Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Deadline)   Paramount will air the first nine minutes of Star Trek: Into Lensflare on December 14th on IMAX. Difficulty: you have to buy a ticket to see The Hobbit   (deadline.com) divider line 142
    More: PSA, Star Trek, IMAX, hobbits, Bad Robot, The Hobbit, Ghost Protocol, Bryan Burk, okays  
•       •       •

2884 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 14 Nov 2012 at 11:39 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



142 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-15 10:04:54 AM  
the only problem with this is it's only one hobbit movie
 
2012-11-15 10:05:07 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: Mentat: I'm not sure the Star Trek and LotR fanbases overlap.

Not that you were serious, but count me in the "not in the overlap" group.


I see some nerdy Venn diagram potential here...
 
2012-11-15 10:05:51 AM  

Egoy3k: If you want star trek or lord of the rings or firefly or (insert your favorite comic book, fantasy or sci-fi story here) movies to be made you have to understand that they will be tailored to please a wider audience than the hardcore fans otherwise they won't be made. All the nerd rage over these movies is just a feeble attempt to get nerddom back to the fringes of society so you can feel special and smarter than the average joe. Grow up.


They also have to have a more grandiose plot. Your average "alien of the week" story isn't going to get a sniff of a greenlight; you have to have higher stakes.

That works in II and VI. Wrath of Khan was Moby Dick with climactic action reminiscent of Das Boot. Undiscovered Country was a myriad of Hamlet characters wrapped in an "end of the Cold War" allegory.

And sometimes it doesn't work. The Motionless picture had a great story, but the pacing should be the subject of ridicule in every freshman Intro to Drama class. Final Frontier had some amazing scenes - particularly the "I don't want my pain taken away! I NEED my pain!" scene might be some of the best philosophical introspection in the entire tenure of the original cast. But that movie got reworked so much it was inevitable that it came out as a trainwreck.
 
2012-11-15 10:09:05 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Final Frontier is Willam Shattner masturbating himself over his own character

.

FTFY. MAN that movie is bad.
 
2012-11-15 10:09:26 AM  

ToxicMunkee: It's time to get over the lens flare butthurt, old man.


It's not the actual lens flare I have a problem with, it's the guys style and he (so far) makes good popcorn movies. But there are some scenes in the first movie where it's so overly bright compared to the preceding scene it actually gives me eye strain. That I've a problem with not his love of lens flare effects.

So hopefully he dials that down a bit in the new movie.
 
2012-11-15 10:14:23 AM  

alienated: Space: Above and Beyond


If ever there was a show that went out in style it was SAAB. The "we know we're cancelled, lets rock and kill EVERYTHING!" ending was glorious.

It should REALLY be rebooted, the show had a lot of promise and the characters were quite good and well fleshed out.

In fact, fark it. I'm off to watch it.
 
2012-11-15 10:28:59 AM  

Forbidden Doughnut: IIRC, that's already been done with Star Wars: Episode 1. Previews for that were shown before some forgettable movie starring Brad Pitt.


Actually, it was The Waterboy. Link
 
2012-11-15 10:36:33 AM  
Silly nerds, there will never be another star trek TV show. Nor any other scific show. They cost too much money to make and you don't want to sit through their commercials. You did it to yourselves.
 
2012-11-15 10:38:21 AM  

Egoy3k: /watchmen is the exception
//that movie was pretty damn faithful to it's source material
///and a good movie too


Amen.
 
2012-11-15 10:45:19 AM  

Omis: Silly nerds, there will never be another star trek TV show. Nor any other scific show.They cost too much money to make and you don't want to sit through their commercials. You did it to yourselves.


i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2012-11-15 10:48:22 AM  

Techhell: "In order to touch Keira Knightly's boobs, you have to buy a ticket to touch Scarlett Johansson's boobs."

Oh, man. That is a difficult question.


it is a trick question. Keira Knightly HAS NO BOOBS.
 
