"STAR TREK" movie comments/reviews (spoilers)

[cosmonaut]

Jaames:   :wacko [Hands back geek card]

Yes, she is 5' 8'' and has a black belt! And now carefully back off, don't look straight in her eyes! :D

[X]

I've been reading all of  your posts and I think I've come to the conclusion that I'm a bit slow on the up take...  Did everyone except me know this was an alternate timeline and not just a timline hick up story?? In every instance of Star Trek that we have seen thus far, the timeline is corrected...I've been trained by Trek to expect this.  The only 'permanent' alternate history we witness is in the Mirror Universe, but now there is an alternate timeline in addition to other universes?

Yes, I will freely admit I was confused at first. It wasn't obvious to me and I was surprised that it wasn't corrected at the end of the film. You may revoke my geek card.  :blush

As I said before, I loved the film...I just didn't expect the curve ball. To me, Kirk learning his that his counterpart knew his father, did not indicate that he was occupying a parallel timeline but a defunct timeline...one in need of correction. Thus the confusion. I get it now and I like it now that I know that everything that occurred in the television series was not systematically erased by JJ. :)

It's not a mistake on your part Jen. there is this little mentioned rule in time travel that every time you do it, you create an alternate timeline. When you "fix" things, you just go back to a time line where things are how you changed them back. Trek was good at doing that, this time they did it as well, but to "account" for the preexisting changes you can go the alternate timeline theory or you can just say that it's the same timeline, but other changes earlier in the time line caused the visual changes.

For me personally, I see it as a descendant of the Enterprise time line and the old time line from the perspective of the characters that we did watch on tv has been made defunct.

This new time line is the "right" and prime time line and the TOS time line is one that might have happened in another life.

So, you aren't wrong.

Look at it like this: It's an alternate time line because it wasn't fixed by the end.

[Rico]

It's the "Back to the Future" syndrome - or difference.  It's either always one timeline and things change in the future as you alter the past, or it's a million different timelines.  Each time something happens or a decision is made, a new branch is created.  The last episode of "Fringe" covered this rather well.  Yes, in Trek most of the time they have used the "Back to the Future" style of things.  But, they really couldn't do that here.  If they did, all 40 years of Trek would have to be dealt with.  It was much easier to just make a new timeline.  Much easier.  Keeps everyone happy and now they can do ANYTHING.  Destroy Vulcan, even kill a main character if they want in another movie.  Everything is possible now.  Because it's all new.  It was a good solution for things.

[Feathers]

Absolutely! The potential for the future is huge...up to and including anothe forty years of history to be built on the new foundations. I don't want to say it's a masterstroke of writing, but it is.

It feels like we've got a whole sack load of new toys to play with but still have all the old ones sitting in the cupboard to bring out and use when we want to.

[Darrell]

I was a naysayer - as time went on, more in a devil's advocate way rather than being serious about it.  I liked it more than I expected, and things I expected would bother me did not.  It was other things like time travel & using the same aliens over again that bothered me most.

Oddly, my favorite part of the movie was the weird alien monster thing that chased Kirk.  I think its time we meet intelligent Federation member races that look like that.  Tatoos & head makeup do not an alien make for me anymore.

Nit picks:  Transporter technology would not let someone beam inside water tubes placed over cheese factory equipment.  Voice recognition is able to translate alien races, but not Chekov's Russian accent?

So I'd give this probably an 8 out of 10 rating even though a lot of little things bothered me.  I am ever so glad that people welding Enterprise panels with arc welders was left out.  :)

Do I think this captured Roddenberry's Vision & direction?  No... but I think he would have given it his blessing & enjoyed it as good entertainment as I did.  My favorite character was McCoy.  Scotty was played BETTER than James Doohan did in my opinion.  Kirk was a bit too criminalistic, & would never have been promoted that quickly given the examples in the film.

Don't be too serious about what Trek should be, and let yourself be entertained, and you will have a good time.

[billybob476]

I'm listening to a bunch of podcast reviews about the movie today. One thing people are bringing up I didn't think of but it's cool:

They really expand the role of communications officer here. They really made Uhura up to be just as good if not better then Hoshi Sato skill wise. She's a great linguist, transcoding signals, etc etc. I'm very happy that they made Uhura much more then the space receptionist.

[spaltor]

I've only made it thru page 4 on this thread, but I have to get back to work, so I apologize if these things have been addressed - just ignore me.

I've gone twice so far, and I love the movie!  My one problem, and it's a small one, is that the Romulans don't look like Romulans. 

