PDA

View Full Version : Star Trek Movie Review

hazlnut
05-08-2009, 05:28 PM
Star Trek: A Franchise Reborn By Quantum Physics!!! A+++:D:):D

My son and I have this ongoing debate about the T.V. show Lost. If you were to go back in time and change some event, would that alter present future reality or create a new timeline from that point forward with its own new future reality. Whatever the answer, if there is an answer, the new Star Trek movie directed by Lost co-creator J.J. Abrams, uses a very clever plot device to slam the door shut on Trekkie purists who might argue, “Kirk wouldn’t say that.” or “The engine room should be two decks lower.” This movie is a prequel that infers a slightly alternate reality stemming from a rift in the space-time continuum caused by a vengeful Romulan named Nero, played by Eric Bana.

The new Star Trek stays true to the original 1966 series with classic character moments like, “I’m a doctor, Jim, not a physicist.” and “Scotty, I need more power.”, followed by, “I’m givin’ her all she’s got, Captain.” These numerous nods to the past were woven into the story so cleverly that, to an outsider like my son, the many outbursts of audience laughter and applause seemed strange—“I don’t get it. What’s so funny?”

The film centers on the beginnings of a relationship between James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto). While Dr. Leonard McCoy is Jim’s best friend at Starfleet Academy, Spock starts off as an elite Vulcan instructor who doesn’t take kindly to being told by an upstart cadet that his perfectly conceived Kobayashi Maru training exercise is based on a false premise and therefore… illogical. :eek:

What’s interesting are some of the key character differences—Quinto’s Spock is prone to more emotion than Nimoy’s, and, while Pine’s Kirk is more edgy, somewhat of a maverick, he only breaks the rules when logic dictates there may be a better winning strategy.

‘Bones’ McCoy is played brilliantly by Karl Urban—hyper-anxious, sarcastic, and never afraid to say what’s on his mind. The rest of the fab seven are also well-played by John Cho as Sulu, Anton Yelchin as Chekov, Simon Pegg as Scotty, and Zoe Saldana as Uhura. Hopefully, we’ll see more of them, especially Pegg, in future installments.

The CGI is outstanding, I recommend seeing it in the best theater in your area—IMAX if available. The action scenes have the right amount of thrill and classic character humor—like Sulu engaging in a sword fight.

This movie is really about these exceptional outsiders who never really fit in and sometimes get overlooked. They outwit their opponents and overcome obstacles with wit and logic—and occasionally, some extraordinary pilot, phasor, transporter, and engineering skills. Let’s face it, the original crew had skills, and this movie tells the story of how they honed those skills and found each other.

It’s no spoiler that Nimoy’s Spock makes an appearance, and there is a great moment when the Old Spock confides in the New Kirk that it was Jim’s father, George Kirk, that inspired the Old Jim to join Starfleet. This revelation speaks to the film’s main theme—Destiny: Can changing the past ever really alter the future?

To the diehard fans that will undoubtedly notice which buttons on the transporter panel were incorrectly labeled—see William Shatner's inspired SNL skit.William Shatter’s inspired ‘Get a Life’ skit on SNL (http://www.myvideo.de/watch/127096/Star_Trek_TOS_William_Shatner_SNL_Get_A_Life).

Bubba Dawg
05-08-2009, 06:00 PM
Thanks very much for that review.

I remember the original series but only got to see a couple of episodes when it was in it's original broadcast run because it came on a channel (network) that we didn't get at the time.

That was a long time ago, in a galaxy....um...wait a minute.....:D

I'm gonna take Miz Bubba and my Brother who calls me Bubba and who I call Bubba and we plan to see it tomorrow. I'm practically Bubbling over.....

megimoo
05-08-2009, 10:40 PM
Star Trek: A Franchise Reborn By Quantum Physics!!! A+++:D:):D

My son and I have this ongoing debate about the T.V. show Lost. If you were to go back in time and change some event, would that alter present future reality or create a new timeline from that point forward with its own new future reality. Whatever the answer, if there is an answer, the new Star Trek movie directed by Lost co-creator J.J. Abrams, uses a very clever plot device to slam the door shut on Trekkie purists who might argue, “Kirk wouldn’t say that.” or “The engine room should be two decks lower.” This movie is a prequel that infers a slightly alternate reality stemming from a rift in the space-time continuum caused by a vengeful Romulan named Nero, played by Eric Bana.

