Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
GustavoLeao

Chris Pine Talks STAR TREK 4

17 posts in this topic

Chris Pine Talks STAR TREK 4 -  New Interview
 
Kirk’s dad, George Kirk (Chris Hemsworth), is reportedly coming back in the next “Star Trek” movie. What are your thoughts on running into your dad and how do you think that interaction will be?
 
It’s such a trip that, in the first one, Chris [Hemsworth] had such a small but super important part and he knocked it out of the park. He’s only on screen for so little time and he’s really emotionally the centerpiece of that film. I’ve only really seen him a couple times since then strangely, so it would be fun to reunite with him. I was honestly quite happy where the end of that father-son storyline ended, but I’d be happy to work with Chris again. He’s a great actor and a really nice man.
 
Full interview with Pine : 
 
Edited by GustavoLeao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Chris Pine Hasn’t Heard Anything About Next Star Trek Movie + Paramount Searching For New CEO
 
Why Star Trek 4 has not entered production yet and so forth ? Abrams said they had their story for the next movie. I wonder.
 
Edited by GustavoLeao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because apparently, each movie MUST take 4 years to make....I miss the 2 year gaps of the 90's. 

I hope they keep JJ away from the director's chair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

Because apparently, each movie MUST take 4 years to make....I miss the 2 year gaps of the 90's. 

I hope they keep JJ away from the director's chair.

But in the 90s...most of the movies sucked...okay they had a similar run in the 80s, and those movies are pretty entertaining...but the 90s?  Let us not go back to a period that gave us one decent action movie, one weird cross generational mess (a mess I enjoy due to nostalgia, but it is a bit of a mess), and then two stinkers.  If they could give me movies like Beyond every two years? I am down...but I don't need them to rush them out assembly line style.  Just every few years or so, give me a decent Star Trek adventure with that likable new cast.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the 90's movies were better than 2009 and into darkness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

All the 90's movies were better than 2009 and into darkness.

I'd almost call it a draw; I loved TUC, GEN and FC.  

But I also thought that ST09 was a nice shot in the arm for the franchise; a fresh infusion of energy it kind of needed at the time.  And ST Beyond was really good in recapturing the spirit of TOS.   Though I agree that STID was a mess.   A beautifully photographed mess (arguably one of the best-looking ST movies ever), but still a mess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I'm sorry as much as I can see flaws in 2009, it is still far more entertaining than Insurrection or Nemesis ever were.  And at this point I might put Beyond above the much loved First Contact.  So I can't agree.  The 90s movies were the weak point of the film end of the franchise in my opinion (I can defend most of the TOS-cast films, with the exception of 5), but I pop in the TNG films a lot less than I pop in TNG itself...they just don't capture the right tone of that show, they don't hold up particularly well in my book...and for all the things I think 2009 didn't do great, I find it a far more enjoyable piece of entertainment than those films were. 

Into Darkness is lousy though.  I'll give you that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, kenman said:

Yea I'm sorry as much as I can see flaws in 2009, it is still far more entertaining than Insurrection or Nemesis ever were.  And at this point I might put Beyond above the much loved First Contact.  So I can't agree.  The 90s movies were the weak point of the film end of the franchise in my opinion (I can defend most of the TOS-cast films, with the exception of 5), but I pop in the TNG films a lot less than I pop in TNG itself...they just don't capture the right tone of that show, they don't hold up particularly well in my book...and for all the things I think 2009 didn't do great, I find it a far more enjoyable piece of entertainment than those films were. 

Into Darkness is lousy though.  I'll give you that.

Pretty much agree, but for me I would say that ST Beyond is a great TOS-style film, and FC is a great TNG film; each are great ST movies, but in their own respective categories...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Pretty much agree, but for me I would say that ST Beyond is a great TOS-style film, and FC is a great TNG film; each are great ST movies, but in their own respective categories...

I think as the years have gone by, my view of First Contact has evolved some. It used to rank pretty high for me. But nowadays I think it has a lot of good stuff in it, I can still enjoy it, but it is kind of just a bit too action heavy zombie movie...to really feel like TNG.  Beyond is a much more big budget action style story than any TOS episode, but it still manages to capture the feel and tone of the original show and it's characters in a way that just balances out for me (the characters feel like those TOS characters put into this extra big budget action adventure tale...oh and the Yorktown just feels so Star Trek to me).

And I dunno what it is, but what actually hurts First Contact for me these days is how much it DOESN'T evoke that TNG feeling. I mean it's fun, you got the characters and actors you love, you get the Borg in a big bad higher budgeted way, and you get little bit of Trek-lore and nice action...but it is lacking a sense of TNG that I can't pinpoint, but I just know it is missing when I watch it now.  Again, not bad, it has just dropped in it's rankings for me personally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See, thats what I like about Insurrection. It actually has that TNG feel to me, plus some action from the Awesome Enterprise E that spent most of the movie just sitting in orbit in First Contact. Not to mention Jerry Goldsmith's great score (for example "The village" and "New sight")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurrection has the closest TNG tone...but the action is cheap and the characters are a bit off...and often it just feels like a crap episode. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kenman said:

Insurrection has the closest TNG tone...but the action is cheap and the characters are a bit off...and often it just feels like a crap episode. 

