Clifton Collins Talks Trek Cheese and New Villains July 17, 2008
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: ST09 Cast, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
Clifton Collins Jr., who plays General Ayel, the right hand to Eric Bana’s Nero in the new Star Trek says that new film is for the fans: "We’re serving the people who are completely enamored with Star Trek." The new Trek bad also talked to Creators.com about Trek ‘cheese’ and his (and Bana’s) role in Star Trek .
Excerpts from Creators.com ‘Hollywood Exclusive’ column
The other day JJ Abrms declared his Star Trek ‘real’ and ‘not kitschy.’ Collins picks up on this theme and talks about Abrams’ de-cheesification:
He’s totally reinvented the whole thing and taken the cheese out of it. I tried to watch some of the old ‘Star Treks’ and with all due respect, they were probably cool at the time, but I couldn’t watch them. [The new movie] is the real deal. It’s just got a lot of reality. It’s not corny at all.
Collins on his and Bana characters
I can’t tell you too much, but me and Eric are some real bad dudes
[SPOILERS]
For spoilers on the characters of Ayel and Nero, see TrekMovie’s recent Star Trek Villain Spoilers article.
Collins February 4 (during the Star Trek shoot) at Hollywood Party
Loading ...
Comments»
I like my Trek Cheese, on the same sandwich as my Shat Ham.
Thanks.
This name calling: “cheese” and “kitsch”, is making me a little nervous.
Also, “corny”.
Oh, man, the cheese is gonna hit the fan with this one… But hey, sometimes a sandwich is good with cheese, and sometimes it’s just as good when you hold the cheese. I’m a man of variety.
This is wonderful news! We’re getting closer to the new movie, day by day. In the home stretch.
=h=
#2—Why? Regardless of whether some people involved may consider the 40+ year-old TOS episodes to be “cheesy”, did you want or expect such a quality in STXI? I didn’t.
Nick Meyer wasn’t a fan of TOS either. But he made some pretty good Star Trek films.
Bear in mind that this guy probably only shot a few scenes, and likely isn’t really all that significant anyway. Who cares if he thought TOS was “cheesy”? If anything, his opinion probably bodes well for attracting newer and broader audiences to see the film. Whether we like it or not, he certainly isn’t the first person I have heard say that Star Trek has cheese disease.
What some don’t seem to think about is that sometimes Star Trek is at it’s cheesiest when it takes itself too seriously.
I hope there is a nice mild blend of everything, just like my favorit colby jack.
I have been watching TOS again recently, and man, as much as I love them, there is alot of cheese. I can’t wait to see JJ’s take on this.
This sounds better and better.
So, Collins could never get into the old Trek. He didn’t like it?
Here’s a secret: that’s true for most people in the world.
#9—Yep. I think its something you had to fall in love with as a kid.
What they refer to as “cheese” or “kitsch” is part of what makes Star Trek work for me. Especially when they refer to it as a bad thing. It’s one thing for an actor to say these things but after hear Abrams bash the Original Series for it…..all it tells me is that he really doesn’t know Star Trek at all.
They only saving grace in this is Bob Orici and I hope his influence keeps it real Star Trek. We shall see won’t we folks?
I watched my DVD of The Cloud Minders over the weekend, and it was a darn good episode. Practically up there with decent TNG episode. The waxed philosophical about the plight of the Trogylites, etc. It was very good.
My wife hasn’t ever seen so much as a whole episode, and she thought the music and the set lighting was very cheesy, but I can’t fault her for that.
#11–”It’s one thing for an actor to say these things but after hear Abrams bash the Original Series for it…..all it tells me is that he really doesn’t know Star Trek at all.
They only saving grace in this is Bob (Orci) and I hope his influence keeps it real Star Trek. We shall see won’t we folks?”
Once again, does anyone remember or care what Nick Meyer thought about TOS? Let’s just say he wasn’t a particular fan.
TWOK….anyone?
Robert Wise didn’t know Star Trek from a 1950’s Martian invasion flick.
TMP?
By the way, my kids laugh at TOS when I watch it. They like some of the movies, but you should have heard my ten year old lose it during “The Doomsday Machine”…
I hope, for the sake of the franchise’s future, that STXI isn’t cheesy at all.
Star Trek ruined Nasa.
Abraham Lincoln.
The Gorn.
Space hippies.
Go-Go boots galore.
Velour sweaters and bellbottoms as uniforms
Shatner’s acting.
Giant space amoebas.
Fu Manchu mustaches and brown shoe-polish make-up on the Klingons.
Bad wigs.
Bee-hive hairdos.
Microphones & salt shakers as futuristic props.
Spock’s groovy electric sitar.
Any chance for Uhura to sing.
Bad Russian accents.
Bad Scottish accents.
Moe Howard haircuts.
AMT models used in place of scale models.
“The Deadly Years”
“Spock’s Brain”
Yup, no cheese here.
(I’m sure Abrams & Co. are simply noting the more dated aspects of the Original Series. Don’t take it so personally, folks.)
#15—Good points.
“Fu Manchu mustaches and brown shoe-polish make-up on the Klingons”
I happen to prefer that though.
showing little respect to TOS when thy guys involved are calling it cheesy and kitsch.
But its like the man Shatner says:
Even the series’ renowned cheesy production design, done on an increasingly tight budget through the show’s 1966-69 run, didn’t put him off.
