Summer Movies Thread

[Murphy3]

I went to see the new Star Trek movie... I didn't see the last one... just had an early day off of work and decided to give it a try. It was phenomenal. You should really give it a try. I definitely want to see the last one now...The cast was really, really good.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Caught it yesterday and loved it. It makes me excited to see what Abrams will do with Star Wars.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

It makes me excited to see what Abrams will do with Star Wars.

I have to admit that I'm a little apprehensive about Abrams' Star Wars... The reason being that my biggest gripe with Star Trek is that it's littered with too many callbacks, too much fan service.

What are the 3 biggest things that a casual, non-Trekkie, moviegoer knows about Star Trek?

1) Klingons
2) Tribbles
3) Khaaaaaaaaaan!!!

And not only can all three be found in Star Trek Into Darkness, but each one plays a major role in the plot.

If there's ONE thing that the prequels suffered way too much from (other than Jar-Jar), it's the ridiculous amount of callbacks and fan service shoehorned into the story for the sake of nostalgia.

Star Wars is in desperate need of a wholly-new adventure, and I don't think we're going to get that with JJ Abrams... Especially not with the same characters coming back (I fully expect to see a "Han shoots first" scene involving Solo's son or something - you heard it here first!)



Oh, and then there's this:

[spreedom]

I do feel compelled to say that I think the new Star Trek is going to go down as one of the worst-marketed movies ever. Not quite John Carter bad, but really bad. It's one of those cases where I, with a very limited knowledge of the series' stories and characters, called the "twist" after I heard who was cast as the villain... I thought it was very obvious who the villain is: spoiler alert! being that he's the only really famous villain in Star Trek history. I thought they should have built their campaign around that instead of presenting him as a generic villain. In fact, there isn't a single trailer that mentions his presumed identity, John Harrison, by name. It would be like if they didn't include The Joker or Loki in any of the trailers for The Dark Knight or The Avengers. It's currently on pace to make less money than the original, which is one of the best-rated blockbusters of all-time. Mind-boggling incompetence there if you ask me.

On a related note, I'm excited for the new Fast and Furious movie (though I am only a fan since the fifth one) and I think the new Hangover movie is going to make a killing. Star Trek is going to be one-and-done in the box office. Crazy.

Also, I think there's an extremely good chance that Man of Steel will beat Iron Man in overall box office numbers... could finish close to total gross of The Dark Knight. Looks like it might be the best superhero movie since then, too.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by spreedom

Also, I think there's an extremely good chance that Man of Steel will beat Iron Man in overall box office numbers... could finish close to total gross of The Dark Knight. Looks like it might be the best superhero movie since then, too.

Blech, I'm not enthusiastic about that movie at all. Judging by the trailers and the people involved, they've done the exactly what I was hoping they wouldn't do with Superman: go out of their way to make him "dark" and "gritty" and "realistic."

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Blech, I'm not enthusiastic about that movie at all. Judging by the trailers and the people involved, they've done the exactly what I was hoping they wouldn't do with Superman: go out of their way to make him "dark" and "gritty" and "realistic."

I was apprehensive about the tone of the movie at first but I've loved what I've seen from the trailers.

Also, I think casting Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent at this point of his career is absolutely brilliant. I think there's a good chance that he's in most of the memorable scenes.

[ShaggyDirk]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Blech, I'm not enthusiastic about that movie at all. Judging by the trailers and the people involved, they've done the exactly what I was hoping they wouldn't do with Superman: go out of their way to make him "dark" and "gritty" and "realistic."

You came to that conclusion from a 2 minute trailer? Humor us with your idea of how they should portray Superman... Please tell us why showing the inner conflict of a boy finding out who he is, and struggling with what to do with that power is "dark" and "gritty". And what the hell is wrong with realistic?

I see from the trailer that most of the movie is like any other recent comic book movie... a lot of action and special effects. The first part of the movie will probably show a similar journey as Batman Begins.

I concluded that Hans Zimmer has nailed a new theme, Kevin Costner is going to be amazing, and General Zod is a bad-ass.

[Ninkobei]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Blech, I'm not enthusiastic about that movie at all. Judging by the trailers and the people involved, they've done the exactly what I was hoping they wouldn't do with Superman: go out of their way to make him "dark" and "gritty" and "realistic."

