Red Letter Media

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 257 24.0%

  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 77 7.2%

  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 460 42.9%

  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 230 21.4%

  • Tim

    Votes: 386 36.0%

  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 208 19.4%

  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 274 25.5%

  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 27 2.5%

  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 541 50.4%

  • Max Landis

    Votes: 64 6.0%
  • Total voters
    1,073
ZMOT said:
the said it was pretty (which it is), just that the script is shit. least paramount knew how to tardwrangle abrams' mystery box fetish.
but then they always had a strange opinion even about the old trek movies. I agree that old trek wouldn't really work on the big screen, but come on, picard getting his hands dirty isn't out of this world since he rose through the ranks not sitting on his ass all day. and even when they shit on STD they're fine with the mirror arc and everything it entails for some reason, even rich (mirror episodes are funny "what if" episodes, the universe makes no fucking sense, making it overly canon is fucking exceptional)

also explains their star wars stuff, they're trekkies first, and there is always some of snobbishness involved even in the best cases (vs the "trek is fucking boring" sw nerd mentality). you can even see it some episodes, like "they get to have the millenium falcon several times, why don't we get the galaxy class".
Click to expand...

Their weirdest Trek opinion is the high esteem in which they hold The Motion Picture, which was shit in 1978 and remains shit today. For guys who are capable of noticing the subtlest flaws in filmmaking, it astonishes me they would praise the costume design of a movie where the colorless uniforms disappear into the beige sets.
 
Mola Ram said:
Their weirdest Trek opinion is the high esteem in which they hold The Motion Picture, which was shit in 1978 and remains shit today. For guys who are capable of noticing the subtlest flaws in filmmaking, it astonishes me they would praise the costume design of a movie where the colorless uniforms disappear into the beige sets.
Click to expand...
But it is "CINEMATIC" and has sweeping shots of things and Jay gets an erection about anything that is "ARTISTIC"
 
Mola Ram said:
Their weirdest Trek opinion is the high esteem in which they hold The Motion Picture, which was shit in 1978 and remains shit today. For guys who are capable of noticing the subtlest flaws in filmmaking, it astonishes me they would praise the costume design of a movie where the colorless uniforms disappear into the beige sets.
Click to expand...

I think it also gets a lot of shit it doesn't really deserve. as trekkies I can understand why they like it (being more "cerebral" and less big blockbuster action schlock, so it feels more in line with trek) - and the art direction/effects probably tickle their "cinephile" senses, maybe that's clouding their judgement a bit.

as for the uniforms, mike explained in the re:view. iirc they look like something someone in the 70's would wear or something (before dissing the 4 layers of wool from the later movies). in general he goes into a bit of detail why he appreciates it which worked for me, not being the biggest fan of the movie either.
 
If anyone ever wondered why Star Trek The Motion Picture was so horribly paced the explanation is actually pretty simple. It was supposed to be an hour long pilot to a new Star Trek series (Star Trek: Phase 2) and was originally titled "In Thy Image".
They took a script for an hour long pilot and stretched it to 2 1/2 hours. And that's why the movie feels like such a crawl.
 
ZMOT said:
as for the uniforms, mike explained in the re:view. iirc they look like something someone in the 70's would wear or something (before dissing the 4 layers of wool from the later movies). in general he goes into a bit of detail why he appreciates it which worked for me, not being the biggest fan of the movie either.
Click to expand...
Anyone who praises TMP's Starfleet uniforms should be forced to actually wear them. 🤣
 
ExceptionallyExceptional said:
They took a script for an hour long pilot and stretched it to 2 1/2 hours. And that's why the movie feels like such a crawl.
Click to expand...
That explains pretty much everything. There is slow and Cerebral and then there is Spock spending 5 minutes floating in space..trying to have Vulcan Mind Sex with a Robot Space Cloud.
 
ZMOT said:
I think it also gets a lot of shit it doesn't really deserve. as trekkies I can understand why they like it (being more "cerebral" and less big blockbuster action schlock, so it feels more in line with trek) - and the art direction/effects probably tickle their "cinephile" senses, maybe that's clouding their judgement a bit.
Click to expand...

