Comments on: Exclusive Video Interview: Nick Meyer Talks Star Trek, Sequel, Opera and More

By: Colin

Colin — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 04:11:36 +0000

HA! I love this guy, so swift and smart, and to the point.

By: mr. mugato

mr. mugato — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 05:58:31 +0000

Ni9ck Meyers has dome some great stuff but this new version of Star Trek is beyond repair.

By: The Weary Professor

The Weary Professor — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 05:34:31 +0000

67: You are most welcome. I hope you enjoy the rest of the Rathbones. I find that even the weakest entries are enjoyable thanks to relatively clever scripting, occasional nods to the Doyle originals, and some solid performances by Rathbone, Lionel Atwill and others. Since I was raised watching the Abbott & Costello movies every week on local TV it’s also fun to see the familiar 40’s Universal bit players popping up in the Holmes adventures.

I share your dismay at the level of discourse in some of these posts, but appreciate the site’s diversity of expression. An interest in Star Trek really does serve as common ground among people of all backgrounds and interests. IDIC indeed.

By: Jeremy Brett was a friend

Jeremy Brett was a friend — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 23:58:17 +0000

62. I appreciate your input, your response was more than the simpleton’s way of using expletives and mother-bashing of someone without anything intelligent to say. I will happily take your advice and give the Basil Rathbone’s a try. Thank you.

In reviewing my post, I must admit, there were times when I cringed in embarrassment as I tried to introduce my wife to the Brett stories. Foremost is the episode that opened with Jeremy singing and the other was the drug-induced mania/nightmare during The Devil’s Foot. I have to agree at times it was a little over the top.

By: R. F. Crowson

R. F. Crowson — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:12:50 +0000

J.J. and Meyer are very much alike, I think. I remember in his Commentary over the Wrath of Khan, Meyer said that he believed art thrived on restriction, rather than throwing tons of money at a problem. J.J.’s use of cinema tricks like the hand banging on the camera and the utilization of the mirrors on the ground behind the actors for the space drop sequence are all reflective of that ideology in film making — including going “on location” for the engine room. Meyer even wanted to put a “Window” in place of the view screen, and even remove the sound of the ship for some “space shots” similar to many scenes in the new movie, but these were ideas that didn’t pass at the time. So, in terms of style and practicality, Meyer and Abrams are both very similar in these respects.

I sincerely hope that Meyer’s talent is utilized in the next movie. I’d love to see him take part in the writing, and directing. And, it’s very doubtful he’d want to do another Khan film for the franchise, so all the people who are against that idea could be at ease.

By: S. John Ross

S. John Ross — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:03:41 +0000

#64: “I’ve since come to think that these are probably necessary if you want to introduce and partially define a specific group of people in just one film”

Rent X-Men, to name just one of dozens of counter-examples.

By: Alec

Alec — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:55:41 +0000

I LOVE Nick Meyer’s Trek films; but we have a new creative force now in the Supreme Court: a team of highly-talented, young professionals, attuned to the modern Hollywood and the modern audience. The team did a very good job with Star Trek 2009; and I would like to see them pilot the franchise for years to come. We can’t properly judge them on the basis of one film; and an origin-story at that. The whole point of the film was to introduce the characters and set them up for future adventures. So I reserve proper judgment until after at least the next film. It’s true that I was a bit annoyed at the somewhat fantastical coincidences and the weak villain in Trek 11; but I’ve since come to think that these are probably necessary if you want to introduce and partially define a specific group of people in just one film, in contrast to George Lucas’s prequel trilogy.

When the next Trek film arrives, the new crew will be familiar with each other and the ship (I suspect that they’re going to be five years’ older) and we can explore their characters more. I personally want to see Kirk’s character explored more via the two halves of his being. In Aristotelian terms, I would say that Kirk is the golden mean between the extremes of his two best friends: the nigh pure logic of Mr Spock; the nigh pure emotion of Dr McCoy. This is the ‘happy medium’ in which Kirk excels as Captain of the Enterprise, drawing upon the strengths of his two best friends. Enter the triumvirate and more hilarious yet touching conflict between Spock and McCoy: two men who never admit to each other that, deep-down, they actually are friends. I would quite like to see Kirk get a proper love interest. This would explore his character more and offer great potential to the story: perhaps she’s harmed in some way or must be sacrificed or Kirk experiences conflict between her and Starfleet. Carol Marcus anyone? It would also open up the possibility for a major female star to feature (which also might help with the international and female audiences). And, inspired by TMP-week, I would like the next film to showcase and champion the theme of the endless beauty and wonder of space. Let’s see some breath-taking shots. And why not include the TNG theme as well as other iconic Trek themes during the film itself? But keep the character-driven, fast-paced, action-adventure, emotional nature of Trek 11.

By: Alec

Alec — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:25:21 +0000

34. Valar1 – December 10, 2009:
‘focus on the characters and forget the bullshit psuedoscience- “I’m remodulating the nadion field and the graviton emitters to fire a 1 nanosecond burst of antileptons”’.

My God Valar! Are you out of your Vulcan Mind? The nadion field was never designed to take that kind of force. Before you blow-up the ship, we must use the primary neutrino displacement grid to set up a make-shift resonating polarizing regulator to neutralize the negatively charged antileptons.

Oh my poor, poor ship.

[off-screen, shouts to attending technicians IN A HUGE, TRULLY FUTURISTIC ENGINEERING ROOM:]

How many times have I told you: the right tool, for the right job!

By: The Weary Professor

The Weary Professor — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:18:13 +0000

59:

Rathbone made a total of 14 Holmes films. The first two were Fox A pictures and the last 12 were Universal B pictures. The first few Universals were indeed, as you say, war propaganda efforts (right down to the Buy Bonds ads at the end of the last reels) and committed the even more egregious affront of transplanting Holmes and Watson to what was then the present day and having them battle Nazis.

As I said in my first post (#6), I agree that both Granada/Brett Watsons were better than Nigel Bruce’s bumbling buffoon. My comments regarding Rathbone’s superiority in the Holmes role refer to just that. While I love the production values and most of the scripts on the Granada/Brett series, I feel Rathbone better captured the authoritativeness and determined single-mindedness of Conan Doyle’s original character. Brett’s performance, while often excellent, sometimes had a tendency to be theatrical and “big.” His was a Holmes of sweeping gestures and violent displays of passion, while Rathbone’s Holmes was the cold calculating machine with a trace of subversive humor we saw in the novels and stories.

If you haven’t seen all of the Rathbone films I strongly suggest you check out the UCLA restorations available on MPI Home Video DVDs. The quality is vastly better than the cheapie public domain prints.

By: Gustavo Valente

Gustavo Valente — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 02:41:58 +0000

OMG!! Can I dream about Nick Meyer helming Star Trek sequel?? That would be effing amazing!!!!!