Sorry but I just loathe that movie; it's like a really bad S7 two-parter.   Like "Gambit: The Movie."   When I go to the movies, I want a movie; not a bad episode that I would barely watch at home, let alone pay to see. 

ST09, for all its flaws, FELT like a movie.  Ditto FC (flaws and all).   INS does not.  It barely registers as an episode. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Sorry but I just loathe that movie; it's like a really bad S7 two-parter.   Like "Gambit: The Movie."   When I go to the movies, I want a movie; not a bad episode that I would barely watch at home, let alone pay to see. 

ST09, for all its flaws, FELT like a movie.  Ditto FC (flaws and all).   INS does not.  It barely registers as an episode. 

It's painfully bad. Much worse than Nemesis, IMHO, though that's not to imply that Nemesis is any kind of "good."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, prometheus59650 said:

It's painfully bad. Much worse than Nemesis, IMHO, though that's not to imply that Nemesis is any kind of "good."

Maybe it's just my expectation level, but I go into a ST movie hoping for a movie first.   INS felt very un-cinematic.   NEM was a bad script, but it least it looked nice, with great visual panache, and a beautiful color palette.  INS just had the feeling of a widescreen S7 episode, and a mediocre one at that. 

If my eyes are going to be fixed on a screen for several hours, the movie should at least look and feel vaguely cinematic. 

The Abramsverse ST movies, for all their faults, do this for me.  Even STID, which I don't like, looked terrific.   Movies are the one-night stands compared to the steady relationship that is a television show.   The one-night stand doesn't necessarily have to look great the morning after, but at least you'll have a nice time for one night... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Color palette of Nemesis was the worst thing about it. Well, besides the look of the Bridge, thats the best that bridge ever looked. The problem with Nemesis isn't the script (Read John Logan's entire uncut script, its actually pretty good) , the problem was the editor for a director that couldn't stop cutting important stuff out, and couldnt get away from his "dark" palette. Listen to his commentary, he says "dark, darker, more dark" over and over and over again. Not to mention Digital Domain did a very crappy job with special effects.

Star Trek Insurrection was cinematic enough. I had a blast watching it in the theatre wan i was 12. 

Anyways, Ill take Baird's DARK over JJ's OH MY GOD I CANT SEE ITS SO BRIGHT LENSFLARE any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

The Color palette of Nemesis was the worst thing about it. Well, besides the look of the Bridge, thats the best that bridge ever looked. The problem with Nemesis isn't the script (Read John Logan's entire uncut script, its actually pretty good) , the problem was the editor for a director that couldn't stop cutting important stuff out, and couldnt get away from his "dark" palette. Listen to his commentary, he says "dark, darker, more dark" over and over and over again. Not to mention Digital Domain did a very crappy job with special effects.

Star Trek Insurrection was cinematic enough. I had a blast watching it in the theatre wan i was 12. 

Anyways, Ill take Baird's DARK over JJ's OH MY GOD I CANT SEE ITS SO BRIGHT LENSFLARE any day.

Tomah-to, tomato... I thought it looked sophisticated.  The Ent-E interiors (all of them) never looked better; and the Romulan senate chamber was a beautiful set.  I don't know about Logan's original script, as I've not read it, but what ended up on the screen was not his best work (this is the same guy who wrote the superlative Bond film "Skyfall").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

The Color palette of Nemesis was the worst thing about it. Well,

1 hour ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Maybe it's just my expectation level, but I go into a ST movie hoping for a movie first.   INS felt very un-cinematic.   NEM was a bad script, but it least it looked nice, with great visual panache, and a beautiful color palette.  INS just had the feeling of a widescreen S7 episode, and a mediocre one at that. 

If my eyes are going to be fixed on a screen for several hours, the movie should at least look and feel vaguely cinematic. 

The Abramsverse ST movies, for all their faults, do this for me.  Even STID, which I don't like, looked terrific.   Movies are the one-night stands compared to the steady relationship that is a television show.   The one-night stand doesn't necessarily have to look great the morning after, but at least you'll have a nice time for one night... :P

besides the look of the Bridge, thats the best that bridge ever looked. The problem with Nemesis isn't the script (Read John Logan's entire uncut script, its actually pretty good) , the problem was the editor for a director that couldn't stop cutting important stuff out, and couldnt get away from his "dark" palette. Listen to his commentary, he says "dark, darker, more dark" over and over and over again. Not to mention Digital Domain did a very crappy job with special effects.

Star Trek Insurrection was cinematic enough. I had a blast watching it in the theatre wan i was 12. 

Anyways, Ill take Baird's DARK over JJ's OH MY GOD I CANT SEE ITS SO BRIGHT LENSFLARE any day.

Somewhat surprises me considering Baird was and is a film editor.

And INS is a second season episode someone rightly left on the floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0