PDA

View Full Version : New Star Trek Movie



Pages : [1] 2

Llama231
2009-04-21, 06:32 PM
I was highly surprised when I noticed that there was no discussion thread for the new Star trek movie, so I decided to post this.

Links:
http://www.startrekmovie.com/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_(film)

It looks O.K. to me, but not great enough to see in theaters.

Discussion time now, yes?

Athaniar
2009-04-22, 05:13 AM
As a Trekkie, it is my obligation to see the movie, and I will do so at the first opportunity. Alternate timeline is interesting, but really, a DS9 or Voyager film would have been more interesting.

kamikasei
2009-04-22, 05:27 AM
Well, it's not properly out yet (and won't be out where I am until the end of May; damn your American hides!). I will go see it when it comes out. Until I see it, I'm carefully avoiding learning too much about it or building up my expectations too far in either direction. I'm worried about it on several points, but I've also been hearing good things and many aspects of what I've seen are promising and/or impressive.

So I'll wait, and see, and hopefully squee more than I nerdrage.

toasty
2009-04-22, 05:43 AM
but really, a DS9 or Voyager film would have been more interesting.

Agreed. A thousand times agreed.

I was too young for the orignal (born in '91), and I completely loved DS9.

Of course, while Voyager wasn't nearly as good as DS9 or TNG, it did have its moments.

I'll probably end up seeing the movie, especially as everyone (except my sister, who HATES TNG and the Orignal) are huge fans.

Selrahc
2009-04-22, 06:03 AM
As a Trekkie, it is my obligation to see the movie, and I will do so at the first opportunity. Alternate timeline is interesting, but really, a DS9 or Voyager film would have been more interesting.

Voyager really ran its course. The crew got home, end of story.

DS9 might have a bit more mileage. I'd certainly be interested in seeing the return of Sisko, but that was about the only thing that didn't get wrapped up. The dominion was defeated, the Pah Wraiths were caged... all the enemies got neatly wrapped up. What is there left to do with the station?

The main problem is that both the series ended pretty conclusively. TNG and the original series didn't, which was why they were able to make movies.

WinterSolstice
2009-04-22, 06:17 AM
I missed the bus concerning Star Trek. This movie will probably be my first real introduction to it. I hope they stay true to what made so many people enjoy it.

Joran
2009-04-22, 10:25 AM
Based on the trailer, I'm not sure why Kirk decided to dump his car into a canyon. Is it supposed to show that he's reckless and a daredevil or just an idiot?

I'm somewhat worried that they're pursuing the wrong direction with Star Trek. They tried to go back to the "roots" with Star Trek: Enterprise, and it just failed.

The best Star Trek series is probably Deep Space Nine, which broke all of the rules of Star Trek. Flawed, morally ambigious characters, story arcs rather than just episodic episodes, and less exploring, more staying in one place. This allowed them to flesh out a bunch of interesting characters and civilizations and generally make great storylines.

There is a place for the type of optimism and sense of adventure that Star Trek brings, especially with everything else going darker and grittier, but I don't think going back and trying with a new Kirk, Spock, and McCoy is the answer. They need to look forward and not backward.

chiasaur11
2009-04-22, 10:33 AM
Based on the trailer, I'm not sure why Kirk decided to dump his car into a canyon. Is it supposed to show that he's reckless and a daredevil or just an idiot?


Since it's Kirk, I'm going with both.

The Vorpal Tribble
2009-04-22, 11:11 AM
I have to say that though the series never did it for me, almost all the Original series movies were awesome. I'm hoping they do the same here, but from what I can tell it's going the way of every Star Trek movie since after the Original, and that's do away with story and simply add on special effects and battles until you forget there is no real story. Oh, and make sure every character becomes a parody/paragon of themselves.

Winterwind
2009-04-22, 11:24 AM
I used to watch Star Trek all the time as a kid, but ever since I learnt what good writing means and saw other series, that did it better, I have grown extremely disillusioned with it. The original series is often rather objectionable from a modern moral point of view (mostly in its presentation of women), but at least it retains a certain charm, whereas TNG is so overloaded with flawless paragon characters and technobabble deus ex machina solutions I don't even consider it watchable anymore. Same goes for Voyager; I haven't seen DS9 in ages, though I'm given to understand it might be the one Star Trek series I might actually enjoy, and by the time Enterprise came out I had long given up on the franchise.

Even so, I'm rather shocked to see how non-interested I have grown about Star Trek. I'm pretty sure I would have laughed if anybody had told me as a kid I would ever say that... but I don't think I care about a new Star Trek movie, and more likely than not am not going to watch it (at least not until it runs in television). :smalleek:

FatJose
2009-04-22, 11:27 AM
I like this movie's serious take on the original series. Looking at the old Kirk/Spock show, it isn't at all similar to the later series. Star Trek was campy and fun in that So bad it's good kind of way. After that the series was made incredibly serious with Next Generation and the other shows. This revamp has me very interested and I'm not at all a trekker, though I was a big fan of Voyager.

kamikasei
2009-04-22, 12:36 PM
Based on the trailer, I'm not sure why Kirk decided to dump his car into a canyon. Is it supposed to show that he's reckless and a daredevil or just an idiot?

I'm guessing it's his father's car, and he's being a rebellious reckless idiot.

Muz
2009-04-22, 04:09 PM
Maybe that was the only way to get it up to 88 miles per hour? :smallwink:

FatJose
2009-04-22, 04:45 PM
Based on the trailer, I'm not sure why Kirk decided to dump his car into a canyon. Is it supposed to show that he's reckless and a daredevil or just an idiot?


Maybe he's playing a holovid game.

Starscream
2009-04-22, 07:11 PM
I'm sure I'll see it. I'm not what you'd call a Trekkie (more into Doctor Who), but I have watched and enjoyed every series, and most of the movies.

As for what we've seen so far, I'm going to throw my name on the "cautiously hopeful" pile. I'm sure a true fan would have immediately noticed that the uniforms have the wrong thread-count and the ceiling is an inch too high or something, but as a casual fan the only observation I have is that it "feels" like Star Trek in a way Enterprise never did.

I agree a Voyager or DS9 movie would have been nice as well. But those shows never had the universal love of the masses that TNG and the original series got. Seeing as Trek films aren't usually huge blockbusters anyway, I can understand them trying to take it in a new direction.

My only fear is what happens if this movie is too successful. I wouldn't put it past them to start a new "original series" based on it, and thus begin the retcon wars.

Linkavitch
2009-04-22, 08:36 PM
It looks okay, but I have a few problems with the cast. (I mean Sylar as Spock? Yeah, he looks like a Spock, but when I see the movie I'm constantly going to be hearing 'tick-tock' and expecting him to start pointing at peoples foreheads.)
The new Kirk they have looks pretty good, but his hair needs to be lighter,
I didn't even recognize McCoy, my Mom (the original trekkie in the family) had to point him out.


On a side note, anyone know why 'okay' is supposed to be spelled wrong?

Lamech
2009-04-22, 08:54 PM
It has Sylar in it. That pretty much means it is going to be awesome. They'll at least get the entire heroes fan-base. (And I'm sure at some points I will be confused by the lack of Sylar killing people.):smallwink:

chiasaur11
2009-04-22, 09:01 PM
It has Detective Nick Angel in it. That pretty much means it is going to be awesome. They'll at least get the entire right thinking population of the world, assuming it is any good at all. (And I'm sure at some points I will be confused by the lack of Shawn killing zombies.):smallwink:

I fixed it for you.

Joran
2009-04-23, 10:48 AM
The original series is often rather objectionable from a modern moral point of view (mostly in its presentation of women), but at least it retains a certain charm, whereas TNG is so overloaded with flawless paragon characters and technobabble deus ex machina solutions I don't even consider it watchable anymore. Same goes for Voyager; I haven't seen DS9 in ages, though I'm given to understand it might be the one Star Trek series I might actually enjoy, and by the time Enterprise came out I had long given up on the franchise.


Deep Space Nine definitely would be your cup of tea. Personally, I did like Voyager, even though I would have made it a little more darker. Sticking by your principles is a little easier when your ship never seems to have any permanent damage. Basically, think Battlestar Galactica, one ship, alone in the dark.


I'm hoping they do the same here, but from what I can tell it's going the way of every Star Trek movie since after the Original, and that's do away with story and simply add on special effects and battles until you forget there is no real story. Oh, and make sure every character becomes a parody/paragon of themselves.

You liked Star Trek 1 and 5?! Woah. Star Trek 4, the crew basically played parodies of themselves and it was still hilarious. The best TNG movie was First Contact, and it was more of a straightforward action movie, with some morals thrown in.

Winterwind
2009-04-23, 11:26 AM
Deep Space Nine definitely would be your cup of tea. I imagine it might; the only problem is, I think I couldn't help comparing it with Babylon 5 all the time, and in that comparison, it would still lose. That much I do remember of it.


Personally, I did like Voyager, even though I would have made it a little more darker. Sticking by your principles is a little easier when your ship never seems to have any permanent damage. Basically, think Battlestar Galactica, one ship, alone in the dark.Plus technobabble, deus ex machina solutions and human glorification*1, minus meaningful conflict and interaction between characters, multiple interweaving plots, exploration of complex moral and philosophical themes and an ongoing storyline.


*1 That's one of my biggest issues with Star Trek in all of its appearances - it is extremely hypocritical in its approach to alien races. Superficially, it pretends to preach tolerance and embracing the different... but it invariably keeps presenting human culture, civilization, emotions and morality as superior to everything else. Aliens that do not perfectly adhere to all of these are patronized as being naive and foolish at best, demonized as evil to be fought and either reformed or destroyed at worst. Quite sad for something that considers itself science fiction (and thus should be expected to truly embrace and explore the unknown and unusual), really.

Joran
2009-04-23, 12:58 PM
*1 That's one of my biggest issues with Star Trek in all of its appearances - it is extremely hypocritical in its approach to alien races. Superficially, it pretends to preach tolerance and embracing the different... but it invariably keeps presenting human culture, civilization, emotions and morality as superior to everything else. Aliens that do not perfectly adhere to all of these are patronized as being naive and foolish at best, demonized as evil to be fought and either reformed or destroyed at worst. Quite sad for something that considers itself science fiction (and thus should be expected to truly embrace and explore the unknown and unusual), really.

Can you cite any examples? (Other than the Ferengi, but they were always a joke race anyway)

I'm going to really disagree with you here. Star Trek tends to treat alien cultures with respect. On each ship, in each iteration, there is at least one alien represented, and throw in Data and the Doctor, different technologies represented. Full-fledged cultures like the Klingon one (TNG, DS9), Dominion (DS9), Vidiian (Voy), Bajoran (DS9) are treated with respect. Usually, if the Federation interferes with another culture, it tends to be conveyed as a bad thing and a breach of their ethics.

The Federation is definitely portrayed as sanctimonious and holier than thou, but the series also do explore the hypocrises in that as well as tackling some pretty heavy moral issues.

Tyrant
2009-04-23, 01:48 PM
*1 That's one of my biggest issues with Star Trek in all of its appearances - it is extremely hypocritical in its approach to alien races. Superficially, it pretends to preach tolerance and embracing the different... but it invariably keeps presenting human culture, civilization, emotions and morality as superior to everything else. Aliens that do not perfectly adhere to all of these are patronized as being naive and foolish at best, demonized as evil to be fought and either reformed or destroyed at worst. Quite sad for something that considers itself science fiction (and thus should be expected to truly embrace and explore the unknown and unusual), really.
I can somewhat see what you are saying with some of the races. However, the Vulcans for instance (in what I saw of the assorted shows anyway) were never looked at as inferior. Some people criticised them for being cold and emotionless, but others considered them very wise and definately worth listening to. DS9 primarily dealt with the Bajorans, the Cardassians, and the Dominion. From what I saw, no one seriously considered them lesser. They considered the Cardassians cruel for their occupation of Bajor and their general methods, but even by current standards they were rightly considered cruel. Even without considering that, is it that far fetched for a show made by humans for humans to be human centric?

As to Trek as a whole, based on what I have seen you write here I also believe you would like DS9. Babylon 5 had the more epic plot so don't try to compare them. DS9 has great characters and true moral gray areas for the Federation that aren't always solved in some last minute, technobabble way that allows everyone to walk away with a clear conscience. It also shows the Federation has a dark side that exists to maintain the Federation at all costs. Another nice feature is the diversity in the main characters. Amongst them are a Bajoran (with others making numerous appearances), a changeling (again, with several others makng several appearances later on), a few Ferengi (that aren't always treated as a joke), a Cardassian who is definately one of the better characters on the show if not the best, a Klingon once Worf shows up (which naturally brings in other Klingons from time to time), a Trill (for most purposes she may as well have been human), and of course several humans. The primary Cardassian and Dominion villains and their primary lackeys were all characters with several appareances. Even though it had several humans, it would better be described as humans in the middle of an alien crossroads instead of the occasional alien aboard human ships like the other shows. In my opinion (take it for what you will) DS9 was the best of the Trek series thus far.

As for the movie, I am in the cautiously optimistic camp as well. Like the other movies, it seems to be taking the action route (which is fine for a movie). I'll have to see it for myself (and I do plan on watching it in the theaters) to really judge.

Llama231
2009-04-23, 06:18 PM
On a side note, anyone know why 'okay' is supposed to be spelled wrong?

Pronounced oh-kee, it is a method of bringing up a topic or replacing okay when it gets boring. Also short for okey-dokie, and similar to the Japanese word for big.

JaxGaret
2009-04-23, 07:08 PM
That's one of my biggest issues with Star Trek in all of its appearances - it is extremely hypocritical in its approach to alien races. Superficially, it pretends to preach tolerance and embracing the different... but it invariably keeps presenting human culture, civilization, emotions and morality as superior to everything else. Aliens that do not perfectly adhere to all of these are patronized as being naive and foolish at best, demonized as evil to be fought and either reformed or destroyed at worst. Quite sad for something that considers itself science fiction (and thus should be expected to truly embrace and explore the unknown and unusual), really.

That's not the impression that I got at all. At least not in TNG/DS9. They show a lot of respect to other cultures, when that respect was due, of course. And they would show respect for certain aspects of other cultures (Klingon honor and tenacity, Ferengi fiscal ingenuity, Cardassian's mastery of intrigue, etc.), even as they decried other aspects of that culture that were less admirable.

Also, the Federation isn't just The Human Empire. It's a Federation with lots of constituent members (yes, I know, I'm captain obvious). A lot of its ideals are taken from the Vulcans (and perhaps other cultures) as well as the Humans.

Winterwind
2009-04-23, 07:48 PM
I think there is a misunderstanding here. I wasn't speaking so much about the attitude the Federation shows towards other races - that is indeed rather respectful - as of the attitude of the show and its makers itself.

Yes, the Federation has its primary directive to not interfere with other races. That comes up every few TNG episodes, invariably when the question is whether the Enterprise crew should adhere to the primary directive or break it because the race in question either has problems it is (of course) not able to solve on its own, or because the race has traditions, laws or other aspects that are (of course) presented as so abominable and intolerable that the Enterprise crew feels compelled to act against them. I remember being irritated by how much this was re-used even back then when I wouldn't miss a single Star Trek episode and considered myself a Trekkie.

Worse, though, is how major differences between other races and humans are played. The Vulcan lack of emotions? Always used for either comedy or to prove how humans are superior to Vulcans, because they are able to solve problems thanks to them that the Vulcans are unable to (a fairly frequent theme in the original series in particular).

Most races are stuck in a state of irrationality when it comes to their traditions, beliefs or whatever - be it a century long vendetta against their enemies or a warlike or otherwise harmful way of solving problems, they adhere to it without reflection until the humans talk them out of it.

The worst offender in my eyes are the Borg though - yes, forceful assimilation of everything that gets into their way is fairly evil, but look at what arguments are made against them in the end, especially in discussions between Janeway and Seven-of-Nine - Janeway is not arguing that the Borg are wrong because they leave their members no free choice, she is always making the argument that individuality itself is inherently better than being part of a hive mind, that a hive mind is automatically a worse state for a race to be in than individuals.

Don't get me wrong - I like my emotions and my individuality just fine. However, to assume this to be an inherently superior state for every imaginable species (and even beyond, for every individual from every species; there might well be humans who would prefer the hivemind state!) is incredibly narrow-minded and completely contrary to Star Trek's stated point of respect and tolerance for the different and unknown.

Imagine the (purely hypothetical) situation that we would encounter a race with a hivemind in reality. Now consider, just how racist (more accurately, speciecist, but let's not discuss semantics) and offensive towards them would the arguments made against the Borg be?


@Tyrant: Actually, I used to watch DS9 regularly (like all Star Trek shows - I only grew disillusioned with it somewhere during Voyager). It must be some thirteen years ago or so, though, and when I watched it I had liked it - but so I had liked TNG, too, and watching TNG now has led me to believe it is so bad it's unwatchable. However, I will trust your judgement; if I get an opportunity to watch DS9 (I rarely watch TV at all lately), I shall do so. :smallsmile:

Tyrant
2009-04-23, 08:33 PM
Most races are stuck in a state of irrationality when it comes to their traditions, beliefs or whatever - be it a century long vendetta against their enemies or a warlike or otherwise harmful way of solving problems, they adhere to it without reflection until the humans talk them out of it.
I think I see what you are saying here. I never really looked at it that way. I always took those types of groups to be metaphors for real world problems that really do exist like the centuries long vendetta or doing things in an obviously destructive way. And I took the Federation to be the ideal of what humans could be if we tried. So I guess if anything I took it as talking down about our darker tendencies. However, I can see what you are saying that if we take it at face value that we are supposed to believe the humans are on the side of right 90%+ "just because". Looking at it like that I can see where you would see at as non stop human centric.

In light of that, I still stand by my assesment of DS9. It has a little of what you are talking about. However, the bulk of it is character driven with development. A number of main characters are not part of the army of white knights that apparently staff the Enterprise. If I recall correctly, by the end the captain has somewhat embraced the local religion (though their gods were verifiably real) as well. The talking down about the dominion is because the options are be slaves or die. The shapeshifters are racist (possibly not the right term) and believe the "solids" are naturally inferior so therefore they must serve or die. Their soldiers are viewed as expendable and they treat them as such. They're evil from our perspective but it never got to the level of mustache twirling while laughing like a maniac.

@Tyrant: Actually, I used to watch DS9 regularly (like all Star Trek shows - I only grew disillusioned with it somewhere during Voyager). It must be some thirteen years ago or so, though, and when I watched it I had liked it - but so I had liked TNG, too, and watching TNG now has led me to believe it is so bad it's unwatchable. However, I will trust your judgement; if I get an opportunity to watch DS9 (I rarely watch TV at all lately), I shall do so. :smallsmile:
I do have one bit of follow up advice. If you watch it, you need to stick with it until the Dominion War. There are plenty of good characters before that point that will hopefully keep you watching, but that's where the show becomes great and not just good. Once it starts it is the primary plot up until the finale. It is the main motivator for a number of the moral gray areas with no easy answers and no last minute techno babble dues ex machina moments. The one technobabble moment I recall was actually a very smart use of a combination of replicator and cloaking technologies that I was suprised they came up with. It's also what motivates the Federation's shadow agency to start taking action. As a side note, if you like the space battles this show was able to capitalise on the switch to CGI to have some truly massive battles towards the end of the war that feature very dynamic movements that weren't possible with the models.

Turcano
2009-04-23, 08:51 PM
Actually, I used to watch DS9 regularly (like all Star Trek shows - I only grew disillusioned with it somewhere during Voyager). It must be some thirteen years ago or so, though, and when I watched it I had liked it - but so I had liked TNG, too, and watching TNG now has led me to believe it is so bad it's unwatchable. However, I will trust your judgement; if I get an opportunity to watch DS9 (I rarely watch TV at all lately), I shall do so. :smallsmile:

I'm in pretty much the same boat as you are, and after re-watching DS9 on DVD about a year or so ago, I can attest that it stands the test of time much better than TNG did.

Anyway, it seems that the Star Trek franchise has steadily begun to run out of ideas since near the beginning of Voyager. Which doesn't make any sense, really; if you want to mix it up you could, I don't know, make a movie/miniseries that didn't focus on the Federation. I know there are a lot of people who would like to see a Klingon-centric work, and there are dozens of cultures that would work as well.

Personally (and I know that the original actors are too old and/or dead to do this), I would give anything to see a movie adaptation of How Much For Just The Planet?

Winterwind
2009-04-24, 09:05 AM
Alright, then; when I have more time, I will consider getting DS9 on DVD. :smallsmile:
And, yes, I do recall the start of the Dominion War was great indeed.

Joran
2009-04-24, 11:26 AM
The worst offender in my eyes are the Borg though - yes, forceful assimilation of everything that gets into their way is fairly evil, but look at what arguments are made against them in the end, especially in discussions between Janeway and Seven-of-Nine - Janeway is not arguing that the Borg are wrong because they leave their members no free choice, she is always making the argument that individuality itself is inherently better than being part of a hive mind, that a hive mind is automatically a worse state for a race to be in than individuals.

Don't get me wrong - I like my emotions and my individuality just fine. However, to assume this to be an inherently superior state for every imaginable species (and even beyond, for every individual from every species; there might well be humans who would prefer the hivemind state!) is incredibly narrow-minded and completely contrary to Star Trek's stated point of respect and tolerance for the different and unknown.

Imagine the (purely hypothetical) situation that we would encounter a race with a hivemind in reality. Now consider, just how racist (more accurately, speciecist, but let's not discuss semantics) and offensive towards them would the arguments made against the Borg be?


I'm confused. Are you annoyed that Janeway doesn't like the Borg? As a human, especially one raised in a society where individuality and self-actualization are immense virtues, it makes sense for her to act this way. Just like it makes sense of Vulcans to argue that logic is superior, or Klingons to argue that honor is most important, or Ferengi to argue that profit is the greatest good.


Worse, though, is how major differences between other races and humans are played. The Vulcan lack of emotions? Always used for either comedy or to prove how humans are superior to Vulcans, because they are able to solve problems thanks to them that the Vulcans are unable to (a fairly frequent theme in the original series in particular).

If I remember correctly, Spock gave as good as he got. He jested with McCoy multiple times; it was a fun dynamic and probably what made the show. Spock is also played pretty seriously in Star Trek 2 and made the logical, non-emotional decision at the end.

GoC
2009-04-24, 11:33 AM
*snip*

This man speaks the truth!


Worse, though, is how major differences between other races and humans are played. The Vulcan lack of emotions? Always used for either comedy or to prove how humans are superior to Vulcans, because they are able to solve problems thanks to them that the Vulcans are unable to (a fairly frequent theme in the original series in particular).
Which makes no sense btw.


Their soldiers are viewed as expendable and they treat them as such.
They are expendable. The reason a life has value is because it is unique and irreplacable and it's destruction would cause immense sadness to those around it.
The individual Jem-Hadar is not unique, it's life is virtually identical to that of 1000 others. Noone will mourn it's passing.


