Nothing But Trailers-Axs TV.

[pjbear05]

If I don't watch it when it shows (Monday 8-11 pm EST), It gets put on the DVR for later. Trailers of upcoming films throughout. A great way to check out a movie before deciding to see it or not. Any other fans?

[Disembodied Spirit]

It's been on for years, sometimes too many Independent film trailers.

[JohnnyBlaze]

It's been on for years, sometimes too many Independent film trailers.

What's wrong with independent films? I'd take a chance on any independent film that I don't even know anything about over any bs by Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich

[Disembodied Spirit]

It's been on for years, sometimes too many Independent film trailers.

What's wrong with independent films? I'd take a chance on any independent film that I don't even know anything about over any bs by Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich

For a trailer show, it's a hard sell. Plus most independent films never get shown outside of NY or LA for a theater release.

Most independent films are bad. Some are awesome.

There is a reason it has a budget of 500 bucks ..this show airs 4 or 5 trailers some times...

[JohnnyBlaze]

It's been on for years, sometimes too many Independent film trailers.

What's wrong with independent films? I'd take a chance on any independent film that I don't even know anything about over any bs by Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich

For a trailer show, it's a hard sell. Plus most independent films never get shown outside of NY or LA for a theater release.

Most independent films are bad. Some are awesome.

There is a reason it has a budget of 500 bucks ..this show airs 4 or 5 trailers some times...

I don't know that show so I can't comment on that. I'm just commenting on your post about independent films.

 

The reason an independent film has a budget of $10 is because people don't believe in it. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad...which your comment seems to insinuate. Here are some of the good-awesome independent films that I bet you like:

 

Terminator (who doesn't know this movie. Anyone that hasn't seen it still knows some lines)

Mad Max

Reservoir Dogs (THE poster boy for independent, cult hit films)

Memento (still Nolan's best. Inception had 17 times the budget of Memento but that was boring crap and Memento wasn't)

Night of the Living Dead ('68) (think about how influential this movie has been)

Lost in Translation (What isn't perfect in this? Murray's perfect. The tone is perfect. Scarlett's bum's perfect.)

Drugstore Cowboy

Roger and Me

Life of Brian

El Mariachi ($7,000 budget, made 22 million...great movie)

The Descent (most big budget Hollywood horror flicks DO suck, this didn't)

Run Lola Run (made for about a million bucks but such a fun fun movie)

Swingers (Vaughn before he started sucking, Favreau before he became a fancy director)

Texas Chainsaw Massacre ('74)

Being John Malkovich

Usual Suspects

Still Alice (Julianne Moore couldn't have done a better job, the story couldn't have been better either. And that was made for like two bucks)

 

Some outright classics in there. And there are tons more.

 

If you say "Most independent films are bad", then you might as well say "Most films are bad" because big budgeted movies don't seem to have a very high percentage of quality films...and certainly not greater or much greater than independent films.

Edited August 17, 2016 by JohnnyBlaze

[Disembodied Spirit]

It's been on for years, sometimes too many Independent film trailers.

What's wrong with independent films? I'd take a chance on any independent film that I don't even know anything about over any bs by Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich

For a trailer show, it's a hard sell. Plus most independent films never get shown outside of NY or LA for a theater release.

Most independent films are bad. Some are awesome.

There is a reason it has a budget of 500 bucks ..this show airs 4 or 5 trailers some times...

I don't know that show so I can't comment on that. I'm just commenting on your post about independent films.

 

The reason an independent film has a budget of $10 is because people don't believe in it. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad...which your comment seems to insinuate. Here are some of the good-awesome independent films that I bet you like:

 

Terminator (who doesn't know this movie. Anyone that hasn't seen it still knows some lines)

Mad Max

Reservoir Dogs (THE poster boy for independent, cult hit films)

Memento (still Nolan's best. Inception had 17 times the budget of Memento but that was boring crap and Memento wasn't)

Night of the Living Dead ('68) (think about how influential this movie has been)

Lost in Translation (What isn't perfect in this? Murray's perfect. The tone is perfect. Scarlett's bum's perfect.)