“The actors were wonderful. And I didn’t care about the sets or anything like that or the cheesy spaceship,” Shatner says. “I think that’s what happens in ‘Star Trek.’ Your eye goes past all the faults because you’re concentrated on the actors and the plot.”
5. Hitch
Why “rehabilitated”? I want you straight and undiluted! : )
I too am looking forward to this movie. It sounds like an entirely different animal than the previous features. Which is a good thing, in my view.
I have a sense of humor about my TOS. I can and sometimes do laugh about it, and if someone wants to call it cheesy, fine.
But keep in mind also that this (hoped for) new series of films will never enjoy the same groundbreaking impact or the longevity of its cheesy source of inspiration. TOS cheese has stayed fresh for 40 years.
As for cheese and kitsch, give the new movie a few decades and it’ll probably qualify, too. To every thing there is a season, Valeris. Then again, it could end up a classic like 2001 or TWOK with no cheese in sight. That’d be okay, too.
My four year old walked into the room the other night while I was watching ‘The Cloud Minders’ and asked me if I was watching ‘Space Chimps’.
18. ByGeorge
Please compare those sets (and special effects) with anything else from 1966 or earlier. Can you provide ANY examples of science fiction sets or effects that were even close to the quality of TOS? I await your answer.
21. Izbot
Did you have a straight look on your face when you compared 2001 and TWOK? C’mon! TWOK was 90% cheese! None of the Trek feautures come close to being the classic that 2001 is!
#17—Seems to me that they are showing quite a bit of respect for TOS just by making a $150 million budget feature film based upon its characters.
TOS is my second favorite television show of all time, and my favorite Star Trek series, but I am not fool enough to believe that the average person wouldn’t think “cheesy” after viewing “The Way To Eden”, “Spock’s Brain”, “The Savage Curtain”, or any number of TOS episodes. The fact is, it is a very common opinion. People like me became attached to the show at a very young age, and by the time we realized just how “cheesy” it often was, it no longer mattered. That opinion, however, has been shared by the directors of past Star Trek films (and pretty good ones, IMO). Why hold JJ and everyone involved with STXI to a higher standard? As long as they make a good film, what difference does it make? All they are doing is being honest. Television shows could be a bit “cheesy” 40 years ago. Big deal. It had some cheesy moments…it had some fantastic moments. The important thing is, it produced characters so iconic that 40 years later, someone has invested $150 million into a movie project with the intention of bringing it back to life.
#24—That’s a matter of opinion. I don’t see TWOK as cheesy at all. What exactly are you referring to? BTW, I consider 2001(as a matter of fact, I think TMP:DE holds up alot better) to be one of the most overrated movies of all time (ducks). It just goes to show you—there are all kinds of opinions (and there is a fine line between cheese and Athlete’s Foot).
I can watch TWOK once a month or so without ever being burnt out on it. I can’t stay awake through 2001:ASO.
Have we forgotten: Everyone involved saw enough in the material to make a $150 Million movie.
If you’re going to create a movie based on a 60s TV show, you had BETTER know how to separate what works from what would not work for a movie.
Star Trek, even though the stories are great, DOES have some cheese.
#15 is right to point it out. I love the cheese, but some don’t. As an example, my wife LOVES the new Battlestar Galactica, but considers the original 1978 series a cheesefest with corny dialogue and bad haircuts.
The best way to show respect to the original material is to treat it seriously, and that means dumping the cheesier aspects, while respecting the core of what makes Star Trek great.
I know people who enjoy the original series partially because of the more hokey elements.
We must repsect the fact that not everyone will enjoy the Original Series as it is, even though the concept, characters, premise and ideas appeal to them.
You know, if anyone feels shortchanged on their cheese after the movie, there are always the fan productions to fall back on. Although they are lovingly and laboriously made, they are brimming with cheese – all of the 60’s lighting gels, set designs and all of the fanboy aspirations packed into downloadable, day-glo wedges! Help yourself. Just go easy on the wine.
Re: #5 – hitch, even rehabilitated, you’re a hoot. I agree with your entire subtext.
I’ve been being bad, staying up late and watching re-runs of “Mission: Impossible” on the wonderful, and unintentionally kitschy, RTN network lately. I’d only seen a handful of episodes over the years. Set in the contemporary, if highly fictionalized, world of the late 60s, it’s just as “cheesy” and laughable at TOS Trek is to the modern sensibility. Everyone doing goofy accents, fooling bad guys with “rubber masks,” tapes that self-destruct, “Iron Curtain” countries with things labeled “Openz” and “Clüze”. Gimme a break.
And yet, it’s terrifically entertaining, and, for it’s time, imaginative and well-done. My 14 year-old son, who’s as modern as the next kid, finds it entertaining as well. So I’m a little prickly when people seem so quick to find the efforts of creators of past eras fodder only for mockery.
That said, I’m not too alarmed about the current Trek movie crew talking about cheese and kitsch. I get it. I look forward to your film.
Scott B. out.
drama and gritty realism in tha’ New Trek:
PINE: What is the meaning of this unprovoked attack? My ship in tatters… Dozens dead and even more wounded! Who the hell are you to do this?
BANA: I’m Batman. (puts on rubber cowl, talks deeper) There is a turmoil in my soul; I slice the fine line between criminal and saviour only to be cut deeply by it.
PINE: What?
BANA: I’m also your uncle… I killed your father to marry your mother and inherit this cool spaceship. Now, I have come back in time to kill you, James, before you boil up the courage to strike me down.
PINE: What?
