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
  #601  
Old 05-12-2009, 02:29 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

The plot holes become clearer but at the same time smaller when you see it for the second time, at least for me. Hell, a black hole that just disappears after it has satiated its hunger is as nonsensical as a chemical rocket that can be shot into the sun in a few seconds. Trek has always been a bit silly and you either have to enjoy it for or despite its silliness.
Reply With Quote
  #602  
Old 05-12-2009, 02:41 PM
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 horatio View Post
The plot holes become clearer but at the same time smaller when you see it for the second time, at least for me. Hell, a black hole that just disappears after it has satiated its hunger is as nonsensical as a chemical rocket that can be shot into the sun in a few seconds. Trek has always been a bit silly and you either have to enjoy it for or despite its silliness.
Indeed. Its science fiction not fiction science.
__________________
'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
  #603  
Old 05-12-2009, 03:04 PM
Capt. Hill's Avatar
Capt. Hill Capt. Hill is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Temple City,CA
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneBuckFilms View Post
STORY

There are a lot of coincidences in the movie, but I take that to reflect the idea that there is an element of Fate and Destiny involved with this legendary crew, that despite the alternate reality created by the Narada arriving and blowing the Kelvin to pieces and killing George Kirk (thus altering events after Stardate 2233.04), and James Kirk's early life, the crew of the Enterprise would come together.
The Alternate Reality also provides a way to remove predictability from future installments. Anything can happen now.

PRODUCTION DESIGN

The new Bridge sets, the Shuttles, and even the much-maligned Engineering worked very well for me, giving a much larger scale, and a very believable interpretation of the 23rd Century.

The Narada was about as intimidating and badass as any ship I've seen in Trek, and Nero was an interesting, if underused adversary.

The Narada interior sets were also an interesting departure, very alien.

The Viewscreen also being a window connects the inside to the outside very effectively, and gives a really good sense of the internal geography of the Enterprise and the Kelvin.

CINEMATOGRAPHY

A little heavy on the Shaky-Cam, but very well done, the lens flares in many scenes add a sense of reality, and also literally highlight the idea of the future being bright.

VISUAL EFFECTS

This is an area where the movie really excels. Although all of the exterior shots were CGI, they did not look like CGI.

They simply were there. And the Enterprise herself was absolutely breathtaking, with some fantastic hero shots, for example, the Enterprise rising out of Titan's atmosphere.

SOUND

The sound was nothing short of amazing, with some very interesting homages to the Original Series, and the new sounds for the Enterprise and the Kelvin were great.

TOS sounds are dotted around the movie at various points, but mixed in with many newer sounds that seem designed to evoke the Original Series without the cheese.

The loud BOOM when starships jump to warp really helped convey the power behind those warp engines, and there are a couple of points where the sound went completely silent, reflecting the fact that there is no sound in space.

The best example, is during the battle with the Kelvin, when all of these loud explosions and weapons fire are exchanged, part of the hull gets blown out, we hear and see a nameless woman holding on for dear life, then letting go, sucked into a silent vacuum, with the phaser and torpedo fire, and chaos going on.

DIRECTION

This movie is fast paced. But everything is still clear, and we know what is going on. Unlike Transformers, the movie does not play like a 2 hour 6 minute Trailer, and we get moments of suspense, comedy, character and drama, and none of it feels rushed.

We find a lot of classic lines from TOS and the movies, but none of them sound forced, and all of them are organic within the story.

CAST

This movie is surprisingly well cast, with Karl Urban almost stealing the show, with a fantastic interpretation of Doctor McCoy.

Chris Pine, the one who initially had me worried, proved to be excellent, as well as Zacharay Quinto.

MUSIC

Michael Giacchino may not be Jerry Goldsmith or James Horner, but he has done a superb score for this movie.
To compare his music to the other installments would be unfair, since the movie is a very different take stylistically to the other 10 movies.

His main theme is instantly infectious, and the score works perfectly with the visuals.

It is premature to call this a Classic score, since only time will show that, but it is one of my favorites.