Drugstore Cowboy

Roger and Me

Life of Brian

El Mariachi ($7,000 budget, made 22 million...great movie)

The Descent (most big budget Hollywood horror flicks DO suck, this didn't)

Run Lola Run (made for about a million bucks but such a fun fun movie)

Swingers (Vaughn before he started sucking, Favreau before he became a fancy director)

Texas Chainsaw Massacre ('74)

Being John Malkovich

Usual Suspects

Still Alice (Julianne Moore couldn't have done a better job, the story couldn't have been better either. And that was made for like two bucks)

 

Some outright classics in there. And there are tons more.

 

If you say "Most independent films are bad", then you might as well say "Most films are bad" because big budgeted movies don't seem to have a very high percentage of quality films...and certainly not greater or much greater than independent films.

Let me correct myself.

Most films are bad. Bad writing. Bad acting and Bad directing.

Big budget, small budget, does not matter. Films are being made that have no business ever being made.

If Hollywood would focus a little more on scripts instead of explosions and blue screens, we'd all be better for it .

Nothing pleases me more than a film that surprises me with a script and acting.

Every year, those moments get even more rare. The public wants Superheroes and remakes...not me

But unless one searches out an independent film, 99% of people will never see it unless a major studio picks up the release.

Which they don't do anymore. They have their head to far up Aquaman's azz...

ON THIS SHOW..These are the crappy Independent films that NO SHOW wants to air along with 3 big budget releases

[JohnnyBlaze]

It's been on for years, sometimes too many Independent film trailers.

What's wrong with independent films? I'd take a chance on any independent film that I don't even know anything about over any bs by Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich

For a trailer show, it's a hard sell. Plus most independent films never get shown outside of NY or LA for a theater release.

Most independent films are bad. Some are awesome.

There is a reason it has a budget of 500 bucks ..this show airs 4 or 5 trailers some times...

I don't know that show so I can't comment on that. I'm just commenting on your post about independent films.

 

The reason an independent film has a budget of $10 is because people don't believe in it. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad...which your comment seems to insinuate. Here are some of the good-awesome independent films that I bet you like:

 

Terminator (who doesn't know this movie. Anyone that hasn't seen it still knows some lines)

Mad Max

Reservoir Dogs (THE poster boy for independent, cult hit films)

Memento (still Nolan's best. Inception had 17 times the budget of Memento but that was boring crap and Memento wasn't)

Night of the Living Dead ('68) (think about how influential this movie has been)

Lost in Translation (What isn't perfect in this? Murray's perfect. The tone is perfect. Scarlett's bum's perfect.)

Drugstore Cowboy

Roger and Me

Life of Brian

El Mariachi ($7,000 budget, made 22 million...great movie)

The Descent (most big budget Hollywood horror flicks DO suck, this didn't)

Run Lola Run (made for about a million bucks but such a fun fun movie)

Swingers (Vaughn before he started sucking, Favreau before he became a fancy director)

Texas Chainsaw Massacre ('74)

Being John Malkovich

Usual Suspects

Still Alice (Julianne Moore couldn't have done a better job, the story couldn't have been better either. And that was made for like two bucks)

 

Some outright classics in there. And there are tons more.

 

If you say "Most independent films are bad", then you might as well say "Most films are bad" because big budgeted movies don't seem to have a very high percentage of quality films...and certainly not greater or much greater than independent films.

Let me correct myself.

Most films are bad. Bad writing. Bad acting and Bad directing.

Big budget, small budget, does not matter. Films are being made that have no business ever being made.

If Hollywood would focus a little more on scripts instead of explosions and blue screens, we'd all be better for it .

Nothing pleases me more than a film that surprises me with a script and acting.

