Interesting read: http://io9.com/5483254/why-alices-adventures-in-wonderland-is-a-steampunk-masterpiece A little "Empire" propoganda: http://io9.com/5483154/do-your-part-for-the-galaxy--join-the-empire-today/gallery/
While amusing, I must put on my total sci-fi nerd hat for a moment and comment on the logic used here. I find that the "odd" curse on Star Trek just doesn't hold up. I for one enjoy many of the odd numbered treks. In fact, I hold some of them in higher regard than many of the even numbers. Cases in point: Star Trek IV--not that great. Dumbed down many of the classic characters we had come to know and love, generally lowering the standards of Trek. Also waaaay overplayed on TV. Star Trek V--This one gets an unfair shake. It actually tried to go back to the roots of Trek, but many found it unsettling. It's not a bad thing to have a crew who's main mission is exploration actually going out on a *gasp* exploratory mission! Star Trek VI--Again, too overplayed. Star Trek (VII) Generations-- Easily the best of the Next Gen movies. It found a way to bridge the gap between crews, gave us a pretty dramatic death scene for you-know-who, had Malcom McDowell as the bad guy. Come on, what's not to love about this movie? Star Treks VIII thru X--With Jonathan Frakes *cough* "directing" these were all pretty much dreck. VIII was tolerable if for no other reason than we got to see the invention of warp drive, but even that was a let-down. I mean really, the dad from Revenge of the Nerds invented the Warp drive? Come on. IX, that was just pure drivel. Don't get me started on X. Let's see, we found another Data that has obviously been deactivated. What harm can come from reactivating it? It's not like we have any experience with something like this going wrong. Uhm... Lore!?! Seriously. How did that movie ever get greenlit? I'm pretty sure Roddenberry was dead by now and Majel Barrett must have been starving to have allowed this cinematic turd to pass through the bowels of the gastric castrophe of a studio that allowed their name to be associated with it. The new Trek was awesome though! Not that I've given this any thought, or anything.
Hold up. [rummaging] I've got one of those hats around here. [rummaging more] Not that one- that's my "I've been to a college" hat [even more rummaging] Nope. That's my "liturgy nerd" hat (a.k.a. biretta). [extreme rummaging] okay. there it is. Now then. I agree. The "curse" does not hold up. Here's my take: Star Trek I. I saw it on VHS while very sick sometime in grade school. 5th grade I think. I didn't know a thing about it going in and I loved it. There, I said it. I loved Star Trek the Motion Picture. Star Trek II. I loved Star Trek I, and so I went out and promptly rented Star Trek II. I was in grade school. TNG was in heavy rotation but the originals weren't on VHS and weren't on cable in my area. My point: if you don't know who Khan is this movie stinks. So I consider this one a Trek fanservice film. As such, I don't dislike it but I also don't think it's as awesome as the Trekkers make it out to be. Star Trek III & IV. Both bad. Star Trek V. Dragged my friend to go see it in the theater. We were two of three people in the place. I liked it then and still do. Agree about on the point about exploration. I also like the fact you don't need to know lots of backstory (a.k.a. Khan, III, and IV). Star Trek VI. Liked it. Think it's a solid film that stands on its own. I honestly don't know if it's overplayed since I haven't had access to cable in years. Star Trek VII. Watched it once. Can't remember much about it. I seem to remember it's kinda silly, but then, that's Trek for you. I'm not inclined to watch it again so I'll go with the "bad" ruling. Star Trek VIII. Saw it in the theater. I really enjoyed it. This one requires Trek knowledge but it was all stuff I already knew. It's been a really long time since I've watched Revenge of the Nerds. I definitely didn't make that connection when I saw Trek VIII. So this is a good Trek in my book. As for the others- haven't seen 'em. Don't wanna see Trek IX or Trek X. And what's with listing Galaxy Quest as a Trek film? It was a Trek parody for goodness sake! Parodies are derivative by nature and do not share equal status with their inspiration. That "fixed" list is just wrong. One of these days I'll see the new Trek movie. Do Trekkers consider it canonical?
In the interest of full disclosure... that isn't my list, nor did I find it, I saw it on a friend's status on facebook, and found it humorous. I liked 1-3, seen only parts of 4, haven't seen 5 or 6, Generations was okay, and that's the end. I've seen bits and pieces of some of the others, but haven't sat down to watch them.
A new Trek movie involves a trek to the theater. Always. I don't think I've seen one I didn't like. I'm not into analyzing movies. I either like or dislike a movie.
On that note, I very much disliked Smokin Aces 2, and Boondock Saints 2, watched both this morning, neither were good enough to even enjoy the same title as the first.
oh sure, Jim. Blame it on another one of your personalities. I mean, "friends." I want to agree. In fact, if I didn't have munchkins I would agree. Trek is awfully scary for 4 year olds and the wife does not appreciate the Trek or being left with said munchkins while I go.
While, I have a trial date in May. I can't believe how long a dumb ticket can get dragged out. The accident was Oct. 28 '09.
While it is a very solid film, and it recieved my, profsaffel's, and twgw's seal of approval (and believe me, she's one of the biggest trek fans I know--That's saying something considering the day-long debates Doug and I have had...) it does alter the timeline of Trek as you know it. Effectively, it reboots the series. While not a necessary move, it is played pretty well, and is easily one of the most accessible/entertaining of the trek movies. The key thing is, it remains true to the characters if not the canon. You can be such a "girl" sometimes. p.s. I am soooo grateful that TWGW loves science fiction.
Anybody catch Roger Ebert's new (old) voice? Skip to around 4:45 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B20_oBI15g#t=4m45s
