely seen flicks are concerned. (The Terminator series, for example, which I hold no prejudice against but which I simply haven't gotten around to watching yet.)
Well, there you are.
-MMoM
[EDIT: I just realized that you were only talking about movies from the eighties. Which essentially means I've spent forever typing up this essentially off-topic post for essentially nothing. Thank you.]
Posted by Home Decor and Gardening (Member # 239) on :
:S
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It's a good thing I didn't say anything about "all time," then.
Vindication!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Back to The Future is in your Top 20 Sci-Fi movies?!?
Your credibility stands in smoking ruins.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
At the risk of dragging us still further off topic...just what do you find objectionable about Back to the Future?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Nothing in particular, but it's also nothing I'd place anywhere near a top 20 list of Sci-Fi's best.
Hell, I'd place Last Starfighter in there before that one.
That's the problem with such lists- you'll always think of something better later.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Well, you also think Wrath of Khan is better than Star Trek: The Motion Picture..."
As does anyone who isn't missing the "immunity to fake and meaningless arthouse pretension" gene.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
How 'bout the gene for immunity to contrived, plot-hole-filled, standard mindless Hollywood action fare, with overblown literary references thrown in to create the illusion of intelligence?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
It's a submarine movie, MIM. Watch it that way, forget all about the "art of film" crap and just enjoy it.
ST:TMP has it's merity but it obviously a '70's movie half-heartedly [i]pretending[i] to be set in the future (McCoy's horrible outfit with the open shirt and gold chains is cringeworthy at the MST3K level).
The models and cinematography is amazing- just the plot and lacking acting (mostly on Decker and Iilea's parts) kills it.
Incidentally, I get to meet Andy Probert in May! He'll be at Wonderfest this year!
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: It's a submarine movie, MIM. Watch it that way, forget all about the "art of film" crap and just enjoy it.
Oh, I do. Don't make the mistake of thinking I don't. But I do cringe at people thinking this is Star Trek at its best. Again, not that it isn't good, but it's not at all introspective science fiction.
quote:ST:TMP has it's merity but it obviously a '70's movie half-heartedly pretending to be set in the future (McCoy's horrible outfit with the open shirt and gold chains is cringeworthy at the MST3K level).
Just like TOS in the 60s and TNG in the 80s. Big freakin' deal.
quote:The models and cinematography is amazing- just the plot and lacking acting (mostly on Decker and Iilea's parts) kills it.
Never found anything lacking about the plot (despite being very similar to "The Changeling" [TOS]) or acting. Part and parcel, one of an amazing number of Robert Wise masterpieces. It's cinematic, intelligent, thought-provoking, and exciting without resorting to space battles to hold it together.
There is very little Star Trek I have seen that I haven't enjoyed on one level or another, and TWOK is no exception. The characterizations are rich and the space battles are nifty, and just the fact that it was a direct follow-up to a great TOS episode is really cool. But there isn't anything cerebral or intellect-engaging about it. Good entertainment, not great cinema.
-MMoM Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
It's mainly the complete lack of tension or urgency from all the crew -except Kirk- that V'Ger is comin' to town to make Earth disapear like it did with those Klingon ships.
That's mostly a directing problem though.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Never found anything lacking about the plot (despite being very similar to "The Changeling" [TOS])
"The Changeling," "Doomsday Machine," (interesting, since that episode features Decker's father) and TAS "One of Our Planets is Missing" (wherein Spock mind-melds with a giant cloud about to devour a Federation colony).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
TMP is nothing like either "The Doomsday Machine" or "One Of Our Planets Is Missing" except in the most superficial of senses. (i.e., yes some elements of the film are reminiscent of some elements of those episodes, but as a whole they are quite distinct.)
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
"BATTLESTAR GALACTICA" -- THE MOVIE!
Dubbed: The Greatest Movie in the Universe, 1978!
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
My original point, or part of it, I think, was that Star Trek II is artfully made. It isn't, in my opinion, good only because it is "fun" or a "good way to waste two hours," though it is certainly both.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
I agree.
