Star Trek (2009) by J. J. Abrams

[tabuno]

I've seen and appreciated a number of sci fi movies for the reasons that 2001: A SPACE ODYESSY held (which I finished watching again two days ago by coincidence).

Alphaville - Haven't seen, but I've put it on my list.

La Jetee - Haven't seen, don't know anything about it.

The Man Who Fell to Earth - saw it years ago. Considered a classic independent.

Brazil - A bizarre and creatively different movie, captivating.

The Quiet Earth (Geoff Murphy) - Haven't seen.

28 Days Later - More sci fi horror than alien fascinating adventure.

28 Weeks Later - Haven't seen. I may never see it.

Soylant Green - Classic dystopian future movie.

Blade Runner - Classic of course, though not much really in regards to aliens rather than replicants.

Gattaca - Under-rated, though not really alien in nature, more about our own furturistic society in regards to genetic discrimination.

1984 - There were two versions. Classic dystopian futurist vision basic on George Orwell's novel.


I would add:

Silent Running. Environmentalist sci fi film (non-alien).

Logan's Run. Age discrimination sci fi (non-alient).

Forbidden Planet. Advanced alien technology in hands of primitive humans.

Alien. About an alien (the real deal here).

THX-1138. Another dystopian future about ourselves. Considered a classic.

Wavelength (1983). Little seen and overlooked movie about aliens.

The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951). One of the true classics about aliens.

Slaughter House-Five (1972). A Kurt Vonnegut novel-based movie. It's as far out of there as any sci fi movie.

Rocky Horror Show. What else can I say.

[Johann]

The Fifth Element deserves a mention I think.

La Jetee is short, but it has similarities with Godard's Alphaville, an intellectual avant-garde film that ain't for everybody. Films buffs love those two..and la Jetee was the source for Terry Gilliam's bizarro 12 Monkeys.

Watch the Marker and Gilliam in one sitting tabuno.
Let us know what you think.
They're good movies to watch back to back in one night...

And good call on 1984. It's science fiction, but it's also disturbingly real as a possible outcome for the human race...

[Chris Knipp]

Touche'... I can't even quote myself accurately. Gorgeous was better. "Glorious" is going a bit overboard.

[cinemabon]

We had this debate over "AI" before this post. As you may recall, I loath that film. I won't go into the awful list of reason why during this post. I consider it one of Speilberg's failures.

As to Star Trek IV, that is usually mentioned as the second most likable Trek adventure after Star Trek II. That was Leonard Nimoy's directorial effort and he put lots of humor into the piece, where the characters often poked fun at their own personas. The worst Star Trek film is considered Star Trek V. William Shatner directed that film. He repeatedly drove his heavy handed style down our throats every chance he got. Needless to say, from the actors to the crew to the critics, most are thankful he never directed another feature film again.

I read the Ebert piece when I found out that he was one of the few critics on Cream of the Crop that did not give "Star Trek (2009)" a favorable review. However, I found his "techinical" objections strange. For example, if all the talk about singularities and time travel bothered him, then why did he give "Star Wars" such a favorable review. Rockets do not "blast" in space. To suddenly lurch into the speed of light would squash the occupants of a spaceship flat. Explosions in space would not have "fire" in them since oxygen does not exist. Yet, Ebert took those things for granted. I believe that as a critic, we must overlook these "technical" details at times and relate whether the story was good or not.

The only film that ever tried to realistically present outer space was "2001 - a space odyssey." Kubrick insisted that he made a film that represented a real depiction of outer space. You hear no sound. You see no explosions. Weightlessness is handled appropritately as well. His attention to details hold up today.

[Chris Knipp]

I was only endorsing Ebert's summary comment on the new Star Trek, not his whole review. He has been known to make mistakes. One has to respect his love of film and broad knowledge of it, however, and since he is notoriously over-favorable on the movies he reviews, it's worth noting when he is niggling in his praise of one. The movie and indeed the whole franchise seem so utterly remote from any kind of realism, it hardly even seems worth thinking about whether events in (the new) Star Trek could actually physically happen. But once again and from another angle, that of scientific accuracy, 2001 comes out on top. I was praising the silence on aesthetic and structural grounds. You point out that it is also appropriate to outer space. As for A.I., as is well known, anyone who condemns it is in the majority. I differ.

[cinemabon]

We had an extensive review of Kubrick's works on this site in the past. However, I agree that "2001" stands out as one of his crowning achievements in cinema. I believe it changed the face of science fiction. Prior to that, "Forbidden Planet" was the standard in filmmed (as a verb) science fiction. That movie seems silly by todays ridged standards (Rumors persist in a another remake of an old movie with James Cameron at the helm no less. But look at what they did with the remake of Bob Wise's "The day the Earth stood still" Ugg! An utter disaster!).

I knew Roger Ebert a very long time ago when he and Gene Siskel started out on public television with "At the movies" when they used to forego joining the crowd in orchestra seats and sneak off to the balcony. Each week they used their famous closing line, "...until next week, the balcony is closed." Gene Siskel offered a great counterpunch to Ebert's effete electic style of intellectualizing. While Ebert has continued successfully over the years, I miss Siskel's down-to-earth commentary sadly missing from the too-smart crowd. He was simply a journalist with an easy to understand manner. Sadly, our world has far too few Siskel's and far too many Pauline Kael wanna-be's.

[Chris Knipp]

The actual successors to Siskel have been unfortunate, and now that program no longer exists. Siskel was not only valuable for being direct or down to earth but for being less prone to like everything than Ebert. And then it was a bit of a surprise after Siskel died to learn how passionately he loved cinema. As for Kael, I liked her far more than either of them, but I don't think today what goes on can really be blamed on her. Her influence is dying out, though not entirely.

