The 12th Fleet: Starbase Valhalla

WelshAvenger wrote:It had to happen sooner or later . . .

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v93Jh6JNBng&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

Edit: ok any idea why the youtube embedding isn't working?
Easier link here . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v93Jh6J ... e=youtu.be

You need to take the "S" off of https and also remove "&feature=youtu.be" off the end.

Doh! Cheers Husker.

Sysil wrote:

cmdraftbrn wrote:*vomits uncontrollably*

And I thought I was negative

Seriously though, the best I can expect from Abrams is an entertaining but not memorable movie. The worst, well, what he did to Star Trek...

So I am not especially excited about these movies. I have only a deep sense of wariness.

Yeah...I'm kinda expecting him to do what he did to Trek to Wars.

Sorotia wrote:

Sysil wrote:

cmdraftbrn wrote:*vomits uncontrollably*

And I thought I was negative

Seriously though, the best I can expect from Abrams is an entertaining but not memorable movie. The worst, well, what he did to Star Trek...

So I am not especially excited about these movies. I have only a deep sense of wariness.

Yeah...I'm kinda expecting him to do what he did to Trek to Wars.

I am expecting a little better with Wars than what he did with Trek, because he is a self proclaimed fanboy of Wars which he wasn't of Trek, so I guess he never really got what Trek meant, except pew-pew and bam-wam-glam. At least from what he has claimed in interviews: he gets wars...

The problem with making a new-age movie for Star Trek fans is that the original Star Trek shows were science fiction, where Star Wars is science fantasy. People don't really care why the engines work in Star Wars, only that they take a ship from point A to point B. In contrast, there are novels of work based around how engines work in Star Trek. I also understand that a lot of the stuff people liked were changed around, but for an action-adventure movie a lot of the changes were not only necessary, but for the better (I.E. the Kobayashi Maru scenario).

Though they don't work with many Star Trek fans, Abrams' movies were good as movies. Because honestly, you can't say that any of Abrams' movies were worse than any of the Next Generation movies (don't get me started on Generations or Nemesis).

EDIT: I don't think Abrams could have ever made a movie that would satisfy Star Trek fans completely and not come off as completely boring to general audiences.

Splodeydope wrote:Because honestly, you can't say that any of Abrams' movies were worse than any of the Next Generation movies (don't get me started on Generations or Nemesis).

It's true that the TNG movies weren't that great, but I will honestly say that they are better movies than what Abrams did. They made the effort to stay true to Star Trek while trying new things. They might not have succeeded but the effort was there. Abrams just made generic action movies with a sprinkle of ST references to try to please the fans.

Sysil wrote:

Splodeydope wrote:Because honestly, you can't say that any of Abrams' movies were worse than any of the Next Generation movies (don't get me started on Generations or Nemesis).

It's true that the TNG movies weren't that great, but I will honestly say that they are better movies than what Abrams did. They made the effort to stay true to Star Trek while trying new things. They might not have succeeded but the effort was there. Abrams just made generic action movies with a sprinkle of ST references to try to please the fans.

Thats not really his fault though. His films is the most attention Star Trek has gotten in recent history. Its really not his or anyone elses fault that the audiences going to theaters in mass right now are those addicted to the Michael Bay Transformers Explosion-a-thons and films like it. And that they could careless about why something works and how.

Would the films have gotten a good reception in theaters without all of the explosions and action? Maybe. But they were just as likely to flop as well. There has been numerous films that were supposed to be huge box office movies that I went to see on the first weekend and it was dead.

At the end of the day. JJ did what he thought he had to do to put Star Trek into theaters, do a decent homage to the original show and films and sell seats. We can harp on him about his lack of knowledge all we want but there are plenty of examples through out the shows and films where things were just off the wall and completely contradicted something previously stated. Especially in TOS where they called Warp things like Time Warp.

The JJ movies could have been just as popular if the characters were more original and the lore was correct. That's what JJ does, he makes flashy films, there is no reason to change the core values of a story to get more people in seats, all you need is the fx for that. I liked the JJ Trek films for their fx and wow factor, for the story and lore I was left wondering why.

As far as SW I'm going to trust that JJ knows more about it than I do and I'll go along for the ride with him on this. Besides it's a teaser and it shows little if anything of the film. Working in the film and TV industry I know how misleading promos can be. Part of it could be a dream sequence, or the light saber could be a creation that dark man in the forrest has had to make himself.

Besides, isn't Jarjar and JJ the same person?

Anyways here is the honest trailer for Attack of the Clones for your entertainment:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Sorotia wrote:

Sysil wrote:

cmdraftbrn wrote:*vomits uncontrollably*

And I thought I was negative

Seriously though, the best I can expect from Abrams is an entertaining but not memorable movie. The worst, well, what he did to Star Trek...

So I am not especially excited about these movies. I have only a deep sense of wariness.

Yeah...I'm kinda expecting him to do what he did to Trek to Wars.

Pardon me, but I didn't see any lens flare.