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
  #401  
Old 05-10-2009, 08:47 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Oh, what a bubble to burst.

I did actually look for something like that when it was panning out. But I never noticed it on the first viewing. When I see it again these are the kind of things I'm wanting to notice.

But I never cared where the ship was built anyway.
__________________
'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
  #402  
Old 05-10-2009, 09:14 AM
JSnyder4's Avatar
JSnyder4 JSnyder4 is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 942
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
But I never cared where the ship was built anyway.
Me either.
It's a rather stupid thing to be concerned about in the end.
For the movie, it works as it is supposed to.
__________________
"I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad, and it's... depressing."
"Tact is just not saying true stuff. I'll pass"
"A sacrifice a day keeps Jesus away"

Reply With Quote
  #403  
Old 05-10-2009, 09:24 AM
heat010 heat010 is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2
Default Agree with most points

I agree that they took a lot of liberties with the canon and the characters were really out of place. Spock would never get in a relationship on the same ship. And what's up with that Orion girl? She looked like she just got out of a Star Trek convention, not the exotic knock your socks girl from The Cage. It was wrong.

The only character I really had respect for is Sulu because he played it very seriously.

3 out of 4 stars
Reply With Quote
  #404  
Old 05-10-2009, 09:46 AM
Timster Timster is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5
Default

I'll put aside my canon gripes (no small feat for me) for a moment.

But I have seen many posts (perhaps not all but nearly all) and to the extent that I have seen comments about the CGI effects, other than some mild glare and "shaky camera" complaints, the consensus seems to be that the effects were "great."

Let me again be the dissenter: I disagree, particularly with respect to the battle scenes.

Though I purposely tried not read reviews beforehand I did see some commentary and one of the bits I noted was one where someone connected with the film indicated a desire to depart from the ST "way" of viewing space battles (two hulking ships approaching each other from afar and firing on each other like ST:WOK space battle or Master and Commander sea battle) and adopt a more Star Wars mode of gyrating/twisting turning type encounters. I had no problem with anyone improving on the space battle stuff (in fact, I thought the much maligned Nemesis had a great space battle scene) and I was actually looking forward to what the new movie would bring.

For the most part, I would say that the previously posted complaints about camera glare, shaky camera stylings were on point, and in my view the constant inappropriate closeups actually diminished the beauty of the the space battle scenes. For instance, in the initial battle with the Kelvin, the camera loved to follow the flight of Romulan torpedos -- but the closeup kills the effectiveness of the scene and just makes for an explosion that jumps out at you but you are almost blinded by the glare of the close up impact. More dramatic: yes, but not as effective. A shot or two of these closeups could have been interspersed here and there for effect with some of the "older" distance/perspective shots, but there was just too much closeup to discern just what the hell was going on.

If you think about it, most people in a movie theater want to keep some distance from the viewing screen for this very reason and the seats closer to the screen are always the last to fill up -- it is just too uncomfortable to be so close up to the screen all the time and these battle scenes seemed to always be in this "in your face" mode. This need for ultramagnification was all over the place; even the Enterprise bridge viewing screen was so huge and the shot of Nero was so close up that the Enterprise crew could see Nero's nostril hairs when he phoned a friend and inquired if the Federation ship captain wouldn't mind shuttling over for some tea, or perhaps some eel torture games.

Another thought: the Romulan ship was from the future (towards the end of the STNG time period, 100 years after Kirk's time where the 200 year old Spock is an ambassador) and it is pitted against a Federation ship (The Kelvin) that is 30 years before Kirk's time. Aside from the fact that the close up angles made it difficult to see what was going on, can someone tell me why this vastly superior future Romulan ship (which later destroyed 3 Kirk era starships in Vulcan orbit in a matter of minutes) was having difficulty in destroying just one even older Federation ship that had no warp power and no shields after the first torpedo impact? And what was the point of George Kirk taking his damaged ship and manually exploding it into the middle of the Romulan ship if no damage to the Romulan ship was actually caused?

Moreover, in the last battle scene of the movie, this advanced Romulan ship has now sustained an explosion of Spock's Vulcan ship (piloted by the younger Spock), the creation of a black hole in (or was it behind, sorry I couldn't see what the hell was happening because of the constant close up crap and ultrafast scene cuts) it and even Kirk discerns and says that the Romulan ship is compromised so that does explain why the inferior Enterprise is able to destroy it. But what did the Enterprise exactly do when Kirk said words to the effect of "Fire everything"-- again there is a close up the front of the Enterprise, launching what appears to be a gatling gun type of hailstorm (torpedos, phasers, water from a squirt gun, you name it, it came out in a flash) that lasts for a second or two and then it is difficult to see the damage caused by this weapon barrage (forget about the fact that this firepower was more advanced than the Enterprise E's arsenal from 100 years later). With all the money spent on these effects you would think that they could have backed up, taken their time and properly shown how a ship got destroyed from a frontal ship assault and the immense pull from a black hole. That shouldn't have been so hard!