2012-11-15 10:55:16 AM  
Guess Im a rare one...Im a Trek and LoTR fan. However I must admit Ive never seen the newest Trek...Ive heard so many bad things I refuse to pay to see it...so when it eventually hits regular cable TV Ill check it out.

The Hobbit however may be the first movie to get to to pay theater prices in several years.
 
2012-11-15 10:58:58 AM  

alienated: Mentat: I'm not sure the Star Trek and LotR fanbases overlap.

Wait, your serious ? Let me laugh harder jpeg


Yes, I was clearly being serious.
 
2012-11-15 11:06:53 AM  

Sultan Of Herf: Guess Im a rare one...Im a Trek and LoTR fan. However I must admit Ive never seen the newest Trek...Ive heard so many bad things I refuse to pay to see it...so when it eventually hits regular cable TV Ill check it out.

The Hobbit however may be the first movie to get to to pay theater prices in several years.


what bad things? bullshiat on fark? the fact that it is the highest rated Trek film ever and made the most money of any Trek film never made you think "oh, I like Trek, maybe i should see this film" or do you just listen to bullcrap on fark?

Because Trek 09 was freaking awesome.

/lifelong Trek fan, the new film was great and really made most of the older films look like crap (except for Wrath of Khan).
 
2012-11-15 11:13:26 AM  
As a person that doesn't care to pay extra for IMAX nor wants to see the next Star Trek, I'm not heartbroken over missing the preview.

/yes, the butthurt does still sting.
 
2012-11-15 11:16:02 AM  

peterthx: StoPPeRmobile: In real life, you can focus on different areas and see better.

You can't do that with a 2D film either so not sure what you're getting at....


I think I get what he's saying. Actually, I get headaches and eye strain when trying to watch movies in 3-D. The problem is that you are looking at a 3-D scene, but EVERYTHING is in focus. Maybe other people are fine, but my brain can't make heads or tails of it. If it's a scene with short depth (inside a room or something), I don't have much of an issue... But if it's an outdoor scene with some serious depth, I get horrible eye strain.

The worst was when I watched a preview for some dance movie. Everyone was dancing in the street and the camera panned back to a long shot with people dancing for blocks down the road. I instantly got a major headache. I'm seeing a long shot with dozens of people dancing at different depths, but they are all in focus. It's not something your brain is used to dealing with. (Part of the headache might have been from being forced to watch a preview for a stupid dancing movie... I can't be sure.)
 
2012-11-15 11:25:20 AM  
Why do people keep referring to the the Star Trek reboot as Star Trek 9?

It wasn't #9, that was Insurrection (which I wish I could forget). The JJ reboot is the eleventh Star Trek film. Into Darkness will be the twelfth.

ST 1-6 - original cast
ST 7 - Generations with mixed cast
ST 8-10 - TNG cast
ST 11-12 - reboot cast + Nimoy
 
2012-11-15 11:55:41 AM  

madgonad: Why do people keep referring to the the Star Trek reboot as Star Trek 9?

It wasn't #9, that was Insurrection (which I wish I could forget). The JJ reboot is the eleventh Star Trek film. Into Darkness will be the twelfth.

ST 1-6 - original cast
ST 7 - Generations with mixed cast
ST 8-10 - TNG cast
ST 11-12 - reboot cast + Nimoy


they call it Trek '09. Because it is the Trek film that came out in 2009.
 
2012-11-15 12:22:47 PM  
I'm completely ambivalent about a new Star Trek movie - Karl Urban was good, Simon Pegg is always entertaining, everything else was pretty meh.

I am, however, farking excited about getting to see more Middle Earth movies. JUST TAKE MY MONEY!

Convincing the girlfriend to go to the IMAX in the next town over may be difficult. I'm considering just organizing a trip with my D&D group, it would be easier. She laughed at me when I got all happy when we saw Wreck-It Ralph and the trailer for the Hobbit played - I hadn't seen the trailer on the big screen yet.
 
2012-11-15 12:29:21 PM  

Alphax: RevRaven: It was more akin to Star Wars actually, structurally anyways. Which is fine...for a Star Wars movie. But as a Star Trek movie (and a reboot! A reboot of the most internally cohesive fictional universe ever written, for Christ's sake.

