Thoughts on the new "Star Trek" movie

Post by **smallaxe0217** » Thu May 07, 2009 5:34 pm

A little background: I have never really seen any of the original episodes. My intro to Star Trek was with TNG and I've always been a fan of Picard and crew, followed by DS9 which I think was the best Star Trek series ever. Voyager was something I'd watch when I was able, but I didn't have strong feelings about it, and I never got into Enterprise. When I heard that the new movie would be a prequel, I was a bit mad, because I thought there was a lot of story left even after the mess that was Nemesis. I was prepared to really hate the movie.

I didn't. It's a very good movie, at the very least it's on the level of "First Contact." It pays respect to the established canon while still coming with something new and different, and this TNG fan is ready to follow the new franchise wherever it might go. Hopefully they'll come out with good stories that focus on the characters, rather than plot-driven exercises...but all in all, it's a good show.

What did you guys think?

Post by **HsojVvad** » Thu May 07, 2009 7:12 pm

Well you said it rates with First Contact. I don't find that very encouraging.

I find First Contact an 2 hour movie that should have been on TV. I don't consider it a real ST movie but a glorified 2 hour epsisode of TNG.

But I do hope it is good. Funny you say it pays respect to cannon where I just read a review of ST and it said something about ignoring established cannon. I hope you are right.

Was going to see it now, but way too tired so will wait and read the reviews here that will be coming in hopefully.

Post by **smallaxe0217** » Fri May 08, 2009 12:21 am

You'll see when you watch it. I would not say that it violates canon, but I believe Paramount intended it as a reboot of sorts.

Post by **Badbru** » Fri May 08, 2009 12:46 am

Spoiler

Seriously you've been warned

See the movie first

I would say that it does violate cannon in the most spectacular way possible. Think about where we are at the end of the movie and what effect that has on established cannon. It's a reboot allright.

Post by **KrazeeXXL** » Fri May 08, 2009 10:06 am

It's a breach with the perfect future Roddenberry came up with. I have to admit that I was a little bit bored in the last time about this original future. Yea they had conflicts but they were able to get all over the obstacles. (maybe in a way to easy some times)

Now, the Enterprise crew has it unlike harder. But I guess they'll get it done.
Somehow

Everything has to rearrange or nothing would happen

Post by **smallaxe0217** » Fri May 08, 2009 10:49 am

Spoiler in reply to Bradbru

Hope you're seen the movie...

I disagree that it violates canon. It reboots it, by making this movie's universe a parallel to the one that's been established (how else is Leonard Nimoy's Spock still in existence and still has memories of all that's happened?) I'm not going to try and figure out the time travel paradoxes, but I read an article that made a good point in saying that this is really a sequel rather than a reboot. In my opinion, JJ Abrahms has managed to do the impossible, and found a credible way to make the Star Trek universe more open for storytelling.

One of the reasons why I initially hated the idea that it was a "young Kirk/Spock" thing was that I already knew what was going to happen in the "future." Think about it; if they had told a story about the established Kirk and Spock, what's the drama in that? You already know everything that's going to happen, whatever story you tell has to be consistent with the 40 years of canon that was happening before, and whatever Kirk and Spock do, you know they'll wind up doing all of those stuff you've seen already. I want something new and different, stories I haven't heard before. I suppose Paramount had the choice of creating a new team in the established universe (timeline after Nemesis), or taking the familiar characters and creating a new universe. I probably would have preferred the former but they've done a good job in doing the latter. The Star Trek franchise now has legs, and for once I'm excited about it.

Post by **Martok** » Fri May 08, 2009 11:11 am

The storyline was poor, the writing was bad, and the acting was just as stiff & awkward as it sometimes was in the previous series/films....but without even the fun camp/cheese that helped make Trek enjoyable. The interiors of the ships looked they were filmed in a combination junkyard/abandoned warehouse.

Perhaps worst of all, Abrams' version of the Trek universe feels almost....dystopian. (And a certain something happening to a certain planet definitely didn't help that image.) What the bloody f****** hell happened to Roddenberry's vision of a bright future??!!

Gah. I wash my hands of Star Trek for good. Guess I'll now be limited to watching reruns of TNG, DS9, and playing BOTF from here on out.

Post by **KrazeeXXL** » Fri May 08, 2009 12:09 pm

martok wrote:What the bloody f****** hell happened to Roddenberry's vision of a bright future??!!

You mean the "fabric softened version"? Time changes. I guess maybe 10 years ago I would've written the same but for a long time I'm pretty sure that this "bright future" never will happen. Not without sacrifices. Or at least the chances that it'll happen are absolutely worst.

I like the story in the movie. It has more near to life than most of the other Trek movies. Everything will and can happen. That's it. Arrange with that fact otherwise go down below. I like the fact to bring some ppl down to earth again. To much are flying around doing nothing.

Sorry if i'm to hard but I don't like fabric softener any more. Maybe it's because I'm grown up or because it just isn't healthy in a long term sight...

martok wrote: Guess I'll now be limited to watching reruns of TNG, DS9,

I'm glad, I'm not. watching every episode for 50 times... isn't very exciting because you know everything what'll happen.

Post by **captaindusk** » Fri May 08, 2009 12:35 pm

SPOILER!!!!!!

Watch it first, then read this!!!!!!!!!!

"Nearer to Life than any other ST movie" I totally gotta disagree with you. It's not a bad movie, yeah it even is a Star Trek movie but it's still a vision. And if "nearer to life" means playing badass trying to beat the hell out of 4 opponents in a bar before getting beaten down I gotta say thats not the life I like to watch. I hated seeing Kirk behave like some uber macho... (yeah I know he may did that in TOS from time to time) but that was only macho stuff to impress the youngsters imo.

