The W
Views: 95772564
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.4.14 2258
The W - Movies & TV - J.J. Abrams' Star Trek
This thread has 9 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.74
Pages: 1 2 Next
(2455 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (30 total)
Mr Shh
Toulouse








Since: 9.1.02
From: Bergen County, NJ

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 15 hours
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.43
Well, that certainly was a reboot, wasn't it?

It was a bit disconcerting to watch Abrams and Damon Lindelof present time travel that allows the rewriting of history after having them pound the "one and only one timeline" version into our heads on Lost for the past four months.

I honestly had no idea that Nimoy was part of the movie.

The casting was impeccable. Spock versus Kirk was tremendous throughout. Of course, the visuals were awesome. I especially appreciated how they made the Kelvin look old and worn. I really loved the score and sound. I especially loved the way Abrams used sudden silence at key points to create tension.

One drop of Red Matter creates a black hole strong enough to consume a planet but a ship full of it can't create a black hole to instantly devour the Enterprise?

I liked it quite a lot.




You askew my mirror. I askew yours.
Promote this thread!
OndaGrande
Kolbasz








Since: 1.5.03
From: California, Home of THE LAKERS!

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 43 min.
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.20

As a stand alone movie,I give it 2 thumbs up. It felt a little more "Transformers" than it did Lost/heroes (funny that the pre-film trailers were Transformers 2 and Terminator: Salvation which set the bar pretty high for ST to follow). Not quite the "Vin Diesel movie" that was worried about earlier on this board, but it had the "oomph" that all other Trek movies have had the potential to but lacked.

As far as ST cannon, it plays around with it alot. While still incorporating all the favorite bits and some other little things you have to catch, the cast structure was tweaked to incorporate most of the TOS characters. Since the "cannon" timeline would not have allowed for it, they try to explain alot of the incongruity away in somewnat of a "Mirror/Mirror... et al" sort of way and if you choose to look at it that way I would say it works.

Being Sci-Fi, it's the kind of thing that can be "fantasy booked" to death, so the uber-purists will probably bitch about it to no end. But in the real world of entertainment dollars and what audiences want to see, it is the shot in the arm the franchise needs if it wants to survive. And although there is pretty much no way of reverting to the "cannon" with this cast, I could see ways of continuing this base storyline into some future projects as long as they don't start going to far off the reservation with it.

I don't think we'll be seeing much more of the Rodenberry idealism that permeated the Trek universe, but the "wagon train to the stars" era is gone and isn't coming back. Given the choice, I know I'd rather go into a battle with ass kicking Captain Kirk than idealist Captain Janeway any day. Overall I say giving Abrams the helm was a damn good choice. If someone could get him to bring Joss Whedon and Seth Green onboard for the sequel, it would probably reek of awesomeness.



LEARN IT, KNOW IT, LIVE IT!
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1804 days
Last activity: 1738 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
I liked it, but I just don't see why TREK had to become STAR WARS. They're two distinct franchises, and TREK had a lot more thought and themes to it. I'm not talking the "wagon train to the stars" stuff, just genuine sci-fi concepts, strong character stuff and a smidge of social subtext. We already have one slam-bang rock'em sock'em space opera. Why do we have to turn TREK into another?



"And here...we...go."
J. Kyle
Boudin blanc








Since: 21.2.02
From: The Land of Aloha

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.27
Sing this special song. It's just for you.
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    Why do we have to turn TREK into another?
Because Star Wars hasn't been himself lately?

Karl Urban and Simon Pegg were just awesome beyond words.

Only complaint: They killed Porthos. Out of all the middle fingers to throw to Enterprise, why'd it have to be the beagle? Sniff.



"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned." The Buddha
Teapot
Kishke








Since: 1.8.02
From: Louisville KY

Since last post: 51 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.89
I know how much JJ Abrams loves characters with daddy issues, so it was a bit of fresh air to see somebody with mommy issues.

And I really hope that Tyler Perry is a Trekkie. Otherwise, his casting is just downright bizarre.

That being said, I really liked it. I've already got plans to see it again tonight.



