Kevin Smith Compares New Star Trek To Wrath Of Khan October 25, 2008
by Rosario T. Calabria , Filed under: Feature Films (TMP-NEM), Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
Seems like everywhere you find Kevin Smith these days, he is talking about JJ Abrams Star Trek movie. In a new interview with SciFi Wire the director compares Trek’s next adventure to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, and he also delved into ‘r word’ territory
Smith: Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan
The new Star Trek film makers (like those before them) have held out Wrath of Khan as the gold standard for a Trek film, and according to Smith they met that goal. Smith tells SciFi Wire:
I can watch the [Star Trek] movies again and again and again. The TV [series] is kind of sacrosanct for a lot of people, but I don’t enjoy it as much as I enjoy the movies. So this one I enjoyed probably the most since I’ve enjoyed, like, Wrath of Khan.
R word alert
SciFi Wire also reports that Smith ‘lauded the performances of Chris Pine (KIrk), Zachary Quinto (Spock) and the rest of the prequel’s cast,’ but he may raise some eyebrows by invoking a certain ‘R word,’ saying:
I’m all for a reboot, because it just keeps it potentially alive longer
More from Smith at SciFi Wire
Related:
Loading ...
Comments»
cool. first
I don’t care WHAT the ‘R’ word is. I just wanna see this movie.
19th! xD
Lets hope the final cut is just as good.
I await the trailer with baited breath and do hope that all Trek fans will share the same viewpoint. Though the success of TWOK lay in the character of Khan and the dynamic between him and Kirk. I hope Nero can be comparable.
#4
I’m with you. Sick of hearing about ‘R’ this, ‘R’ that.
All trek-related news so far has been rated ‘R’. ;)
Did anyone who reads this site NOT know this was a reboot?
Vic
I am totally going to see this movie, regardless if people say it stinks or not…but wow, those pictures of the bridge make it look like a Vidal Sassoon beauty salon instead of the bridge of the Enterprise. They must keep Scotty and Co. jumping replacing burned out light bulbs. ;-)
Notice how, in the article reboot was mentioned in the same sentence as prequel?
I bet he just meant rebooting as in giving the series a fresh perspective with new actors. Of Bob Orci has been so adamant that this doesn’t betray canon, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. And even if it does, I won’t care that much, cause Star Trek has never been very consistent.
I trust Kevin Smith’s judgment because he’s an ardent student of filmmaking and he KNOWS the sci-fi genre. His own movies have been a bit uneven, in my opinion (and probably in his, as well), but his fanboy credentials are undisputed.
On a side note, I’ve read some rumors online that real, official images of the new Enterprise may be released early next week. Has anyone else heard anything about this?
Well I’m sick of hearing anything related to Kevin Smith, whoever he is.
At the end of the day what it all means is that Star Trek is back to its best and I couldn’t be happier! :)
Kevin Smith has made some great movies, along with some duds, so I think I can trust he knows the difference between a great movie and a bad one. Plus, he’s a Devils fan! Can’t find any faults there :P
Bringing up TWOK is the Trekkish equivalent to Republicans bringing up Reagan. You have to do it or lose all credibility with the base.
Nemesis was compared to TWOK too, remember? (Though I expect this movie to be much, much better.)
I just want the “R” words to include ROCKIN’
If there are other “R” words, I’m cool with that.
They’ve changed lots already – anyone who says the new bridge is just like the old bridge but different (such as the cast) isn’t strictly correct – it’s a major update let’s be honest.
But if it all gives the same ‘feeling’ as TOS and the film is well acted, plotted and executed, then there’s no harm.
I’d hate some overly complicated sop of a plot twist to ‘explain’ the new bridge lights, the blue deflector dish and why starfleet has hired a new wardrobe designer who just loves those little arrowheads everywhere to keep it to canon. Casual fans won’t mind and the good of the film will have to take priority over keeping us more nostalgic fans fully fed.
Image we get near the end of the film, the Big E is all beaten up and Admiral Nogura comes up and says – “well done boys and girls, we’re going to give her a refit but due to budget cuts we’re taking all the blue bridge lights out and outsourcing the instrumentation to Fisher Price…
“…oh and Button Moon Corp are fitting a 1960s style radar dish out the outside of the hull. Just don’t ask.”
re: 12. Chris M – October 26, 2008
“At the end of the day what it all means is that Star Trek is back to its best and I couldn’t be happier! :)”
So you’ve seen the movie then…
Watch it Mr. Smith or Mr. Orci will hunt you down!
….and the adventure continues…
Kevin Smith again, eh?
Ho-hum….
Let’s face it, the next big news is going to be in about three weeks, with the release of ‘Quantum of Solace’….
If there is one word I hate in Hollywood it’s Reboot or Retcon.
To me retconing the timeline is a step too far to explain how this new film is diff from the Star Trek that we will always love.
I’ll be seeing the trailer this thursday!!! EXCITEMENT!
re-boot or whatever…
I’m just glad it’s not another re-run! (…because that’s all I’ve seen for a long while!)
They compared “Nemesis” to “Wrath of Khan”. I hope this movie will only have the success of ST2 but it shouldn’t be a copy of it!!
It’s in the eye of the beholder, folks, and I’ve no doubt that a lot of long-time Trek fans will consider this movie to be a reboot in significant respects.
my personal opinion is that wrath of kahn was a pretty badly directed film. it hits some good moments, but really just a bunch of action scenes with no real sci fi concepts
ive always thught the st:tmp was the ultimate star trek movie. ok not perfect, it is beautiful and thoughtful
I’m sure BND will agree that Some R words Arrr Acceptable. Too bad the Movie Couldn’t come with an R rating. Diora Baird. HELLO!!!
#25 I agree.
TMP was ahead of its time and gets better with age.
Why everyone is so bent on recapturing the feel of TWOK is beyond me…. oh yeah, PROFIT.
At this point, and after seeing Nemesis recently, this purist says reboot away!
BTW, New Voyages (yeah, yeah…Phase II) has a NEW, new, Spock- the guy who doubled for Quinto! He looks amazing.
Hats off to them!
We heard this about Nemesis, “wrath of khan….”
I remember reading the leaked script and thinking, this could be a really tense movie (despite all the horrible continuity problems).
Then I watched the movie, and wondered what the hell I was thinking when I was reading the script (maybe it was the excitement of a new Trek film).
All I’ll say, is we’ve been down this road before, everyone saying how good it is, and ending up with a turkey.
Don’t believe anything you read. Just believe what you see.
I have more faith from this team for one reason. There’s no Rick Berman, who didn’t really get any sort of consistent grip of what a Star Trek movie should be.
There is an ‘R’ word for people who have problems with the ‘R’ word.
Retentive.
:p
The opinions on Trek of this guy are diametrically opposed to mine – I think the TV shows are not even in the same league as the movies, which usually weren’t very good because of poor writing, and I think rebooting Trek makes about as much sense as re-writing Shakespeare.
That Smith likes the new movie tells me nothing, therefore.
Ah. Vindication.
I really wish people would STOP IT with the comparisons to Wrath of Khan. We got that load of horse puckey with Nemesucks, didn’t we? Oh, this is a lot like WoK, people will love it because it evokes memories of WoK, the villain is a lot like Khan.
In a pig’s eye!
If I want to watch Wrath of Khan, guess what? I’ll pop in the frakkin’ DVD and, after James Horner’s epic score, fast forward to the battle of the Mutara Nebula or when the Reliant first ambushes the Enterprise. When I go see Star Trek next year, I want a damn good Trek movie–I do not want to watch this movie and be reminded of superior films.
And isn’t that the problem of Trek movies for…well, since Undiscovered Country? The attempt to present a villain who is “like Khan”? the problem is that the writers miss the forest for the trees. Khan wasn’t a great villain just because he was Khan–there’s a LOT going on in Wrath of Khan besides Ricardo Montalban’s scenery chewing and kick-ass space battles. There’s character development and heart–something that too many of the TNG Trek films completely missed.
Reboot away. The old Trek is dead and it is time to resurect it from the ashes. Look at what it did for BSG. This is the best thing to happen to trek.
TrekMovie is swarmed with people who don’t care about Star Trek, tehy only care about Abrams, beacue sthey are Lost, Alias and Felicty fans, not Star Trek fans. And, naturally, they don’t understand importance of canon. And, I also think that some of them are on somebody payroll. Please don’t delete this post (I sholud write this in every post ;) )
Ante, are talking about the phase disrupter canons from Enterprise? Cause, ya know , they totally suck. Bring on the turbo lasers from Star Wars.
Please no more comparisons to Wrath of Khan. I hope it’s better but Trek comparing this or that with Wrath of Khan usually sucks
There were “Wrath of Khan” comparisons when “Nemesis” was being screened… and we all know how well that turned out. So let’s just wait and see.
Comparisons between the new film and TWOK are inevitable, noty just because the filmmakers themselves have evoked it, but because TWOK is, like it or not, considered the high-water mark for the Trek films. It essentially re-launched the franchise after the disappointment of TMP. It brought action, color, and strong characterization back to Trek and provided the fuel to carry these characters through four more films.
Nemesis was also compared to TWOK, and those comparisons are not unfair. That movie does follow many of the same plot concepts as TWOK, but they didn’t work because they were either forced upon the audience (i.e. Shinzon’s connection to Picard), or they were very poorly handled (such as the Reman weapon that takes FOREVER to power up). The fact that the formula didn’t work in Nemesis does not mean, however, that the formula itself is invalid. It’s all in the execution, and just because Nemesis didn’t deliver as promised doesn’t mean the new film won’t either. That’s like saying “Nemesis was compared to TWOK and Nemesis is a bad movie, so TWOK must be a bad movie, too.”
