Star Wars

Why Business Insider keeps going off topic I'll never understand, but I think this question at least is definitively settled.

http://www.businessinsider.com/star-wars-original-script-han-shot-first-2015-6

I don't think the "Han Shot First" thing is really as ambiguous as that article makes it out to be.  In the original version of the film and all re-releases up until 1997, Han was the only one who shot in the cantina.  You can still call it self-defense since he was being held at gunpoint and threatened with murder, but the chain of events is pretty clear.  The only ambiguity comes from the sloppy editing job on the '97 Special Edition, which was slightly improved in the 2004 DVD release (what I like to call the "Very Special Edition").

About JJ Abrams and star trek .. http://9gag.com/gag/aRPxjrB?ref=mobile.s.cp

Love John Stewart.

I've never been a Star Trek fan myself but I feel for those who are and saw the series used as training wheels for a guy who always wanted to make Star Wars movies instead.

JJ's two films are not ST its as simple as that- they just have the same character names and ship names, but thats as far as any similarity goes.
You can nail a door to a pigs head but it doesn't make the pig a house.

Yeah the ST films were Star Wars films in ST garb. Abrams is good at rebooting franchises by making them generic and boring to actual fans but appealing to the masses of fans who couldn't give a shit. Hence my apprehension about Episode VII. I hope it actually means something or has some connective tissue with the rest of the saga.

I was massively skeptical of Episode VII when it was announced, and even more so after Abrams was attached to the project, but I've enjoyed the trailers so far. That's more about getting swept up in the hype than anything else, but I think there's a better chance for these films since Abrams has always been passionate about Star Wars. And while I hated Into Darkness, ST '09 was a pretty decent faux-SW film.

ST '09 was a pretty decent faux-SW film.- Eldo

It wasn't even that. Leaving aside the characters and alleged STness the plot is shallow and trite and has plot holes so big you can drive the entire starfleet through them sideways and it had one of the least memorable, pointless, makes no sense at all bad guy whose motivations dont even vaguely add up or make any sense, let alone the rest of his crew.

it was fun though

No, it wasnt.

it was very entertaining

Kinda entertaining for a non Star Trek film. it would have made a big difference to have a different actor for Kirk: his 'intense' just looks 'wild'.

it would have made a big difference to have a different actor for Kirk- Halfy

And a script. And someone who had the smallest inclining of a clue what ST is about.

I like young Spock and Bones, but young kirk doesn't have Shatners charisma or beauty.

Mrs Figg wrote:it was very entertaining  

Pettytyrant101 wrote:

And a script. And someone who had the smallest inclining of a clue what ST is about.

But it did have a script (not necessarily a good one) and Simon Pegg seems to have a good inkling about ST-he even got the terrible Scottish accent right (which I'm sure his Scottish wife thabked him for)

Well he sort of got it right- the original Scotty has a terrible Scottish accent and so does Pegg, but they are different terrible Scottish accents. Doohans sounds weirdly like mangled Scottish, as a kid watching I always just assumed it was how the language would sound in the future.
So it would be better if Pegg rather than trying to do an actual Scottish accent and failing had just tried to copy Doohans original bad accent.

But I cant agree anyone knew what ST was about- the films dont have the basic philosophy of Rodenberry's ST underpinning and driving them- and without that philosophy it can't be ST.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:

But I cant agree anyone knew what ST was about- the films dont have the basic philosophy of Rodenberry's ST underpinning and driving them- and without that philosophy it can't be ST.

Never been a big ST fan, but most of the movies are meant to be a bit...shit anyway aren't they? You can't blame the Studios for wanting to do a reboot after Enterprise and the forgettable one Tom Hardy's in.

The motion picture is very pure ST but over long and with tedious 'effects' shots.
2 is good, great character study, good bad guy, good plot, excellent battle in the nebula. Very ST philosophy examining life, death, ageing, loss of virility, and facing the consequences of your own past.
3 is surprisingly entertaining whilst having a throwaway contrived get Nemoy back as Spock plot.
4 is huge amounts of fun with a very ST philosophy story.
5 s um, 5.
6 is scifi taken the end of the cold war, pure ST that. First half is brilliant, second half not so good but still entertaining.

None of the films however ever achieve the heights of the best of the tv in original, ST:TNG and DS9- I dont really count anything after that, they lost their way.  

I like the one with V'ger and the other one with the Wales

Thats 1 and 4 Figg - The Motion Picture and the Voyage Home.

I loved both of these movies.  SW more obviously, but I remember them both being a lot of fun.