WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:03 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 136 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:55 am 
Offline
Genetically-Altered Lynx
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:43 am
Posts: 2860
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
DoomsdayClock wrote:
TheMovieDude wrote:
Mission: Impossible 3, Star Trek and Super 8 are good flicks.

Not sure what this comment adds to the debate. However, I'll try to infer your meaning.

I've never seen Mission: Impossible 3, so no comment there.

I saw Super 8 and I enjoyed it. I agree it was a "good flick." Not great, but good. Sure, Abrams is a serviceable filmmaker who can make good films. I do not deny that.

Now, here I go again, so I will abridge my comments because you can go to the Star Trek thread to get all of the juicy details.

Dropping all of the concerns I have with how he altered canon - forgetting all that. Star Trek is NOT a good film. The screenwriting is lazy, riddled with plot holes, and the storyline is just plain stupid.

Now, if Star Trek was truly a well written film with a good story and believable character interactions I may not feel so badly about what he did in "making it his own." I'm sorry if this comes off as, "you liked Abrams Star Trek therefore you don't know what a good film is." I don't want it to come off that way, but IMO, it is just a bad fucking movie.

And I'm not a guy who happily digests all "old" Star Trek and thinks that its good. Star Trek V was a total shitfuck, Star Trek VI is a hackneyed turd.

Bottom line is I don't think Abrams gives a shit about Star Trek. He admitted he wasn't a fan. My guess is Paramount figured Abrams is hot right now, and we want to put asses in seats so take this beloved property and do whatever the fuck you want. As long as the grosses are high Captain Kirk can be a Mexican pedophile with a hair lip. Go nuts!


DDC, I love when you talk about Abrams and Star Trek, t makes me happy in my nether regions.

I mean...

No, that's what I meant.


Yes, you did.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:53 am 
Offline
A pretty butterfly.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:50 pm
Posts: 965
Location: Australia
DoomsdayClock wrote:
You hated "old" Star Trek.

Nope. I never said I "hated" Star Trek at all. But thanks for making the assumption. I said "I didn't give a shit", that's not the same as "Hating". I was completely indifferent and had no interest in looking into the franchise. I could see how much of impact it had on pop culture and Sci-Fi in general, but it wasn't something I really wanted to explore.

DoomsdayClock wrote:
Now, all of a sudden - after years and years of continuity - Michael Bay takes over the Bond Franchise. Decides, "I'm doing it my way." Changes EVERYTHING that was familiar about Bond except for the names. How happy would you be? Now, these films may find a new fan base. They may be entertaining. But now knowing that the franchise that you came to know and love is - at best - temporarily changed, or - at worst - forever changed, you may be more than just a little bitter.

Of course you go to the Michael Bay argument. Who better to prove a point ... But see I'm pretty unbiased here, so I can look at it a bit more objectively, and, from where I'm sitting, convincing me that Star Trek is a worthy franchise to invest my time in is a good thing.

DoomsdayClock wrote:
Not sure if you're a Godfather fan, but if they announced tomorrow that the franchise was going to be rebooted, which headline would you rather read...

J.J. Abrams to direct Godfather reboot

or

Martin Scorsese to direct Godfather reboot

Ugh, these kinds of arguments piss me off to no end, and I'm not even going to dignify it with an answer.

DoomsdayClock wrote:
Dropping all of the concerns I have with how he altered canon - forgetting all that. Star Trek is NOT a good film. The screenwriting is lazy, riddled with plot holes, and the storyline is just plain stupid.


Sorry you feel that way, I rather enjoyed it, as do all of my friends who scoffed at the mention of it and then proceeded to change their mind after watching the film. I'm excited for Into Darkness.

I look forward to having a Director who knows how to direct actors and how to tell a story attached to Star Wars. But I guess I'm just too derp to understand.