Every year, those moments get even more rare. The public wants Superheroes and remakes...not me

But unless one searches out an independent film, 99% of people will never see it unless a major studio picks up the release.

Which they don't do anymore. They have their head to far up Aquaman's azz...

ON THIS SHOW..These are the crappy Independent films that NO SHOW wants to air along with 3 big budget releases

Good correction with "most films are bad" but now I got a bone to pick with the superhero movie comment.

Think about this: there have been more Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings/Hobbit films than all the MCU movies combined.

 

This year there are 2 MCU movies, 2 from DC, and 2 in X-Men related flicks. Compare that to the number of horror films out this year. Or any other genre for that matter. Many people hate superhero flicks. I get it. But there just aren't that many in the grand scheme of movie genres.

 

I love some superhero flicks but many do suck: Bats vs Supes sucked, I can't trust Suicide Squad so I haven't seen it, and I don't like the Deadpool character so I didn't see the movie.

 

It's not as simple as "people want superhero movies". Look at Guardians of the Galaxy. Most people didn't even know what that was so they COULDN'T have wanted it...yet it did very well.

 

As far as Aquaman goes, I'm not sold on that barbarian actor doing an adequate job. I don't want it. And on TRF, I can't think of anyone that defends superhero flicks more than me.

[KenJennings]

Superhero movies basically killed "movies" for me. I've only been to two movies in the past 3 years as a result. Nothing Hollywood puts out interests me anymore. It's thoughtless spectacle. In order to get a big budget movie made these days, the appeal has to be to the lowest common denominator. It's far too much business and not enough art, you can't play to a niche, and you can't alienate anyone. Edited August 17, 2016 by KenJennings

[JohnnyBlaze]

Superhero movies basically killed "movies" for me. I've only been to two movies in the past 3 years as a result. Nothing Hollywood puts out interests me anymore. It's thoughtless spectacle. In order to get a big budget movie made these days, the appeal has to be to the lowest common denominator. It's far too much business and not enough art, you can't play to a niche, and you can't alienate anyone.

I disagree. "Thoughtless spectacle"? There's very little difference between what goes on in Star Trek and some superhero movies. And I like Trek...some at least. The better Trek movies do a great job with the characters, same as the better superhero flicks. All the colorful goodies of explosions and costumes are there in both too. Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years. The better MCU movies take their stories directly from the comics and have done a great job adapting the characters and storylines. The problem is that the MCU movies get rolled together with the usually shit DC flicks, the unreliable X-Men movies, three-fifth of the Spidey flicks, and awful stuff like Fantastic Four and its reboot. Without actually looking at all the superhero titles, I'd say not even 50% of superhero are good. Still, the bad ones aren't enough to "kill ALL movies" for me. And that's a shame because there have been plenty of good non-superhero movies out there too.

 

A lot of you guys are stuck on if something is a big budget movie too. Does that really matter? Just watch stuff that might interest you. I don't watch Transformers or any of those Emmerich end of the world disaster flicks. And no way would those balls stop me from missing other movies just because I think they're not good. Go watch Still Alice and Dallas Buyers Club, two flicks as far away from the superhero genre as possible. Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

[Disembodied Spirit]

Superhero movies basically killed "movies" for me. I've only been to two movies in the past 3 years as a result. Nothing Hollywood puts out interests me anymore. It's thoughtless spectacle. In order to get a big budget movie made these days, the appeal has to be to the lowest common denominator. It's far too much business and not enough art, you can't play to a niche, and you can't alienate anyone.