I suppose if I went back to the movie a second time (like some have already done) I might be better able to appreciate the effects of the space battles but my bottom line was the the effects were so designed to be "in your face" that for me the superiority of these effects was lost/wasted/diminished. And one should go to see a movie again to get subtle things that were missed the first time around, not to re-view obvious things that were just improperly focused.

Sorry but I'll take the Nemesis or First Contact battle scenes over the scenes from the new movie any day -- I'll comprehend more of what I'm seeing and I won't get a headache. Or I wouldn't need to go back multiple times and see it again.

For the next Trek film the CGI mavens should heed a simple order once in a freaking while: "Mr. Sulu, screen magnifiction factor .25" Please!

Last edited by Timster : 05-10-2009 at 09:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #405  
Old 05-10-2009, 10:46 AM
Spock's Avatar
Spock Spock is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnum View Post
DS 9 and the Star Trek Enterprise went back to the Mirror Universe and kept it alive. I hope Paramount does the same for the normal Star Trek Universe. Thats all I am asking. Keep this universe of Abrams, but please every once in a while make a movie about the normal universe too.

No.. The Reason for staying with the NEW timeline is simple..(with the exception of spock (vulcans live a long time...) The other actors are TOO OLD to play those characters.. this way we still have trek (the old one is still there..if you wish to see it there are many ways to do this...) But We now have a NEW re-invigorated trek that can be expanded upon and have NEW story lines and adventures.. I don't wish to see all the OLD episodes and movies RE-MADE..(with different actors) THAT would be STUPID and REDUNDANT. That Timeline has happened it is Documented.. watch it ALL you Want! If you Don't like the new trek.. get a netflix account and watch all the old trek you want.. The "NORMAL" universe is up to TNG.. and even most of those actors are getting up there... We need to move on... OR you can stay where you are and also trek lives in fan fiction.. Enjoy it.. But don't expect everyone else to Re-tread the same ol' stuff over and over.. it makes NO Sense... Live Long and Prosper.... and GET OVER IT. ;-)
__________________
"Live Long And Prosper"
Reply With Quote
  #406  
Old 05-10-2009, 11:37 AM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim
Anthony: Does the time travel explain why the Enterprise looks different and why it is being built in Riverside Iowa?
Bob: Yes, and yes.
Actually? No, it really doesn't. See, a couple of the more notable things that make the Enterprise look different also appear on the Kelvin, and the Kelvin's design pre-dated Nero's arrival in the Kirk era. Then, after Nero destroyed the Kelvin, he basically did nothing but wait for Spock for the next 25 years. That's why Kirk had to explain to Pike that the "lightning storm in space" was the arrival of the ship that destroyed the Kelvin -- if Nero had created enough of a stir to affect the design of the Enterprise, presumably Pike would have known what that "lightning storm in space" meant without having to be told.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #407  
Old 05-10-2009, 11:39 AM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spock View Post
No.. The Reason for staying with the NEW timeline is simple..(with the exception of spock (vulcans live a long time...) The other actors are TOO OLD to play those characters.. this way we still have trek (the old one is still there..if you wish to see it there are many ways to do this...) But We now have a NEW re-invigorated trek that can be expanded upon and have NEW story lines and adventures..
So can the classic one. I think what he meant was using the new actors to portray the original universe characters in adventures we haven't seen that happened before and during the original five year mission.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #408  
Old 05-10-2009, 11:54 AM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livingston View Post
Come on, it was fun though, wasn't it? You were just a little enthralled watching it weren't you? I mean, regardless of any plot/story criticism, this compared to TOS, it was an experience and I don't just mean brainless eye candy. There was a hint of majesty there wasn't there? The final frontier, expanse. Unknown territory. I felt the film really captured that well. Space, the final frontier, it captured that well, I thought.
Not really, no. Sorry to disappoint you, but this struck me more as a space action flick that had been shoehorned into Star Trek branding more than an actual Star Trek film.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #409  
Old 05-10-2009, 12:05 PM
jerhanner's Avatar
jerhanner jerhanner is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deep in the 100 Acre Wood
Posts: 3,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spock View Post
We need to move on... OR you can stay where you are and also trek lives in fan fiction.. Enjoy it.. But don't expect everyone else to Re-tread the same ol' stuff over and over.. it makes NO Sense... Live Long and Prosper.... and GET OVER IT. ;-)
Spock, you are wise in all your manifestations.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #410  
Old 05-10-2009, 12:27 PM
omegaman's Avatar
omegaman omegaman is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Posts: 4,609
Default

Anyone else wondering why McCoy was making such a fuss onboard the shuttle that was simply transporting him from Iowa to Star Fleet Academy. Are we to assume the shuttle had to fly into space to get from Iowa to San Francisco?
__________________
TREK IS TREK. WHATEVER THE TIMELINE!

The next TV Series should be called STARFLEET!
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 09:25 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.