JJ Abrams is a (visionary/disgrace) who must be (commended/stopped): Star Trek

[Reply #360 on:]

http://io9.com/5246250/why-is-the-media-trying-to-make-star-trek-fans-look-like-naysaying-dorks

[Reply #361 on:]

Hehe, slusho.

[Reply #362 on:]

What if the 90's prequel film happened?

[Reply #363 on:]

STWAR TWARK

Not a lot to say really, other than I really liked it. Fun, other stuff you've already heard.

9.5/10

Mr Abrams I forgive you now for producing Cloverfield.

[Reply #364 on:]

Stwar Twark?

[Reply #365 on:]

http://io9.com/5246250/why-is-the-media-trying-to-make-star-trek-fans-look-like-naysaying-dorks

Preemptive ridicule to undermine any criticism. Clever trick.

[Reply #366 on:]

ok, which 4 of you voted Enterprise? I'm looking at you, winna.

[Reply #367 on:]

and may I add: what a sausage fest. funny sidenote: apparently this dude I blew off meeting several times way back in november/december was in the same theater and the same showing I went to on Friday, but apparently I'm so outwardly nerdish in person that he didn't recognize me from my online randtastic pics.

[Reply #368 on:]

I just got back from the movie. It was actually quite good. Totally alternate universe. Only thing that bugged me was Chekov. I wasn't really impressed with the guy who played him. That said Karl Urban was really good and Simon Pegg was funny. Spock was interesting, much more unstable than is normal.

Karl Urban was great, I think he had Bones down pretty damn well. I was glad they got in a "I'm a doctor, not a (Fill in the blank)" If there wasn't I'd have been very sad.

This isn't a major plot point but if you think I should put this in spoilers tell me: The Spock/Uhura stuff was really, really, really weird to me.

There was no Kirk shirt rippage so that made me sad.

I'm too lazy to do a proper review.

[Reply #369 on:]

More lens flare = more awesome.

[Reply #370 on:]

this whole damn movie was amazing. i want to tape miniature tv screens that play this movie to my eyelids so i can watch it every time i shut my eyes. bonus points for redshirt idiot who gets vaporized.

Hehe, slusho.

i think i may have been the only person in theater to laugh when i heard that. if only they included at least that much cloverfield viral stuff in cloverfield.

[Reply #371 on:]

Did anyone else see Wil Wheaton on the bridge of the Kelvin or was it just some guy who looked like him?

[Reply #372 on:]

Is that the dude from Legally Blonde who's really dorky?

No, no it is not.

although, that guy is in it for about 2 seconds.

[Reply #373 on:]

Just got back from seeing it. I enjoyed it.

My gripes are thus: Chris Pine made no effort to emulate any of William Shatner's characteristic Kirk delivery. Apparently he was concerned about being seen as parodying Shatner by mimicking him. That ain't quite right - Shatner's vocal patterns (and slight hint of Canadian accent) are Kirk's. If you don't play Shatner, you aren't really playing Kirk. QED. All I needed was one or two - - inappropriate pauses.
Zachary Quinto was great, but I have a similar problem with him - he sounded nothing like Leonard Nimoy. His voice was way too high.

Also

Show spoiler

Spock and Uhura?! wtf!? That just ain't right. Must erase memory. If Spock needed a woman it should have been Nurse Chapel. She's been gagging for it since the 60s.

And old Spock's flash-forward was in the next-gen time period, which missed a good opportunity for a Picard cameo. That would have been cool, old baldy instructing Spock to go do his black hole thing.

Beyond that, it was great.

Unlike Enterprise, which seemed to have more advanced technology than TOS, this prequel actually shows less advanced tech; the more primitive versions of hardware seen in the show. I appreciated that.

The extra bulk of the warp nacelles actually makes sense if those were less-advanced nacelles than in TOS. Technology always shrinks as it progresses. Remember that when Enterprise was refit in The Motion Picture they became smaller again.

The weapons systems, while appearing visually more spectacular, also seemed a bit low-tech by comparison to later incarnations (phasers firing in bullet-like bursts instead of a solid stream) so that makes sense in terms of progression as well.