Furthermore, we don’t really know which concepts the makers of the new film might be using as inspiration, so the comparison is a bit unclear. If they’re talking about strong characterization, great interpersonal dynamics, solid action, and a high-stakes threat that has an honest, personal effect on the characters, then everything should be okay. As fans, we should be mindful that we’ve been suckered before, but let’s not write off the comparisons to TWOK because Nemesis didn’t use them effectively. Like I said before, it’s all in the execution. We’ll find out soon if the filmmakers can deliver on their promises.
Would this guy PLEASE stop comparing this movie to other things like Star Wars and KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN? It’s getting very annoying!
34. Ante
You’re an idiot. I care about Trek. I have cared about Trek since I was a child watching it first run on NBC. It was the other way around for me.. after seeing that Abrams was doing Trek.. I started watch his other stuff. I rented Alias and Lost and enjoy it quite a bit. I was already a fan of Transformers and have started watching Fringe.
I understand the importance of canon.. you don’t understand that TOS was fully of canon problems… what they called Starfleet.. what the called the UFP.. continuity errors all over the place. If you cannot keep canon in TOS… at least keep the spirit of it. Is Capt April canon? some say yes, some say no. Is Star Trek 5 canon? Roddenberry says no. Canon is in the eye of the beholder. People say that Chekov in this movie is not canon. Why? Who says he wasn’t on board in a different department before becoming a bridge officer. It wasn’t written anywhere so it is conjecture that I am very open to.
Trek needs updating or it will be dead forever. When you have a show that lasted 5 series (6 if you count TAS), 10 movies… it is hard to keep anything canon. Who cares if it is called a reboot or a reimagining or a redo… just go see the movie and judge it AFTER you have seen it. For all those saying they refuse to see it.. Yeah, right. LoL. You’ll be there opening day.
I was watching some classice Trek on TV this morning. I realized just how dated and 60’s it looked. you CAN’T do that on the big screen in 2008… it would look… stupid. NOTHING about those sets works anymore. For those that want the sme bridge .. the same enterprise from the 60’s… THAT would surely kill Trek for good. And going back to TNG or a completely different new voyages type movie wouldn’t work either. the Next Gen movies killed that with Nemesis. THIS is the only way to make Trek work again now… go back and make it interesting again.
I am a HUGE TOS fan… the show and the movies… by far my favs.. including STV. But I am open minded enough to look forward to some new Trek! It will be weird to see other people in the classic roles.. but some new blood and energy is what is needed. With Kelley and Doohan gone… there is no way we can have an original cast movie. The Undiscovered Country was a great send off for those guys. Time for something reenergized, reinvigorating and refreshing.
Too much hype about this movie will eventually destroy it…
And Since when did Kevin Smith become anything but a big fat nerd? A nerd who’s known for his love for Star Wars, has made b-movies and is pretty much useless…
Sorry but Kevin Smith is way overrated and if HE says it good… that doesn’t count at all to me…
But whatever.. right, people who love Kevin for no reason, probably takes this as a sign from God.
34. Ante – October 26, 2008
“TrekMovie is swarmed with people who don’t care about Star Trek, tehy only care about Abrams, beacue sthey are Lost, Alias and Felicty fans, not Star Trek fans. And, naturally, they don’t understand importance of canon. And, I also think that some of them are on somebody payroll. Please don’t delete this post (I sholud write this in every post ;) )”
Based on what?..Your gut feeling? I love lost but didn’t watch the others. I am here because of a love of the Trek Universe. Your post looks like you are here to troll.
There’s a new Star Trek movie coming out?
What is ‘retcon?’ Can someone explain this to me?
If these guys have the balls to reboot Star Trek, recast leads and redesign the 1701, then they should be able to use the word ‘reboot.’ The word/metaphor only means that you’re shutting down and restarting, either with the same or updated operating system. It’s not like ‘reimagining’ or ‘recreating.’ Or installing a new operating system–which is what I’d call the new BSG.
As for Khan, yes, it’s sacrosanct and represents the high water mark for filmed Trek. Ricardo Montalban’s entire career was mere prelude to his bare-chested, megalomaniacal, soliloquies.
But arch villains in general were never the peak moments of televised Trek, TOS in particular. In my opinion, the majority of the A-level episodes of TOS were rooted in what science fiction author Cory Doctorow calls ‘predicting the present.’ In other words, it was when Star Trek extrapolated current events and science, creating stark choices for Kirk and the crew. “City on the Edge…” was very much about politics and history. Many episodes were about inequality. And the vast majority of episodes were rooted in modernity and Cold War uncertainty about friends and villains, grey morality and spycraft.
The Supreme Court shouldn’t put too much stock in their ability to mine a vein of Montalban in a mountain of Bana. [All due respect paid to Bana--he shouldn't be called to do the impossible.] If I had pull, I’d send out a memo to all concerned: enough with the TWOK comparisons; underpromise and overdeliver!
I also recall Nemesis being compared to “TWOK”.
Well, it fell far short of that!
Nevertheless, I do not believe films should copy “TWOK”…only be of the same quality of storytelling and filmmaking.
