Author Topic: A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...there was...Star Trek (SPOILERS) (Read 8240 times)

Gizzmonic · « **on:** May 11, 2009, 04:47:59 pm »

Did anyone see Star Trek this weekend? I saw it on Friday and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. I was never a big Trek fan but I think they made an interesting movie out of it without changing the key personalities. There's more action than a lot of Trek movies. I am not familiar with Abrams' other work but he did a very good job with this one. I think the villain was a little weak, but still a great action movie overall. Much better than Wolverine Origins .

Matt · « **Reply #1 on:** May 11, 2009, 04:56:16 pm »

Always more of a Star Wars geek then Star Trek but I'm going to see this on the IMAX tonight.

TheWizard · « **Reply #2 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:00:03 pm »

It was an awesome movie. I am more of a Next Generation guy, but they did a really cool job.

Only disagreement I have is that I thought the villain was pretty awesome.

Noe · « **Reply #3 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:40:04 pm »

Didn't see it, but saw the line of Trekkies outside the Alamo Drafthouse. All were in full uniform too. No sight of a Lil' Puma, just a bunch of Enterprise crew members.

Matt · « **Reply #4 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:40:13 pm »

Are the lens flares going to fry my retinas on the IMAX screen?

Col. Sphinx Drummond · « **Reply #5 on:** May 11, 2009, 06:11:06 pm »

I'm going to see it tomorrow night at the IMAX theater in the Bob Bullock Museum. I really was more of a Next Generation fan too.

ybbodeus · « **Reply #6 on:** May 11, 2009, 06:58:14 pm »

I understand that even Captain Pike's role was included?

TheWizard · « **Reply #7 on:** May 11, 2009, 07:03:22 pm »

Quote from: ybbodeus on May 11, 2009, 06:58:14 pm

I understand that even Captain Pike's role was included?

Yep. I won't spoil anything for you, but it explores Pike's role as captain of the Enterprise.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #8 on:** May 11, 2009, 08:03:46 pm »

Yeah, the characterizations are fresh, if a little sparse, and the chemistry between the main players (Kirk, Spock, Bones, etc) feels a lot like the old one. And The Wizard, feel free to spoil away, I'll change the title just so people won't be fooled.

Fredia · « **Reply #9 on:** May 12, 2009, 08:29:09 am »

i rememebr when i was in 8th grade and the show was struggling to say alive. i was hooked from then on. cant wait to go

Andyzipp · « **Reply #10 on:** May 12, 2009, 08:32:53 am »

Quote from: Fredia on May 12, 2009, 08:29:09 am

i rememebr when i was in 8th grade and the show was struggling to say alive. i was hooked from then on. cant wait to go

Can we assume you're talking about the original series?

Guinness · « **Reply #11 on:** May 12, 2009, 08:38:11 am »

Long time Trek fan, saw it Friday night and thought it was awesome. Going again this weekend. I thought Kirk, Spock and McCoy were uncannily done. Boy and that guy who did Spock prime really nailed it!

Fredia · « **Reply #12 on:** May 12, 2009, 11:44:17 am »

yes i am old enough to remember the origianl and we actually had a color tv. so dont be hating or jealous

Matt · « **Reply #13 on:** May 12, 2009, 12:00:56 pm »

I'm not a Star Trek fan at all but thought it kicked ass. So good to see a well-made modern sci-fi movie. I like how they envisioned the engineering rooms on the starships too. I always thought in the past they were too neat and spread out. The Apple Store bridge was a bit much, I kept looking for Limey in the background. I like how they explained the "reboot" and some of the differences and tweaks made to the cannon of Star Trek.

ybbodeus · « **Reply #14 on:** May 12, 2009, 06:35:52 pm »

Odd tangent: SNL's skit portraying the final voyage of the Enterprise, including mocking NBC's decision to cancel the show, was one of the highlights of the first season.

"I want my ears back!"

"Live long and prosper---Promise!"