I'm with you, dude. Something about that Superman is just off-putting. They just took the Dark Knight equation and applied it to Superman. It is on my do-not-see list.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Ugh, can't wait to see Star Trek when I get a chance.

As for the new Superman movie...can't believe Zach Snyder got to direct that after Sucker Punch and Watchmen were flops.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by spreedom

I do feel compelled to say that I think the new Star Trek is going to go down as one of the worst-marketed movies ever. Not quite John Carter bad, but really bad. It's one of those cases where I, with a very limited knowledge of the series' stories and characters, called the "twist" after I heard who was cast as the villain... I thought it was very obvious who the villain is: spoiler alert! being that he's the only really famous villain in Star Trek history. I thought they should have built their campaign around that instead of presenting him as a generic villain. In fact, there isn't a single trailer that mentions his presumed identity, John Harrison, by name. It would be like if they didn't include The Joker or Loki in any of the trailers for The Dark Knight or The Avengers. It's currently on pace to make less money than the original, which is one of the best-rated blockbusters of all-time. Mind-boggling incompetence there if you ask me.

On a related note, I'm excited for the new Fast and Furious movie (though I am only a fan since the fifth one) and I think the new Hangover movie is going to make a killing. Star Trek is going to be one-and-done in the box office. Crazy.

Also, I think there's an extremely good chance that Man of Steel will beat Iron Man in overall box office numbers... could finish close to total gross of The Dark Knight. Looks like it might be the best superhero movie since then, too.

Star Trek will do fine at the box office. No, it might not reach the level of the last franchise to continue.

Also, oddly enough, the new Fast and Furious movie is getting pretty good reviews.. I won't see it..but it's shocking that the reviews are as good as they are.

[Murphy3]

One movie that I'm looking forward to seeing is Mud... great reviews.. maybe best movie of the year so far.

[Big Boy Laroux]

Saw the new Star Trek today - I liked it, but have to say i liked the first one more... With any sequel, you run the risk of not feeling as fresh as the first film, and i guess that's what affected me here.

As for who the villain is - agreed, one of the worst kept secrets in Hollywood this year. Although it was never ever mentioned leading up, you knew who it was going to be.

It did definitely move Sherlock up on my netflix list.

[Kirobaito]

I loved the 2009 Star Trek. Then I watched all of the other movies and a lot of the TV shows n Netflix and liked it less. It really is a totally different kind of movie. I'll see the new one, but I am less enthused about doing so than I may have otherwise been.

Don't care to see the new Superman movie. Superman has never done much for me.

[Big Boy Laroux]

Regarding superman - I'll definitely see it. Does the trailer make it look darker? Yes - but we have no clue if the entire movie is that way. I don't think it will be gritty like batman, but will attempt to have more of the soul-searching that we'd expect for someone thrust into a hero role from an early age. Plus we already had a reboot in the spirit of the original (including a christopher reeve clone), and it was not very well received overall.

I also wonder how much of the trailer is studio meddling vs Snyder - trailers and advertising are not on the director 100%. There is a lot of studio involvement.

I agree on Snyder, though. Although I enjoyed watchmen, I'm surprised he got this film...

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

Regarding superman - I'll definitely see it. Does the trailer make it look darker? Yes - but we have no clue if the entire movie is that way. I don't think it will be gritty like batman, but will attempt to have more of the soul-searching that we'd expect for someone thrust into a hero role from an early age. Plus we already had a reboot in the spirit of the original (including a christopher reeve clone), and it was not very well received overall.

I also wonder how much of the trailer is studio meddling vs Snyder - trailers and advertising are not on the director 100%. There is a lot of studio involvement.

I agree on Snyder, though. Although I enjoyed watchmen, I'm surprised he got this film...

Sure we don't "know" that it will be darker, but I'd be shocked if a movie directed by Zack Snyder, produced by Chris Nolan, and written by Jonah Nolan and David Goyer (same writers of Nolan's Batman movies), would be anything but "dark." I also remember a quote a few years back from some executive at Warner Bros. saying that they wanted the next Superman movie to be "dark to the extent that the character allows it." Plus all the quotes from Zack Snyder and David Goyer have been about how they want Superman to be "naturalistic" and "grounding it in reality."