QUINTO: Captain, I am in love with the stableboy, not the duke. I denounce my nobility for such love!
PINE: What?
NIMOY: Ship out of danger? I have been and will always be your friend.
PINE: What?
CHO: Nero’s lying! He’s trying to muscle in on our territory. But his shower-curtain of falsitudes can only lead to where you cut me out and give him the whole business! (uses controlled substance) Say hello to my little friend! (pulls out Joe Pesci and points him at viewscreen)
PINE: Oh, for crying out loud. Time to get cocky. (sets ship on self-destruct) Nero- if you do not stop trying to attack this ship and kill me, I will blow it up!
COLLINS: (to Nero) I don’t think he’s bluffing…
MONGO: This seem familiar to Mongo…
PINE: What?
Arrrrrr…
#23
I’ve never watched ST for the special effects. Gimme a good story with great characters and I’ll watch. Gimme great special effects, costumes, elaborate productions etc but without a story that is wildly emotional, gut wrenching, thought provoking, exciting to keep me on edge of my seat, humorous, or just plain fun — I’ll pass on watching it.
If you want to give godd characters great story and great effects – no problem. But I watch for the story and characters before effects. I won’t complain if someone wants to take the cheese away but it doesn’t matter that much, my eyes go past that aspect of it.
26.
TWOK cheese:
Khan and his crew look like an 80’s Heavy Metal band. Cheesy.
The Genesis Planet effects (inside and out) are super cheesy!
Kirk’s wimpy, whiney son is cheesy.
“Khannnnnnnn!” is cheesy.
Scotty carrying his dead nephew onto the bridge is cheesy.
Reusing the TMP spacedock sequence was cheesy.
Kirsty Alley was too damn sexy to be a Vulcan. Cheesy, but good! : )
I’ll take Joachim over Ayel any day.
arrrrr… saw Eric Bana and this here Clifton Collins pushin’ old women in tha’ street, holdin’ up local stores wit’ a chainsaw, and jaywalkin’ all over creation…
bad, bad dudes…
Arrrrrrrrr…
32.
Khan and his crew look like an 80’s Heavy Metal band. Cheesy.
- More so in retrospect that at the time of released.
The Genesis Planet effects (inside and out) are super cheesy!
- ??? I don’t see cheese in the Genesis demonstration sequence CGI, though it is a little dated now due to the CGI advancements made since 1982.
Kirk’s wimpy, whiney son is cheesy
- Actually, I though his character was pretty believable. I saw him as someone who made assumptions about a father he didn’t know.
“Khannnnnnnn!” is cheesy.
- Fantastic, pure, prime, mature cheddar. Love it !!!
Scotty carrying his dead nephew onto the bridge is cheesy
- Not to me. Serves to remind the audience of the stakes.
Reusing the TMP spacedock sequence was cheesy
- Nope. Just cheap. It worked though, since it is the same Enterprise, and would not have looked that much different if redone. 10 cent solution ;-)
Kirsty Alley was too damn sexy to be a Vulcan. Cheesy, but good
- Especially with Kirk in the turbolift. “It’s still regulation, Admiral.”
#32—Can’t say I smell the cheese in that lasagna…
1.Khan and his crew look like an 80’s Heavy Metal band—dated, perhaps, but cheesy?
2.The Genesis Planet effects (inside and out)—I don’t see it. mediocre budget effects for the early 80’s… that’s about it.
3.Kirk’s wimpy, whiney son—the product of a single mother without an Alpha-male role model around.
4.“Khannnnnnnn!” —classic Shatner overdramatization. If that’s cheesy, he has never done anything that isn’t.
5.Scotty carrying his dead nephew onto the bridge—since when is emotionally rash behavior over a dead relative (particularly one so young) cheesy?
6.Reusing the TMP spacedock sequence—that’s just good economics!
7.Kirsty Alley was too damn sexy to be a Vulcan—now that’s just racist! LOL. Back then, she (Alley) was just a cute, young and inexperienced actress. She (Saavik) is also half-Romulan. Spock can tell you all about their “sex appeal”.
24. Anthony Thompson
“Did you have a straight look on your face when you compared 2001 and TWOK? C’mon! TWOK was 90% cheese! None of the Trek feautures come close to being the classic that 2001 is!”
I was serious, TWOK is a classic. And I agree with Closetrekker that TMP:DE is a classic in its own right. Of course putting TWOK and 2001 in the same sentence as examples of timeless sci fi classics was bound to stir a up few people but I stand by my opinion.
And Closetrekker: A lot of my friends feel the same way about 2001 (that it’s overrated or boring, etc). But you can’t deny its influences (especially on TMP which it fairly matches in tone and pacing), particularly with regard to its effects. Consider that it came out the same year as “Planet of the Apes”, “Barbarella’ (cheeeeeeesy!) and TOS seasons 2 & 3 then compare and contrast. And I can see that ol’ JJ has been influenced by the film in his previous works with regard to the film’s ambiguity. It leaves a lot of lingering questions and no nice, neat answers. And JJ likes that kind of thing. Look at “Cloverfield” and how you are given a cropped moment of a much larger story — and no definitive answers — yet I feel it was totally effective. Also, I don’t just consider 2001 a classic because it’s influential. I love every single thing about it — every shot, every image, every nuance. Just like TWOK.
33. DJT
“I’ll take Joachim over Ayel any day.”
Excuse me, huh?! How can you make a statement like that when the film’s a year away? Haven’t even seen this guy’s performance yet! That’s like saying, “Next year’s television season sucks!” What do you have a time machine?