The TOS Theme at the end is jarring on CD, but is absolute gold at the end of the movie.

OVERALL

This is an excellent movie, and in some ways, I would place this up with TWOK.

JJ Abrams should be very proud of his work here.

In summary, I totally agree with all of the statements made above, meaning if I were to make a review on this movie...this is EXACTLY what it would look like.
I was finally able, after homework and all sorts of other stuff, to see Star Trek this past Sunday, and that was a treat to my mom as it was indeed Mother's Day. My verdict, in my own words: "Dude!!! It was like an awesome-tastic rollercoaster ride!!! I remember leaving the theatre I was at (AMC Santa Anita...on an IMAX SCREEN), and I was a total motormouth in conversation with my mom and dad ('cause both my folks came) about how blown away I was with how this film presented itself. I've also talked about the movie with some friends and colleagues @ school, sharing my awesomer reviews of it, and the majority of them want to go see it too!!
I wanna go see it again...so maybe I should go seek out some friends of mine that have agreed on a date to go see it,and come along with 'em
Reply With Quote
  #604  
Old 05-12-2009, 07:00 PM
AyanEva AyanEva is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,452
Default

After my third viewing tonight, I've come to the conclusion that Kirk is indeed given command of the Enterprise immediately after the incident with Vulcan.

He still has bruises and scratches on his face! I'm not sure why I didn't notice before but the injuries are obvious. There's a large bruise on his left check and faded injuries around his left eye, I believe, as well as scratches on his lip and I think his chin too.

Can't be more than a week or so after they return to Earth from blasting Nero to bits.

I mention this only because I know there was debate about what point after the fight with Nero that Kirk was given his command. It was almost immediately after.

The end where he's getting his medal and all, there are close ups of his face, look at his lip and the left side of his face and you'll see what I mean.

Also, I FINALLY SAW THE FINS MOVE! I took me the whole movie to catch it (I kept remembering to look for the fins only after the ship was already in warp or had already dropped out of warp). But finally, when Spock Prime did the monologue and the camera glided over the ship, they came to the nacelles and I'm like staring HARD at them because I didn't want to miss it. And I saw the fins move and light up!

I must say, I quite like that effect. And the ship truly is gorgeous.
Reply With Quote
  #605  
Old 05-12-2009, 07:07 PM
Aqua's Avatar
Aqua Aqua is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 447
Default

which monologue? I want to fast forward to that part and watch
__________________
To bathe a cat takes brute force, perseverance, courage of conviction - and a cat.
The last ingredient is usually hardest to come by.
- Stephen Baker
Reply With Quote
  #606  
Old 05-12-2009, 09:32 PM
Ryan S. Ryan S. is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 0
Default Not great or good, it was terrible... and here is why (long review).

This post is an extension of a thread I started at Rotten Tomatoes ST XI forum, which to my surprise has some viewers agreeing with me. I'll do my best to balance this post but make no mistake about it, I believe this is one of the worst Start Trek films ever produced.

I understand and agree with the need for a 'reboot", but certainly not at the expense of everthing the classic Start Trek meant. One poster on RT responded that I should not look at what was but what the new ST is and cited some examples. Frankly I don't care what it is because so much of what made this an enduring series has been stripped away.

Ask yourself this question: If they were trying to establish a Star Trek franchise today using this film as a base, would it last? I think the answer is clearly... NO!

No one will remember this film.

This is at best a visually appealing romp that unfortunately fails to capture (in fact it seems to purposely neglect) the essence of Gene Roddenberry's original themes. This movie is less of a reboot than an excuse to lure a built in Trekkie fan base into another over produced CGI fest that sacrifices substance for visual appeal. I'll admit in some scenes it's beautifully rendered and it's something past ST films needed.