I recall was actually a very smart use of a combination of replicator and cloaking technologies that I was suprised they came up with.
That was actually the stupidest moment in the series. It removed the main limits on replicator technology and left you wondering why the heck the Federation hasn't launched a series of Von Newmann probes and created fleets of a billion warships?

Joran
2009-04-24, 12:32 PM
They are expendable. The reason a life has value is because it is unique and irreplacable and it's destruction would cause immense sadness to those around it.
The individual Jem-Hadar is not unique, it's life is virtually identical to that of 1000 others. Noone will mourn it's passing.

I think Deep Space Nine actually did a good job of showing individual Jem'Hadar. There was the Jem'Hadar child, a couple Jem'Hadar with honor (the one who killed Weyoun for questioning his loyalty, the one who refused to kill Worf, the one who went into a trap knowing it was a trap), and a rebel Jem'Hadar (the one who was immune to ketracell white) off the top of my head. A lot of times they are faceless mooks, but there are a few that have developed beyond the usual super soldier.



That was actually the stupidest moment in the series. It removed the main limits on replicator technology and left you wondering why the heck the Federation hasn't launched a series of Von Newmann probes and created fleets of a billion warships?

Well, Star Trek has a history of not always thinking through the technology. Another episode had a sniper rifle that could see through walls and would teleport bullets. Just think about the ramifications for privacy of an easy way to look through walls. Never mind the timeship that could erase anything from time and was nigh-invulnerable.

kamikasei
2009-04-24, 01:09 PM
the one who refused to kill Worf, the one who went into a trap knowing it was a trap

Those guys both got such excellent lines.

Horatio@Bridge
2009-04-24, 03:05 PM
I imagine it might; the only problem is, I think I couldn't help comparing it with Babylon 5 all the time, and in that comparison, it would still lose. That much I do remember of it.

As a fan of both Babylon 5 and DS9, I'd recommend seeing them both. If you saw the first few seasons of DS9 you might have come away with a bad opinion of it, but the show really gets its stride around season 4. Oddly, this was about the same time that a certain writer left to supervise Voyager. >.>

If nothing else, you absolutely have to see "In the Pale Moonlight."

Joran
2009-04-24, 03:42 PM
As a fan of both Babylon 5 and DS9, I'd recommend seeing them both. If you saw the first few seasons of DS9 you might have come away with a bad opinion of it, but the show really gets its stride around season 4. Oddly, this was about the same time that a certain writer left to supervise Voyager. >.>

If nothing else, you absolutely have to see "In the Pale Moonlight."

Which writer?

There are a couple great episodes even early on in DS9. Duet, the accused Cardassian war criminal and The Wire, where we get a lot of Garak are seasons 1 and 2.

Athaniar
2009-04-24, 04:00 PM
DS9 and Babylon 5 are both two of my favorite series. Watch them both. They are great.

Dervag
2009-04-24, 04:21 PM
I think Winterwind has an excellent point. Star Trek has trouble with the implied contradiction between "inclusive future for everyone with lots of tolerance" and "Ah, look at how quaint all those irrational aliens are for not adopting our social model. See how they would be mired in savagery if not for our enlightening influence? We must be careful not to touch these cultures for fear of damaging them!"


Which makes no sense btw.That depends on what the Vulcans really do inside their heads. The fact that the way the Vulcans we see think is called "logic," or translates into English as "logic," does not mean that Vulcans are intellectual superiors of humans. Among other things, it is strongly implied that rather than being emotionless by nature, Vulcans make a deliberate effort to suppress emotion through meditation and mental discipline. On the one hand, this might make them better at considering some situations dispassionately and coming up with a ruthlessly "right" answer. On the other, it could also give them a head full of mental complexes that cripple their ability to handle some kinds of situations.

In which case there could easily be situations where a human would have no trouble picking an answer (a right answer?), but a Vulcan would be paralyzed.


They are expendable. The reason a life has value is because it is unique and irreplacable and it's destruction would cause immense sadness to those around it. [goes on to say that this doesn't apply to Jem-HadarThat is a specific philosophical perspective, not a universally obvious fact. There are moral systems in which making 1000 copies of one person does not make any of the copies any less valuable, significant, or real than the original was.


That was actually the stupidest moment in the series. It removed the main limits on replicator technology and left you wondering why the heck the Federation hasn't launched a series of Von Newmann probes and created fleets of a billion warships?It's not hard to come up with answers to that. The most notable reasons might be:
-Fear of the effects of replicator malfunctions. Normal replicator technology is not dangerous because it can't create enormous numbers of anything without a specific order to do so, and because it doesn't go searching for raw materials to make copies with. Von Neumann machines do.
-Human factors. Federation ships are typically designed to require crews, with good reason- the Federation has already had at least one disastrous experience with a pure AI-controlled ship. As in "lost a Constitution-class with all hands" disastrous. But there's no point in building a billion ships if you're not prepared to train a billion crews.
-Size limits. A practical limit on the maximum mass that can be replicated in one go is a sharp limit on how fast you could build vast replicated warfleets.

bladedSmoke
2009-04-24, 06:59 PM
I'm just going to go see it because of Sylar & Simon Pegg.

Yes, I know, I'm a Philistine. :smallbiggrin:

Swordguy
2009-04-24, 09:12 PM
So...was I the only person who liked Enterprise? Discounting about the first season (which I do for pretty much ANY show, since the actors are still getting to know their characters) I rather enjoyed it. I'm aware that it did all sorts of unholy things to continuity, but I don't care - the stories they were told were fun and ST has never had continuity as its strong point anyway. I considered the ST:E series to effectively be a reboot of canon in any case. Viewed through that lens, so the obsessive types can unbunch their panties, I put the last two seasons of ST:E just behind seasons 4-5 of ST:TNG and the Dominion War story arc in the "best Trek" category.

I felt that Archer had a good balance between James "I sleep with and/or shoot it" Kirk, and Jean-luc "let's talk about our feelings over a cup of Earl Gray, hot" Picard. And while the Temporal Cold War thing got old and, like all Time Travel plots, made for messy bookkeeping (I was half expecting Archer to be his own grandfather), the third and fourth season had a pleasant and irreverent spirit to them. The Mirror Universe episodes are, I thought, easily in the top 10 ST episodes of all time. Yet all I see on the 'net is "Enterprise was horrible and every involved should be shot in the face for daring to participate". What gives?

(For the record, the series finale was a slap in the face. The cast planned to refuse to film it, and I echo the words of Jolene Baylock...the finale was "appalling". I pin this one entirely on Berman & Braga, and it's telling that I can't find ANY positive feedback on the episode, from cast, crew, of fans, other than that B&B themselves provided.)

SolkaTruesilver
2009-04-25, 02:10 AM
So...was I the only person who liked Enterprise? Discounting about the first season (which I do for pretty much ANY show, since the actors are still getting to know their characters) I rather enjoyed it. I'm aware that it did all sorts of unholy things to continuity, but I don't care - the stories they were told were fun and ST has never had continuity as its strong point anyway. I considered the ST:E series to effectively be a reboot of canon in any case. Viewed through that lens, so the obsessive types can unbunch their panties, I put the last two seasons of ST:E just behind seasons 4-5 of ST:TNG and the Dominion War story arc in the "best Trek" category.

I felt that Archer had a good balance between James "I sleep with and/or shoot it" Kirk, and Jean-luc "let's talk about our feelings over a cup of Earl Gray, hot" Picard. And while the Temporal Cold War thing got old and, like all Time Travel plots, made for messy bookkeeping (I was half expecting Archer to be his own grandfather), the third and fourth season had a pleasant and irreverent spirit to them. The Mirror Universe episodes are, I thought, easily in the top 10 ST episodes of all time. Yet all I see on the 'net is "Enterprise was horrible and every involved should be shot in the face for daring to participate". What gives?

(For the record, the series finale was a slap in the face. The cast planned to refuse to film it, and I echo the words of Jolene Baylock...the finale was "appalling". I pin this one entirely on Berman & Braga, and it's telling that I can't find ANY positive feedback on the episode, from cast, crew, of fans, other than that B&B themselves provided.)

I would have been happier at Enterprise if it had ended after season 2 or 3. That way, I wouldn't have given a **** if they had been cancelled or not.

But NOO, they had the indecency of producing one of the best Star Trek season ever made (the concentration of awesome in this season is higher even than Deep Space Nine's) AND cancel.

Season 3 was okay. The first 2 seasons weren't groundbreaking. A few episodes wreaked a lot of elements (but the acting was good).

I have to say, I loved the realism of the MACO's combat tactic when moving around the ship. Much more intelligent than Riker&Worf's trawl in the hallways in "Nemesis", when they don't even have their phaser raised when they meet "accidently" the boarding party.

averagejoe
2009-04-25, 02:52 AM
So...was I the only person who liked Enterprise? Discounting about the first season (which I do for pretty much ANY show, since the actors are still getting to know their characters) I rather enjoyed it. I'm aware that it did all sorts of unholy things to continuity, but I don't care - the stories they were told were fun and ST has never had continuity as its strong point anyway. I considered the ST:E series to effectively be a reboot of canon in any case. Viewed through that lens, so the obsessive types can unbunch their panties, I put the last two seasons of ST:E just behind seasons 4-5 of ST:TNG and the Dominion War story arc in the "best Trek" category.

I felt that Archer had a good balance between James "I sleep with and/or shoot it" Kirk, and Jean-luc "let's talk about our feelings over a cup of Earl Gray, hot" Picard. And while the Temporal Cold War thing got old and, like all Time Travel plots, made for messy bookkeeping (I was half expecting Archer to be his own grandfather), the third and fourth season had a pleasant and irreverent spirit to them. The Mirror Universe episodes are, I thought, easily in the top 10 ST episodes of all time. Yet all I see on the 'net is "Enterprise was horrible and every involved should be shot in the face for daring to participate". What gives?

(For the record, the series finale was a slap in the face. The cast planned to refuse to film it, and I echo the words of Jolene Baylock...the finale was "appalling". I pin this one entirely on Berman & Braga, and it's telling that I can't find ANY positive feedback on the episode, from cast, crew, of fans, other than that B&B themselves provided.)

It's possible you're right. Season one was bad enough that I never really watched past that, and I really have no inclination to do so. I'd need a very high recommendation indeed to delve back into the sheer stupidity that marked Enterprise plots.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-04-25, 02:58 AM
It's possible you're right. Season one was bad enough that I never really watched past that, and I really have no inclination to do so. I'd need a very high recommendation indeed to delve back into the sheer stupidity that marked Enterprise plots.

Stick to season 4, and cry.

the Vulcan Civil War Arc, the Augment Arc, the Klingon Mutagenic Virus Arc, the Mirror Universe Arc..

Awesome

Graybacca
2009-04-25, 08:22 AM
Stick to season 4, and cry.

the Vulcan Civil War Arc, the Augment Arc, the Klingon Mutagenic Virus Arc, the Mirror Universe Arc..

Awesome

i totally agree with you here, i thought that this season lone should have granted them a one year reprieve on the cancelling.

as for the new move I'm hopefully optimistic.

Winterwind
2009-04-25, 10:53 AM
I'm confused. Are you annoyed that Janeway doesn't like the Borg? As a human, especially one raised in a society where individuality and self-actualization are immense virtues, it makes sense for her to act this way. Just like it makes sense of Vulcans to argue that logic is superior, or Klingons to argue that honor is most important, or Ferengi to argue that profit is the greatest good.Yes, Janeway not liking the Borg is perfectly sensible, but it's painfully obvious we are meant to agree with her. Just like the constant derision against the hive mind. No, of course the Borg cannot be creative, can only gain new insights by assimilation. Yes, of course humans outsmart Borg at every step. Etc., etc. As I said, I don't mind the attitudes of the characters in the show, it's the attitudes of the writers that annoy me.


So...was I the only person who liked Enterprise?I watched the first three or four episodes, concluded it was more of the same stuff I had already seen in TNG and Voyager, and stopped watching. I was a bit short on time back then, or else I might have given it a bit more of a chance (I was already of pretty much the same opinion about TNG and Voyager as I am now, but I still prefer to give something a bit time to see whether it is good or not usually).
I regretted it a bit, after hearing the latter seasons had some fairly epic and well done plots, but it was too late by then. Besides, I can do only so many things at once. :smallwink:

Tyrant
2009-04-25, 09:29 PM
They are expendable. The reason a life has value is because it is unique and irreplacable and it's destruction would cause immense sadness to those around it.
The individual Jem-Hadar is not unique, it's life is virtually identical to that of 1000 others. Noone will mourn it's passing.
My point was that they intentionally created (or modified, it's been a while since I have seen the episodes) an intelligent race (that they had be naturally addited to a drug they manufacture) that can think and reason for the sole purpose of using them as cannon fodder. From our present day perspective (much less the future "enlightened" perspective) this is an evil act. I should have elaborated. They also killed their smarter soldiers (Weyoun) when they screwed up and they actually had personality. Just because you can make more doesn't mean throwing them away without a second thought isn't what most people would view as evil.

That was actually the stupidest moment in the series. It removed the main limits on replicator technology and left you wondering why the heck the Federation hasn't launched a series of Von Newmann probes and created fleets of a billion warships?
As someone else already mentioned, do they even have the manpower to crew anywhere near that number of ships? They clearly don't have great AI as they still can't replicate Data and seem to continue to marvel at his existence. So, I don't believe they could easily crew the ships with some type of AI. Also, perhaps there are some unknown limits on the replicators. A self replicating mine probably isn't as complicated as a full starship (if I had to guess). I suppose the real question is why the Dominion doesn't do that (I assume they don't) because they seem to be able to churn out soldiers endlessly. I'm not saying it's perfect. I am saying it was nice to see them actually use the technology they have in a halfway intelligent way for once instead of ignoring it.

Dervag
2009-04-25, 10:37 PM
As someone else already mentioned, do they even have the manpower to crew anywhere near that number of ships? They clearly don't have great AI as they still can't replicate Data and seem to continue to marvel at his existence. So, I don't believe they could easily crew the ships with some type of AI.That was me.

The Federation can create a tactical AI capable of running a warship in battle, and of doing it well. That was first done in the Original Series era, during the M5 incident. And Enterprise wasn't even designed to be controlled by an AI; the M5 computer was a plug-in module!

But then M5 went ape and blew up a Constitution-class starship with all hands during the proof-of-concept training exercise.

Given that little bit of history, and given the many other cases in which Star Trek AI went crazy (on holodecks, on androids, on holograms), we can draw some pretty strong conclusions. I think it's safe to say that in Star Trek, a stable and reliable human-level AI is the exception and not the rule. Under the circumstances, it's not surprising that the Federation is reluctant to build entirely robot warships.

Robot mines are one thing; they have a limited ability to pose a threat to anything outside their engagement zone. Warp-capable robot battleships are another matter entirely.

The Extinguisher
2009-04-25, 10:52 PM
Fun fact:

I got tickets to a pre-screening :smallbiggrin:

chiasaur11
2009-04-25, 11:01 PM
Fun fact:

I got tickets to a pre-screening :smallbiggrin:

Fun fact:

I hate you now.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-04-26, 01:14 AM
Fun fact:

I hate you now.

Let's find a way to ban him from this forum. It's the only proper punishment...

Joran
2009-04-26, 04:53 PM
So...was I the only person who liked Enterprise? Discounting about the first season (which I do for pretty much ANY show, since the actors are still getting to know their characters) I rather enjoyed it.

Guilty as charged. I gave it two seasons, wasn't impressed and gave up on it. My wife, who was also a big Star Trek fan, hates Scott Bacula with a passion that burn and gave up somewhere in middle of season 1.

I think somewhere in the middle Battlestar Galactica started up and we shifted. I think I'll try to get back to Enterprise, my friend who never gave up hope did say it got better, but there is only so much room on the Netflix queue.

Llama231
2009-04-27, 05:57 PM
Fun fact:

I got tickets to a pre-screening :smallbiggrin:

No, this is the sort of situation in which we need large amounts of butter.

Logic
2009-04-27, 06:38 PM
I like the trailer, and plan on seeing the new movie at a midnight showing. IT will be the first midnight showing I have ever attended, if that tells you anything.

As for the new film being canon or not, there is a comic book tie-in that explains a few things. Damn those pesky time travellers!

snoopy13a
2009-04-27, 07:05 PM
The trailer seems off to me. I really can't put a finger on it but something about it turns me off. Perhaps it is because it seems too busy? I don't know.

Hell Puppi
2009-04-27, 07:11 PM
It has Simon Pegg in it.
I do believe that makes it a law that I have to go see it.


What? It's Simon Pegg!

Scorer
2009-04-28, 04:55 PM
Well, Star Trek has a history of not always thinking through the technology. Another episode had a sniper rifle that could see through walls and would teleport bullets. Just think about the ramifications for privacy of an easy way to look through walls. Never mind the timeship that could erase anything from time and was nigh-invulnerable.


Maybe all of you will enjoy these videos I found on youtube about Star Trek Mistakes... Many I already knew, many I saw for the first time and laughed my "that" off.

Enjoy! ^^

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1chtJQFQNs

Vael Nir
2009-04-28, 05:23 PM
Babylon 5 and DS:9 are different beasts entirely

As for treating alien cultures with respect (or none), Deep Space 9 was in my eyes a lot better than B5... B5 used alien customs for comedy consistently. When it was well done (the centauri, the minbari, although the minbari had some fairly ridiculous ones) it was good, but some of the other races... green vs. purple, the simpletons of the council of non-aligned worlds, as well as the ancients that Ivanova goaded... well, I'd say that DS:9 definitely irritated me less here.

Both shows have their crowning moments; DS:9 has the epic dominion war battles (watching that federation fleet tear into the huge dominion force was just epic), some characters who definitely knock it up a notch (Garak, Julian, O'Brian mainly), interesting and complex villains (Gul'Dukat, Dumar, even Weyoun in his own way)... and the morally ambiguous episodes. I only saw the later seasons, and they were generally awesome.

Babylon 5 has some great protagonists, a very well thought out overall plot (Sinclair...), good characters, very much gray morality, some great villains (Bester, Morden, Mollari/G'kar earlier in the series), some epic crowning moments of awesome (Ivanova), a shifting command staff (!). A lot of funny as well.

And Vir Cotto. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8MjQ5Z7ZNo

I would definitely recommend watching both.

Lord Seth
2009-04-28, 07:32 PM
I found Enterprise to be pretty bad, but then again I only saw episodes from the first two seasons. Though the Agony Booth's reviews of A Night in Sickbay (http://agonybooth.com/recaps/Star_Trek/Enterprise/A_Night_in_Sickbay.aspx) and Two Days and Two Nights (http://agonybooth.com/recaps/Star_Trek/Enterprise/Two_Days_and_Two_Nights.aspx) were pretty funny. (be warned that the person who wrote the former hated Enterprise as a whole, but to be fair it's hard to defend the episode).

Though on the subject of Star Trek reviews/recaps, I highly recommend Sci-Fi Debris's the Opinionated Star Trek Episode Guide (http://www.youtube.com/user/sfdebris). He mostly focuses on Voyager, but has done some in the other series too. I find him quite funny.

Lord Seth
2009-04-28, 07:51 PM
As a fan of both Babylon 5 and DS9, I'd recommend seeing them both. If you saw the first few seasons of DS9 you might have come away with a bad opinion of it, but the show really gets its stride around season 4. Oddly, this was about the same time that a certain writer left to supervise Voyager. >.>I assume you're talking about Michael Piller. You want to know the funny thing, though? He was the guy who turned The Next Generation around after its weak early seasons, and was the writer of the highly acclaimed The Best of Both Worlds. So it's a bit funny that his arrival so greatly improved The Next Generation, but Deep Space Nine improved after his departure.

Though to be honest, I'm not sure if it was Michael Piller's departure that made the difference in DS9 as much as Ira Steven Behr becoming the guy in charge of the series...maybe a bit of both.

EDIT: Whoops! I meant to add this into my previous message via edit, but goofed up and made two separate messages.

FoE
2009-04-29, 04:49 PM
I’m looking forward to it. If nothing else, Star Trek needed this reboot. The mythology has become stifling; there was no room to tell new stories. But the film in general looks pretty high-quality. :smalltongue:

Of course, I’ll check out the reviews before I rush out to the theatres; I generally find that, while we all may have different tastes about what is a truly excellent film, truly terrible films are universal.

Llama231
2009-04-29, 06:58 PM
And Vir Cotto. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8MjQ5Z7ZNo


Moa Vir!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47DfQcHMYLY&feature=related

Yez.

SurlySeraph
2009-04-29, 07:25 PM
Does anyone else think the trailer is a bit dark for Star Trek? Kirk's a alienated reckless idiot, Spock's unstable and violent, the crew of the Enterprise appears to consist entirely of moody 20-year-olds, and there's a remarkable amount of fleet battling and massive explosions for a peaceful galaxy. I mean, they're not turning it into Warhammer 40K, but I thought Star Trek was all about optimism and harmony.

chiasaur11
2009-04-29, 07:35 PM
Does anyone else think the trailer is a bit dark for Star Trek? Kirk's a alienated reckless idiot, Spock's unstable and violent, the crew of the Enterprise appears to consist entirely of moody 20-year-olds, and there's a remarkable amount of fleet battling and massive explosions for a peaceful galaxy. I mean, they're not turning it into Warhammer 40K, but I thought Star Trek was all about optimism and harmony.

James T Kirk has always been a reckless idiot who gets into constant barfights and space battles.

The calm peaceful bit is wherever Kirk ain't.

SurlySeraph
2009-04-29, 07:42 PM
Yes, but I'd always thought of Kirk as more "lovable scoundrel" and less "car-wasting jackass who provokes his crew members into attacking him."

Seraph
2009-04-29, 08:13 PM
Yes, but I'd always thought of Kirk as more "lovable scoundrel" and less "car-wasting jackass who provokes his crew members into attacking him."

I thought the point of the movie was to show Kirk going from "Moody reckless idiot" to "mellow reckless idiot who knows when to turn it down and captain a ****ing starship".

kamikasei
2009-04-30, 03:02 AM
Does anyone else think the trailer is a bit dark for Star Trek? Kirk's a alienated reckless idiot, Spock's unstable and violent, the crew of the Enterprise appears to consist entirely of moody 20-year-olds, and there's a remarkable amount of fleet battling and massive explosions for a peaceful galaxy. I mean, they're not turning it into Warhammer 40K, but I thought Star Trek was all about optimism and harmony.

Kirk as a reckless idiot: I'm not sure how much time the movie spans. We see him trashing a car when he's a kid. Then, he gets in a barfight or something when played by Chris Pine and is advised he should enlist in Starfleet. And he ends up on the Enterprise somehow. For all we know the movie proper could start with him having graduated the Academy or completed a tour on the Farragut and matured; the "brat with daddy issues" stuff could just be backstory.

Spock as unstable and violent: hmmm? I can think of one scene where he seems to be attacking Kirk. Not enough context to say what's going on there.

Rest of the crew as moody twenty-somethings: we barely see the rest of the crew. They don't get a chance to seem like much of anything.