Star Trek is many things but “corny” isn’t on the list.
They musn’t forget that part of that “cheese” is part of the charm. They need to be really careful on what “cheese ” they remove and how much. Remove the charm from TOS and they will fail.
#27:”Have we forgotten: Everyone involved saw enough in the material to make a $150 Million movie.
If you’re going to create a movie based on a 60s TV show, you had BETTER know how to separate what works from what would not work for a movie.”
Exactly so.
If TOS and Trek were not cheesy, “Galaxy Quest” would not have been possible.
Khan and his crew look like an 80’s Heavy Metal band. Cheesy. - Yes. Ricardo’s muscle chest.
The Genesis Planet effects (inside and out) are super cheesy! - NO. Pretty frakking state of the art at the time.
Kirk’s wimpy, whiney son is cheesy. - Original script had him bone’ing Saavik.
“Khannnnnnnn!” is cheesy. Nope – classic trek moment.
Scotty carrying his dead nephew onto the bridge is cheesy.Nope – yet another great moment for effect. The original script even had the funeral
Reusing the TMP spacedock sequence was cheesy. yes, but it was thankfully shorter, still cool
Kirsty Alley was too damn sexy to be a Vulcan. Cheesy, but good! : ) Are you kidding? Sexy vulcans rule.
#37—I’d be the first to admit that my opinion is the minority one when it comes to grading 2001:ASO. I cannot help it. None of the fine cinematography or the knowledge that it influenced other great films/filmmakers keeps me entertained. I’m just being honest. And it’s not as if I am one of these people who hates older movies or cannot enjoy anything but mindless action or raunchy comedy. It just never does anything for me. I’m glad that Abrams and others can take something beneficial from the film. It just bores me. I was taken in the first time, but it’s just not one of the films I can rewatch again and again.
I’m never aware of the “cheese” when I watch TOS alone. As soon as somebody walks in the room, though, I immediately start to see it through their eyes and the “cheese” becomes apparent.
The movies are a different thing, however. People’s affection for many of the movies just proves that the heart of ST is the character dynamic. With the 60’s “cheese” gone, the plot and characters take over in the movies and “non-fans” can still enjoy it.
I guess I still view TOS through a child’s eyes and that’s one reason watching it has always been a special experience for me as an adult.
I’d just like everyone to pause and consider the idea of “removing the cheese” by making a Trek movie focused on a Romulan time-travel plot.
Just pause, inhale, exhale, and consider.
And speaking of inhaling, if this is true, then we could have people walking out of the theaters next year saying “Man, that was like Star Trek, except they totally cut the cheese!” “Yeah, who did that? Who cut the cheese?” “Abrams, man. He cut the cheese.”
It could go on T-shirts.
It’s a space opera where “aliens” are human actors with rubber ears/antenna/forehead bumps. Of course it’s cheesy. That’s what Star Trek IS. It’s Sci-Fi and allegory. If you try for some kind of “realism” then you don’t understand it.
Good. Feel the same way about TOS. If it wasn’t for the remastered episodes, they’d almost be unwatchable.
I actually think the remastered ones look more cartoony than the original.
i just added a cheese/kitsh poll (see right column)
I’m really amazed that I got through reading 43 posts before I found a reference to cutting the cheese.
Which Trek is the cheesiest? They all have their own portioned amount. TNG is one big cheesefest. DS9 had its share (Ferrengi, anyone?). ENT early on overdid it with the forced “sexiness” and pee-pee jokes. But VOY is probably the cheesiest of all. That third season in particular was insane — I still can’t tell if the writers were totally clueless and driving in the dark with no headlights or if the whole season was an extended joke.
And speaking of cheese, remember in VOY’s “Learning Curve” when Neelix accidently made the ship’s bioneural gelpacks sick with bacteria…from a cheese? Best worst line from any Star Trek:
Chakotay: “Get this cheese to sickbay!”
44. At leaset it wasn’t in an Elevator ;-)
I personally like Cheese quiche. Sometimes some spinach is good, too. What do call that, florentine? Anyway, you can add bacon or onions as well. Very tasty.
What’s that? Oh, kitsch.
Nevermind.
When you’re making a film as expensive as this is, you don’t have room for cheese and kitsch. Gots to be real! This is today, not 1966.
I want this new one to be just as real and good as The Dark Knight or Casino Royale.
More lameness!! Some one wake me up when there is some real news or Tressurian Intersection gets done. Until then color me bored silly
#46—”Good. Feel the same way about TOS. If it wasn’t for the remastered episodes, they’d almost be unwatchable.”
I also think its good that they are excluding cheese in STXI, but I think TOS (at least 25-30 or so best eps) is the most rewatchable Star Trek series.
#50—”Which Trek is the cheesiest?”
That’s easy for me…anything that involves a “holodeck adventure”.
#50—”Best worst line from any Star Trek:
Chakotay: ‘Get this cheese to sickbay!’ ”
Funniest thing I’ve heard all day! LMAO.
“Have we forgotten: Everyone involved saw enough in the material to make a $150 Million movie.”
They also saw enough in the material of Transformers to make $150 million movie, and they saw enough in the material of G.I. Joe to make a $170 million movie. Them spending this much money doesn’t mean that they love the material, it means Star Trek is a well known name and they think they can make money off of it. That is all.
How in the world to do all the people who call the sets and costumes of TOS “cheesy” enjoy a play? Or do you?
