Star Trek II-(Wrath of Khan) (1982) > Star trek (2009)

sxt

Just saw this movie yesterday on the tv. Quelle suprise, what a movie! Had never seen it before. Khan was the coolest badass baddy!

Goldstein

I'm sitting this one out before I have a meltdown

Sad Professor

I wouldn't compare them as they are very different films. Khan has a real story about mortality, revenge and sacrifice, the type of themes that Star Trek always dealt with; where as the 2009 film is just very entertaining fluff for the most part. I’m optimistic that the sequel will aim a bit higher.

I would never dismiss Abrams’s contribution to the franchise though. Reinventing Star Trek for a modern audience isn’t easy. He’s the first person since Meyer who had the right idea about how to put Trek up on the big screen.

Slydice

May this thread live long and prosper

nyarlothothep

Yes TWoK is a better film in my opinion. New Star Trek is an offence against nature. Post TNG star trek is in the same category. DS9 sucked ass and no one is willing to admit it because it was "dark" and somehow "dark" makes anything good.

Sad Professor

nyarlothothep wrote: »

DS9 sucked ass and no one is willing to admit it because it was "dark" and somehow "dark" makes anything good.

I couldn't disagree more. DS9 was darker, sure, but that was a small part of why it was so good. In fact, it was probably the lightest and funniest of the shows. The stories were complex and interesting and the writers weren't afraid to take risks. And unlike TNG, it had real character development.

Goldstein

nyarlothothep wrote: »

DS9 sucked ass and no one is willing to admit it because it was "dark" and somehow "dark" makes anything good.

Sad Professor wrote: »

I couldn't disagree more. DS9 was darker, sure, but that was a small part of why it was so good. In fact, it was probably the lightest and funniest of the shows. The stories were complex and interesting and the writers weren't afraid to take risks. And unlike TNG, it had real character development.

Sidestepping what JJ did (Some of which was great, some not so much), DS9 also featured the best supporting cast by a country mile. In fact many of them are undeniably among Trek's greatest characters of all time. Garak in particular was an immensely layered, well crafted and patiently built up cerebral true anti-hero. Then you've got the quantum-eske Sloan, Dukat as one of the most cunning and three dimensional antagonists to feature in any fictional show, the absurdly entertaining Gowron & Martok, and the redoubtable Jeffrey Combs as Weyoun & Brunt. Considered together, they're an ominously great bunch of actors & characters and are certainly one of the primary underlying pillars of DS9's success.

You'd have to have missed a hell of a lot of eps to regard DS9 as anything other than stellar science fiction. Berman, Pillar, Behr, Moore and the other main writers understood their field on a level that no other show did (often rising to and even surpassing that of TNG at times) and they understood it damn well.

The Wire, The Visitor, Hard Time, Defiant, In The Pale Moonlight, The Siege of AR-558, Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges, Extreme Measures, Far Beyond the Stars, A Time to Stand, Favor The Bold, Trials & Tribble-ations, Call to Arms, Inquisition, Improbable Cause / The Die is Cast, In Purgatory's Shadow / By Inferno's Light, Empok Nor, Sacrifice of Angels.
Have a gander at those 20 anyway for starters.

nyarlothothep

Goldstein wrote: »

Sidestepping what JJ did (Some of which was great, some not so much), DS9 also featured the best supporting cast by a country mile. In fact many of them are undeniably among Trek's greatest characters of all time. Garak in particular was an immensely layered, well crafted and patiently built up cerebral true anti-hero. Then you've got the quantum-eske Sloan, Dukat as one of the most cunning and three dimensional antagonists to feature in any fictional show, the absurdly entertaining Gowron & Martok, and the redoubtable Jeffrey Combs as Weyoun & Brunt. Considered together, they're an ominously great bunch of actors & characters and are certainly one of the primary underlying pillars of DS9's success.

You'd have to have missed a hell of a lot of eps to regard DS9 as anything other than stellar science fiction. Berman, Pillar, Behr, Moore and the other main writers understood their field on a level that no other show did (often rising to and even surpassing that of TNG at times) and they understood it damn well.

The Wire, The Visitor, Hard Time, Defiant, In The Pale Moonlight, The Siege of AR-558, Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges, Extreme Measures, Far Beyond the Stars, A Time to Stand, Favor The Bold, Trials & Tribble-ations, Call to Arms, Inquisition, Improbable Cause / The Die is Cast, In Purgatory's Shadow / By Inferno's Light, Empok Nor, Sacrifice of Angels.
Have a gander at those 20 anyway for starters.

