Star Trek

It wasn't the ringtone that annoyed me, it was the shameless need to show the Nokia logo that irked me.

That and Uhura ordering a Budwieser. But hey, they're both incredibly minor discrepancies on a fantastic film.
 
As a general film goer and non trekkie Star Trek is still the blockbuster film of 2009 for me so far. Had a good all roundness and a gorgeous pallet and effects. Plot was a little thin but there was lots of little complexities. The intent of the film hit the nail on the head.

Wolverine was average, Terminator Salvation bombed (beaten by Star Trek this week in US charts!) Angels and Demons was poor.. its Transformers next and Harry potter.
Its certainly a DVD/Bluray purchase In the Autumn.
 
I thought it was brilliant. I hold The Original Series quite close to my heart so I was a little concerned I might not like the film but I was really impressed. The plot was pretty thin and there were some holes, but it didn't take anything away from the experience. What I really loved were all the character moments and I was impressed that characterisation wasn't sacrificed and the film made into just another generic sci-fi action flick when it so easily could have been.

The acting was top notch. Zachary Quinto was Spock, no doubt about it, and Karl Urban stole the show. I was wary of Chris Pine because he's so young but he really impressed me and I was sold on his take on Kirk by the end of the film. There wasn't anyone in the cast who wasn't worthy and the chemistry between everyone was amazing - I could believe they would go on to be a legendary team in the future.

I'll be seeing the film again, definitely. It looked really beautiful on the big screen.
 
Seen this one today on DVD while the missus was out.

Wow.

I'm quite spoiled. I've just seen this and District 9 on DVD. Two fantastic Sci Fi movies, that once I finished watching I felt I could start them all over again. It's been ages since I could say that!

I thought we might end up with a fast paced effects driven film here, with less focus on the wonderful Trek characterisations we know and love, and story coming distant second. I suppose to some extent this did prove to be the case (how can the new cast ever better the originals?), but the end result was a serious shot in the arm for Star Trek imho. I loved the fact that broadly aping the original cast was kept to respectable levels, and that each actor gave their characters their own approach (esp. Kirk imo). But the bigger picture beyond that was a tightly packed and brilliant story, now crying out for number two.
 
Strawman. What I (or anyone) thinks of Generations or Insurrection plays no part on the quality - or lack of - in Nemesis.



Supposition. Frakes may just as easily have hated the movie for being rubbish.

Nemesis suffers from a poor plot, a bad villain and - shock, horror - recycled plot points. Add to that pointless car chases and characters acting completely out-of-character.

Nemesis was only dark because of the low lighting levels. Other than that, it was about a campy, 2-dimensional villain, poorly veiled to appear serious and moody.



Nemesis was nothing more than a film that wanted to desperately be Wrath of Khan.

The only comparison between this new film and Nemesis appears to be that the antagonists are Romulan. Except, of course, in Nemesis, the antagonist was human and aided by Remans. The only other comparison is that they had weapons of mass destruction.

But then Shinzon's radiation gun was little more than a poor man's genesis device. The entire end of Nemesis plays out just like the end of Wrath of Khan. Villain's plan fails and therefore attempts to destroy the crippled Enterprise, but fails due to a beloved character sacrificing himself for the crew.

At least Nero had a real beef with the Federation. Shinzon had a lifetime of hatred for the Romulans, so when his opportunity of revenge arrves, what does he do? Attack Romulus? No, he decides to attack Earth.

There's next to no similarities between the new Star Trek and Nemesis and Nemesis is far more guilty of ripping off older Trek films itself.
 
It hasnt been rubbished, the events in the film lead to an alternative timeline not an altered one. Therefore everything that has already happened still exists. This is just an alternative timeline which runs along side the existing one.
 
Yes, and at no point in that episode was time travel ever, ever mentioned as being the cause of Worf's dimension jumping

And the main problem with Bob Orci's musings on quantum mechanics is that he's basing everything on the Many-World's Interpretation, which in addition to being disputed is also not accepted as standard. He also assumes quantum mechanics as being "most advanced and complete". It's neither the most advanced (that would be the even more disputed String Theory) or the most complete (that would be classical mechanics or general relativity). He also assumes that if the Many WorlRAB Interpretation holRAB true that time travel must involve alternate realities. It doesn't, and in fact most theories point to one conclusion: in the real world, you can't go back into the past. You can build a time machine but you can't go back to before the machine was invented.

Reading that article seems to show Orci with a massive boner for quantum mechanics. In actual fact, although quantum mechanics has produced many real world predictions (and without it the computer I'm using would never have been invented), it's still very incomplete and in the worRAB of my Cosmology 205 professor "a complete and utter mess".
 
Have to agree with you there!

Also disliked the Chekov character, and Simon Pegg felt awfuklly out of place.
There were some aweful plotholes- like the core detonating on the edge of a black hole- not even light can escape from a black hole!!
Was a very good film though- just not as great as I hoped.
 
Thoroughly enjoyed Abrams film. Not a Riker, Picard, Crusher, Sisko, Janeway, Archer, Chakotay or Paris and last but certainly not least, a Worf (oh what joy not to have to listen to Worf say "honour" fifty times a sentence) to be seen for miles. Utter, utter bliss.
 
I've popped over to Movies speacially to say how much I loved this film!

I grew up with star Trek and, while never a Trekkie in the sense of being able to name every nuanced moment of every episode, I've seen all of TOS, TNG, RAB9 (best of the lot!) Voyager (just cos it's Trek and I had to, though I suffered!) and Enterprise, AND all the films.

And I loved this film.

Acting great, made me cry at the start and laugh throughout, great fun, and a fantastic way to re-launch the franchise whilst respectfully tipping the hat to its origins. Karl Urban and Zachary Quinto were especially wonderful!
 
I think I agree with what you are saying. The film really got the emotional core of TOS and the characters are portrayed so well that they manage to carry the film over any plot problems.

However the sequal to this really neeRAB to have a much stronger plot for it to survive. They've shown us they can do the characters well and they've succeeded in giving us an intorduction to them. But film 2 neeRAB to go a step further with plot, because these elements cannot be used again. Film 2 will not be an origin story, so the plot will be far more important.

Still, as it stanRAB, I started out very unsure bout this film and its been far better than I could have expected. Because of that, I'm willing to remain optomistic about the future. The only downside is that the last time I did this with Star Trek was when Voyager came out. My optomism was NOT rewarded ;)

I'm hoping for better luck this time!
 
Back
Top