rehmwa 2 #76 May 14, 2009 QuoteWTF? Dude, you need to get a life.. rigghhhht, Jan, because I'm the one that over analyzed the thing and was disappointed because the movie didn't stand up to so many subjective standards....... Whoopie Goldberg.....self righteously....congratulating the earthlings for outgrowing so much species adolescence - Star Trek has overkilled that card SO much over the last couple decades - and so has everyone else. If you want a movie like that, I'd suggest anything with Salma Hayak or Jennifer Connelly perhaps you and Quade could out back and beat yourselves with sticks over how horrible mankind is and how the movies today don't satisfy the guilt we should all so righteous demand Edit: I actually don't care - individuals can take from a movie all they want. I was THRILLED to see a movie that wasn't preachy like all the other ones out there and was surprised by people that wanted even more of the same ol' same ol'. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #77 May 23, 2009 Quote If you've just reprogrammed a psych test, do you really sit and eat an apple while dozens of people watch you obviously cheat? Interesting tidbit. Just finished watching "The Wrath of Kahn". Do you remember when Kirk finally admits to Lt Saavik how he won (admitted he cheated) on the Koybiashi Mayru scenario? He was sitting on Ceti Alpha V's underground, in the Genesis stage 2 creation, eating an apple! Think they kind of tied this in to the new movie? For the geeks? ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #78 May 23, 2009 Quote Interesting tidbit. Just finished watching "The Wrath of Kahn". Do you remember when Kirk finally admits to Lt Saavik how he won (admitted he cheated) on the Koybiashi Mayru scenario? He was sitting on Ceti Alpha V's underground, in the Genesis stage 2 creation, eating an apple! Think they kind of tied this in to the new movie? For the geeks? ltdiver YES! Yes he did! A few friends of mine who are true Trekkies have compiled a list of references the new movie made back to the cannon of all the old movies and shows.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #79 May 23, 2009 Quote Quote Interesting tidbit. Just finished watching "The Wrath of Kahn". Do you remember when Kirk finally admits to Lt Saavik how he won (admitted he cheated) on the Koybiashi Mayru scenario? He was sitting on Ceti Alpha V's underground, in the Genesis stage 2 creation, eating an apple! Think they kind of tied this in to the new movie? For the geeks? ltdiver YES! Yes he did! A few friends of mine who are true Trekkies have compiled a list of references the new movie made back to the cannon of all the old movies and shows. And that -might- have been interesting if at any other time in the 40 year history of the series or movies it was established that every time Kirk feels like being a smart ass and pulling the wool over his enemies eyes he eats an apple. But, in this case, it's just STUPID grasping at fanboi worship. Tons of literary characters have quirks that tell the audience something "interesting" is happening in the mind of the hero; Spock raising an eyebrow for instance. However, Kirk eating an apple isn't one of them.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #80 May 23, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Interesting tidbit. Just finished watching "The Wrath of Kahn". Do you remember when Kirk finally admits to Lt Saavik how he won (admitted he cheated) on the Koybiashi Mayru scenario? He was sitting on Ceti Alpha V's underground, in the Genesis stage 2 creation, eating an apple! Think they kind of tied this in to the new movie? For the geeks? ltdiver YES! Yes he did! A few friends of mine who are true Trekkies have compiled a list of references the new movie made back to the cannon of all the old movies and shows. And that -might- have been interesting if at any other time in the 40 year history of the series or movies it was established that every time Kirk feels like being a smart ass and pulling the wool over his enemies eyes he eats an apple. But, in this case, it's just STUPID grasping at fanboi worship. Tons of literary characters have quirks that tell the audience something "interesting" is happening in the mind of the hero; Spock raising an eyebrow for instance. However, Kirk eating an apple isn't one of them. That may be, however I'm sorry to read the vile contempt to a simple nod to the former movie. For instance, this Trek fan puts it very nicely (as do a host of others I googled after reading your post). http://open.salon.com/blog/douglas_moran/2009/05/11/star_trek_melancholy Oh well. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #81 May 24, 2009 Thank you for the link. I was thinking I was the only one wondering what the future held in a future with out the hard Vulcan influence.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #82 May 24, 2009 QuoteThank you for the link. I was thinking I was the only one wondering what the future held in a future with out the hard Vulcan influence. You're welcome. It was an interesting read for me as well on that subject. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #83 May 24, 2009 >I was thinking I was the only one wondering what the future held in a >future with out the hard Vulcan influence. I wouldn't worry about it. If there's another Star Trek movie and they need to resurrect a planet (or a character) they'll go back in time and save them. Heck, the earth was destroyed (or completely assimilated or whatever) by the Borg in one of the movies. But a quick trip back in time solved that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
