Thoughts on the new "Star Trek" movie

This forum contains threads from main General Chat forum older than 3 months.

Moderator: thunderchero

User avatar
TurboC
Lieutenant-Commander
Lieutenant-Commander
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:00 am

Post by TurboC » Mon May 11, 2009 12:17 am

stardust wrote:Coming back to the scene of the Enterprise jettisoning it's warp cores. Leaving aside the minor fact the shockwave ought to have turned the ship inside out, (especially as we've seen the structural integrity severely compromised i.e the cracks in the bulkheads and view screen)
In the time between the jettisoning and the detonation, WHAT is powering the Warp drive, as this was all that was keeping the Enterprise from being sucked in?
Starships and other objects CAN "coast" at warp speeds as long as their warp field remains stable. There's precedent for that in TNG, more than once I believe. As far as this situation -- no explanation is necessary, because I'm sure Abrams and the writers didn't care. They just did whatever they wanted, went halfway toward making sense and then gave up. But I'd say -- NO, a warp field wouldn't be stable if you were so close to a black hole that even being AT WARP meant you weren't getting away. And if the core breach explosion was powerful enough to get them far enough away for Impulse/thrusters to do it, it would pretty much destroy the ship, as you say.

"We need to blow something else up at the end, let's have the warp drive not be enough to get away from the black hole, so they have to blow it up to get away. I don't care how it's done, just make it look cool. ... So they've done warp core breaches too many times? How could we make it different? How about multiple warp cores or something? What? I don't CARE if the Enterprise never had that!! It's an alternate timeline, get with the program. Listen, just throw a bunch of stuff out there and make it explode. Then they get away. Yeah, on impulse, thrusters, whatever. I don't care. Just print it."

:lol:
stardust wrote:And I'm sorry, but that supernova idea was bull.
Prior to the movie, a series of Star Trek comics were released, called "Countdown." These comics have been accepted by Abrams as canon. Here are some of the first issue's highlights (lowlights) :

- Nero was mining "Decalithium" in the Hobus system... Deca-? Trilithium wasn't good enough eh? Nor Quad-, Pent-, Hex-, Sept-, Oct- or Nona-? Had to go all the way up to Deca-?
- The Hobus system star made a large solar flare, making them flee the mining planet, and this solar flare not only destroyed the entire planet, but converted the planet's mass into energy! :roll: And that's supposed to explain why the subsequent supernova was powerful enough to destroy neighboring star systems' planets!

..... So again we see half-understood science being wielded as a blunt instrument to advance whatever plot they want. They don't CARE if it makes sense. There's also crap like a Reman ambush and Data as captain of the Enterprise (uhh where'd Data come back from? B-4 got a massive bios update? And so soon after the events of Nemesis?)

It started to bother me, then I realized -- this is just a comic. Comics do things like this all the time. They use pseudoscience, totally implausible scenarios and two-dimensional characters to tell their "fantastic stories." It's just a cartoon.

And THEN I realized -- the new "Star Trek" movie is a cartoon as well!! That's EXACTLY what it is -- it's a cartoon with live actors. NOW I finally have a basic understanding of what I watched yesterday. The characters were two-dimensional because they were cartoons. The plot and science were paper thin because they were just a comic book page. So, this movie was "comical" in more ways than one!

Well, I don't really care for comics. I do care for the depth that Star Trek once had, and the vision of the future and heights of storytelling it could occasionally achieve. None of those were present in this, Abrams work of "pulp fiction."

User avatar
RSE_Chris
Commander
Commander
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 2:00 am
Location: England, UK

Post by RSE_Chris » Mon May 11, 2009 9:04 am

I watched it on Friday, and I really enjoyed it, which seems to put me in the minority so far.

I went into the cinema with an open mind, not expecting it to be like the Star Trek I watched growing up. Star Trek needed to change, a lot, to continue the franchise, so I'm confused at what people actually thought this movie was going to be like. :?

As for the actors, I thought they did a very good job; especially Pine and Quinto. They had large boots to fill, and they did it well, whilst remaining different (I think Quinto was born for this role).

Tech was a bit off; blackhole time-travel, transporting onto a ship that had shields up etc; but I didn't let this put me off too much.

Main thing - It set out what it was meant to do: appeal to a broader audience. This film outsold Wolverine 3 times over on the opening weekend and took the number 1 box office position.

Overall I thought it was great. I certainly do not hold it as the best Star Trek film, but it was a good effort and I could easily watch it again. I look forward to seeing this cast in future Star Trek films, which I am confident will come.

Pigman
Commander
Commander
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:00 am
Location: Devon, England

Post by Pigman » Mon May 11, 2009 11:27 am

Hi RSE_Chris
I watched it on Friday, and I really enjoyed it, which seems to put me in the minority so far.
Looks like I'm also in that minority (see my earlier post) and I will be going to see it again, this time with wife and friends (took son and daughter last Friday).

Like you said, key is to watch with open mind. As for technology issues that others have complained about, lets not forget that warp travel is not actually possible and neither is matter transportation of live beings (I understand some experiments have been done), so before people complain about red matter creating black holes, let's not forget that Star Trek IS NOT REAL.

That said, I don't know if I'm ready for a new Star Trek based on an entirely different time line.

My suggestion to Paramount would be to make another film where our heros have to go back in time and mend the original time line so that all of our existing Star Trek canon fits and then we can have a new TOS!

Regards

Pigman

User avatar
TurboC
Lieutenant-Commander
Lieutenant-Commander
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:00 am

Post by TurboC » Mon May 11, 2009 4:18 pm

Pigman wrote:As for technology issues that others have complained about, lets not forget that warp travel is not actually possible and neither is matter transportation of live beings (I understand some experiments have been done), so before people complain about red matter creating black holes, let's not forget that Star Trek IS NOT REAL.
... and there's still a big difference between plausible extrapolation, and fairly well-known science being completely ignored.

Warp drive isn't real -- really? I never knew that. :roll: Actually it isn't real as far as we know on earth, but it is still a plausible technology. There are theories as to how it could be accomplished. We don't know everything about the potential manipulation of spacetime, all we do know is that light speed appears to be a speed barrier in normal space. A warping ship isn't travelling normally through space, it is warping space. This is a plausible extension of known science, and does not contradict known science.

Transporters are one exception. It's not that transporters couldn't theoretically work as described - there's really nothing currently known in science that prevents them from working, given an advanced enough machine to do the job. The problem is the consequence of how they work -- if you converted a person to energy, it would be enough energy to blow a giant crater in a planet. That makes the transporter one of the most powerful weapons in Trek. Anyway, the transporter has been in Star Trek from day 1, so it's a little late to complain about it now.

The point is that all throughout trek, but especially in the next-gen era and beyond, writers and others involved have gone out of their way to produce PLAUSIBLE pseudoscience. They use some new principle in physics and try to extend it 300 years to imagine what might be possible. Sometimes, later discoveries contradict what they imagined, but at least at the time it's usually plausible.

The black hole thing is just a joke! We don't know everything about how black holes work, but we do know with 100% certainty that anything other than a truly massive black hole WILL kill you if you were to enter it! There are some theories that an utterly super-massive black hole, one where the event horizon looks almost flat as you approached it, might let you approach and enter without immediately dying -- and in that case, the pseudoscience of time travel could be written in. That wasn't the case here. These were very small and ordinary black holes, made only from the matter of a few stars worth or less. Anyone getting close to them would be turned into a thin atomic spaghetti. It wouldn't really matter what time-effects happened to them after that, since they'd be extremely and irreversibly dead.

So yeah, there's no excuse. Abrams chose to completely ignore known science. Like I said, the movie is just a comic book. Most Star Trek fans wanted more than that.

User avatar
carcher
Commander
Commander
Posts: 383
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:00 am
Location: England uk

Post by carcher » Mon May 11, 2009 5:11 pm

As i write this i haven't seen the film,but reading through the thread i see a lot of talk about canon. I'm 49 years old (yes,i'm afraid so lol)so you can imagine i was a rabid
TOS fan from the time it first aired in the uk.When TNG came along i hated it ! one reason being it broke the cardinal (canon) rule from TOS.....a klingon on the bridge of the USS Enterprise!!!!! WTF??? Kirk would have gone apeshit , kicked him in the bollocks and dragged him to the brig,giving him a good kicking along the way,
Over time i grew to really like TNG, and "that bloody ugly klingon .who should be "cleaning out the s***house" instead of being on the bridge"became one of my favorite charecters.My point?.......a canon rule was broken but no one talks about it or complains about it anymore (and belive me , we did complain ) because over time it's become accepted.
I dont want to be contraversal or start an argument or anything,but it seams to me a lot of st fans are looking backwards ,i mean real time not star trek time line,instead of forwards,TOS,TNG,DS9 and all will never be made again, so if canon rules get broken no matter how upset about it you are in a few years it will most likely be accepted as part of trek lore. and hopefully a new generation of st fans will grow up blissfully unaware of the uproar caused by the latest movie in the same way TNG fans were unaware of the outrage felt by the TOS generation at seeing a klingon on the bridge of the enterprise.

As I said, i've not seen the movie yet but i will get around to it and i'll go to see it with an open mind (like im sure roddenbury would have done) i will not walk into the cinema under a dark cloud of doom and despair because somebody told me that red matter is not a part of trek lore
i'll be prepared to enjoy myself ,i dont think i will love the movie but im confident i wont hate the movie, (is it even possible to hate a movie?) i hope to walk out of the theater feeling good about seeing it and looking forward to the dvd release with all the extras.
Don't forget the movie was not made to entertain a few ppl on this forum,it was aimed at the wide world and the wide world appear's to like it......... a lot
for the world is hollow and i have touched the sky....and one day mickar.....one day.....one sweet day......HAS ARRIVED!! HAPPY DAYS :D

User avatar
enterprise
Cadet 3rd Year
Cadet 3rd Year
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:00 am

Post by enterprise » Mon May 11, 2009 5:14 pm

I went to see the star trek movie last thursday and I cant see why so many people like it but some dont like it. I think it was the best star trek movie ive seen, execpt for star trek 3.

User avatar
HsojVvad
Commodore
Commodore
Posts: 776
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:00 am

Post by HsojVvad » Mon May 11, 2009 7:56 pm

Now if we take the special effects out, would this still be a great Star Trek moive?

As for cannon, maybe it will be fixed in the 3rd movie. Who knows, mayb eit will be like a Bobby Euing from Dallas. It was all a dream and everything will be hunky dory afterwards.
PRIUSQUAM PRAESENS DAMNATUS SALVENS :
HIC HOMO NESCIENS. QUAE FUTURA EST ?

EST PLANE VANUM?
MAGNIFICANDUM?
ERROR AUT SANUM?
O FORTUNA EST!
QUA?

User avatar
beepo
Lieutenant-Commander
Lieutenant-Commander
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:00 am
Location: Chepachet, Rhode Island U.S.

Post by beepo » Mon May 11, 2009 10:10 pm

:( I just saw it and am disturbed. It is a great sci-fi movie. However they need to fix a lot before they get to a third movie. The timeline is screwed pretty bad as of this movie. However like I said I enjoyed it more so as a sci-fi movie more than as a trek movie.

User avatar
war800
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:00 am

Post by war800 » Mon May 11, 2009 10:45 pm

people, you have to remember this is a 'reboot'. i still haven't seen it, but i know that's what their doing. everything that we knew of Star Trek canon, was thrown out the window, and no longer exists in the new movie's timeline. that's how i will look at it. and so should you guys

User avatar
TurboC
Lieutenant-Commander
Lieutenant-Commander
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:00 am

Post by TurboC » Mon May 11, 2009 11:33 pm

carcher wrote:When TNG came along i hated it! ... My point? A canon rule was broken but no one talks about it or complains about it anymore (and belive me , we did complain ) because over time it's become accepted.
I understand your analogy, but I don't really agree. TNG was a great show, and that's why you grew to like it. Why? It had good writing, and still had at least some characters with depth (Picard, Data...) Abrams' "Star Trek" is NOT a great movie. It's a slightly-above average movie. The characters are cartoons. There is no depth, no great interplay between the characters, no intelligence present. As I said, it might have been a great comic-book, but that's all. TNG came to surpass the original series in many fans' eyes, and it spawned 2 more series in the same universe. I'm sorry but I don't think Abrams' "Star Trek" will ever be seen as surpassing anything, except maybe Starship Troopers...

User avatar
smallaxe0217
Ensign
Ensign
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:00 am

Post by smallaxe0217 » Tue May 12, 2009 12:35 am

From my surfing the net, the minority on this forum is the majority worldwide...

One thing you can be sure of is that canon as you know it is kaput, gone, extinct. All of what you know happened in another timeline that pretty much ended when James Kirk's father died fighting Nero. I guess right now, it's all about whether you want to look FORWARD or look BACKWARD, and it would not be profitable for Paramount to look backward.

but I guess arguments like this will never end :D Time will tell how this movie will stand up.

User avatar
jonboylondon
Captain
Captain
Posts: 532
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 2:00 am
Location: the greatest city in the world....
Contact:

Post by jonboylondon » Tue May 12, 2009 2:37 am

TurboC wrote: Transporters are one exception. It's not that transporters couldn't theoretically work as described - there's really nothing currently known in science that prevents them from working, given an advanced enough machine to do the job."
Im afraid there is and its completely impossible.... (sorry) :wink:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle and http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Heisenberg_compensator
TurboC wrote: "but we do know with 100% certainty that anything other than a truly massive black hole WILL kill you if you were to enter it!"
Again we dont know with 100% certainty as we cannot even determine the nature of black holes :wink: - but i totally agree with you regarding the "red matter stuff" - what a load of tosh....absolute bunkum. Strange though as ST often likes to keep at least an element of truth in there tech but this was way out there.... :roll:

As for my opinion:

Pro's

- Good pace did not slow down and was not to long

- Good acting though I dont think anyone really nailed the character or mimicked the prior actors ways except for mcoy who was utterly brilliant - spot on!!. I liked the cast though and no-one was poor or over the top.

