Monday, July 25, 2016

F This Movie! - Star Trek Beyond

Patrick, Mike and Adam Thas celebrate 50 years of Star Trek and bounce back from Into Darkness.



Download this episode here. (40.9 MB)

Subscribe to F This Movie! in iTunes.

Listen to F This Movie! on Stitcher.

Also discussed this episode: The Fifth Wave (2016), Allegiant (2016), The Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015), Escape from New York (1981), Halloween (1978), Assault on Precinct 13 (1976), Everybody Wants Some! (2016), Outlaws & Angels (2016)

34 comments:

  1. Only partway through listening to this but wanted to comment on Beyond in 3D. I honestly don't think it added much and there's a huge problem with a lot of scenes already being so dark that watching them through 3D glasses makes them really hard to see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you are so right... half of the film was too dark and fast to see anything

      Delete
    2. Glad it wasn't just me. Barely had a clue what was going on in most action scenes! Dark and blurry.

      Delete
  2. Haven't listened yet, but I love when Mark and Adam are on. They have a real friendship which shines through and makes the podcast really easy and fun. Their bit during the marathon was great.

    Anyone wanting Patrick and Mike to do a Hellraiser SMM retrospective this October? Hell yeah...I promise I'll watch them all too, if they do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Paul! And please don't make us watch all of the HELLRAISER movies.

      Delete
    2. Pomaro! Do it for the fans! Fun fact, my phone autocorrects your last name to "Potato".

      Delete
    3. I'm hoping for a Wrong Turn podcast. Did you guys know there's 6 Wrong Turn movies? 545 total minutes. Let's do it.

      Delete
  3. Super fun podcast. A few thoughts/questions:

    1) I heard Simon Pegg named the character Jaylah because they wrote her character as someone "like Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone" and they eventually started to call her "J-Law" and then finally "Jaylah"

    2) Did you guys like the Rihanna song at the end?

    3) I kept getting distracted by the reference of "Yorktown" because it's a mall in Lombard, IL. I kept wondering how this movie will play at that mall theater...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) I didn't know that. Thanks!
      2) It was...fine? I honestly have zero memory of it.
      3) YES.

      Delete
  4. When I heard Sabotage kick in, I think I actually remarked to myself "hmm, I wonder how Patrick will respond to this." I liked that call back, not to mention it's just a song I enjoy in general, so it's always welcome.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh boy. Now I have to be 'that guy'. Alright, here we go. First of all, I think part of the reason I didn't enjoy much of this movie is I saw it in 3D and it was without a doubt the worst 3D I've ever seen. Many of the action scenes were dark and shakey and the 3D glasses made it so hard to make out what was happening. I need to go back to it in 2D and I fully plan on it.

    But my big problem with this movie is Kirk and Spock. I agree that this was more of an ensemble, and I love that. I think Bones was the best part of this movie and I'm so glad he finally got more screen time. But this series has no idea what to do with Kirk. In the first movie his arc is he's too wild and reckless and he has to learn to be Captain Kirk. Great. I loved it. Second movie he gets the exact same arc. Whatever. Now in this movie he's bored and depressed and has to learn to be Captain Kirk. Why on earth is Chris Pine never allowed to just be Kirk? Why can he never play the great, brilliant Captain that Shatner got to play? Why does he have to learn to be Kirk in every movie? He also gets the same Admiral arc that Kirk had in Wrath of Khan. As if any of us wondered where that was going to go.

    Zachary Quinto seems like he's barely trying to play Spock anymore. He laughs, he cries, and he's never uncomfortable with any of it. I know his Spock is a more emotional character than Nemoy played, and I've been ok with it. But in the first movie his Mother and whole planet dies, and his girlfriend couldn't even get him to show emotion about it. It took Kirk provoking him to anger. Now he'll be as emotional as possible and doesn't care. So frustrating.

    Beyond that, I just found the villain weak and his motovation and plan very uninteresting. I liked some things. The supporting characters were great. Jayla was great. The Sabotage scene was great. But I found the whole first half of this movie such a downer because I had to watch Kirk and Spock mope around and be depressed, and it made me depressed too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess once you scream "KHAN!" and have a high-flying kung-fu fight on top of vehicles in the future, all sense of subtlety goes out the window.