I disagree. "Thoughtless spectacle"? There's very little difference between what goes on in Star Trek and some superhero movies. And I like Trek...some at least. The better Trek movies do a great job with the characters, same as the better superhero flicks. All the colorful goodies of explosions and costumes are there in both too. Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years. The better MCU movies take their stories directly from the comics and have done a great job adapting the characters and storylines. The problem is that the MCU movies get rolled together with the usually shit DC flicks, the unreliable X-Men movies, three-fifth of the Spidey flicks, and awful stuff like Fantastic Four and its reboot. Without actually looking at all the superhero titles, I'd say not even 50% of superhero are good. Still, the bad ones aren't enough to "kill ALL movies" for me. And that's a shame because there have been plenty of good non-superhero movies out there too.

 

A lot of you guys are stuck on if something is a big budget movie too. Does that really matter? Just watch stuff that might interest you. I don't watch Transformers or any of those Emmerich end of the world disaster flicks. And no way would those balls stop me from missing other movies just because I think they're not good. Go watch Still Alice and Dallas Buyers Club, two flicks as far away from the superhero genre as possible. Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

Dallas Buyers Club was great acting. I have not seen Still Alice but will watch on your recommendation Blaze.

I did see Independence Day 2...Yikes..WOW..Some studio exec had no idea what he was doing...

Avoid at all costs...note, I dont do theaters only online watching, and wanted to turn it off, so I cleaned the house while the aliens were attacking us ..

I'm a bit of a movie snob, and honestly skip most Superhero films, The Chris Nolan Batmans were the exception for me.

Very good. I love the business of cinema, and the financial side amazes me, more importantly the financial mistakes.

[KenJennings]

There's very little difference between what goes on in Star Trek and some superhero movies.

 

If you're talking about Trek'09 or Into Darkness, or even Nemesis, I'd agree. And that's exactly why those movies were such a letdown.

 

Beyond was a refreshing display of character, but still did leave me pining for old school Trek. What I wouldn't give at this point for something like Insurrection, or The Undiscovered Country...

 

And no, I'm not hung up on budgets, but I am hung up on the profit motive behind movies. There's very little imagination, very little wonder in movies anymore. Sure you get the occasional Interstellar, which was alright; but most of what Hollywood churns out is a bastard rehash of some piece of nostalgia, lost for what it was in favor of cheap modernization and the latest colorful trends gleaned from some social media hotlist.

 

Movies just don't have a lot of magic behind them anymore. They don't inspire me, they don't leave me dreaming. Even franchises I once loved (Star Trek, Jurassic Park, Independence Day, Ghostbusters) feel hollow in their new endeavors, more like they're slapping a classic label on a generic product, just to bilk me for money. And even when they produce something half-way decent, it still feels so 'off'. They leave me feeling like a mere consumer. Eat it up and come back for another plateful.

[KenJennings]

Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

 

On the point of budgets, the fact that ten million dollars is seen as a paltry, token sum in the business of producing two hours worth of film; is pretty ridiculous.

 

There's no reason a two hour movie should ever cost that much.

[KenJennings]

Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years.

 

Never heard of it, but interestingly enough, when I wiki'd it: no mention of Data was found, though there was an implication that Vision was a ripoff of Spock.

[Lucas]

Just sitting here eating dinner, and I thought I'd look up some of the budgets to some good films ( mostly horror )

 

- Halloween $325,000

 

- Blair Witch Project $60,000 ( some list it at $25,000 )

 

- Invasion Of The Body Snatchers ( 1956 ) $400,000

 

- Psycho $800,000 ( 800 grand for the greatest director of all time to make a classic )

 

- Paranormal Activity $11,000

 

- Carnival Of Souls $30,000

 

- Mean Streets $500,000

 

- Friday The 13th $700,000

 

- Suicide Club $250,000

 

- Night Of The Living Dead $114,000 ( some list it as low as $25,000 )

 

- Texas Chainsaw Massacre $140,000

 

- Eraserhead $10,000

 

- Dawn Of The Dead ( 1978 ) $500,000

Edited August 18, 2016 by Lucas

[Lucas]

Phantasm - $300,000

 

Taxi Driver - 1.3 Mil

Edited August 18, 2016 by Lucas

[JohnnyBlaze]

Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years.