A lot of their opinions (and I'm basing this mostly on Mike and the bearded Canadian -- they did the review, and I have a feeling Rich probably isn't on the same wavelength and Jay likely doesn't even care) are so weird I wonder if they're just trying to be contrary. The uniforms are infamously terrible and were supposedly horrible to wear, requiring a steam cleaning at the end of every shooting day. The pace is awful. The original release had numerous bad effects shots with jarringly visible matte lines. Contemporaneous reviews suggested Robert Wise did not give a wet shit about the movie and directed it with one hand. If they like it, more power to them, but nothing in that review was especially convincing.

It's one of the few times where their affection for something seems to override their critical impulses. Mike seemed oddly impressed by all the symbolic sex in the movie, which was so obvious even when it was released that no less a sci fi personage than Alan Dean Foster sneeringly described it as "a 44 million dollar fuck."
 
TiggerNits said:
Right now the only person I'd like to see touching Star Wars aside from Faverau would be Tarintino. Just a pair of competent story tellers making "Day in the life" style films that occasionally tie in to one another
Click to expand...

I both agree and disagree with Rich's assessment that Star Wars is so "limited."

Star Wars appears so limited because the people making the movies right now are insanely incompetent. Disney thinks that all they need to do is slap a lightsaber or an X-Wing on something, and it's enough for the fans to shut up and be satisfied. I would say that at this point, the Episodes are the things that are limited. That's because the Original Trilogy told the only story we all really needed about the Rebels vs the Empire. There's not much to tell aside from that, and it clearly shows because of how disastrous the Sequel Trilogy turned out.

One of the things that I enjoyed about Rogue One was that none of the characters (aside from Vader) were a Jedi/shown with a lightsaber. That's something I've always asked for with future Star Wars stories; to see other types of characters that live in the galaxy. Rogue One, I think, was a good effort in an attempt to show other types of characters-- too bad the movie failed in giving those characters ... Character. I haven't seen The Mandalorian yet, but it looks like it mostly succeeds at doing what I want to see from Star Wars at this point.

I would love it if we got short stories/limited run TV shows about random characters that live in the Star Wars universe.
 
Last edited:
TiggerNits said:
Right now the only person I'd like to see touching Star Wars aside from Faverau would be Tarintino. Just a pair of competent story tellers making "Day in the life" style films that occasionally tie in to one another
Click to expand...

Why?

Despite the fact that Tarantino wouldn't touch it with a 100 ft pole...

He would either conform his style for it. So, it would be loyal to the series(painstakingly so). It was like he wasn't even directing it..

He wouldn't conform and it would be this insane mess...

Signature directors don't really work for Star Wars. It's really the perfect vehicle for journeymen...

Though, someone like James Cameron(not too distinct)would fit right in. Ron Howard would have been better not cleaning up someone's mess...

If I had to pick franchise for Tarantino? Bond, he would be fantastic for a retro Bond...
 
Mola Ram said:
Their weirdest Trek opinion is the high esteem in which they hold The Motion Picture, which was shit in 1978 and remains shit today. For guys who are capable of noticing the subtlest flaws in filmmaking, it astonishes me they would praise the costume design of a movie where the colorless uniforms disappear into the beige sets.
Click to expand...
If you keep it in context of the Trek fandom at the time it's OK, and if you keep in mind it was a 1970s movie it makes far more sense.

It's worth noting that the Director's Cut is shorter.

edit: while I'm at it Star Trek Phase II scripts, which TMP was based on, were also used for two pretty bad episodes of TNG, "The Child" (Troi gets raped, probably for the first time) and "Devil's Due" (kind of funny, also kind of stupid)
 
StarkRavingMad said:
I both agree and disagree with Rich's assessment that Star Wars is so "limited."