TNG had excellent character development, you say Garak, I say Picard. And Worf moved from "micro brain" to a semi competent officer. The actors were also better, for example Jeffrey Combs was annoying as Weyoun, he was meant to be this "ambassador of evil" but instead came across as a smarmy weak non entity. Avery Brooks is very limited with Sisko, Sisko angry=hyperventilating whilst enunciating every word with perfect clarity. DS9 was ass, just admit it. BSG is also ass and one of the worst sci fi shows in history. TNG and TOS 4 life.

stiffler123

Speaking of Star Trek, I cannot wait for this http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1946421/. William Shatner visits and interviews all the star trek captains. It looks fantatic. A clip with him talking to Patrick Stewart.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6uMiPJ3Xcw&feature=related

Goldstein

nyarlothothep wrote: »

TNG had excellent character development, you say Garak, I say Picard. And Worf moved from "micro brain" to a semi competent officer. The actors were also better, for example Jeffrey Combs was annoying as Weyoun, he was meant to be this "ambassador of evil" but instead came across as a smarmy weak non entity. Avery Brooks is very limited with Sisko, Sisko angry=hyperventilating whilst enunciating every word with perfect clarity. DS9 was ass, just admit it. BSG is also ass and one of the worst sci fi shows in history. TNG and TOS 4 life.

heh-heh, I think you may have bought a phaser to a starship fight. Anyway, to retort on some of the above:

Garak Vs Picard?
Where did Picard Vs Garak come from? It's not really an either or situation. One is the lead actor of one the most successful science fiction shows ever made and star of four follow on movies. The other is a supporting character with a heavy presence in less than 10 eps of a subsequent variant. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Stewart may just have had slightly more screentime. Both posess great skill and ability.

Combs: "came across as a smarmy weak non entity"
As Weyoun, Combs was playing a smarmy, weak, non-entity so mission accomplished there. That was just his guise. Underneath, Weyouns were revealed to be most cunning, manipulative and insidiously dangerous politicians skilled at misdirection and false outward appearances. Combs veiled that nuance very effectively just enough so that you could perceive the true aspect of the character. His credentials are beyond reproach - ask anyone who's watched a Shran-heavy ep of Enterprise and you'll see a similar display.

Sisko: "Enunciating every word with perfect clarity"
I-can't.......................think-of...........anyone-else-who ............employed..........unusual..................speech-quirks ........................can-you?

Also, Stewart was and remains a master of ennunciation. He'd want to be given his training and career. There are schools of thought that maintain this ability can be interpreted as an asset to an actor.

"Avery Brooks is very limited with Sisko"
Sisko's character had access to and utilised a very large gamut of emotions. Much of this sprung from the fact that Sisko was a single Father and character driven and deeply emotionally resonant episodes such as "The Visitor", the plot of which particularly transends science fiction, show off these traits of both actor and character far more eloquently than I can explain here. He was also a General in a real war and wasn't afraid to get his hands dirty if the occasion called for it - a much welcome mature transition from the goodies Vs badies that often epitomised previous Treks.

"DS9 was ass" "BSG is also ass" "TNG and TOS 4 life."
You sure talk a lot about asses Mr. Shakur.

I leave you with Sisko's parting monologue from "In the Pale Moonlight", one of the most skillfully written and executed episodes of any franchise:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-YyL7X4CWw

Skinfull

No comparison between these movies. They are polar opposites! Different era of film making altogether! Though the screen glare in Trek 2009 is beyond ridiculous, I still love that movie so!

More Trek! Watching through TNG at the moment and loving it!

Auvers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRnSnfiUI54

KHANNNNN (had to do it)

some great cheese from the old maestro

Kiith

nyarlothothep wrote: »

DS9 was ass, just admit it. BSG is also ass and one of the worst sci fi shows in history. TNG and TOS 4 life.

Wow...just wow :eek:

I loved The Next Generation, but it had nowhere near the character development that Deep Space 9 had. Not even close. And that's simply because 90% of the time TNG was a week-by-week story, whereas DS9 had an arc that lasted 4 seasons. Arcs will always win out in terms of story telling. In TNG, there was almost always a resolution to the story in 40 odd minutes. Because there had to be. Some of the stories in DS9 were stretched out (and i don't mean that in a bad way) over seasons.

Both shows have their merits, but Deep Space 9 was, by far, my favourite.

Kiith

Oh, and Wrath of Khan was a better movie. Very different, and aimed at a very different audience, but it more of a classic Star Trek film. One of the best space battles as well. Nice and tactical.

Loved both films though.