JJ Abrams' cast (via the vehicles of the screenplay and script) for the most part fail to carry the weight of this story, and to this reviewer at least, certainly don't seem capable of shouldering Star Trek's long legacy. The scenes are clipped and disjointed sacrificing continuity and pace. Instead the actors' conflicted and somewhat manic (and supposedly humorous) performances only seem to serve as a painful respite between each overproduced action sequence. I've always considered such cinematography as was used in this film as a lazy way to build suspense and drama where none clearly exists. I can't think of a better example in recent history.

I do not fault the actors as I'm of the opinion that several are truely talented. Feature films are a director's medium. That said, the characters as they are portrayed in this film are mostly a joke.

Leonard Nimoy's performance, through no fault of his own, seems out of place. As the only actor who would have been capable of grounding this farce by lending his considerable on screen weight, it really is a shame that his character was not properly developed, but then again none of them really had a chance.

The characters seem lost between a the roles of comedians and vulnerable heroes. Really, a 'flagship' crewed almost solely by teenagers? Ok, Kirk, Spock and some of the other crew are in their mid to late twenties, but let's face it, in context they are almost completely unbelieavable . In the past ST universe pitch battles were often fought strategically. The weight of the event powered through. Now it's a slugfest with all guns blazing until something blows up beautifully, more work for ILM I guess.

In a vain attempt to recapture the wit and humor of the classic series they've instead filled the feature mostly with cheap slapstick hammy jokes delivered at the most inappropriate times. The dialogue is lacking and under developed, enough said there.

The story delivers little in terms science fiction believability and therefore lacks the chance to provide the escapist experience that most great sci-fi easily conveys. This was a franchise that always prided itself on developing its' sci fi tech to weave the story together. The use of tech in STXI to fill in for the lazy writing is shameful.

In a attempt to match the current trend of creating a gritty and urgent feel at every turn JJ Abrams has instead taken a step away from giving this movie and the future of the franchise any sense of identity. Only viewers who haven't had the opportunity to view the best of Star Trek's previous features will be taken in by the illusion.

Yes, I know that Star Trek needs to move on. That Shatner, Nimoy and the rest of the crew will never be seen on screen again. That TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, and the TNG films weren't perfect. But is was always STAR TREK and for the most part you always knew it. That is why this franchise has endured! Another film like this will really kill it!

Overall this latest rendition of Star Trek disappoints and doesn't deserve the title of space epic or even a reboot. It should
be forgotten. Give the series a good rest and begin again with a properly themed screenplay and script. One can only hope that
this is not the direction that this venerable franchise will take moving forward.
Reply With Quote
  #607  
Old 05-12-2009, 10:00 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
The plot holes become clearer but at the same time smaller when you see it for the second time, at least for me. Hell, a black hole that just disappears after it has satiated its hunger is as nonsensical as a chemical rocket that can be shot into the sun in a few seconds. Trek has always been a bit silly and you either have to enjoy it for or despite its silliness.
That's indeed true as well.

The only thing I really have to change in my own review is my positive words about the Enterprise. Given the debate about her size, if she's approximate to the TMP ship - I think she's beautiful. If she's 900 meters, she's an ugly, ugly nonsensical monster.

That's the biggest difference in my thoughts after a few days. And it can be fixed if established the ship isn't a freak now.
__________________
'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
  #608  
Old 05-12-2009, 10:34 PM
Sesshu Sesshu is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 16
Default I have way too much time.

**SPOILERS** will follow so stop reading now if you don't wish to read them.

**SPOILERS** are ahead so **STOP NOW** if you don't wish to read them.

I write an "introduction" since I see that the main bone of contention is between those who accept the movie and those who feel that the canon has been violated. A simple solution would be to either reject the movie (and sequels) flat out or accept it. However, Star Trek 2009 has enough good things in it (along with the bad) that it puts the fans (like myself) who want to reject it between a rock and a hard place.