Now that re-introductions are out of the way, I'd like to see this cast's Wrath of Khan.

Oh and I absolutely loved the reworking of the Original Series theme at the end, though it could have used a bit more original Trek music throughout. Some Star Beyond Time would have been nice.

[Reply #374 on:]

Just got back from seeing it. I enjoyed it.

My gripes are thus: Chris Pine made no effort to emulate any of William Shatner's characteristic Kirk delivery. Apparently he was concerned about being seen as parodying Shatner by mimicking him. That ain't quite right - Shatner's vocal patterns (and slight hint of Canadian accent) are Kirk's. If you don't play Shatner, you aren't really playing Kirk. QED. All I needed was one or two - - inappropriate pauses.

I'd argue that ShatKirk has become such a parody of himself that any attempt to emulate his vocal characteristics would have taken away from the movie.

Zachary Quinto was great, but I have a similar problem with him - he sounded nothing like Leonard Nimoy. His voice was way too high.

At least he learned how to do the Vulcan live long and prosper gesture.

The extra bulk of the warp nacelles actually makes sense if those were less-advanced nacelles than in TOS. Technology always shrinks as it progresses. Remember that when Enterprise was refit in The Motion Picture they became smaller again.

It looked to me like there were windows on the undersides?  Jeffries tubes, maybe?

The weapons systems, while appearing visually more spectacular, also seemed a bit low-tech by comparison to later incarnations (phasers firing in bullet-like bursts instead of a solid stream) so that makes sense in terms of progression as well.

I've always wondered why they couldn't just shoot torpedos out of the sky with phasers.

Oh and I absolutely loved the reworking of the Original Series theme at the end, though it could have used a bit more original Trek music throughout. Some Star Beyond Time would have been nice.

I was kinda hoping that they'd go through each of the series' themes.

Also, this movie has done something so few movies have been willing to do:

Show spoiler

Kill Winona Ryder

[Reply #375 on:]

Show spoiler

I can't quite believe they actually destroyed Vulcan.
Oh well.

One niggly thing occurred to me - if the 'red matter' could be 'ignited' so easily and collapse into a 'black hole', then there was really no need to drill it deep inside a planet. Detonating a quantity of it in the atmosphere would easily be enough.

[Reply #376 on:]

I saw it 2 days ago with my boyfreind Jamie! it was kind of confusing overall but the ships and battles were cool.

[Reply #377 on:]

Show spoiler

I can't quite believe they actually destroyed Vulcan.
Oh well.

One niggly thing occurred to me - if the 'red matter' could be 'ignited' so easily and collapse into a 'black hole', then there was really no need to drill it deep inside a planet. Detonating a quantity of it in the atmosphere would easily be enough.

Show spoiler

Maybe they were doing it inside the planet for the pure enjoyment of seeing Vulcan sucked inside out?! I know I would if it looked so cool. And it could also be for the fact that they may of been unsure of the damage it could do as it seem the only time they saw the red matter in use was when they got sucked through the black hole, they may not have wanted a repeat.

[Reply #378 on:]

Show spoiler

Personally, I feel that Spock Prime was forced to tell Nero how the red matter worked, but lied about drilling being required so that people would realise Vulcan was being attacked before the red matter was actually jettisoned. With drilling: "We're being attacked, send for help!" Without drilling: "Wow, what a curious looking meteor." FWOOP!

[Reply #379 on:]

It was OK.

The effects were fantastic, particularly the Kelvin space battle at the beginning and the end battle. The dynamics of the scenes made the battles better than the static-looking ones on the TV series and certain other films (shows what a better director Abrams is compared to Stuart "I've Never Seen Star Trek Yet My Direction Was Derivative Shit" Baird). Quinto and Urban were fantastic as Spock and McCoy, Pine was OK as Kirk (pity the character acted like a twat for the whole film), and the other main character actors did well with the limited screen time they got. Except for Ben Cross who was a crap Sarek. And Scotty was just Desmond from Lost.

