OMG Star Trek

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:49 pm

Neon wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:Premiere is tonight, I'll figure out if it's good or not.
Isn't that next week hoss

World premiere yo

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:51 pm

Ed Oscuro wrote:
Neon wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:Premiere is tonight, I'll figure out if it's good or not.
Isn't that next week hoss
World premiere yo

That is hog wild.

There's an IMAX theater 'round these parts, I'm gonna see it there

BryanM · Post by **BryanM** » Sat May 02, 2009 10:07 pm

Wheaton was writing reviews of TNG eppys for awhile there. With some behind the scenes nostalgia.

The first season and so was kind of crummy and creepy; remember that episode where Picard doesn't trust Data and entrusts Wes to keep an eye on him, and then when the Wes goes "Yo I think something's up with Data" Picard does a psycho 360 and yells "SHUT UP WESLEY." What a shitty boss.

The writers, they made us hate him. The storyline when he sods off as a demigod was half decent, but outside of that, p'leh.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Fri May 08, 2009 7:23 am

awesome movie

gonna see it again in imax hopefully

szycag · Post by **szycag** » Fri May 08, 2009 8:07 am

Saw it in IMAX, front row @_@ Don't do this. I only had to because of some misunderstanding with buying a friend's ticket. Someone should count how many BLINDING LENS FLARES there are in this movie.

shouldn't be any spoilers here if you've watched the trailers at all...

I loved it a lot, although I think they were so intently focused on re-establishing the hero characters that they failed to make a truly hatable three dimensional villain. I'm sure there were a lot of backstory scenes on him that got edited out. There's just so much characterization over two hours that the actual MO is kind of an afterthought. Still an enjoyable film, just will probably lead to a potentially better sequel with a more drawn out threat and less camaraderie.

themachinist · Post by **themachinist** » Fri May 08, 2009 8:52 am

I just saw it tonight. A few things made me raise a brow but it was a lot of fun to watch.

szycag · Post by **szycag** » Fri May 08, 2009 9:51 am

Interesting soundtrack choice for the "kid kirk steals a car" scene from that first discouraging trailer. I guess that's a classic for this generation. I certainly went crazy for the video when I was a kid. Just weird that it's canonical enough now to be in a Star Trek movie.

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Fri May 08, 2009 9:38 pm

Just got back from watching this new fangled Star Trek film today. At my local movie theater, it was shown in DLP format. Looked quite dazzling with all the cool digital effects provided by ILM and Digital Domain this time around. ^_~

The ending of this new ST film might remind you of how the original Star Trek: The Motion Picture ends...very befitting tribute indeed. ^_~

I like that sexy and voluptious alien gal that Kirk is lying on top of. What's her name btw?

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

Randorama · Post by **Randorama** » Sun May 10, 2009 1:34 am

Some quick impressions.

The movie is basically a re- boot, as they change a lot of the series' continuity and try to set up a new 'classic star trek' cinema franchise. If you know a bit the overall continuity of the series (without even being a trekkie), the plot will make a sense (hopefully) after a while.

It obiously lacks depth, i.e. it doesn't go beyond the 'sci-fi action flick' themes. The enemies are really mono-dimensional and there is no (pretentious) theme to support all the action, just "problem! Revenge! Fight'" browahah.

The special effects are quite slick and the retro reconstruction of the old bridge are on the other hand quite classy, easily the best aesthetic aspect of the movie.

It is overall good, as it mixes action and humor in good measure. The secondary characters (everyone except Spock and Kirk, really) are a bit more developed but still rather 'flat'.

Zachary Quinto presents an interesting Spock, more edgy and aggressive than the original one, yet still the 'logical' Spock of old.

Overall good entertainment, even if it is not clear whether 'Star Trek' is back, or they just reconceptualized the best series of the bunch.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Sun May 10, 2009 3:22 am

PC Engine Fan X! wrote:The ending of this new ST film might remind you of how the original Star Trek: The Motion Picture ends...very befitting tribute indeed. ^_~

I don't know what you mean, but I noticed that "new Kirk" was acting more like Shatner than in the rest of the movie...intentionally of course.