My Portillios Italian beef sandwich with sweet peppers and mozz was as good as Wrath of Khan
I bought a new pair of Nike kicks and they fit so good it was like Wrath of Khan
When I got the bill to repair my Mercedes ML 350 I almost went all Wrath of Khan but then my service specialist fixed it so my warranty cobvered it which was as cool as Wrath of Khan
Kevin Smith is a great guy but his belly is getting bigger than the Genisis Planet in Wrath of Khan
Gigli was so “Nemesis”…
Why does everyone expect the new Trek to be a carbon copy of TOS? We, the viewing audience, are 40 years older, much more sophisticated and accustomed to top rate SFX and CGI and demand a certain level of scientific credibility. Rocket ships with fins,windows and sparklers flaming out the back just don’t cut it anymore!
I can look back at the 60’s episodes and recognize that the budget,special effects,acting and sensibilities were from that era. There is a certain strata of fans that will only accept the canon from that time period. I enjoy the 60s Trek it will always be the original and nostalgia aside I will enjoy the reboot,re-imaging,prequel or whatever you wish to call ST_XI.
#34:”TrekMovie is swarmed with people who don’t care about Star Trek”
Which is why we hang around here talking about “Star Trek,” of course.
#34:”…they don’t understand importance of canon.”
I understand it precisely. I don’t care though – which is entirely different from caring about “Star Trek.”
Ante,
warning for trolling.
if there is one thing that I have consistently warned people over and really bugs it, it is those who claim to have cornered the market on how to be a fan.
Montreal Paul
warning for flaming. Even though he was trolling, this site does not condone going personal.
People read too much into the word “reboot.” In Hollywoodspeak, it simply means taking an old, moribund property and bringing it back to life as an active franchise. There are many ways of doing that, and starting over with a new continuity (as GALACTICA did) is just one of them. The DOCTOR WHO approach — staying in the same continuity but bringing a fresh style and attitude to it — is just as much a “reboot” in the terms filmmakers use, and it sure sounds like that’s the approach Abrams & co. are taking.
Sorry Anthony… I take back my comment calling him an idiot. The rest of my post stands. I will refrain from going personal in the future.
Too bad Smith can’t write or direct a movie to save his life.
@53,
Finally someone with a sense of quality and taste!
Kevin Smith is a fluke and a useless, dated joke in Hollywood. Why we even have to have his opinion here is beyond me, let alone trying to figure out why he was allowed to see this movie. Clearly he’s got NOTHING to do with it.. so.. why?
We’re probably bigger Star Trek fans than he is and yet he’s got this lame line of saying it’s as good as Star Trek II. Is that what we do now? Star Trek is constantly compared to the past episodes? Wow… that’s not quite the progress I’ve been looking for in this new revitalization of the series…
@34 I know it hurts to see what they are doing to Star Trek. The stance I’m going to take is to read the TNG prelude comics and make my decision on to see this thing based on how they do. Obviously if they are aim the comic at 12year olds it doesn’t bode well but to have this TNG link to me makes what Smith is saying targ droppings. Certainly you’d think JJ and co would have a clause in the NDA prohibiting the use of the R word
#54: “Kevin Smith is a fluke and a useless, dated joke in Hollywood.”
You’re entirely wrong.
There’s a reason Smith is being interviewed a lot right now. It is not because he saw the “Star Trek” movie. Do you know what it is?
Yeah, he did Clerks. Okay fine. Good. But then, wow, the rest of his stuff is just bad. Come on man. It’s sad people still flock to his stuff.
Kevin Smith is hilarious…and so are his films.
Aside from that he’s a fanboy like a lot of us here and while his opinion isn’t the “gospel”…it’s just one fans opinion of a film that none of the rest of us have seen.
It still all comes down to each of us seeing it ourselves and formulating our OWN opinions…
I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not a fan of Kevin Smith’s films. I’m not saying they’re bad, they’re just not my cup of tea. However, I have heard him KS do tons of radio interviews here in L.A., and he comes off as a funny, knowledgeable, and likeable guy. He loves making movies, and he is a movie fan, especially of the genre stuff. So, even though I’m not a fan of his work, I do give some creedence to his opinions rearding Trek, and for that matter, Watchmen as well.
#33 – “Reboot away. The old Trek is dead and it is time to resurect it from the ashes. Look at what it did for BSG.”
I’d really rather not. ;)
Seriously, I guess I’m one of the relative minority who doesn’t think that Mooreverse BSG is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Some of its writing is better, but much of what I really enjoyed about the original BSG was lost with the new one, so much so that I think nuBSG would have really worked better if it had been a post-apocalyptic Earth story, with the remnants of Earth Humanity seeking out legends of a lost spinoff of our civilization.
I really think Richard Hatch’s “Second Coming” would have been the better way to go.
To be fair, even if Trek were creating a separate Abramsverse, they don’t seem to be thinking nearly as radically as what Moore did, which is all to the good.
#51 – “The DOCTOR WHO approach — staying in the same continuity but bringing a fresh style and attitude to it — is just as much a “reboot” in the terms filmmakers use, and it sure sounds like that’s the approach Abrams & co. are taking.”
