The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Movie Discussion/ SPOILER reviews HERE - *SPOILERS* enter at own risk
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #211  
Old 05-08-2009, 10:28 PM
Elizadolots's Avatar
Elizadolots Elizadolots is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,466
Default

It's an offhand thing...I think it's when all the Vulcans are on board...we hear him, off camera, say "where's Chapel?".
__________________


Thanks to Ron Salon for the signature banner!
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 05-08-2009, 10:46 PM
tarzan tarzan is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vanlo View Post
Product placement in star trek! Nokia phone, and Budweiser were the two I saw... Did I miss any others? Still drink crap beer in the 24th century?
I would HOPE that by the 24th century, human reasoning will have evolved to an advanced enough level to where this ridiculous government prohibition on cannabis will have long been ended, and people would be intoxicating themselves with THC instead of beer.
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 05-08-2009, 10:59 PM
Timster Timster is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5
Default New movie: Great to watch, difficult to swallow

There is a good "wow" factor with this movie and fans old and new will like what they see while the movie plays. For many diehard fans, regrets will linger as you walk out of the theater.

The casting is very good; agree that Bones is great (he did seem to steal the show), new Scotty is a gas, the new Chekov and Sulu come off as far more polished, new Uhura is the new Catwoman, new Kirk is pretty good and the re-energized Pike has never seemed better.

Lots of action, plot was in the top three of Star Trek movies (we'll deal with canon issues in a moment), movie wasn't slow and ending was largely appropriate, even if somewhat a replay of Star Trek 4 and 6.

But I did walk out with the feeling, and I see it mentioned in one of the early posts, that the Star Trek that I grew up with is dead. I know there are alternate timelines in early TOS episodes and that one timeline in DS9 was allowed to linger in future episodes, but the point is that the REAL Star Trek Universe always prevails, and the timeline stays intact. STNG's Yesterday's Enterprise -- a classic no matter which series is your favorite -- did it right, allowing the show to return to it's original timeline but allowing the contamination of Yar's defection to the alternate timeline to vex Picard in future episodes. They could have easily done something like that for this movie; instead a deliberate and callous decision was made to just blow up the past.

This movie obliterates 79 television episodes and 6 movies with it's timeline change -- WHY? Because Paramount was desperate to revive the franchise, just as they were desperate after Star Trek I bombed, and they let Nicholas Meyer kill off Spock in Star Trek II. Just because ST Nemesis -- which had nothing to do with the TOS crew -- bombed, there was no reason to completely piss on TOS history and act as if they are doing everyone (including die hard fans) a favor. For crying out loud, even the internet Star Trek series gang filmed a fairly complicated episode where the established timeline of the Doomsday Machine episode was altered - to the point where Kirk was captain of the Farragut and Captain "Ahab" Decker survived his encounter with a planet wrecker -- but in the end they returned to the normal timeline.

My point is that there was no good reason for Paramount to let Abrams do what he did and all the "get over it, who cares about canon" crowd can just stick it. With this stellar cast, they could have easily have done a story that did not alter the timeline or better yet, they could have altered the timeline if that was necessary but restored it at the end of the movie. No one gets hurt and everyone is happy. The complete disregard for the fans who grew up with Star Trek is just unconscionable.

So it was nice to see the movie, but I won't pay to see it again. I saw Treks 1-6 multiple times, but not this one.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 05-08-2009, 11:06 PM
thanis thanis is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 92
Default

***POST IS ALL SPOILERS***

Quote:
Originally Posted by vanlo View Post
...obviously required to fit Old Spock into the story, but this part could've been written a little better... I mean, transporting from a stationary planet to a ship moving at warp speed? a little disappointing this period of the film...
This part of the film was very disappointing for me. The acting was good and honest to the characters during those scenes. Especially Leonard Nimoy. Both actors who play Spock, they pulled it off. Not due to make-up or CGI, just pulled it off with acting.

However, the entire plot elements, the moment Kirk met Furture Spock, the story weakens a bit. Then, goes way to far, with the teleporter equation. It is more than a typical mistake, it is a big future story-bump, not so much for this monie, but for future movies set in the new universe from the 2260s on or TNG timeline post-Nemesis.

***Boring conversation about timeline***

Scotty must have finished the teleporter equation after 2369 (appearance in TNG). There was no evidence of this extended distance teleportation in 2379 (Nemesis). It is not clear when Spock traveled back in time (it would have to be between 2379 and say 2420. That would be a long life-span for a Vulcan, and Spock is half-human, so you would think it would be less. IDK, I guess the Genesis event could alter all that. However the limitation is Scotty. Given human lifespans, don't think you could push his discovery of teleporter equation much past 2400.

******

The new film used the teleporter like Galaxy Quest's digital conveyor to quicken the pace. It used a spoofs understand for a Star Trek franchise film.

I love what-ifs and else-worlds. I don't mind changing major elements, but you don't change the rules.

I'm hopeful they explain the limitations of this teleporter equation. At the very least, the frequencies can be blocked (per what the mining platform did). Hopefully this can be done with out drilling holes in planets.

Still, the teleporter equation changes the logistics of Star Trek, as you have to ask why use starships for transportation,and ponder the value of phasers and photons (as you could either use the transporter offensively or defensively).
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 05-08-2009, 11:06 PM
Elizadolots's Avatar
Elizadolots Elizadolots is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,466
Default

Timstar....did you not pay attention to the movie? That was explained, quite nicely and simply.When Nero went back in time he altered the course of history so they were in (as Uhura says) and "alternate reality". Also, this alternate reality is created in the presence of a person from the first reality, so it is a subsequent reality. Everything Kirk, Spock, McCoy et al went through still stands.
__________________


Thanks to Ron Salon for the signature banner!
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 05-08-2009, 11:21 PM
Timster Timster is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5
Default

I understand the premise of the movie, whether explained nicely or not. The fact remains that in just about every SF timeline movie, the original timeline is restored with only minor changes (well, maybe not Back to the Future, but did you really want to see McFly working for Biff) at most.

Nero changed the past when he destroyed the Kelvin and, yes, the TOS crew that is on the Enterprise doesn't know anything about the "old" timeline, since from their perspective it is just not destined to happen. The premise of the movie is logical and it explains many deviations from established Star Trek lore: how Kirk served aboard the Farrugut under Captain Garovick, not the Enterprise under Pike, etc. I get it.

My objection is not to the validity of the timeline change -- like questioning other plot holes or quirks of this movie, many of which are mentioned in the posts. Rather I maintain that just because the apparently permanent timeline change it is logical and explained doesn't make it right.

And I still say it was not necessary -- they could have respected and not obliterated established series lore. Paramount deliberately killed it with no remorse.
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 05-08-2009, 11:35 PM
Elizadolots's Avatar
Elizadolots Elizadolots is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,466
Default

Again....did you not watch the movie? At the end of the movie, Kirk is Captain of the Enterprise (CHECK), Spock is First Officer on the Enterprise (CHECK), Scotty is Chief Engineer on the Enterprise (CHECK), Uhura is Communications Officer of the Enterprise (CHECK). Pike is in command of the local Fleet (CHECK), Sulu is the Helmsman of the Enterprise (CHECK), Chekov is the whatever the heck he does that's not Helmsman of the Enterprise (CHECK).

What was missed in the bringing it together?
__________________


Thanks to Ron Salon for the signature banner!
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 05-08-2009, 11:45 PM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

I'm afraid that many people will still not understand that there are two Star Trek universes/timelines now and they exist parallel to each other.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 05-09-2009, 12:12 AM
omegaman's Avatar
omegaman omegaman is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Posts: 4,613
Default

Saw the movie this afternoon.
The theatre was packed with people of all ages.
A large majority were over 40 years of age.
The movie was well received.
The movie is a tour-de-force.
Nimoy's performance memorable and moving.
I urge everyone to see regardless of their personal opinions of what is and what isn't Star Trek. You will love it.
Love the way the phasers central red and blue core spins 180 degrees for either stun or kill.
__________________
TREK IS TREK. WHATEVER THE TIMELINE!

The next TV Series should be called STARFLEET!
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 05-09-2009, 12:16 AM
_Hades_'s Avatar
_Hades_ _Hades_ is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
I'm afraid that many people will still not understand that there are two Star Trek universes/timelines now and they exist parallel to each other.
I couldn't have said it better myself. This movie was fantastic. This is an alternate timeline so everything that happened in the other movies and series will still happen in that timeline. This is something new and even if you don't care to admit it, it was something needed.

I have always liked Star Trek. I've seen all the movies and almost all of the episodes of every series. I even had that electronic Enterprise D back in the 90's. I have not read the comics or the books because I honestly dont have the time (and I've been more into Star Wars than anything else.. I know, I know..). But what this movie did is create new fans of the genre. It brought new blood into something that was starting to show it's age. I didn't even know this forum exsisted until after I came home from watching the new movie. I was so excited about it that I wanted to talk to other fans about it (Aynaeva is friggen hillarious - I've been using geekasim all day). This is what this movie is doing. Maybe they will work on the timeline thing next movie? No one knows.

The only two problems I had with this movie are obvious. First off, Vulcan. Seriously? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over? That is a *huge* deal. And though I might have had a little bit of trouble swallowing it, I'm ok with it. I't will provide very interesting and new ideas and stories because, lets face it, we know what happens down the road. Now.. we dont.

The second thing is Kirk's light speed promotion to 1st Officer. From brand new cadet to 1st Officer/Captain in three years. That's way too fast. The *only* way I could visualize that ever happening is if somehow Spock Prime (which this forum is the first time I've heard him called that) told Captain Pike who he was and that Kirk needed to be in that position. Other than that, I'm at a loss.

But overall, I loved this movie. My mom, who watched the very first episode of TOS back in the day absolutely loved it too. I did not see one person upset in that theater when we left. And I just cant wait to see it again!
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 09:36 PM.


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.