      Delete
    2. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 4:02 PM

      I can't say the representation of Kirk affected me the same way it did you. The way he feels at his low-key, early birthday party was him wanting to get out from under his father's shadow, which is symptomatic of what the Kelvin time line caused. His "boredom" later on and interest in accepting the Vice Admiral promotion, especially when this film takes place three years into the five year mission, and we only got three seasons of the television series, for me, was indicative of the fact that after those three seasons of television, the next time we see Jim, in TMP, he's already an admiral. And we know how Spock feels about that choice. "You were a fool to accept promotion." I think if Kirk's decisions and his path were TOO different, simply because it's a different time line, he just wouldn't be Kirk. Just because the time line changes, I don't think a person completely changes. Events can change a person's worldview, but you don't suddenly stop being who you are. I also don't think Kirk wouldn't be approached for promotion simply because the stream of time has altered.
      It's kind of the same reason why Khan appearing in Star Trek Into Darkness doesn't bother me. The Eugenics Wars occurred before the time line was altered, which means the Botany Bay would still be out there. And since Kirk's history with the Enterprise occurred earlier than it was supposed to, the Enterprise wasn't the ship to find Khan and his people, so "Space Seed" occurred differently than it had in the original series. Instead, "Space Seed" became Into Darkness. For me, the whole Star Trek II part of Into Darkness was the Prime universe pushing up against the Kelvin universe, trying to right itself. Having Carol Marcus appear in Into Darkness is a callback to Star Trek II, of course, but I've always thought Carol was the "little blond lab technician" that Gary Mitchell was referring to in "Where No Man Has Gone Before," the one Gary "pushed" onto Kirk, the one Kirk says he almost married. And could it be he almost married her because she was already pregnant with David?

      Delete
    3. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 4:08 PM

      Krall's motivations brought me right back to the original series. It was almost a staple of the original series that some admiral, commodore, or rival captain had a grudge with either the Federation as a whole or with Kirk, leading Kirk to fisticuffs with the guy.

      Delete
    4. Thanks for the incredibly insightful comments. All of that makes sense. I still don't like watching Kirk be bored and depressed though. I'm just such a massive Capt Kirk fan that I want to see him be awesome. I'll definitely go back to the movie with your thoughts in mind.

      Delete
    5. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 5:17 PM

      Kirk is always awesome, even when he's bored or depressed. He's depressed while he's drinking with Bones because he wishes his dad could see him being awesome. And strangely, I saw that scene as a callback, not to Kirk TOS, but to "The Cage." It's like the scene where Pike is depressed and goes to talk to Dr. Boyce over drinks. I was waiting for Bones to say, "Some people tell their bartender things they'd never tell their doctor," and for Kirk to say, "Thanks, Doctor Bartender." I wonder what the issue was for Kirk to leave the captains chair behind and become an admiral in the Prime universe. Maybe the prestige that comes with being admiral? But of course, being an admiral ultimately depressed him. As did growing old.

      Delete
  6. So, this movie is pretty awesome. If you're going to make a $200M Star Trek movie, I think this is about as good as you'll get. I'm finally happy to see all the crew members get their screen time, and I loved every single line out of Karl Urban's mouth. He stole every scene he was in. Also, I thought the "swarm" concept was really inspired and great.

    To get a little negative for a second though, am I the only one who doesn't like the new portrayal of Spock? Its not Quinto's performance per se, I can't think of anyone who could do a better job. But his dialogue seems to boil down to "infinite qualifiers". Which wasn't really a thing for Nimoy. I mean, sometimes he'd say something like "if I were a human". But I think every line out of Quinto starts with "sir, if I were to use a miss of vernacular common to the human species..." or something. I just don't like it. Anyway, really fun movie. Easily the best blockbuster this year for me (sorry Cap).

    Also, True Lies forever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 3:20 PM

      All those "Sir, if I may..." moments, were, to me, a mix of the first season Kirk/Spock/McCoy banter, a little of Star Trek IV Spock, Star Trek VI Spock ("If I were human, I believe I would tell them to go to hell") and it suddenly brings to mind the way Nimoy spoke in Star Trek II -- "if I may be so bold..."

      Delete
    2. Right, but I feel like the writers have been overdoing it, and it's taking away from Spock's presence. In the original series, Spock was always pretty to the point. He never really said more than he had to. In these, I'd say about 25% of his lines come with a "qualifying affix", which feels more like the writers having fun with a thesaurus than actual dialog. Now, Spock did that in TOS, but it was pretty rare, and that's what made it fun. There were several times during Beyond where I thought "okay, get on with it."