Mike Zeidler
Pepperoni








Since: 27.6.02
From: Champaign, IL

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.85
Apparently I have no idea what Tyler Perry looks like. Was he the main Starfleet guy at the meetings? I think my favorite odd casting choice was Akiva Goldsman (writer of Batman & Robin) as a Vulcan High Council member.

I like the "Star Trek as Star Wars" analogy, the first time I saw someone running through the new hallways, I said "that's a Star Wars hallway". It seemed like this was at once more and less futuristic than the original series. The engine room & shuttle bay scenes seemed far too low tech for something set so far in the future, but I did like the new costumes. (I actually thought the opening scenes took place in the future of TOS/TNG/DS9/Voyager, as the uniforms seemed like a nice organic step forward)



"Tattoos are the mullets of the aughts." - Mike Naimark
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.16
Those bastards got me. I had some much hate going in, but left feeling like I was home again. I think the idea of red matter, really WTF is that, perhaps creates an alternate timeline like Mirror/Mirror or maybe it opened itself up to an alternate timeline. Either way, I don't care, because they did perserve the last 40 years which is something I was dreading going into this film.

I do think Kirk was a bit over the top, but old Spock explaining he actually had a father figure in the original time explained why he was Shanter's Kirk on speed at times. The rest of the cast was amazing and I loved how everyone got a chance to shine. The end credits was worth the price of admission alone.

I don't think they Star Wars it upped and went back to the human element of Star Trek. This reminded me of X-Men 1 were it was just a giant trailer for X-2. It won't surprise me if the sequel has more of an idealogical theme and Klingons, lost of Klingons.
CxMorgado
Boudin rouge








Since: 21.1.02
From: Boston MA is the rippen'ist town...

Since last post: 121 days
Last activity: 1 day
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.88
That ruled. I'm pleased as punch. Not only did they completely reboot the series in a way that changed the long stagnant status quo, but they did it by establishing that this movie (and all future movies) are an alternate reality created by the villain traveling in time. So all the old movies and the tv series still happened, but they don't have to worry about their continuity. That's awesome.

I never felt that any of the Trek movies really dealt with any of the mini-morality play issues of TOS, or at least not in a manner that wasn't ham handed to the point of feeling satirical, so there not being much of a moral complexity involved didn't bother me a whit.

The cast was great, Karl Urban (McCoy) and Simon Pegg (Scotty) especially. My fears of Starfleet 90210 as indicated by the trailers were completely wrong. They made Kirk a Sawyer from Lost type of rogue, which I thought worked as a great replacement for the puffed up bravado that Shatner's line deliveries gave the character, and Sylar made for a great Spock, even when he was face to face with the original. By the end of the movie I was 100% accepting this as the new crew of the Enterprise, and when the scene of them all taking their spots on the bridge hit at the end, I was getting the rush of excitement I used to get as a kid watching the reruns of the original series at my Grammas. They made a smart choice by not choosing to just do imitations the original cast, and it really gave everything a breath of fresh air while still giving you just enough of the original versions to get that old familiar fondness going. And unlike the Wolverine movie, every single one of them got their moment to shine.

They made it totally accessible to anyone who's never heard of Star Trek while still "keeping it real" for the Trekkies (even tho I've seen some other messageboards where the Trek fans are bitching about everything from Quinto being too thin to play Spock to the special effects not matching the visual continuity of the other movies because they were too good). All the catchphrases made it in, we got Kirk bedding down with a green skinned alien chick, and we got the "Space the final frontier" speech (when did they PC that up as "To boldly go where no one has gone before"? That's silly as all hell, especially when you consider just how ground breaking the original was in it's demonstrations of equality). What more could you ask for?

Thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up (one for each of Lieutenant Arex's arms, I totally hope we get to actually see him in a live action movie now that the technology is there). A torch was very definitely passed here.



Biddip-bo!
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.16
They PC the Boldy Go speech for Next Gen's opening. I really do want to see this again. I am just glad they explained things and kept the original continuity intact.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 46 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.51
    Originally posted by lotjx
    They PC the Boldy Go speech for Next Gen's opening.
Also at the end of ST6:TUC.



StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.90
I liked it a lot, not at all a fan of the original series, or any of the other series. But this movie was spot on for giving backstory, developing the story, and making non fans enjoy it.