Universe is violent: it looks to me like there's a battle involving Kirk's father set before the movie takes place and one, presumably, as or near the climax of the film. As is a trailer's wont, those scenes have probably been mined for every bit of CG that can be use to lure in viewers.

Basically, nothing about the trailer suggests that it reflects the structure or plot of the movie at all. It's just scenes and fragments in isolation. No point trying to reverse-engineer it in much detail.

My concern is why the bloody Romulans are in it. In Shadow warships. With planetbusters. ???

SmartAlec
2009-04-30, 04:20 AM
Spock as unstable and violent: hmmm? I can think of one scene where he seems to be attacking Kirk. Not enough context to say what's going on there.

I assumed we're seeing a young Spock, who hasn't quite mastered keeping his emotions in check.


there's a remarkable amount of fleet battling and massive explosions for a peaceful galaxy

Not sure about peaceful - the Federation is in a state of cold war with the Klingons at this time, isn't it?

skywalker
2009-05-01, 12:33 AM
I thought the point of the movie was to show Kirk going from "Moody reckless idiot" to "mellow reckless idiot who knows when to turn it down and captain a ****ing starship".

I think this is the idea...

WalkingTarget
2009-05-01, 09:22 AM
My concern is why the bloody Romulans are in it. In Shadow warships. With planetbusters. ???

My understanding is that there's time travel involved (a real shock in a Trek movie, that).

kamikasei
2009-05-01, 09:33 AM
My understanding is that there's time travel involved (a real shock in a Trek movie, that).

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Seriously, god damn it, people!

WalkingTarget
2009-05-01, 09:45 AM
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Seriously, god damn it, people!

Yeah, I mean, I thought that the first time anybody in the federation saw what a Romulan looked like was in an original series episode.

1. Enterprise approaches Romulan ship (which is all anybody had seen so far due to Romulan secrecy/xenophobia).
2. They bring up a visual somehow.
3. Enterprise crew all turn to look at Spock.
4. Spock raises eyebrow.

I always thought that the Earth/Romulan war would be an interesting thing to cover, but Enterprise got canceled before their timeline could catch up to that.

kamikasei
2009-05-01, 09:53 AM
Yeah, I mean, I thought that the first time anybody in the federation saw what a Romulan looked like was in an original series episode.

Yeah, it was supposed to be this whole thing where the Romulans were so isolationist that they were never seen; all the battles were fought in space and the final treaty was negotiated over radio.

But that's not so bad; it's annoying, but just a continuity tweak. It's the rumoured use of time travel that annoys me; it's just a weak and overused device.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-05-01, 10:40 AM
My understanding is that there's time travel involved (a real shock in a Trek movie, that).

ARG!

Time Travel : The Key to Wreak Canon

The Extinguisher
2009-05-01, 10:59 AM
I'm seeing it tomorrow, so I'll let you guys know what's with the what what and all.

But I made the mistake of letting a big Trekkie know that I had pre-screening passes, and now he wants my blood.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-05-01, 11:04 AM
I'm seeing it tomorrow, so I'll let you guys know what's with the what what and all.

But I made the mistake of letting a big Trekkie know that I had pre-screening passes, and now he wants my blood.

Don't worry, we all make those kind of mistakes...

...

My testicles will never be the same after mine.... :smalleek:

Lord Seth
2009-05-01, 12:24 PM
Then, he gets in a barfight or something when played by Chris Pine and is advised he should enlist in Starfleet.Well, part of Picard's backstory was that while at the Starfleet Academy, he got into a barfight that nearly killed him...it's not like it's something new.

But hey, Never Trust A Trailer.

The Extinguisher
2009-05-03, 07:25 PM
Warning: Spoilers!

It was a really good movie. Completley screwed over continuity, but it's all okay, because it's actually a sequel. Alternate timelines and all that jazz. So all the movies and tv shows before don't actually count.



But still, it was a great movie, a great cast and they need to find a way to make a TV show out of it.

Llama231
2009-05-03, 09:24 PM
Warning: Spoilers!

It was a really good movie. Completley screwed over continuity, but it's all okay, because it's actually a sequel. Alternate timelines and all that jazz. So all the movies and tv shows before don't actually count.



But still, it was a great movie, a great cast and they need to find a way to make a TV show out of it.


lolololololololol.:smallyuk:

Did Spock slice anyone's head off?

Lerky
2009-05-05, 10:04 PM
I'm deeply disappointed that it's an "alternate time-line" themed movie which basically makes it as non-canon as a movie can get. But I still look forward to seeing it. I even got my old Star Trek uniform from 2 years ago and plan to wear it on opening day! Who else here's dressing up for the movie?:smallbiggrin:

The Extinguisher
2009-05-05, 11:23 PM
It's still canon insofar that people say it is. And it's still an excellent movie.

I don't see the problem.

Renegade Paladin
2009-05-05, 11:50 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02LgdXVkXgM

:smallbiggrin:

Lerky
2009-05-06, 09:55 PM
I have devided to start making OOTS-Style Star Trek avatars for anyone willing to ask for them. I can't promise they'll be good, since I'm still a cadet at Inkscape, but I promise I'll try my best for any die hard fans out there:smallamused:

Last_resort_33
2009-05-07, 04:12 AM
Plot: a bit meh

Film in General: Awesome

I've seen most Star Trek apart from Enterprise, but I wouldn't call myself a Trekkie. We saw it at the Bradford IMAX at 00:01 and I left feeling pretty awesome... that might just have been sleep deprivation however.

Couple of good nods and references in there.

Llama231
2009-05-07, 07:59 PM
So, ...
The movie officially is in theaters in the US today.

puppyavenger
2009-05-07, 11:20 PM
Just got back from seeing it in Imax.

initial thoughts

1. They had the people in the theaters wearing star fleet uniforms
2. They advertised a con before the movie started
3. The person in front of us appeared to be dressed up as Luke Skywalker (:smalleek:)
4.Chekhov is awesome.
5. so is scotty
6. Having never seen the original series, can't comment on how it compares.

7. "No Endor holocaust" is in full effect

chiasaur11
2009-05-08, 09:12 PM
Saw it.

I have but one major complaint. My face hurt from smiling so much.

Also: JJ Abrams may well be physically incapable of making a project without time travel of some sort.

kamikasei
2009-05-08, 09:15 PM
It was a lot of fun. The humour was good, a lot of the characterization was excellent (McCoy was dead on). But I really, really don't like time travel. I thought it was extraordinarly unnecessary here, and only detracted from the storytelling. And there were aspects of the plot that were straight-up stupid. So while I enjoyed it, it disappointed me.

kpenguin
2009-05-08, 10:14 PM
Saw it.

I have but one major complaint. My face hurt from smiling so much.

Also: JJ Abrams may well be physically incapable of making a project without time travel of some sort.

Cloverfield?

chiasaur11
2009-05-08, 10:24 PM
Cloverfield?

Didn't you see the tiny flux capacitator on the monster's back?

The Blackbird
2009-05-08, 10:39 PM
Plot: a bit meh

Film in General: Awesome.

Same here.

Just saw it today. When Neo shouted "Spock! SPOCK!!!" I was like, come on that's a Kahn ripoff and you know it:smallannoyed:

chiasaur11
2009-05-08, 10:44 PM
Same here.

Just saw it today. When Neo shouted "Spock! SPOCK!!!" I was like, come on that's a Kahn ripoff and you know it:smallannoyed:

Well, yeah.

One of those most fun things in Trek needs referencing.

The Blackbird
2009-05-08, 10:48 PM
Well, yeah.

One of those most fun things in Trek needs referencing.

Everthing else was great but KAHN is an original, they should not have done it again.

Lerky
2009-05-09, 01:29 AM
JJ Abrams may well be physically incapable of making a project without time travel of some sort.
being a HUGE fan of J.J.'s work, I feel the slight need to quote this, since it made me laugh so hard:smallamused:

I thought the movie was pretty good, suffice to say I was REALLY disappointed when I heard the movie was going to take place in an "alternate reality" but I think they pulled it off better then I was suspecting. Not to mention Zoe Saldana was sooooooooo hot when she was kissing Spock:smalltongue:and man, oh man, was the dialogue hilarious! Perfectly perfect scripting, my friend had to lean over and tell me "you know...this is pretty darn funny.":smallbiggrin:

I loved Scotty in it! What he does isn't glamors, but he keeps the Enterprise running. Poor Doohan...your mission ended too soon:smallfrown:

chiasaur11
2009-05-09, 02:03 AM
I loved Scotty in it! What he does isn't glamors, but he keeps the Enterprise running. Poor Doohan...your mission ended too soon:smallfrown:

Yeah.

His son cameoed, by the way.

Had a minor bit in the transporter room.

And, as always, JJ worked Greg Grunberg in.

He play's Kirk's (voice only) step dad.

KIDS
2009-05-09, 03:55 AM
I was never a fan of Star Trek and had only ever seen two random episodes but, wow, this movie is incredible. I loved every second of it. Anyways.

1. both of Spock and Kirk's childhoods are described really well in a very short time, giving more than most other movies give in a few hours (just watched X-men origins's pointless characters beforehand so it was a huge difference)
2. humor is clever and subtle. Chekhov is funny, but mild enough not to mess up serious situations. Also, "I have your weapon"? WIN!
3. Uhura was particularly likeable and it's nice to finally see a sci-fi movie that has a serious female character I loved it how no one had the courage to say anything comforting to Spock except her, some kind of silent hero
4. Except for one bit (you know), time travel is done well and makes sense most of the time.
5. Hand to hand combat scenes are excellent as well. The camera is shaky but for some reason it didn't bother me.

In short: An awesome movie well worth seeing for both fans and non-fans (I can't emphasize enough how important this is, making it attractive to the larger audience). And though it's not the gigantic story on the level of Dark Knight, it's still superb. This new fan looks forward to the continuation of the series :smallsmile:

p.s. I was glas to see Zachary Quinto (Sylar) from Heroes in the lead role, even if filming messed up the last season of Heroes. But I always thought his acting was great and he deserved a big role like this.

Verruckt
2009-05-09, 04:14 AM
I've not seen one full episode of the original series and am by no means a Trekkie, but dear God in heaven I loved this film. I haven't been smiling this much since 300, it was that kind of gleeful awesome for awesome's own sake. My only complaint was that the camera man seemed to be under attack by a vicious lens flare monster on a couple occasions.

Also "Phasers to full." should be forever replaced by "Prepare the face-ruiner, and stand by to eff them up royally on my command"

Forrestfire
2009-05-09, 09:14 AM
I've been stoked for this movie since I saw the trailer a few months ago and was not disappointed. :smallbiggrin:


I found it hilarious when
the red-suited guy gets sucked into the drill on Vulcan...:smallbiggrin:

I also want to own the retractable sword in that same scene..
I also like the scene where Spock and Kirk enter [future] Spock's ship.
Ship: "Welcome, Ambassador Spock."
Kirk: "Well that's weird."

:smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin:

Thufir
2009-05-09, 09:55 AM
I loved the bit at the end
with the two Spocks. "My customary salutation would seem rather self-serving at this point, so I will simply say, 'Good luck.'"

kamikasei
2009-05-09, 11:37 AM
So apparently there's a four-issue tie-in comic that explains some of the stuff in the backstory that I found most aggravating. However, they weren't much good, and just replaced a "what? That's basic real-world science fail" with "ugh, Treknobabble with uninteresting plot frosting".

It irritates me that a major movie like this would be released with a plot hole patched over in a sub-par marketing tie-in.

Sigh... well, the movie was still full of awesome.

revolver kobold
2009-05-09, 11:42 AM
So apparently there's a four-issue tie-in comic that explains some of the stuff in the backstory that I found most aggravating. However, they weren't much good, and just replaced a "what? That's basic real-world science fail" with "ugh, Treknobabble with uninteresting plot frosting".

It irritates me that a major movie like this would be released with a plot hole patched over in a sub-par marketing tie-in.

Sigh... well, the movie was still full of awesome.

What was the plot hole? I saw it the other night (thought it was pretty bloody good), but can't think of any plot holes...

Maybe I'm just not thinking hard enough...

kamikasei
2009-05-09, 11:54 AM
What was the plot hole? I saw it the other night (thought it was pretty bloody good), but can't think of any plot holes...

Maybe I'm just not thinking hard enough...

It wasn't really a plot hole in terms of internal logic. It was just that
the idea of "a supernova that threatened the galaxy", which could destroy Romulus from a whole other system, and could somehow be stopped using a black hole, was absurd. As described in the movie, it was just so thoroughly wrong that it left a bad taste in my mouth, and undermined the motivations of the villains.

The comics took the basic wrongness of this as it appeared in the movie and replaced it with rather dull Treknobabbling. I wish they'd just made it something that made some kind of sense in the first place.

revolver kobold
2009-05-09, 12:00 PM
It wasn't really a plot hole in terms of internal logic. It was just that
the idea of "a supernova that threatened the galaxy", which could destroy Romulus from a whole other system, and could somehow be stopped using a black hole, was absurd. As described in the movie, it was just so thoroughly wrong that it left a bad taste in my mouth, and undermined the motivations of the villains.

The comics took the basic wrongness of this as it appeared in the movie and replaced it with rather dull Treknobabbling. I wish they'd just made it something that made some kind of sense in the first place.

OH! Yeah, I nearly stood up in the cinema and yelled out "SUPERNOVAS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY", but I don't think my friends, who are massive Trekkies, would have appreciated that.

Finn Solomon
2009-05-09, 12:38 PM
What I knew of Star Trek before this movie came from Twisted Toyfare Theatre and StarDestroyer.net so I went into the cinema expecting at best, an okay film. I didn't expect to be mightily impressed. I love an awful lot about the movie. Being a child of two different cultures myself Spock's dual heritage really resonated with me. I have to say Zachary Quinto just looks perfect for the character. Apart from the first scene as a kid where Jim Kirk was being an assh-le (I particularly loathe children without manners and sending a car over a cliff seems the epitome of that), I enjoyed the character as portrayed by Chris Pine. Proud but not too arrogant, ladies man but not too horndog, brash hot head but still with a measure of respect for the Captain. Not being over the top is the key to playing such a character and I felt Mr. Pine got it spot on.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-05-09, 01:50 PM
I have to say, I mostly enjoyed it. But there are some nitpicks here and there, my biggest (and the one no one else me seems to care about)

Since when do you give an un-commissioned Cadet the command of a Starship? Okay, maybe they gave him a special commission as an officer. Okay, maybe they would have fast-tracked him into Command Duty in his career. Okay, MAYBE they would have put him for recommendation for an early command... But the Flagship of the Federation, right off the bat?

I though you needed at least some experience in a Command position before being given such responsibility (and it's a HUGE responsibility)

also

They have UNCOMMISSIONNED (or newly commissionned, or disgraced) officers serving full-time as the senior officers of the Flagship?! Same thing about up-there. Even if they are talented and gifted, they are still green peoples. Only Spock and Scotty are actually experienced officers

Texas_Ben
2009-05-09, 01:54 PM
Not being over the top is the key to playing such a character
I disagree:
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/1189376850594.jpg

Dervag
2009-05-09, 04:43 PM
I liked it very much.



7. "No Endor holocaust" is in full effectCould you explain what makes you say that (in a spoiler)? I cán't quite remember.
______


It was a lot of fun. The humour was good, a lot of the characterization was excellent (McCoy was dead on). But I really, really don't like time travel. I thought it was extraordinarly unnecessary here, and only detracted from the storytelling. And there were aspects of the plot that were straight-up stupid. So while I enjoyed it, it disappointed me.What I would say in favor of the time travel is that it gave Abrams the artistic freedom to get creative. The backstories of the Star Trek characters are fairly well established, and setting up an alternate timeline gives Abrams a level of liberty that would normally only be enjoyed by an outright franchise reboot... which Abrams wasn't trying to do.
______

Admittedly, the whole supernova/black hole/Romulus thing leaves a lot to be desired as science.I think it would have been better from a science standpoint ifRomulus's sun threatened to go supernova, and the promise of Federation aid made "in the future" by Spock included Federation support in transporting survivors off the planet. The black hole generator could be used to create a bunch of miniature black holes at key points around the star Romulus. These holes would create direction-specific regions in which the dangerous radiation from the supernova was diverted or absorbed by gravity (see "gravitational lensing" for reference), eliminating the threat of the supernova to the surrounding star systems.

The blast of radiation from a supernova would be a threat to nearby star systems, generating enough radiation to sterilize planets even from a range of many light years. But if you can generate black holes at will, you can probably neutralize the effect of the supernova.

In this case, Spock's failure in the future would be far more specific and significant. Not only would he personally have failed to put a defense in place to protect Romulus specifically, but the Federation would failed in its promise to evacuate the Romulan people as a whole. That would help to justify Nero's anger at the Federation in general, rather than at Spock and the Vulcans specifically.

LCR
2009-05-09, 04:53 PM
I liked the movie, but it wasn't really Star Trek anymore. I do have a couple of questions/nitpicks, though:

1) Why are Sulu and Chekov older (or at least more senior) than Kirk? I always thought the Original Series Chekov/Sulu were meant to be younger and to be tutored by the older Kirk. How does time travel change those age differences?

2) Who in God's name promotes a completely inexperienced cadet to first officer? And what kind of mock-military then promotes said cadet to captain of the flagship? I would have understood if they had promoted him to lieutenant right away (he'd still would have skipped two ranks this way), but to captain? Come on ...

3) Are there no senior officers in Star Fleet to man the bridge on the Federation flagship? The whole bridge crew seems to consist of newly commissioned cadets (except for Spock).

4) Why does McCoy attend Starfleet Academy? He's already a doctor when he boards the shuttle with Kirk and shouldn't have to go through the whole drill.

5) Why has the Enterprise more than one Warpcore? And why looked main engineering like the engine room in a 19th century steam ship? Even engineering in Enterprise (that other mostly godawful prequel) looked more futuristic than this.

6) Why did the Old Spock just accept Vulcan's demise? He's obviously quite smart and knows about time travel (did it himself quite a few times). He could just fix everything, yet seems to be contented by picking out a new planet for the few surviving vulcans.

kamikasei
2009-05-09, 05:02 PM
What I would say in favor of the time travel is that it gave Abrams the artistic freedom to get creative. The backstories of the Star Trek characters are fairly well established, and setting up an alternate timeline gives Abrams a level of liberty that would normally only be enjoyed by an outright franchise reboot... which Abrams wasn't trying to do.

Eh. Using time travel as an excuse to rewrite history seems to me a worse option than just saying "yeah... we're rewriting how some of this stuff happened". A reboot, in my opinion, would have been a cleaner and more satisfying option (did we really need to be reassured that, it's okay! this new movie won't change the events of Insurrection!?).

I also think the time travel weakened the plot in a specific way:
Past a certain point you basically had Future!Spock telling everyone that they were destined to become great friends and do x, y and z. I would have preferred an organic development where they did this for themselves.

SCIENCE!:

The blast of radiation from a supernova would be a threat to nearby star systems, generating enough radiation to sterilize planets even from a range of many light years.

True, but not that badly and not from that far away. It would clearly not be something that "threatened the galaxy" (was that line really necessary?). And it's highly implausible to me that it's easier to do anything with black holes than to just shield specific endangered planets, in the Trek verse; and even then, the Romulans are the faction in established canon would would least need outside help in manipulating black holes for their advantage.

And science-related plot:
The basic idea was clear enough: they needed a disaster, and a way for Nero to blame the disaster on Our Heroes, and a way for him to have a specific MacGuffiny doomsday device, which is easiest if linked to the disaster. But in execution, I felt it fell flat. (For one thing, if you can make black holes, there's no reason to drill to the planet's core first. You can just fire the black hole itself, directly. Or drop the red matter bomb onto the surface - any reason why that shouldn't work?)

Overall, I think the movie would have been better with no time travel, with a "conventional" enemy and a little less contrivance in how the crew came together (as Solka mentioned, it's a little incredible that Kirk would be made captain (right over Spock's head!) fresh out of the Academy and take over a command crew who mostly found their way to their positions by accident or battlefield promotion).

But still, we got a fun movie with a lot of good to be said for it.

And BEAM SPAM in Trek, with BSG-style camerawork, which was pretty winful.

KnightDisciple
2009-05-09, 05:10 PM
I liked the movie, but it wasn't really Star Trek anymore. I do have a couple of questions/nitpicks, though:

1) Why are Sulu and Chekov older (or at least more senior) than Kirk? I always thought the Original Series Chekov/Sulu were meant to be younger and to be tutored by the older Kirk. How does time travel change those age differences?

2) Who in God's name promotes a completely inexperienced cadet to first officer? And what kind of mock-military then promotes said cadet to captain of the flagship? I would have understood if they had promoted him to lieutenant right away (he'd still would have skipped two ranks this way), but to captain? Come on ...

3) Are there no senior officers in Star Fleet to man the bridge on the Federation flagship? The whole bridge crew seems to consist of newly commissioned cadets (except for Spock).

4) Why does McCoy attend Starfleet Academy? He's already a doctor when he boards the shuttle with Kirk and shouldn't have to go through the whole drill.

5) Why has the Enterprise more than one Warpcore? And why looked main engineering like the engine room in a 19th century steam ship? Even engineering in Enterprise (that other mostly godawful prequel) looked more futuristic than this.

6) Why did the Old Spock just accept Vulcan's demise? He's obviously quite smart and knows about time travel (did it himself quite a few times). He could just fix everything, yet seems to be contented by picking out a new planet for the few surviving vulcans.


1.)Um, Kirk's like 25. Whereas Chekov said he was 17. Sulu's age is indeterminate.
2.)No answer at this time...
3.)I think the point there was that the emergency came up so suddenly that cadets were all they had.
4.)He'd still need to learn Starfleet regs and procedures. Maybe learn to even more medical techniques as well.
5.)Redundancy? Plus, it looks like it ejected 8 reactors total. Which happens to match the number of reactors on the nuclear carrier...USS Enterprise. And while I could have done with a touch less clutter, I liked this look. It looked like a real engineering section. You want exposed machinery so it's easier to get to.
6.)Well, the time travel that got him there was a no-go. And most/all other methods he knew of were unreliable, if not outright dangerous or one-shots. Maybe he also didn't want to try looping around time that much. Plus, it's nice that there's not a magic reset button for the film.

kamikasei
2009-05-09, 05:15 PM
I liked the movie, but it wasn't really Star Trek anymore. I do have a couple of questions/nitpicks, though:
1) Why are Sulu and Chekov older (or at least more senior) than Kirk? I always thought the Original Series Chekov/Sulu were meant to be younger and to be tutored by the older Kirk. How does time travel change those age differences?

I'm not sure what is ever established either way about Sulu's age in the original series or in this movie. He was junior to Kirk in the original, of course, but not necessarily younger. In this one, he was freshly-assigned, right? I can't remember whether an ensign or lieutenant... anyway, he was pretty green, as far as I could tell.

Chekov was seventeen in the movie, so certainly younger than Kirk, and possibly more junior (it was hard to tell who was meant to be a real officer assigned to the Enterprise before the crisis and who was a still-technically-a-cadet filling a role for the emergency).