The old cast is back, though younger, and (I say this with some reservations) it appears they click, despite the over caricaturization. Dissenting fans realize that the temptation to see young Kirk, Spock and the rest back in "origin" action is a hard thing to resist. I doubt there's a way (within reason) to restore the timeline. Even if there was, one timeline/history has to go. Besides, how many times can you change time before it becomes ridiculous? Perhaps we'll find out. Still, the writers would have to preserve canon if they restored canon and since I deem them "less than diligent" (discussed later) it's not going to happen. I realize many people say that this is an alternate universe. I disagree. The timeline of the "original" universe has been changed. Nothing that has happened over the last 43 years (since 1966) will happen (within reason). I've just had my past erased, except I still remember it. DVDs don't lie

Some people here say that Paramount can always make a "canon" Star Trek movie here and there with... who... what? Certainly not with the TOS cast. And a TNG movie is not going to happen now, not that it ever was. This is what they have now. And they will continue with sequels. This "reboot" movie is already successful (despite some glaring defects: discussed later) and the actors are young enough to easily last another forty-three years if need and want be. Paramount will not be making any Star Trek movies that occur post Nemesis while they have this success going. Why would they? They might, if they have the resources and think it's wise, but who would you rather see? A new crew, or this original, younger crew?

It matters not whether this is an alternate universe or not then. Fans are stuck with it. And I maintain that the timeline of the original universe has been changed. To paraphrase Carl Sagan, what's the difference between a universe that you can't interact with, and a universe that doesn't exist? And what interaction is there going to be between this supposed alternate universe and the supposed real one? None that I forsee. This is the universe I've been put in (metaphorically--I haven't lost my mind yet) and it doesn't matter what other universes exist. I can't go to them. I realize Mirror, Mirror type episodes existed. One in TOS and one that I saw in DS9. These episodes didn't last 43 years In this universe Spock's mother is dead and Vulcan is destroyed so if Kirk and Co. ever find Khan and Co., I guess Spock will really die. I'm just pointing that out as an example. I trust they won't redo The Wrath of Khan. And I can already see how to bring Spock back using the Vulcan colony =/

Given that this is how it is, I suppose I'll see how they play it out. I wasn't expecting anymore Star Trek movies anyway. "My" Star Trek is intact since I can always either reject this one, or accept that it's a hard reboot. The only bone to pick, if one wants to pick a bone, is whether they could have played this as a "true" origin prequel. Some people remarked it would lack action and be boring. To that I can only say that the phosphoric acid in soda is bad for your teeth It would have taken more research and more work (thinking). It "could" have been done well if the will to do it well was there. It could have had about five or six movies (10-15 years) before the characters looked like they didn't fit. Is Paramount really keeping the option open for these actors to do "25 to life" in Star Trek movies? Being an option, I suppose so.

I would have to say that Paramount pulled the plug on "classic" Star Trek and made a value bet. It was still a gamble, as some value bets turn out to be but it paid off. On "this" hand. Star Trek fans will see this movie to judge it for themselves and the big budget advertisements lured in some Star Wars and other sci-fi fans, although clearly there's a lot of overlap in those three groups. Whether the success continues, and whether Paramount will do much better than the gross of the three day rush (to see the movie) is still unclear. It may have been a value bet with the thought of leaving the game soon (make one or two sequels and dump it). Making a different play, and perhaps a bit less money on "this" hand, may have been the better long term decision. Also, with the bigger budget and bigger advertising a "canon" prequel may have done just as well, and possibly better. Okay, we'll see how it works out. Not much else to do.

I had to break my post up since it was close to 30k characters. If that's a problem I have no problem if it's deleted.
Reply With Quote
  #609  
Old 05-12-2009, 10:36 PM
Sesshu Sesshu is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 16
Default I have way too much time 2

My giggles and grunts about the movie in general are below. Feel free to pass on them. Since "heresy" was committed I didn't let many "plot blunders" get by. I sacked them with gusto as well. I realise most (if not all) Star Trek movies (and most movies in general) have plot blunders. So you may proceed, but don't say I didn't warn you.