- Good Special effects - not brilliant, but good and the fight scenes were good which ST has always been useless at....

- Easily followed by non trek audience..

Cons

- Technobabble was pitifull - red matter/timetravel/grandfather paradox/vulcan blowing up and not being detected/spock watching on a planet close nearby a black hole!!!!!! so many soooo many!!!!!!!!

- Camerawork I hate the L.A.P.D Blue camerawork HATE IT and he did it in this STAY STILL!!!!

- Soundtrack was awfull forgetfull drivel and was like a poor copy of the new batman movies tune. ST is normally so good with music

- Look: as in did not feel like ST more like a poor SW/Firefly and the ship was absolutely awfull - fat and dingy. Bleeps and phasers/torps sounded like a cheap b movie and the transporter was silly to boot.... Also what was with the engine room? Water vats and pipes - looked like a cement factory not a high tech starship...

- To sentimental and at times stupid (kirk father ramming a ship while listening to his his baby and cooing???) There was no need for the Uhura spock thing - it was just silly,stupid mush.....

- The movie did not seem to even take cannon a little seriously which was a shame and had another half arsed silly temporal story again (why is spock still there????????????? answers on a postcard please!!)

Ill have to watch again and though I was hoping for much, much more i still enjoyed it. However I am now totally convinced they should have let J.M Straznski do the new ST and have really dropped the ball with that one..!!!

7 out of 10

JBL

PS -

Wrath Of Khan 9/10
Voyage Home 8.5/10
The Undiscovered Country 8/10
First Contact 8/10

:P
Monks: Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem
[bonk!]

KrazeeXXL
BORG Trouble Maker
BORG Trouble Maker
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 3:00 am
Location: the 36th Chamber

Post by KrazeeXXL » Tue May 12, 2009 3:03 am

smallaxe at least the new movie made it quick - Guillotine style -> zack :lol: like an axe lol but a big one ;)

yea it looks like a comic. I have to admit. This description fits perfectly. But for those who say that JJ killed Star Trek I have to answer that it already was dead. It began slowly with Insurrection and ended up finally with Nemesis. And all ppl said that Nemisis was crap (I guess 95% at least). So things had to change. Everyone wanted something new. Something cool.

For me the new movie is. I was thrown completeley into the action within the first 5000 Frames of the movie and I knew it'll be different.

You can allways make something better and this movie hasn't definitely reached the tip of the flagpole. It wasn't supposed to be! the top of the flagpole was First Contact and it was nearby impossible to make a better TNG Movie.

You can't get even better and better all the time. That isn't logical. I'll miss the old crew but I have a house full of original DVD's and VHS and so on. I watched it often and I will in the future.

But it's a fact that ST had to change. And I'm glad that it doesn't ended up like Star Wars. Yea, the characters look two dimensional. What have you expected? Everything new would have been damned. There wasn't big room left for any changes. Yea there wasn't sage chitchat we used to know but seriously wtf? :lol:

One twisted guy comes from the future, kills your mother and "black-holes" your home-planet and erases almost everything - dang!!! - the whole Federation and some of you need some friendly chitchat and maybe a game of poker or 3d chess between the characters with shakespeare-like talking? :lol:

I have to admit, that is and was the essence of ST but I'm dang sure it'll come back (changed...). I thought I'm the pessimist all of my life :lol:

I don't think they will continue this spiderman-style or however you want to call it in the next movie. I'd like to see the personalities grow. But there are 35 million ppl knowing them (more or less) and they look at everything so it was better to do less of this interacting - I'm pretty sure about.

And another thing. I'm a little bit disappointed @ some comments here. I read almost nothing (except recently in JBLs post or cd's) about the ships (except the junkyard called engineering looks like sh**) or the phasers - how they look like/ the cgi or anything. Nothing about the actors, the new Kirk, the new Spock, Uhura or Bones. For me they acted great. Imagine to play a role like Kirk or Spock and the 35 mio crazy fans you get suddenly. I was a little bit shocked as I saw Carl Urban. Cool actor I have to say. I liked him in Doom. (depended that I did not followed the trailer stuff - I wanted a surprise so didnt involved to big into these trailer discussions my best friend told me about)

Another thing... To the logical failures so often mentioned. I look with my best pal TNG once a month because of an ABO and then we watch at least 2 DVDs. I could name errors and unlogical things in every episode. They are everywhere. Failures in canon/physics/what characters say/even logic - the list is almost endless. (but do I hate ST for it's failures? guess you all know the answer to this question)

If someone or in this case something is dead we inclined to glorify it. It has no failures to us and is almost perfect. But it isn't. Nothing is. Even the universe isn't (JBL may correct me :lol:) - everything changes - where the way goes maybe only one knows.

I love all ST shows. Maybe every single episode and I'm glad that it is how it is - like all of you, too.

But I won't cleave to it so extremely. I follow buddhism in this way which teaches: not to cleave on something/someone you definitely gonna lose he/she/it. That's suffering and that's life.

It's a matter of fact that some ppl want to suffer. But every adult has to know what he/she wants to do and which way to go (called life). It's not my way anymore. I suffered enough in my life. I ended with this and I won't ever rope ST into this sh**.

but we all are glad to be free and to do anything we want. Love it, hate it never mind. I'm outta this thread. If you want to suffer, do it without me.

sincerly yours,

K

btw I dont wanted to convince anyone to like the movie ;)

carcher/pigman I liked your postings. JBL yours, too even if you beaten me today in the tourney :lol:
Last edited by KrazeeXXL on Tue May 12, 2009 3:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TurboC
Lieutenant-Commander
Lieutenant-Commander
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:00 am

Post by TurboC » Tue May 12, 2009 3:21 am

jonboylondon wrote:Im afraid there is and its completely impossible.... (sorry) :wink: (Heisenberg compensator etc)
First off, it's NOT theoretically impossible. I'm sorry, but I'm definitely not one of the physicists who worship at the altar of quantum mechanics. QM is very useful, its principles can predict certain things and describe things in interesting ways. However, I believe that QM is not a root cause, but an effect. It is a consequence of something else more fundamental that we don't yet understand. As for QM's holy 'uncertainty' -- a very interesting hypothesis is that particles DON'T inherently behave in a wave-like manner -- they only wave around because of the motion of the space they occupy (quantum vacuum fluctuations.) Put a buoy on the ocean, it moves up and down - it's a wave! No, it's moving because of the ocean. If you calm the ocean around the buoy, or simply put it in a calm lake or swimming pool - it's not waving anymore. If the Heisenberg compensator calms the wave motion of the space around the person or particle, the transporter could work perfectly fine.

Whether you believe this hypothesis or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that it is plausible, and that's all that is required in this case (defense of technobabble.) Furthermore, it at least refers to a technology (Heisenberg compensator) to try to bridge the gap. What was the technology Spock and Nero used to avoid being turned into spaghetti by the black hole? Was it explained? No, they just fell into the black hole and magically avoided the effects. That's why it's not the same thing, and that's why it's crap.

User avatar
jonboylondon
Captain
Captain
Posts: 532
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 2:00 am
Location: the greatest city in the world....
Contact:

Post by jonboylondon » Tue May 12, 2009 4:50 am

TurboC wrote:First off, it's NOT theoretically impossible. I'm sorry, but I'm definitely not one of the physicists who worship at the altar of quantum mechanics.
Thats fair enough... but to say its theoretically possible!! 8O 8O 8O . If you can explain how to get around the uncertainty principle, achieve absolute zero, change the known and proven laws of Physics in our universe and make it work mathematically then that makes a theory.

I understand why you may have misgivings about quantum mechanics and I share them myself but to say the transporter is theoretically possible without offering any theoretical science is just a statement not a theory.

It is not "plausable" as you say - its just sci-fi nothing more. You said "there's really nothing currently known in science that prevents them from working, given an advanced enough machine to do the job" Even if we have a super comp to handle the equations we dont have matter converters do we? How about all the other components? How do we beam them??

Physics has provided ample evidence as to why it is theoretically impossible and there are further uncertainty principles to overcome as well such as Entropic uncertainty principle and Energy-time uncertainty principle thrown in which mathematically show it is impossible!!

I have no wish to flame or upset but we do not even understand how our Sun works yet and there is far too much assumption over science these days rather than hard cold facts (one of the reasons why im not a huge QM fan as well!!)

However back to topic (and should we wish to continue a new thread maybe?) I completely agree with you :wink: :D :wink: At least they made an effort to cover there technobabble holes and at least consulted with scientists with there "Heisenberg compensators" and "Warp Drives."

Here they did nada and didnt even bother to base it on any known science - Here they just made drivel up!!

JBL
Monks: Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem
[bonk!]

Locked

Return to “General Chat Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users