The new Star Trek stays true to the original 1966 series with classic character moments like, “I’m a doctor, Jim, not a physicist.” and “Scotty, I need more power.”, followed by, “I’m givin’ her all she’s got, Captain.” These numerous nods to the past were woven into the story so cleverly that, to an outsider like my son, the many outbursts of audience laughter and applause seemed strange—“I don’t get it. What’s so funny?”

The film centers on the beginnings of a relationship between James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto). While Dr. Leonard McCoy is Jim’s best friend at Starfleet Academy, Spock starts off as an elite Vulcan instructor who doesn’t take kindly to being told by an upstart cadet that his perfectly conceived Kobayashi Maru training exercise is based on a false premise and therefore… illogical. :eek:

What’s interesting are some of the key character differences—Quinto’s Spock is prone to more emotion than Nimoy’s, and, while Pine’s Kirk is more edgy, somewhat of a maverick, he only breaks the rules when logic dictates there may be a better winning strategy.

‘Bones’ McCoy is played brilliantly by Karl Urban—hyper-anxious, sarcastic, and never afraid to say what’s on his mind. The rest of the fab seven are also well-played by John Cho as Sulu, Anton Yelchin as Chekov, Simon Pegg as Scotty, and Zoe Saldana as Uhura. Hopefully, we’ll see more of them, especially Pegg, in future installments.

The CGI is outstanding, I recommend seeing it in the best theater in your area—IMAX if available. The action scenes have the right amount of thrill and classic character humor—like Sulu engaging in a sword fight.

This movie is really about these exceptional outsiders who never really fit in and sometimes get overlooked. They outwit their opponents and overcome obstacles with wit and logic—and occasionally, some extraordinary pilot, phasor, transporter, and engineering skills. Let’s face it, the original crew had skills, and this movie tells the story of how they honed those skills and found each other.

It’s no spoiler that Nimoy’s Spock makes an appearance, and there is a great moment when the Old Spock confides in the New Kirk that it was Jim’s father, George Kirk, that inspired the Old Jim to join Starfleet. This revelation speaks to the film’s main theme—Destiny: Can changing the past ever really alter the future?

To the diehard fans that will undoubtedly notice which buttons on the transporter panel were incorrectly labeled—see William Shatner's inspired SNL skit.William Shatter’s inspired ‘Get a Life’ skit on SNL (http://www.myvideo.de/watch/127096/Star_Trek_TOS_William_Shatner_SNL_Get_A_Life).That wasn't bad . I'll have to re evaluate you !

enslaved1
05-08-2009, 10:54 PM
Why can't Hollywood leave well enough alone? What I've heard about the movie thus far, it seems like it would have been a good start for a brand new franchise, instead of relaunching an old one. It may be a great movie, but the constant revivals of late are really getting on my nerves. Isn't there an original idea left in those putzs? Don't they have the backbone to try out their new ideas without riding the coattails of an old licence? Does every old show and movie need to be redone and updated for a new generation? Can't we just enjoy the originals in peace? Where's my cane and hearing aid?

\end old fart threadjack carry on

Lars1701a
05-08-2009, 11:53 PM
I FUCKING HATED IT.

They just had to alter the time line, HOW IN THE HELL does a 3rd year cadet get made into a first officer? Capt? Why destroy Vulcan? Now the guy that played bones was the only bright spot in the cast. The guy who played spock was as big a Douche as WC. Uhura (sp)? should have had bigger cans and where do they get off showing some sort of shenanigans between them? The old spock looked older then my 95 year old Grandfather(may God rest his soul). The guy who played scotty was ok. I could go on and on about this piece of trash. Gene must be rolling over in his grave (i know he was cremated) if he had one. Hollywood is so hard up they will fuck with a great franchise just to squeeze a few bucks out of us. Me and a friend went to see it at 1250 and the damn thing cost us 25bucks (IMAX). This has to be the worst build of hope for a good movie only to have my hopes dashed. /rant off

How do the make the Enterprise on the planet? How does it escape Earths gravity?

Every ship in TOS had a symbol of its own and only after the first movie did starfleet adopt the Enterprises symbol.

I am choking on my own rage here.

Lars1701a
05-08-2009, 11:54 PM
Why can't Hollywood leave well enough alone? What I've heard about the movie thus far, it seems like it would have been a good start for a brand new franchise, instead of relaunching an old one. It may be a great movie, but the constant revivals of late are really getting on my nerves. Isn't there an original idea left in those putzs? Don't they have the backbone to try out their new ideas without riding the coattails of an old licence? Does every old show and movie need to be redone and updated for a new generation? Can't we just enjoy the originals in peace? Where's my cane and hearing aid?

