The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/index.php)
-   Star Trek XI: The Movie (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Klingons and Augments - The Benchmark (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11701)

horatio 05-13-2012 01:54 PM

Klingons and Augments - The Benchmark
 
Obviously the effects and acting of the twelfth Trek movie will be far superior to television but the natural question will be whether its story can compete with the previous story arc that dealt with Klingons and Augments (Borderland, Cold Station 12, The Augments, Affliction, Divergence), especially as the script has already been the main and only weakness of the last movie.
Note that the runtime does not differ that much, 200 vs. 130 min, so the 'in television you have more time to tell a detailed story' argument stands on a shaky ground.

kevin 05-13-2012 02:32 PM

Not being a significant supporter of the Augment story arc (particularly in respect of it's explantion of Klingon ridges - which I think exemplifies ENT's strongest weakness of deeming it necessary to explain things that didn't warrant explaining ultimately) anyway then in all fairness I don't suppose I have many genuine concerns in the area of 'competing'...............assuming the sequel script enters such territory.

Captain Tom Coughlin 05-13-2012 02:36 PM

I can't really have an opinion until I've seen it, I don't have any idea what they are going to do. I'm not really thrilled with the whole Khan angle, but who knows where they will go with it.

horatio 05-13-2012 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin (Post 323474)
Not being a significant supporter of the Augment story arc (particularly in respect of it's explantion of Klingon ridges - which I think exemplifies ENT's strongest weakness of deeming it necessary to explain things that didn't warrant explaining ultimately) anyway then in all fairness I don't suppose I have many genuine concerns in the area of 'competing'...............assuming the sequel script enters such territory.

Have you actually seen these episodes? Because the Klingon ridges were a little joke at the end but not the core of the story.

In the last movie there have been Vulcans and Romulans and it did not tell anything about them at all, let alone connect them in any way.
The Augments stories on the other hand did flow into the political background (the Orion, Klingon, soon-to-be Federation border triangle area) and later merged naturally with the Klingons.
So to rephrase my question, will the next movie be fanwank galore like the first movie or will it not just throw everything into the pot but actually cook something new out of these familiar ingredients like the previous story that involved Klingons and Augments did?

kevin 05-13-2012 03:11 PM

I don't think the Augment story is without it's fanwank either to be fair from what I recall. Explaining the ridges is a pretty big fanwank moment alone really. Plus you have Soong, genetics. A few other things I think. Yes you have the politics............but fanwank remains in there. I'm 50/50 on it but I think I saw those ones, but my memory on ENT is questionable to be fair since I was waning at the time and it's been years since I saw any of it now.

It's like most of ENT's storylines. I'm not and never was big enough on the show to start with (and obviously by extension the main storylines) to be immediately concerned about the possible effects of the sequel's story on them. Since we don't yet know what precise territory it might cover. The political foundation aspects of the story have been done, and neither 'Space Seed' nor TWOK needed to discuss them (ignoring the 'real' reason for that of course) so there's not an immediate need for any other Khan story to concern itself with a story that took place 100 years earlier.

If it's going down that route.

horatio 05-13-2012 03:32 PM

I think it makes a difference whether you just throw stuff in for the sake of it or whether you combine it to create something new. It is not really fanwank or continuity obsession if we deal with the latter.
That's why I always criticize the previous two attempts to repeat TWOK, it was a blunt attempt to copy patterns that worked instead of an inspiration or a usage of ingredients from TWOK that were used to cook something new.

Back to the twelfth movie, I am actually pretty sure that unlike in STXI the familiar guys, here Khan and the Klingons, will have something to do with each other. Of course in-universe-wise the movie will have nothing to do with the previous stories that involved Klingons and Augments but it will be compared with it just like it will be compared with TWOK.

kevin 05-13-2012 03:38 PM

I guess overall it depends how you found that overall arc. I guess I recall the fanwank more. But then I disagree that the last film was a blunt copy of TWOK. Nemesis was, no argument and it failed because it exactly almost copied TWOK. But to some degree ALL the films have tried to replicate TWOK's successful balancing act of elements. The results have always varied. The last film on the other hand had a much different primary story. Nero was simply a catalyst for the formation story. There are aspects of TWOK in Spock/Nero's relationship but it's not the main drive of the film. He was not the best villain, to be sure though.

omegaman 05-13-2012 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horatio (Post 323482)
I think it makes a difference whether you just throw stuff in for the sake of it or whether you combine it to create something new. It is not really fanwank or continuity obsession if we deal with the latter.
That's why I always criticize the previous two attempts to repeat TWOK, it was a blunt attempt to copy patterns that worked instead of an inspiration or a usage of ingredients from TWOK that were used to cook something new.