The two biggest complaints I've heard were
1. Spock Prime's arrival taking 25 years, even though he was right behind Nero.  I'm sure that can be explained away with relativistic physics surrounding black holes and gravity wells.  It's been a long time since I was in cosmology class, but I do remember that time dialation is a super tricky thing.

2.  The promotion of all of the cadets so quickly.  Remember that ALL of the other cadets were killed immediately after arriving at Vulcan, and the primary fleet is nowhere to be found.  So in addition to Vulcans down being an "endangered species", Starfleet is very depleted.  It's not a perfect explanation, but I can suspend my disbelief for it.

[spaltor]

I was not so impressed with Chris Pine as Kirk though as he reminded me too much in his voice, dialog and mannerisms of Ben Browder's character on SG-1 and I found that slightly distracting. Quinto as Spock was quite wonderful even though he portrays a more emotional Spock than we are used to. Zoe Saldana is quite sexy and lovely to look at on screen. I hope the future films give her a little better part to play. Simon Pegg as Scotty was hilarious.

I kept getting flashes on Ben Browder, too!  I'm glad someone else saw it. 
And I'm now in love with Simon Pegg.

[Jaames]

I was very skeptical of Simon Pegg (a comedic actor?!?) as scotty, but I have to admit that he was great.

[DontcallmePigboy]

I was thinking about the movie further. 

Kirk's father saved over 800 lives?  They must really pack them on those starships.  What was the number of crew members on the Kelvin

Is "old" Spock stuck in this reality now?  Is he going to help re-populate the Vulcan species. 

[spaltor]

Is "old" Spock stuck in this reality now?  Is he going to help re-populate the Vulcan species. 

Yep, that's the impression that I got.

[X]

http://www.screendaily.com/news/star-trek-rules-international-roost-with-355m-overseas-launch/5000931.article

[X]

I really liked the small cuts from Iowa to Vulcan as we see young Kirk and Spock and then their older selves. It told a story without belaboring anything. I did have one problem with the barroom scene with Kirk when Uhura says that she thought all farm boys did was have sex with animals. Was a reference to bestiality really necessary? I would not want my young son or daughter thinking about and possibly acting out sex with animals because this film plants a seed in a young persons mind.
Kevin

kevin, I thought about this for a few days and decided that I had absolutely no problem with the scene and still plan on taking my 5 year old to see the movie. I think the reason that I didn't have a problem is because I've seen women who didn't want to be hit on toss out even more harsh lines in night clubs and bars. I didn't see this as something negative or bad, but something that happens in the here and now when men refuse to take no for an answer. It felt real to me.

I also think that if this plants any sort of seed for anyone to want to test out sex with farm animals, then they had issues long before seeing the movie. I think that expect that to happen is kind of like blaming movie violence or rock music for someone being violent in real life. No, that not a good analogy. To me it's like saying that people talking about violence or sex on screen is planting seeds for someone to go off and have sex with green aliens or phaser people. I think that most people are a little more balanced than that and those that aren't shouldn't blame movies for how they act.

[Chrystabel]

Saw the movie again on IMAX after school...loved it even more the 2nd time!  I honestly don't remember the last time...strike that...the last movie I saw more than two times in the theatre was LOTR.  Okay, how about...I don't recall ever going to a movie by myself!  I had no problem going to this movie by myself today, and I know I'll see it again in the next couple of weeks.

Loved, loved, LOVED the nod to Admiral Archer's prize winning beagle...bad Scotty!

[Ktrek]

I also think that if this plants any sort of seed for anyone to want to test out sex with farm animals, then they had issues long before seeing the movie. I think that expect that to happen is kind of like blaming movie violence or rock music for someone being violent in real life. No, that not a good analogy. To me it's like saying that people talking about violence or sex on screen is planting seeds for someone to go off and have sex with green aliens or phaser people. I think that most people are a little more balanced than that and those that aren't shouldn't blame movies for how they act.

I see exactly what you are saying but for me this crosses a line of "decency" because bestiality is an unacceptable and immoral form of sexual expression. I think the writers could have found a way to get their point across without stooping to such crudeness. I wonder how you would treat it if you had a ten year old daughter or son asking what sex with animals is? I think you might feel different. Your five year old, although I think is waaaaaaaay too young to be taking to this film, would likely not even catch it or have any questions about it but a child in puberty? I just think it was uncalled for, absolutely unnecessary to the story, and morally irresponsible of the authors. They know full well that there are going to be young people in the audience and I just think it speaks a whole lot as to Orci and Kurtzman's character. In other words...not much there.

Kevin