\end old fart threadjack carry on

I am only 30 something and I could not agree more.

I could have been happy if they stuck to the time line and did a story straight out of TOS BUT NO they had to screw with it.

SarasotaRepub
05-09-2009, 10:29 AM
Thanks for the review hazlnut!

I've been reading that Star Trek purists would be angry with this movie. :D

They said it was more an Shootem up Adventure film with Kirk more like
Han Solo.

Lars1701a
05-09-2009, 01:38 PM
Thanks for the review hazlnut!

I've been reading that Star Trek purists would be angry with this movie. :D

They said it was more an Shootem up Adventure film with Kirk more like
Han Solo.

just a cheap attempt to get a few more bucks out of us.

hazlnut
05-09-2009, 03:57 PM
Thanks for the review hazlnut!

I've been reading that Star Trek purists would be angry with this movie. :D

They said it was more an Shootem up Adventure film with Kirk more like
Han Solo.

That's what I thought before I saw it. It's got some great action, but stayed true to the humor of the original series--as far as the philosophy, I would argue that the original series was born in the mid-60's and any attempt to stay true to the original concepts and also be relevant in today's would, by necessity, need to move in a new direction.

Like they say, there's no accounting for taste. With any great film there are always people who don't like it because it's just not their cup of tea.

I can say that the writing and directing are of the highest quality--I was actually surprised at how well drawn the new versions of the characters were.

Remember, in a 1960's TV show, characters were essentially 2 dimensional. Now in the era of Sopranos, Lost, and others, today's audience are more sufisiticated and expect something more when it comes to characters. Just like the 1960's special effects would have fallen flat on today's movie audience, so would they type of dialogue and story telling of the 1960's. To stay 'too true' would have been death.

The major story event that seems to be getting the most negative response from a minority of purists, I think gives a new dimension to the character of spock. Complicates him in a challenging and interesting way.

So far, the film has made... $31 million (Thursday night and Friday) and is expect to pull in$70 million by Monday. Yahoo users have been overwhelmingly positive -- A.

Lars1701a
05-09-2009, 07:07 PM
That's what I thought before I saw it. It's got some great action, but stayed true to the humor of the original series--as far as the philosophy, I would argue that the original series was born in the mid-60's and any attempt to stay true to the original concepts and also be relevant in today's would, by necessity, need to move in a new direction.

Like they say, there's no accounting for taste. With any great film there are always people who don't like it because it's just not their cup of tea.

I can say that the writing and directing are of the highest quality--I was actually surprised at how well drawn the new versions of the characters were.

Remember, in a 1960's TV show, characters were essentially 2 dimensional. Now in the era of Sopranos, Lost, and others, today's audience are more sufisiticated and expect something more when it comes to characters. Just like the 1960's special effects would have fallen flat on today's movie audience, so would they type of dialogue and story telling of the 1960's. To stay 'too true' would have been death.

The major story event that seems to be getting the most negative response from a minority of purists, I think gives a new dimension to the character of spock. Complicates him in a challenging and interesting way.

So far, the film has made... $31 million (Thursday night and Friday) and is expect to pull in$70 million by Monday. Yahoo users have been overwhelmingly positive -- A.

I would have to disagree with you on the story line part, it not only changed it from the 60's point of view but every time line on was changed including TNG, DS9 etc. This movie was ok if you never saw a ST moive or TV episode. The minority of purists you so eloquently knock is what saved the franchise time after time ole bag of douche.

Not to mention the fact a 3rd year cadet was made into a capt how do they enplane that?

I dont care how much money it makes that does not make it a good movie just that alot of people got tricked into seeing it like I was.

On edit: if there is a big drop off next week it prolly will be a statement that this movie sucked.(or should say the second part of the movie did)

Lars1701a
05-09-2009, 07:11 PM
By the way that guy they got to play Kirk in the movie couldn't hold TOS kirks jock strap.

movie buff
05-09-2009, 08:37 PM
I'll be seeing it tomorrow.

enslaved1
05-09-2009, 11:07 PM
I am only 30 something and I could not agree more.

I could have been happy if they stuck to the time line and did a story straight out of TOS BUT NO they had to screw with it.

I'm only 30 something too, but I seem to be aging fast. :D There was one comment I heard that with the reset, fans can wonder if Kirk still turns out to be the fearless leader they know and love. This can make for interesting storytelling, but I would still rather something new than another "updating" of an old world.