I also gotta say that it's reaaally near to life seeing a 10 year old kid driving an oldtimer while turning on a wonderful radio with a huuge Nokia display listening to the Beasties (nothing against the Beasties they are great)

And if "nearer to life" gotta mean to hide under the bed watching a girl undress I also don't like that. I mean nothing against half naked hotties but come on?? Too much hollywood popcorn stuff.

I liked the movie but I gotta admit that it didn't felt like Star Trek anymore. I had the feeling of watching any science fiction movie. Again, I do not critizise the movie, I liked it but before seeing a series based on it I would rather see more movies and that's it.

The characters were drawn amazing imo and the idea of the alternate timeline offers great storytelling possibilities and the effects were amazing. but again I'm sad to say I felt the same way like I did after watching Transformers. A great way of entertainment for 2 hours but there's no greater impression.

There were other things which I didn't like but I won't start whining like some uber nerd. Go watch it and make an opinion for yourself. This was just mine. I respect every other opinion. And don't wanted to hate on anyone's post.

And due to the fact that the world is maybe more bad like in the days TOS was made, wouldn't that be THE reason to keep Roddenberry's bright future vision? We'll get into trouble soon enough on earth imo.

Post by **KrazeeXXL** » Fri May 08, 2009 2:57 pm

"near to life" drawn to the destruction of vulcan. and that everything isnt that perfect it used to be before. (the end of the movie f.e.)

Dude you're hanging on this quote and cracked it outta the context. But if you mean you have to then so it be.

Post by **captaindusk** » Fri May 08, 2009 3:03 pm

I fail to see the significant difference

To the other movies. They blew up earth, they blew up Veridian III, They blew up Praxis and so on. I really don't get it ^^. But check your PM's anyways dude ^^.

Ok Veridian III and Earth were prevented in the end ^^

Post by **Army40** » Fri May 08, 2009 11:49 pm

Well guys it's a Must See Movie....if you're a fan of Sci-Fi....but if you're a hardcore trekker Roddenberry style...forget it....too many things have changed in there...story, ships, buildings on Earth and on Vulcan, Vulcan itself, Spock's mom, Romulus and so on and on.

I've got mixed feelings about the whole thing.
I've already talked too much. If it's a reboot of the franchise...then it will attract younger people but us Oldies...we better adapt or forget about Star Trek as we once knew it. Even the unread books I own feel like it's no longer Trek...used to be before THIS day....but not anymore....Star Trek Universe went in the garbbages.

Post by **Army40** » Fri May 08, 2009 11:52 pm

KrazeeXXL wrote:"near to life" drawn to the destruction of vulcan. and that everything isnt that perfect it used to be before. (the end of the movie f.e.)

Dude you're hanging on this quote and cracked it outta the context. But if you mean you have to then so it be.

Yeah they blew up Vulcan in this Alternate Reality Universe but, Romulus went Kaboom in the Old Spock's universe which would be where Riker and Troy would be with Starship Titan. The whole thing sux.

Post by **KrazeeXXL** » Sat May 09, 2009 12:15 am

Army40 wrote:The whole thing sux.

I don't like to judge about things I don't know completely. All known ST facts are gone and I'm sorry about it, too.

but everything has to rearrange. Don't you think that maybe Picard get his mission done without the big structure the Federation used to be?

I mean things will develop different and damn they have to. I was bored about the things I know

I love "old Trek". I can remember the first time I seen TNG.

and what does Troi and Riker have to do with it? maybe they're F****** around in the orion nebula or somewhere else

dunno it really

the bloodwine

Post by **Solon** » Sat May 09, 2009 12:36 am

I have not seen the movie.

But I am sooo old that I saw ST TOS live on TV as a high school-er.

Based on what I am reading, I would say that Paramount is trying to bring in a younger audience. Hence, the things all of you are referencing: the porn, poor dress, bad attitudes and blowing up Vulcan.

Sci-Fi writers are always using things to bring in ideas. Think about the perspective Spock was constantly bringing to Kirk and even to McCoy.

Does any of that perspective exist in America today? I cannot find, and I have tried, anyone under the age of 30 who can discuss a logical sequence of ideas, even with some coaching. Oh they're loud, opinionated and very sure of themselves; talking while playing with their belly button ring, or scratching their exposed butt crack, but they can neither explain their argument nor draw any useful information from it in the end. Obviously, blowing up Vulcan is essential, else the younger audience would all be wondering who this 'clueless' guy Spock was, and why he was acting in a way that made them all feel uncomfortable?

I travel 6 months out of the year, and the happiest times for me now commence when the wheels come up on the plane and I am leaving the USA. The optimistic, well-educated, well-dressed and fairly moral country I grew up in has vanished completely in the intervening years.

Now Hollywood sells its Movies primarily to an overseas crowd (revenues run about 60-70% from overseas box-office and DVD sales). However, the TV audience is here in the US. So, Movies can have a variety of themes, and are not set as to a particular audience. But, if Paramount wants to generate a future TV audience, then they are stuck with the younger US demographic, with all their tastes, concepts, predjudices and misconceptions.

At a guess, you are saying that this new movie 'feels' like modern Amerika. A shame, but predictable, if that is your target audience.

DISCLAIMER: The above is a piece of logic, drawing parallels between the culture that created each style of ST. Therefore, if you are under 30, reading this, went through the American School system and did not major in College in one of the hard sciences, you will not understand it. Please do not take this failure personally, just blame me, an old white guy for screwing up the wonderful good time you are having and go immediately to the next post.

Solon