_________________
Image

http://vimeo.com/korireaymackey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:25 am 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8131
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
i wouldn't continue arguing with ddc, he's a new yorker.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:56 pm 
Offline
The Watcher
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:58 am
Posts: 3650
Location: New York
Lil' Bernie wrote:
Nope. I never said I "hated" Star Trek at all. But thanks for making the assumption. I said "I didn't give a shit", that's not the same as "Hating". I was completely indifferent and had no interest in looking into the franchise. I could see how much of impact it had on pop culture and Sci-Fi in general, but it wasn't something I really wanted to explore.

Fair enough. Bottom line is your a new fan. You can't get pissed at how he messed up canon because you're not invested. So let's drop that discussion since you have no frame of reference.

Lil' Bernie wrote:
Of course you go to the Michael Bay argument. Who better to prove a point ... But see I'm pretty unbiased here, so I can look at it a bit more objectively, and, from where I'm sitting, convincing me that Star Trek is a worthy franchise to invest my time in is a good thing.

Michael Bay, or whoever. I'm using hyperbole to illustrate the point of picking a director who didn't like or care about Star Trek's legacy or canon. It's easy to visualize what Michael Bay's James Bond movie would be like, so, yes, I latched onto the easy analogy. Say what you want about Zack Snyder, I think most of us were happy that we had a director who read, and cared about doing Watchmen the "right way." Even if you don't like what he did, we can all respect the producers choice for picking him and not faulting them for going with, lets say... Michael Bay. I think the choice of Abrams for Star Trek was a poor one for all the reasons I stated. Again, reasons you would not have any concerns with considering you had no investments in the prior Trek incarnations.

Lil' Bernie wrote:
Ugh, these kinds of arguments piss me off to no end, and I'm not even going to dignify it with an answer.

I see where it may seem like a pointless analogy, but the truth is, I think you need the right director for the right job. Let me make a better example, and I'm serious...

Tim Burton to direct remake of The Wizard of Oz

or..

Quentin Tarantino to direct remake of The Wizard of Oz

Now, I would love to see how Tarantino would handle The Wizard of Oz, however, I think most - not all - Oz fans would prefer Burton helm such an endeavor. I'm not saying Burton would definitely do a great job, but on the surface he's certainly a better fit as far as the source material and genre.

Lil' Bernie wrote:
Sorry you feel that way, I rather enjoyed it, as do all of my friends who scoffed at the mention of it and then proceeded to change their mind after watching the film. I'm excited for Into Darkness.

I look forward to having a Director who knows how to direct actors and how to tell a story attached to Star Wars. But I guess I'm just too derp to understand.

I'm sorry I feel this way too. I think it's much easier to enjoy this film, and overlook plot holes, when you're not familiar with the genre and the canon, but still, there is some real stupid shit going on in this film. I've named many in the past, but let me re-mention one and you can tell me if it really isn't as stupid as I think it is...

Instead of putting Kirk in the brig or confining him to quarters, Spock - the most logical person on he Enterprise - sends him down to a barren ice world where he may live or die. Probably die since it's freezing cold and there are giant monsters roaming around. That is just balls out, fucking stupid. It's done so Kirk can serendipitously meet future Spock in an ice cave for exposition, then later meet Scotty. Now in order to get Kirk back on the Enterprise, Scotty says he can beam someone on a starship that is lightyears away and in warp because he's been "tinkering." If the transporter could even theoretically work in this manner it would completely change the entire face of how these stories are told because that is a pretty powerful tool. Lazy. Fucking. Screenwriting. Drafted to rush the story along so Kirk can have time to fight an ice monster.

As far as Star Wars goes, I actually think he's a pretty good fit. And, my guess is they won't let him re-write canon, so that should not be an issue. Also he can't do much worse than Lucas. What really irks me is that if he's good for Star Wars, Hollywood should know he's not good for Star Trek.

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:31 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
DoomsdayClock wrote:
As far as Star Wars goes, I actually think he's a pretty good fit. And, my guess is they won't let him re-write canon, so that should not be an issue. Also he can't do much worse than Lucas. What really irks me is that if he's good for Star Wars, Hollywood should know he's not good for Star Trek.