Links234

I loooooove the new star trek film, but its kinda hard to compare the two 'cos I grew up with all things trek and khan I've probably seen as many times as star wars. I think they're both amazing.

also I'm one for the underdog, Deep Space 9 was probably the best trek series I really want to watch it all again from start to finish, I've not seen it in years.

nyarlothothep

Kiith wrote: »

Wow...just wow :eek:

I loved The Next Generation, but it had nowhere near the character development that Deep Space 9 had. Not even close. And that's simply because 90% of the time TNG was a week-by-week story, whereas DS9 had an arc that lasted 4 seasons. Arcs will always win out in terms of story telling. In TNG, there was almost always a resolution to the story in 40 odd minutes. Because there had to be. Some of the stories in DS9 were stretched out (and i don't mean that in a bad way) over seasons.

Both shows have their merits, but Deep Space 9 was, by far, my favourite.

The characters in TNG were more interesting. Example: Picard :troubled, complex philospher king introvert: Sisko, General Custer in space, Beverley Crusher: repressed MILF with an on off thing with Picard: Bashir, Mr. Bland, O Brien, started on TNG, DS9 owes TNG, Worf likewise, Data, fascinating exploration of AI in practice, excellent philosophical episodes dealing wit the nature of consciousness, the rights of man, etc due to Data's character arc: Odo, changeling type dude, a super cop in space, Troi, hot empathetic cheerleader in space: Kira Neyrs, boring bajoran who kept going on about the occupation or something. Jadzia Dax was uber boring, her character was a perfect match for Bashir. The only thing DS9 had going for it was Garak and Gul Dukat. Quark was ok too. Also Wesley was a great character given that he was a nerd in space, how many of you get to see one of your people in space!? He was probably the most accurate portrayal of what teenagers are like, really annoying, stupid know it alls except contrary to convention he's an uber geek and as his story arc progresses he looses a lot the deus ex boy genius aspect which bogged his character down and becomes basically an authentic highly intelligent dude who goes gay with the traveller.

Kiith

Your argument is invalid because you just said Wesley was a great character :pac:

Seriously though, fair enough if that's what you think, but i'd disagree with almost everything you said. O'Brien was pretty much a faceless transporter chief until DS9. Then he became an actual character. Similar (although to a lesser extent) with Worf. Crusher better then Bashir? :eek:

Auvers

TNG was the best trek by a long way

DS9 was Coronation street in space

Theboinkmaster

Auvers wrote: »

TNG was the best trek by a long way

DS9 was Coronation street in space

you couldn't be more wrong. DS9 was not only by far the best Trek show but indeed one of the best TV shows of all time.

and time will show you that. i recently tried to re-watch TNG and could only watch the really good shows and it was ok.

but DS9 i have re-watched over twice on DVD and watched every single episode of every season. Stands up like a mo'fo

Skerries

DS9 only got into it's stride in the last 2 seasons

Kiith

DS9 was brilliant from season 3 onwards.

faceman

Very different movies. Abram's movie was only Star Trek in part and took more from the Star Wars type of sci fi than Star Trek.

Both films are good but equally comparable they are not.

Just on the TNG movies, they are all desperate. Awful stuff. Picard always plays a blood thirsty shallow captain in the movies whereas in the TV show hes an intelligent charismatic leader who uses violence as a last resort.

DS9 only got good when the Dominion war broke out. and I agree with Goldstein above, "In the Pale Moonlight" is probably one of the best star trek episodes ever written.

Theboinkmaster

Kiith wrote: »

DS9 was brilliant from season 3 onwards.

Definitely

johndoe99

stiffler123 wrote: »

Speaking of Star Trek, I cannot wait for this http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1946421/. William Shatner visits and interviews all the star trek captains. It looks fantatic. A clip with him talking to Patrick Stewart.

watched it last night, it was superbly made. Avery Brooks was hilarious, he's not exactly all there now.

mikhail

faceman wrote: »

Just on the TNG movies, they are all desperate. Awful stuff. Picard always plays a blood thirsty shallow captain in the movies whereas in the TV show hes an intelligent charismatic leader who uses violence as a last resort.

This isn't a very popular opinion, but I'm quite fond of Generations. It's not without its faults, but the Picard arc, from

learning of his family's death to the lines with Riker near the end about the nature of time

is a nice piece of science fiction writing.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I used to kind of like the TNG movies, then i watched plinketts "reviews" of them and ever since I've seen them for the ridiculous, insulting ****e that they are

damn you plinkett

Sad Professor

Plinkett's Star Wars reviews were great, but I thought his Star Trek ones were very nitpicky. For example, complaining that the lighting is so dark in Generations. I mean, come on! It's darker because the film had a decent cinematographer. Although given Berman's preference for bland, brightly lit cinematography on the show (in contrast to the early seasons), it was probably more because they were trying to hide the cheap looking sets.

