Monday, March 02, 2009
Trek Reviewing: Why It's Fraught With Peril
I'm glad I've studied history...because as one looks at primary source material, instructions are given to understand the time and place that the source material comes from.
Also if one is a student of history, de facto, if you want to study it, you have some respect for some of it. (Granted, anyone who 'respects' the Inquisition or the Holocaust needs serious medical help, but that's neither here nor there.)
Trek itself is now something of an historical artifact...going on 45 years old.
And, as such, you have to respect the time, place and budgets (and good writing or lack thereof) connected with TOS, TAS, the spinoffs and the films...
Mark Altman, founder of Geek Monthly reviewed the trailers and twenty minutes of film footage....
He is mainly positive about the new film, that makes me happy.
I agree with his stance on the Romulans, because after all in the Pre-TOS time period Spock states
"No Human, Romulan or ally has ever seen the other."
(Granted, a couple of renegade Vulcans and Aenar have, but it's likely Vulcan and Andoria never made those instances public. And starships getting assembled in Iowa? Give me a break.)
I disagree with his concerns about Zachary Quinto's Spock. If that kid can make Sylar on "Heroes a complex anti-hero to root for (as I did last week...first time I *ever* wanted to see the carving out of brains.)
he'll do fine with Spock.
And, if Altman could have just stopped the column after reviewing the new film, it would be a great review....
But he somehow had the need to rag on the older films.
"all the original Trek movies looked cheap and, well, cheap.'
Oh please. Compare those movies to the original pilot with it's worse-than-the rest of TOS chauvinism, and *paper* output of the ships computer, non digital analog timers...and they look magical. There was a fifteen year gap in SFX technology then. (not to mention some [slight] evolution in attitudes towards women.)
He felt that "...by trying to get Scotty, Uhura and Sulu into the action as well as Chekov, they’re doing the big three a disservice. Chekov’s played for comic relief, much as he was in Star Trek IV, and, at the end of the day, who really needs him."
They're part of the fabric, they need to be there. Period. This is what I mean about respect for history.
And, being a Spock fan, I just cannot abide what he said about Mr. Nimoy's cameo.
"...the new kids on the block wouldn’t have to listen to long, ponderous scenes like Leonard Nimoy as Spock explaining technobabble to Scotty that he’s from the future and Captain Kirk needs to get Spock emotional to take command. That’s Next Generation, guys, and as much as I loved seeing Nimoy on screen as Spock again, I couldn’t but help feeling it was like dropping Jar-Jar into a scene in The Empire Strikes Back."
Mr. Altman, the clock is ticking for the remaining TOS actors. Abrams has said that he didn't want to do the film unless he had Nimoy on board.
There will be a time when we can't have the TOS Spock in a film, just as we cannot have TOS McCoy or TOS Scotty now.
I'm glad he's there, long-winded and technical or not.
Also if one is a student of history, de facto, if you want to study it, you have some respect for some of it. (Granted, anyone who 'respects' the Inquisition or the Holocaust needs serious medical help, but that's neither here nor there.)
Trek itself is now something of an historical artifact...going on 45 years old.
And, as such, you have to respect the time, place and budgets (and good writing or lack thereof) connected with TOS, TAS, the spinoffs and the films...
Mark Altman, founder of Geek Monthly reviewed the trailers and twenty minutes of film footage....
He is mainly positive about the new film, that makes me happy.
I agree with his stance on the Romulans, because after all in the Pre-TOS time period Spock states
"No Human, Romulan or ally has ever seen the other."
(Granted, a couple of renegade Vulcans and Aenar have, but it's likely Vulcan and Andoria never made those instances public. And starships getting assembled in Iowa? Give me a break.)
I disagree with his concerns about Zachary Quinto's Spock. If that kid can make Sylar on "Heroes a complex anti-hero to root for (as I did last week...first time I *ever* wanted to see the carving out of brains.)
he'll do fine with Spock.
And, if Altman could have just stopped the column after reviewing the new film, it would be a great review....
But he somehow had the need to rag on the older films.
"all the original Trek movies looked cheap and, well, cheap.'
Oh please. Compare those movies to the original pilot with it's worse-than-the rest of TOS chauvinism, and *paper* output of the ships computer, non digital analog timers...and they look magical. There was a fifteen year gap in SFX technology then. (not to mention some [slight] evolution in attitudes towards women.)
He felt that "...by trying to get Scotty, Uhura and Sulu into the action as well as Chekov, they’re doing the big three a disservice. Chekov’s played for comic relief, much as he was in Star Trek IV, and, at the end of the day, who really needs him."
They're part of the fabric, they need to be there. Period. This is what I mean about respect for history.
And, being a Spock fan, I just cannot abide what he said about Mr. Nimoy's cameo.
"...the new kids on the block wouldn’t have to listen to long, ponderous scenes like Leonard Nimoy as Spock explaining technobabble to Scotty that he’s from the future and Captain Kirk needs to get Spock emotional to take command. That’s Next Generation, guys, and as much as I loved seeing Nimoy on screen as Spock again, I couldn’t but help feeling it was like dropping Jar-Jar into a scene in The Empire Strikes Back."
Mr. Altman, the clock is ticking for the remaining TOS actors. Abrams has said that he didn't want to do the film unless he had Nimoy on board.
There will be a time when we can't have the TOS Spock in a film, just as we cannot have TOS McCoy or TOS Scotty now.
I'm glad he's there, long-winded and technical or not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)