That's where I stared laughing out loud.


That's where I realized he was trolling.
 
2012-11-15 12:51:44 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: Omis: Silly nerds, there will never be another star trek TV show. Nor any other scific show.They cost too much money to make and you don't want to sit through their commercials. You did it to yourselves.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286]


I was gonna let that slide and point out that I'd rather watch a 'talk heads' SciFi show like Pioneer One than I would a 'dark & gritty' shlokfest that the big studios want to put out.

But when I saw you'd yanked that image from the dailyfail I just had to reply to you and complement you on a good choice for image host. Nicely done and well played.
 
2012-11-15 01:28:22 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: I am sure the Hobbit will be great for fans of the book.


Kidding, right? The flick is sure to eviscerate the book with Peter Jackson & Co.'s made-up backstory in place of the songs.
 
2012-11-15 01:29:32 PM  

madgonad: Why do people keep referring to the the Star Trek reboot as Star Trek 9?


people who want to forget about nemesis and that other crappy one
 
2012-11-15 01:38:37 PM  

moothemagiccow: Jim from Saint Paul: I am sure the Hobbit will be great for fans of the book.

Kidding, right? The flick is sure to eviscerate the book with Peter Jackson & Co.'s made-up backstory in place of the songs.


if I have to hear another goddamn hobbit song I might just poke knives into my ears.

fark the goddamn songs.
 
2012-11-15 01:47:37 PM  

frepnog: Sultan Of Herf: Guess Im a rare one...Im a Trek and LoTR fan. However I must admit Ive never seen the newest Trek...Ive heard so many bad things I refuse to pay to see it...so when it eventually hits regular cable TV Ill check it out.

The Hobbit however may be the first movie to get to to pay theater prices in several years.

what bad things? bullshiat on fark? the fact that it is the highest rated Trek film ever and made the most money of any Trek film never made you think "oh, I like Trek, maybe i should see this film" or do you just listen to bullcrap on fark?

Because Trek 09 was freaking awesome.

/lifelong Trek fan, the new film was great and really made most of the older films look like crap (except for Wrath of Khan).


A lot of negative on here, but that doesnt sway me much...I think when it comes to movies Fark has a big touch of hipster going...hating things that are popular. Others have told me its very different from all the other Treks, which is likely a touch of good and bad. Im sure Ill see it sooner or later.
 
2012-11-15 02:36:33 PM  
As if they expected the Hobbit to have a hard time selling seats...
 
2012-11-15 03:01:08 PM  
Great Janitor:As a life long Trek fan, I'll admit that Star Trek 09 is not the worst Trek movie (Star Treks 1 and 5 compete for that spot), but it's not the best (2, 6 and 8 compete for that spot), but it's better than 3, 9 and 10.

No, First Contact was a horrible Star Trek movie. I would say all the Next Generation movies were bad movies. They just left behind everything that made TNG worth watching.

A review of First Contact stating why it's bad.
 
2012-11-15 03:06:32 PM  

Sultan Of Herf: frepnog: Sultan Of Herf: Guess Im a rare one...Im a Trek and LoTR fan. However I must admit Ive never seen the newest Trek...Ive heard so many bad things I refuse to pay to see it...so when it eventually hits regular cable TV Ill check it out.

The Hobbit however may be the first movie to get to to pay theater prices in several years.

what bad things? bullshiat on fark? the fact that it is the highest rated Trek film ever and made the most money of any Trek film never made you think "oh, I like Trek, maybe i should see this film" or do you just listen to bullcrap on fark?

Because Trek 09 was freaking awesome.

/lifelong Trek fan, the new film was great and really made most of the older films look like crap (except for Wrath of Khan).