I doubt it.
Can you watch 12 Angry men and enjoy it or does it turn you off because its asking you to “believe” the men are in a real jury room? Is the drama lost on you because the judge is sitting behind a courtroom mock-up?
Fascinating.
Come on, folks. Do you think Chris Nolan is saying that the 60’s TV Batman was “culturally reflective, layered, art”? No. It’s CHEESE. TV in the 60’s was cheeeeeese-a-rific. I love it, but I don’t want a new movie to look the exact same way.
JJ has taken Picard’s, ‘Make it so!’ and made it his by turning it into, ‘Make it real!’
Thank the Great Bird of the Galaxy! Exactly what the franchise needs to regain wide appeal!
…the adventure continues…
You’re gonna need a lot more than steel rails and brushed aluminum walls. Nemesis and Enterpriose was full of “real”.
If you don’t like the characters and the predicament they are put in doesn’t interest you, you don’t have jack.
Give us Kirk and Spock, with a relationship and chemistry that rivals the TV series. Put them in a fantastic, imaginative exciting adventure that makes us care. Then, and only then, will you have succeeded….aluminum walls and expensively tailored uniforms are nothing more than window dressing.
I hope that when they say they are removing the cheese, that they are not in fact removing the humour from Star Trek!
# 23 – Er… in case you haven’t noticed its 2008 not 1966!! To those of us not trapped in a time warp or in denial it is quite obvious that TOS now appears cheesy and dare I say it dated!! That doesn’t matter to us we all still love it but do you honestly believe the general movie going audience is going to want to watch that?! If they even tried that then it would end up more like the remake of Starsky and Hutch than Star Trek!! Is that what you want? I don’t imagine so! Someone else earlier in the thread referenced the Shat where he said that we can all look beyond Star Treks faults because of the the great actors characters and stories. Wouldn’t it be great if the new project gives us something that is real Trek with great acting, great characters and a great story and we don’t have to look past any faults?!
Being faithful to the source does not mean they have to replicate 1966!! I’m hoping for innovation not imitation and everything I’ve seen and read so far gives me grounds for optimism.
59. star trackie –
“How in the world to do all the people who call the sets and costumes of TOS “cheesy” enjoy a play?”
Oh but the play’s the thing! Actually I think the difference is that on most TV shows (excluding sitcoms with audiences) the sets are so convincingly real that viewers are often oblivious to the fact they’re filmed in a studio. It is easy to recreate an office or courtroom in a studio since you just use the same materials used to build an actual courtroom, office, what-have-you. Star Trek’s cheesy sets come into issue because the setmakers are trying to create something speculative from the future but using modern building materials under time and budget constraints. Watching an episode of The Office it’s easy to believe it was filmed in an actual place and not in a studio (it’s a studio set). Same for Law and Order or any other series set in the here and now. It’s a lot easier to dress those sets with appropriate props etc since you just go buy whatever at a store. Not so with Star Trek. It all has to be fabricated. And not always as convincingly as those other shows. This has the effect, with some people, to take them out of the story and focus on the fake-ness of it all. You don’t really get that watching Boston Legal.
In the ‘olden days’ of TV set designers made no attempt at realism (just watch any old Twilight Zone episode, they all look like sparcely-dressed stage sets for plays) — they were plays for television. That’s where terms like “teleplay” came from originally. Now, one could argue, we’ve become more ’sophisticated’ viewers and require that extra-convincing level of realism in our televised ‘plays’. Anything less than what some viewers are expecting becomes “cheesy”. And, yeah, probably a good percentage of those folks don’t or haven’t enjoyed an honest-to-goodness play.
#64
I believe it was me who quoted Shatner. My point is that story, plot, acting and characters are more important than special FX. Spend the most in these areas then go for the effects. Admittedly many newcomers to ST will be a little put off if they pay for a movie ticket and are presented with cheap looking sets and effects. You don’t want to look like your are soaking the moviegoers for $$ while spending as little as possible to make the movie. Would be a turn off. Never think special effects and expensive sets can make up for a poor story, poor character or lousy actors for a lot of ST fans.
66. ByGeorge
Too true, too true. Spending $150 million on a film doesn’t insure its success. How much did Speed Racer cost? Like $195 million? Did anyone go see it? It made back only $45 million at the box office. That’s considered a disaster. Hollywood loves to give sci fi movies — especially summer sci fi movies — insane budgets for special effects in hopes that it will draw audiences in. I always think of that godawful Lost in Space movie that looked amazing but lacked in every other department. Well, except the cheese department.
@62 methinks you are confusing real with the world within which Star Trek takes place and how characters act and the story is told.
Drop the TrekBabble and the cheesy moments like littering the bridge with Klingon translation books and strawman Starship Captains like in Generations on the Enterprise B.
Make the story real by treating it with the same approach if it were taking place today. Play fair. Use the SF elements as a springboard to dramatic conflicts not as a crutch to skirt around having people resolve those conflicts.
…the adventure continues…
Past the Next Gen., A lot of the cheese fell away, and ST started getting better. I’m starting to get a bit worried that this won’t be Trek any more, it’ll be just another movie, that happens to look like Trek. I’m still really excited to see the first Star Trek blockbuster in the modern sense (the motion picture came really close though) and to see more people get into it.
I think if there is a sequel, a bit more cheese and kitsch may make it in, after the first softened to blow to non-fans.
64.
