The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Post links to movie critic reviews (SPOILER FREE or properly labeled as SPOILERS)
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-13-2009, 04:53 AM
That Metal Beastie's Avatar
That Metal Beastie That Metal Beastie is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Overhere
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
Somethings are more fantasy than science.
And yet that doesn't mean the plot and the devices have to be contrived.
True that. When done well the contrivances don't feel contrived.
__________________
'A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.'

Thomas Pynchon
'GRAVITY'S RAINBOW'
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-13-2009, 05:01 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

That's true because the transporter, the warp drive, the matter antimatter reactor are all devises use to help drive the plot. They are introduced provisionally at first with little scientific explanation but we accept them as part of the background just as airplanes, computers, and shuttle lauches are apart of our background.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-13-2009, 05:14 AM
That Metal Beastie's Avatar
That Metal Beastie That Metal Beastie is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Overhere
Posts: 2,527
Default

Exactly!
__________________
'A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.'

Thomas Pynchon
'GRAVITY'S RAINBOW'
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-13-2009, 05:18 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

If I recall transporters weren't just done for flare...but to avoid lengthy shuttle scenes.
A quick jump to the planet with out all the fuss.

That's definitely a contrivance.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-13-2009, 05:28 AM
That Metal Beastie's Avatar
That Metal Beastie That Metal Beastie is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Overhere
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
If I recall transporters weren't just done for flare...but to avoid lengthy shuttle scenes.
A quick jump to the planet with out all the fuss.

That's definitely a contrivance.
An infinitely cool contrivance.
__________________
'A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.'

Thomas Pynchon
'GRAVITY'S RAINBOW'
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-13-2009, 02:40 PM
Elizadolots's Avatar
Elizadolots Elizadolots is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataan View Post
That was a pretty good review Elizadolots, it was really a good read, thanks.

My one and only complaint is that you did not cover what I thought was one of the most controversial aspects of the movie, which was the destuction of the Vulcan homeworld and all but about 10,000 of her people. I am of the opinion that if that one piece of the movie alone had been re-written somehow to avoid this happening it would have turned into an even better movie. Vulcan and her people are a cornerstone of Star Trek and I just feel that it's just been ripped away leaving a gaping hole in it place.
I was trying not to spoil anything that wasn't highly suggested in the Trailer. I suspect the destruction of Vulcan is setting us up for follow on stories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
I liked the tone of the review.
It was not critical or insulting nor derisive.
The conversational aspect made it easy for everyone to apprciate.
Thank you.
__________________


Thanks to Ron Salon for the signature banner!
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-15-2009, 07:42 AM
barbreader barbreader is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8
Default

Here's my own review:
http://readerswritings.blogspot.com/...r-trek-xi.html
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-15-2009, 08:06 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Very good review.

You went on a bit of a tangent there a couple of times.
So on an off note. Thanks for taking the time to joing up to our (now your) little forum, we're glad to have you around barbreader...

Firstly I must go scientificly....
To introduce a mass sufficient enough to create a black hole would mean to add somehwere near 20 or so solar masses to a planets mass. That's twenty Suns in the heart of the planet. The colapse wouldn't take even minutes. It would be instant. The interior of the planet in the event horizon (assuming part of the planet is not in the event horizon) would immediately disappear within the Black Hole. There would likely be a massive emmision of energy by the sudden stripping of molecular and stomic bonds of that material and a beam of energy would briefly emit out from both poles of the planet while the outter shell was torn assunder because of the gravitational tidal forces that vary at distant from the singularity. The Debris field fould be spherical but over years it would turn into an accretion disk.

Also:
If the gain in mass was gradual. Then it would have been impossible to stand on the surface of vulcan with increasing solar masses in the core of the planet. The space shuttle is about 3 G's of constant Force.

Earth's solar mass would something like 0.000006 solar masses. Just adding 1 solar mass would kill everone and the planet instantly.

What makes so little sense is if Red Matter is so dense then how is it even used in such quantities? One Drop destroyed Vulcan but a hole sphere of the stuff is in Spock ship... It makes no sense at all.

Does spock's ship have ability to Negate billions of solar masses in some sort of anti grav field?! Who knows...

None of this resembles anything scientific...It might as well be hypermatter from star wars.

Good call on the Molten Earth. One could not sustain a tunnel to the planets core. It would immediately fill in with Magma and colapse because of the spin and mass of the planet.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-15-2009, 10:06 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,078
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
If I recall transporters weren't just done for flare...but to avoid lengthy shuttle scenes.
A quick jump to the planet with out all the fuss.

That's definitely a contrivance.
That's exactly why it was invented. A way to quicken up the story was all that was behind it.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 05-16-2009, 05:50 AM
Southern2356's Avatar
Southern2356 Southern2356 is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 141
Default

Angels & Demons only got 37% on Rotten Tomatoes, ST still holding at 95%. It maybe be a better second weekend than we could hope for. I know I'll add a bit more to the gross later today for a matinee.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:35 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.