20/20 hindsight, my friend. If nothing else, take comfort with the knowledge that he will no longer be involved with Trek after this second movie. And since Abrams is already lining up his next projects, I don't think he'll be on Wars for very long, either.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:56 pm 
Offline
The Watcher
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:58 am
Posts: 3650
Location: New York
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
DoomsdayClock wrote:
As far as Star Wars goes, I actually think he's a pretty good fit. And, my guess is they won't let him re-write canon, so that should not be an issue. Also he can't do much worse than Lucas. What really irks me is that if he's good for Star Wars, Hollywood should know he's not good for Star Trek.

20/20 hindsight, my friend. If nothing else, take comfort with the knowledge that he will no longer be involved with Trek after this second movie. And since Abrams is already lining up his next projects, I don't think he'll be on Wars for very long, either.

No hindsight on my part. As soon as I heard that Abrams wasn't a Trek fan, or had really seen any Trek, and that Paramount told him all he needs to keep - as far as they care - is the what the Enterprise looks like on the outside I knew we were in trouble.

The brass at Paramount are at fault here too (add that line to virtually ever misstep the franchise has taken) so I don't 100% blame Abrams. You can't put 100% blame on the kid who burned the house down when the parents let him play with matches.

And it seems you're inferring he won't be making another Trek. Is that confirmed? As this forum would say, "links or it didn't happen."

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:04 pm 
Offline
The Watcher
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:58 am
Posts: 3650
Location: New York
Starwars.com just posted an article about J.J. Abrams thoughts on Star Wars. I'm glad he grew up with it and appreciates it. This quote from J.J. particularly makes me feel more optimistic about his participation...

J.J. Abrams wrote:
I feel like the world of Star Wars has gotten to be so vast, not just in terms of the various mediums that Star Wars occupies, but because of the visual possibilities that technology has allowed and Industrial Light & Magic is so remarkably capable at creating. My favorite thing about Star Wars is the ability to tell an incredibly personal, intimate, and emotional story against a backdrop of conflict and battle that’s planetary and massive. What I would love to see is a story about characters that I am desperately entertained by and definitely care about, and keep that story as focused as possible and make more of that than the pyrotechnics of it all which to me is what makes Star Wars so brilliant. If it’s a TV show, that’s terrific. If it’s animated I’m all for it. If it’s a radio show or a video game or an online experience — whatever it is I would love to discover in this vast universe some new characters that make me feel the way that Luke, Leia, and Han Solo did.


Full article here:
http://starwarsblog.starwars.com/index.php/2013/01/29/director-j-j-abrams-and-his-lifelong-appreciation-of-star-wars/

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:49 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
DoomsdayClock wrote:
And it seems you're inferring he won't be making another Trek. Is that confirmed? As this forum would say, "links or it didn't happen."

Point taken. No, I'm simply guessing that Paramount won't wait around for Abrams to finish work on Star Wars before moving forward with Star Trek.

Of course, Paramount was perfectly happy to wait while Abrams wrapped up Super 8, but that was a stand-alone film that was made under Paramount. I somehow doubt they'll be as patient while Abrams shepherds a landmark sci-fi franchise for a competing studio.

Additionally -- I cannot believe I have to repeat this so many times -- Abrams is not a man who's known for finishing what he starts in terms of franchises. Just ask anyone with a passing knowledge of Lost, Undercovers, Fringe, Alcatraz, Person of Interest, etc. The man stays just long enough to get a creator/executive producer credit, then he's gone. I'm frankly amazed that Abrams agreed to direct the second Trek film, but then I remember that it took him so many years before he formally agreed to that in the first place. I guess he was waiting for Paramount to send in that extra Brinks truck.

No, Abrams is not going back to Star Trek, at least not as a director. Count on it.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:43 pm 
Offline
A pretty butterfly.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:50 pm
Posts: 965
Location: Australia
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
DoomsdayClock wrote:
And it seems you're inferring he won't be making another Trek. Is that confirmed? As this forum would say, "links or it didn't happen."