metalslug 36 #84 May 25, 2009 QuoteThis I saw as a poorly-acted tribute to Shatner. Few people can do the arrogant macho captain like him. But I do think Star Trek is better without him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeJD 0 #85 May 26, 2009 Finally saw it last night, and making allowances for the fact that it is just a movie, I had a great time. The only things that bothered me (includes SPOILERS) were: 1) The nods to the original series, although they were part of the fun, made things a bit uneven. So on one hand we have fantastic, spectacular CGI but then we also have aliens that are clearly just girls in green body paint or little people dressed up in latex suits, and given that they could have done so much more on that score I can only think that was part of the homage. 2) It looked like there'd been some last-minute cutting, maybe to get the length down (or maybe to secure a younger certificate). For instance one minute we're seeing the brain bug thingy being force-fed to Captain Pike and then we don't see him again until his rescue (after which, presumably, they manage to extract the thing again, although no mention is made of it) - there has to have been a deleted scene or two in there. 3) The whole time travel plotline seemed redundant - it had the whiff of being inserted just to allow Leonard Nimoy to appear in his original role. Fun movie, though, and a nice reboot to the franchise. After that great start, I only hope the sequel turns out to be more Dark Knight than Quantum of Solace. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #86 November 21, 2009 Haven't read this thread yet, but just saw it... I received it Tuesday from Netflix but put it off. I am a trekkie-by-proxy. I have seen most of the series as a young child and all of the original movies at least a half-a-dozen times. I had read fantastic reviews--about how it was amazing for both fans and those who have never seen any variation of Star Trek before. I didn't buy it. While I do not think it would have been half as enjoyable if I did not know the history--regardless--, I LOVED it! Oh my gosh! Great storyline, and a wonderful tribute. I was particularly astonished at the authenticity of the original characters' mannerisms and the same-sort-of camera angles/production. Really refreshing! Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #87 November 21, 2009 Quote There are a few theaters in Portland like this. $3 to get in, beer and pizza available. (Sort of the opposite of VIP seating, with old couches in some, regular theater seating in others.) Yes! We had a theater like that--only one my father went to. Awesome pizza and IBC root beer floats! Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #88 November 21, 2009 QuoteWas disappointed in both the character of Scottie and the actor playing him. I found "this Scotty" a very humorous addition, but probably not what I pictured a younger Scotty to be by any stretch. With that said, the actor was great for what they seemed to be going for.Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Orchid 0 #89 November 21, 2009 Quote I didn't buy it. Oh my gosh! Great storyline, and a wonderful tribute. I was particularly astonished at the authenticity of the original characters' mannerisms and the same-sort-of camera angles/production. Really refreshing! Yes it is...I have always been a Trekkie....I loved it & I bought it! "Love is doing small things with great love." Lacrosse: Legally beating men with sticks since 1492 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #90 November 22, 2009 There is only one problem with all pre-quels, it is the creation of suspense. Example - we know that certain characters live, so they cannot die in this movie. There is a guaranteed limit on their possible danger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #91 November 22, 2009 QuoteThere is only one problem with all pre-quels, it is the creation of suspense. Example - we know that certain characters live, so they cannot die in this movie. There is a guaranteed limit on their possible danger. Disagree. If I tell you the ending of "2012" is the end of the world and the heros make it, are you surprised? If I say that at the end of a RomCom, the guy and gal get together, is THAT a surprise? Does knowing that ruin a story? No. That's actually what made you willing to pay to see the movie in the first place. Not only did you already know the ending before you went into the movie, you'd be pissed as hell if there wasn't a logical reason for the movie ending either exactly like you expected it to end or had a twist so compelling you agreed with it. Trust me; audiences HATE IT when the end of a story is a twist they don't agree with. Stories are about the journey. Ultimately, 99.99% of all stories you KNOW the hero is going to live in the last frame, so if you think about it, it's never really about knowing if they live to the next movie, but rather how they get there. In the case of "New Trek", I think JJ Abrams failed miserably with the Kirk story and only sort of got it right with the Spock story. All of the rest, miserable failures with the possible exception of "Bones".quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gearless_chris 1 #92 November 22, 2009 QuoteStories are about the journey. Ultimately, 99.99% of all stories you KNOW the hero is going to live in the last frame, so if you think about it, it's never really about knowing if they live to the next movie, but rather how they get there. In the case of "New Trek", I think JJ Abrams failed miserably with the Kirk story and only sort of got it right with the Spock story. All of the rest, miserable failures with the possible exception of "Bones". I don't think he develped Bones enough to do his story wrong. For some reason I don't remember Uhura being developed in the original series, she was always in the background. Maybe we're just used to the way the newer series gave all the main characters their day in the sun. I liked the New Star Trek, but I could've done without destroying Vulcan. I could've done without Enterprise destroying Florida when that wasn't in the storyline of any of its previous shows."If it wasn't easy stupid people couldn't do it", Duane. My momma said I could be anything I wanted when I grew up, so I became an a$$hole. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #93 November 22, 2009 QuoteI don't think he develped Bones enough to do his story wrong. Alcoholic doctor fleeing to Star Fleet to escape his bitch ex? I'll accept that. Fits within what we know about the character. QuoteI could've done without Enterprise destroying Florida when that wasn't in the storyline of any of its previous shows. Well, at least the first season of "Enterprise" was pretty close to Roddenberry's original vision for the series. JJ Abrams completely tossed out Roddenberry in favor of his own "vision". What a freakin' egotist.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #94 November 22, 2009 Quote Quote Stories are about the journey. Ultimately, 99.99% of all stories you KNOW the hero is going to live in the last frame, so if you think about it, it's never really about knowing if they live to the next movie, but rather how they get there. In the case of "New Trek", I think JJ Abrams failed miserably with the Kirk story and only sort of got it right with the Spock story. All of the rest, miserable failures with the possible exception of "Bones". I don't think he develped Bones enough to do his story wrong. For some reason I don't remember Uhura being developed in the original series, she was always in the background. Maybe we're just used to the way the newer series gave all the main characters their day in the sun. I liked the New Star Trek, but I could've done without destroying Vulcan. I could've done without Enterprise destroying Florida when that wasn't in the storyline of any of its previous shows. OMG! They destroyed Vulcan?!? ....and when you say they destroyed Florida, do you mean the WHOLE state or maybe just Miami or "The Villages" or something like that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #95 November 22, 2009 Quote ....and when you say they destroyed Florida, do you mean the WHOLE state or maybe just Miami or "The Villages" or something like that? They did that in the second or third season of the TV series "Enterprise" a few years ago. Not the entire state, but a maybe 5 mile wide swath in a non-specific area one of the main character's sister lived in.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #96 November 22, 2009 QuoteNot the entire state, but a maybe 5 mile wide swath in a non-specific area one of the main character's sister lived in. Then the entire season got lost in the time-continuum, so I guess it never really happened. Er, happens. I mean it doesn't ever happen. Of course, it's Star Trek, fiction, so it's safe to say it won't really ever happen. But what I really mean, is in the show, that season, taking place in the future, the fictional events of that year, which is to say, in a present date, which created several shows for a season, at the end of that season, those events never took place, due to some very complicated temporal logistics.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #97 November 22, 2009 Quote Quote Not the entire state, but a maybe 5 mile wide swath in a non-specific area one of the main character's sister lived in. Then the entire season got lost in the time-continuum, so I guess it never really happened. Er, happens. I mean it doesn't ever happen. Of course, it's Star Trek, fiction, so it's safe to say it won't really ever happen. But what I really mean, is in the show, that season, taking place in the future, the fictional events of that year, which is to say, in a present date, which created several shows for a season, at the end of that season, those events never took place, due to some very complicated temporal logistics. Hey! Wait just a minute!.......that sounds like "Dallas"! (or "Newhart") Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #98 November 22, 2009 QuoteHey! Wait just a minute!.......that sounds like "Dallas"! (or "Newhart") They had time-travelling in Dallas? I guess I should've watched it.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #99 November 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteHey! Wait just a minute!.......that sounds like "Dallas"! (or "Newhart") They had time-travelling in Dallas? I guess I should've watched it. Lame assed dream sequence ending to a particular mystery. In this particular case "who shot JR?" Frequently TV series don't have satisfying endings and a lot of them fall back on the crap assed "and then I woke up" device to either solve an issues the writers got themselves in or end the series. Lamest device ever.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tumbler 0 #100 November 22, 2009 I loved the movie... I suppose I had low expectations but found myself really surprised. I did not think this was going to have the suspense of Michael taking out Frado and a true follow along to a story line... I took it for what it was. I was entertained, liked the way Bones pulled from the past with his lines and fell in love with the new container systems that will allow me to make back to backs with ease! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites