Tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4632 posts, RR: 7 Posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1910 times:
Anyone really looking forward to the newest installment in the Star Trek franchise? Anyone going to the see it on opening day? I used to do that kind of stuff but probably won't for this one but I am tempted. I suspect that there is a correlation between A.nutters and Trekkers (the term I tend to link myself with).
Anyone going even farther and dressing up or going to some of the parties that are being done?
So far everything I have seen and read implies that J.J. Abrams did a good job and may just redeem the show from the STX debacle and give it new life (again. How many times has it died, been killed, or just lost favor?).
The new cast I hope is ready:
Chris Pine - Kirk
Zachary Quinto - Spock
Karl Urban - Bones
Zoe Saldana - Uhura
Simon Pegg - Scotty
John Cho - Sulu
Anton Yelchin - Chekov
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1892 times:
Quoting Tugger (Thread starter): Anyone really looking forward to the newest installment in the Star Trek franchise?
Certainly not me! This new film completely deviates from what is canon. My believe is that this will ultimately kill Star Trek. This film was made for making money, not with a decent, with a Star Trek canon agreeable story in mind. Even Star Trek: Nemesis had more continuity in mind (though I believe the worst of all TNG movies was Star Trek: Insurrection, the ninth installment).
Let us all remember: Nicholas Meyer was the guy who, with what some of us call "The Trilogy", helped made Star Trek this popular phenomenon that it is today. For the 1980's, he could have been considered someone who made a radical makeover of that, what Gene Roddenberry made, but he still kept the original Star Trek canon intact.
JJ Abrams on the other hand, re-wrote the story, change scenarios (only for the sake of modern appearance and SFX), and created a story about James T. Kirk and his crew on the Enterprise, that does not conform to that what every Star Trek follower and Trekkie knows from TOS. The original, non-refit Enterprise should look exactly like the one in TOS, not get a makeover. The makeover of the Enterprise was done during the Star Trek films, and the storyline refits.
This is just an overcommercialised version of Star Trek, not the real deal.
Springbok747 From Australia, joined Nov 2004, 4387 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1884 times:
I got cheap tickets, so going this evening (May 7th - opening day here in Oz) with a few friends from university. The movie has been marketed really aggressively here, with ads on every bus shelter and lots of billboards. Plus it has a rating of 8.3/10 on IMDB..so it can't be all bad and the trailer looks interesting, so why not. I'm not having high expectations though.
Glidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1018 posts, RR: 50 Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1876 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 1): Certainly not me! This new film completely deviates from what is canon.
Have you seen it yet?
I'm just back from the theater. I think it is all right. The movie explains a lot of things, shows even humor as almost all other Star Trek movies do and is exiting.
Under the line, I think the movie is absolute ok. Sure, they have changed the design of mainly the warp engines. But, well... maybe those engines haven't been good after all and Starfleet changed them later on to more efficient ones as they can be seen in the original series.
I've expected far less and became more as thought at the end...
I've seen the trailers, and from what I've seen, I don't like anything that I've seen in it. Then again, I'm a Star Trek purist, which explains why I'm against JJ Abrams going outside the box with Star Trek XI.
MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6242 posts, RR: 51 Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1859 times:
I don't know what to think. I mean I'll see it....probably just because I've seen all the rest + Nimoy's decision to be in it....but, I'm not a fan of JJ Abrams in general. I don't want a sexed up Star Trek, nor one with an abundance of CGI just to "fit in". And I'm still mad that they couldn't figure out a way to put Shatner in it...I mean it's science fiction for pete's sake...I'm sure they could have figured out a way if they wanted to.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1848 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 1): Certainly not me! This new film completely deviates from what is canon. My believe is that this will ultimately kill Star Trek. This film was made for making money, not with a decent, with a Star Trek canon agreeable story in mind.
That is Star Trek's ultimate problem, it is confined by canon. And so much of it is crap. Yes crap, and I say that as a lifelong Star Trek fan. Star Trek was a low-budget western in space with cardboard sets, velvet uniforms, and aliens in rubber suits. And it isn't like Star Trek hasn't distorted, altered, tweaked "canon" for the sake of dramatic license or convenience before.
The more I read about the movie the more I am intrigued by it. The only downside in my mind is the use of time travel as a plot device, but that boat has long since sailed in the Trek world. I'm not sure if it will restart the Star Trek franchise... frankly I think it should have been put to rest a while ago.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6195 posts, RR: 13 Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1626 times:
I thought they did a good job with the movie. Great job with the design of the ship; I'm glad it looked more like the original Enterprise in the classic movies and not like the cheesy model used in the 1960s now hanging in the Smithsonian.
A basic issue with the plot, however. We all know Kirk was young for a starfleet captain, but come on, no matter how much of a bright cookie he may have been, there's no way in hell they'd take a cadet in his junior year at the academy and ultimately put him in command of Startfleet's brand new flagship right away. That would be like taking a junior midshipman from Annapolis and saying "Congratulations, you're now the captain of the USS Ronald Reagan!" Would never happen, regardless of how badass you thought he was. He would have needed somewhat of a normal career progression before he'd be anywhere near qualified or experienced for that job, and surely there were plenty of other startfleet captains or senior commanders out there who would have filled the billet. But hey, it's fiction, so whatever.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1618 times:
I actually quite enjoyed the movie.
Of course with it not using series actors (except Nimoy), it gave a chance for something new.
They are calling it a reboot... I'd have to agree... it is set up for at least a few more sequels using this current cast.
I've always enjoyed the Star Trek movies and series, but a lot of it was getting too niche, too "trekkie" that you couldn't take people along with you to go see it because most of them didn't want to!
This movie does still have cheese... but its quality is much higher than previous lowbudget efforts for the most part.
I recommend anyone trekkie or not to go see it.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7447 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1595 times:
Yeah I thought it was pretty good. One of my friends who is a big Trek guy thought they took some liberties.
But it was good. One thing that bugged me was the fight scenes and the "action." It just seemed a little bit too amped "up" to me. Everything was SO loud and SO fast. Fight scenes were unintelligible, blurry and confused, because of the visual style. But when the camera actually stopped shaking, the movie was quite good.
RFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1562 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 1): Certainly not me! This new film completely deviates from what is canon.
Well, I watched the original TV series live, the first time it was on, and I think the new movie is excellent. The best, most believable script of any of the Star Trek movies, and for once the actor is playing James T Kirk, not an impersonation of William Shatner (even Shatner plays an impersonation of himself in the original TV series).
Quoting Jhooper (Reply 7): they'd take a cadet in his junior year at the academy and ultimately put him in command of Startfleet's brand new flagship right away.
This is one place where the hard core Trekkies have damaged the franchise badly.
In the original TV program, the Enterprise is a small armed survey ship. Far from Star Fleet's brand new flagship.
Kirk is a Lieutenant Commander - a very junior rank for any ship's captain in any time but a major war. LCDR's do not get major capital ships.
Unfortunately, the 'love' of Star Trek fans created a completely unrealistic career path.
Rather than Kirk advancing in rank, and commanding larger ships, eventually squadrons and a fleet, it was the Enterprise which moved from a small armed auxillary to the queen of the fleet.
No movie has ever dealt well with this inherent destruction of the original Star Trek concept.
The new movie makes a typically clumsy attempt at explaination - the destruction of a large part of Star Fleet's ships.
Pike as a senior captian takes a very junior crew of academy instructors and senior experienced cadets. Still, he would not have the authority to jump a cadet over commissioned bridge officers like Sulu to First Officer.
The ignorance of military rank has always been one of the weakest parts of the Star Trek franchise.
At least Kirk is still just a LCDR at the end of the new movie, though a jump from cadet to LCDR - four ranks/ paygrades - would be impossible except in a major war where the majority of senior officers were killed/ disabled. Though it might be a temproary rank.
In the TV series he was promoted from LT to LCDR when he was given command of the Enterprise. Spock is always senior to Kirk in rank, but is a staff officer, not a line officer eligible for command.
PS - If you don't see the movie, you are missing one heck of a good show.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1537 times:
I saw the movie last night with my roomates, who are both non-trek fans. The really liked it. I liked it too, but probably not as much as them. That I think is the crux of it, this movie really brings in non-Trek fans to the franchise quite successfully -- if this weekend's box office numbers are any indication. But long-term Trek fans are left a little cold.
Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 11): This is one place where the hard core Trekkies have damaged the franchise badly.
I think my earlier post sums this up. Star Trek canon is riddled with so much crap, abuse of plot devices such as time travel, transports, warp drives that we cannot fault Abrams at all. He abuses technology as a plot device in perfect Star Trek fashion. The fleet should have taken longer than minutes or hours to make it from Earth to Vulcan, the use of the transporter on the shuttle on the ice world in the Vulcan system to beam aboard Enterprise, how a core world (Vulcan, Earth) of the Federation is lacking any self-defense -- no ships in orbit, no stations, no planetary defensive systems.... But all of this is in perfect harmony with the Trek world where we know. where both at once the Federation and humanity are both all powerful and powerless at the same time.
Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 11): In the original TV program, the Enterprise is a small armed survey ship. Far from Star Fleet's brand new flagship.
I always had the impression that the Constitution class was near the top of the line and state of the art of StarFleet of the mid 23rd century. Though that may be an artifact of all the external stuff that came later as people tried to recreate the Trek world.
Overall I think the movie was good and probably the best Trek film since at least First Contact (ok -- that isn't difficult) if not ST VI or ST IV. Its visually pretty stunning and makes use of CGI well in that is it well integrated. What I particularly liked is that the story in many ways revolved much more around Spock than Kirk. Which for future movies is an interesting proposition. Because in the series and movies we never really get into Spock much, and frankly he is a pretty complex and interesting character.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Okees From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 424 posts, RR: 6 Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1517 times:
Not being a huge Star Trek fan as most of you guys out there, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Action packed, story seemed to make sense to me, and god damn some nice explosions. My dad is a huge trek fan, and he loved the movie. He said its perfect for fans like him to explain the beginning of how Kirk and Spoc came into the picture.
From what I understood, this movie is what Roddenberry wanted to make in the 80's, explain how things started and what not. I wonder if he would have been happy with the movie.
All in all, I cant wait for the new Transformers. The new trailer looks badass!
Cytz_pilot From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 546 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1510 times:
I saw it yesterday and thought it was great fun. The interactions between Kirk, Spock and McCoy were fantastic. Yes, the writers took liberties, but also covered their tracks since it was made clear that the events at the beginning of the movie never happened in the (accepted) timeline of Trek. So of course, this is an alternate timeline. That basically gives them free rein to write and design whatever the hell they want for this and future movies. Look forward to the sequels, where Kahn dies in a water-skiing accident and Tribbles defeat the Borg!
NoWorries From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 523 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1507 times:
Quoting DesertJets (Reply 12): I always had the impression that the Constitution class was near the top of the line and state of the art of StarFleet of the mid 23rd century. Though that may be an artifact of all the external stuff that came later as people tried to recreate the Trek world.
That is my recollection as well ... I watched it first run when I was kid (way back in the mid 60s) -- Thursday night. In one episode Kirk proudly proclaims that there are only twelve like her in the fleet. And in another episode a starship captain wannabee referred to it is a very special ship and crew.
In most of the episodes, other starfleet captains we're portrayed as much older than Kirk.
PhilGil From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 249 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1486 times:
I'm also a fan from way back (watched TOS during it's first run on TV) and I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. The filmmakers and cast were able to pull off something quite extraordinary - develop characters that were believable as younger versions of people many of us know very well, provide lots of action while not losing track of the relationships between the crew (which were at the heart of TOS) and producing a film with mass-audience appeal while still incorporating plenty of inside jokes for the fans.
LHR380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1460 times:
Quoting DesertJets (Reply 17): What I did really like in the film were all the subtle references to trekdom. Sulu's fencing ability, the crazy analogies to explain complex things, the earslug thing. That gets a thumbsup from me.
That was funny, the audience laughed, most of them, when we all noticed the little things, especially the ear bug.
DanTaylor2006 From UK - England, joined Feb 2006, 459 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1445 times:
Went to see Star Trek on its opening night here in Sheffield, and... no, I'm not a great fan of Star Trek, but I thought it was brilliant - one of the best movies I've seen this year, if not the best. The plot made sense, there was plenty going on action wise, and it was humorous. Thoroughly enjoyed it, and I'll probably most likely go see any sequels, should they choose to produce them.
Type-Rated From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 4350 posts, RR: 20 Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1431 times:
We went to see it yesterday at an IMAX theater where is was called "The Star Trek Experience". The sound effects rocked you in your seats quite a bit. I have never heard jumping to warp speed being so loud! This movie is made to keep everyone entertained and it does keep you entertained, as long as you don't think too much.
While it was entertaining, I just couldn't stick with the "alternative timeline" concept. The acting was pretty good, but Vulcans are Vulcans and not some Rudolph Valentino... God that was a messy make out scene....
and I like my Vulcans being unemotional too....
Fly North Central Airlines..The route of the Northliners!
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1422 times:
Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 11): Kirk is a Lieutenant Commander - a very junior rank for any ship's captain in any time but a major war. LCDR's do not get major capital ships.
In TNG, Picard took command of the Stargazer when both captain and first officer died. He was an LCDR at the time and was apparently promoted straight to Captain.
Another hypothesis is that he was promoted to CDR, was captain of the ship before becoming full captain. That isn't anything unrealistic, since in real life navies, people at the rank of Commander can hold command of a ship. I do agree that being promoted from Cadet directly to LCDR is totally unrealistic.
Well remember that Spock is half human and so battles emotions in a way that Vulcans don't have to. The "human" side is in addition to the supposedly strong Vulcan emotions that the society has suppressed.
The funny thing about talking like this is that its all made up fiction, no reality here (of course just wait till the year 2161 and March 22, 2233 in Riverside, Iowa).
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
If you remember the first pilot, "The Cage", Spock was pretty emotional there as well (there were a few occasions, when Spock would smile like he was very happy). Then again, the character of Spock was re-defined in the second pilot and subsequent episodes of TOS, making Vulcans the emotionless, logic believing people that we know. To talk about a turn of events, Spock even tried to do the Kolinahr after the Enterprise's five year jouney, to rid himself of all emotions.
25 RFields5421: When I joined the US Navy in 1972, there were a lot of ship CO's who were LCDR, and even a few LT who were CO's. Of course as ships have gotten fewer
26 PSA53: I thought it was pretty good.I was impressed on the good job that Quinto did on Spock.Pine's,Kirk was acceptable as the rebel Kirk is, and Greenwood's
27 JoeCanuck: The original Trek was all about the characters playing it tongue in cheek...they were having a blast. That's why it survived the velvateen shirts and
28 Type-Rated: You are exactly right. The Star Trek Movie didn't actually begin until 30 minutes past its start time. In fact when the movie actually began, I thoug