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75vstartrek.phtml

subnuclear · « **Reply #15 on:** May 12, 2009, 07:55:36 pm »

I thought it was pretty and well-directed, but stupid. I found all the Star Trek in-jokes incredibly irritating. And did they actually stage a fist fight in a space ship with a overhang with no handrails that looks over a huge chasm so we could watch the bad guy fall over it? Yes. Yes they did. Also, the "multiple-universes" time travel plots are the laziest form of science fiction writing.

I should of listened to Roger Ebert, who I agree with on all Star Trek movies 100%, and waited for it to come on cable.

Bench · « **Reply #16 on:** May 12, 2009, 08:53:56 pm »

Quote from: subnuclear on May 12, 2009, 07:55:36 pm

And did they actually stage a fist fight in a space ship with a overhang with no handrails that looks over a huge chasm so we could watch the bad guy fall over it? Yes. Yes they did.

I guess there's no OSHA in the Federation.

Ron Brand · « **Reply #17 on:** May 12, 2009, 09:10:37 pm »

Quote from: Bench on May 12, 2009, 08:53:56 pm

I guess there's no OSHA in the Federation.

It was a Romulan ship, and you know they don't need no stinkin' OSHA.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #18 on:** May 13, 2009, 10:14:49 am »

OSHA inspector: Well, Captain Nero, you certainly have compounded your violations. No guard rails between levels of the ship, the Denubrian Torture Slugs don't have a lock on their terrariums, and that triple bladed war sword is jutting out at a dangerous...URGGHHH!

HudsonHawk · « **Reply #19 on:** May 13, 2009, 10:15:51 am »

Quote from: subnuclear on May 12, 2009, 07:55:36 pm

I thought it was pretty and well-directed, but stupid. I found all the Star Trek in-jokes incredibly irritating. And did they actually stage a fist fight in a space ship with a overhang with no handrails that looks over a huge chasm so we could watch the bad guy fall over it? Yes. Yes they did. Also, the "multiple-universes" time travel plots are the laziest form of science fiction writing.

Don't get me started on the scientific mess that is most "science fiction", especially Star Trek. If you're searching for science, you won't find it anywhere near Star Trek. It's mostly "ficition", with very little "science".

subnuclear · « **Reply #20 on:** May 13, 2009, 10:59:32 am »

Quote from: HudsonHawk on May 13, 2009, 10:15:51 am

Don't get me started on the scientific mess that is most "science fiction", especially Star Trek. If you're searching for science, you won't find it anywhere near Star Trek. It's mostly "ficition", with very little "science".

Oh I don't expect anything scientific, just better fiction. "Twelve Monkeys" (and the weird little French film that its based on) is an excellent example of time-travel fiction done right. That's all I'm asking here.

HudsonHawk · « **Reply #21 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:02:21 am »

Quote from: subnuclear on May 13, 2009, 10:59:32 am

Oh I don't expect anything scientific, just better fiction. "Twelve Monkeys" (and the weird little French film that its based on) is an excellent example of time-travel fiction done right. That's all I'm asking here.

Well, I agree, but that's not what Joe Sixpack wants. He wants flashing colored lights.

JaneDoe · « **Reply #22 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:04:03 am »

Quote from: HudsonHawk on May 13, 2009, 11:02:21 am

Well, I agree, but that's not what Joe Sixpack wants. He wants flashing colored lights.

And bipedal aliens.

Andyzipp · « **Reply #23 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:07:13 am »

I liked the movie. In the same way I like National Treasure movies. Turn off the brain and insert the popcorn. Forget almost every detail 20 minutes after leaving the theatre. (Except for the part with Gaila. Yowza.)

austro · « **Reply #24 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:23:43 am »

Quote from: JaneDoe on May 13, 2009, 11:04:03 am

And girl bipedal aliens.

FIFY.

JaneDoe · « **Reply #25 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:43:22 am »

Quote from: austro on May 13, 2009, 11:23:43 am

FIFY.

