"STAR TREK" movie comments/reviews (spoilers)

Trekkygeek · May 12, 2009, 01:45:20 PM

I dare say you'll catch up.

I have to say mate, you had faith in Abrams from the very beginning and you assured us that everything was going to be cool. Whereas I was always doubtful and thought this was going to crush the franchise to dust.

I think this is maybe why I have had such a reaction to this movie. All my doubts were washed away and I look forward my kids growing up with fantastic Trek movies. (in another four movies, my little'uns will be old enough to go to the cinema to see it with their geeky dad.) javascript:void(0);

Rico · May 12, 2009, 01:53:28 PM

Trust me, I was very happy it all turned out well. I knew he could make a good movie and he seemed to have surrounded himself with people who cared about Trek. But you never completely know until it's all finished. You know what, I actually think the next film could be even better!

Bryancd · May 12, 2009, 05:07:54 PM

The movie was brilliant. I still say the initial movie stills as well as the first trailer were very unsettling. I was more irritated by the universal fawning and lack of a quality, critical discussion, so I took it upon myself to be the voice in the wilderness. I still say if some of you thought that initial stuff was FABULOUS and without criticism, Hollywood has nothing to worry about in it's future! ::)

X · May 12, 2009, 05:12:24 PM

Quote from: Bryancd on May 12, 2009, 05:07:54 PM
The movie was brilliant. I still say the initial movie stills as well as the first trailer were very unsettling. I was more irritated by the universal fawning and lack of a quality, critical discussion, so I took it upon myself to be the voice in the wilderness. I still say if some of you thought that initial stuff was FABULOUS and without criticism, Hollywood has nothing to worry about in it's future! ::)

So what you're saying is that even thought we were right, we were wrong? And even though you were wrong, you were right?

Bryancd · May 12, 2009, 05:19:46 PM

Quote from: Just X on May 12, 2009, 05:12:24 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on May 12, 2009, 05:07:54 PM
The movie was brilliant. I still say the initial movie stills as well as the first trailer were very unsettling. I was more irritated by the universal fawning and lack of a quality, critical discussion, so I took it upon myself to be the voice in the wilderness. I still say if some of you thought that initial stuff was FABULOUS and without criticism, Hollywood has nothing to worry about in it's future! ::)
So what you're saying is that even thought we were right, we were wrong? And even though you were wrong, you were right?

Yep. :biggrin
Come on, some of that stuff didn't look all that great. The bridge worked but could have been much better. Don't get me started on Engineering... :old_bash:

Jaames · May 12, 2009, 05:26:42 PM

I have heard a lot of complaints about the look of engineering. I have to say it didn't affect me one way or the other but my buddy absolutely loved it. He thought that's exactly how engineering always should have looked.

It's playing in IMAX here in Vegas through the end of next week. I think I am going to go Friday morning to see it in the IMAX format, I may never forgive my self if I don't.

Bryancd · May 12, 2009, 05:28:43 PM

I'm going to try and see it a big screen on Friday as well. We have an IMAX here in Tempe, but I prefer a more traditional theater with an almost IMAX sized screen and awesome sound.

Geekyfanboy · May 12, 2009, 05:54:42 PM

Just realized I never posted my thoughts on the New Trek... this is from my blog.

Well it was released four days prior but I was finally able to see the new Star Trek movie. I have been excited to see this movie since I heard the were making it but as the date got closer and excitement did not build like it had with other Star Trek films.

This was a re-boot of the series. Going back to the Kirk era and using all new actors. I was never a huge fan of the TOS (The Original Series) era so maybe that is why I wasn't uber excited to see this. I mean I saw previews and it looked like an AWESOME action movie but it didn't feel like Star Trek.. at least not the Star Trek I grew up on. So I did not see it opening night but knew I wanted to see it opening weekend because most of my friends would have seen it before me and I didn't want to be spoiled. Well spoilers happened and I found out about a few key moments.. oh well.

So on Sunday Harry and I sat there in the packed theater and waited to see JJ's version of our beloved Star Trek Universe. When it was over I was EXTREMELY EXCITED and LOVED every moment of this new Trek. I like that they created an alternate timeline instead of a erasing the forty years of Trek history. This opened up the storyline for anything to happen and boy did it. Planets blowing up, unexpected folks hooking up and things being slightly tweaked.