A bit about "my" origin. I watched the first Star Trek episode to ever air in 1966 when I was twelve. I loved it. It was my escape from my Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde father. I also loved, and still do, science. Yes, Star Trek was science fiction (or fantasy/adventure if you prefer). It was also a vision of a better future. I was saddened and confused when the series was cancelled. If I recall correctly the network was confused also because the show was actually doing well. I believe the scoop is that they were monitoring the wrong demographic. That's why the reruns did so well (so I assume).

A few years ago I watched The Menagerie yet again (and again almost all three TOS seasons on a lark--no, not in one sitting) and I marveled at the communicators. I mean, wow, cell phones. I don't think anyone back then dreamed (besides Roddenberry) of cramming the "boxes" we had into something you could hold in your hand and take with you wherever you went. I'm sure there are other examples. I also saw where Lucas got most of his ideas from.

That's not to say I wasn't delighted when in 1977 I and my then girlfriend watched Star Wars. It was remarkable. Obviously, I watched the first Star Trek movie, and so on. The Star Wars movies were "generally" better than the Star Trek movies, but Star Trek was still "home" to me. It had a deeper storyline (78 episodes) and its message had always impressed me. Besides, it served me in a time of need and I'm sure I had/have a certain loyalty/attachment to it. Hence, my "review" is very biased. I'm letting you know that I know that

Since I liked Star Trek, and Star Wars as well (to mention a few), I have pretty much incorporated the "imagined TV/film experience" into something that seems real. I was there from the beginning. I lived it. It didn't happen? I was there. I saw it happen

Also remember that I have had forty-three years to let Star Trek sit with me and my other thoughts/views/experiences. My point of view will be different from someone who has not had that time. That is, of course, a distinction "I" point out, and my point of view may be different from another's for other reasons as well. I'm not saying I'm older and wiser; I'm saying I've had more time and more time "does" make for a different integration/interpretation process than less time. Less here does not mean worse, just different. It's something to consider.

I saw the previews (one picture would have been enough to draw me in and glossed over some forums and knew there was an "advanced" time traveling Romulan ship involved, but more I did not know. I sat in the theater and watched as the U.S.S. Kelvin approached an anomaly. The huge Romulan vessel emerged, as expected. I was surprised that I became choked with emotion as young Jim Kirk was born, his father seconds away from a heroic death, and his mother deciding on a name because, well, that's what mothers do (particularly trying to do it before their husbands die). It was like watching a just discovered old family movie of, say, your grandparents and your parents, at some critical time in their lives, and you knowing that some of them would become legends. Whether that was accidental, or intentional, I don't know if anyone will reveal But it was a great start.

The film continued and the emotion continued. Young, impetuous Kirk almost falling off a cliff, young Spock in his Vulcan school being tormented by young Vulcan bullies (which is actually sort of illogical, but, okay--and I must say I was surprised that Sarek was not scripted as a more "distant" father). Again, with Uhura and Kirk and that bar room fight scene, Pike challenging Kirk to do better... A very, very good start, I felt. The emotions were certainly "tapped" very well. I was hooked and choked up.

Bones was played well. I got "eating the apple--Wrath of Khan" during the Kobayashi Maru scenario/test, but I thought Kirk was too cocky doing it. Just a bit less would have been better. The apple was great, though. So far, so very good.

Checkov's accent was a bit much, even for Checkov, not to mention "what is Checkov doing there to begin with?" He comes to the Star Trek scene later, but hey, okay. It's a reboot (I'm hoping a reasonable reboot).

Kirk with a green woman? Heheh. Okay, some comic relief. Nice. Scotty with a not so Scottish accent? Okay. But why the Ewok with him? Ahh... Ewoks are cuddly and the kids will love them. Meh, okaaaay. Star Wars ripoff, but okay. Sulu is okay too, but not enough of him appears. Such is life in the cinema.

But what happened to Nero? He vanished. Did he get into a really great poker game? What was this naughty Romulan up to? Apparently he was waiting for someone to appear (hopefully not for the entire 25 years) in a particular place in space.