No seriously. Why are people so stupid to think all aliens would have the same body shape as humans? Most aliens in the movies have 2 arms, 2 legs and just have different facial features, or only two fingers or some silly shit like that.

Now Jabba the Hut, at least he looked different from a humanoid.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #26 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:55:58 am »

Quote from: JaneDoe on May 13, 2009, 11:43:22 am

No seriously. Why are people so stupid to think all aliens would have the same body shape as humans? Most aliens in the movies have 2 arms, 2 legs and just have different facial features, or only two fingers or some silly shit like that.

Now Jabba the Hut, at least he looked different from a humanoid.

The same reason people from other planets all speak English. So we can relate to them. If you want to make them eeeeevil, give them a non-humanoid shape (especially reptile or insect) and make them speak gibberish.

Ebby Calvin · « **Reply #27 on:** May 13, 2009, 11:58:10 am »

Quote from: Gizzmonic on May 13, 2009, 11:55:58 am

The same reason people from other planets all speak English. So we can relate to them. If you want to make them eeeeevil, give them a non-humanoid shape (especially reptile or insect) and make them speak gibberish.

See: Troopers, Starship

Matt · « **Reply #28 on:** May 13, 2009, 01:54:41 pm »

Weren't the Romulans and Vulcans supposed to have visited Earth in ancient times? I don't know my Star Trek but I thought that's what happened.

austro · « **Reply #29 on:** May 13, 2009, 01:58:33 pm »

Quote from: Matt on May 13, 2009, 01:54:41 pm

Weren't the Romulans and Vulcans supposed to have visited Earth in ancient times? I don't know my Star Trek but I thought that's what happened.

According to Dutch myth, they built the pyramids.

HudsonHawk · « **Reply #30 on:** May 13, 2009, 02:30:42 pm »

Quote from: Matt on May 13, 2009, 01:54:41 pm

Weren't the Romulans and Vulcans supposed to have visited Earth in ancient times? I don't know my Star Trek but I thought that's what happened.

And mated with humans. Spock is a hybrid.

Fredia · « **Reply #31 on:** May 13, 2009, 03:45:42 pm »

lol then you would have to deal with the paradox of spock being with spock and the fact they did not know the sex of the baby who became kirk. (a few other things i wont go into ) the movie was excellent in face. it was non stop from front to back and the star trek references made the movie. if you are not a trecker.. then i guess i can understand your ignorance..i mean irritation

ybbodeus · « **Reply #32 on:** May 13, 2009, 03:48:17 pm »

Quote from: Gizzmonic on May 13, 2009, 11:55:58 am

If you want to make them eeeeevil, give them a non-humanoid shape (especially reptile or insect), make them speak gibberish and put a Cubs cap on 'em.

FIFM, anyway.

Matt · « **Reply #33 on:** May 13, 2009, 03:49:41 pm »

I thought it was weird how the uniforms at the beginning of the movie that were in the past looked more futuristic then the uniforms in the rest of the movie.

Waldo · « **Reply #34 on:** May 14, 2009, 10:45:58 pm »

Quote from: HudsonHawk on May 13, 2009, 10:15:51 am

Don't get me started on the scientific mess that is most "science fiction", especially Star Trek. If you're searching for science, you won't find it anywhere near Star Trek. It's mostly "ficition", with very little "science".

Hence why it is called "science fiction".

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #35 on:** May 15, 2009, 09:38:59 am »

Well, in honor of this movie, I Netflix'd the first 2 Star Trek movies on Blu Ray. I'm becoming an even bigger nerd than I could have possibly imagined.

MusicMan · « **Reply #36 on:** May 15, 2009, 09:53:38 am »

Quote from: Gizzmonic on May 15, 2009, 09:38:59 am

Well, in honor of this movie, I Netflix'd the first 2 Star Trek movies on Blu Ray.

Make sure to wake up in time to watch the second.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #37 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:13:53 am »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 15, 2009, 09:53:38 am

Make sure to wake up in time to watch the second.

So the first one is boring? I've heard the cliche "the odd numbered Star Treks suck" before, guess it's true, eh?