A lot of negative on here, but that doesnt sway me much...I think when it comes to movies Fark has a big touch of hipster going...hating things that are popular. Others have told me its very different from all the other Treks, which is likely a touch of good and bad. Im sure Ill see it sooner or later.


i don't get the "it's not trek" shiat people spout. hey look, kirk, spock and mccoy. hey look, enterprise. hey look, Leonard farking Nimoy. Most people's complaints center around lens flare (which I didn't really notice until it was pointed out), the damn way the phasers looked (the old constant laser blasts looked foolish, the star wars blaster effect looks much better) and just other nitpicking possibly that there were no long ass boring diplomacy discussions.

as a movie, it was just awesome on a stick. as a trek movie, it was the best damn trek movie ever made, only rivaled by WoK.
 
2012-11-15 03:08:59 PM  

SMB2811: Great Janitor:As a life long Trek fan, I'll admit that Star Trek 09 is not the worst Trek movie (Star Treks 1 and 5 compete for that spot), but it's not the best (2, 6 and 8 compete for that spot), but it's better than 3, 9 and 10.

No, First Contact was a horrible Star Trek movie. I would say all the Next Generation movies were bad movies. They just left behind everything that made TNG worth watching.

A review of First Contact stating why it's bad.


by the time they started spending time on the unneeded black chick and ephram cochran, yep, first contact had started sucking like a drunken prom date.
 
2012-11-15 03:12:54 PM  
I dunno, did there have to be so many plot holes in every single movie since Wrath of Khan? And in the new one, did the characters in the reboot have to be such utter characatures of their counterparts? It was like an SNL sketch. I'm not even going to biatch about the lens flares, even though they made it so you couldn't see WTF was going on half the time. But that's a design choice, fine. But Christ that movie had some shiatty writing. So did the TNG movies, with the possible exception of First Contact.
 
2012-11-15 03:32:11 PM  

SMB2811: Great Janitor:As a life long Trek fan, I'll admit that Star Trek 09 is not the worst Trek movie (Star Treks 1 and 5 compete for that spot), but it's not the best (2, 6 and 8 compete for that spot), but it's better than 3, 9 and 10.

No, First Contact was a horrible Star Trek movie. I would say all the Next Generation movies were bad movies. They just left behind everything that made TNG worth watching.

A review of First Contact stating why it's bad.


Yeah, I already knew that was the Plinkett review before I clicked the link. And honestly, he is right. It is not a bad movie, but, Trek films tend to be rated not by themselves but as compared to other Trek films. Compare First Contact to Generations, and First Contact is the better movie. Compare it to Boondock Saints and it loses.

It also reinforces what I said above, Star Trek is better as a tv series than a movie. Star Trek in general suffers in movie form the same way just about every movie based on a tv show does. Look at The Addams Family. Good movie, better sets, better costumes, better effects, but the series is 100x better than the movies were.
 
2012-11-15 03:40:12 PM  

Great Janitor: Yeah, I already knew that was the Plinkett review before I clicked the link.


Oh Christ, fark Plinkett. I'm sick of constantly hearing his shiat that everyone already said 15 years ago.
 
2012-11-15 03:43:00 PM  

Vaneshi: Jim from Saint Paul: Omis: Silly nerds, there will never be another star trek TV show. Nor any other scific show.They cost too much money to make and you don't want to sit through their commercials. You did it to yourselves.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286]

I was gonna let that slide and point out that I'd rather watch a 'talk heads' SciFi show like Pioneer One than I would a 'dark & gritty' shlokfest that the big studios want to put out.

But when I saw you'd yanked that image from the dailyfail I just had to reply to you and complement you on a good choice for image host. Nicely done and well played.


I clicked the first one on google search, it just happened to be that one, lol.

I can understand your thought process on what kind of shows you'd like to see.

There ARE a few decent sci-fi shows. You're right that there may not be another Star Trek for a long time anyway.

/am knee deep in Season 4 of Voyager
//more good stuff then people remember
///but not alot more
 
2012-11-15 03:46:07 PM  

frepnog: moothemagiccow: Jim from Saint Paul: I am sure the Hobbit will be great for fans of the book.