Star Wars appears so limited because the people making the movies right now are insanely incompetent. Disney thinks that all they need to do is slap a lightsaber or an X-Wing on something, and it's enough for the fans to shut up and be satisfied. I would say that at this point, the Episodes are the things that are limited. That's because the Original Trilogy told the only story we all really needed about the Rebels vs the Empire. There's not much to tell aside from that, and it clearly shows because of how disastrous the Sequel Trilogy turned out.

One of the things that I enjoyed about Rogue One was that none of the characters (aside from Vader) was a Jedi/shown with a lightsaber. That's something I've always asked for with future Star Wars stories; to see other types of characters that live in the galaxy. Rogue One, I think, was a good effort in an attempt to show other types of characters-- too bad the movie failed in giving those characters ... Character. I haven't seen The Mandalorian yet, but it looks like it mostly succeeds at doing what I want to see from Star Wars at this point.

I would love it if we got short stories/limited run TV shows about random characters that live in the Star Wars universe.
Click to expand...
Star Wars is about as limited as Dungeons and Dragons.

Which is to say it's not really limited in a story sense, but you're kind of stuck with specific classes that have to appear.

Ihavetinyweewee said:
Why?

Despite the fact that Tarantino wouldn't touch it with a 100 ft pole...

He would either conform his style for it. So, it would be loyal to the series(painstakingly so). It was like he wasn't even directing it..

He wouldn't conform and it would be this insane mess...

Signature directors don't really work for Star Wars. It's really the perfect vehicle for journeymen...

Though, someone like James Cameron(not too distinct)would fit right in. Ron Howard would have been better not cleaning up someone's mess...

If I had to pick franchise for Tarantino? Bond, he would be fantastic for a retro Bond...
Click to expand...
Bruh, Twi'lek girl foot fetish shots.
 
Star Trek: The Motion Picture is the best ST movie. It's arguably the only ST movie (maybe The Voyage Home as well).
It's a slow episode about exploring the unknown and some philosophical ponderings made on a cinematic scale.
Some things are dated, mostly the fashion and the green screen, but it still aged surprisingly well.
V'ger still looks awesome, all the models do. I like the mat paintings as well.
The plot doesn't feel "of it's time", you could take the same script and make a modern movie out of it.
Maybe it's just me being bored out of my skull whenever action happens in big movies nowadays (I literally skip through the action in the MCU to get to some banter) but I'm glad that there's a total of maybe 1 minute of action.

Way better than any action crap like we're getting today.
I don't think it's boring, there are enough things happening throughout the movie.
You want boring? Watch The English Patient.

You people iz haterz for not liking it.
 
Idiotron said:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture is the best ST movie. It's arguably the only ST movie (maybe The Voyage Home as well).
It's a slow episode about exploring the unknown and some philosophical ponderings made on a cinematic scale.
Some things are dated, mostly the fashion and the green screen, but it still aged surprisingly well.
V'ger still looks awesome, all the models do. I like the mat paintings as well.
The plot doesn't feel "of it's time", you could take the same script and make a modern movie out of it.
Maybe it's just me being bored out of my skull whenever action happens in big movies nowadays (I literally skip through the action in the MCU to get to some banter) but I'm glad that there's a total of maybe 1 minute of action.

Way better than any action crap like we're getting today.
I don't think it's boring, there are enough things happening throughout the movie.
You want boring? Watch The English Patient.

You people iz haterz for not liking it.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the haterz are right.
 
Mola Ram said:
It's one of the few times where their affection for something seems to override their critical impulses. Mike seemed oddly impressed by all the symbolic sex in the movie, which was so obvious even when it was released that no less a sci fi personage than Alan Dean Foster sneeringly described it as "a 44 million dollar fuck."
Click to expand...
Foster even wrote it into the novelization. Kirk reminisces about his "love instructor," and the Enterprise has observation lounges specifically for crew members to fuck under the stars.
Marissa Moira said:
Remember Starfleet actually allows you to wear ornamental feathers on your head as part of their uniform. Go full Warband Headdress and tell command to accept nothing less.
Click to expand...
Or nothing more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom