Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:38:15 -0400
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:05:39 GMT, Amy Guskin <aisling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
(in article <tqsua3dbpg52n6tvpmgniivsq2k15h2u4a@xxxxxxx>):On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:40:28 -0400, Josh Hill wrote
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:46:31 GMT, Amy Guskin <aisling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
(in article <5o8ta3dv0o7l65u60sq53je19q5nvale2k@xxxxxxx>):On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:05:58 -0400, Josh Hill wrote
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:42:36 -0500, "Carl" <cengman7@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Thunder Fantastic!" <deceptar@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uGwri.18797$fJ5.7693@xxxxxxxxxxxx
I have to say I'm not looking forward to any re-imagining of Star
Trek...
I
was a big fan of the original and it just won't be the same for me
without
those actors.
I'm sure the new movie will make money and people will love it but I
intend to pass on it. For me, anyway, I think Star Trek is dead...
Personally, I think the *only* way to revive Trek is to re-imagine it.
Trying to go back in time is (IMO) a terrible idea; everyone knows how it
ends before it starts. Trying to go forward is difficult because you're
trapped by canon. In theory it shouldn't matter because the stories
should
be based on people, but fans get distracted by any little deviation from
what went before.
On the other hand, if they tried a "reset" of Trek now I think they'd be
too
influenced by and compared to Batllestar Galactica. They'd probably do
things simply to show they're being different. The comparison would get
in
the way. They'd need to wait a few years for it to work.
If they don't do a full reboot, let it rest in piece.
OTOH, the Bond movies have worked through many Bonds, and there have
been successful remakes of some pretty iconic stuff, e.g., King Kong. <<
You thought that was successful? Oh, wait: you said _successful_, not
"good."
You didn't like the 2005 Kong? I thought they did a fairly amazing job
at a task I would have thought impossible, though the film was too
busy, long, and action-packed to recapture the iconic poetry of the
original. <<
Well, you've just summed up what I didn't like about it.
Alas, that seems to ail many movies and TV shows today. But you've
just reinforced my impression that rather than noticing wildly
different things, people tend to like and dislike the same things
about movies but to attach different weightings to their likes and
dislikes. Not that there aren't some 14-year-old male target audience
types somewhere who get, er, well somethings when they hear the fire
of semi-automatics.
My personal gripe of the week, Jericho, which I hadn't seen but
checked out after someone mentioned it here. OK, so, it's not a good
sign, but let's ignore the fact that they were strikingly original
enough to chose a Biblical name beginning with "Jer" for their
post-nuclear holocaust series, I've watched about half of it anyway.
Will someone explain to me why,
(Spoiler space, not that it's really good enough to care)
after every major city in the country has been destroyed by nuclear
bombs:
- No one in Jericho ever has so much as a bad hair day
- Everyone's clothes are neatly ironed despite the fact that there's
been no electricity for months
- All the radioactivity mysteriously vanishes within an hour of the
fallout
- People just happen to have so many candles around that they're still
burning them everywhere months after they lost electricity
- The flashlights are all still working months after they lost
electricity
- Chinese bombers drop six huge pallets of aid including a power
generator but they didn't think to drop a working radio
- Everybody doesn't starve to death after the food runs out
- The cattle and horses don't die from grazing on radioactive grass or
the townspeople from drinking radioactive milk
- People harvest and eat corn that was in the field when the fallout
fell
- People can drink the water
- A day or two after they watched an H-bomb go off, the town's
teenagers have a party
- Despite the fact that the countryside and highways are intact,
commerce vanishes
- The young women of Kansas talk like valley girls
--
Josh
"Your manuscript is both good and original. But the part that is
good is not original, and the part that is original is not good."
-- Samuel Johnson
.
- References:
- [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Stefan
- Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Thunder Fantastic!
- Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Carl
- Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Amy Guskin
- Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- From: Amy Guskin
- [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- Prev by Date: Re: TLT: Bonus comic (no spoilers, just shopping hints)
- Next by Date: Re: Guess what showed up in *my* mailbox today!
- Previous by thread: Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- Next by thread: Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