 

Never heard of it, but interestingly enough, when I wiki'd it: no mention of Data was found, though there was an implication that Vision was a ripoff of Spock.

I knew the Spock implication would be there. I thought about it myself many times. However, (The Silver Age) Vision was an android trying to fit into society and wanting to understand human emotions. Given that character history, Data sounds more like Vision than Vision sounds like Spock. I can't explain why Wikipedia doesn't mention Data in connection to Vision. It should be there. Then again, it's not like wiki always gets things right and doesn't leave stuff out. Any schmuck can write on there.

 

My real point is: How can you, King of Star Trek, turn your nose up at superhero stories that are often very similar to Trek ones? In fact, there was that Next Gen episode in which Star Fleet was determining if Data was sentient/alive/whatever. It was Picard vs Riker in a courtroom type hearing. Picard ended up proclaiming Data was "a culture of one". I'm sure you remember it. But yeah, the idea of being alive/sentient had already been touched on several times with Vision in Marvel comics throughout the 70s. And yeah, I'm sure you'll point to sci-fi novels and mags even preceding the Vision themes in the late 60s and 70s.

[JohnnyBlaze]

Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

 

On the point of budgets, the fact that ten million dollars is seen as a paltry, token sum in the business of producing two hours worth of film; is pretty ridiculous.

 

There's no reason a two hour movie should ever cost that much.

Ok, sure. But how can you even rip a 5 million dollar budget when you're kissing the feet of Trekdom? Makes no sense to be annoyed about big budgets when you love Trek. What was Star Trek Beyond's budget? 200 million?

[JohnnyBlaze]

Superhero movies basically killed "movies" for me. I've only been to two movies in the past 3 years as a result. Nothing Hollywood puts out interests me anymore. It's thoughtless spectacle. In order to get a big budget movie made these days, the appeal has to be to the lowest common denominator. It's far too much business and not enough art, you can't play to a niche, and you can't alienate anyone.

I disagree. "Thoughtless spectacle"? There's very little difference between what goes on in Star Trek and some superhero movies. And I like Trek...some at least. The better Trek movies do a great job with the characters, same as the better superhero flicks. All the colorful goodies of explosions and costumes are there in both too. Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years. The better MCU movies take their stories directly from the comics and have done a great job adapting the characters and storylines. The problem is that the MCU movies get rolled together with the usually shit DC flicks, the unreliable X-Men movies, three-fifth of the Spidey flicks, and awful stuff like Fantastic Four and its reboot. Without actually looking at all the superhero titles, I'd say not even 50% of superhero are good. Still, the bad ones aren't enough to "kill ALL movies" for me. And that's a shame because there have been plenty of good non-superhero movies out there too.

 

A lot of you guys are stuck on if something is a big budget movie too. Does that really matter? Just watch stuff that might interest you. I don't watch Transformers or any of those Emmerich end of the world disaster flicks. And no way would those balls stop me from missing other movies just because I think they're not good. Go watch Still Alice and Dallas Buyers Club, two flicks as far away from the superhero genre as possible. Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

Dallas Buyers Club was great acting. I have not seen Still Alice but will watch on your recommendation Blaze.

I did see Independence Day 2...Yikes..WOW..Some studio exec had no idea what he was doing...

Avoid at all costs...note, I dont do theaters only online watching, and wanted to turn it off, so I cleaned the house while the aliens were attacking us ..

I'm a bit of a movie snob, and honestly skip most Superhero films, The Chris Nolan Batmans were the exception for me.

Very good. I love the business of cinema, and the financial side amazes me, more importantly the financial mistakes.