My only complaint was Chekov. HATED the guy who played him.
John Orquiola
Scrapple








Since: 28.2.02
From: Boston

Since last post: 132 days
Last activity: 96 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.56
Loved it. Loved, loved, loved it. Have a few minor complaints, quibbles, etc. but still enthusastically in the "It's awesome camp!" Please enjoy my review:

http://www.backofthehead.com/entertainment/2009-05-08.startrek.html

Going back tomorrow to the IMAX with my 10 year old nephew in tow. I really feel like Star Trek is a touchstone film, something on par with the first Star Wars or Indiana Jones - a movie that a kid can see which will likely stay with him for the rest of his life. If not spark a love of Star Trek, then at least a love of sci-fi or love of movies. But I expect after experiencing Star Trek, my nephew will be assimilated.
ekedolphin
Scrapple








Since: 12.1.02
From: Indianapolis, IN; now residing in Suffolk, VA

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.04

Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
I can't believe they destroyed Vulcan! Wow, that still blows my mind.




Fantastic film, though.



"I don't want to see this foolishness!"
"What kind of foolishness do you want to see?"

--Sam the Eagle and Gonzo, Muppet Vision 3-D

Fan of the Indianapolis Colts (Super Bowl XLI Champions), Indiana Pacers and Washington Nationals

Certified RFMC Member-- Ask To See My Credentials!

Co-Winner of Time's Person of the Year Award, 2006

Lexus
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 9 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.44
For starters, if you're not up to date with internet nomenclature, it's 'canon', not 'cannon'.

The movie was the shit. THE SHIT. If you haven't, pack up the rest of the Clampets and get your ass to the theater NOW. Is it Star Trek? Not like you've ever seen it. Is it Star Wars? It's a more realistic Space Opera. This movie will make you feel like you wish you had a ticket to the next showing.

Did it alienate the originals? No, except the entire run of 'Enterprise', which wasn't WRITTEN BY GENE RODDENBERRY, ergo, NOT-CANON since it wasn't written by the original author (look at the definitions of canon around the 'Net if you doubt how I feel). You may hear word from others on this here internet, but it doesn't take a massive dump on continutity (what 'canon' is short for, BTW, guys), it acknowledges and expands upon it. Then again, most continuity nuts don't site 'I, Mudd' or even 'The Trouble with Tribbles' when explaining TNG or DS9.

Furthermore, if you know nothing about Star Trek, this movie is Non-Stop. Nothing fails to captivate, nothing fails to stimulate, nothing fails. This is the sci-fi movie of our generation, all three Star Wars prequels included. Has it taken the mantle of "Space Opera" away from Star Wars? Maybe, maybe. Did it deliver where Episode I, II, and III failed? Absolutely.



"Laugh and the world laughs with you. Frown and the world laughs at you."
-Me.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 46 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.51
    Originally posted by Lexus
    For starters, if you're not up to date with internet nomenclature, it's 'canon', not 'cannon'.

    The movie was the shit. THE SHIT. If you haven't, pack up the rest of the Clampets and get your ass to the theater NOW. Is it Star Trek? Not like you've ever seen it. Is it Star Wars? It's a more realistic Space Opera. This movie will make you feel like you wish you had a ticket to the next showing.

    Did it alienate the originals? No, except the entire run of 'Enterprise', which wasn't WRITTEN BY GENE RODDENBERRY, ergo, NOT-CANON since it wasn't written by the original author (look at the definitions of canon around the 'Net if you doubt how I feel). You may hear word from others on this here internet, but it doesn't take a massive dump on continutity (what 'canon' is short for, BTW, guys), it acknowledges and expands upon it. Then again, most continuity nuts don't site 'I, Mudd' or even 'The Trouble with Tribbles' when explaining TNG or DS9.

    Furthermore, if you know nothing about Star Trek, this movie is Non-Stop. Nothing fails to captivate, nothing fails to stimulate, nothing fails. This is the sci-fi movie of our generation, all three Star Wars prequels included. Has it taken the mantle of "Space Opera" away from Star Wars? Maybe, maybe. Did it deliver where Episode I, II, and III failed? Absolutely.
Dear Expert on Everything:

You misspelled "cite."

