The Summer Movie season is nearly upon us and 2013 is shaping up to be one spectacular show. I think the battle for this year’s crown comes down to three outstanding projects: Iron Man 3, Star Trek Into Darkness & Man of Steel.

Which one will stand out critically? Commercially? Which one will connect to audiences most?

Ultimately, it depends on which franchise you love and the history behind it. Are you excited to return to Marvel’s Cinematic Universe after the events of The Avengers? Are you counting down the days until J.J Abrams unleashes another adventure in his rebooted Star Trek universe? Can the DC Universe thrive without Christopher Nolan’s Batman?

These are all questions that will be answered but which one will truly deliver?


Views: 112

Replies to This Discussion

Pepper is a strong character, when you boil her down.  Crossing her strikes me as being a poor idea.  As for the Mandarin ... I get the feeling that he is in for a first-class butt-whipping!

I'm peeved about Star Trek mostly because J. J. Abrams apparently has little or no regard for the original or the characters or what those characters were about.  I'll watch it and may like it, but his Star Trek resembles the original the way a fish resembles a bicycle.

As for Man of Steel ... I'm going to wait to hear some buzz after the release and decide whether I want to see it or wait for it to show up on HBO.

I fully enjoyed Abrams last Star Trek movie. But he turned it into more of a space opera, which is what Star Trek never was. I have nothing against space operas, they are great movies/tv, but thats not what Star Trek was. I'll still watch it and enjoy it, but i do wish he would make it more like the series, any of them.

My point precisely, Kosak.  Star Trek was about something more than whizzing spaceships and lasers and explosions and what has become known as space opera.  Its characters were real and three-dimensional, nuanced and flawed and very damned human ... even the non-humans.  They had an arc to them, an arc and history which should be respected.  Abrams has frankly either not done his homework or he has chosen to wipe most of the slate clean while retaining the names.

The original Kirk and Spock and McCoy and Scott and Sulu and Chekov and Chapel were characters worthy of respect, not just names to be played with by someone less interested in making a statement than in making a buck.

I agree Kosak - it is like they stripped the deeper story away and replaced it with an action movie.

I've been looking forward to the new Star Trek, but what you all are saying sounds so disappointing. I dislike violence action movies in general, but especially if they lack character development.


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service