2) Who in God's name promotes a completely inexperienced cadet to first officer? And what kind of mock-military then promotes said cadet to captain of the flagship? I would have understood if they had promoted him to lieutenant right away (he'd still would have skipped two ranks this way), but to captain? Come on ...

3) Are there no senior officers in Star Fleet to man the bridge on the Federation flagship? The whole bridge crew seems to consist of newly commissioned cadets (except for Spock).

Agreed that this was silly.


4) Why does McCoy attend Starfleet Academy? He's already a doctor when he boards the shuttle with Kirk and shouldn't have to go through the whole drill.

Presumably, to become a military officer trained to operate as a doctor on a starship, rather than just act as a civilian doctor. You'll note that he doesn't take longer than Kirk (who's fast-tracking his way through, after all) to be ship-ready. And if you think he shouldn't need to learn as much Starfleet-specific stuff on top of his doctoring to serve, you may be right, but maybe the added time is taken up with xenobiology and suchlike so that he can learn to treat alien crew members and "new life" after an Earth-bound medical career?


5) Why has the Enterprise more than one Warpcore? And why looked main engineering like the engine room in a 19th century steam ship? Even engineering in Enterprise (that other mostly godawful prequel) looked more futuristic than this.

Style. It didn't look like "a 19th century steam ship" to me but like the beating heart of a complex machine such as one might find in the engine room of a real-world modern naval vessel. I think they took it a bit far, but eh.

Why multiple warp cores? Well, that may have just been one warp core in several parts. Or they may have been ejecting the antimatter containment pods as well as the core. Or they may have been obeying sensible design practices and employing redundancy in a critical system. Or maybe that's how warp cores looked back before they switched from lithium to dilithium :smallbiggrin:.


6) Why did the Old Spock just accept Vulcan's demise? He's obviously quite smart and knows about time travel (did it himself quite a few times). He could just fix everything, yet seems to be contented by picking out a new planet for the few surviving vulcans.

True... that's also a problem. The obvious caveat is that time travel is unpredictable. The obvious real-world explanation is that it would alter the story that we'd just been told and wipe out the established events that the sequels will build on. But neither of those really hold up. This sort of thing is another reason I dislike time travel in Trek stories...

LCR
2009-05-09, 05:23 PM
1.)Um, Kirk's like 25. Whereas Chekov said he was 17. Sulu's age is indeterminate.
2.)No answer at this time...
3.)I think the point there was that the emergency came up so suddenly that cadets were all they had.
4.)He'd still need to learn Starfleet regs and procedures. Maybe learn to even more medical techniques as well.
5.)Redundancy? Plus, it looks like it ejected 8 reactors total. Which happens to match the number of reactors on the nuclear carrier...USS Enterprise. And while I could have done with a touch less clutter, I liked this look. It looked like a real engineering section. You want exposed machinery so it's easier to get to.
6.)Well, the time travel that got him there was a no-go. And most/all other methods he knew of were unreliable, if not outright dangerous or one-shots. Maybe he also didn't want to try looping around time that much. Plus, it's nice that there's not a magic reset button for the film.

1) My point being that they still graduated before Kirk (he's a cadet, Chekov's an ensign, Sulu a lieutenant) and are therefore more senior (or would be, if it weren't for Kirk's magical promotion)
3) You'd still think they had some officers left to man the flagship ...
4) Of course, I can't really know this for sure, but in most armed forces, physicians are more or less directly commissioned and not required to attend the regular service academies
5) I'm not saying it wouldn't make sense to have more than one warpcore (in fact, that's probably a good idea), only no other ship in Star Trek ever had more than one warpcore. Why would they suddenly implement such a radical change in design?
6) Only they also did that in that movie where they had to fetch those whales from the past. Simply by flying through a sun. And they have the Guardian of Forever. Sure, might be risky, but you'd think that billions of Vulcans saved might be a good enough reason to try anyway.

KnightDisciple
2009-05-09, 05:27 PM
5) I'm not saying it wouldn't make sense to have more than one warpcore (in fact, that's probably a good idea), only no other ship in Star Trek ever had more than one warpcore. Why would they suddenly implement such a radical change in design?


Do we know if none of the other vessels in the movie (well, Starfleet vessels, anwyays) had more than one?

Maybe they implemented it for the same reason that they had non-exploding consoles: It makes sense!

puppyavenger
2009-05-09, 05:39 PM
I liked it very much.

Could you explain what makes you say that (in a spoiler)? I cán't quite remember.



http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoEndorHolocaust

The Drill over earth reach through the atmosphere and the drill was powerful enough to reach the earths core in a matter of minutes/hours. S, even assuming that there's some special shield around the drill to concentrate energy (a very good idea, and the only possible way Kirk and co could have done their attempted heroics on Vulcan) how does whats basically a space elevator falling form the sky have no affect on the local climate? shouldn't it cause some mass destruction? yet the academy that (from what I understand from one viewing) is on the same bay that the drill was directed at is completely unharmed from the events of the movie.


also, should the Black hole from all those red matter droplets be bigger, rather then smaller then the one made from only one?

Ravens_cry
2009-05-09, 06:32 PM
Peace and Long Life

NNh
MM MMMM
MMM MMMM MM
MMM NMMMM NMM
N MMM MMMM MMM
MMM MMM NMMMM MMM
MMM MMN MMMM MMMN
MMM MMM MMMM NMMM
MMMN MMM MMMM MMMM
MMMM MMMMNMMMMM MMMM
MMMMNMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
NMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MMMMMN
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMN NMMMMMMMMN
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
NMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMN
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMN
NMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
NMMMMMN

Live long and Prosper.

Thufir
2009-05-09, 06:33 PM
1) My point being that they still graduated before Kirk (he's a cadet, Chekov's an ensign, Sulu a lieutenant) and are therefore more senior (or would be, if it weren't for Kirk's magical promotion)

The whole point of the alternate timeline-ness was that Kirk grew up without his father as an inspiration, etc. Therefore he joined Starfleet later than he did in the original timeline, allowing Chekhov and Sulu a headstart on him.

TheThan
2009-05-09, 07:51 PM
Ok I just got back from seeing the new star trek movie and wow it was really good. It’s not the best in the franchise, but its still pretty good. The movie is exactly what it looks like a rip roaring action flick, with lots of shooting, yelling and explosions. As a result the plot is about as thin as you’d expect. The actors bang on nailed the characters… with the exception of Chekov, who was a little too… cheery for the roll. Going in, my worst concern is that the actors would botch the job with the characters they were given, but I was pleasantly surprised with how good of a job they did.

Not to give anything thing away, but the movie takes place in an alternative reality which means they can throw any sort of continuity they had out the window. While it technically isn't a reboot, you can easily think of it as sort of one. This may or may not enrage hard core Trekkies, so season to taste.

About the only thing I didn’t like was that the movie was way to busy. Everything (and I mean everything) is moving, flashing and spinning. Even in the scenes where there shouldn’t be anything like that. I made the person next to me sick and caused a little bit of sensory overload. There’s so much of it that it detracts from the action of the scene.

Seraph
2009-05-09, 07:55 PM
I was a bit weirded out by the interior design until I got that it was a partial deconstruction/homage to Used Future ideas. most modern scifi like BSG, ships are old and look like industrial plants half-falling apart. the new design takes the elements of this (catwalks, vast cramped space) but doesn't make it used - its all shiny, new, and still has its OSHA approval stickers. the style is used future spacetech before its, well, used.

A. Smith
2009-05-09, 10:06 PM
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoEndorHolocaust

The Drill over earth reach through the atmosphere and the drill was powerful enough to reach the earths core in a matter of minutes/hours. S, even assuming that there's some special shield around the drill to concentrate energy (a very good idea, and the only possible way Kirk and co could have done their attempted heroics on Vulcan) how does whats basically a space elevator falling form the sky have no affect on the local climate? shouldn't it cause some mass destruction? yet the academy that (from what I understand from one viewing) is on the same bay that the drill was directed at is completely unharmed from the events of the movie.

It's not that big, and probably not that heavy (considering it's hanging from a starship). And it's not falling from that high. It's not the Death Star, you know.

The bay you're seeing is the San Francisco Bay, by the way.

also, should the Black hole from all those red matter droplets be bigger, rather then smaller then the one made from only one? Why should it? "Red matter" only starts the reaction. The size of the black hole is proportionate to the mass that's in it, and instead of a planet (Vulcan), it only has a single ship to "feed" on.

By the way, just came back from seeing it. It was awesome.

Screw sequels, I want a new series.

Turcano
2009-05-09, 10:52 PM
It way a very good film, although I didn't really like the time-travel reboot thing (to say nothing of the whole "time travel through a black hole" bollocks, which irritated the hell out of me).

Also, while he did a good job, seeing Simon Pegg as Scotty is a surreal experience.

Dumbledore lives
2009-05-09, 11:05 PM
Just saw it and I thought it was very good, though my opinion of Star Trek is based on a couple episodes of the original series, I really haven't seen much Star Trek at all. The black holes didn't really make much sense, but the rest of the movie makes up for it. Also I liked how they mainly adhered to the no sound in space.

With the final explosion I swear they were right by Earth, considering the warp took basically no time. And wouldn't the huge black hole affect something negatively, just maybe.

A. Smith
2009-05-10, 12:30 AM
With the final explosion I swear they were right by Earth, considering the warp took basically no time. And wouldn't the huge black hole affect something negatively, just maybe.

Not really. A black hole with only the mass of a ship isn't very dangerous at all. Not more dangerous then the ship being there.

Zeta Kai
2009-05-10, 12:54 AM
It was awesome. That is all.

Dervag
2009-05-10, 03:15 PM
I liked the movie, but it wasn't really Star Trek anymore. I do have a couple of questions/nitpicks, though:

1) Why are Sulu and Chekov older (or at least more senior) than Kirk? I always thought the Original Series Chekov/Sulu were meant to be younger and to be tutored by the older Kirk. How does time travel change those age differences?

2) Who in God's name promotes a completely inexperienced cadet to first officer? And what kind of mock-military then promotes said cadet to captain of the flagship? I would have understood if they had promoted him to lieutenant right away (he'd still would have skipped two ranks this way), but to captain? Come on ...

3) Are there no senior officers in Star Fleet to man the bridge on the Federation flagship? The whole bridge crew seems to consist of newly commissioned cadets (except for Spock).

4) Why does McCoy attend Starfleet Academy? He's already a doctor when he boards the shuttle with Kirk and shouldn't have to go through the whole drill.

5) Why has the Enterprise more than one Warpcore? And why looked main engineering like the engine room in a 19th century steam ship? Even engineering in Enterprise (that other mostly godawful prequel) looked more futuristic than this.

6) Why did the Old Spock just accept Vulcan's demise? He's obviously quite smart and knows about time travel (did it himself quite a few times). He could just fix everything, yet seems to be contented by picking out a new planet for the few surviving vulcans.

1) Kirk enters Starfleet academy late. Instead of going into the academy in his teens in response to his father's example, his being raised by a single mom (with some implied child abuse) leads him into a dead-end life as "the only genius-level repeat offender in the Midwest." He doesn't join the Academy until he's 21 or 22, which means that by his junior year, officers several years younger than him (like Sulu and Chekov) are now his fellow students.

2) It's strongly implied that Starfleet has effectively no experienced officers available to man the seven ships sent to relieve Vulcan. That's why they draft the Starfleet Academy trainers and cadets en masse. Those ships are in the yard for one reason or another, and they haven't had full officer complements appointed, so the most promising cadets get pulled on board to take up the slack... which leads to

3) In that case, it's quite possible that Pike, God help him, has no one he considers more qualified to act as first officer than Kirk. He may have other commissioned officers aboard, but only in specialist tracks (you don't want the medical officer commanding the ship in combat), or have them be nothing but time-servers who aren't suitable for a crisis situation- like the previous comm officer Uhura replaces, who can't identify Romulan transmissions).

By contrast, Pike has been grooming Kirk's tactical instincts and command skills for three years. He's just proven his tactical instincts by correctly predicting that they were flying into an ambush. And (this is important) Pike doesn't seriously expect anything to happen that would force Spock to relinquish command... and Spock is qualified.

4) Yes, McCoy should have to go through at least an abbreviated version of Starfleet Academy before being assigned aboard ship. He must become familiar with shipboard life (note that he's deeply uncomfortable with space travel at first). He must learn military procedures and the use of military hardware. And he's going to need specialized training in the kinds of injuries and diseases a Starfleet doctor is most likely to face (phaser burns are probably not a common problem back in Georgia).

5) The Enterprise has multiple warp cores for a good engineering reason- failsafes. Several smaller cores have a big advantage over one large one; you can shut down one before a malfunction becomes serious, because you have others to take up the load.

Also, to me at least, the Enterprise engineering compartments look as much like the insides of a modern nuclear reactor than like a Victorian engine room. It's likely that in the future, people will pay more attention to making machinery accessible for maintenance than they will to making everything look all ergonomic and futuristic, just as they do today or did in the past. At least, they will if they're smart. By that standard, the Enterprise engineering room is good- you can get at things without having to cut apart the walls.

6)Without the "red matter" or the advanced tech aboard his own ship, it's likely that he can't specifically arrange a time travel operation to save Vulcan. At the very least, any such operation would have to be carefully planned and prepared if there was to be any chance of actually stopping Nero. Who says that at the end of the movie, he isn't in the planning stages of an operation like that? Even if he wants to do it, it would be grossly illogical to go off unprepared, with limited resources and a tech base over a century inferior to the stuff his enemy has.

Moreover, even if Spock does exactly that, he'll probably just be creating another alternate timeline. It might be worthwhile, but it won't save the universe.


The Drill over earth reach through the atmosphere and the drill was powerful enough to reach the earths core in a matter of minutes/hours. S, even assuming that there's some special shield around the drill to concentrate energy (a very good idea, and the only possible way Kirk and co could have done their attempted heroics on Vulcan) how does whats basically a space elevator falling form the sky have no affect on the local climate? shouldn't it cause some mass destruction? yet the academy that (from what I understand from one viewing) is on the same bay that the drill was directed at is completely unharmed from the events of the movie.The space elevator in question isn't nearly as long as a conventional one; to use it, Nero's ship has to hover in low planetary orbit. The drill cable itself may "only" be fifty to a hundred miles long. It's not extremely massive, either- large, but not huge.

Moreover, we don't know how much time passes between the destruction of the drill and the ceremony in the final scene. If it were several months, it's quite possible that with Federation-level technology,the needed repairs to get the Academy running again could be made.

Damage to the Federation capital would be severe, but it need not be all-encompassing (especially if most of the drill cable fell out in the Pacific, and not onto the city itself)


also, should the Black hole from all those red matter droplets be bigger, rather then smaller then the one made from only one? Perhaps- but on the other hand, it may be that to get full effect from a given droplet of red matter you have to enclose it in a specially designed device. For example, any large block of plutonium will explode, but to get a gigantic mushroom cloud explosion you must use shaped charges to compact the plutonium into a denser mass. So what we're seeing here is an uncontrolled red matter reaction, instead of the precisely controlled ones used before. Despite using a much larger total mass, you might get quite a bit less in the way of singularity.[/QUOTE]
__________


Just saw it and I thought it was very good, though my opinion of Star Trek is based on a couple episodes of the original series, I really haven't seen much Star Trek at all. The black holes didn't really make much sense, but the rest of the movie makes up for it. Also I liked how they mainly adhered to the no sound in space.

[spoiler] With the final explosion I swear they were right by Earth, considering the warp took basically no time. And wouldn't the huge black hole affect something negatively, just maybe.Given that Star Trek warp drive operates at speeds tens or hundreds of times the speed of light, even a few seconds in warp drive at relatively leisurely power levels would be enough to flick them millions of kilometers from Earth.

Seraph
2009-05-10, 04:02 PM
Perhaps- but on the other hand, it may be that to get full effect from a given droplet of red matter you have to enclose it in a specially designed device. For example, any large block of plutonium will explode, but to get a gigantic mushroom cloud explosion you must use shaped charges to compact the plutonium into a denser mass. So what we're seeing here is an uncontrolled red matter reaction, instead of the precisely controlled ones used before. Despite using a much larger total mass, you might get quite a bit less in the way of singularity.

The way I saw it, red matter worked by becoming a core of a singularity and drawing in surrounding matter to increase its mass. (yes I know that tat sentence makes no sense, bear with me.) you could get dramatic reactions from planets and supernovae because there's a lot of matter around to fuel the reaction, but the black hole at the end was relatively small because it was only feeding off a single ship, even if it did have significantly more red matter to work as a catalyst.

kamikasei
2009-05-10, 05:05 PM
Damage to the Federation capital would be severe, but it need not be all-encompassing (especially if most of the drill cable fell out in the Pacific, and not onto the city itself)

A nit:
Paris is the Federation capital, not San Francisco. San Francisco is just the site of Starfleet Command and Academy. The capital of Earth, in turn, may be somewhere else again (New York?).


Given that Star Trek warp drive operates at speeds tens or hundreds of times the speed of light, even a few seconds in warp drive at relatively leisurely power levels would be enough to flick them millions of kilometers from Earth.

In the movie, warp drive seemed absurdly fast, so if they enter warp at all they should be able (from a narrative standpoint) to go from any point in a system to any other.

Dervag
2009-05-10, 07:28 PM
A nit:
Paris is the Federation capital, not San Francisco. San Francisco is just the site of Starfleet Command and Academy. The capital of Earth, in turn, may be somewhere else again (New York?).That really isn't a spoiler, if you ask me, since the only way you'd ever find it out is by looking at stuff that isn't in the movie. Certainly it's not a plot point.

That said, I'll take your word for it.
______


In the movie, warp drive seemed absurdly fast, so if they enter warp at all they should be able (from a narrative standpoint) to go from any point in a system to any other.Even if warp drive isn't "absurdly" fast, it is by definition an FTL drive or the Federation wouldn't even exist. Any FTL drive can be used to travel very fast inside a solar system.

Finn Solomon
2009-05-10, 08:14 PM
I disagree:
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/1189376850594.jpg

But that's my point. If Chris Pine had played it over the top he would have come across as Pine playing William Shatner playing Kirk. As it is he brings his own take to the character, and doesn't come off as imitating Shatner.

adanedhel9
2009-05-10, 08:24 PM
Saw it last night; I think I need to see it again to decide whether I really liked it or not. The movie runs at such a frenetic pace that I didn't really have time to think about most of it.



On the "supernova that threatens the galaxy": my immediate thought was that Spock was speaking metaphorically (since the literal interpretation is just absurd). At the end of DS9 and the TNG movies, peace between the Federation and Romulus was a distinct possibility. Romulus (or another nearby star) going supernova could have certainly threatened the potential galactic peace.
On the new look of engineering: The engineer in me appreciates the ease of access, clear labeling, etc. But the trekkie in me would've liked at least a shot of the "pillar" warp core style. I could see that configuration making sense when surrounded by the new style.
How did the warp core detonation keep the Enterprise from falling into the black hole? The force in an explosion isn't some intangible energy - it's carried the exploding matter. The exploding matter would be affected by the black hole just as much as the Enterprise; it shouldn't have had any effect on the Enterprise's fate.

Llama231
2009-05-10, 09:23 PM
I finally got around to seeing it making it the last real movie that I have seen in theaters since Pirates 3. I have my nitpicks (pretty much the same as everyone else), but overall I found it quite awesomesauce. It kind of seems like they are setting it up for a new series with all of this alternate reality stuff, a less experienced Kirk, and an annoyingly done romanticism.:smallyuk:

The Tygre
2009-05-10, 10:23 PM
Saw it last night.
Loved it.
'Twas awesome.
And I will definitely be seeing it again.

SOdhner
2009-05-11, 02:03 PM
I had One Major Complaint (http://therestofyourmice.blogspot.com/2009/05/rant-you-probably-shouldnt-read-this.html) but other than that it was a lot of fun.

Yes, there were some odd things with the science or logic or whatever, but I expect a certain amount of that from Star Trek and this was well below what it would have needed to be to bother me.

I was very pleased, and I'm looking forward to more.

BRC
2009-05-11, 04:06 PM
I discussed it with my friends today, and we realized something major.

So, Nero wants to destroy Earth and Vulcan. He has a ship full of black-hole creating red matter, and he has a giant drill thingy that can go straight to a planet's core. Either one of these, on it's own, could destroy a planet. Either by eating it up in a black hole, or simply by rewriting it's climate and topography by digging a hole with a giant laser. That alone would cause plenty of problems.

And yet, he seems determined that he must use both these weapons. Black Holes are very nasty things, just detonating some of that red matter near the surface of the planet should be enough, you don't have to dig a big hole in it first.

The Tygre
2009-05-11, 04:07 PM
The science and technical stuff doesn't really weird me out. I just expect any given Sci-Fi movie to miss some details. Besides, years of Enterprise has dulled my senses to logic and good Star Trek.

Graybacca
2009-05-11, 07:41 PM
I discussed it with my friends today, and we realized something major.

So, Nero wants to destroy Earth and Vulcan. He has a ship full of black-hole creating red matter, and he has a giant drill thingy that can go straight to a planet's core. Either one of these, on it's own, could destroy a planet. Either by eating it up in a black hole, or simply by rewriting it's climate and topography by digging a hole with a giant laser. That alone would cause plenty of problems.

And yet, he seems determined that he must use both these weapons. Black Holes are very nasty things, just detonating some of that red matter near the surface of the planet should be enough, you don't have to dig a big hole in it first.



Yes, but think of it form a revenge crazed Romulans point of view, whats more fun watching a planet be pulled apart peace by peace from the outside or watching a planet pull it's self apart form the inside out.

Thrawn183
2009-05-11, 09:14 PM
Well, it certainly wasn't the worst trek movie, but it wasn't a fun experience for me.

- Previews: I closed my eyes when I saw previews for movies that I want to see, but they were so loud covering my ears and humming didn't block out the sound. I'm really pissed about getting such huge chunks of the next Transformers movie spoiled.
- Time Travel. I'm seriously sick and tired of it. Time travel is the sign of weak writing. Yes, occaisionally an entire story will be based around it and it is interesting. Time travel as a plot device is a pathetic cop out to weak writing.
- The first quarter of the movie. Instead of switching to different cameras to view different characters, they pivoted the camera. Same with ship battles. You can show the ships being maneuverable without dancing the camera. When combined with the slight fuzziness of the picture, I got a migraine and almost puked my guts out all over the theater.
- Rewriting characters. Honestly, is it really that hard to write an interesting story without rewriting characters? I mean, this is just another sign of increadibly weak writing on a plot level scale, maybe not as bad as time travel, but definitely close.

That said, I liked kirk and the doctor and the rest of the characters. I liked that the action was more... dynamic. It just wasn't worth the money paid to see it in the theater. Rent it sure, but don't drop 13 bucks.

Swordguy
2009-05-11, 10:01 PM
Frankly, I feel that this movie will revitalize Trek as a franchise - this crew needs their own series. It's good, and it's accessible. Sure, there's quibbles (the scale of the engineering spaces, for example, are almost certainly too large to actually fit within the ship, given the scale of the windows and the depth of the shuttlebay) but if you can't get past them, you're too jaded to be watching movies.