Additionally -- I cannot believe I have to repeat this so many times -- Abrams is not a man who's known for finishing what he starts in terms of franchises. Just ask anyone with a passing knowledge of Lost, Undercovers, Fringe, Alcatraz, Person of Interest, etc. The man stays just long enough to get a creator/executive producer credit, then he's gone. I'm frankly amazed that Abrams agreed to direct the second Trek film, but then I remember that it took him so many years before he formally agreed to that in the first place. I guess he was waiting for Paramount to send in that extra Brinks truck.

No, Abrams is not going back to Star Trek, at least not as a director. Count on it.


All of those are television shows. Long-form storytelling. Films are different, sir. While I won't say that he'll definitely return, I'd actually be surprised if he doesn't.

_________________
Image

http://vimeo.com/korireaymackey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:52 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Lil' Bernie wrote:
All of those are television shows. Long-form storytelling. Films are different, sir.

I did only list TV shows, but that's because the vast majority of his work is in TV. Going to his history in cinema, the only films he's directed so far were Mission: Impossible III (didn't come back for the sequel), Super 8 (didn't even try making that one into a franchise, thank heavens), and Star Trek. That's one out of three.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:04 pm 
Offline
Drinking a toast to absent friends.

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:38 am
Posts: 1258
DoomsdayClock wrote:
Starwars.com just posted an article about J.J. Abrams thoughts on Star Wars. I'm glad he grew up with it and appreciates it. This quote from J.J. particularly makes me feel more optimistic about his participation...

J.J. Abrams wrote:
I feel like the world of Star Wars has gotten to be so vast, not just in terms of the various mediums that Star Wars occupies, but because of the visual possibilities that technology has allowed and Industrial Light & Magic is so remarkably capable at creating. My favorite thing about Star Wars is the ability to tell an incredibly personal, intimate, and emotional story against a backdrop of conflict and battle that’s planetary and massive. What I would love to see is a story about characters that I am desperately entertained by and definitely care about, and keep that story as focused as possible and make more of that than the pyrotechnics of it all which to me is what makes Star Wars so brilliant. If it’s a TV show, that’s terrific. If it’s animated I’m all for it. If it’s a radio show or a video game or an online experience — whatever it is I would love to discover in this vast universe some new characters that make me feel the way that Luke, Leia, and Han Solo did.


Full article here:
http://starwarsblog.starwars.com/index.php/2013/01/29/director-j-j-abrams-and-his-lifelong-appreciation-of-star-wars/


I just don't understand what there is to tell after Return of the Jedi. The Empire is gone, the Sith are all dead. It just seems like they're going to pull something out of their asses and it's going to be lame as fuck. I'd be all for this new trilogy if it was based around Knight of the Old Republic or something.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:03 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Oh, madvillain. The Empire has fallen, which means that a whole galaxy will be in anarchy. Plus, Luke is now the only Jedi left, which means that he has to save the order from extinction all by himself. I don't know the first thing about the Extended Universe, and I could tell you that there is still SOOOOO much room for a whole new trilogy.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:59 am 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8131
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
madvillain wrote:
DoomsdayClock wrote:
Starwars.com just posted an article about J.J. Abrams thoughts on Star Wars. I'm glad he grew up with it and appreciates it. This quote from J.J. particularly makes me feel more optimistic about his participation...

J.J. Abrams wrote:
I feel like the world of Star Wars has gotten to be so vast, not just in terms of the various mediums that Star Wars occupies, but because of the visual possibilities that technology has allowed and Industrial Light & Magic is so remarkably capable at creating. My favorite thing about Star Wars is the ability to tell an incredibly personal, intimate, and emotional story against a backdrop of conflict and battle that’s planetary and massive. What I would love to see is a story about characters that I am desperately entertained by and definitely care about, and keep that story as focused as possible and make more of that than the pyrotechnics of it all which to me is what makes Star Wars so brilliant. If it’s a TV show, that’s terrific. If it’s animated I’m all for it. If it’s a radio show or a video game or an online experience — whatever it is I would love to discover in this vast universe some new characters that make me feel the way that Luke, Leia, and Han Solo did.