I like that sexy and voluptious alien gal that Kirk is lying on top of. What's her name btw?

Hell if I know, just some random girl from Orion...I think she ends up on another ship.

Randorama wrote:The movie is basically a re- boot

The "re-boot" stuff is pretty much just aesthetic; obviously there wouldn't be any Nokia plugs in the original series but things like that and a shinier Enterprise don't change the reality of previous ST stuff. It's clear that the actual storyline stuff is meant to fit into the existing Star Trek "universe" (or "universes," more properly this time around).

szycag · Post by **szycag** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:20 am

MILD SPOILERS HINTED AT HERE:

I wouldn't say the re-boot is purely aesthetic, Kirk and Spock are changed greatly, I don't want to spoil it but they've changed more than just aesthetics considering the stuff Nero accomplishes. It kind of upsets me actually that some villain we hardly got to know changed that much about the lives of people we've cared about for years. I'm crossing my fingers for sequels or another TV show that will make it worthwhile.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Sun May 10, 2009 6:49 am

Enjoyed it immensely.

It cost me 160 pesos (£2.50) to watch this movie in the most amazing cinema at Manila (Greenbelt) in the Philippines. The bass literally knocked me off my chair and the screen was HUGE!

About a week ago I watched "Watchman" in the Xscape deluxe cinema in Milton Keynes UK. It cost 4 times as much to get in and the food prices were ridiculous and I didn't enjoy the experience nearly as much as Star Trek in Manila.

When the movie ended about 20 guys came straight in to clean up the place. You could see your face in the floor.. Great stuff! I wanted to take a picture but the security hijacked me and I thought I was going to prison

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Sun May 10, 2009 7:32 am

szycag wrote:I wouldn't say the re-boot is purely aesthetic, Kirk and Spock are changed greatly,

That's not part of the "re-boot." That's because the storyline has changed how those characters get to become very similar to the ones we know (it's pretty much just a conceit of the movie, albeit a nifty one. [SPOILER: a good example would be McCoy who starts off saying "I like that guy!" about Spock]).

Things that would make the original series different = "re-boot"

Things that are different because of the storyline [SPOILER: time travel, aka the thing used in every other Star Trek movie] = not reboot

t0yrobo · Post by **t0yrobo** » Sun May 10, 2009 7:41 am

Meh, nitpicking what qualifies as reboot criteria is silly. It's a retooling of the original series, and ultimately a new branch on the timeline.

Like lots of recent movies (comic books ones etc.) I'm more interested in a sequel than the first one. Now that they've gone through the exposition and everyone knows the characters and whats going on they're free to do more interesting stuff.
Maybe next they'll fight the aliens from the lens flare galaxy that have been trying to sabotage them.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Sun May 10, 2009 8:18 am

It's a retooling of the original series, and ultimately a new branch on the timeline.

At the risk of being boorish, let me reiterate that those are two different things, chief. I do get the point. Sticky academic question really. This movie does a bit of both in my opinion.

With the way that other J.J. Abrams vehicle, Lost, has been dealing with alternate timelines, it's hard to say that this is meant to be a "new branch on the timeline," although the events of the movie clear the way for some interesting stories in future outings. Spoiler: Spock talks about the future that we have experienced and is surprised at how things turned out in this timeline, so it's not so simple as a new branch. It all weaves back in together.

Clearly there are some stylistic changes (and probably some other super nitpicky details which would mainly be a matter of opinion) that one would expect shouldn't have changed just because of the storyline, and those things are what is "retooled," but of course somebody can always say "that event changes everything, and if it hadn't happened then everything would be as we know it from the 60s show." There's no evidence one way or the other there (aside from common sense).

Admittedly there hasn't been a Star Trek anything yet that hasn't been a retooling of a previous one without causing some issue down the line that needed to be smoothed over, and we all know how ST movies love the time travel.

Randorama · Post by **Randorama** » Sun May 10, 2009 2:33 pm

To be honest, I thought about it a bit and it seems like they really re-shuffled the origins a bit but for the rest the template of the original series is almost intact.

I remember that the first season of the classical series has a slightly different style, but haven't seen it in a while...For the aesthetics, dunno again. It really looks like they maintained the old style but had more money to make it sleeker, I felt it to be very retro' ( a plus on my book).

Does anyone know the various homages/puns/whatever they make along the movie? I get the "I am Spock" line from Nimoy (in the cave), and I think that the main dock in the space (the round thing with six smaller round things around) is also some kind of homage.

Edit: I remember that at some point there was a script regarding the origins of the Kirk-Spock-Bones trio, is this related to it or I am recalling some urban legend?

No_not_like_Quake · Post by **No_not_like_Quake** » Sun May 10, 2009 7:06 pm

I'm guessing the idea of Spock being in Captain Pike's crew is uh, not the case anymore.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sun May 10, 2009 7:50 pm

Well IMAX wasn't worth it. The screen is big and curvy, whoop-de-doo. A lame gimmick to fuck you for the extra bucks

Randorama wrote:Does anyone know the various homages/puns/whatever they make along the movie? I get the "I am Spock" line from Nimoy (in the cave), and I think that the main dock in the space (the round thing with six smaller round things around) is also some kind of homage.

Minor spoilers for those who have not seen:

Sorry if I'm telling you something you already know as you seem to be familiar with the original series but they do all the classic catchphrases ("I'm a doctor, not a _____" "I'm givin' her all she's got, Captain!" "Are you outta your Vulcan mind?" etc.)

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Sun May 10, 2009 10:50 pm

I remember the green skinned gal from the original ST series, and she appears in this new ST film as more shapely and bustier. Yeah, this new ST film does pay homage to the original ST series in more ways than one. ^_~

What did you think of the sexy situation developing between Spock & Uhura in this new ST film? I don't recall of Spock and Uhura ever having that type of sexual longings/the hots for each other in the 1960s series with the exception of Capt. Kirk and Uhura kissing on a nationally syndicated TV series...was considered a very controversial inter-racial kissing scene when it first debuted back in the day. ^_~

2009 makes it thirty years of the ST films that have been released since the first one back in 1979 beginning with Star Trek: The Motion Picture one. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

MadSteelDarkness · Post by **MadSteelDarkness** » Mon May 11, 2009 5:51 am

Hey guys, I just saw this and enjoyed it for the most part.

But!

I always imagined a young James T Kirk being more of a Clash/Ramones fan than a Beastie Boys fan.

Also: this movie needed much more Simon Pegg.

t0yrobo · Post by **t0yrobo** » Mon May 11, 2009 6:08 am

Ed Oscuro wrote:
It's a retooling of the original series, and ultimately a new branch on the timeline.
At the risk of being boorish, let me reiterate that those are two different things, chief. I do get the point. Sticky academic question really. This movie does a bit of both in my opinion.

With the way that other J.J. Abrams vehicle, Lost, has been dealing with alternate timelines, it's hard to say that this is meant to be a "new branch on the timeline," although the events of the movie clear the way for some interesting stories in future outings. Spoiler: Spock talks about the future that we have experienced and is surprised at how things turned out in this timeline, so it's not so simple as a new branch. It all weaves back in together.

Clearly there are some stylistic changes (and probably some other super nitpicky details which would mainly be a matter of opinion) that one would expect shouldn't have changed just because of the storyline, and those things are what is "retooled," but of course somebody can always say "that event changes everything, and if it hadn't happened then everything would be as we know it from the 60s show." There's no evidence one way or the other there (aside from common sense).

Admittedly there hasn't been a Star Trek anything yet that hasn't been a retooling of a previous one without causing some issue down the line that needed to be smoothed over, and we all know how ST movies love the time travel.

Yeah i pretty much agree with what you're saying. I think what they were going for was making it pretty much a clean break from the previous series/movies so that they don't have to deal with all kinds of continuity bullshit. I mean, they had a whole conversation about it.
From my understanding with the time travel stuff in star trek they've more or less maintained that each instance starts it's own timeline. Sure it's largely just a matter of convince for the plot, but it's science fiction so whatever.

robthebanks · Post by **robthebanks** » Mon May 11, 2009 6:44 am

Just saw it, enjoyed it quite a bit. I thought the inside jokes were good, namely the one in which Kirk and Hikaru go down to destroy the drill-machine, and an extra crew member tags along who is almost instantly killed off... Definitely a fun, light-hearted, self-aware movie that has entertainment as its main goal (along with racking up the $$ of course)...

With that in mind (and as others have noted) it is certainly not the star trek of the past that is concerned with philosophical exploration, but then again, the last few TNG movies have also favored action over thought.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Mon May 11, 2009 7:12 am

I think I liked it because there was quite alot of good one liners, stupid accents and alot of action. This new Star Trek feel is much more my cup of tea than the days of the emotion chip and political ramblings that went on forever. If there isn't conflict then there isn't any point making a movie on it, especially since you've got all these wonderful weapons at your disposal.

Octopod · Post by **Octopod** » Mon May 11, 2009 2:12 pm

Major suckage.

Post by **undamned** » Mon May 11, 2009 4:08 pm

I saw it on Saturday. I thought it was a solid movie. Very enjoyable, with nothing that made me think, "Oh, that was stupid. Why'd they have to put that in there?"

Conclusion: Startrek > (Starwars EP1-3)

-ud

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Mon May 11, 2009 7:34 pm

robthebanks wrote:Just saw it, enjoyed it quite a bit. I thought the inside jokes were good, namely the one in which Kirk and Hikaru go down to destroy the drill-machine, and an extra crew member tags along who is almost instantly killed off...

Yeah that's true too. And he wears the red uniform

croikle · Post by **croikle** » Mon May 11, 2009 8:29 pm

undamned wrote:"Oh, that was stupid. Why'd they have to put that in there?"

The monsters on the ice planet?

Sly Cherry Chunks · Post by **Sly Cherry Chunks** » Mon May 11, 2009 8:57 pm

croikle wrote:
undamned wrote:"Oh, that was stupid. Why'd they have to put that in there?"
The monsters on the ice planet?

Saving Romulus by replacing it's sun with a black hole

Spock could see Vulcan from the surface of another planet

Spock ejecting Kirk off the ship

They can teleport from Saturn to Earth but they need a drill to get to the center of a planet

The list goes on.

However the performances were all excellent, the things they changed didn't matter and even the ship looked cool once you saw the whole thing.

lilmanjs · Post by **lilmanjs** » Mon May 11, 2009 10:01 pm

so what if there were some parts that didn't meet up with what we all know and love about star trek. this was a cool movie and a great reboot to the franchise.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Tue May 12, 2009 12:03 am

Sly Cherry Chunks wrote:Saving Romulus by replacing it's sun with a black hole

Obviously a stopgap measure.

Spock could see Vulcan from the surface of another planet

Pretty sure that was a moon and Spock was stranded there by Nero on purpose so he could see its destruction. The smaller of the beasts seems to be the type of thing Spock supposedly has as a pet as a kid.

Spock ejecting Kirk off the ship

I don't see the problem with this one, as from Spock's perspective Kirk was causing more trouble than he could deal with.

They can teleport from Saturn to Earth but they need a drill to get to the center of a planet

I'm not sure where you're getting teleport from Saturn from (you mean Kirk and Spock transporting at warp?), but you think that's the only smudge related to transporters? :lol:

My addition to the list would be how they managed to find the Enterprise's coordinates to beam aboard...yeesh.