[Johann]

Thanks for bringing up James Cameron, cinemabon.

He decided to become a filmmaker because of Kubrick and Star Wars. He has said that when he saw 2001 he was fascinated with it and that he had to find out how Kubrick did it. You know, that old chestnut about a work of art and the mystery behind what created it...and Cameron also said he was jealous of Star Wars: A real neo-Myth. I wanted to be the one who made that movie!

He made something just as classic, though: The Terminator.
Why on God's green earth he didn't keep making sequels to his own epic series is beyond me. I thought Terminator was his baby.
You would think that he'd never let any other filmmaker touch that saga, that he'd be the one blowing people's minds with new installments, but no. I'm glad he made the excellent and Legendary Titanic and Ghosts of the Abyss, but man, he's one of the best directors out there (Canadian too, I feel compelled to add). His flagship franchise is being handled in a slightly sub-par fashion without him at the helm. Maybe he's not interested anymore? Maybe he's got other projects he wants to forge ahead on? Some moons ago he was attached to a live-action version of the classic anime Battle Angel: Alita, which really got my blood pumping, because James Cameron would really do it justice, and I'm sure would turn a lot of peeps into Battle Angel fans in the process...
But we'll just have to see what he does next, I guess.
Kubrick and Lucas got him into the director's chair.
I'm just wondering out loud what he'll do in the future.
He's got a degree of secrecy surrounding his career right now that's a little unsettling. But I'll wait patiently for his next feature.
He's worth it.

[Johann]

And I agree totally about Gene Siskel.
He was a good man and a passionate movie guy.
He did a great interview with Kubrick when Full Metal Jacket was being released in 1987.

[Chris Knipp]

You must also like that Cameron is a Canadian. I see that he actually wrote a lot of the spinoffs of Terminator, he just didn't direct them. Don't you think that somebody who is clever and original and energetic enough to originate a successful mega-franchise wants to go on to direct new things and not the sequels, which in some sense are hack work by comparison?

You probably don't care to mention it, but the film by Cameron that I personally like the best by far is Titanic. But I will be interested to see the newest Terminator because the producer is the relative of a friend.

[Johann]

Yes, I love the fact that the biggest box-office champ was made by a Canadian (born in my home province of Ontario too).
Between IMAX, Atom Egoyan, Cameron and many others, Canada rocks on the world cinema stage.

I know he has every right to do other projects and different things, I'm not saying he should stick to the Terminator series and nothing else, but I do lament that he's not the one directing the films.
I'd feel the same way if Christopher Nolan handed Batman to someone else.

James Cameron can do whatever the hell he wants.
He's definitely earned that right.
But I do wish he'd make a Terminator sequel himself.
That would be something to really get jazzed about.
Like I said, maybe he's had enough.
Maybe he's too interested in other projects.
That said, T-3 was great to my mind and "Salvation" looks pretty boss. At least Cameron is overseeing what the final product is.
Did anyone here hear anything about Cameron's reaction to "Rise of the Machines"? I haven't heard anything.

[Johann]

Just looked it up on wikipedia and Cameron said about Rise of the Machines: In one word?: GREAT.

So there you go. From the man himself.
"Salvation" looks even better than "Machines", so it's probably safe to say Mr. Cameron approves of it as well.

[Johann]

And why aren't we talking about Abrams' Star Trek?
Isn't this thread about Kirk and Spock?

[Chris Knipp]

There's a limit to how long we an talk about Abrams' Star Trek. I notice you have not mentioned Titanic. I imagine you would rather forget about it--not your kind of blockbuster, but I prefer it to comic book monster stuff like Terminator. "Between IMAX, Atom Egoyan, Cameron and many others, Canada rocks on the world cinema stage." Many others such as who?, I wondered, so I looked up "Canadian film directors" on the inevitable Wikipedia. Huge: David Cronenberg. Notable: Guy Maddin, whom I've finally leearned to appreciate. Me, I'm not such a fan of Paul Haggis, except for his writing for Clint. Some Qubecuois French directors of note exist, I was thinking, but I can find only two whose names i know, Claude Jutra and Denys Arcand. Im sure I'm missing lots. Can you help?

I'm thinking the Aussies make a really strong showing to with, the likes of Bruce Beresford, Graeme Clifford, John Hillcoat, Phillip Noyce, Peter Weir, Alex Proyas, and Fred Schepisi. And New Zealand's not too shabby with Jane Campion, Peter Jackson, and some others whose work i've found striking such as Lee Tamahori and Geoff Murphy. Can you add to those lists?

[Johann]

You didn't notice my first Cameron post in this thread?
Where I said Titanic is excellent and Legendary?
You can't talk about James Cameron without talking about Titanic.
It's impossible.

Other Canadian directors of note:

-Larry Kent (an underground legend who I met at the 24th VIFF)
-Mary Harron (I shot Andy Warhol/American Psycho/The Notorious Bettie Page)
-Bruce McDonald (Hard Core Logo)
-Norman Jewison (Jesus Christ Superstar)
-John Smith (the Boys of St. Vincent)
-Ted Kotcheff (First Blood)
- Arthur Hiller (Love Story)
-Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters)
- George Dunning (The Beatles: Yelow Submarine)
- Patricia Rozema (Samuel Beckett's Happy Days)

and Mack Sennett is Canadian, as well as the founder of MGM: Louis B. Mayer (but he was born in the capital of Belrus. He was raised in St. John, N.B.)

We got pedigree...