I was NOT implying that the movie should look like TOS. It had better not! I was simply stating that in it’s time (1966) the series did not have cheesy production design but was probably state of the art. No one else had done it better before. Period. Kubrick, of course, advanced the state of the art of production design in science fiction two years later with 2001. Of course, he had millions to spend!
The poll lacks a “It’s a moot question since any movie centered on a Romulan time-travel plot is inherently 100% pure cheese and Abrams and company are just pulling our collective leg … or maybe our collective finger” choice, although I readily acknowledge that it wouldn’t easily fit :)
Plus, we’ve already seen the go-go boots. The cheese is confirmed. :)
Re: #30
PINE: What?
JULES WINFIELD: Say “what” again! Say “what” again! I dare you! I double-dare you! Say “what” one more damn time!
Oh wait – this is Star TREK, not Star WARS…
he was disrespectful of TOS
why does JJ and this guy not respect TOS
JJ is trying to make Trek his own and that’s not right
As great as 2001 is, has anyone looked at it recently? Visually, BOTH Star Trek AND 2001 answered this question:
“What if 1960s people were living in the future?”
Look at the clothes and hair. Pan Am spaceliners, anyone? Kinda… cheesy.
The thing that I like about 2001 is that it captured the boredom of what a long-distance space trip would really be like. In other words, what some viewers criticize the movie for, I call pretty dang brilliant. But that’s probably a comment for another thread involving Buzz Aldrin. :-)
Believe me, the new Trek movie will have its portion of future-fromage, whether it wants to or not. The passage of time “ripens” most things in the cheese department, especially science fiction movies and TV shows.
Scott B. out.
Beyond the cheese, there were good stories. That’s good enough for me.
I think you all are going to buy tickets to the midnight premiere anyways, so stop complaining.
# 65 – Thank you. I’ve always thought that some of the best TOS episodes resembled small-cast stage plays myself. Some of my favorite performance eps include The Man Trap, Return to Tomorrow (Shat was better as Sargon than Kirk in that one!), The Empath (yes, i’m probably in the minority there, but I loved that the nonexistent stage environments made you concentrate on the actors more) and of course, Conscience of the King REALLY ran with the whole play idea.
I’ve actually taken to using my VLC player to crop the picture down to letterbox format when I watch some of these remastered eps, and I’ve gotta say I’m starting to pay less attention to the gray walls in McCoy’s office, or the purple\green back lighting in the Enterprise hallways and really look at Shat, Nimoy, and Kelly in a different take. I recommend re-watching some of these eps in that format and seeing if it changes how you take in some of these stories sometime.
#76: That’s an assumption/stereotype we see a lot of around here, but it doesn’t hold true for everyone. I still haven’t seen the last two Trek films at all, not even on video. Not all of us are automatic ticket-sales.
But yes, stories are key. And cheese is inevitable, especially for this new film (unless we’ve been misled about the basics of the film, our friend Mr. Collins is essentially the Deputy Mayor to Mayor McCheese).
i dont like this guys comments at all and he is disrespectful to the legacy that this classic series left. he isnt doing himself or the fans any favours. if TOS is cheese ill have a large slice of Gorganzola please.
TOS rocks. im getting a little nervous now!
Greg
united Kingdom
73. captain_neill –
“he was disrespectful of TOS, why does JJ and this guy not respect TOS, JJ is trying to make Trek his own and that’s not right”
I think you’re reading too much into this. Acknowledging that certain aspects of Trek haven’t held up well over the decades is not neccessarily disrespectful. I love TOS yet it isn’t flawless — it could use some cosmetic improvements and there’s nothing wrong with a tweak here and there as long. We’ll see if those tweaks are helpful or not next year but to accuse these guys of being disrespectful is a little reactionary. From what JJ and the writers have said so far they seem *very* respectful of TOS and want this relaunch to be successful and not the nail in Star Trek’s coffin.
80# i think it would have been fairer to have said ’some parts/aspects of it dont stand up anymore’ rather than just saying he couldnt watch TOS now.
thats not nice even though hes entitled to his opinion of course. i dont think it sends out a very positive message to TOS fans to hear that. especially as JJ is strying to get everyone on board for this movie. It doesnt help to get this comment. id like to think that everyone involved in this film has the utmost respect fro whats gone before. TOS deserves that at least.
Greg
UK
77. 24th Century Rockstar -
I agree, I love ‘The Empath’, ‘The Man Trap’ and ‘Spectre of the Gun’ in part for their sparse sets. They are absolutely proof that good storytelling doesn’t always need a lot of blinky lights and cgi — in fact, those flashy details can be totally absent.
Anton Yelchin, a real Russian, will use the fake accent that Walter Koenig, who also speaks Russian, used in TOS. Cheese.
“When you’re making a film as expensive as this is, you don’t have room for cheese and kitsch. Gots to be real! This is today, not 1966.”
Um, Superman Returns was $270 million. War of the Worlds was $132 million. Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull was $185 million. The Phantom Movie, uh, Menace was $115 million. Hulk was $137 million. Pluto Nash was $100 million. Aeon Flux was $60 million. Alexander was $155 million.
No room for cheese and kitsch because of expense?
Son, what have been smoking?
81. classictrek -
Maybe so but this is coming from an actor playing a minor role in the movie. And he speaks to people who may have been put off in the past to the percieved ‘cheesiness’ of the show. He’s really saying that even movie-goers who didn’t care for TOS may really like JJ’s film because those quaint old 60s trappings are not present there. I don’t think he was really speaking to the long-time fans.