As soon as The Dark Knight became the gigantic success that it was, I guessed that the people at Warner Bros. would tried to apply the Batman formula to Superman. I figured it was only a matter of time before they threw money at Chris Nolan to get him involved with the project. It's basically the exact same thing that happened in the 90's when they hired Tim Burton to direct "Superman Lives." Thankfully that movie didn't get made (although Nic Cage, giant spiders, and gay robots probably would have pretty damn entertaining.)

I'm also not excited about Henry Cavill as Supes. He's a decent actor I suppose and he definitely looks the part, he has virtually no charisma as on screen. Granted I've only seen him in "The Tudors," but there was nothing remotely notable or memorable about his performance. He's just "there."

Don't get me wrong, I'll definitely give it a chance. And for all of my complaints, I expect it to be considerably better than Superman Returns, which I'm sure most of us would rather just forget.

[Underdog]

"I wouldn’t want people to think we’re doing for Superman what we did for Batman.”

“It’s very much Zack’s film and I think people are going to love what he’s done…I think it’s really remarkable to take on that character. Superman is a completely different character than Batman. So you can’t in anyway use the same template." --Christopher Nolan

People on the internet who haven't seen the movie > Christopher Nolan, compulsive liar

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Underdog

People on the internet who haven't seen the movie > Christopher Nolan, compulsive liar

First time I've seen that quote. That's encouraging.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

First time I've seen that quote. That's encouraging.

Well, obviously you have a life or something... That quote isn't exactly recent.

[Underdog]

Oh, and Star Trek Into Darkness gets a big thumbs up... Every bit as entertaining as the first one, but without the long "to-do" checklist - it's easier to tell a story when you've laid the groundwork. Great popcorn flick.

Ironman 3? Not so much. I liked Avengers, but all the Marvel solo films have been mediocre. This one was no exception.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Oh, and Star Trek Into Darkness gets a big thumbs up... Every bit as entertaining as the first one, but without the long "to-do" checklist - it's easier to tell a story when you've laid the groundwork. Great popcorn flick.

Ironman 3? Not so much. I liked Avengers, but all the Marvel solo films have been mediocre. This one was no exception.

I liked both, but agree that Star Trek was better. Iron Man had a cool concept, but just felt much more like Empire Strikes Back (silly, a little uninspired, predictable) than Return of the Jedi, which is fine, since it is the third movie. It was worth the $8 and the $5 popcorn.

Star Trek wasn't fantastic either, but I really enjoyed it. Lots of fan service, a good cast and lots of action. Simon Pegg is a personal hero of mine.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I liked both, but agree that Star Trek was better. Iron Man had a cool concept, but just felt much more like Empire Strikes Back (silly, a little uninspired, predictable) than Return of the Jedi, which is fine, since it is the third movie. It was worth the $8 and the $5 popcorn.

Are you sure you aren't getting your Star Wars movies confused? I don't know of many that look at Empire Strikes Back as "silly, a little uninspired, predictable".

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

Simon Pegg is a personal hero of mine.

It was nice to see Scotty get a bigger role in this one, same with Uhura... Maybe Star Trek 3 will give Sulu and Chekov a little more to do next time around?

I also wonder how Carol Marcus is going to fit into future installments? I like that she had a role bigger than "love interest," although she did give Kirk a little look at the end that seemed to foreshadow their relationship from the original timeline.

[Murphy3]

I probably won't see Iron Man 3. I didn't make it through 1... Haven't seen 2. I did like Thor well enough.. I enjoyed Captain America. However, neither were on the same level as Avengers.

As for Star Trek spoilers.. I suppose I hadn't heard anything about the movie so I was surprised with who the villain turned out to be. I haven't seen the previous Star Trek.. will watch it this weekend. I can say that this last Star Trek movie is far superior to anything Star Wars has done since The Empire Strikes Back.

[Underdog]

Oh, and speaking of Carol Marcus - God must have been "in the zone" when he created Alice Eve...

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Movies I want to see this summer other than Star Trek:

1. Elysium
2. This is the End
3. Captain Phillips (although Oct release date)
4. Pacific Rim
5. Lone Ranger...jk.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Movies I want to see this summer other than Star Trek:

1. Elysium

Looks awesome as hell... Can't wait to see Neill Blomkamp's follow-up to District 9.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Looks awesome as hell... Can't wait to see Neill Blomkamp's follow-up to District 9.