Full article here:
http://starwarsblog.starwars.com/index.php/2013/01/29/director-j-j-abrams-and-his-lifelong-appreciation-of-star-wars/


I just don't understand what there is to tell after Return of the Jedi. The Empire is gone, the Sith are all dead. It just seems like they're going to pull something out of their asses and it's going to be lame as fuck. I'd be all for this new trilogy if it was based around Knight of the Old Republic or something.


holy shit man, do you not know how many books take place after jedi? they completely detail the remnants of the empire and everything.

of course, this trilogy is going to follow whatever ideas lucas had back when he was planning to make 7-9, so that for the most part will go against anything post-Jedi in the EU (though the fans will figure out some sort of timetable to fit it all in anyway, just because that's what they do).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:18 am 
Offline
...look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:28 pm
Posts: 2021
Location: Aotearoa
DoomsdayClock wrote:
Lil' Bernie wrote:
Nope. I never said I "hated" Star Trek at all. But thanks for making the assumption. I said "I didn't give a shit", that's not the same as "Hating". I was completely indifferent and had no interest in looking into the franchise. I could see how much of impact it had on pop culture and Sci-Fi in general, but it wasn't something I really wanted to explore.

Fair enough. Bottom line is your a new fan. You can't get pissed at how he messed up canon because you're not invested. So let's drop that discussion since you have no frame of reference.


I'm a waaaay old fan. I enjoyed the reboot for it's heartful embrace and re-energizing of the original characters and the spirit of Trek, something, to my mind, looooong missing from the *shudder, 'franchise'. The writing wasn't too bad, probably it's weakest point. But considering it was made during the writer's strike, pretty good goin'.

Dunno how I feel about more Star Wars. If they base it on one or two of the comic book threads, then it's got a chance.

_________________
...evidently chicken-town.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:53 am 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
WJK wrote:
holy shit man, do you not know how many books take place after jedi? they completely detail the remnants of the empire and everything.


You know what's going to be the best part about that ? All the contradictions.

:D

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:59 am 
Offline
The Watcher
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:58 am
Posts: 3650
Location: New York
Mister Pain wrote:
I'm a waaaay old fan. I enjoyed the reboot for it's heartful embrace and re-energizing of the original characters and the spirit of Trek, something, to my mind, looooong missing from the *shudder, 'franchise'. The writing wasn't too bad, probably it's weakest point. But considering it was made during the writer's strike, pretty good goin'.

Lot's of fans liked this film. What can I a say. For me, canon abandonment + shitty writing. I can't get past that.

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:33 am 
Offline
A pretty butterfly.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:50 pm
Posts: 965
Location: Australia
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
Lil' Bernie wrote:
All of those are television shows. Long-form storytelling. Films are different, sir.

I did only list TV shows, but that's because the vast majority of his work is in TV. Going to his history in cinema, the only films he's directed so far were Mission: Impossible III (didn't come back for the sequel), Super 8 (didn't even try making that one into a franchise, thank heavens), and Star Trek. That's one out of three.


And it doesn't really count ... Each M:I film has had a different Director, and it's not like he was a creator of the franchise or anything.

_________________
Image

http://vimeo.com/korireaymackey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:48 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Lil' Bernie wrote:
And it doesn't really count ... Each M:I film has had a different Director, and it's not like he was a creator of the franchise or anything.

Okay, so we haven't really seen enough of Abrams' film work to see if his habit of abandoning franchises will carry over from TV to film. Point made.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:38 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8131
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
This just in:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/15/ ... s-han-solo

It seems that Harrison Ford is set to return as Han Solo. Latino Review is reporting this, guys, they're generally on top with their shit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:04 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
My real question is, if Han Solo is in, then where will this take place in continuity ? Will we see Han the smuggler ? Or New Republic politician Solo ?

Or will they just ditch the extended universe ? And what will happen with the fans and the franchise then ?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 136 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.114s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]