Nero "did" ask the captain of the Kelvin what stardate it was. Nero was not pleased with the answer. Nero must have miscalculated, went back to whatever time he was from and would no doubt try to come back again at the "right" time (so I thought--I may be right actually since I now know that Nero had the red matter, but I really hate the idea of gliding gently through a black hole and coming out the other end feeling refereshed and in another era--that just ain't real).

Okay, so there's a distress call from Vulcan. Obviously that's Nero doing naughty things at the right time now. He did say he was going to make "him" watch (I wasn't sure who "him" was but thought it must be Spock--which Spock I wasn't sure).

So now here's Nero drilling a hole in the planet Vulcan. Okay. Where are the planetary defenses? Well, he clobbered the federation ships so his own ship must be some kind of supership. But still, six billion Vulcans on Vulcan and they look up and stare? No Vulcan fleet coming to the rescue? No planetary defenses that even in that time would sink, or at least shoot at a "129 year from the future" starship? Was this the probe from ST4? Nah, sorry. At the least shuttles would be coming up. Hell, I'd get a ladder and try to swat the guy with a broom myself. But if Nero did neutralize the planetary defenses, at least tell me about it with more than a quick one liner since if it was a one liner, I missed it. Nah boys, you got this one wrong. Something does not feel right here, and "that's" the problem with "this" Star Trek. The script is a roller coaster ride going from really good to really mediocre to really horrible, and I mean "Ed Wood" horrible all things being equal. This was far from the worst scene, of course.

Last edited by Sesshu : 05-12-2009 at 10:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #610  
Old 05-12-2009, 10:38 PM
Sesshu Sesshu is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 16
Default I have way too much time 3

Uhura intercepts a Klingon transmission that reveals 40 odd Klingon warships were destroyed by "something" and she doesn't deem this noteworthy enough to pass up to her superiors? Besides, what was Nero doing in Klingon space? Did he destroy their planet too? Who is going to be left if he did?

The Vulcans don't know Nero is trying to blow their planet up, but the guy obviously doesn't have a drilling permit either, right? No signs of even futile resistance?

Enterprise gets there late (good thing too), and Kirk, Sulu and the "lunchmeat" guy dive down since the transporters are being jammed. Why not have a few more people dive down? Like maybe a dozen more. "Lunchmeat" buys it, Kirk loses his phaser, okay, fistfight. Sulu just brings a neat sword. Say what? No phaser? I understand we are getting to roots here, but there is a time for a sword, and there is a time for a phaser. This is phaser time. This drill that is making the planet Vulcan dance does not bode well. The fight sequence, like most fight sequences in this film, is frenetic and hard to follow, as is a lot of the movie. I didn't get a good feel for most of the fight scenes.

Some "asides" here. Enterprise from 1977 looks better than this "comicy" 2009 Enterprise. The interior of the 1966 Enterprise looks better than the "sewer pipes" in this ship. The engine room is pathetic and my kitchen is a better bridge. (The bridge is lit up like an Apple store.) But that can be forgiven. No problem. What did they do with the money, though? It's quite possible they intended it to look cheesy. If so, okay.

Now here Pike meets Nero and I must say I was distressed at "The Wrath of Khan" creature put into his body to make him speak. Umm... This is not a good Easter egg. We seem to be losing a bit of respect here now. I mean, why a scene from "The Wrath of Khan?" This is not a funny scene. This is where I started to get really worried, because now it's becoming... dense, and it's becoming dense on purpose.

Oh oh, you mean they're really going to let this guy blow up Vulcan? Yeah, they did. Nero drills a hole to Vulcan's core and injects some "red matter" and we get a mini black hole. Well, I can suspend my disbelief but not enough to allow them to blow up the planet Vulcan. Rather than build on the richness the planet Vulcan would add to the 50 planned sequels, they blow it up? Brilliant.