And who knows? Maybe Clifton Collins Jr. was never a fan of TOS — being a fan would hardly be a prerequisite for being cast in the new movie. So what if he didn’t care for TOS or found it “corny”? He’s just a bit player in a much larger tapestry.
#45:
You’re right about that. Another moment of brilliance from my favorite Trek captain. :-)
This has probably been talked to death by now, but I thought humans and Romulans had never seen each other before “Balance of Terror”. Do we know if this story changes that?
I had a similar reaction to Collins when I tried watching TOS, I love TNG DS9 and ENT.
10. Closettrekker – July 17, 2008
#9—Yep. I think its something you had to fall in love with as a kid.
I disagree, you did not have to be a kid to become a fan of TOS. My father was 26 years old when Star Trek premiered in Sept. 1966. I turned 5 years old in Feb. of 1967 and remember watching a few episodes with him during that time. I believe the first 2 season aired on Thursday Nights at 8:00 PM and the 3rd season aired on Friday Nights at 10:00 PM (too late for me to watch at that time). Remember there was a letter writing campaigne to NBC during the second season of TOS asking NBC NOT to cancel Star Trek. I seriously doubt the people writing NBC were kids.
The first 2 seasons of Star Trek was superior to any other Science Fiction TV Series at the time. Think about it, the only other Sci-Fi TV Series’ of 1960s were the Irwin Allen garbage (Lost In Space, Land of the Giants, TIme Tunnel, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea) or Quinn Martin’s The Invaders. So, yes I grew up watching Star Trek in syndication during the early 1970s but my father and other adults were fans of the show during Star Trek’s prime time airing in the 1960s. My father and I plan on seeing JJ Abrams new Star Trek film next year.
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
Star trek the motion picture made a large effort to be “real” as possible and was real boring.
All I’m saying is that, there’s been WAY too much calling the original series “Cheesy”. You know some of us (myself included) LOVE the original series and the other shows. I welcome realism with open arms, but this movie better “feel” like Trek.
74. captain_neill – July 17, 2008
“why does JJ and this guy not respect TOS
JJ is trying to make Trek his own and that’s not right”
I know you are protective of Trek, but you can’t read these interviews and get so worked up over them.
Think about it. JJ doesn’t respect TOS yet he’s making a TOS film…. and stepped up to the plate and decided to direct. He’s vowed to respect canon and his writers love Trek.
Relax.
“Seems to me that they are showing quite a bit of respect for TOS just by making a $150 million budget feature film based upon its characters.”
Or desperation to have a tent-pole franchise. That budget actually scares me because to be deemed a success, Trek is gonna have to make a heck of a lot of money to just break even.
I’m also put off by the “cheese” and “Kitsch” comments. It indicates a superficial understanding of TOS. The show is 40+ years old for heaven’s sake and of course it’s going to look it. But there must be something magical and special about it or it couldn’t have lasted this long and they wouldn’t be spending that $150 million. Such cavalier dismissals are troubling to me because it makes me wonder if they GET it.
#32
I agree. A lot of cheesiness in TWOK, and a lot of cheesiness in TOS too. I really *love* TOS but I surely don’t expect cheese in a 2009 movie.
The Irwin Allen shows are fun — and I don’t think they were trying to be preachy and serious science fiction. You have to watch those in that context.
The Invaders is a GREAT series! The X-Files of it’s time.
“…me and Eric are some real bad dudes.”
…That never made it past the 5th grade, judging from the grammar.
Continues to sound like crap.
#97 -
Pick another note to play.
#90-
That had more to do with a weak script, bland acting and poor editing, rather than trying to make it more “real.”
I was 4 in ‘67. My grandmother used to call Star Trek “The Scary Show.” It used to give me nightmares. I remember one scene in “The Guardian of Forever” where this bum blew himself away with a phaser. That was not cheese, that was horror. Those people that went through the Guardian could have been Monsters. Especially McCoy with his drug induced paranoia. They could have played up McCoy’s paranoia when he went back in time, but instead he just slept it off and behaved himself.
I guess what I’m trying to say, to the people in the ’60’s there were a lot of scary new ideas there, and it wasn’t cheese.
Latter on, there were some things that didn’t ring true, like Apollo’s hand or Abraham Lincoln sitting out in space–that was clearly a lack of imagination. It spoiled the whole effect of these people out there in an egg shell of a ship that can be destroyed at any moment, but still go on.
#93 Krikzil,
Nobody has dismissed anything and you don’t throw 150 million at a movie because you don’t have a tentpole movie. (and they DO)
Too many people taking a few words far too seriously. Trying being a harsher judge in about 294 days.
Star Trek XII” The return of Stanky.
How are you, friend?
“#93 Krikzil, Nobody has dismissed anything and you don’t throw 150 million at a movie because you don’t have a tentpole movie. (and they DO)
That’s the only reason you spend that kind of money. To make lots more money and for good or bad, Hollywood is dependent now on these mega blockbusters for their bottom line. Kinda sad that I’m not sure studios are gonna take risks for the quirky, small films as much as they have in the recent past. Lots of talent turned up there.
“Too many people taking a few words far too seriously. Trying being a harsher judge in about 294 days.”
I’ll judge as I see fit, now or later. And speaking of taking things a little too seriously…..
….I don’t jump to conclusions on a movie almost 300 days away based on a few words of an interview (like Kitsch or Cheese).