If you've seen the trailer, then you can tell that he is still sticking it to the studios who shafted him of Halo. That Elysium "space station" looks just like the Halo in the game.

The first Abrams Star Trek and Blomkaumps District 9 both came out in 09 and certainly paved the way for the flood of Sci Fi films now coming out.

[Big Boy Laroux]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Movies I want to see this summer other than Star Trek:

1. Elysium
2. This is the End
3. Captain Phillips (although Oct release date)
4. Pacific Rim
5. Lone Ranger...jk.

Why the JK on lone ranger? I think it looks pretty entertaining.

Agree with Elysium at the top of the list.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

Why the JK on lone ranger? I think it looks pretty entertaining.

Agree with Elysium at the top of the list.

It has Johnny Depp in it..He's a worthless piece of garbage.

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

It has Johnny Depp in it..He's a worthless piece of garbage.

Wow, did you catch him having sex with your mom or something? Talk about an overreaction.

Depp's recent acting style and role choices has annoyed me, but man... a worthless piece of garbage? Relax.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by spreedom

Wow, did you catch him having sex with your mom or something?

Actually, I caught him with your dad while your mom took turns spraying them with pee.. I just thought I'd be outraged for you.

[chumdawg]

I watched Iron Man 3 in Kuala Lumpur. I fell asleep at least twice. I was in one of those comfy recliner chairs with a blanket, though.

Interesting note... In Malaysia they show a two-minute video tribute to their king and his family immediately before the movie screens. You have to stand, like it's the national anthem over here.

[BGMaverick9]

Iron Man 3 was pretty blah to me.

[Thespiralgoeson]

I enjoyed Iron Man 3. Not as good as Iron Man 1 or The Avengers, but a huge step up from Iron Man 2.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I enjoyed Iron Man 3. Not as good as Iron Man 1 or The Avengers, but a huge step up from Iron Man 2.

I made a huge step up from Iron Man 2 in the toilet this morning...

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I made a huge step up from Iron Man 2 in the toilet this morning...

I lol'd.

[b_o_r]

I saw Star Trek on opening day and felt "meh" once the credits rolled. They could have left out the "love" scenes out and focused more on the villain who I thought was underutilized in the film. The CGI was very good in the film though.

Superman from the trailer looks very boring.

I've read so many bad reviews on Iron Man 3 that I'll just wait for the DVD.

Elysuim looks like it has the potential to be bad film.

This the End looks hilarious from the trailers.

As a zombie fan I want to see World War Z with Brad Pitt.

[Murphy3]

Just wasn't that impressed with the preview for Elysium.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Well the JJ Abrams Star Trek is really its own entity. I view it more as a movie that lives in its own world versus being wholly in the Star Trek one. Of course, I've only seen the first so I can't speak for the second.

And a Star Wars that has fan service? PLEASE! That is exactly what Star Wars needs to be after the last three abominations that Lucas gave us. It almost seemed like Lucas purposely pissed off fans with Jar Jar and Metichlorians because he could. We need a movie that goes back to the heart of what the Force is all about and not a genetic disease.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Well the JJ Abrams Star Trek is really its own entity. I view it more as a movie that lives in its own world versus being wholly in the Star Trek one. Of course, I've only seen the first so I can't speak for the second.

And a Star Wars that has fan service? PLEASE! That is exactly what Star Wars needs to be after the last three abominations that Lucas gave us. It almost seemed like Lucas purposely pissed off fans with Jar Jar and Metichlorians because he could. We need a movie that goes back to the heart of what the Force is all about and not a genetic disease.

By "fan service" I mean the inclusion of Boba Fett('s dad) and Chewbacca for no other reason than to have Boba Fett and Chewbacca in the movie... Or a pod race scene that's totally reminiscent of the speeder bike scene... Or the asteroid field, AGAIN... And didn't the C3 unit at the beginning of Phantom Menace say "how rude" just like C3PO did in Empire? Or how about Anakin getting his hand cut off at the end of the second movie just like Luke did?

I could go on and on and on - these things were included solely for the sake of nostalgia, rather than because they were relevant to the plot.