I was rather impressed at the conversation about the alternate timeline. It felt like it was aimed directly at the three hardcore trekkies sitting behind us and pointing out continuity errors. The only way it could have been better is if the actors had DIRECTLY addressed the camera and said something to the effect of "this is a whole new series, and nothing you know applies. Get over yourself. Yeah, you in the 9th row. Just shut up and watch the movie."

Also, I'm disappointed that not one of you mentioned the throwaway line regarding why Scotty was stuck in that remote outpost:

"There was a transporter accident involving Admiral Archer's prize beagle."

"How long did it take him to materialize?"

"I'll let ya' know when he does..."

Poor Porthos!

TheThan
2009-05-11, 10:22 PM
Yeah, your always going to get the hardcore nerds that can’t just sit back and enjoy the movie. It doesn’t take itself seriously, and the audience shouldn’t either.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-05-12, 12:01 AM
Yeah, your always going to get the hardcore nerds that can’t just sit back and enjoy the movie. It doesn’t take itself seriously, and the audience shouldn’t either.

I dunnow. I consider myself a big fan, and my only beef is that Kirk is given a command at the end of the movie. Outside of this, the whole movie is very enjoyable.

I usually simply sit back and try to enjoy the media presented at me :smallwink: But I guess some people can't even do that... :smallfrown:

chiasaur11
2009-05-12, 12:23 AM
I dunnow. I consider myself a big fan, and my only beef is that Kirk is given a command at the end of the movie. Outside of this, the whole movie is very enjoyable.

I usually simply sit back and try to enjoy the media presented at me :smallwink: But I guess some people can't even do that... :smallfrown:

Ah, but remember:

He's James T Kirk.

They'd probably need to kill him to get him out of the chair, and he's just a bit too good a captain to brutally laser to death.

Hell Puppi
2009-05-12, 01:41 AM
See...I thought of the time travel as more of 'this is in a different universe than the original star trek, so we are free to muck about with our own continuity' sort of thing, so that way one is free to do additional movies without the worry that you're screwing around with canon, or that you're going to invalidate the old trek in the eyes of fans by simply plowing along with your own storyline.

Also, Bones and Scotty were awesome.

I did like how everyone seems to have been 'updated' in a way in terms of character. Though I am kind of annoyed that even in the distant future I'd still have to wear a dang skirt, though I guess Uhura just wouldn't be the same without one.

SolkaTruesilver
2009-05-12, 01:54 AM
Ah, but remember:

He's James T Kirk.

They'd probably need to kill him to get him out of the chair, and he's just a bit too good a captain to brutally laser to death.

It still doesn't mean that you hand over a command of a starship to an inexperience cadet who have shown brillance.

There is more to the duties of a Starfleet Captain than making one brillant plan to destroy the ennemy.

If they had fast-tracked him into gaining a Command SOON, maybe. That'd make sense. But right away? Come on... He hasn't even served 1 day as a proper First Officer.

kamikasei
2009-05-12, 02:21 AM
I did like how everyone seems to have been 'updated' in a way in terms of character. Though I am kind of annoyed that even in the distant future I'd still have to wear a dang skirt, though I guess Uhura just wouldn't be the same without one.

Going by the early TNG seasons you wouldn't have to, you just have the option to, whether male or female. Hmmm, did we in fact see any be-pantsed female crew in this movie?

SmartAlec
2009-05-12, 02:28 AM
- Time Travel. I'm seriously sick and tired of it. Time travel is the sign of weak writing. Yes, occaisionally an entire story will be based around it and it is interesting. Time travel as a plot device is a pathetic cop out to weak writing.

Was the time travel in this movie a plot device? It wasn't used to resolve anything; it was simply a frame for the story.

Dervag
2009-05-12, 10:34 AM
Yes, but think of it form a revenge crazed Romulans point of view, whats more fun watching a planet be pulled apart peace by peace from the outside or watching a planet pull it's self apart form the inside out.My theory is as follows:

The drill cuts a bore only a few tens of meters wide. It's too small to destroy an entire planet- even if you cut the planet in half using the drill, it would take an enormous amount of time and gravity would just pull the halves together. You could scour the surface with the drill, but that would likewise take a long time. Moreover, we've seen that the drill is vulnerable to destruction, either from space or (presumably) from ground-based weapon platforms. Nero probably doesn't have an infinite supply of drills.

As for why he uses the drill on the planet, I can think of a reason. He wants the planet to be rapidly consumed by the black hole, so rapidly that escape is almost impossible. If the red matter impacts on the planet's surface, the resulting hole will form there, and will not have dramatic effects on the other side of the planet for quite some time- gravity due to a singularity drops off fast as you move away from it.

By forming the black hole deep underground, he can start causing nasty seismic effects quite rapidly, and the black hole will consume the planet faster.
________


Also, I'm disappointed that not one of you mentioned the throwaway line regarding why Scotty was stuck in that remote outpost:

"There was a transporter accident involving Admiral Archer's prize beagle."

"How long did it take him to materialize?"

"I'll let ya' know when he does..."

Poor Porthos! I find it rather unlikely that the Archer referenced is the Archer who captained the first Enterprise, given the chronology.

But you're right, I totally didn't notice that.
________


Going by the early TNG seasons you wouldn't have to, you just have the option to, whether male or female. Hmmm, did we in fact see any be-pantsed female crew in this movie?I'm... pretty sure I did, but I can't be absolutely certain. Not going to watch it a third time just to check.

Thrawn183
2009-05-12, 01:07 PM
Was the time travel in this movie a plot device? It wasn't used to resolve anything; it was simply a frame for the story.

Think about it like this: Nero was essentially an enemy with a really powerful ship because he was from the future. It's easy to write in him surprising enemies and such because... he's from the future, who would see it coming? Then, when the protagonists need to save the day? Another guy from the future. It actually made the antagonist weaker, because instead of him being a legitimate enemy (ie. someone who's put in the time an effort to say build a fleet capable of taking on the federation) he's just some dude from the future.

Long story short, if you need something time travel is a pathetically easy way to get it and as a result is a writing device for the weak.

Now, if the entire story was about time travel that would be different. It's not. It's about the crew of the enterprise. Time travel didn't make them more special somehow. 99% of the time, time travel just ruins whatever its put into. This is one of those times.

SmartAlec
2009-05-12, 02:34 PM
Now, if the entire story was about time travel that would be different. It's not.

Are you sure? From where I'm sitting, the entire movie was about time travel. Not about time travelling, but rather about the effects that time travel has on a universe and the changes that result.

kamikasei
2009-05-12, 02:53 PM
Are you sure? From where I'm sitting, the entire movie was about time travel. Not about time travelling, but rather about the effects that time travel has on a universe and the changes that result.

No, that was something that happened in the movie.

What the movie was about was the early days of the crew of the Enterprise. The time travel was used to tie this in to established continuity while giving the creators freedom to violate that continuity. For my money it would have been better to just say, "there will be changes. This stuff is now the story instead of the backstory, which necessitates changes for dramatic reasons. Now is not then, so there will be changes for that reason. Just relax and enjoy it." It worked for BSG, after all. (Obviously that was part of a much more comprehensive re-imagining, but it's not like all the changes made between series were necessary just to make the redesigned sets acceptable.)

Look at it this way: was the movie advertised as "Kirk and Spock battle time travelers!" or as "See Kirk and Spock just getting started!"? If the movie had not contained time travel would you be saying, "dang, that movie was about something totally different"? (Yes I know obviously not, but you get my meaning.)

averagejoe
2009-05-12, 02:57 PM
I was rather impressed at the conversation about the alternate timeline. It felt like it was aimed directly at the three hardcore trekkies sitting behind us and pointing out continuity errors. The only way it could have been better is if the actors had DIRECTLY addressed the camera and said something to the effect of "this is a whole new series, and nothing you know applies. Get over yourself. Yeah, you in the 9th row. Just shut up and watch the movie."

I agree. I usually hate time travel, and Trek's increasing dependence on them has been a rather sore point for me over the years (with some notable exceptions) but this was appropriate and, in some ways, hilarious.


I find it rather unlikely that the Archer referenced is the Archer who captained the first Enterprise, given the chronology.

And, even if not, Porthos would be long dead. Could have gotten a new beagle, but it wasn't Porthos.

FatJose
2009-05-12, 03:10 PM
Movie rocked but the people behind that movie sucked on Nemoy's jobbles for too long. After a while I was wondering if he would ever step aside...never did.

Minor Nitpick on how a scene should have gone in my mind.

Spock Prime: Our race is now in the thousands, if that. Your main concern and responsibility should be repopulating but you also have a great blah blah blah with Kirk. There are two of us. We should take advantage of this. You go with Kirk. Boldly go whe-
Spock: Ah Hell Nah! Let me get this straight. You're telling me, young and in his prime Spock, to go get myself in all types of danger while you, an old man, goes around "tending" to all the distraught She-Vulcans left alive?
Spock Prime: Why, ofcourse. It is only logical
Spock: No! You're the ObiWan here!
Spock Prime: Wrong franchise.
Spock: Whatever. If you got such a woody for that jerkbag Kirk, YOU go with him. You got like... a hundred years of experience over me. You go!
Spock Prime:...okay..*mutter mutter* but I wanted to get down with the Pon Farr...

valis
2009-05-12, 06:32 PM
I don't know how to do the spoiler box so I left some space. There's only some minor spoilers so whatever.
















I didn't like this movie and here's why.
*Nero's motivation makes little sense.
*Why he doesn't warn his home planet about there impending doom makes no sense
*Even if his motivation did make sense why didn't go to home planet and help build up an army then destroy Vulcan.
*Why he waits 20 years for the red matter when he can take out an entire fleet of star ships makes the movie pointless.
*Apparently I have to buy the four issue mini to understand the above flaws. **** that.
*Aside from Kirk and Spock all the other characters are wasted.
*I still don't understand how a black hole is the answer to a supernova.
*Spock becoming Captain then First Officer was a hat trick the movie didn't need.
*Product placement!!!! I never want to hear Beastie Boys ever again.
*I understand that Kirk cheats when taking the Kobiashi Maru but I know that when cheating on test you're supposed make it look like your not cheating. Honestly Kirk deserved to get caught.
*Chris Pine acts like a frat boy that uses roofies habitually. I drinking a soda when I was watching this movie and couldn't help but keep my eye on it just in case.

Lerky
2009-05-12, 06:42 PM
But that's my point. If Chris Pine had played it over the top he would have come across as Pine playing William Shatner playing Kirk. As it is he brings his own take to the character, and doesn't come off as imitating Shatner.
I figured Pine was playing it over the top. He was flirting with every girl he saw and passed Starfleet while hardly trying. Not to mention his "stunt" on that one simulation.

Tyrant
2009-05-12, 07:00 PM
*Nero's motivation makes little sense.
His home planet was destroyed when others promised to help. He blames them. It's pretty simple.

*Why he doesn't warn his home planet about there impending doom makes no sense
You got me. Nero was a miner, not a genius. Maybe the thought truly never occured to him (though I consider that unlikely). Or maybe he was taking into account his people's tendency to be quite suspicious of anything and everything and knew his claims would sound dubious at best.

*Even if his motivation did make sense why didn't go to home planet and help build up an army then destroy Vulcan.
The Romulans at this point in time wouldn't have been personally effected by the destruction of Romulus (which, again, they may not believe will happen). It may not have been a simple matter of saying, "hey let's destroy Vulcan for what could be a false claim of a future wrong".

*Why he waits 20 years for the red matter when he can take out an entire fleet of star ships makes the movie pointless.
He wasn't waiting for just the red matter. He wanted Spock to watch his planet die while being powerless to stop it. That Spock had the red matter was simply convenient and allowed him to carry out what he sees as poetic justice using the very thing that was promised to help his people.

*Apparently I have to buy the four issue mini to understand the above flaws. **** that.
I kind of agree with this statement.

*Aside from Kirk and Spock all the other characters are wasted.
Come on. Bones was great.

*I still don't understand how a black hole is the answer to a supernova.
Even though it tries sometimes, Star Trek shouldn't be counted on to have foolproof science.

*Spock becoming Captain then First Officer was a hat trick the movie didn't need.
I can see this complaint.

*Product placement!!!! I never want to hear Beastie Boys ever again.
Oh no, they use a song from our time. There is no possible way songs recorded on numerous mediums could possibly still be around and still have retro fans. Or people might still have products made by current companies. Honestly I think complaints of product placement are pointless. You are watching a commercial product made by a company out to make money. If a product can be put in, it will. I know it can get bad, but I don't consider one song bad.

*Chris Pine acts like a frat boy that uses roofies habitually. I drinking a soda when I was watching this movie and couldn't help but keep my eye on it just in case.
What?

Seraph
2009-05-12, 07:58 PM
*Why he doesn't warn his home planet about there impending doom makes no sense
*Even if his motivation did make sense why didn't go to home planet and help build up an army then destroy Vulcan.

its ****ing Romulus. their shtick is incredible amounts of paranoia and suspicion. not only would they not believe him, they'd probably kill the entire crew the moment they were out of the ship and send the thing to a black ops research center for the next 50 years. Nero himself is Romulan, he knows this.

Joran
2009-05-12, 10:48 PM
Guys, guys, you're missing the big point. The entire movie is racist!

George Takei specifically picked a fencing foil because he didn't want to perpetrate racial stereotypes. What does Sulu in the movie use? A freakin' katana! Of course, because he's Japanese; all Japanese have katanas! Oh and of course, since he's Asian, he knows kung fu! Heck, the actor's Korean and they have him playing a Japanese person. I thought we'd have progressed in 45 years!

For those who are wondering, yes, I'm joking. Some background: Sulu in TOS was supposed to come charging on the bridge with a samurai sword, but George Takei didn't want to perpetrate Asian stereotypes so he insisted on using a fencing foil instead. Also, mocked in Futurama:


Shatner: Oh, that's good, good, good, good. And then, George, you give them a karate chop!

Takei: I find that offensive. Just because I'm of Japanese ancestry you assume I know karate. Have I ever led you to believe I've studied karate?

Shatner: Well, no, but you never talk about yourself.

Takei: (sadly) Maybe if you showed a little interest.

And of course later on in the episode, he did in fact know karate ;)

As a person who watched over a decade worth of Star Trek, I liked the movie and thought it was enjoyable. The time travel plot was an attempt, in Universe, to freshly reboot the series and I think it succeeded.

Oh and fresh science stuff. Even if a supernova can irradiate and sterilize a nearby system, it'd take YEARS for the radiation to get there. In a world of FTL transport, they could have easily rescued everyone.

SmartAlec
2009-05-13, 01:01 AM
Even if a supernova can irradiate and sterilize a nearby system, it'd take YEARS for the radiation to get there.

Perhaps the star in question was in the Romulus system? Most star systems are at least binary.

Hawriel
2009-05-13, 06:13 AM
Well I saw the movie sunday. Im not a die hard treky(er). I am aware of Treks continuity, but not dork enough to be a finatic. I came to the movie with a pritty open mind. I compared it to the ultimates. Things will be a little different but the core is the same. The core of the characters are the same its the continuty that is bugging the crap out of me. Yes I know alternate time line.

However the difference the distruction of the Kelven makes would not put Chekov and Sulu on board the Enterprise with Pike. Chekov didnt join untill afew years after Kirk was captain. It would make alot of sence for Chekov to be in kirks class or just behind him. That's one example for how the actual history could be intigrated into J.J. Abrams alternate time line.

I liked Kirks new history, It made sence seeing as he was now with out his father. I compare it to Sam Jacksion Nick Fury. The character's core is the same but the motives and personality are slightly changed in a way that does not harm him. It just makes him interesting in a new way. However the dudging of my I just want to see this movie as a kid was begining to weaken.

The thing that did it was the romulens. No one new any thing about romulens at that time period. All they new was their lanquage was kinda similar to vulkan. This replaced the moment in time when the federation saw romulens for the fist time. But it was treated as if it wasn't any thing new. Along with the crap black hole plot, and the fact that Pike made a cadet that was one enter button away from being expelled from the academy first officer.

The last plot hole is the romulen ship. Its a mining ship. Nero said so. he was doing his yellow hat construction job when the plot hit him. I dont care what year in the future you come from but a dump truck is a fugging dump truck. Even if it is a drill and back ho combination. I dont care if you take todays giant yellow tonka toy dump truck used in pit mines, and drag it back in time to fight a shermen tank. It's going to lose. It should not have torpedos. Not only this but the layout of the ship was obsurd. One big cavernous space that had mario plat forms for the decks. The whole thing was presuized! At least one of the Kelven's topedose would have breached the hull. End of movie.

I so wanted to like this movie. 12 has to be good. Even numbered star trek movies dont suck.

Edit. I did enjoy all of the actores in the movie. They played their parts very well. I cant stand the story and plot.

Ryusacerdos
2009-05-13, 06:24 AM
About Romulans. At their core, they are Vulcans without the logic and emotional training.

Its stated that Vulcans are naturally extremely emotional creatures, nearly consuming themselves in civil war before Surak's teachings took hold.

Take Spock's near choking to death of Kirk - if Sarek wasn't there to stop him he might have actually killed Kirk right then and there, and he definitely would not of stopped at all if he was not trained to control his emotions.

But Nero doesn't have that training - the death of his wife and child, of his home planet, and most of his race drove him to the genocide he committed and he has no emotional break to stop himself.

Its not logical at all, and that is half of the point of Nero's rage in the movie (the other half is an excuse for the Enterprise crew to get together and kick ass).

Ryusacerdos
2009-05-13, 06:28 AM
The last plot hole is the romulen ship. Its a mining ship. Nero said so. he was doing his yellow hat construction job when the plot hit him. I dont care what year in the futer you come from but a dump truck is a fugging dump truck. Even if it is a drill and back ho combination. I dont care if you take todays giant yellow tonka toy dump truck used in pit mines, and drag it back in time to fight a shermen tank. It's going to lose. It should not have torpedos. Not only this but the layout of the ship was obsurd. One big cavernous space that had mario plat forms for the decks. The whole thing was presuized! At least one of the Kelven's topedose would have breached the hull. End of movie.


The ship having Borg level armaments was explained in the prequel comic series, Star Trek: Countdown.

Nero got some help from Romulan researchers working on reverse engineering Borg technology. Its a mining vessel retrofitted with Borg weapons, shields, and regenerative systems.

kamikasei
2009-05-13, 06:29 AM
The last plot hole is the romulen ship. Its a mining ship. Nero said so. he was doing his yellow hat construction job when the plot hit him. I dont care what year in the futer you come from but a dump truck is a fugging dump truck. Even if it is a drill and back ho combination. I dont care if you take todays giant yellow tonka toy dump truck used in pit mines, and drag it back in time to fight a shermen tank. It's going to lose. It should not have torpedos.

According to the comic tie-in,
after the destruction of Romulus Nero took his (indeed humble and underpowered) mining ship to a secret Romulan military depot and persuaded them to outfit it with their latest-and-greatest technology, Borg-derived stuff that rebuilt it from the inside out and made it capable of kicking ass in its own time.

I thought this was rather silly, to be honest, and it annoys me that they put stuff like this in to supplementary materials. The movie should be capable of making sense on its own.

Ryusacerdos
2009-05-13, 06:33 AM
According to the comic tie-in,
after the destruction of Romulus Nero took his (indeed humble and underpowered) mining ship to a secret Romulan military depot and persuaded them to outfit it with their latest-and-greatest technology, Borg-derived stuff that rebuilt it from the inside out and made it capable of kicking ass in its own time.

I thought this was rather silly, to be honest, and it annoys me that they put stuff like this in to supplementary materials. The movie should be capable of making sense on its own.

Ninja'd you, but personally even before looking it up online I had just made up my own explanation, like the mining vessel was built to mine very special material or Romulans, being the paranoid people they are, had no reason not to arm a ship potentially carrying very valuable or sensitive equipment related to mining.

Actually that is how I deal with most inconsistent things in entertainment - in order to maintain my suspension of disbelief I make my own explanation, one that I find pleasing and enjoy. And if I can't do that then the creators really did mess things up and its not just me being nitpicky.

Hawriel
2009-05-13, 06:35 AM
According to the comic tie-in,
after the destruction of Romulus Nero took his (indeed humble and underpowered) mining ship to a secret Romulan military depot and persuaded them to outfit it with their latest-and-greatest technology, Borg-derived stuff that rebuilt it from the inside out and made it capable of kicking ass in its own time.

I thought this was rather silly, to be honest, and it annoys me that they put stuff like this in to supplementary materials. The movie should be capable of making sense on its own.

Nero must have had the construction yellow paint removed there too. Yet no truck nuts to really show his ship had balls.

Your right. The movie should be able to stand on it's own. It bugged me when I heard about the comic after seeing the movie. Star Wars had been doing this for afew years now. It's part of a full media presentation model holly wood is going for I guess.

Hawriel
2009-05-13, 06:44 AM
Actually that is how I deal with most inconsistent things in entertainment - in order to maintain my suspension of disbelief I make my own explanation, one that I find pleasing and enjoy. And if I can't do that then the creators really did mess things up and its not just me being nitpicky.

I do this to. In some cases I do alot of mental back bending to make it work. Just couldnt with this movie.

@swordguy.

Thanks for showing the beagle lines. I totaly missed the names of the admeral and the dog. :smalltongue:

Obrysii
2009-05-13, 07:46 AM
Besides the plot holes and things being where they are out of convenience, does anyone else hate CGI?

Even now, in 2009, the CGI looks much worse than Star Trek: The Motion Picture's special effects.

kamikasei
2009-05-13, 08:01 AM
Besides the plot holes and things being where they are out of convenience, does anyone else hate CGI?

Even now, in 2009, the CGI looks much worse than Star Trek: The Motion Picture's special effects.

Um.

No?

I was perfectly happy with the CG in this.

Seraph
2009-05-14, 06:23 PM
Guys, guys, you're missing the big point. The entire movie is racist!

George Takei specifically picked a fencing foil because he didn't want to perpetrate racial stereotypes. What does Sulu in the movie use? A freakin' katana! Of course, because he's Japanese; all Japanese have katanas! Oh and of course, since he's Asian, he knows kung fu! Heck, the actor's Korean and they have him playing a Japanese person. I thought we'd have progressed in 45 years!

its actually a cavalry saber.

who's the racist one now?

chiasaur11
2009-05-14, 06:28 PM
its actually a cavalry saber.

who's the racist one now?

I know this one, I know this one...

Dracula, right?

Curse you racist Dracula!

averagejoe
2009-05-14, 07:52 PM
I know this one, I know this one...

Dracula, right?

Curse you racist Dracula!

Don't be too hard on him, he was a product of his times.

chiasaur11
2009-05-14, 08:03 PM
Don't be too hard on him, he was a product of his times.

Well, that excuses him then.

Less so in the present.

Plus, he just killed MI 13 and conquered the UK.

Not exactly cricket, eh what?