Lars1701a
05-09-2009, 11:36 PM
I'm only 30 something too, but I seem to be aging fast. :D There was one comment I heard that with the reset, fans can wonder if Kirk still turns out to be the fearless leader they know and love. This can make for interesting storytelling, but I would still rather something new than another "updating" of an old world.

NO ONE ANSWERED ME but how does a 3rd year cadet become a starship capt? COME on people lets keep it somewhat bound in reality.

I am sorry this douche bag they got to play Kirk aint no bad ass compared to the one from the 60's. I thought they would go a bit PC with him and i was right.

Chekhov (sp)? is so annoying I would rather read one of WC or CW screeds then watch hm act.

Sulu? every since the man who played him for years came out of the closet I cant stop making jokes about him. (the one in the new movie)

Full-Auto
05-10-2009, 12:53 AM
LOVED IT!!!! I can't wait until we get the next installment.

Zathras
05-10-2009, 03:32 AM
LOVED IT!!!! I can't wait until we get the next installment.

Same here...in fact I plan on seeing it again with friends, in IMax this time.

Lars1701a
05-10-2009, 10:35 AM
Meh your all sell outs :D

Lars1701a
05-10-2009, 10:54 AM
Picture this: They revisit star wars and decide to fiddle with the story line in order to get a few more bucks out of it?

hazlnut
05-10-2009, 01:08 PM
Picture this: They revisit star wars and decide to fiddle with the story line in order to get a few more bucks out of it?

Leonard Nimoy, the original Spock, made an appearance and SNL last night and summed up your point of view very succinctly. :p

Bubba Dawg
05-10-2009, 01:13 PM
NO ONE ANSWERED ME but how does a 3rd year cadet become a starship capt? COME on people lets keep it somewhat bound in reality.

Lars. Dude. This isn't just any cadet. It's James T. Kirk.

Geez man. Even I knew that one. :rolleyes:

Zathras
05-10-2009, 01:23 PM
NO ONE ANSWERED ME but how does a 3rd year cadet become a starship capt?

By getting a battlefield promotion to first officer by Captain Pike as the best man for the position, then having Captain Spock being relieved of command as required by the regs....plus, as BD said, it's James T. Kirk. :D

COME on people lets keep it somewhat bound in reality.

Ummmm.....it's a movie.....about the future.....no reality there. ;)

Bubba Dawg
05-10-2009, 01:31 PM
That's right Zathras. Lars doesn't understand that Captain James T. Kirk has to have a Concealed Weapons License in every star system just so he can legally wear pants. :cool:

hazlnut
05-10-2009, 05:53 PM
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'

hazlnut
05-10-2009, 08:11 PM
Box Office Weekend: Star Trek Conquers the Universe (http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1897184,00.html) -- $76.5 Million jinxmchue 05-11-2009, 01:57 PM I'm glad I decided to read the plot at the movie spoiler websites. I'm sick and tired of alternate timelines. The whole concept has been done to death. hazlnut 05-11-2009, 02:08 PM I'm glad I decided to read the plot at the movie spoiler websites. I'm sick and tired of alternate timelines. The whole concept has been done to death. The opening weekend numbers don't seem to reflect that. Perhaps 'alternate timelines' have been overdone in an alternate universe, where this movie was sent back in time and released in 1982. But here, the people not aware of that other universe went to see this film in droves. In fact, if I could go back to Thursday night and see it again, I would put less butter on my large popcorn and ask for no ice in my coke. Hopefully, that would not alter the time-space dealio too much:);) Shannon 05-11-2009, 05:36 PM My guys are going to see this tonight. I would normally not go but movie theaters are cold so I'll be there.:D ironhorsedriver 05-11-2009, 06:35 PM I actually enjoyed it. It was entertaining. I like the old Star Trek, and agree it's in it's own league. But I went to this movie, with no pre-conceptions, and found it to be good. Zathras 05-11-2009, 08:15 PM The big surprise for me about the movie was the actress that played Spock's mother....didn't recognise who it was when I saw the movie and when I saw her name in the credits I had to go to IMDB to find out which part she played. Lars1701a 05-11-2009, 08:28 PM The big surprise for me about the movie was the actress that played Spock's mother....didn't recognise who it was when I saw the movie and when I saw her name in the credits I had to go to IMDB to find out which part she played. If I was the Director of the movie I would make sure she didnt make off with any props :D Zathras 05-11-2009, 08:43 PM If I was the Director of the movie I would make sure she didnt make off with any props :D Heh heh, if it was me, I would have asked for some of the props as part of my salary for doing the movie. I saw the special on the auction of Star Trek props and costumes back in 2006. The 6 foot model of the Enterprise D was valued at$20,000 to $30,000....it went for$567,000.

