RiffTrax Forum
 

Captain's Log, Stardate 9529.1

Started by Pak-Man, February 05, 2007, 11:38:17 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

macleod

Quote from: torgosPizza on February 10, 2007, 06:35:31 PM
The only reason Star Trek is even trying a reboot now is because of name recognition. If they had a new project come out called "The Adventures of Hammy and Pointy-Ears" and it seemed similar in concept and execution to the ST franchise, you'd have a lot of angry trekkers going "Rip-off!"

So my point is (if I have one) that just because it's a Trek movie with Trek actors doesn't make it immune to the idea that the movie is bad. As anyone here can attest, there is good sci-fi (Blade Runner) and there is terrible sci-fi (Battlefield Earth). There are a lot more factors that go into considering something bad than just how the actors did or how well a movie is shot, so on and so forth.

Thank you Torgo; to all the Trekkies out there, just admit the material is what it is.

FrensaGeran

Very well, macleod. The material... is awesome. The characters are well developed, and their relationships are complex. Kirk and Spock have a history which can be seen even if you've never seen the show before, and it adds a nice layer of nostalgia to the franchise. Hammy and Pointy Ears have nothing but a premise, and that ship can't sail.
"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons." - T.S. Eliot

sarcasm_made_Easy

as a fellow trekkie i just got to put my foot down.  the movie sucks, the only reason it exists is past history with the franchise.  The only reason its watchable is established out of movie material that movie assumes you know. 

Pretty blunt i know but nonetheless true. 

6079SmithW

Never having watched any Star Trek except the two rifftrax ones and a few stray episodes in class or what have you (yes, I watched one in a class, a speech teacher showed us the 'Darmok' episode from the one with Xavier and the Reading Rainbow guy in it) I would say that VI is not innately a terrible movie. In V, the characters come off as cloying and unlikable. In VI, they at least seem moderately interesting, and I'm not wondering why in God's name anyone would put them in a movie. Not great, mind you, but not terrible.

Also, Pauline Kael liked II specifically because of the sense of familiarity with the characters and camaraderie between them, and she said she'd never watched the show. Therefore, I conclude that it's not just a name brand thing, the characters make goofy situations more interesting because of something innate to them and the way the actors play them.

sarcasm_made_Easy

how dare you add clear proof that previous statement is wrong,  i use my sarcasm powers to place you in an ivisible cube filled with air. 

NOW WHAT PUNK

macleod

Well, I agree that star trek VI isn't terrible, but it still banks on the franchise to be at all decent!

Sarcasm, thanks for the breath of fresh air!

Thom_Serveaux

Quote from: macleod on February 11, 2007, 08:05:37 PM
Well, I agree that star trek VI isn't terrible, but it still banks on the franchise to be at all decent!

Sarcasm, thanks for the breath of fresh air!
Yeah, sarcasm, nice move...  What do you call that, 'Sarcasm Cubed'?

sarcasm_made_Easy


macleod

Hmm....mimes scare me...you should stick to your guns, literally :D

starfighter

Quote from: Thom_Serveaux on February 10, 2007, 09:58:42 AM
Quote from: rayjherr on February 10, 2007, 12:03:14 AM
what was that line on Conan? "Star Trek XVI : The final payment of Shatner's Beach house"
Come on Shatner, like you're not making enough on Boston Legal, at lest  Lloyd maybe needs the money, its not like his royalty checks from Angel's in the Outfield is doing him a lot of good
Um, in my last post I was referring to which Star Trek movie that I would like to see Riffed, in this case, it would be 'Star Trek: The Motion Picture' In which Christopher Lloyd appears, as opposed to 'Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country' in which he does not.  I hope this clears up any confusion...
I think you've got the wrong movie.  Christopher Lloyd is the Klingon captain in Star Trek III, the guy Kirk fights on the Genesis Planet as it's destroying itself.  I don't remember him being in the first Trek movie.

Thom_Serveaux

Damn! I guess some of those just sort of blur together...

macleod

Well really....don't all Klingons look alike?  ;)

Thom_Serveaux

"They're like Klingons without the Kling."   -Joel.   #104(Women of the Prehistoric Planet)

Seriously, couldn't they have just had it so the males have that brow ridge, y'know 'ribbed for her pleasure..'  :rimshot:







































.....I'll get my coat.