• Thatuserguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sorry I can’t read your comment. The 20 lens flares he put on screen still have me blinded

        Edit: to be clear. I don’t think his movies are bad per say. They’re just painfully mediocre.

      • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        He’s always the wrong choice for anything that calls for the bare minimum planning and substance, but that’s what they keep giving him. He has good instincts for cinematography but shouldn’t be trusted with anything that requires an actual plot.

          • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            He would probably announce a trilogy, spend the first movie setting up some mystery in Pandora’s core and then would never follow up.

            spoiler

            And somehow Quaritch would return, but Cameron has that covered already.

  • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    People are taking this interview out of context.

    He said, as a kid, he never liked Star Trek. But as an adult, after rewatching TOS to prepare for the 2009 film, he grew to appreciate Star Trek.

    • 🍉 DrRedOctopus 🐙🍉@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      kinda doesn’t count, he accepted the job, and was given the job, despite not liking the source material,

      him doing basic research later and changing his mind is irrelevant.

      Why accept a job making media you don’t care about. besides the money

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        First, you’re assuming you have to love the story or the universe to make a good movie set in that universe.

        Second, if you could get paid several tens of millions of dollars to make a movie I’m pretty sure you would, and you’d probably do a hell of a good job catching yourself up.

        I’m not sure why you’d say it “doesn’t count”.

        • 🍉 DrRedOctopus 🐙🍉@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I also assuming that there are countless talented people who love the source material, and better to give them a chance than giving it to someone who just makes content.

          I am not going with “hire fans” bullshit, just that there are so many actual directors in the industry who already have a passion for it, so it is just a marketing choice to hire someone for the name.

          Art is art, not content, when it is turned to content we get slop like those movies.

          • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Are you saying he’s not an actual director? What makes someone an “actual director”?
            Why do you think it was a marketing choice to pick him? He wasn’t exactly a major director at the time. He was far from unknown but he didn’t have a lot of movies.

            Which Star Trek to you is art and not content? I assume you mean made as a passion and not for commercial purposes?
            I feel like that’s just ignorant of how movies are actually made.

            Is it content because it’s popular and you don’t like it?

            • 🍉 DrRedOctopus 🐙🍉@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Meant directors who actually like the subject.

              The Abraham Star Trek movies were just forgettable. he tried to turn star trek into star wars. They are content made in meeting rooms by executives, not really creative decisions or story telling.

              To a lesser degree that happens to every major movie,

              • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                You had a director who actually liked the subject. It’s right there in the interview. Wasn’t a fan as a child, liked it as an adult.

                It sounds like you didn’t like the movie, so you’re saying it was because the director lacked something or the writers lacked something relating to “art”, instead of just saying you didn’t like the movie.

                All but the most niche movies are about making money. That’s what they are. People can make good movies, but they’re all still fundamentally about money. The entire star trek franchise exists to make money.
                The early movies were made as a cash grab to chase after Star wars money. You’ve got the movie director saying the series is boring and being selected because he can make it for cheaper.

                It’s fine to not like the movie, but acting like the movie can’t be good because those making it have financial incentives? C’mon.