So far, for all the sturm und drang, I think Christopher’s got the right of it. Now, obviously, there may be more secrets that could change that assessment once revealed, but if we aggregate the total of the comments from Messrs. Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, Nimoy, and even Kevin Smith, along with what little visual evidence has been revealed to date, it still supports Christopher’s conclusion.
#24 and #58 – “It’s in the eye of the beholder, folks, and I’ve no doubt that a lot of long-time Trek fans will consider this movie to be a reboot in significant respects.”
and
“It still all comes down to each of us seeing it ourselves and formulating our OWN opinions…”
Wise words, both. :) I suspect that there will be a wide continuum of reaction, depending on how, for lack of a better term, flexible people’s view of continuity will be before they decide there’s been enough supposed violation to result in a whole new Abramsverse Trek. e.g., to oversimplify horribly, those who insist on absolute visual fidelity will no doubt be quite convinced that it’s a reboot already, for obvious reasons. Those who are less wedded to every bit of visual detail, but are more focused on storytelling fidelity, might not be so sure. And, of course, there are myriads of variations within each of those simplified categories.
It doesn’t matter if Smith liked the movie. He saw it for free. It matters if the real fans of Trek do since we have to pay for the ticket.
KHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
thats all i have to say about it
The trailer will pretty much sum up the look and feel of the picture for many people. I intend to give it more of a chance than that, but for me (being a very visual person) it makes a big difference in whether or not I get deeply involved in the film or just go and watch.
alexx… get a new thesaurus for your birthday? just kidding.
As with EVERYTHING else in the world be it a movie, a book, a painting, or a blind DATE I’d say that reserving your judgement until you’ve actually SEEN whatever it is your wondering about would perhaps be best. why we insist on prejudging this thing based on comments from directors, TOS actors, producers, bloggers, fanboys et al is beyond me. so far what do we REALLY have to go on? a few screen shots? a ‘leaked’ script?
Myself, I’m a huge Star Trek fan in all its incarnations and appreciate each for what it is. Some are better than others obviously. Do I blindly put WOK on a pedestal and detest Nemesis? no. Yes, WOK is a great film but is by no means the ‘citizen kane’ of Sci-Fi. It’s not even the best Sci-Fi movie of the 80’s but i digress. I watched Nemesis without having heard or read about all the negative reviews it got. I did this on purpose… And I actually liked the movie.
We humans love to tear things down for the sake of tearing them down. Whether it’s a movie, a musician, a politician or a celebrity. why that is may be complicated and quite frankly beyond my understanding, but never the less we do it( or in some cases build them up for the sake of building them up see: Barack Obama. again I digress). why is it, do you think, that there are more stories on the news, in magazines and on the internet about Britney Spears and OJ Simpson than there are about more important issues that affect the human existence. As for taking others ‘opinions’ and using those to form your own take this case as an example. the film ‘Goonies’. this film is generally regarded as a ‘classic’ by most. Yet when it came out even Siskel and Ebert gave it two thumbs down. Does that make it a bad movie? no. It only means two guys from Chicago didn’t like it. My point is we all like what we like. Art is inherently subjective. This movie is a piece of art. Now, some may dispute that fact. That’s ok. I take no offense. If there were some ’standard’ to judge art then, in my opinion, there would cease to be any. Art envokes emotion by nature for better or worse. Star trek’s fanbase is legendarily nitpicky and. willing to cut off it’s nose to spite it’s face if they feel threatened in anyway. Had we gone by the fan reaction to TNG back in 86/87 and ONLY used others ‘predictions and opinions’ on the project to form our opinions of the show would have been foolish at best and at worst would have killed ST forever. complaints about the ‘reboot’ of ST at that time not only echo but mirror todays complaints: A new cast, a new ship, will it be true to canon etc. Hell, the same thing happened when DS9 was launched and it got comapred to TNG. Truth be told TOS IS dated. It IS time for a reboot. do I LOVE it? absolutley. It’s my favorite series of all time. be time marches on . you really CAN’T expect it to be what it WAS. even the 1st ST movie wasn’t anything like TOS…neither was WOK. Everything has to evolve. times change. hopefully for the better. if we take history as any indicator then perhaps this new movie will be the greatest thing since replicated food or it may be a dud. there really is no way to know until we see it though. I reserve my judgement. Do I have trepidations? am I concerned with canon? yes. Does that mean I dismiss it out of hand and start trash talking it? no. talk to me after I see it and I’ll give you my opinion on the film. Until then I’ll be waiting excitedly to see what they come up with.
as for Kevin Smith… again. we LOVE to tear people down. The guy makes films. Some are great, some aren’t. Does his opinion matter? yes, maybe more than mine and he IS entitled to it. If I were famous or anyone else here would perhaps they’d interview us. if it had said John Doe weighs in on new ST film would we have read it? perhaps not. It’s advertising. and Kevin Smiths word carries alot of weight with fanboys (the core audience for this movie) I don’t blame them for asking him. (in my opinion his movies are generally pretty good… Mall-rats is a classic and so is clerks) The “s” talking that people do about him… where that comes from I have no idea. I’d like to see what these people could make given the oppotunity. Talking smack makes you sound juvenile, jealous, petty and stupid. get over it.
ok ok ok. thats enough from me. not that my opinion is worth a dang thing anywya.
“I can watch the [Star Trek] movies again and again and again. The TV [series] is kind of sacrosanct for a lot of people, but I don’t enjoy it as much” I think he (Kevin Smith) has it backwards. It’s the original series that is great to watch over and over again. The reason why Wrath of Khan was so good is because it followed closely the tv series style and storyline. Most of the movies suck because the writing is bad and lacks the imagination of the TOS especially seasons 1 and 2.
To answer # 48, “why does everyone think the movie should be a carbon copy of TOS,” that is not what Canon folks are demanding. What Canon folks want is a movie that is true to the original characters and look of Star Trek. I don’t care for JJ’s spin on Star Trek or any other directors, I just want a film that when watched will effectively depict how the crew got together in a visual manner consistent with the TOS era and with a brilliant storyline that made us all fans of the original.
Several days ago, I watched KHAN for the first time in a very long time. It is still a movie with some truly great Star Trek moments. The battles were nicely done, the interaction between Kirk/Spock/McCoy was in top form, and Spock’s death scene was sobering. What I found myself disliking most were the scenes with Carol and David. While I acknowledge their importance to the story (and to STIII later), they just didn’t do it for me… and I’m not altogether sure what that means, but I felt like fast-forwarding whenever their scenes came up (although I did not, of course!). Two other things that always bugged the crap out of me (and I know I’m gettin nit-picky): when Khan is hoisting that piece of the bridge off the fallen Joaquin (sp?) it really looks like a piece of cardboard, it jumps in his hand; the other is just as Joaquin dies in Khan’s arms his eyes are open, then as Khan pulls him to his massive chest, Joaquin’s eyes close. (I had to get this off my not-so-massive chest, and if you had never noticed these things before you probably will now, so I am truly sorry…)
As I mentioned above, the things I liked about the film I REALLY liked. I thought this film made the best use of the Kirk/Spock/McCoy triad better than any of the other films, and their banter was right on. I thought the film really succeeded in making Kirk a more epic kind of hero, while the series was more about Kirk solving one problem after another, and the following films didn’t really expand much more on the character. The Spock death scene really transmitted the feeling of loss, and it is made even more poignant because of Spock’s sacrifice for his shipmates.
I suppose comparing the new film to TWOK is done for several reasons, (which have been mentioned in other posts, I believe). In the end, regardless of whether the new film is like TWOK or not, if it manages to move us the way TWOK did, that alone would justify the comparisons.
Hasn’t every film since Wrath of Khan been lauded, upon release, as the best one since… well, Wrath of Khan?
Wasn’t Rick Berman out there beating the drum upon the release of his Treks claiming that Soran, The Borg Queen, Ruafo, and Shinzon were the best villains since Khan?
Khan was 26 years ago. I’d be happy if Trek XI is the best film since Trek VI.
As far as Smith’s stamp of approval goes, he is a self-professed geek (who isn’t on this site) and has achieved some modicum of success in this business, ironically enough in a completely different genre. For those reasons he is seen as some sort of sage when it comes to his opinion on sci-fi films. I don’t understand why Smith’s views are held in such high regard. For anyone who feels relieved that Smith gave a workprint of his friend’s film his thumbs up, why do you feel his sensibilities on this stuff hold any more insight or relevance than anyone else on this board? Isn’t this the same guy who wet himself over Daredevil and Phantom Menace?
#44 Retcon = “ret”roactive “con”tinuity.
It means for example, going back later and explaining that Starfleet is the quasi military of the United Federation of Planets, with a headquarters sometimes called “Space Central” but run by “Starfleet Command”, and that the technical arm of Starfleet that coordinates ship construction is the “United Earth Space Probe Agency” a/k/a “UESPA”.
It’s the fun game some of us have been playing since 1966, which is nitpicking, then coming up with retcon explanations… and seeing if the production staff comes up with a better retcon.
Best example is Star Trek: Enterprise under Manny Coto, who set the record for most effective, most efficient, and most fascinating retcons, particularly the tying together of Soong’s ancestors, androids, Klingon foreheads, Eugenics Wars, Khan… etc.
Let’s hope the Supremes manage to do as well as Coto.
At this point the whole “reboot” versus “prequel” versus “reimagining” thing is completely moot. The movie is in post-production, there’s nothing that can be changed in terms of major plot developments (aside from alternate scenes/takes), and we’ve seen enough to know that it is not going to proceed as a strictly constructed prequel to TOS. We also already know enough to say that it hasn’t done to Star Trek what BSG-R did to BSG-TOS. Captain Kirk is still a man, Uhura is still black, and Spock is still not an alcoholic.