Back to the twelfth movie, I am actually pretty sure that unlike in STXI the familiar guys, here Khan and the Klingons, will have something to do with each other. Of course in-universe-wise the movie will have nothing to do with the previous stories that involved Klingons and Augments but it will be compared with it just like it will be compared with TWOK.

Probably. What's certain is this movie will follow JJ's previous style with little time for pause for thought.

horatio 05-13-2012 04:22 PM

I wonder whether there will be a monster in it. Hard to imagine an Abrams flick without lensflares and monsters. For my taste Abrams is too blunt. Of course I want to be emotionally manipulated but not in such a transparent way.
I guess this happens when you copy another moviemaker. Once again we see the important difference between being inspired and being a copycat.

samwiseb 05-15-2012 02:31 AM

It seems intentionally ironic to mention 'fanwank' (a word I find distasteful anyway, hence my use of quotation marks) in regards to ST09 while comparing it to ENT S4. I'm sort of scratching my head to come up with any 'fanwank' moments in the last movie. On the contrary, the movie is most often criticized for its lack of concern with the fans -which is why for example Gayla is "that green chick that 'everyone' knows Kirk sleeps with" rather than an 'Orion slave girl'.

I'm also not following why 'the' important question of the day suddenly is how the movie will compare to these particular five episodes. Out of more than 600 hrs of ST, why these eps? Do they represent the pinnacle of ST for any reason? I for one have seen these episodes, and all eps in between, which now puts me about 3/4 the way through S4. I already don't remember the 'Ruffles have Ridges' scene 'vividly' enough to concur whether it was intended as a joke or not (I would kind of hope for their sake it wasn't, because I read it mostly as a continuity geek-out moment), however I think I can safely say I don't consider ENT S4 itself to represent the strongest season of ST. To say the next film will be compared to these eps seems unlikely, since only a very small fraction of the intended audience will have seen them (until last summer I hadn't). To say it will be compared to STII seems a more tangible concern.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin (Post 323483)
But then I disagree that the last film was a blunt copy of TWOK. Nemesis was, no argument and it failed because it exactly almost copied TWOK. But to some degree ALL the films have tried to replicate TWOK's successful balancing act of elements. The results have always varied. The last film on the other hand had a much different primary story. Nero was simply a catalyst for the formation story. There are aspects of TWOK in Spock/Nero's relationship but it's not the main drive of the film. He was not the best villain, to be sure though.

This.

I think Khan being in the next movie is still less than official anyway. It seemed 'official' two weeks ago, but I think there's been some more backpedaling since. Even accepting that Schinzon and Nero are 'Khan' (let's not forget Ru'afo while we're at it), Khan himself is not 'Khan'. We already know what turns Khan into 'Khan', and that's 15 years in a desert with no toilet paper. And until seven years ago, Khan wasn't an 'Augment' either (he was doing just fine as a 'genetic superman'; retro-continuity being such a wonderful thing).

Quote:

Originally Posted by horatio (Post 323488)
For my taste Abrams is too blunt. Of course I want to be emotionally manipulated but not in such a transparent way. I guess this happens when you copy another moviemaker. Once again we see the important difference between being inspired and being a copycat.

Well, you did say 'blunt'. I'm not sure in this case if the moviemaker he's supposed to be 'copycatting' is Spielberg or Meyer. However I am genuinely curious to come across insightful criticism towards JJ that doesn't upon closer inspection turn out to appear influenced or motivated from the standpoint of frustrated ST fandom.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.