Not only that, but Spock Prime is on Delta Vega right next to Vulcan, except that Delta Vega is not suposed to be in the same system as Vulcan. Delta Vega was a planet located near the galactic barrier, in the Delta Vega sector in TOS. Listen to "this" conceit and what I can only term as disrespect: "In an interview with TrekMovie.com, Orci said, 'We moved the planet to suit our purposes. The familiarity of the name seemed more important as an Easter egg, than a new name with no importance.'" I submit the purpose was to be "less than diligent". Look below.

Think about Khan, since they brought him up What happened to Ceti Aplha 5 when Ceti Alpha 6 blew up? Right! Now what should happen to Delta Vega, where Spock Prime is, when Vulcan gets sucked into a black hole? Right! I guess it suited their purposes to not lay waste to Delta Vega as well. It also apparently suited their purposes to insult our intelligence twice with one blow rather than think

Spock's mother also bites it. Nice. Destroy all of it. And they proceed to. Uhura chases Spock to, well, make out with him. How did this happen? Why did it happen? Spock just loses a planet, his mother, and Uhura becomes manipulative enough to offer her support right at that vulnerable moment? Nice. And what is, towards the end, Uhura doing to Spock on the transporter in front of Kirk and everyone else? Swapping spittle? Spock "allows" this? Is this necessary? Must have some sex in the movie, eh?

The first interracial kiss on American TV: "Plato's Stepchildren", 1968. This is not a slap for Gene Roddenberry, it's a punch in the face. Nice job of insulting Roddenberry. What were you guys thinking of? Fast money? Titillate the tweens that adore Twilight? Henceforth known as the 3T Maneuver. The turbolift scene was actually not that bad since Spock contained himself, and Uhura did as well, mostly. That I can accept. That's not an insult to anyone. It can even be considered an Easter egg, though I would like to know why Uhura had these feelings for Spock. But the transporter room scene? It's shameful to do that to the Spock character, the Uhura character, and since Kirk is right there I couldn't help but remember that historic kiss, so now I sense a disrespect for Roddenberry's achievement. No one thought of this? I'm not saying there was an "intent" to insult Roddenberry, but did everyone in production, writing and direction have a laspe in consciousness?

I now felt the roller coaster's full effect. And in a movie, that's not a really good feeling to have. While, generally, I liked the interaction between the characters (Uhura/Spock aside) and some of the script, I had to deal with the destruction of Star Trek as I know it. Since I went into it earlier, I won't repeat myself.

While the first hour or so of the movie was much to my liking, I can't say that for the rest of the movie. The Romulan supership is actually a mining barge. This is a mining barge from hell. This mining barge could probably be the Romulan Flagship from the time (era) it came from. What is a mining vessle doing with such fire power? I have to read a Star Trek (non canon) comic book/graphic novel to understand that about twenty years after Nemesis the Romulans, and I think the Borg, fitted that ship in that way. Since I did not read the comic book, I don't know why it was fitted that way. One needs to read a comic book/graphic novel to catch up on Star Trek? Could you at least have told me where to get the comic book? I realise some of the fans here like the comic book/graphic novel that this movie borrowed from. It's fine that you like it, but they should have explained this in the movie as well. I would bet that most Star Trek fans have never heard of that book/novel. I'm glad you got your Easter egg, but it was never explained to me.

Nero is upset that Spock didn't arrive in time with the red matter to prevent Romulus', and I might add Remus', sun from going supernova. His pregnant wife perished, as well as a heck of a lot of Romulans. The Romulans didn't know their sun was going supernova? Cern scientists here on present day Earth can pedict a supernova 9 days before it happens. I'm sure Romulans 300 years more advanced, if not more, would be more capable. But then, Romulus would probably have been fried by the preceding gamma ray bursts. And the Romulans would have been able to predict that too. Don't you guys do your homework? Or are you going to sound as silly as Han Solo did when he said he did the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs? And I really don't want to hear Lucas' "after the fact" explanation, although it was clever (maybe next time he'll hire the person that came up with "that" fix "before" he makes a movie). If you want to write in the big leagues, do big league homework. Or hire me, or any Star Trek fan. This is beyond "less than diligent". It's called "I don't care".
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 01:56 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.