Let’s just wait until the movie comes out. At that point (or perhaps after the first real trailer, or perhaps as of now already), the purists will have disavowed the film as un-canon and excommunicated those of us who haven’t, the purists’ apologists will conjure up absurd, hairsplitting retcons to reconcile both sides, and the rest of us will let the plot of the movie and its adherence to the spirit of Star Trek dictate whether we accept the film or not.
#70 – “the purists’ apologists will conjure up absurd, hairsplitting retcons to reconcile both sides”
Apologists or not 9, I think the absurd hairsplitting retcons are a lot of fun (though I’m not really sure that it’s legit to call them retcons if they’re just convoluted ways of saying that what was actually said/shown can fit together ;) )! Heck, in the old days, the term for some of the oddities in Trek was YATI (for Yet Another Trek Inconsistency), and coming up with ways to resolve them was *part of the fun* of fandom.
Assuming ST ‘09 doesn’t outright explicitly say, when it’s all over, “Okay, we are now in another universe relative to the one that contains TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, and Trek I-X,” I fully expect a whole new round of YATI-resolution theories (and, actually, even if it does, i wouldn’t be shocked to see some attempts to see what new stuff could be re-applied to the original universe; heck, I’d plan to do that, myself :) ), and as long as folks take them as part of the game, there’s nothing wrong with that at all.
Good question, by the way: what did rebooting and re-imagining do to Galactica? We now have a show which was not bad for one season and which was cancelled after four seasons because it had completely lost any coherence. Jumped the shark after only one season because the writers had already run out of good ideas.
72 – Okay, to be fair, it’s not being cancelled prematurely. The story will reach its natural conclusion at the end of the fourth season, or so they tell us. I didn’t like that it completely ignored much of what made BSG TOS interesting to me, and I’m not fond of how unrelentingly dark the show is, but it does seem like the producers and writers are getting to tell the story they wanted to tell for the show.
- All i want to hear from the producers is “- we all know that Star Trek was rusty , and all we want is to bring more modernism in this saga ..with the new movie”..STAR TREK :T.W.O.K . is very ..old…people..
maybe the TWOK comparisons are there as Nero and his gang act like and behave like a certain superhuman and his gang
like Shinzon? he’s got his haircut. For once I’d like real romulans as the bad guys not some rogue faction or human clone but real Romulans leading the mighty Star Empire with the Tal Shiar in the shadows but wait this movie is set too late for the first Romulan war and too early for a second.
i had to LOL with every TNG movie when Berman said ‘we have a Khan like villian!’
i can picture the script meetings where the writers go over the story and berman interjecting ‘ yes..but wheres the Khan like villian?..we need a khan like villian’
actually TOS movies only did ‘khan’ the once really – Kruge was kind of similar but was quite true to the vicious klingons of TOS…in IV there was no villian…V had Sybok who wasnt like Khan at all, and ‘god’ dosnt really count…and Chang in VI was another klingon who didnt really turn villianous onscreen until the end battle..and then he wasnt really khan like (well maybe quoting shakespeare was similar to khans melville obsession)
Khan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villianKhan like villian
I’m tired of reading comparisons to ST2. Yes, it was a good movie, not a great movie. It had a good story but, next to V, looked the cheapest since it had a small budget and was made by Paramount’s TV division in order to wring as much $ as possible.
As stated earlier, Nemesis was compared to TWOK, too but it totally bombed even though there were some good moments in the movie.
Let’s hope the trailer coming out soon will give us a better sense of what direction the movie is going to go…and as I’ve said before..please
give us an IMAX version, 70mm, or both please since you’ve got the time to make the prints! Make those cuts special edition with extra footage!
I think Kevin Smith should direct the next Trek film and it should have C***knocker in it as the villain!
I always found TWoK to be lacking in plot. Hope the new movie has more plot than TWoK did.
72 & 73 — For the record, I think that BSG-R is far superior to BSG-TOS, and that BSG-R is proceeding naturally toward its conclusion, as 73 says. Unlike Star Trek, in my opinion, BSG-TOS was a ridiculous myth-vehicle with silly caricatures for characters and no credibility whatsoever at its basis, whereas BSG-R is a serious work.
Star Trek-TOS on the other hand has at its basis a serious, credible premise (with ridiculousness occasionally tagging along for the ride), so it does not deserve the same treatment of re-imagining. Star Trek XI will hopefully give the franchise a fresh lease on life, with a new set and a new stable of actors, but the fundamental concept is unchanged — that, to me, is already clear.
Why do we keep getting Kevin Smith’s opinions, he is not a full blown Star Trek fan.
Does not put me at bay
#82—”Why do we keep getting Kevin Smith’s opinions”
Because he’s one of the few that has seen it.
Look, his opinion may not have me placing bets in Vegas on next year’s Oscars, but it certainly doesn’t make me uneasy to think that someone who likes Star Trek says it is the best one in 26 years…
“i can picture the script meetings where the writers go over the story and berman interjecting ‘ yes..but wheres the Khan like villian?..we need a khan like villian’”
Absolutely, every film needs a khan like villain.
What made Khan so great was
- his vengeance
- his intelligence
- his passion
- he had a history and was a familiar character to the viewers
- he was a challenge for Kirk
- he was responsible for the death of a beloved character
I do not know who Kevin Smith is.
Apparently he’s a cult film director who is a friend of Abrams, and, having seen the film at some point, has signed an agreement not to divulge anything useful. Ra-Ra Star Trek!
The fact that he favors the films over the TV series means he’s in the minority of Trekkers. I’d like to hear his opinion of all Trek films. Bottom dollar he hasn’t seen them all.
No more Ra-Ra!
#76 – “For once I’d like real romulans as the bad guys not some rogue faction or human clone but real Romulans leading the mighty Star Empire with the Tal Shiar in the shadows but wait this movie is set too late for the first Romulan war and too early for a second.”
Maybe someday they’ll brush off the Eric Jendresen script and actually make a go of it. From what I’ve read, I think it would have been pretty cool, myself.
#81 – “Unlike Star Trek, in my opinion, BSG-TOS was a ridiculous myth-vehicle with silly caricatures for characters and no credibility whatsoever at its basis, whereas BSG-R is a serious work.”
See, I thought the basic premise of both BSG-TOS and nuBSG were essentally the same. It was the background and tone that became radically different. The idea that what happened to the 12 Colonies was something that Humanity did to itself, by creating the Cylons, rather than a conflict with an alien species, was an interesting choice, though not one I would have made.
I have to admit, though, that I liked the mythic stuff a lot, and in the end, the other big difference–just MHO, mind you–was that in BSG-TOS, I liked and/or respected most of the characters. In nuBSG, I can say neither about them. I do think, had BSG-TOS survived longer, that we might have seen more stories about the difficulties of living in that situation, and possibly something like the New Caprica story arc. Alas, all that remains in the realm of speculation. Ahh, well… :)
“Star Trek-TOS on the other hand has at its basis a serious, credible premise (with ridiculousness occasionally tagging along for the ride), so it does not deserve the same treatment of re-imagining. Star Trek XI will hopefully give the franchise a fresh lease on life, with a new set and a new stable of actors, but the fundamental concept is unchanged — that, to me, is already clear.”
And with this, I agree completely.
A reboot….What a joke! I hope this movie bombs. It goes to show you that Hollywood is complete out of new ideas. Now we have to go back and do some silly reboot of TOS instead of doing a new cast.
Note to Abrams and Co: You are a bunch of tools. Over rated!
Screw STXI. Trek is dead!
#87—-Troll.
#87: “Screw STXI. Trek is dead!”
This reminds me of a flyer I once saw at the first San Diego Comic Book Convention I went to back in ‘76. (God, I’m old) The flyer contained an underground comic-style cartoon of a fat, big-bosomed woman having sex with the rotting corpse of Spock with a caption about Star Trek being dead.
As we all know, the cartoonist was right.
#87 – Well, let’s give them a chance first before we condemn. Messrs. Orci and Kurtzman have said in various interviews that their intent is for the events of this film to be considered a part of the Trekverse continuity. If that is true, if, in the end, that’s the case, and this film adds to what’s come before, it could be a great thing.
If not, well…. They’ll lose at least a couple of C-notes in ticket sales from *me*. What others may do, I can’t address.
I’m just sad that Jerry Goldsmith isn’t around to score it.
I hope they use some version of his Star Trek: TMA/Star Trek TNG theme, though.
I can see Smith doesnt respect TOS any, since he’s for a reboot, like so many other “fans”. Just throw away the old because only the new matters to anyone. So Kevins getting in line to relieve himself on Roddenberry’s grade like so many other “fans”
With this new movie everything that came before will be rendered null and void. Wiped from existence. And no one cares. Theyre all too happy to embraced anything as long as it bears the STAR TREK brand regardless if it respects what came before or not.
My childhood has been killed. Brutally murdered. My happy memories watching the show rendered null and void. because now none of those stories are valid. Wiped out from Temporal tampering.
Of course i dont expect the gushers to care. They got their shiny new objects, what do they care how those fo us who have followed Trek from our childhoods feel. Its a zero sum game, you can only love one or the other and embracing this movie means the classic doesnt mater to you. Its not good enough for you any more. Screw us classic fans ewho held Star Trek close to our hearts for decades.
I recon Ill get flamed for this. But thats the way it goes.
Enjoy your molestation of a sacred Sci-Fi legacy. But you’ll forgive me if I dont join you all in dancing on the graves of DeForest Kelley, Doohan and all the other great vets of a classic thats no longer loved
Garth, maudlin much?
I don’t expect you to grok this, but it’s not all black & white. Some of us are happy there’s something new and fresh, but are not rooting for a true reboot, one that dispenses with everything that came before. It’s all a question of degree, and you’d be hard-pressed to argue we already have proof that this movie is a flat-out reboot — in fact, I’d argue that we have proof of the opposite, though the jury is still out on a number of significant details.
[...] Kevin Smith Compares New Star Trek To Wrath Of Khan | TrekMovie.com [...]