Kidding, right? The flick is sure to eviscerate the book with Peter Jackson & Co.'s made-up backstory in place of the songs.

if I have to hear another goddamn hobbit song I might just poke knives into my ears.

fark the goddamn songs.


I never like the Lord of the Rings books. Got about halfway through 2 towers. Also had read all of the Hobbit. The Hobbit, as a book, is overrated at best.

When a buddy brings it over I'll watch it. No money from me though.
 
2012-11-15 03:53:18 PM  
There are only TWO theaters in the entire Tampa Bay area showing the Hobbit in full HFR 3D. I have already purchased my tickets for opening day at one of them. This Star Trek news is a nice bonus!

In my experience - yes, Star Trek and LOTR fans are one and the same (me, for example). I do not know a fellow LOTR geek who does not also love Star Trek.

Suck it, haters.
 
2012-11-15 03:55:09 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: /am knee deep in Season 4 of Voyager
//more good stuff then people remember
///but not alot more


Seven of Nine is awesome. Not just because she's hot.
 
2012-11-15 04:19:59 PM  

Mugato: Jim from Saint Paul: /am knee deep in Season 4 of Voyager
//more good stuff then people remember
///but not alot more

Seven of Nine is awesome. Not just because she's hot.


We have had this conversation in multiple threads.

We still agree.

:)
 
2012-11-15 05:39:36 PM  
i.imgur.com 

Never has a thread amused me so much.
 
2012-11-15 06:15:30 PM  
I'm holding out for a motion picture of The Silmarillion. It doesn't have to be a motion picture though, i guess; it could just be 4 hours of staring at a still picture. That would probably knock out as many people as the book.
 
2012-11-15 08:07:57 PM  
There's no colon in the title, subby. It's Star Trek Into Lensflare.
 
2012-11-17 11:02:55 AM  

frepnog:
i don't get the "it's not trek" shiat people spout. hey look, kirk, spock and mccoy. hey look, enterprise. hey look, Leonard farking Nimoy. Most people's complaints center around lens flare (which I didn't really notice until it was pointed out), the damn way the phasers looked (the old constant laser blasts looked foolish, the star wars blaster effect looks much better) and just other nitpicking possibly that there were no long ass boring diplomacy discussions.

as a movie, it was just awesome on a stick. as a trek movie, it was the best damn trek movie ever made, only rivaled by WoK.


Star Trek isn't about individual characters, or ships, or actors. It's not about the technology or how things look. Star Trek is about presenting "big social issues" and "science" and keeping your brain turned on. Those are the three things that make Star Trek into Star Trek. That's what makes it different than Star Wars, for example. There's many valid arguments as to how well Star Trek did that over the last two series, possibly even the last three series (I'm a huge defender of DS9, but people do have issues with it as it's the only series not set directly on a space ship) in all aspects - the writing, the acting, the effects, etc. And the movies have been utterly shiate, trying to be both Big Blockbusters and dealing with "big social issues" and "science" and hurts like hell to try to twist your brain into the knots to follow the whats and why's.

The Star Trek 09 didn't bother with "big social issues" nor did it bother with "science". It actively encouraged you to shut your brain off and just oogle the pretty scenery. It was essentially a "Transformers"-esque movie with the a Star Trek sticker slapped on it, which made it a much better movie/blockbuster than any movie with the Star Trek label movie since Star Trek IV or II. But what keeps it from being a true Star Trek movie is that there's nothing to take from the movie beyond "Ooohh... pretty.".
 
2012-11-18 01:30:26 AM  

Techhell: Star Trek isn't about individual characters, or ships, or actors. It's not about the technology or how things look. Star Trek is about presenting "big social issues" and "science" and keeping your brain turned on. Those are the three things that make Star Trek into Star Trek.


Social issues showed up now and then? Science? No. I think the term was 'technobabble'.

Keeping your brain turned on? Only so that you could laugh at the pseudoscience and the plot holes. There were big, thick 'Nitpickers Guides' published for a good reason, and I saw some problems that those books missed.
 
Displayed 42 of 142 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report