Love,
CRZ



Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
    Originally posted by Lexus


    Did it alienate the originals? No, except the entire run of 'Enterprise', which wasn't WRITTEN BY GENE RODDENBERRY, ergo, NOT-CANON since it wasn't written by the original author (look at the definitions of canon around the 'Net if you doubt how I feel). You may hear word from others on this here internet, but it doesn't take a massive dump on continutity (what 'canon' is short for, BTW, guys), it acknowledges and expands upon it. Then again, most continuity nuts don't site 'I, Mudd' or even 'The Trouble with Tribbles' when explaining TNG or DS9.


Well this whole business on not "taking a massive dump on continuity" is mainly lip service to the fanboys so they don't bitch too much. It is a reboot and the story gives them an escape plan if they want to abandon it, which they won't because it is the most highly rated/reviewed Trek since II, IV, and First Contact.

Also, Gene only wrote 12 episodes of Star Trek, an uncredited write on the first movie, and three episodes of TNG.

I have some nitpicks

Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
(like how Kirk just went up the ziggurat -- lickity split, and now that there is a black hole around Saturn and no one seems worried
but it is a solid movie that my anti-Trek GF absolutely LOVED. Solid 9/10 from me.



-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --

"I remember meeting a mother of a child who was abducted by the North Koreans right here in the Oval Office."
George W. Bush - June 26, 2008, during a Rose Garden news briefing.
Leroy
Andouille








Since: 7.2.02
From: Huntington, NY

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.57
    Originally posted by Zeruel
    I have some nitpicks

    Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
    ...and now that there is a black hole around Saturn and no one seems worried



My take on your latter nitpick...


Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
I got the sense that they hyperlightwarpspeeded pretty far away, so there was no black hole around Saturn


I'm kind of torn myself. I one hand, I really enjoyed the film. One the other, there's a distinct part of me that feels this whole "reboot" thing is totally unnecessary and the Star Trek universe was fine where it ended. Well, maybe not fine, but had run its course. None of the characters, save for maybe Bones and a little bit of Spock, felt like their historical counterparts. But once you got over some of that, it's a pretty fun movie.

I did like the nod to the red shirts being canon fodder... (Get it? Canon fodder?!?) Anywhoo...

My hope is that there's some kind of plan for a story arch, and that it's not going to be a "milk this reboot until its dry" kind of a thing. But that might be asking for a bit too much.

(edited by Leroy on 10.5.09 0114)



We all have ways of coping. I use sex and awesomeness.
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 269 days
Last activity: 230 days
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.24
    Originally posted by CRZ
    Dear Expert on Everything:

    You misspelled "cite."

    Love,
    CRZ

Also, the Clampetts (from The Beverly Hillbillies) spelled their names with two Ts.
Mr Heel II
Bratwurst








Since: 25.2.02

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.24
That kicked so much ass, I'm thinking about seeing it again today.


Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
The one thing I wanted to see in this was the playing out of the Kobiyashi Maru scenario, That scene brought the house down. They could not have played that better...especially when we learned who designed it. BRILLIANT payoff.
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 269 days
Last activity: 230 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.24
So I haven't seen it yet, but since they can finally update Memory Alpha (the Star Trek wiki) with information from it, let me see if I understand the jist.


Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
The James Kirk in the movie is a version of James Kirk who grew up without his father because of a time anomaly that enabled a rogue Romulan to travel back in time 150 years and caused the events that caused his father's death.

In this timeline, Vulcan is destroyed by the Romulan, who is mad that Romulus will be destroy in the future. Who knows what future differences between this alternate universe and the traditional TOS universe (what Memory Alpha is calling the "prime" universe) will later be revealed.


Sounds simple enough :)
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 4.74
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: Jay Leno's final TONIGHT SHOW
Next thread: Grade the 2008-2009 SNL Cast
Previous thread: Tintin the Movie?
(2455 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Eh, I didn't think it was anything special. I know I'm in the minority, but I actually prefer Newbern to Daly, although there's not a whole lot of difference between them.
- Tenken347, Superman: Brainiac Attacks (2006)
Related threads: STAR TREK trailer! - Simon Pegg is the new Scotty!!! - STAR TREK XI News. - More...
The W - Movies & TV - J.J. Abrams' Star TrekRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.21 seconds.