I didn't get that from the marketing, Connie. I got "We are going to do it ANEW" but that did not imply that they thought the originals were inferior. There was a lot of reverence for the original series in it for me.
Oh, and I loved it and TOS.
Kaylee: H-how did you... g-get on...? Early: Strains the mind a bit, don't it? You think you're all alone. Maybe I come down the chimney, Kaylee. Bring presents to the good girls and boys.
'Objects In Space'
Buffista Movies 7: Brides for 7 Samurai
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
Scrappy - Dec 07, 2009 3:52:27 pm PST #5405 of 30000
Life moves pretty fast. You don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
§ ita § - Dec 07, 2009 3:56:47 pm PST #5406 of 30000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Trek has tried new characters before, a bunch of times. But even with the luxury of series behind them, the movies didn't pull. The only way to use the original golden characters and not mess up continuity was to go something like they did.
Beverly - Dec 07, 2009 4:03:03 pm PST #5407 of 30000
Days shrink and grow cold, sunlight through leaves is my song. Winter is long.
This is one of those Tom Bombadill things, isn't it?
§ ita § - Dec 07, 2009 4:13:03 pm PST #5408 of 30000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
What's a Tom Bombadil thing? Surely not an implication he belonged in the film?
Sophia Brooks - Dec 07, 2009 4:14:04 pm PST #5409 of 30000
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Tom bombadil is where I permanently stopped reading.
Beverly - Dec 07, 2009 4:14:54 pm PST #5410 of 30000
Days shrink and grow cold, sunlight through leaves is my song. Winter is long.
No, just a difference in people's perceptions of what is and what isn't sacrosanct when turning text into film. Some people's untouchable institutions are other people's streamlining, or fodder for updating. Can't please everybody.
Typo Boy - Dec 07, 2009 5:15:46 pm PST #5411 of 30000
Calli: My people have a saying. A man who trusts can never be betrayed, only mistaken.Avon: Life expectancy among your people must be extremely short.
Can't please everybody.
"So you might as well please yourself." Sorry. Refuse to get that earworm without sharing.
sarameg - Dec 07, 2009 5:45:25 pm PST #5412 of 30000
So I actually want to see a movie or two. This is unheard of. One is Up in the Air because of a bit of trailer monologue I saw that just got me. And Invictus just because.
Huh. I might even spring for a ticket (since I doubt I can find my dvd player easily...)
Polter-Cow - Dec 07, 2009 5:54:46 pm PST #5413 of 30000
What else besides ramen can you scoop? YOU CAN SCOOP THIS WORLD FROM DARKNESS!
One is Up in the Air because of a bit of trailer monologue I saw that just got me.
I really liked it. I think the buzz it's been getting is a little over-the-top, but it is a good movie.
Strega - Dec 07, 2009 6:20:42 pm PST #5414 of 30000
It's not that I think the source material isn't being treated with the proper reverence. Private Life is affectionate, but it's definitely irreverent. But with Trek & SH, it seems like the only point of even referencing the source material is to simplify marketing.
Why do a whole movie in which the plot is an elaborate justification to free yourself from everything that went before? Why not just start fresh? And if you want to do a goofy Victorian buddy-action-comedy, do that, but why call it Sherlock Holmes? There's the rote complaint about how something is "X with the serial number filed off" -- with these, the serial number is the only thing left.
I mean, I understand the value of name recognition from the studio's point of view. But I'm not sure why I should be interested just because of that.
I'm not opposed to reboots & rethinking classic characters and all that. But there needs to be some thinking in order for there to be rethinking, and both of these movies just look fundamentally empty-headed to me. I mean, the marketing for Holmes feels like, "Hey, it's Sherlock Holmes, but he's kind of grubby and sleazy and punches people and isn't that CRAZY? Because it's Sherlock Holmes! Man, we are just out of control over here!" And then the Star Trek marketing emphasized that there were many sexy hotties and rebellious punks and romance and big action sequences, which pretty much read to me as "So don't worry, because this is nothing like Star Trek!"