MusicMan · « **Reply #38 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:16:02 am »

The first one is a horrible mess of dullness.

TheWizard · « **Reply #39 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:28:18 am »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 15, 2009, 11:16:02 am

The first one is a horrible mess of dullness.

In fairness, its.. well.. old.

Waldo · « **Reply #40 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:28:37 am »

Quote from: Gizzmonic on May 15, 2009, 11:13:53 am

I've heard the cliche "the odd numbered Star Treks suck" before, guess it's true, eh?

The even-good/odd-bad rule is generally true, with a couple of exceptions.

1 - Dreadfully boring
2 - Excellent
3 - Good
4 - Good/Excellent
5 - Terrible
6 - Good/Excellent
7 - Decent
8 - Excellent
9 - Bad
10 - Terrible

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #41 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:38:38 am »

Quote from: Waldo on May 15, 2009, 11:28:37 am

The even-good/odd-bad rule is generally true, with a couple of exceptions.

1 - Dreadfully boring
2 - Excellent
3 - Good
4 - Good/Excellent
5 - Terrible
6 - Good/Excellent
7 - Decent
8 - Excellent
9 - Bad
10 - Terrible

I once saw a homemade Mystery Science Theater 3000-ization of Star Trek V. It was pretty hilarious. That movie was made for MST. Especially the "sexy fan dance."

MusicMan · « **Reply #42 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:40:37 am »

V was directed by Shatner, as a condition of him agreeing to do IV (he was jealous of Nimoy getting to do III and IV). It was doomed from the beginning.

I've not yet seen the new one, but II, IV, and First Contact are the only ones I will bother watching if they're on.

Bench · « **Reply #43 on:** May 15, 2009, 12:50:56 pm »

Which was the one with the humpback whales?

ybbodeus · « **Reply #44 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:03:04 pm »

IV. Other than Spock knocking out the guy on the bus, it was pretty forgettable.

homer · « **Reply #45 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:10:45 pm »

Quote from: ybbodeus on May 15, 2009, 01:03:04 pm

IV. Other than Spock knocking out the guy on the bus, it was pretty forgettable.

I enjoy the scene where Scotty and Bones are trying to use the 1984 (or whatever) computer by talking to it, and it doesn't respond-- then Bones spots the mouse and hands it to Scotty and he tries to talk into it like a CB radio... good stuff.

ybbodeus · « **Reply #46 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:16:06 pm »

Story wise, it was actually like something that Roddenberry would come up with; in terms of how it was executed, it just fell a little flat.

That's a good recall, homer. Spock's "talking to the whale" just came back to me, too; the kid's reaction to his mother was funny, I guess. Seeing the crew interact with modern day America was somewhat comical, and watching Bones cure the old woman with kidney failure was good, too, I suppose.

Maybe it wasn't totally forgettable; maybe I'm just getting forgetful.

Col. Sphinx Drummond · « **Reply #47 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:52:40 pm »

I thought it lacked verisimilitude and required too much of a suspension of disbelief.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #48 on:** May 18, 2009, 12:39:48 pm »

I watched the first 2 on Friday and MM was totally spot-on. Nothing at all happens in Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) and by the time I started up on Wrath of Khan I was already drifting off to sleep. I didn't enjoy it much as a result. I guess I should have just skipped part 1 altogether.

Limey · « **Reply #49 on:** May 18, 2009, 01:11:56 pm »

Quote from: Gizzmonic on May 18, 2009, 12:39:48 pm

I watched the first 2 on Friday and MM was totally spot-on. Nothing at all happens in Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) and by the time I started up on Wrath of Khan I was already drifting off to sleep. I didn't enjoy it much as a result. I guess I should have just skipped part 1 altogether.

I believe Mad comic's send up of #1 was titled Star Trek: The Motionless Picture.

Author Topic: A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...there was...Star Trek (SPOILERS) (Read 8240 times)

Noe

Andyzipp

Guinness

Andyzipp