Flame of Anor
2009-05-14, 08:20 PM
...so...confused...:smallsigh:

Llama231
2009-05-14, 08:25 PM
Besides the plot holes and things being where they are out of convenience, does anyone else hate CGI?

Even now, in 2009, the CGI looks much worse than Star Trek: The Motion Picture's special effects.


How so? I do not see.

Mauve Shirt
2009-05-14, 09:54 PM
I thought it was a fantastic movie. :smallbiggrin: Very fun, and I think the time travel plot is good enough to reboot the movie. Red matter was dumb, but it's Star Trek, I can't nitpick about the science being dumb.

TheEmerged
2009-05-14, 10:15 PM
Besides the plot holes and things being where they are out of convenience, does anyone else hate CGI?

Even now, in 2009, the CGI looks much worse than Star Trek: The Motion Picture's special effects.

Generally I'm the type to allow people their opinions but... um... no.

I'm not sure how old you are, but I'm old enough to remember seeing ST:TMP in the theatres. This is manifestly not the case. We made fun of how stupid most of the effects looked back then.

Dervag
2009-05-15, 12:12 AM
However the difference the distruction of the Kelven makes would not put Chekov and Sulu on board the Enterprise with Pike. Chekov didnt join untill afew years after Kirk was captain. It would make alot of sence for Chekov to be in kirks class or just behind him. That's one example for how the actual history could be intigrated into J.J. Abrams alternate time line.That's about what happens. Chekov is several years younger than Kirk, but he enters Starfleet only a year or two earlier.

Starfleet makes a common practice of assigning less experienced officers to the conn stations on the bridge in rotation (you can see this in the Original Series episodes; it's not always the same guys there). Chekov "just happens" to be assigned one of the helm slots, probably because he shows exceptional promise- think of him as being as high-scoring in Russia as Kirk is in the US. That gives him the opportunity to distinguish himself as an effective junior officer, albeit one who badly needs to calm down.

Both Chekov and Sulu presumably wind up on the Enterprise because the Enterprise crew gets the highest-scoring cadets. My guess is that the ship had very few assigned officers (since it wasn't quite ready for its maiden voyage), and that they had to fill out the vast majority of the Table of Organization with Academy instructors and cadets.


I liked Kirks new history, It made sence seeing as he was now with out his father. I compare it to Sam Jacksion Nick Fury. The character's core is the same but the motives and personality are slightly changed in a way that does not harm him. It just makes him interesting in a new way.Seconded.


The thing that did it was the romulens. No one new any thing about romulens at that time period. All they new was their lanquage was kinda similar to vulkan. This replaced the moment in time when the federation saw romulens for the fist time. But it was treated as if it wasn't any thing new. Along with the crap black hole plot, and the fact that Pike made a cadet that was one enter button away from being expelled from the academy first officer.Pike may have made a bad decision, but remember that Kirk was the guy who just warned him that he was about to fly into an ambush. Moreover, I don't think Pike seriously expected Spock to wind up incapacitated in a situation that would leave Kirk in command. Depending on just how badly limited his supply of experienced officers was, he may not have had a better choice.

And as for seeing the Romulans, I think I have an explanation. After the attack on the USS Kelvin (carried out by Romulans), the Federation would know what Nero looked like, because of after action reports by surviving bridge crew from the Kelvin. Moreover, it's very likely that the Federation would press for an investigation within the Romulan Empire, Given what just happened to Kelvin, Starfleet desperately needed to know whether the Romulans had that level of capability in general, and whether they were planning a general attack.

The resulting full-court push to get more intelligence on and diplomatic contact with Romulus would leave the Federation at least a little better informed about Romulans than they were in the original timeline.
_______


The last plot hole is the romulen ship. Its a mining ship. Nero said so. he was doing his yellow hat construction job when the plot hit him. I dont care what year in the future you come from but a dump truck is a fugging dump truck. Even if it is a drill and back ho combination. I dont care if you take todays giant yellow tonka toy dump truck used in pit mines, and drag it back in time to fight a shermen tank. It's going to lose. It should not have torpedos. Not only this but the layout of the ship was obsurd. One big cavernous space that had mario plat forms for the decks. The whole thing was presuized! At least one of the Kelven's topedose would have breached the hull. End of movie.I suspect that the Romulan ship has excellent shielding relative to 23rd century weapons (designed to survive large debris impacts or attacks from 24th century raiders); the Kelvin didn't even make a dent except by ramming.

As for those funny cluster missiles, we're not sure how capable they are relative to the ECM and shields of 24th century warships. They work great on the relatively primitive ships Starfleet has available... but the technology level of the 2480s is as far beyond that of the ships Starfleet has in the movie as those ships are beyond the first Enterprise (from the Enterprise TV series). It's no surprise that a large ship designed by the paranoid and militaristic Romulans (probably laid down about the time of the Dominion War) is fitted with weapons that can wipe out a whole fleet of 23rd century ships.
______

I think it makes at least a reasonable amount of sense when the movie is treated as a standalone, even ignoring anything that may be in those comics.

skywalker
2009-05-15, 01:07 AM
Man, I really liked this movie!

I think I'll address a couple of the arguments floating around:

1st, the CGI was pretty awesome, I was unaware I was watching CGI with the exception of the one female alien officer whose face was obviously computer generated. It was a lot better than ST:TMP.

2nd, I was pretty shocked by the mining vessel having massive torpedoes as well. However, Nero is the kind of guy whose first thought when his wife dies is "That guy didn't stop it, which he promised to do. Now this is all his fault, and he must die!" This seems like the kinda guy who might pack a little something extra to begin with. I was still pretty shocked at the size of that vessel. I mean, come on, it dwarfs the Kelvin, and is noticeably bigger than Enterprise... Starfleet ships didn't grow that much in 150 years, but apparently Romulan ships did. I know that Romulan Warbirds from "The Next Generation" were supposed to be bigger than that show's Enterprise, so I guess this thing is about right-sized...

3rd, On the subject of Sulu and race, I don't think it's such a big deal that he had a katana. In 1967, it was "oh, Japanese people use katanas, here George, have a katana." Today it's more like "Ok, the kids really like to see people using katanas, and a fencing foil is really not going to fit into this scene..."

Takei also said that he completely approved of a Korean playing Sulu, since in the original series, Sulu was meant to represent all of Asia. Sulu isn't even a Japanese name. It comes from the Sulu Sea, which is near the Philippines.

Man did I love Charlie Bartlett and his w's v's.

ocato
2009-05-15, 08:31 AM
2nd, I was pretty shocked by the mining vessel having massive torpedoes as well. However, Nero is the kind of guy whose first thought when his wife dies is "That guy didn't stop it, which he promised to do. Now this is all his fault, and he must die!" This seems like the kinda guy who might pack a little something extra to begin with. I was still pretty shocked at the size of that vessel. I mean, come on, it dwarfs the Kelvin, and is noticeably bigger than Enterprise... Starfleet ships didn't grow that much in 150 years, but apparently Romulan ships did. I know that Romulan Warbirds from "The Next Generation" were supposed to be bigger than that show's Enterprise, so I guess this thing is about right-sized...

The way I see it, a mining ship like that has a few things in mind. Jerks might try to steal that which you have mined. Shoot them! Crazy Shrapnel Torpedoes possibly double in clearing large amounts of dirt in some way that might be advantageous when compared to photon torpedoes. Maybe they get a more efficient explosion spread or something? Also, the shape of the ship kind of suggested that it 'eats' asteroids or small moons (or drills into the sides of them, bring the surface into the ship and giving a portable atmosphere for miners). Of course, that's all random speculation and is probably crazy-talk.

Joran
2009-05-15, 01:20 PM
its actually a cavalry saber.

who's the racist one now?

Lies and trickery!

http://www.tvsquad.com/images/2005/10/georgetakei4.jpg

Is that a fencing saber? BTW, did I miss the token "Oh my" from the new Sulu? New Sulu is obviously not as buff as Old Sulu.


3rd, On the subject of Sulu and race, I don't think it's such a big deal that he had a katana. In 1967, it was "oh, Japanese people use katanas, here George, have a katana." Today it's more like "Ok, the kids really like to see people using katanas, and a fencing foil is really not going to fit into this scene..."

Takei also said that he completely approved of a Korean playing Sulu, since in the original series, Sulu was meant to represent all of Asia. Sulu isn't even a Japanese name. It comes from the Sulu Sea, which is near the Philippines.

Wholeheartedly agree, that entire post was tongue in cheek :) Star Trek has a long and proud tradition of screwing up the ethnicity of the Asian crew members. Ensign Kim was played by a Chinese actor, Ensign Sato was played by a Korean actress, Keiko O'Brien was played by a Chinese actress. I don't mind actually, just like a Swedish actor will be called upon to play to play an Irishman, German, and Russian. An actor should be able to play a lot of different roles and different ethnicities.

Also, the word "fencing" has obviously changed in the future, because I'm not sure what kind of "fencing" that was =P

Dervag
2009-05-15, 03:35 PM
2nd, I was pretty shocked by the mining vessel having massive torpedoes as well. However, Nero is the kind of guy whose first thought when his wife dies is "That guy didn't stop it, which he promised to do. Now this is all his fault, and he must die!" This seems like the kinda guy who might pack a little something extra to begin with. I was still pretty shocked at the size of that vessel. I mean, come on, it dwarfs the Kelvin, and is noticeably bigger than Enterprise... Starfleet ships didn't grow that much in 150 years, but apparently Romulan ships did. I know that Romulan Warbirds from "The Next Generation" were supposed to be bigger than that show's Enterprise, so I guess this thing is about right-sized...Also, it's reasonable for a mining ship to be huge- it has to carry very large masses of dense cargo. That might also explain the open construction- metal or ore goes between all those big tentacle-looking structures, where it's easy to get at, and is held in place using tractors, force fields, or just big honking cables strung between the pylons. The design gives you plenty of easily accessible cargo volume while keeping the mass of the ship under control.

Hawriel
2009-05-15, 10:53 PM
Dervag:

Good arguments. I've been thinking about some of that sence I last posted. I agree that even a mining vessal may have weapons. In Nero's time the Romulans, Cardasians, Klingons, Federation and Dominion all faught a huge war afew years befor this super nova. Piracy is most likely a problem again sence thoughs four nations fleets are still being rebuilt. And well it's a Romulan ship they are crazy backstabby any way. Proton torpedos (or what ever they where) still seem a bit much. Two small or med grade phaser or disrupter banks would seem more apropriat. I guess thats getting nitpicky.

Sence it is a mining ship. The things standard tractor beam emitters have to be powerfull. I dont question the large open hullspace eather. Thats whare small or cut pieces larger asteroids would be held for prossessing. I wouldnt be supprised of the ship had a refinery as well. Its the open crew space and oddly platformed decking that made go :smallconfused:.

CGI.

The CGI was good. Even though I dont mind the style of Enterprises interior. I thought it was over done with the blinky, shiny and pinging. I could get a sence of the layout of the bridge, and engineering was a mess.

Ok the only CGI that bugged me was the two aliens. Why have CGI aliens when two extras in makup is better. Then you dont have to remember to stick the CGI alien in the back ground all the time. They forgot. Also why did they have to have new made up aliens? Whare the hell are the Andorians? They always get shafted. Other than on Enterprise.

PC police about asian actors? Who cares? So what if a Chines guy plays a Korian, or a Philipeno plays a Japanies character. How is this different from English playing French, Germens playing Scotts, or Irish playing a Russian. :smallannoyed:

kpenguin
2009-05-15, 11:09 PM
I think you guys are focusing on the wrong thing here. It's not racism that's the problem, it's ageism! George Takei was 29 when he played Sulu on the original series, yet John Cho, who's playing a younger Sulu, is 36! They can't even get the ages right!

((The above post was tongue in cheek. Please do not consider it to be a serious one.))

Hell Puppi
2009-05-15, 11:22 PM
Also, the word "fencing" has obviously changed in the future, because I'm not sure what kind of "fencing" that was =P

Yeah I was wondering about the flipping and stuff...

then I remembered the time my fencing instructor backflipped over a bush :smalleek:

It wasn't really 'traditional' fencing, but then again learning Olympic-style fencing and trying to use it in combat will most likely get you killed.

reorith
2009-05-15, 11:23 PM
this would have made the movie even better.

http://i43.tinypic.com/2dcbwa9.jpg

Jimor
2009-05-16, 06:30 AM
The CGI was good. Even though I dont mind the style of Enterprises interior. I thought it was over done with the blinky, shiny and pinging. I could get a sence of the layout of the bridge, and engineering was a mess.

Yeah, Engineering got a bit overblown. At one point I was all: "Are they running through a... brewery???" :smallconfused:

Overall, though, I enjoyed it a lot, even with the nitpicks.

Zenos
2009-05-16, 12:26 PM
Saw the movie yesternight, it made me smile and laugh.

chiasaur11
2009-05-16, 12:36 PM
Yeah, Engineering got a bit overblown. At one point I was all: "Are they running through a... brewery???" :smallconfused:


Where do you think Scotty got the Ale required to perform his job at peak efficiency?

nothingclever
2009-05-16, 01:29 PM
I mostly liked the movie but I hated the music. The constant use of Gregorian chants to make things exciting and epic was extremely annoying to me. By the end of the movie the music became an outright assault on my ears. Loud generic blurs of nonsense aren't needed even if plenty of other movies use them.

The fighting scenes inside the alien ship were terrible. I hated the garbage where Spock/Kirk runs around avoiding gunfire and we see constant blurry vision nonsense. It reminds me of the last Bourne movie where the camera is shaking all the time even when characters aren't moving to give a more "realistic" feel to the fight scenes. Lots of blurry vision is anticlimactic.

I hated the new Spock and Uhura thing. Uhura just looks like she's only in the movie for sex appeal and because the makers felt a more "mainstream" version of Star Trek meant a tacked on mandatory romance theme was needed.

Rockphed
2009-05-16, 01:37 PM
I hated the new Spock and Uhura thing. Uhura just looks like she's only in the movie for sex appeal and because the makers felt a more "mainstream" version of Star Trek meant a tacked on mandatory romance theme was needed.

You seem woefully uninformed about Star Trek if you think that shipboard romances are new.

KnightDisciple
2009-05-16, 01:56 PM
Where do you think Scotty got the Ale required to perform his job at peak efficiency?

....It all makes so much sense now!

Zenos
2009-05-16, 02:32 PM
@nothingclever: I did find some of the music jarring and unpleasant.

averagejoe
2009-05-16, 02:37 PM
You seem woefully uninformed about Star Trek if you think that shipboard romances are new.

Well, to be fair, that one was pretty random and out of nowhere.

In addition, the obligatory romantic subplot that gets tacked onto every action flick gets kind of old after awhile.

Rockphed
2009-05-16, 02:55 PM
Ninja'd you, but personally even before looking it up online I had just made up my own explanation, like the mining vessel was built to mine very special material or Romulans, being the paranoid people they are, had no reason not to arm a ship potentially carrying very valuable or sensitive equipment related to mining.

Personally I liken it to how a troupe of miners wielding picks might not be the best army you can have, but they can still kill somebody. Mining in space requires use of many of the same principles as fighting, for instance that drill. As such, the Romulans probably had a small supply of missiles for self defense and could turn their Mining Lasers into death beams at a whim.


Well, to be fair, that one was pretty random and out of nowhere.

In addition, the obligatory romantic subplot that gets tacked onto every action flick gets kind of old after awhile.

Well, Ohura has always been the heart of the Enterprise crew, and Spock had at least one woman pining after him in the original series. As such, I can see him getting women to like him, especially one of the most personable women in the crew when he is having problems.

Furthermore, I liked the counterpoint of womanizer Kirk never even getting a name out of Ohura to very much not a womanizer Spock getting her name almost in passing.

nothingclever
2009-05-16, 03:02 PM
You seem woefully uninformed about Star Trek if you think that shipboard romances are new.
I've seen plenty of Star Trek. I'm not an expert on it but I've seen the majority of the different series multiple times.


Well, to be fair, that one was pretty random and out of nowhere.

In addition, the obligatory romantic subplot that gets tacked onto every action flick gets kind of old after awhile.
This is like what I mean. The romance seemed very pointless to me and it didn't make much sense. I guess it's nice to see Kirk being beaten by a more serious person in the area of romance for once but when you think about it Spock isn't very attractive. Sure he has plenty of good qualities but he still talks like a computer and lacks understanding of human interaction such as telling jokes and being sarcastic. Plus I just dislike Uhura in this one since she sounds stupid when she asks him what he needs and proceeds to kiss him all over. It pretty much looks like she's asking him if he wants to have sex to get over his mother dying. I think that scene would've been much nicer if she just hugged him. I'm fine with sex appeal in a Star Trek movie I simply feel her role in it was way too blatant and the romance didn't make sense. It's like that last Star Trek series that was canned where they made the stereotypical analytical person a female Vulcan. I didn't watch much of it but from what I saw it tried to get better ratings by throwing in some extra tacky drama.

averagejoe
2009-05-16, 03:41 PM
Well, Ohura has always been the heart of the Enterprise crew, and Spock had at least one woman pining after him in the original series. As such, I can see him getting women to like him, especially one of the most personable women in the crew when he is having problems.

You misunderstand where I'm coming from. I don't mind the fact that they got together, I mind the fact that it was so damn random. It would have been better if there was some, you know, reason for it, or something. The way they pulled it off the characters just seemed to randomly come together without motivation.

Mercenary Pen
2009-05-16, 07:11 PM
Where do you think Scotty got the Ale required to perform his job at peak efficiency?

Not ale, Whisky.

That being said, I have a few issues:


1- They ruined the enterprise's nacelles.

2- I liked the increased number of phaser banks on enterprise. Took the ship up to a more believable fighting standard without pushing it all the way to Defiant-class weapon coverage.

3- The implication with cadets manning the entire battlegroup under Enterprise is that:
- Those ships were, for the most part, newly built.
- Most competent officers had been reassigned to the major trouble spot of the time, staffing the main fleet with a high proportion of the best officers below staff level that the entirety of starfleet could muster.
- The ships that were not newly built were assigned primarily to the protection of earth. Any capital is symbolic, so even the most magnanimous governments will maintain military assets to defend their capital.

Rutskarn
2009-05-16, 07:19 PM
Saw it.

Pros: Solid movie.

Cons: Needs moar Simon Pegg.

As far as romantic subplots go: this one was kinda tacked on, but at least it didn't dominate the movie. I think I've made my opinions on the matter clear (http://www.chocolatehammer.org/?p=161): movies really need to get over the idea that every movie must end with a couple walking into the sunset, even if it's over the bodies of half a country.

Dervag
2009-05-16, 07:34 PM
Well, Ohura has always been the heart of the Enterprise crew, and Spock had at least one woman pining after him in the original series. As such, I can see him getting women to like him, especially one of the most personable women in the crew when he is having problems.

Furthermore, I liked the counterpoint of womanizer Kirk never even getting a name out of Ohura to very much not a womanizer Spock getting her name almost in passing.It's strongly implied that Spock learned her name during their years of association in the Academy- Uhura was one of Spock's proteges.

Also, if you look at some of the original series episodes, you see evidence of... not romantic tension between Spock and Uhura, not exactly. But Uhura does a bit of comical flirting with Spock, at least in the first several episodes. I can't speak for later in the series, since I haven't watched a substantial fraction of them yet.

The idea of there being chemistry between the two (or, at least, of younger Uhura having a crush on Spock that she would have grown out of in a few years' time) isn't as far out as it sounds.
_____


You misunderstand where I'm coming from. I don't mind the fact that they got together, I mind the fact that it was so damn random. It would have been better if there was some, you know, reason for it, or something. The way they pulled it off the characters just seemed to randomly come together without motivation.So while I agree they didn't do a good enough job of building it up, there's a real precedent for it in the original material. Also, it is made clear that Uhura and Spock knew each other well; Spock's the one who gets her a position on Enterprise, remember?

Also, it's not necessarily a "pairing" at the end of the movie; we don't really see any evidence that there's any kind of a stable relationship there. It seems just as likely that the whole thing was Uhura's reaction to stress and the horrible disaster that had happened to Spock.

chiasaur11
2009-05-16, 07:36 PM
Not ale, Whisky.



Well, yeah, once Scotty gets it working, but Olson, rest his soul, was a fan of a good Romulan Ale.

Ziren
2009-05-16, 07:55 PM
Saw it just now and I think it's mediocre. In pretty much any interview he gave about the movie J.J. Abrams mentioned that he has never been a Star Trek fan. And that's exactly what I saw when I watched the movie.

Major issues were:
- It was an action movie, plain and simple. Star Trek was never about the action and anyone who has watched more than two episodes should know this.

- Spock Prime's "Power of Friendship" speech at the end. You wanted to advance the Kirk - Spock friendship by not interfering? And you only risked the destruction of the federation over it? You're a *insult*!

- A lot more points could be listed here, such a the incredibly one-dimensional characters, but that's actually all falling under "it's an action movie".


Minor issues:
- Sometimes I had the feeling that there was just stuff thrown in that the writers or the director thought to be very science fiction, no matter how little it fit the scenario. Worst offender: The cop in the childhood scene.

- Logical errors:
(A lot of them have been pointed out already, so I'll just list those that I haven't seen in this thread)
1. How did Nero know when Spock Prime would arrive in the past?
2. How did he know that he had killed Kirk's father? Unless he has a photographic memory (which they would have made a plot hook if this were the case) there's no way he would have remembered such a minor detail like the ship on which Kirk's father served from reading through Kirk's memoirs (or whatever he read in the comic, I haven't got it here) once.
3. The big predator on the ice planet left the prey he had already killed to rot to go after Kirk, who makes for a much smaller meal.

FatJose
2009-05-16, 08:05 PM
I liked the random pairing. It was better than what the commercials kept pushing. The trailers made Kirk/Uhura a huge red herring. It was almost a certainty and then "boom" Uhura/Spock. Also, didn't they stroke you fans enough in our happy places? They went as far as putting Nimoy in there and giving this whole convoluted explanation on why THIS Star Trek is different and that it's an alternate time-line so the original is still safe but that isn't enough, I guess.

According to the ever-volatile WikiGods

Nichols "created a relationship between Uhura and Spock as being her mentor and the person she looked up to. Uhura was the only one who could play the Vulcan lyre and the only one who had the audacity to sing a song teasing Spock."


- Logical errors:
(A lot of them have been pointed out already, so I'll just list those that I haven't seen in this thread)
1. How did Nero know when Spock Prime would arrive in the past?
2. How did he know that he had killed Kirk's father? Unless he has a photographic memory (which they would have made a plot hook if this were the case) there's no way he would have remembered such a minor detail like the ship on which Kirk's father served from reading through Kirk's memoirs (or whatever he read in the comic, I haven't got it here) once.
3. The big predator on the ice planet left the prey he had already killed to rot to go after Kirk, who makes for a much smaller meal.

