Coming Up- Friday, May 8th

Another week, another summer blockbuster. Star Trek is the movie to see this week, regardless of how tired the series may be. Next Day Air has The Wire connection that Obsessed did, but this week there is real competition.

Lucas:
J.J. Abrams made his fortune with Lost, now it's time to see if his magic can work on the big screen, and with an established franchise. To be honest, I'm worried. Wolverine's awfulness this weekend has reminded me just how easily a movie can go wrong when it tries to insert a new story into the continuity of an existing universe. Besides the fact that Star Trek has been done again and again and again, there's the additional danger of using CGI as a crutch. We've come a long way from the cheap plastic models of the original series, but replacing those models can't replace storytelling... there needs to be a compelling, plausible plot to back up whatever the effects department dreams up.

Further, that story must somehow fit into the existing mythology. For example, we know that Kirk cheats on the Kobayashi Maru test, the test that is supposed to be unwinnable. Star Fleet uses the test to see what candidates will do under extreme pressure, but Kirk thinks there is no such thing as a situation that is unwinnable. Part of the mystique of James T. Kirk is that he defeated this test... but that mystique was aided by the fact that we didn't know how he did it. Will J.J. Abrams's vision live up to what we have imagined? And finally, there's the time travel bit. From what I've been able to glean from articles and trailers, Kirk saves the universe in this film. Now, is that really necessary? Why couldn't the film just be about one man's struggle through the training process of Star Fleet, with a wink and a nod toward the audience who knows that he will become one of the most celebrated officers in the fleet? Instead of showing a simple story in extraordinary surroundings, they've decided to make an extraordinary story in extraordinary surroundings. It's possible, but not plausible.

Add all of this up, and it comes down to this: I'm worried.

Urban:

Okay, I have to weigh in on this one,,,,, but from a completely different point of view. I know very little about Star Trek, other than having seen The Voyage Home and The Final Frontier when I was younger. I guess my principle way of assessing why I want to see this film is that as someone who doesn't know very much about the multiple series', the prequel is the best way to introduce the characters. It is also a genius way to incorporate new life and some hip-ness into a franchise that seemed to be losing steam. Also, the advertising Paramount has commissioned looks really good.

I agree in principle with the themes that Mr. Lucas addressed. Storytelling is often cut at the expense of thrills and explosions during the summer blockbuster season. However, from the opinion of the outsider, this series has never been based on special effects, but rather by grinding out a story (one of the main reasons that I never watched it, though I was intrigued by the philosophical/sociological themes is that I thought it was exceedingly dull) that is based on some great characters. I don't expect that to change.

Read on...

Coming Up Friday, May 1

URBAN:
When you look at the offerings at your local theater you will realize that none of the other studios expect to make any money by competing with X-Men Origins: Wolverine. With that being said, I have to admit that I already have low expectations for this film. The advertising thus far would lead one to believe that this film is the equivalent of last year's The Incredible Hulk, in the amount of money spent on effects, budget for actors, and (most importantly) writing and directing.

It does look like it is going to attempt to place Wolverine in some historical context. If it can pull this off as a plausible explanation of the origin of the character this film might possibly overcome the obvious reliance on special effects in place of the story. In this case, the film might be able to rise to the level of Ironman, rather than The Incredible Hulk.

Wolverine was always my favorite X-Men character when I was a kid. I just hope that it isn't ruined by opportunists trying to make a quick buck copying the proven success of recent superhero films, and especially the Batman franchise with it's focus on the explanation of a character's gritty origins.


LUCAS:
I'm still holding out hope. I had a lot of reservations when they announced the first X-Men, for many of these same reasons... they're childhood icons, screen representations and actors won't be able to live up, etc. But they managed to put together a fairly good movie, and the actors met their roles reasonably well.

So, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. They don't have Brian Singer involved, which was part of what made the first two movies work, but they also don't have Brett Ratner, which is part of what made the third movie fail. I don't know what to expect with Gavin Hood, as I haven't seen either of the films he's directed previously, but I'm staying optimistic. But perhaps the wish is the father of the thought.

Read on...