Still Alice: Julianne Moore at her best. Alec Baldwin, who I usually think is just "ok" to "above average", does an excellent job playing her husband. Such a believable movie with a great portrayal of the progression of Alzheimer's. I didn't cry watching it but I should've. Grade: A+

[Disembodied Spirit]

Superhero movies basically killed "movies" for me. I've only been to two movies in the past 3 years as a result. Nothing Hollywood puts out interests me anymore. It's thoughtless spectacle. In order to get a big budget movie made these days, the appeal has to be to the lowest common denominator. It's far too much business and not enough art, you can't play to a niche, and you can't alienate anyone.

I disagree. "Thoughtless spectacle"? There's very little difference between what goes on in Star Trek and some superhero movies. And I like Trek...some at least. The better Trek movies do a great job with the characters, same as the better superhero flicks. All the colorful goodies of explosions and costumes are there in both too. Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years. The better MCU movies take their stories directly from the comics and have done a great job adapting the characters and storylines. The problem is that the MCU movies get rolled together with the usually shit DC flicks, the unreliable X-Men movies, three-fifth of the Spidey flicks, and awful stuff like Fantastic Four and its reboot. Without actually looking at all the superhero titles, I'd say not even 50% of superhero are good. Still, the bad ones aren't enough to "kill ALL movies" for me. And that's a shame because there have been plenty of good non-superhero movies out there too.

 

A lot of you guys are stuck on if something is a big budget movie too. Does that really matter? Just watch stuff that might interest you. I don't watch Transformers or any of those Emmerich end of the world disaster flicks. And no way would those balls stop me from missing other movies just because I think they're not good. Go watch Still Alice and Dallas Buyers Club, two flicks as far away from the superhero genre as possible. Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

Dallas Buyers Club was great acting. I have not seen Still Alice but will watch on your recommendation Blaze.

I did see Independence Day 2...Yikes..WOW..Some studio exec had no idea what he was doing...

Avoid at all costs...note, I dont do theaters only online watching, and wanted to turn it off, so I cleaned the house while the aliens were attacking us ..

I'm a bit of a movie snob, and honestly skip most Superhero films, The Chris Nolan Batmans were the exception for me.

Very good. I love the business of cinema, and the financial side amazes me, more importantly the financial mistakes.

Still Alice: Julianne Moore at her best. Alec Baldwin, who I usually think is just "ok" to "above average", does an excellent job playing her husband. Such a believable movie with a great portrayal of the progression of Alzheimer's. I didn't cry watching it but I should've. Grade: A+

I thought Alec Baldwin was good in Concussion too. Movie was good for being a true story as well.

But Will Smith did not deserve an Oscar nomination as some have stated

[JohnnyBlaze]

Superhero movies basically killed "movies" for me. I've only been to two movies in the past 3 years as a result. Nothing Hollywood puts out interests me anymore. It's thoughtless spectacle. In order to get a big budget movie made these days, the appeal has to be to the lowest common denominator. It's far too much business and not enough art, you can't play to a niche, and you can't alienate anyone.

I disagree. "Thoughtless spectacle"? There's very little difference between what goes on in Star Trek and some superhero movies. And I like Trek...some at least. The better Trek movies do a great job with the characters, same as the better superhero flicks. All the colorful goodies of explosions and costumes are there in both too. Data himself is very much a ripoff of Marvel's comic book Vision who preceded him (Data) by 20 years. The better MCU movies take their stories directly from the comics and have done a great job adapting the characters and storylines. The problem is that the MCU movies get rolled together with the usually shit DC flicks, the unreliable X-Men movies, three-fifth of the Spidey flicks, and awful stuff like Fantastic Four and its reboot. Without actually looking at all the superhero titles, I'd say not even 50% of superhero are good. Still, the bad ones aren't enough to "kill ALL movies" for me. And that's a shame because there have been plenty of good non-superhero movies out there too.

 

A lot of you guys are stuck on if something is a big budget movie too. Does that really matter? Just watch stuff that might interest you. I don't watch Transformers or any of those Emmerich end of the world disaster flicks. And no way would those balls stop me from missing other movies just because I think they're not good. Go watch Still Alice and Dallas Buyers Club, two flicks as far away from the superhero genre as possible. Just superb, thoughtful movies with a total COMBINED budget of $10 million (if you're still hung up on budgets).

Dallas Buyers Club was great acting. I have not seen Still Alice but will watch on your recommendation Blaze.

I did see Independence Day 2...Yikes..WOW..Some studio exec had no idea what he was doing...

Avoid at all costs...note, I dont do theaters only online watching, and wanted to turn it off, so I cleaned the house while the aliens were attacking us ..

I'm a bit of a movie snob, and honestly skip most Superhero films, The Chris Nolan Batmans were the exception for me.

Very good. I love the business of cinema, and the financial side amazes me, more importantly the financial mistakes.

Still Alice: Julianne Moore at her best. Alec Baldwin, who I usually think is just "ok" to "above average", does an excellent job playing her husband. Such a believable movie with a great portrayal of the progression of Alzheimer's. I didn't cry watching it but I should've. Grade: A+

I thought Alec Baldwin was good in Concussion too. Movie was good for being a true story as well.

But Will Smith did not deserve an Oscar nomination as some have stated

Didn't see that. I skip Will Smith movies. Never really liked his stuff. It'd take someone like Denzel, Hanks, or Freeman in the same flick for me to watch a Will Smith movie these days.

[KenJennings]

My real point is: How can you, King of Star Trek, turn your nose up at superhero stories that are often very similar to Trek ones?

 

Superhero movies have far more in common with Star Wars than Star Trek. They are spectacle, rather than parable. Superhero movies are about exceptional individuals whose talents and means are depended on by everyone else. Star Trek is about cooperation and the notion that everyone contributes to the whole. Star Trek is historically diplomatic- more willing to spend a scene talking and rationalizing rather than slugging it out with an unreasonable villain. Star Trek is more grounded, more measured and willing to take the time to explore the human details of a situation.

 

The Star Trek movies of late have not been an exception to this. Beyond was saved by the fact that they went the extra mile to build on characterization, they painted a picture of a crew that worked brilliantly as a whole, but failed as a mere sum of its parts. But even so, it did fall flat with a less developed antagonist than I'd like to see, including a generic threat; and it relied far too much on the 'wow factor' of destruction and chaos. This mixed bag made it easily the best of the modern "superhero" incarnation of Trek that falls so far short of the classic franchise, which was nothing like the modern form. Into Darkness was one of the worst things ever made under the Star Trek banner. It exemplified everything about superhero movies that bores and disappoints me.

 

This video offers a beautifully self-abasing explanation of everything wrong with modern Star Trek, and superhero movies alike.

 

[JohnnyBlaze]

Ok. All good Trek is good because it's intelligent, creative, character driven, and focuses on cooperation. Bad Trek is similar to Star Wars and superhero stories. That's some snobby shit right there.

 

And what would you say about my earlier point regarding Data being ripped off from Vision?...that TNG episode I mentioned too being something right out of Vision's long history. Oh that's right, you didn't see that on Wikipedia so you can toss that out.

 

I don't see what's so painful about admitting the positive similarities between Trek, superheroes, and (now) Star Wars. Oh that's right, you find superhero stuff boring so there can't be anything good or anything shared in common with the good elements of Trek.

 

We all like what we like and that's fine but you're in some serious denial about all the similarities these stories and characters have.

Edited August 18, 2016 by JohnnyBlaze

[JohnnyBlaze]

((double post)) Edited August 18, 2016 by JohnnyBlaze

[KenJennings]

Ok. All good Trek is good because it's intelligent, creative, character driven, and focuses on cooperation. Bad Trek is similar to Star Wars and superhero stories.

 

Yes. Your words, but I'm fine with that.

 

That's some snobby shit right there.

 

Since when is 'having an opinion' snobby? Can I say the same thing about your opinion of Roland Emmerich or Will Smith movies? Why are you allowed to dislike things or have standards, but I'm a snob for doing the same thing?

