The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > The New Enterprise...
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-20-2011, 09:59 AM
Livingston's Avatar
Livingston Livingston is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Along the Kessel Run
Posts: 4,964
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin View Post
The thing I like about the new Bond is that he brings back the idea that Bond is a dangerous guy. He has intensity, and he comes across as a bit of a sociopath. Bond is supposed to be dangerous. Moore was anything but.
That was a nice touch with Craig's Bond. That cool 'shaken not stirred' swagger was definitely replaced by something more dangerous. He's more like the Bond in the books from what I hear. I just hope they can eventually get a little of the 'shaken not stirred' back though.
__________________


"Death, delicious strawberry flavored death!"
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-20-2011, 11:59 AM
Enterprise Captain's Avatar
Enterprise Captain Enterprise Captain is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto, ON Canada
Posts: 1,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
The new Enterprise definitely is not as bad as the Daniel Craig Bond reboot...............that I can absolutely say.

Nothing is as bad as that.
Have you seen these?:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin View Post
Maybe I'm strange, but I like the Bond reboot

And I also like the new Enterprise, although I like the TMP era refit more.
I agree with you on all counts.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-20-2011, 01:23 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
Have you seen these?:

Yep, and I would absolutely still say Quantum of Solace was considerably worse than any of them.



But then it may have a place on my top worst films I've ever seen period. And I've seen The Expendables. For all that they are not brilliant, I wouldn't place the SW prequels on that list personally.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-21-2011, 06:42 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livingston View Post
That was a nice touch with Craig's Bond. That cool 'shaken not stirred' swagger was definitely replaced by something more dangerous. He's more like the Bond in the books from what I hear. I just hope they can eventually get a little of the 'shaken not stirred' back though.
Me too but I guess that the old playful Bond somehow doesn't fit the times.

I have always liked the irony and distance in Bond. This new kind of hyperrealism doesn't do the trick in my opinion, it rather increases the risk that the franchise sinks into arbitrary action movie waters.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-21-2011, 03:48 PM
Livingston's Avatar
Livingston Livingston is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Along the Kessel Run
Posts: 4,964
Default

Very true, that 'irony and distance' you see in Bond is something that sets it apart from every other spy genre movie. If you completely lose that quality you're going to end up being lost with all the other action/spy flicks that come out.
__________________


"Death, delicious strawberry flavored death!"
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-22-2011, 12:41 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

That's actually one of my feelings about the new films - to me, they don't actually have the feel of a Bond film.

The central character could have any name at all. And since the films themselves are fairly average anyway (they just don't have any rewatchability for me much) they don't stand out from the action/spy crowd already.

I'd still say cumulatively for me the Bourne trilogy is 'better' made on balance than the last two Bond films.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-22-2011, 06:35 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

I think there is a general trend towards more realism. While Burton's Batman maintained a bit of a comic-book atmosphere Nolan's Batman doesn't.

This has many obvious advantages but there is something about a film emphasizing that it is a film. When you watch old silent movies they are of course less realistic than 'talkies' but precisely via emphasizing that it is not just a 1:1 copy of reality a movie can express itself.
I think in the case of Bond that's the, as Livingston called it so wonderfully, "shaken not stirred".

PS: While we are at it, I think that ST09 evaded this trade-off and achieved more realism without abandoning the sense of TOSish cheesiness and don't-take-yourself-to-seriously.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-22-2011, 06:52 AM
FireDevlin's Avatar
FireDevlin FireDevlin is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 376
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
That's actually one of my feelings about the new films - to me, they don't actually have the feel of a Bond film.

The central character could have any name at all. And since the films themselves are fairly average anyway (they just don't have any rewatchability for me much) they don't stand out from the action/spy crowd already.

I'd still say cumulatively for me the Bourne trilogy is 'better' made on balance than the last two Bond films.
I liked the Bourne films. Too much 'shakeycam' for me personally (at least in the theater).
__________________
"I'll break out of this zoo somehow and get to you. Is your blood red like ours? I'm gonna find out. "-Captain Christopher Pike
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-22-2011, 06:56 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Shakey-cam in the Bourne films (and in Star Trek) doesn't usually bother me. I find it leads to a sense of 'being there' as opposed to being held at more of a distance through static camerwork.

Or the general realism that Horatio mentions. I tend to prefer it nowadays on balance. It feels more naturalistic.

But it can go too far............Cloverfield I find unwatchable because there's too much of it. Which is a shame, since I think I would like it a lot better if they had just reigned it back a little.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 05-22-2011, 02:13 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

I'd say that the difference between Cloverfield and Star Trek or Dark Knight or Quantum Solace is that you sometimes have a third person perspective in the latter movies, of course nothing as extreme as a narrator but you get things like e.g. a hovering camera or some narrative distance to the characters.
Cloverfield on the other hand is totally zoomed in on its characters and can't work any other way. After all the purpose is not that you understand anything as viewer but share the confusion and fear of the characters (which are pretty flat and this is in my eyes the main weakness of Cloverfield).
A sequel might move in more conventional monster movies waters.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:16 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
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.