All the actors were fantastic. (going to use their characters names instead of actors names) Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Sulu were spot on. Scotty, Bones and Chekov stood out. Scotty was funny and refreshing, Bones was played perfectly, and Chekov was cute, funny and smart.

I liked the story, how they tied in the original Trek universe and I loved seeing Leonard Nimoy as old Spock.

SFX were AWESOME, music was great and the overall movie was fun and entertaining. Of course not everything was perfect but those little things that bothered me were way over shadowed by the cool things that I loved.

I swore I was not going to buy the new Star Trek action figures.. but as I was getting into the car I turned to Harry and said.. "CRAP!! Now I have to buy the figures."

I can't wait for the next Trek film.

Feathers · May 13, 2009, 03:35:06 AM

Coming back to a couple of things...

I wasn't overjoyed by Scotty's little green friend and the fact that he got onto the E at the end means that he's probably along for the ride in future too.

The other thing I haven't worked out yet is how Archer and Scott would have overlapped in time for the whole 'prize beagle' event to have happened. I thought Enterprise was supposed to be 100 years before TOS and even allowing that this story shaves seven years off of Kirk's rise to Captain, that's still 93 years after Enterprise putting Archer at, what? 135?

Having said all that...I'd rather the Archer reference was in rather than than out so I'm happy they did it. I just can't make the maths work.

cosmonaut · May 13, 2009, 03:45:23 AM

You're right about the time gap:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Star_Trek
Maybe Archer and his Beagle successfully reproduced? ;)

X · May 13, 2009, 03:48:03 AM

Quote from: Feathers on May 13, 2009, 03:35:06 AM
Coming back to a couple of things...

I wasn't overjoyed by Scotty's little green friend and the fact that he got onto the E at the end means that he's probably along for the ride in future too.

The other thing I haven't worked out yet is how Archer and Scott would have overlapped in time for the whole 'prize beagle' event to have happened. I thought Enterprise was supposed to be 100 years before TOS and even allowing that this story shaves seven years off of Kirk's rise to Captain, that's still 93 years after Enterprise putting Archer at, what? 135?

Having said all that...I'd rather the Archer reference was in rather than than out so I'm happy they did it. I just can't make the maths work.

Did you forget that Bones was in the first episode of TNG?

cosmonaut · May 13, 2009, 03:52:34 AM

And Spock even made it post-TNG, but for a dog it would be a very, very long time.
A clone-dog, maybe?

Feathers · May 13, 2009, 04:09:33 AM

Quote from: Just X on May 13, 2009, 03:48:03 AM
Did you forget that Bones was in the first episode of TNG?

You're right X, I did forget that and I guess the time gaps are more or less the same but that was 100 years further in the future so the med tech then may have progressed a bit more.

Mind you, we didn't have Archer in the film itself and no one said when the test occurred so I guess it not too much of a stretch. Thanks for clearing that up :)

X · May 13, 2009, 05:11:51 AM

Quote from: cosmonaut on May 13, 2009, 03:52:34 AM
And Spock even made it post-TNG, but for a dog it would be a very, very long time.
A clone-dog, maybe?

They said his prized beagle ... I'm thinking that he bred Porthos on returning to earth and this might be one of Porthos' line. Thus making it prized.

What I found most interesting about that line was that they said Admiral Archer. According to some sources, Archer dies in 2245 and held ambassador, chief of starfleet, and President of the Federation titles. ( His file in the mirror universe). Given this this is another alternate timeline, Enterprise is launched in 2245 in the normal verse and 2258 in the new universe and we can see that there are even more differences under the surfaces.

We might be able to assume that perhaps this Admiral was in the fleet longer and given their tech, there could have been some problems with the first fleet and forced them crew to light speed and time dilation a few times in their career. They would be older, but not physically.

I think there are a lot of places where we can if it in. If it helps, the writers did mean Jonathan Archer when they wrote it, but didn't specify Porthos.

Bryancd · May 13, 2009, 05:18:12 AM

It's a reboot, they have a tremendous amount of leeway in terms of incorporating familiar, canonical names, places, and events without having to adhere slavishly to a timeline previously established. The mental gymnastics are amusing and fun for fans, but I think there is a point we just need to go with it. :)
Besides, as that line was delivered post-timeline alteration, all previous dates are suspect. Myabe Archer was born later, maybe the NX-01 was launched later, who knows! I loke that they brought in the name without having to justify it's use.