      Delete
  7. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 3:09 PM

    I loved Star Trek Beyond. Saw it twice already. Unlike most, there hasn't been a movie in the Kelvin time line that I've disliked. I enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness very much. I totally understand anyone who feels it sacrilegiously ripped off Star Trek II or dishonored Gene's vision. For me, the movie that insulted me as a Star Trek fan -- and as a TNG fan -- was Star Trek First Contact. For me, no TNG movie worked. The Best of Both Worlds, Redemption and Redemption II, All Good Things, those were all better TNG "movies" than the TNG movies we got. I have been charmed by everything we've gotten theatrically since 2009. If the new Star Trek 4 turns out to be the last with the new TOS reboot cast, I would hope Paramount keeps it going with a reboot of TNG. And since cinematic universes are such a thing now, rebooting TNG would give the studio the opportunity of a built in universe, considering Deep Space Nine and Voyager connect.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 3:14 PM

    Wow, I'm surprised by all the disappointment for Zachery Quinto's portrayal this go-round. I thought this was the closest he's come so far to approximating Nimoy's mannerisms. His retorts to Karl Urban, his eyebrow raising? Top form. To me, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 4:35 PM

    1. The reason I think no one is bickering online about the Magnificent Seven remake ruining childhoods, whereas we all put up with all that shit over Ghistbusters? Well, Ghostbusters is 30 years old, while Magnificent Seven is... sixty? There's probably an age range for film geek Internet trolls. They skew younger.

    2. As for the even-odd Star Trek theory, I'm about to debunk it right now. No even-odd theory works if Star Trek III exists. And I think the reason 2, 4, and 6 are good have more to do with Nicholas Meyer's involvement -- not to short shrift Nimoy at all -- than with the films' even or odd placement in the franchise. After the original series films, I think it's just up to personal taste.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Plus, you can't discount the low quality of the Ghostbuster's trailers (at least in the opinion of most people myself included). The M7 trailers are pretty spectacular.

      Delete
    2. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 5:06 PM

      You do have a point. However, the trolls would've trashed the Ghostbusters trailers regardless.

      Delete
    3. Probably. Trolls gotta troll.

      Delete
    4. Michael GiammarinoJuly 25, 2016 at 5:19 PM

      Unfortunately, they do indeed.

      Delete
  10. As for the aging thing and why Edison looks different, I assumed it was because of the life-extension tech he mentions at one point, which was re-writing his DNA. For whatever reason, part of it involved him reverting if he did some life sucking of humans (commence hand-waving).

    ReplyDelete
  11. Going to see it tonight on big olde Imax, in 3D too, and I don't like post converted 3D, I would rather see 2D on imax but there only showing 3D, so let's see how it goes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Overall a fun time, I liked the feel of Pegg's writing, and the music choices, 3d was not for me as usual being fake 3d, I will wait to watch it again on Bluray in good olde 2d and suspecti will enjoy it more, the light loss on 3d with the glasses made the dark scenes very dark, stick with 2d would be my advice, coming from someone who is not a trekkie and I just wanted a Sci fi action film and it delivered

      Delete
  12. I really enjoyed this movie. It's been a long summer of crap, and this was a real diamond in the rough. Watched most of it with a huge smile on my face. And I really liked the Sabotage scene. That worked perfectly for me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Here's also to hoping Jayla is a mainstay.

    Also speaking of Anton Yelchins sweetness, watch 5 to 7 if you haven't. So good. Romantic drama from last year and it's great!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Also the Mag 7 new trailer is so Hateful 8...with the characters being named numerically

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is my least favorite Star Trek in the new series. Its more than likely because I'm not a huge Star Trek fan and this movie probably is the most Star Trek like. I missed JJ Abrams feel of the movie. I didn't care for most of the action either. star trek 2009 and even into the darkness tricked me into thinking I was a Star Trek fan. Beyond is by no means bad but just not as good as the others for me. Probably one of the best movies I've seen this summer.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I loved it. I had tons of fun, much more than I thought I would have after the first disappointing trailer.
    I also wasn´t sure about Justin Lin directing and the behind the scenes drama about kicking Roberto Orci from the directors chair and putting the first script into the trash can.
    Well, to me everything worked out perfectly. Great action, great visuals, engaging performances and maybe a nice addition to the future cast with Jaylah who I think will take over for Chekov.
    So far for me this reboot series has produced three highly entertaining winners, all of which I have rated 9 or 10 on IMDB.
    The in memoriam credits for Leonard Nimoy and Anton Yelchin made me tear up a bit. Nimoy was a part of my movie life for 44 years, since I first watched Star Trek TOS at age 6. And watching Anton Yelchin here made me remembering his role in the 2006 movie Alpha dog, which was one of the saddest and sweetest performances he ever gave.

    ReplyDelete