 

My question would be why the hell are you getting so defensive about a stated opinion. You asked why I like Star Trek and not Superhero movies. I told you. I stand by it

 

And what would you say about my earlier point regarding Data being ripped off from Vision?...that TNG episode I mentioned too being something right out of Vision's long history. Oh that's right, you didn't see that on Wikipedia so you can toss that out.

 

Well, considering that I'm not well verse on obscure 70s comic books, I didn't really feel the need to comment. If your complaint is that the concept of 'blurred lines of AI sentience' is a ripoff of a comic book, I can drag you back to Asimov and earlier. Similar concepts are present throughout fiction for thousands of years. I'm not going to put a lot of stock into the notion that one of the most well presented science fiction parables in history is ripped off from some Bazooka Joe.

 

I don't see what's so painful about admitting the positive similarities between Trek, superheroes, and (now) Star Wars. Oh that's right, you find superhero stuff boring so there can't be anything good or anything shared in common with the good elements of Trek.

 

Again your words. I don't like superhero movies.

 

If your point is that, like Star Trek, they contain story narratives and varied characters. Sure. There's that similarity, they have that in common with all stories. I'm not going to go down the line and list every way that they're alike. I'm going to point out the things I see as different, and the reasons I prefer one over the other.

 

We all like what we like and that's fine...

 

Really doesn't seem like you believe that.

 

...but you're in some serious denial about all the similarities these stories and characters have.

 

Sorry you see things that way. I've already explained myself.

Edited August 18, 2016 by KenJennings

[JohnnyBlaze]

Ok. All good Trek is good because it's intelligent, creative, character driven, and focuses on cooperation. Bad Trek is similar to Star Wars and superhero stories.

 

Yes. Your words, but I'm fine with that.

 

That's some snobby shit right there.

 

Since when is 'having an opinion' snobby? Can I say the same thing about your opinion of Roland Emmerich or Will Smith movies? Why are you allowed to dislike things or have standards, but I'm a snob for doing the same thing?

 

My question would be why the hell are you getting so defensive about a stated opinion. You asked why I like Star Trek and not Superhero movies. I told you. I stand by it

 

And what would you say about my earlier point regarding Data being ripped off from Vision?...that TNG episode I mentioned too being something right out of Vision's long history. Oh that's right, you didn't see that on Wikipedia so you can toss that out.

 

Well, considering that I'm not well verse on obscure 70s comic books, I didn't really feel the need to comment. If your complaint is that the concept of 'blurred lines of AI sentience' is a ripoff of a comic book, I can drag you back to Asimov and earlier. Similar concepts are present throughout fiction for thousands of years. I'm not going to put a lot of stock into the notion that one of the most well presented science fiction parables in history is ripped off from some Bazooka Joe.

 

I don't see what's so painful about admitting the positive similarities between Trek, superheroes, and (now) Star Wars. Oh that's right, you find superhero stuff boring so there can't be anything good or anything shared in common with the good elements of Trek.

 

Again your words. I don't like superhero movies.

 

If your point is that, like Star Trek, they contain story narratives and varied characters. Sure. There's that similarity, they have that in common with all stories. I'm not going to go down the line and list every way that they're alike. I'm going to point out the things I see as different, and the reasons I prefer one over the other.

 

We all like what we like and that's fine...

 

Really doesn't seem like you believe that.

 

...but you're in some serious denial about all the similarities these stories and characters have.

 

Sorry you see things that way. I've already explained myself.

"Defensive", not really. I see snobbery and I'm addressing it.

And be honest, you're not sorry I "see things that way".

 

I said I didn't like Will Smith movies. Sure. But I didn't say too much about it other than that. You're prattling on about the greatness of (x) and the crappiness of (y) without acknowledging the similarities between both. This is where I see the snobbery. But you disagree. Ok.