TMP is another matter. I have got the Director's Edition DVD and the old Version on VHS, recorded on the telly. I think the D.E. version is quite watchable yet I don't find it very exciting or even thought-provoking. The acting as very wooden and I can't see why it should be considered a "masterpiece" of Bob Wise. Only the cinematography - especially the scenes featuring the "new" Enterprise - is highly artful IMHO.
On the whole I prefer TWOK to TMP anytime.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"[TMP] is cinematic, intelligent, thought-provoking, and exciting..."
Check, fail, fail, fail.
"Again, not that [TWOK] isn't good, but it's not at all introspective science fiction."
And from the way most so-called "introspective" sci-fi is in fact less mentally stimulating than a trip on a crappy psychedelic drug, we can all be thankful for that.
Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
My own opinion is that TMP is a terrible film, with a dull plot stretched out over too much movie. It's bad when movies use fast pacing and constant action to substitute for plot or character development, but there is such a thing as being too slow, as well. Especially when there still isn't much character development or story as a result. Except in one or maybe two exterior shots, I find no improvement in the DE (and at least one change I actively dislike).
As for being "introspective" and 'thought-provoking," TMP certainly isn't in the company of Asimov, or Barnes or Varley or Gerrold.
On the other hand, I enjoy watching TMP just to see so much of the interior of the Enterprise, and to hear ship announcements and comm traffic that ties in with the FJ technical manual.
Marian
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Most good "thought provoking" Sci-Fi would never get greenlighted by a studio.
I was reading an intro to a story by Dan Simmons where he mentions that the story was originally a pitch for ST: Voyager.
He (over the phone) detailed the premise of Voyager entering a binary star system, meeting inhabitants that altered themselves to life/travel in space with no ship. They would offer to enhance Voyager's crew and the moral dilemma would be in who stays and who goes. The (unnammed) producer asked at the pitch's end "One question: What's a Binary Star?"
This is why there's no "thought provolking sci-fi"- the producers are not sci-fi fans.
So Simmons said fuck it and it became a really good (IMHO, at least) short story from the universe of his Hyperion novels (themselves excellent reads- my favorite sci fi, really).
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
TMP had a very 2001 quality to it. But I'm not sure how exciting it was intended, maybe 27 years ago, yeah...but most of us here are not even old enough to remember seeing it in that light, so of course our persepectives are skewed.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Actually I think we're among the few who might find redeemable qualities to TMP.
Most audiences today (non-trek fanatics) expect mindless CGI-laden explosion fests (both Tomb Raider movies were box office smashes, yet even the re-release of Alien tanked.)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Tomb Raider did OK ($131,144,183 domestic, according to IMDb.), but smash seems to be stretching it, and Tomb Raider 2 only made $65,653,758 domestic, and just $156,453,758 worldwide.
I also don't think you can draw many parallels between that and Alien. Or any, for that matter. A new film compared to the limited re-release of something 20+ years old? (Though check out how quickly the number of showings seems to have dropped: data.)
For that matter, I like Alien as much as the next guy, but I don't think I'd hold it up as a landmark of cerebral cinema anyway.
(Personal facts: Saw Tomb Raider in theater because people from my physics class wanted to, have not seen the sequel, traveled to see Alien's rerelease at the cajoling of friends. Well, the cajoling had more to do with whether I would please drive them across the Cascades.)
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: He (over the phone) detailed the premise of Voyager entering a binary star system, meeting inhabitants that altered themselves to life/travel in space with no ship. They would offer to enhance Voyager's crew and the moral dilemma would be in who stays and who goes. The (unnammed) producer asked at the pitch's end "One question: What's a Binary Star?"
If I were the producer, my one question would be: "What possible relevence does the binary star system have to the story?"
quote:Originally posted by MarianLH: On the other hand, I enjoy watching TMP just to see so much of the interior of the Enterprise, and to hear ship announcements and comm traffic that ties in with the FJ technical manual.
Your post makes me sad.
Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)