Shannon
05-11-2009, 09:21 PM
I absolutely loved the movie! It was fantastic.

NJCardFan
05-12-2009, 03:02 AM
How do the make the Enterprise on the planet? How does it escape Earths gravity?
The original plan for TOS was to have the ship land and take off from whatever planet that week's adventure was going to be from but doing that proved costly so this led to the addition to the transporter. However, it is strange that in the trailers the ship is being built on earth but in the teasers it was being built in space dock.

Lars1701a
05-12-2009, 06:38 AM
I am surrounded by star trek heathens :(

jinxmchue
05-12-2009, 12:37 PM
The big surprise for me about the movie was the actress that played Spock's mother....didn't recognise who it was when I saw the movie and when I saw her name in the credits I had to go to IMDB to find out which part she played.

Ya wanna ride her?

linda22003
05-12-2009, 12:46 PM
The big surprise for me about the movie was the actress that played Spock's mother....didn't recognise who it was when I saw the movie and when I saw her name in the credits I had to go to IMDB to find out which part she played.

So... who was it?

NJCardFan
05-12-2009, 01:34 PM
So... who was it?
Unless my eyes are going bad, it says Winona Ryder.

linda22003
05-12-2009, 01:43 PM
I looked at IMDB, but since I didn't see a character called "Spock's Mother", I couldn't guess which one it might be.

jinxmchue
05-12-2009, 01:54 PM
I looked at IMDB, but since I didn't see a character called "Spock's Mother", I couldn't guess which one it might be.

His mom's name is Amanda.

jinxmchue
05-12-2009, 02:01 PM
Unless my eyes are going bad, it says Winona Ryder.

Yes. I said that. :D

hazlnut
05-13-2009, 01:58 AM
The big surprise for me about the movie was the actress that played Spock's mother....didn't recognise who it was when I saw the movie and when I saw her name in the credits I had to go to IMDB to find out which part she played.

Re: Spock's Mom. Interesting that in the new timeline, both Spock and Kirk have lost a parent.

If and when there is a sequel--to what extent will that make the new versions of these characters different.

I don't recall Spock having a fling with Uhura in TOS -- that was interesting.

Did Spock's mom show up in TOS, I only remember her from one of the movies--IV, I think.

Zathras
05-13-2009, 03:50 AM
Did Spock's mom show up in TOS, I only remember her from one of the movies--IV, I think.

Spocks mother's name was Amanda Grayson and she did make an apperance in TOS episode "Journey to Babel, played by the actress Jane Wyatt. She was also in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home which was her last film role.

SarasotaRepub
05-13-2009, 08:16 AM
I am surrounded by star trek heathens :(

LOL!!!!:D Easy Lars. Hey, did you know they are replacing the
Enterprises Warp Drive with a Hyper-Drive Motivator in the next
movie???:confused::D

Lars1701a
05-13-2009, 09:33 AM
LOL!!!!:D Easy Lars. Hey, did you know they are replacing the
Enterprises Warp Drive with a Hyper-Drive Motivator in the next
movie???:confused::D

That reminds me, the fracking engineering section looked like a damn chemical factory. Nothing like the old one.

The bridge also didnt look even remotely like the one in the TOS cept maybe all the white walls and floors.

Shannon
05-13-2009, 10:18 AM
That reminds me, the fracking engineering section looked like a damn chemical factory. Nothing like the old one.

The bridge also didnt look even remotely like the one in the TOS cept maybe all the white walls and floors.

Who gives a shit, ya friggin geek. It was a great movie. Get a life.:p

Lars1701a
05-13-2009, 10:39 AM
Who gives a shit, ya friggin geek. It was a great movie. Get a life.:p

I beg to disagree shannon. I could give a rats ass if you or anyone else gives a "shit". So kiss my ass. :p

hazlnut
05-13-2009, 11:50 AM
LOL!!!!:D Easy Lars. Hey, did you know they are replacing the
Enterprises Warp Drive with a Hyper-Drive Motivator in the next
movie???:confused::D

No, I heard they were going to replace it with a Flux Capacitor.