Silence!! #19 He knows his place. I don’t know If it was Cheesy, But I always Liked The “Mind Meld” Bass Music. it was Cool and it’d be Awesome if they use Some sort of Bass Sounds if Spock Melds in The New movie.
“….I don’t jump to conclusions on a movie almost 300 days away based on a few words of an interview (like Kitsch or Cheese).”
Xai– Expressing the fact that I find the kitsch and cheese remarks “troubling” is just that. I’m not “jumping” to anything – it strikes an off key chord in me — a superficial skimming of what TOS “is” to ME. (It’s the same feeling I got when I heard a couple of Pine’s perceptions about Kirk.) But the magic of Star Trek is that it IS so many different things to people.
krikzil- I saw your post on the other thread about having friends in the industry. Know anyone who worked on the set in any shape, form or fashion? Come over to the chat thread and spill.
#1
” I like my Trek Cheese, on the same sandwich as my Shat Ham.
Thanks.”
I think I know what he’s saying, and it has exciting potential attached to those sentiments, but I echo CmdR’s thoughts. (well put by the way)
#9
“So, Collins could never get into the old Trek. He didn’t like it?
Here’s a secret: that’s true for most people in the world.”
What research data are we basing this statement on?
Denise — We have a chat thread? Well, dang it. But in answer to your question, yes, knew folks, been on set of one TV show and STIII (that was a bit of divine providence. I went to Occidental College and had a heart attack when they used our wacky fountain and Admin Building stairs for Vulcan and the refusion scene).
Wow – were you enrolled there when they were filming? To get to the chat thread, go to the top of the page, look for the tab that says Chat, and click away. WARNING: Craziness ensues once you enter the chat dimension…
Collins? Collins?? Ah yes, Nero’s sidekick. Had totally forgotten about him.
Anyway, I’m really glad that I’ve never been hooked for XI, so I don’t have to de-hook myself every time I read one of those interviews.
“Wow – were you enrolled there when they were filming? ”
Yes. And the wondeful part was that several members of our sci-fi club (The 3rd Foundation) were members of the Audio Visual department and had keys to every buiding on campus. Heh heh. So we moved from room to room for optimum viewing. And then finally just went down and they didn’t seem to care. More in chat…
“Dwiy!!”
Any fan should be able to see there’s definitely a distinctive “cheese” difference between the TOS series & the TOS movies. I think the new film will take Trek to a new level of reality & seriousness while still defining the characters we’ve always loved. Look at James Bond. There’s a huge difference in the Roger Moore films than there is with almost all the rest.
Clifton Collins sounds like an idiot, or just another kid who has no sense of TV history. Star Trek is 40+ years OLD. If you watch ANY drama from 1966, or 1967 they are ALL cheesy, the dialog, the sets, the clothes.
TWOK is cheesy – Kahn’s blond surfer dudes, David Markus with his sweater on his shoulders. The first year of TNG is Cheesy.
It’s called TIME. in 30 years JJ’s will look cheesy.
For it’s time Star Trek was DEAD serious, Dagger of the Mind, What Are Little Girls Made Of, Miri, A Private Little War, Metamorphosis.
Try to have a little bit more insight than what has happen in the last 12 months, Cliff
77
“The Empath (yes, i’m probably in the minority there, but I loved that the nonexistent stage environments”….
Deforest Kelley cited this as probably his favorite episode in an interview near the end of his life due in part to the staging of the episode. As a kid I loathed it. The passage of time, the birth of my kids, and 16 yrs of public school teaching have made me look at things differently.
What an idiot and pompass, arrogant ass! If it wasnt for ‘cheese’ this guy would not have a paycheck! And obviously, ‘Cheese’ worked all these years or else, you would not have 10 movies, over 800 hours on T.V. 5 spinoffs and a multi million dollar merchandise industry spanning over 40 years! So, if this movie is the ‘real deal’ what does that make TOS? The fake deal? It sounds to me that they are trying replace 40 years of history and this comment is the icing on the cake. Lets not forget ENT and NEM were supposed to be more hard hitting and realistic, and look at what happened! ‘probably cool at the time’ well, if TOS was cool at the time, then why is it still being shown in it’s redone glory every week? They would not show it if no one watched it! It is comments like these that make me not want to see this movie, due to their lack of respect.
#117: I think there’s a faint chance he’s just joking. I mean, again, consider the evidence … we have a Romulan-centered time-travel plot starring a bald villain named Nero, for Christ’s sake. That’s seventy-five metric tons of Commercial-Grade Processed Cheese Food Product, right there, and this guy is playing the sidekick to the Big Cheese.
There’s no such thing as a non-cheesy Romulan time-travel plot anyway, but when you embody the film’s threats in a villain … *and* name him Nero … that tips your hat that you’re not only making a purposely cheesy movie, but that you may well be determined to out-cheese them all :)
The new poster looks good and has eliviated some concerns about the new actors.
Still annoyed with this guy for saying TOS is unwatchable.
TOS is still very watchable.
Hey, it ain’t easy bein’ cheesy..
“Clifton Collins Jr., who plays General Ayel, the right hand to Eric Bana’s Nero in the new Star Trek says that new film is for the fans: “We’re serving the people who are completely enamored with Star Trek.”"
&
“He’s totally reinvented the whole thing and taken the cheese out of it. I tried to watch some of the old ‘Star Treks’ and with all due respect, they were probably cool at the time, but I couldn’t watch them. [The new movie] is the real deal. It’s just got a lot of reality. It’s not corny at all.”
More than a bit contradictory?