Star Trek Online

Star Trek Online (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/index.php)
-   Ten Forward (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/forumdisplay.php?f=129)
-   -   About Wrath of Khan (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=644991)

jestersage 04-29-2013 02:26 AM

About Wrath of Khan
 
For a certain reason, I decide to rewatch the Wrath of Khan, and I am not saying it's a bad movie. Yet, in light of JJ, what do you makes it special, and what make it different from JJTrek?

reyan01 04-29-2013 03:24 AM

The acting, the story, the settings, the morality. The obvious references to other literature - Moby **** (blasted swear-filter!) being the most obvious example, with a copy of that very book actually appearing on Khan's shelf.

The issues that they explored, such as growing older, watching younger people step into the fray. It offers a moral dilemma without a simple solution, and action that didn't come at the expense of the story. And Khan may not have been terribly relatable in STII, but his anger and frustration that stems from the loss of his loved one certainly was. And Spock's death was very well portrayed.

It just felt..... epic.

messahla 04-29-2013 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jestersage (Post 9523171)
For a certain reason, I decide to rewatch the Wrath of Khan, and I am not saying it's a bad movie. Yet, in light of JJ, what do you makes it special, and what make it different from JJTrek?

First JJTrek is not star trek and never will be star trek

Quote:

Originally Posted by reyan01 (Post 9523541)
The acting, the story, the settings, the morality. The obvious references to other literature - Moby **** (blasted swear-filter!) being the most obvious example, with a copy of that very book actually appearing on Khan's shelf.

The issues that they explored, such as growing older, watching younger people step into the fray. It offers a moral dilemma without a simple solution, and action that didn't come at the expense of the story. And Khan may not have been terribly relatable in STII, but his anger and frustration that stems from the loss of his loved one certainly was. And Spock's death was very well portrayed.

It just felt..... epic.

I agree with everything you just said

jam3s1701 04-29-2013 04:06 AM

What makes it better erm. . . It was an original story for one, and they didn't think of making a copy of the best star trek film just because there lazy

MAGIC BLOOD wasn't in it either

reyan01 04-29-2013 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jam3s1701 (Post 9523901)
What makes it better erm. . . It was an original story for one, and they didn't think of making a copy of the best star trek film just because there lazy

MAGIC BLOOD wasn't in it either

It's not really a copy though - the dumbed-down story and style over substance notwithstanding, JJ is no Nicholas Meyer.

patrickngo 04-29-2013 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jestersage (Post 9523171)
For a certain reason, I decide to rewatch the Wrath of Khan, and I am not saying it's a bad movie. Yet, in light of JJ, what do you makes it special, and what make it different from JJTrek?

Okay, well...we'll start with a few basics.

1. special effects: wrath of Khan was a movie that used SFX as a garnish, the main meal wasn't the eye-candy.

2. Storyline/scripting: because the SFX wasn't the point of the movie, the actors had to actually tell a story. This differs from the TNG films more than it differs from the Abrams flick, but there were fewer logical inconsistencies in Wrath of Khan, in part because it had a simpler, shorter, more directed and CLEANER storyline that only HINTED at events prior, as opposed to trying to develop the entire 'universe' from scratch in 2 hours.

3. Acting: Shatner was Jim Kirk for YEARS, Pine was Jim Kirk for less than A year. There were fewer teething problem as a result.

4. Expectation: The audience's expectations were vastly different, this made Wrath of Khan a much easier 'sell' than the 2009 Abrams flick. Wrath of Khan's Kirk had a long history with the Audience, Pine's Kirk was this new guy, no history with the audience, no prior development from a beloved teevee series, even the point in the careers is radically different, as was the backstory. ST (2009 version) was an introduction piece, ST:WOK was a continuation piece, the expectations are VERY different because the Products end up being VERY different.

5. Production Values: people put hard numbers on this and really shouldn't-Abrams did a lot of 'experimental' crap just because he could (See comment 1), the budget for Wrath of Khan was lavish for it's time, but tighter than most films today could be made with, and they didn't have cgi, so most of the effects were practical effects-which in turn limited their use quite a bit, so extraneous material was cut prior to filming (the benefit of hard budgets), this is similar to having a professional edit your written stories-remove the extraneous material, tighten up the dialogue, 'show' rather than 'tell' and 'hint' rather than 'show'...and it worked at the time, and still works today.

commandersalvek 04-29-2013 08:27 AM

The Wrath of Khan had a story.

JJs had a mess hidden by FX

Oh oh the viewers are beginning to question whats happening -quick blow up a planet!-dazzle them with lens flares!

jestersage 04-29-2013 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jam3s1701 (Post 9523901)
What makes it better erm. . . It was an original story for one, and they didn't think of making a copy of the best star trek film just because there lazy

MAGIC BLOOD wasn't in it either

Right, thanks for the reminder of the deus ex machina - at least with wrath of khan, the solution to the problem involves longer time and sacrifice of another love one.

On a sidenote, that basically confirmed the cruse, does it not?

valoreah 04-29-2013 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by messahla (Post 9523731)
First JJTrek is not star trek and never will be star trek

Well said. :D

eldarion79 04-29-2013 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valoreah (Post 9527491)
Well said. :D

I say poorly said, but Trek fans has been saying **** Series is not Trek since TOS went off the air.

Fun facts about TWOK, Roddenberry considered it to be not canon due to disagreements with the director. TWOK was a soft reboot of Trek (The director wanted to showcase younger actors-Saavik was the only one that made it and a new ship-eventually the Excelsior) and it ignored the events of TMP. The movie had Spock die at the beginning due to a script leak that said Spock died at the end, similar to what we have now.

About CGI and Special Effects, in its time, TWOK had a lot and included some of the first CGI to appear in film (Genesis sequence). Like George Lucas has said about Star Wars, if they had today's technology, they would've have used it.

TWOK was just a revenge film, plain and simple. I do agree however it was the actors that made the film what it was, all that comardarie between them was awesome. From Kirk's Arent You Dead to McCoy's What's holding up the damn elevator. The best part of the film for me was when Scotty brought his dying nephew to the bridge.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:39 AM.