Thoughts on the new "Star Trek" movie

Post by **TurboC** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:21 am

jonboylondon wrote:Thats fair enough... but to say its theoretically possible!! . 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 just explained how to get around the "uncertainty principle" -- quiet the quantum vacuum fluctuations (assuming quantum vacuum fluctuations will be proven to be the reason behind uncertainty.) I don't have to give a schematic of the future machine which could do this. Something is theoretically possible anytime it is not provably impossible. In fact, there are far more speculative machines in star trek than the Heisenberg compensator - at least it has the virtue of dealing with an aspect of physics we still don't fully understand / don't fully have complete theories and equations for. How about inertial dampers? I'd definitely say that canceling inertia is far less plausible than canceling uncertainty. And the universal translator -- why don't we still hear or see the alien speech? Not to mention all the times it works right off the bat in a first contact situation, without having to go through a learning process, like with the "Skrreeans" in DS9's 'Sanctuary.' That language-learning process was conveniently omitted (for time purposes) from so many situations...

Post by **HsojVvad** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:21 pm

war800 wrote: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

I am sorry, why should I have to look at it as a 'reboot'? I don't want a reboot, I want a good Star Trek movie. It's all a cash grab the way I see it now. But I will go see it so I can give a proper review and judge for myself. I will see the first one, but if I don't like it, I will not see the sequales then.

I will go see Terminator (wish Jamers Cameron was directing it) and Angels and Deamons before I see Star Trek.

Post by **TurboC** » Tue May 12, 2009 7:27 pm

It could have been a reboot AND a good Star Trek movie. Too bad it wasn't. Again, "IMO". Whether you like it depends on what you care about and what you are looking for. If you don't mind shallow writing, ridiculous science and frantic scene pacing, you might enjoy everything else.

My brother-in-law is going to see it tonight. I've been trying to figure out whether he will like it, hate it or somewhere in between, but I'm not sure. His favorite trek is the old Star Trek, he likes the characters and the music (lol.) I think he will dislike much of what was done to the characters, and probably the music as well, but he has pretty unrefined tastes and seems to be won over by special effects. So I think he will like it, and if nothing else he'll say he likes it just to tick me off. Heh.

Update: He says "thumbs down."

He has some sense after all, lol. "I don't know... it was almost like a parody." Sounds about right.

Post by **daedalus** » Wed May 13, 2009 12:28 am

It certainly screws up the timeline. But it maintains the kitschy tone of the original series and the actors were spot on, especially Bones. The worst part of the movie was Tyler PerryÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s cameo. He is full of drivel. At least he plays an admiral, a role usually reserved for loser actors.

Post by **OmegaX** » Wed May 13, 2009 12:15 pm

imho, contrary to what some people keep going on about, the writing wasn't shallow. it struck me along much the same lines as TOS. except the spock/uhura thing did kinda bug me, but hey, it worked. everything about this movie was an alternate timeline/reality/universe. every absolutely changed when nero first appeared. and i liked the first scene. yes lt. kirk was on a collision course while listening to his son be born, so? it made it a little more human imo.

and kirk fit his role perfectly, if you ask me. the kirk we all know and love DOESN'T EXIST in this movie. the kirk we knew became the way he is because of the upbringing of his parents. his dad wasn't around in this movie to give him a sense of morality and duty. so kirk in a bar fight? plausible.

i actually liked the look of the new engine rooms, though they could have done a little more futury stuff.

there have been thoughts that stable subspace fields could protect a vessel from the effects of a black hole. combined with a sturdy structural integrity field could be a way how nero and spock's ships survived. and yes, very little is known about black holes. there are many theories out there saying the intense gravity could tear a hole in space and time, that anything not ripped about by the gravity could travel through to somewhere or sometime. so the black hole time travel didn't bother me much. and yes, i do agree that they should have explained what the heck red matter was...

all in all, i thoroughly enjoyed the movie. i knew it was going to be nothing like the trek i knew. those of you who hate it because it changed trek... well, tough, i guess. i know there was plenty wrong in the movie, but there has been plenty wrong in EVERY trek movie. i, personally, look forward to the future of the franchise. those of you who don't, well, that's what dvds are for. here's to long life, trek!

EDIT: and they should have at least kept the camera a little more sturdy... but like cloverfield, it probably won't seem as bad on a smaller screen when it comes out on disc.

Post by **TurboC** » Wed May 13, 2009 7:07 pm

I'm finished arguing for now, clearly the people that liked it aren't gonna stop liking it.

But I will say -- I never bothered buying Nemesis, and I doubt I will buy this one either.

Post by **jake42485** » Fri May 15, 2009 11:45 am

I personally enjoyed the movie, although I can see where some wouldn't. To lighten the mood of this discussion I will now ask you to direct your attention to this dripping satire

.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/t ... =b-section

Post by **KrazeeXXL** » Fri May 15, 2009 12:59 pm

lol this one was funny.

btw I have got a question. Has the movie a name?

Or is it just called ST XI: the reboot (after the Nemesis crash)?

Post by **stardust** » Fri May 15, 2009 1:34 pm

Blah, I've gotten way beyong the point of not caring anymore with this reboot that's stuck the boot in IMO

They could put a talking Moose in charge of Engineering in the next movie and I wouldn't care *sigh*

Post by **TurboC** » Fri May 15, 2009 6:20 pm

I've heard that the next movie is going to bring back Khan.

Post by **Pigman** » Fri May 15, 2009 6:29 pm

TurboC said

I've heard that the next movie is going to bring back Khan.

and why not....it's an alternative timeline now?!

I'll be going to see the film for 2nd time this Wednesday so will view it with the positive and negative comments of you all in mind.

As some of you will know, my favourite Star Trek is TOS and yet I quite enjoyed the film, despite all it's faults and technical failings don't matter too much as it's Sci Fi (Fi = FICTION!!!)

So let's not get too exercised about red matter

Would love to see Khan again....anyone know if Ricardo Montalban is still alive and would like to reprise his role?

Regards

Pigman

Post by **captaindusk** » Fri May 15, 2009 6:34 pm

I'm sure he would like to reprise it and would shine in the movie (if it really would be made) but unfortunately he died January 14th 2009.

Post by **Pigman** » Fri May 15, 2009 7:18 pm

I'm sure he would like to reprise it and would shine in the movie (if it really would be made) but unfortunately he died January 14th 2009.

Thanks captaindusk, that's really sad news and I don't think anyone else could play Khan so I'll tell Paramount to forget that option.

Regards

Pigman

Post by **Scatter** » Sat May 16, 2009 9:51 pm

the movie sucked harder than an orion slave girl carrying a very large vacuum powered straw...

Post by **stardust** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:28 am

Pigman wrote: Thanks captaindusk, that's really sad news and I don't think anyone else could play Khan so I'll tell Paramount to forget that option.

Regards

Pigman

Please do tell them that. TWOK's my favorite film mainly because of Montalban's protryal of Khan.

Seriously though, and this is levelled at the movie industry in general, why can't any of them write original stories anymore? They all seem to be jumping onto the re-make and pointless prequel bandwagon

At the risk of exposing my immaturity

@ Scatter