And I agree with Faceman that Abrams's Trek is in many ways more Star Wars than Star Trek. Not an entirely bad thing though as Star Wars was always much more cinematic. Bringing in Ben Burtt to do the sound effects was a brilliant idea.

mikhail

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

I used to kind of like the TNG movies, then i watched plinketts "reviews" of them and ever since I've seen them for the ridiculous, insulting ****e that they are

damn you plinkett

I just watched his one on Generations. His only really valid point is the plot hole arising from Guinan's "any time and any place" line in the Nexus. Mostly, it's just bitching about trivial stuff - prop and lighting inconsistencies with the series, a fecking border in a photo album, the guy in charge of a battleship not electing to pilot it himself mid-battle, ship combat tactics, minor physics stuff (timing) - so much of the review is just really whiny bull****.

At one point he complained that they didn't take a course of action which would have left them sitting in orbit around a planet, scratching their balls while they waited for a missile they probably couldn't intercept to be launched from a point they couldn't locate.

I have to admit though, I am rather fond of his extended rant about the room with no purpose in First Contact.

Auvers

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

time will show you that.

time will show me what exactly

I watched TNG when it first aired and watched them all again recently and they are still great

DS9 just never did it for me, too much on the drama and Avery Brooks should be on Fair City he's such an unwatchable appalling actor

also what wtf where they thinking about with those bloody Ferengi episodes

Dr Bob

Kiith wrote: »

O'Brien was pretty much a faceless transporter chief until DS9. :

I love Ds9 , but that's not quite true , he started off as un-named conn officer - became un named transporter guy , got a name , became transporter chief , and was a reoccurring character with a decent amount of screentime up until DS9 started.So he was fairly well established before Ds9.

stiffler123

johndoe99 wrote: »

watched it last night, it was superbly made. Avery Brooks was hilarious, he's not exactly all there now.

Where did you see it if you don't mind me asking? I can't find it anywhere online.

faceman

mikhail wrote: »

I just watched his one on Generations. His only really valid point is the plot hole arising from Guinan's "any time and any place" line in the Nexus. Mostly, it's just bitching about trivial stuff - prop and lighting inconsistencies with the series, a fecking border in a photo album, the guy in charge of a battleship not electing to pilot it himself mid-battle, ship combat tactics, minor physics stuff (timing) - so much of the review is just really whiny bull****.

At one point he complained that they didn't take a course of action which would have left them sitting in orbit around a planet, scratching their balls while they waited for a missile they probably couldn't intercept to be launched from a point they couldn't locate.

I have to admit though, I am rather fond of his extended rant about the room with no purpose in First Contact.

Generations just felt like an extended TV show. And to be fair, it was prior to Picard's turning to the darkside. But it still sucked balls.

sxt

From wiki:

"Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is a 1982 American science fiction film released by Paramount Pictures. The film is the second feature based on the Star Trek science fiction franchise.

The plot features James T. Kirk (William Shatner) and the crew of the starship USS Enterprise facing off against the genetically-engineered tyrant Khan Noonien Singh (Ricardo Montalbán), a character who first appeared in the 1967 Star Trek television series episode "Space Seed"

There is a back story ,star trek episode relating to this film! Awesome :eek:

Sad Professor

Did you not gather that from the fact that Khan and Kirk knew each other in the film?

Mickeroo

I love Star Trek (2009) but to me it doesn't really feel like a star trek film and it will never be the classic Wrath of Kahn is. Gotta say though, as poor as Insurrection and Nemesis were, I always liked Generations, mostly because you get to see Kirk and Picard together, but seriously though I always thought First Contact was by far the best of that bunch, and next to Wrath of Kahn and The Voyage Home it's always been my favourite Trek movie.

As for the shows, well DS9 will always be my favourite, NSG was great too but not a patch on DS9, though I prefer Picard as a character to Sisko.

Seriously though I'm not seeing a lot of love for Voyager on this thread, whats the deal there? :pac: I remember there being some decent story lines in the laters seasons, like where they had to team up with the Borg to fight that new species(forgotten the name)

BlitzKrieg

Has anyone backed star trek 09 over wrath of khan???


I doubt anyone would Khan is the best star trek film (with undiscovered country being a close 2nd.)

And add another one to the DS9 love. Awesome series with possibly the best reoccuring villain in the series (GUL DU KAT!) and the best anti-hero of the series (GAREK!)

the biggest crime of the ds9 series is they shook up the universe so much and then it was all bystepped by the main series by having voyager being in another quadrent and the movies ignoring the changes made, then enterprise being a prequel and finally a reboot. Worf is the federation ambassador to klingon? F*ck that get back to your position on the enterprise...


that really pissed me off.