1. I think Nero was looking for "that" period's Spock but didn't know what time he was in. That's why he got REALLY mad when he found out the date
2. Kirk was just born when his father died. He didn't see anything to begin with. Spock knows that Nero killed Kirk's father because he travelled back through time and saw the wreckage/put two and two together and/or kept an ear out for news and recent events. He also talked to Nero personally after going back in time. If you mean Nero? He would know. It would be in the news. He knows Kirk as well. Kirk was known as a legend in Nero's time so I doubt he wouldn't be acting like "Oh, snap. I just killed Kirk's daddy."
3. That bothered me as well. I hate that in movies featuring large carnivores hunting people. Nothing is ever as good as human meat, I guess. What bothered me even more was that it was bright red...in the tundra. How is that a sound evolutionary path to take? "I want everyone and anyone to see me at all times." If only the slightest bit of him was peeking out his cover would be blown.

averagejoe
2009-05-16, 08:42 PM
So while I agree they didn't do a good enough job of building it up, there's a real precedent for it in the original material.

This was actually a point I was going to bring up as a reason why this could have been good; it is, in fact, something I enjoyed in the original material. However, even if one thinks out rational justification after the fact, the way they presented it in the movie felt only one step away from some random girl making out with some random guy. Yes, they knew each other, but there was no indication at all of romantic interest until they started making out because, like, that's what you do when your friend's mom dies I guess? I mean, the prior scene with Spock and Uhura was one I, for whatever reason, took particular note of at the time, and remembered when all the other stuff was going on, and it was still a "what the hell" moment for me.

Ziren
2009-05-16, 08:44 PM
1. I think Nero was looking for "that" period's Spock but didn't know what time he was in. That's why he got REALLY mad when he found out the date
2. Kirk was just born when his father died. He didn't see anything to begin with. Spock knows that Nero killed Kirk's father because he travelled back through time and saw the wreckage/put two and two together and/or kept an ear out for news and recent events. He also talked to Nero personally after going back in time. If you mean Nero? He would know. It would be in the news. He knows Kirk as well. Kirk was known as a legend in Nero's time so I doubt he wouldn't be acting like "Oh, snap. I just killed Kirk's daddy."
3. That bothered me as well. I hate that in movies featuring large carnivores hunting people. Nothing is ever as good as human meat, I guess. What bothered me even more was that it was bright red...in the tundra. How is that a sound evolutionary path to take? "I want everyone and anyone to see me at all times." If only the slightest bit of him was peeking out his cover would be blown.


1. I'm talking about the scene later, when one of Nero's crew members says something along the lines of "We're at the right coordinates. He should appear any time now." And just then, Spock Prime gets out of the time tunnel. Given that they were sent back in time by a black hole without any knowledge about how this worked, I find it implausible that they would be able to calculate when and where Spock would appear.
2. I meant Nero and your explanation makes sense. I guess they would make an honorary mention to Kirk's father after he sacrificed himself to rescue a large number of people (800, according to Captain Pike, though I would think this is propaganda or another logical error given the size of the ship).

SolkaTruesilver
2009-05-17, 12:31 AM
You misunderstand where I'm coming from. I don't mind the fact that they got together, I mind the fact that it was so damn random. It would have been better if there was some, you know, reason for it, or something. The way they pulled it off the characters just seemed to randomly come together without motivation.

I don't think it's possible to show the motivation and keeping it a PG movie...

averagejoe
2009-05-17, 12:54 AM
I don't think it's possible to show the motivation and keeping it a PG movie...

:smallamused:

Touche.

Dervag
2009-05-17, 01:37 AM
- Logical errors:
(A lot of them have been pointed out already, so I'll just list those that I haven't seen in this thread)
1. How did Nero know when Spock Prime would arrive in the past?I'm going to guess math. Nero had plenty of sensor data on the black hole and on what happened when Spock entered it. Assuming that the science of his era can analyze and understand black hole-based time travel (and since they can create black holes, that seems likely), it's quite possible that with years to do the math, he could figure out when and where Spock would arrive.

Nero may not have known what stardate he arrived in, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have calculated stuff about the time travel effect once he had the current stardate for calibration.

At the very least, he might get a rough clue that he could use to stake out that general region of space, then fly closer to the scene as the black hole formed. Remember how the USS Kelvin found the hole, and Nero, in the first place? They didn't know it was going to be there, but they were close enough to reach it before Nero's ship came through.
________


2. How did he know that he had killed Kirk's father? Unless he has a photographic memory (which they would have made a plot hook if this were the case) there's no way he would have remembered such a minor detail like the ship on which Kirk's father served from reading through Kirk's memoirs (or whatever he read in the comic, I haven't got it here) once.Assume that Nero has been monitoring Federation transmissions or otherwise tapping into the Federation network. He's had 25 years with nothing to do but prepare and gather intelligence on Federation space before Spock arrives. So it's not surprising that at some point he ran into a partial account of the attack on the USS Kelvin. At which point, he would probably see something like "Commander Kirk rammed the alien vessel, sacrificing his own life to cover the escape of the survivors."

Now, Nero may not be all that familiar with Federation history, but the name "Kirk" almost has to ring a few alarm bells in his head. His first thought is along the lines of "Holy crap did I just kill the Captain Kirk?" Assuming there's something like an encyclopedia on board his ship (with future computers, that's likely), he can quickly determine that no, he didn't... and deduce just who he had killed.


3. The big predator on the ice planet left the prey he had already killed to rot to go after Kirk, who makes for a much smaller meal.Yeah. That bugged me too. The only thing I can think of is that it planned to go back for that kill later.
_______


3. That bothered me as well. I hate that in movies featuring large carnivores hunting people. Nothing is ever as good as human meat, I guess. What bothered me even more was that it was bright red...in the tundra. How is that a sound evolutionary path to take? "I want everyone and anyone to see me at all times." If only the slightest bit of him was peeking out his cover would be blown.It's so big that it's effectively impossible for it to sneak up on anything. The beast is clearly an ambush predator- it skulks around below the ice, then breaks up through and grabs its prey before the prey has time to run or put up much of a fight. In that environment, being bright red is only a disadvantage if the enemy gets a chance to see you... which it doesn't, you being under the ice.

Alternatively, the bright red coloration may be a temporary thing. Maybe this is Giant Amphibious Ice-Monster mating season, and the redness evolved to attract mates.
_________


This was actually a point I was going to bring up as a reason why this could have been good; it is, in fact, something I enjoyed in the original material. However, even if one thinks out rational justification after the fact, the way they presented it in the movie felt only one step away from some random girl making out with some random guy. Yes, they knew each other, but there was no indication at all of romantic interest until they started making out because, like, that's what you do when your friend's mom dies I guess? I mean, the prior scene with Spock and Uhura was one I, for whatever reason, took particular note of at the time, and remembered when all the other stuff was going on, and it was still a "what the hell" moment for me.Call it a stress reaction. That really does happen to some people in traumatic circumstances.

Also, notice that Spock isn't really reacting as if he has any strong feelings for Uhura aside from the teacher-student respect. He's so tightly controlled that it's hard to tell, but it seemed to me like Spock is just sort of riding it out, trying not to hurt Uhura's feelings and give her the reassurance she needs. So this may even be a one-way thing, not a "pairing" in the sense of "they go steady, eventually get married, and live happily ever after."

I would speculate that we can square this with the behavior of Uhura in the original series- for a few years back at the Academy, Uhura was attracted to Spock, but he didn't reciprocate it, and eventually she got over it. The humor we see her poking at Spock in Original Series episodes is a coping mechanism, or possibly a reaction to how foolish she feels about having a crush on him.
______


2. I meant Nero and your explanation makes sense. I guess they would make an honorary mention to Kirk's father after he sacrificed himself to rescue a large number of people (800, according to Captain Pike, though I would think this is propaganda or another logical error given the size of the ship).The Kelvin could have had an additional group of colonists or researchers on board. Or, being a relatively older ship (probably 40 to 60 years older than Enterprise), it may have required a larger crew because there was less automation and fewer systems that could be operated by remote control without a human being watching them all the time.

Rockphed
2009-05-17, 01:50 AM
My thought on the Kelvin was that it was a colony ship. I don't have anything other than that at some point in the original series Kirk mentions having 400 some lives to worry about and the Kelvin looking like it has about the same size saucer as the enterprise.

skywalker
2009-05-17, 03:07 AM
Yeah I was wondering about the flipping and stuff...

then I remembered the time my fencing instructor backflipped over a bush :smalleek:

It wasn't really 'traditional' fencing, but then again learning Olympic-style fencing and trying to use it in combat will most likely get you killed.

Fencing is technically just a convoluted corruption of the latin for "defense." I think using it as a general term for "sword-fighting" would be fine...

I know we've moved on from race but in the case of Asian actors playing other Asian ethnicities, there are certain rather well-known distinguishing characteristics among East Asians that make suspension of disbelief slightly harder for some of us. Sulu, however, is a completely generic name. Does anyone know if they ever call him Hikaru? I think a Japanese person might be upset that a Korean was playing a character who was originally Japanese. The idea that they're "interchangeable" might offend some Asians as well. It's pretty clear, in any case, that Takei is Japanese, and pretty clear that John Cho is Korean.

Leliel
2009-05-17, 03:56 AM
All I have to say is this:

When can I fly the Narada's class in Star Trek Online?

Winthur
2009-05-17, 06:20 AM
Oh my God, this is definitely going to be one of the best movies of 2009! I loved everything - action, acting, music, effects, the characters were well fleshed out, and humor - while funny - wasn't forced upon you. Very fun to watch.

Worth watching at least three times.

Also: Jennifer Morrison as Kirk's mother! :smallbiggrin:

averagejoe
2009-05-17, 06:43 AM
Call it a stress reaction. That really does happen to some people in traumatic circumstances.

Also, notice that Spock isn't really reacting as if he has any strong feelings for Uhura aside from the teacher-student respect. He's so tightly controlled that it's hard to tell, but it seemed to me like Spock is just sort of riding it out, trying not to hurt Uhura's feelings and give her the reassurance she needs. So this may even be a one-way thing, not a "pairing" in the sense of "they go steady, eventually get married, and live happily ever after."

I would speculate that we can square this with the behavior of Uhura in the original series- for a few years back at the Academy, Uhura was attracted to Spock, but he didn't reciprocate it, and eventually she got over it. The humor we see her poking at Spock in Original Series episodes is a coping mechanism, or possibly a reaction to how foolish she feels about having a crush on him.

I really don't see it as a "pairing;" actually that's one of the things that fan communities do that I find puzzling. I just claim that they in no way really bothered to sell it. It can be rationalized and explained to a certain amount of satisfaction; sure, it fits the character, and sure these things do happen in stressful situations. However, I just didn't buy it. They didn't bother to set it up, the situation was improbable at best, implausible at worst, and the actors didn't really sell it. It really could have been a scene where a woman picked a guy at random, went up to him without greeting, and kissed him. With some change of costume and background.

What made it work in the old series was that Nichelle Nichols was able to pull off a sort of playful flirtatiousness in such a way that it was genuinely charming, and somehow managed to evoke a sense of chemistry even with Spock's, um, lack of it. I'm not sure if I saw New Uhura display emotions besides annoyance or borderline arrogant confidence. There didn't seem to be any genuine warmth there.

So, in the end, I don't know what it is. I'd have to see it again to be sure. It could have been the writing choices, or the directing choices, the actors, or a combination of all of them. Point is, that whole subplot was pulled off in a fairly unsatisfying manner.

Brewdude
2009-05-17, 07:33 AM
It looks like some of you are just unobservant.
The Uhura/Spock pairing was set up plenty early in the film when Spock showed concern about appearing to "play favorites." What the heck do you THINK he was talking about?

And no, don't go saying that you were talking about that they got paired at all...the posts clearly show annoyance that the kissyface "came out of nowhere," which clearly isn't the case.


No, the problems weren't plot, they were science, which is nothing new for star trek.

ocato
2009-05-17, 07:46 AM
I have to agree, the movie seems to set up that the Spock/Uhura relationship existed prior to their station on the Enterprise. Granted, this was sort of vague ('playing favorites' came off as 'favorite pupil' not "Lt. Kissyface') and didn't make perfect sense until later, but after seeing the entire movie, it's pretty clear that that is what they were trying to do.

Hawriel
2009-05-17, 08:32 AM
Im glad some one els was put off by the big red monster. It was wholy nonsensicle. It was JJ abrams uneeded another bigger fish from phantom menace. The saber tooth polar bear thing looked like it belonged in that enviornment. This Lucas/D&D monster did not.

I didnt have any problems with Uhura and Spocks romance. Maybe if they showed Uhura actualy in the acadamy it would have for shadowed it better. However when Uhura chewed out spock for not being assined to the Enteprise there was the abviose logical know what I deserve argument. And a definate 'if you ever want to see me naked again' undercurent.

(edit) I actualy thought it was a great foil for Kirks always getting the girl shtik. The same way as he always got the crap beat out of him in every fist fight.

As for engineering looking to much like a brewery. I was talking to an aquantance and she said it they used a winery for engeering set.

JadedDM
2009-05-17, 07:59 PM
What's this about black holes and time travel?

Was I the only one who learned in 4th grade that black holes are not holes at all, but super dense collapsed stars?

Zocelot
2009-05-17, 08:29 PM
I saw the movie with some of my smartest friends. I thought it was decent and enjoyed it, but I doubt I'll see it again. As always, it was fun to point out all of the innacuracies after it was over.

Zain
2009-05-17, 09:11 PM
the new starterk movie is asome:smallbiggrin:

Meltemi
2009-05-17, 10:09 PM
What's this about black holes and time travel?

Was I the only one who learned in 4th grade that black holes are not holes at all, but super dense collapsed stars?

Well, hypothetically, if I recall my grade school astrophysics (which consisted of the one book we had at the library, mind you) right, a rapidly rotating collapsing body that maintains its angular momentum would form a toroidal singularity, rather than a point singularity. Since we don't exactly know at all what's on the other side of such a black hole, this could conceivably be stretched to permit transit, after a fashion, leading to the theorized "black hole as wormhole" concept or like form of travel, time or otherwise. As a practical matter, the "after a fashion" bit is because you still have to overcome the minor problem of successfully transiting and escaping a body so dense that light itself cannot pass, and that leaves aside the very likely fact that there is almost certainly no "other side" to consider. On the other hand, I suppose the USS Kelvin finding a mysterious dusting of atomic debris and a flash of Hawking radiation would have been a bit anti-climactic.

I saw it today. I rather liked it, though I'll admit that Kirk being raced straight from Cadet to Captain at the end bothers me a little (over Spock, no less), and even excepting that most of his graduating class got wiped out around Vulcan, I cannot help but wonder how that's going to look to the rank and file. On the other hand, Starfleet's never made any pretention about being a fully military organization; if anything, their pretentions have been a touch in the opposite direction, up to and including putting large families on the Galaxy class to discourage risk-taking and loudly insisting to all that will listen that they're purely a peaceful and exploratory institution that just happens to have warships as powerful as any of their counterparts. I also can't help but wonder what happened to all of the colonies you would expect Vulcan to have founded off-world if there are only something like the cited 10k left, or what happened to Robert April, or Sulu with a katana instead of epee or rapier, or...well...we'll leave that aside. I thought that there were several nice touches, like Uhura being assigned to the Farragut, the unfortunate demise of Porthos, the red-shirt being the odd one out when Kirk and Sulu went after the drill on Vulcan, the shuttle design, and so forth. I actually half-expected them to reveal in the camera pan that the shuttle that brought the Kelvin's captain over the Nero's ship was named Galileo, no less. ^_^

Trizap
2009-05-17, 11:57 PM
I liked how Spock said "live long and prosper" to those council guys at the academy as if it was a threat. I mean when you can turn a wish for a good life into a defiant threat, you know you are awesome.

skywalker
2009-05-18, 02:39 AM
What's this about black holes and time travel?

Was I the only one who learned in 4th grade that black holes are not holes at all, but super dense collapsed stars?

No one is really quite sure. At all. This isn't like gravity where we're pretty darn sure, but not quite. Or anti-matter, where we're kinda, like 90% sure. This is one of those things where we're really not sure. But the leading theory among "smart people" at the moment is that you could conceivably go back in time via a black hole. *shrug.* It's what my science-smart friend from Carnegie Mellon said after the movie to a friend who raised your exact same question.

Ziren
2009-05-18, 03:16 AM
No one is really quite sure. At all. This isn't like gravity where we're pretty darn sure, but not quite. Or anti-matter, where we're kinda, like 90% sure. This is one of those things where we're really not sure. But the leading theory among "smart people" at the moment is that you could conceivably go back in time via a black hole. *shrug.* It's what my science-smart friend from Carnegie Mellon said after the movie to a friend who raised your exact same question.

Actually, according to a friend of mine who is writing her thesis about black holes, the only thing links time travel with them is, that some black holes are apparently so dense, that their gravity could bend time (well, every object that has a gravitational field does that, but it's usually neglible). However, the gravity of such a phenomenon would rip you to shreds before you could observe if you really went back in time (or to the future).



I'm going to guess math. Nero had plenty of sensor data on the black hole and on what happened when Spock entered it. Assuming that the science of his era can analyze and understand black hole-based time travel (and since they can create black holes, that seems likely), it's quite possible that with years to do the math, he could figure out when and where Spock would arrive.

Nero may not have known what stardate he arrived in, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have calculated stuff about the time travel effect once he had the current stardate for calibration.

At the very least, he might get a rough clue that he could use to stake out that general region of space, then fly closer to the scene as the black hole formed. Remember how the USS Kelvin found the hole, and Nero, in the first place? They didn't know it was going to be there, but they were close enough to reach it before Nero's ship came through.

Doesn't make sense. Nero was the first one to be pulled into the black hole (which the writers use as an explanation for why he went further to the past, which makes even less sense), so he couldn't know when exactly Spock would have entered the black hole. And considering that a few seconds made a difference of 25 years... yeah guessing wouldn't get you very far.

Oslecamo
2009-05-18, 04:46 AM
Doesn't make sense. Nero was the first one to be pulled into the black hole (which the writers use as an explanation for why he went further to the past, which makes even less sense), so he couldn't know when exactly Spock would have entered the black hole. And considering that a few seconds made a difference of 25 years... yeah guessing wouldn't get you very far.

You need to take the following in consideration:

1-Nero is the comander of a mining ship.
2-Said mining ship has enough firepower to curb stomp entire fleets.
3-Said mining ships also has resources and tools to survive all by itself for 25 years in federation space whitout being detected or needing to dock for maintenance.
4-It also includes interrogation tools.
5-All in all it actually threatened the whole federation by itself.

So clearly since it has super heavy fire power, resistance, durability and interrogation labs, it's not much of a stretch that they have some super advanced physics lab inside that would allow them to discover when and where Spock would pop up.

factotum
2009-05-18, 06:48 AM
Apparently there were some deleted scenes suggesting that the Narada got crippled with the Kelvin rammed it, and Nero and his crew then spent the next 25 years as "guests" of the Klingon government on Rura Penthe. This raises all sorts of other questions, though, like why didn't the Klingons spend those 25 years ripping the Narada apart for every single bit of tech they could get off it? In fact, they must have REPAIRED the thing for Nero and his crew to be able to get away in it!

Kris on a Stick
2009-05-18, 06:52 AM
Apparently there were some deleted scenes suggesting that the Narada got crippled with the Kelvin rammed it, and Nero and his crew then spent the next 25 years as "guests" of the Klingon government on Rura Penthe. This raises all sorts of other questions, though, like why didn't the Klingons spend those 25 years ripping the Narada apart for every single bit of tech they could get off it? In fact, they must have REPAIRED the thing for Nero and his crew to be able to get away in it!

Dun dun dunnn!!!! I think we have the villains of the next movie/season. :smalltongue:

Man, Borg regeneration technology must be advanced.

SmartAlec
2009-05-18, 09:03 AM
he couldn't know when exactly Spock would have entered the black hole.

One assumes that the Narada's crew would have the sensor data from just prior to them going into the black hole, so they'd have some details on what was happening with Spock's ship. They'd likely have a bit of information on Spock's ship, such as mass and engine output, seeing as they were working with him. They'd also have details on the black hole itself, such as how strong the pull of it was. The rest is extrapolation, all they'd need is a computer.

Dervag
2009-05-18, 10:07 AM
Well, hypothetically, if I recall my grade school astrophysics (which consisted of the one book we had at the library, mind you) right, a rapidly rotating collapsing body that maintains its angular momentum would form a toroidal singularity, rather than a point singularity. Since we don't exactly know at all what's on the other side of such a black hole, this could conceivably be stretched to permit transit, after a fashion, leading to the theorized "black hole as wormhole" concept or like form of travel, time or otherwise. As a practical matter, the "after a fashion" bit is because you still have to overcome the minor problem of successfully transiting and escaping a body so dense that light itself cannot pass, and that leaves aside the very likely fact that there is almost certainly no "other side" to consider.I would point out that Star Trek technology includes an understanding of the structure of spacetime far greater than our own. As best as I can determine, their warp drive wouldn't even work without their using such an understanding to fold the spacetime immediately around their ship like a silly paper hat. Therefore, I'll grant them a pass on being able to transit a wormhole successfully.


I saw it today. I rather liked it, though I'll admit that Kirk being raced straight from Cadet to Captain at the end bothers me a little (over Spock, no less), and even excepting that most of his graduating class got wiped out around Vulcan, I cannot help but wonder how that's going to look to the rank and file.It occurs to me that this may have been a political decision. With Vulcan destroyed and most of the Vulcan species wiped out, Earth is the premier planet of the Federation. Sure, there are other species in the organization, but none of them can rival humanity's position as the prime mover of Starfleet. With the Vulcan "brain trust" largely destroyed, Earth's role as the military core of the Federation becomes far more important in relative terms, and the "United Federation of Planets" starts to look a lot like the "Terran League" or something like that.

And James Kirk is the (telegenic) guy who just saved the Earth from destruction at the hands of a ruthless alien enemy. Even Spock himself is likely to admit that he would not have saved Earth if not for Kirk, and if he doesn't the bridge recorder will. Spock was headed somewhere completely different.

If Kirk had failed, homo sapiens would have been in nearly as bad a fix as the Vulcans, and the Federation would have lost both its greatest research labs and the heart of its military in less than a week. But Kirk succeeded by taking command of a starship. He probably never should have had that command, but no one can argue with the results.
________

At the same time, the Federation's leadership (senior politicians and admirals) are going to be taking a lot of flak from the general public. They failed to protect Vulcan, and except for a great deal of luck they would have failed to protect Earth. So one way they can draw public attention away from their own failure is to promote success, make Kirk out to be even more of a hero than he already was, and give him a prominent position that maximizes his "media darling" status.

At least, that's my explanation for Kirk getting Enterprise. Make sense?
________


I also can't help but wonder what happened to all of the colonies you would expect Vulcan to have founded off-world if there are only something like the cited 10k left, or what happened to Robert April, or Sulu with a katana instead of epee or rapier, or...well...we'll leave that aside.In 1965, having Sulu be proficient with a katana, jian, or other classical "Eastern" sword would have been pure orientalism. Giving him an epee made sense because epees were within the range of swords a Western audience would consider "normal" and not "exotic..." in the worst possible sense of the word "exotic." In the context of 2009, they can get away with it. Katanas are recognized well enough that they are not just part of the native garb of 'traditional Asians.'

