| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Enda80
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
108 Posts |
 Posted - 10/29/2010 : 02:49:04 AM
|
Ken Begg pointed out that he feels smarter than the makers of the 1980's Superman films since he noticed that as the films grew campier they grew less successful, both artistically and financially. The same applies to the makers of the 1990's Batman films.
Well, it occurred to me that this also applies to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles films of the 1990's as well. The first film had some jocular bits of dialogue, but not slapstick. In fact, the first film played it so seriously that it surprised parents. (Considering that the Turtles started as a spoof of Elektra, Daredevil, and the X-Men, that the first film played it so seriously grows even more unexpected.)
To show how serious the first TMNT film played out, an example: they had a scene where a man offhandedly attacks a young boy. In the script and novelization, the young boy that Tatsu attacks was to die from the beating. The sounds of the boy breathing and others saying he would be all right were added at the last minute after the movie ratings board objected to the scene.
The next two films did grow a bit more slapstick and lighter in style. Needless to say, the series ended then (other than a CGI follow-up). |
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2010 : 1:39:45 PM
|
Once could certainly make the case that the Star Trek films got progressively campier and less successful.
The problem was that all the sequels, even the Next Gen movies to some extent, kept emulating ST: IV Voyage Home. |
 |
|
|
Terrahawk
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
644 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2010 : 9:11:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by zombiewhacker
Once could certainly make the case that the Star Trek films got progressively campier and less successful.
The problem was that all the sequels, even the Next Gen movies to some extent, kept emulating ST: IV Voyage Home.
Don't know if I agree with that. A brief chronology of the films.
TOS
1. While technically great, it was a tepid outing. The characters didn't match their TV counterparts and the film felt way to sterile.
2. Let's face it, this is the best film of the series.
3. Good, not great. Being older, I appreciate it more than I did as a teenager.
4. This one seems to divide people. Some hate it and others love it. I fall in the latter category.
5. Well, Ken eviscerated this one with good reason.
6. Another good entry, although the political allegory is too heavy handed.
TNG
After 7 years on TV and one of the best series finale's ever, there was a lot of momentum going into the movies.
7. Mistake trying to bridge the old and the new series at this point. Should have waited until the second movie. But, lame fights and poor comedy bring down this film. Plus a lame story. TV writing.
8. Good entry but it kills the Borg. Again, TV writing.
9. Wait, they paid movie prices for a two-parter TV episode?!?!
10. Death of TNG. Too much Data.
You might make the case that the TNG series of movies plummeted but TOS had a fairly solid run.
I summon Bigger Fish! |
|
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 3:07:51 PM
|
The first three Star Trek films, whatever their relative strengths and weaknesses, all shared one trait in common: they eschewed cheap jokes, resisted the temptation to dumb the plots down, and essentially played their stories straight.
Admittedly, ST:TMP went too far in the other direction, coming across as coldly cerebral and almost utterly humorless, much to its detriment, but ST:TWOK and ST:TSFS both deftly managed to balance drama with humor without sacrificing gravitas. For original series analogs, consider "The City on the Edge of Forever" or "Devil in the Dark" as prime examples of this same delicate balance.
Unfortunately, for the series, the fourth entry in the film sereis, ST:TVH, was a page right out of the old "I, Mudd/The Trouble With Tribbles" handbook. Now, don't misunderstand me: I enjoyed ST:TVH. I love the "I, Mudd" episode. I love tribbles. (I even own a tribble, though maybe we shouldn't get into that right now.) But I don't want every Star Trek episode to be about tribbles. I don't want every Trek story to be about Kirk matching, um, wits with Harry Mudd. Sure, watching the Enterprise crew lampooning themselves every now and then can be fun, but I also want to see Kirk dropkick the bejeesus out of Khan. That's what made me a Captain Kirk fan when I was a kid. The heroics. Not the pratfalls.
The problem for the film franchise is that once ST:TVH became a smash crossover hit, one that both Trekkers and non-Trekkers could enjoy, the powers that be decided, that's it, from hereon in, we're playing the Enterprise crew strictly for laughs. There is no way, I repeat, no way Paramount writers would have even considered a scene of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy sitting around a campfire singing "Row, Row, Row Your Boat", Scotty walking into a bulkhead and knocking himself out, or Spock flying around the ship in rocket boots had it not been for the rampant silliness of ST:TVH.
Ditto ST:TUC, the next entry in the series. Though it was undeniably a step up from the previous film, ST:TUC remained mired in goofy silliness that would have been unthinkable only a few years before. At least when Kirk battled his doppleganger at the climax of "Whom Gods Destroy," the writers had the courage to play the scene straight. But when Kirk fights his doppleganger midway through ST:TUC, the characters crack jokes at each other instead. Others scenes, such as the Enterprise crew impersonating Klingons in order to sneak past a Klingon patrol, call to mind the Saturday Night Live-level schtick of ST:TVH. (While you're at it, Chekov, why don't you ask the Klingons where they keep their "nuclear wessels"?)
Even the climax of ST:TUC is played far too loosely, with lame jokes substituting for dramatic tension. ("Doctor, would you care to help me operate on a torpedo?") The disparity in quality between the finale of this film and the finale of ST:TWOK speaks for itself.
Sadly, ST: Generations seemed to take its cues from ST:TVH as well. Except for one sketch on the holodeck, Picard is presented as serious, somber, dynamic: in short, a thinking man's sci-fi hero. Of course he was; that's precisely the way he was depicted in the TV series. But Kirk, on the other hand, was now firmly in stuck in "Shatner-mode," if you will. Hence, in almost every scene he appears (with the exception of his actual death scene), Kirk comes off as nervous, twitchy, self-mocking, easily distracted, and ultimately a lightweight. Is there even a remaining trace of the James Tiberius Kirk from "Balance of Terror" or "Space Seed" or, holy heck, even "The Corbomite Maneuver" to be found in the new, dumbed-down fan-friendlier Kirk 2.0 we see bounding across the screen in big screen adventures such as ST:G? Frankly, no. (Unless the TV series writers came up with a scene where Kirk says, "I can't fight the Gorn now. My omelettes will get cold!" Must have missed that one.)
Now with the above taken into consideration, one must ask, where did the movie writers get the idea to camp Kirk up? In my judgement, it was unquestionably ST:TVH. The fourth movie was a welcome change of pace, and I'm glad they did it, but they should have quit while they were ahead. |
Edited by - zombiewhacker on 11/07/2010 3:10:07 PM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked