posted
I keep an eye on OSC's reviews. Sure, we don't agree on everything, but he's certainly more "populist" than a lot of reviewers --- and we agree a lot on science fiction.
I looked forward to a mention of the new Star Trek film, figuring that it must be a "must-see". Even if he didn't watch Trek, he'd surely be intrigued by the hype and the fact that it's big budget sci-fi.
But instead of Star Trek, he went to see 17-Again. I'm not going to judge. But I think that there's a slight chance that he doesn't necessarily make the decisions on which movies he's going to see at the box office.
He'd stated that Serenity was one of the best science fiction movies ever? Star Trek had a lot of the Serenity feel, but it was more fun and more optimistic. I hope he gets a chance to go this weekend. I'll keep my eyes peeled for a review.
posted
OSC is not a Star Trek fan. In fact, he's been quite vocal about his disdain for the show.
As I recall, he considers the setting and many elements of the core premise to be shoddily put together. He also feels Nimoy was the only performer out of the original series cast who had actual acting chops.
I wouldn't hold my breath. He is a fan of some of J.J. Abrams stuff, though. So who knows?
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, I felt that Nimoy's performance was the weakest out of the entire cast. The acting was one of the best parts of the film, actually.
Anyone who labors the "science" behind the story is bound to be disappointed. But as a writer who values characterization first, I think he may be pleasantly surpised.
Posts: 688 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Herblay: You know, I felt that Nimoy's performance was the weakest out of the entire cast. The acting was one of the best parts of the film, actually.
I was referring to OSC's perviously stated opinions about TOS. I have no idea if he has any opinion on Nimoy's current work.
quote:Anyone who labors the "science" behind the story is bound to be disappointed. But as a writer who values characterization first, I think he may be pleasantly surpised.
Oh, it's not the science that got raked over the coals in the previous statements I've read by OSC on Trek. Though he does feel live action 1930s-style space opera has been done much better.
From what I've seen, many or most of the Trek characters are not all that interesting to him.
But, like I said, he is an Abrams fan. Maybe he'll check it out.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
And it is, by the way, a *rave* review. At one point he speculates that it is the best space adventure story ever.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I personally enjoy that all forms of story-telling are fleshing out thier characters like never before. Good guys vs bad guys always seemed too simlple, a story is more compelling when even the antagonist is simply a little less moral and on the other side of an incident rather then being a mindless jerk.
And with how they re-wrote certain things, character dynamics that were never eluded to are front-faced and given importance. These would not be possible if not given consideration the psychology of the various characters.
Besides, Shawn of the Dead and Harold in the same movie with aliens.... thats all win.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
That review was totally unexpected... I've been waiting for days now for OSC to bash Star Trek. Guess I'm not good at predicting his reactions.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: That review was totally unexpected... I've been waiting for days now for OSC to bash Star Trek. Guess I'm not good at predicting his reactions.
Well, to be fair, he did take the opportunity of talking about Star Trek to bash the intellectual elites and English teachers who have trained millions of Americans not to recognize what makes Star Trek a good movie... so there's that.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Herblay -- you DID notice that the 17-again review was dated 4-26-09, right? What date did Star Trek come out again? After that? Oh. . . . . /rolleyes.
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
He talks about how the movie is about who is the better leader than about friendship, but I think the movie implies that Kirk is a better leader with Spock as his partner than he would be alone.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
So it sounds like he really doesn't hate Star Trek. He dislikes the original series, and I always have as well. He never watched the other series, so he can't pass much of a judgement.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's supposed to review everything, not just the stuff he's watched. I'm not even sure he's trying very hard to do that.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