On top of that, a fencing epee would have been a rather silly weapon to carry into a serious fight, even a serious swordfight in any case. A longer, straight-bladed sword makes more sense in that context.
_______


I liked how Spock said "live long and prosper" to those council guys at the academy as if it was a threat. I mean when you can turn a wish for a good life into a defiant threat, you know you are awesome.I'm not sure I'd call it a threat, but it was a great example of defiance. The tone I got from it was "You disgust me, I will have no part of this, goodbye."
_______


Doesn't make sense. Nero was the first one to be pulled into the black hole (which the writers use as an explanation for why he went further to the past, which makes even less sense), so he couldn't know when exactly Spock would have entered the black hole. And considering that a few seconds made a difference of 25 years... yeah guessing wouldn't get you very far.Nero knew where Spock was at the time hewent in, and he could make a pretty good estimate of how long it would take Spock to get sucked into the hole. Not a great one, but... it was all he really had to work with. He needed to capture Spock if he wanted a weapon capable of destroying planets, rather than merely damaging them. Even if he'd had to cope with a measurement error of a few years either way, that would be good enough.

Also, it's possible that when you enter the hole doesn't matter nearly as much as the mass of your ship, which "side" you enter from, and a number of other factors much better known to Nero.

Ziren
2009-05-18, 03:43 PM
Nero knew where Spock was at the time hewent in, and he could make a pretty good estimate of how long it would take Spock to get sucked into the hole. Not a great one, but... it was all he really had to work with. He needed to capture Spock if he wanted a weapon capable of destroying planets, rather than merely damaging them. Even if he'd had to cope with a measurement error of a few years either way, that would be good enough.

Also, it's possible that when you enter the hole doesn't matter nearly as much as the mass of your ship, which "side" you enter from, and a number of other factors much better known to Nero.

Paraphrasing Spock: Nero's ship got sucked in first, so it emerged 25 years earlier. So yes, entrance time seems to be the only factor important to when you appear in the past. Like I said before though: It makes no sense. Since the black holes mass increases the longer it's existing space-time should actually be MORE bent is you enter later and thus send you to a point in history that is further away from the one you started at.

Dervag
2009-05-18, 06:29 PM
Paraphrasing Spock: Nero's ship got sucked in first, so it emerged 25 years earlier. So yes, entrance time seems to be the only factor important to when you appear in the past. Like I said before though: It makes no sense. Since the black holes mass increases the longer it's existing space-time should actually be MORE bent is you enter later and thus send you to a point in history that is further away from the one you started at.Spock said something along the lines of "what was a few seconds for me was twenty-five years for Nero." That doesn't give us any insight into why that should be true.

Maybe the mass of the ship matters. Maybe the "warp factor" the ship's drive is at when it transits the wormhole matters. Maybe the other endpoint of the wormhole moves closer to the first endpoint in time as the hole forms fully, and eventually the two holes wind up superimposed on each other at the same time, collapsing into a "true" black hole that you can't sail through.

The key unifying point here is that we don't know. All we really know is that the Star Trek universe has a wide range of technologies for manipulating the shape of spacetime, including several established mechanisms for time travel. They know more than we do, and we don't have a good sense of the upper limit on what they're capable of.

So this is a case where I'm willing to grant the writers a pass. Given the basic improbability (that a ship with a warp drive we know manipulates spacetime) can pass through a wormhole and travel backwards in time by entering a black hole, we have no idea how this phenomenon works or how well understood it is in the Star Trek universe in the 2380s. According to what we know about physics, it shouldn't be possible at all. So if it is possible then it requires physics and engineering knowledge we don't have and don't understand well enough to define limits on.

That is not to say that "anything's possible." But I see no compelling reason to assume Nero can't predict Spock's emergence point, given that he knows a fair amount about Spock's ship, Spock's trajectory before entering the hole, and the method Spock used to go through.

sealemon
2009-05-19, 12:04 AM
Saw the movie. Loved the movie. Some random thoughts:

1. While a retractable katana was pretty cool, I too would have liked to see some sort of fighting rapier/epee/calvery sword instead...just because.

2. However, seeing the Red Shirt buy it, combined with the retractable parachutes made up for it. Also liked the whole Ultimate Halo jump.

3. No problem here with a Romulen mining ship being armed. Would have been more irked if it HADN'T have been. And as it was, it seemed to me that using missles made mroe sense than having rows and rows of disruptors. Maybe it's just all those years of playing MOO and MOO2 (In those games missles are better for the cheaper ships you build; the advance ships generally have mroe beam weapons).

4. Black hole for time travel? meh, no sillier than slingshotting the sun to achieve not only timetravel, but controlable timetravel.

5. The main thing that got to me is something I haven't noticed on this thread yet; Spock maroning Kirk on the planent was out of character at best, and a court marshal offense at worst. The ship's brig would have been the logical choice for the obrderline insubordination Kirk was showing. The only reason to send him to the planet was...the plot required it for him to meet Spock Prime.

6. I hadn't read anything about the movie before going to see it, so as soon as it was clear it would be time travel I was a little unnerved, but i liked the way it was handled. A clever way to molify the Trekers who wouldn't be able to STAND any changes to canon as well as taking the series in a new direction. For a Star Trek fan like me who isn't married to the series, it was an interesting study in how a single event can change so many things.

Serpentine
2009-05-19, 12:24 AM
Saw it yesterday - went on a 4 hour round-trip roadtrip to do so. I liked it, though I think I would've liked it more if I'd seen all the other movies first, like I wanted to.
I've gotta say, if you want to reboot an old and well-loved series, there're worse ways of doing it than explicitly creating an entire alternate universe for it.
By the way,anyone think the Spock-Uhura thing might've been a nod to the "first interracial kiss on US TV" (which apparently was only about the 3rd)?

edit: My Boy has an inquiry: Why was a mining ship armed up the wazoo, and why was that hugefriggingmongous Lovecraftian monstrosity only manned by about 8 people?

Joran
2009-05-19, 09:59 AM
5. The main thing that got to me is something I haven't noticed on this thread yet; Spock maroning Kirk on the planent was out of character at best, and a court marshal offense at worst. The ship's brig would have been the logical choice for the obrderline insubordination Kirk was showing. The only reason to send him to the planet was...the plot required it for him to meet Spock Prime.


Well, Spock was already really annoyed at Kirk for cheating at his test. He had just lost his mother and most of his species. Kirk also managed to sneak onto the starship in the first place and has at least one friend who was willing to help him. Firing him out onto another planet seems plausible for an emotionally roiled Spock who wants nothing to do with Kirk and is looking for the easiest way to get rid of him.

Personally, I was surprised Spock Prime was even on that planet. I would have thought Nero would keep Spock Prime on his ship, show him his planet being destroyed, and relish the look on his face. Maybe monologue a bit as he's doing it.

factotum
2009-05-19, 10:54 AM
edit: My Boy has an inquiry: Why was a mining ship armed up the wazoo, and why was that hugefriggingmongous Lovecraftian monstrosity only manned by about 8 people?

Again, this is stuff they didn't put in the film--supposedly the Narada was retrofitted with some military hardware by a few surviving Romulan scientists. Can't help but feel that leaving out a lot of this explanation did the film no favours!

Flame of Anor
2009-05-19, 11:40 AM
the new starterk movie is asome:smallbiggrin:

http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm303/Lord_Chamberlains_Men/starterk.jpg

STARTERK

skywalker
2009-05-19, 02:22 PM
edit: My Boy has an inquiry: Why was a mining ship armed up the wazoo, and why was that hugefriggingmongous Lovecraftian monstrosity only manned by about 8 people?

It is still a mining ship. Most of it's functions are probably automated. This thing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger_288') has a tiny crew.

sealemon
2009-05-19, 07:06 PM
Well, Spock was already really annoyed at Kirk for cheating at his test. He had just lost his mother and most of his species. Kirk also managed to sneak onto the starship in the first place and has at least one friend who was willing to help him. Firing him out onto another planet seems plausible for an emotionally roiled Spock who wants nothing to do with Kirk and is looking for the easiest way to get rid of him.

The easiest (not to mention SOP) procedure would have been to confine him to the brig. An investigation would have easily revealed Bone's culpability; either send him to the brig as well, or in the event the medical staff is short, confine the doctor to medical with a security detail.

But doing such a common sense and logical step would have prevented Kirk from meeting Spock Prime, not to mention being chased by the slimy spider/dino critter. Or meeting Scotty and his mutant Ommpa Loompa buddy.

sealemon
2009-05-19, 07:10 PM
Personally, I was surprised Spock Prime was even on that planet. I would have thought Nero would keep Spock Prime on his ship, show him his planet being destroyed, and relish the look on his face. Maybe monologue a bit as he's doing it.
Yeah, now that you mention it, confining Spock to the planet (especially so close to a Federation outpost) seems conter intuative.


My Boy has an inquiry: Why was a mining ship armed up the wazoo, and why was that hugefriggingmongous Lovecraftian monstrosity only manned by about 8 people?

Again, this is stuff they didn't put in the film--supposedly the Narada was retrofitted with some military hardware by a few surviving Romulan scientists. Can't help but feel that leaving out a lot of this explanation did the film no favours!

I cannot STAND being required to read a comic or novel to understand what the film should have made clear.

Besides, it makes sense to me that the ship would be huge to move more ore, and that it would be armed becuase 1. Space pirates and 2. It's a romulan ship

Still loved the film though. Not like Star Trek has ever been exaclty hard sci-fi.

KnightDisciple
2009-05-19, 08:32 PM
Yeah, considering it's from the future, I'm sure there's plenty of automation (even putting aside any comic info). Also, we only saw the "bridge crew" mostly. We don't know how many crew it actually had.

As for armament; consider how relatively slow it was. Yeah, it caught Old Spock's ship, but that was mostly surprise. Pirates are probably not eliminated, and Romulans are quite paranoid. Also, the only thing we see could conceivably be really suped-up mining charges. (Yes, I know, comic, but I'm going with others that I've seen put this forward as an explanation that doesn't need the comics, but doesn't explicitly conflict.) The shape, while weird, could work for basically wrapping around asteroids and slowly ripping them apart.

factotum
2009-05-20, 02:30 AM
Besides, it makes sense to me that the ship would be huge to move more ore, and that it would be armed becuase 1. Space pirates and 2. It's a romulan ship


The thing that got me, though, is why the ship had so much completely empty space inside. It makes sense to build the ship as small as possible to save on costs, particularly for something that's designed as a commercial mining vessel, yet they built it about 10 times larger than necessary and designed it to look like the offspring of Cthulhu and a Mack truck? Didn't make a great deal of sense. Although it DID look majorly cool as it came out of the singularity at the beginning of the film!

Kris on a Stick
2009-05-20, 02:37 AM
Two Words: Cargo Capacity. There's no sense in building a cargo ship that doesn't have giant empty spaces inside. That's what a cargo ship is.

Ziren
2009-05-20, 03:09 AM
Also: In the prequel comic it is shown that Nero's ship is able to attack while being cloaked. One has to wonder why he never used that move in the movie. Seriously, he's shown to destroy a dozen Kilngon ships that way, one would think that during that time he could take on the whole federation armada, if he just used that technology.

Dervag
2009-05-20, 10:31 AM
Also: In the prequel comic it is shown that Nero's ship is able to attack while being cloaked. One has to wonder why he never used that move in the movie. Seriously, he's shown to destroy a dozen Kilngon ships that way, one would think that during that time he could take on the whole federation armada, if he just used that technology.We never see him fight a whole fleet at once. For all we know, he did cloak to destroy the (six? seven?) Federation ships that arrive at Vulcan ahead of the Enterprise. Or to destroy the (forty-something?) Klingon warbirds mentioned in that transmission in the movie.

He's more interested in destroying planets than killing ships, so his ability to cloak and fight entire fleets isn't all that relevant to his strategy unless he is attacked by a fleet in a situation where cloaking is practical.

Besides, his shields are tough enough that it takes a truly catastrophic impact to cause any serious damage to his hull; he can shrug off the best 23rd century technology has to offer except under extreme conditions.

terrant
2009-05-20, 11:49 AM
Well I liked it, the noise and action levels very different from previous Trek films, but good. The scene where the cadet fleet each went to warp was gloriously BANG BANG BANG (not a film to sleep through).

What did annoy was Spook's ship. It moved like a Star Wars craft and sounded like a Star Wars craft. I suspect some crossover of effects people who should have been roundly beaten on.

Lamech
2009-05-20, 12:24 PM
Although its already been said, I just assumed that the mining ship used mining charges and the fact that it was huge and had advanced tech solved all other problems.

Also... next time the world is at stake you do not beam over a couple of people to stop them. You beam over an assult team if your really concerned about that one life. As many heavily armed people as possible. If you think maybe possibly killing one person is an acceptable risk to save the planet you beam over a nuke. Or five. And laugh.

Also where were earth's defenses? You think they could have shot down the drill at least. Even if they had to fire antiques.

Dervag
2009-05-20, 02:02 PM
Also... next time the world is at stake you do not beam over a couple of people to stop them. You beam over an assult team if your really concerned about that one life. As many heavily armed people as possible. If you think maybe possibly killing one person is an acceptable risk to save the planet you beam over a nuke. Or five. And laugh.They needed to send Spock; no one could stop Kirk from going. They should have sent enough redshirts to back them up, you're absolutely right. And a nuke, once they got Pike, Kirk, and any surviving redshirts off.

On the other hand, for all we know they were planning to do exactly that; Nero went into warp drive almost immediately after the loss of the drill, which would have made beaming a nuke onboard very difficult.

But the real key to the raid wasn't so much to rescue Pike as it was to capture Spock-Prime's ship and the black hole-creating "red matter."


Also where were earth's defenses? You think they could have shot down the drill at least. Even if they had to fire antiques.It seems likely that all Earth's defenses were space-based; there are major disadvantages to using ground batteries for defense against an enemy in space. And it's implied that Nero knew everything he needed to neutralize those defenses- remember that he tortures Captain Pike for "the codes to Earth's defenses" or something like that.

Lawless III
2009-05-21, 01:32 AM
This movie was fairly terrible if you actually expected any sort of real quality. The plot was thin and full of holes (most of which have been discussed to death already), and the characters were all completely one dimensional. It was frustrating how shallow they all were. Instead of creating empathy through character developement and showing you their personalities, they just used the situations to try to make you like them and allowed one trait become their whole personalities. Kirk's the jocular bad ass, Spock is cold and logical. Who cares? They're bland, uninteresting, and generic. Don't even get me started on the dialogue. It was like a bad fan-fiction (I realize the phrase "bad fan-fiction" is redundant.) "I bet you're feeling really emotional right now!"

I wish I could unwatch this movie. Actually, I'm loathe to even call it a movie. It is in fact an insult to all serious film. However, no one wanted to watch a film. They wanted green women, explosions, and nostalgia. This thing was just a giant checklist of memorable lines and characters. Beam me up, Scotty? Check. Live long and prosper? Check. The words logical, illogical, and emotional? Check. Check. Check. Check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check. Please let me just die before anyone says any of those words again!

Despite this, I completely understand why most of you enjoyed this movie. It was full of high fructose nostalgia. That's okay. We all have a weakness for childhood memories.

Hawriel
2009-05-21, 05:51 AM
What did annoy was Spook's ship. It moved like a Star Wars craft and sounded like a Star Wars craft. I suspect some crossover of effects people who should have been roundly beaten on.

Not the only thing that was star wars ish. The warp drive and how it works was totaly remade into star wars hyperdrive. Also back then you dont go to warp that close to a planet. Pike should have never been suprized by the junk yard he flew into. He would have been able to see it comming. You can see things out side the warp bubble.

Edit.
the more I think about it the more I dislike this movie. Sorry Dervag I tried to accept your argument for why Nero's dump truck was armed like a battle ship. I just cant. Its a dump truck. Albeit with a back ho lazer drill attachment. Its still a damn dump truck. 150 year old weaponry should still rip it appart.

As for the comic. It brakes the plot even more. When did Nero have time to go off for who knows how long to have his ship refitted into a killing machine? He was doing his job then bang Romules is destroyed he goes ape **** and attacks spock. NONE! No time at all. And how does a minor know whare a secret base that has borg tech is?

SmartAlec
2009-05-21, 06:14 AM
Its a dump truck.

Well, if you compare a modern-day dump truck with the original Benz patent motorwagon from 1886... that's less than 150 years, and my money's still on the dump truck if it comes to a fight.

Joran
2009-05-21, 11:47 AM
Well, if you compare a modern-day dump truck with the original Benz patent motorwagon from 1886... that's less than 150 years, and my money's still on the dump truck if it comes to a fight.

Then outfit it with a couple fifty-cal machine guns and a TOW missile launcher and armor it up a bit. You'd have a pretty fearsome weapon for the 1850's.

SmartAlec
2009-05-21, 12:22 PM
Then outfit it with a couple fifty-cal machine guns and a TOW missile launcher and armor it up a bit. You'd have a pretty fearsome weapon for the 1850's.

If we're going to add guns, I'm fairly sure that if you gave the motorwagon state-of-the-art 1880s firearms and the dump truck commonly-available firearms for the year 2009, the dump truck is still going to come out ahead.

Things tip even further if you open up the field to explosives and large-scale projectiles - allowing for the idea that the Narada is packing military-grade hardware. The motorwagon is simply too small to mount a howitzer or a cannon, but the dump truck is quite capable of having someone in the back with a rocket-propelled grenade.

Perhaps a better analogy would be an early 19th century East Indiaman/Royal Navy ship of the line vs. a World War II-era merchant navy vessel? The merchant navy ship is at a serious disadvantage against warships of its' own era (not to mention aircraft or submarines), but it could likely outpace and sink a wooden sailing ship with little trouble.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-05-21, 12:58 PM
Saw it. Liked it, but only because I refused to think about it. The casting and acting was spot-on, at least. Especially McCoy.

Ziren
2009-05-21, 01:12 PM
And how does a minor know whare a secret base that has borg tech is?

At least that question I can answer: The Romulan council members told him before he killed them.

Dervag
2009-05-21, 01:32 PM
Despite this, I completely understand why most of you enjoyed this movie. It was full of high fructose nostalgia. That's okay. We all have a weakness for childhood memories. For those of you who just liked it for the shiny lights and the explosions, that's fine really. There will always be generic blockbusters in need of idiotic masses. You fit the bill perfectly.Well, I may be an idiot, but at least I can take consolation in the fact that most of the human race is similarly idiotic while I work on my graduate degree in physics.
______


Not the only thing that was star wars ish. The warp drive and how it works was totaly remade into star wars hyperdrive. Also back then you dont go to warp that close to a planet. Pike should have never been suprized by the junk yard he flew into. He would have been able to see it comming. You can see things out side the warp bubble.I'm not sure I agree about the "Star Wars hyperdrive" thing; having ships boom out of visibility as they enter warp is entirely reasonable even if they travel only in normal space at small multiples of the speed of light.

On top of that, going towards Vulcan at the warp factor they were using, they wouldn't have had much warning of the debris cloud via lightspeed sensors- the destruction of the Federation fleet happened only a few minutes ago. Pike would not have had time to react to the wreckage cloud before arriving in the middle of it.

With FTL sensors it's another matter, but I'm not sure Kirk-era subspace sensors were up to the task of resolving debris on the hundred meter scale that close to a planet, and distinguishing it from a fleet of functioning starships.

So yes, Pike could see outside the bubble; the question is whether his sight would be sharp enough and long-ranged enough to give him a useful warning.
________


Edit.
the more I think about it the more I dislike this movie. Sorry Dervag I tried to accept your argument for why Nero's dump truck was armed like a battle ship. I just cant. Its a dump truck. Albeit with a back ho lazer drill attachment. Its still a damn dump truck. 150 year old weaponry should still rip it appart.It's a freaking Romulan dump truck. The Romulans are no more likely to build an unarmed warp-capable ship than they are to become a hippy commune.

So they put their equivalent of a .50 caliber machine gun on their dump truck. Do you know how much damage a dump truck with a .50 caliber machine gun could do to an army loaded with weapons from the early nineteenth century?

Athaniar
2009-05-21, 04:16 PM
Just saw the movie approximately 5 to 3 hours ago, and I have to say it was a good movie. I liked it, and hope there will be many sequels. Alternate universe for the win?

Also, debate: which one is the coolest, the Narada or the Scimitar?

chiasaur11
2009-05-21, 05:12 PM
Just saw the movie approximately 5 to 3 hours ago, and I have to say it was a good movie. I liked it, and hope there will be many sequels. Alternate universe for the win?

Also, debate: which one is the coolest, the Narada or the Scimitar?

Narada.

It's in a good film, giving it a massive edge. Also, Cthulhian tentacles.

ColonelFuster
2009-05-21, 05:37 PM
Well, I may be an idiot, but at least I can take consolation in the fact that most of the human race is similarly idiotic while I work on my graduate degree in physics.

I've been lurking for quite a while; I just popped in to say that Dervag just won the internet.

I went to see the movie not long ago, and I have to say i'm impressed. Being in the business, I see too many bad castings and terrible plotlines shoved in my face, to the point where I don't go to see movies anymore. I am quite content watching a TV show that I can turn off partway through without feeling like i'm wasting money. Star Trek was an exception because, well, I never was into Star Trek as a kid (I had no TV), and I felt less geeky for it. I love LOST despite all of it's shortcomings, so a Bad Robot version of Star Trek seemed like it would be perfectly tolerable. I took my $25 gift card for AMC that had been gathering dust and went to see it.

My first thought? The scene of Spock as a child was pulled off masterfully. Would have made a great short film just by itself.

Arriving at the wreckage outside of Vulcan was tense and ridiculously emotional, all the way through to when they left. I don't care how warp drive works. Neither should you. Star Trek is now... cool. You can go into a college dorm and shout, "Hey, has anyone seen the Star Trek movie??!" and not get beat up! If my plastic sister can say something like "I loved Star Trek- Don't tell anyone." than I am happy with the movie.

Casting Sylar as Spock was masterful. Totally cold with something lurking just below the surface, like a Great White about to break through the ice to eat a baby seal... that was what I see from his performance in Heroes. That's the only reason I watch the show, because the rest of the actors are TERRIBLE.
Scotty was exactly as comic-relief as he should have been. And does anyone else think that there was some poking fun at how Scotty got fat later?

All in all, it was great. Maybe i'm not a rabid fanboy, so it dosen't hurt my sense of pride to say this, but CHILL OUT. I don't care if the stardates were incorrect, or if you can observe what's at the terminal point of your warp, or if a mining ship shouldn't be equipped with that much weaponry, or if Spock was really gay, or WHATEVER. Let it go. It's not really Star Trek. It's an alternate universe- one that's not geeky, it's cinematic. It dosen't need ties to the old show to be enjoyable. And you definately won't enjoy the movie if you're actively trying to pick it apart.