Show spoiler

Eric Bana was quite good considering the villain could never have been fully developed, at the risk of overshadowing the origins story. I wonder if he'll star in as Nero in a Wolverine-type prequel to flesh out the character's backstory. They could call it Romulus, My Planet that Gets Destroyed in the Future For No Apparent Reason. Yeah, that was a letdown. Two major ST planets destroyed for no real reason. The only purpose I could see in destroying Romulus was so Nero could do his best impression of Shinzon and scream and cry at everyone. If the "plot" required him to be angry at Spock, couldn't Spock have just not sent him a birthday card? And why destroy Vulcan? I was surprised that it happened so early in the film.

And what kind of message does Kirk's promotion send to other cadets? "Act like a stupid twat and we'll let you skip the chain of command by advancing you to CAPTAIN OF THE BRAND NEW PRISTINE FLAGSHIP OF THE FLEET"?????? Wesley Crusher, eat your heart out.

7/10 on the basis of the direction, effects and general giddyness. Better than Generations, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis, but nowhere near the quality of the others.

[Reply #380 on:]

Smitty, I've oddly heard that Bana was kinda lame but Scotty was quite good. But I've heard from everyone that Pine was meh.

Show spoiler

I'm also surprised the destroyed Romulus in the real universe and then destroyed Vulcan in the alternate. I wonder how those Vulcans will deal with such a revelation. Probably illogically. However, they already did some shit to the Klingon homeworld in Undiscovered Country.

[Reply #381 on:]

Man this movie is good. I think that if my dad wasn't seeing it with my I would have cried. But it's so cool, and the actors *drools*. For me, this movie could have been 3 hours longer.

[Reply #382 on:]

I wonder if he'll star in as Nero in a Wolverine-type prequel to flesh out the character's backstory.

http://trekmovie.com/2008/10/17/exclusive-details-on-star-trek-movie-prequel-comic-series/

[Reply #383 on:]

The Shatner Scene

[Reply #384 on:]

That wouldn't have felt right. Shatner looks significantly older now than he did when Kirk died in Generations.
Plus, yeah... forced cameo.

Carol Marcus would have been an okay character to include though. But Janice Rand - she should certainly appear in the next film as a romantic interest.

[Reply #385 on:]

Since we're now dealing with alternate timelines and such... Just for shits and giggles.

[Reply #386 on:]

Does a Star Destroyer (or whatever the ship from Star Wars is called) actually have offensive weaponry?  I assume it must but I don't recall seeing it in action in either Star Wars or The Empire Strikes Back. (My Ewok alert system prevents me from recalling anything about a certain other Lucas effort.)

[Reply #387 on:]

I wonder if he'll star in as Nero in a Wolverine-type prequel to flesh out the character's backstory.

http://trekmovie.com/2008/10/17/exclusive-details-on-star-trek-movie-prequel-comic-series/

OMG IS IT TEZ CANNON??

[Reply #388 on:]

Since we're now dealing with alternate timelines and such... Just for shits and giggles.

Enterprise FTW.
I don't believe Star Destroyers had shields since I'm sure I recall seeing TIE Fighters crash into them unobstructed. And since Star Wars lacks matter transportation technology, Enterprise could just beam a photon torpedo into the Star Destroyer's reactor core, failing all else.

Would be an awesome looking battle though.  *saves picture*

[Reply #389 on:]

What strikes me as interesting is the amount of details on the Star Destroyer compared to the Constitution-class ship.  Was Star Trek prop makers just lazier?

[Reply #390 on:]

Enterprise FTW.

Would be an awesome looking battle though.  *saves picture*

Try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idbBTGwj6g8

[Reply #391 on:]

Star Destroyers are indeed armed with shields, that's what those towers on top of the bridge generate. It seems to sit right on the hull, though. Certainly, they're never been portrayed as being in any way visable.

And they have, like, 20 or 40 turbolaser cannons. Which are big.

Whether the sheilds would prevent transporter beams, I don't know, as Star Wars has never concerned itself with such trvialities as 'science', so in the interests of actually making for a reasonable contest, I will say that it can, in fact, ward off teleported matter somehow.

And it will win the battle because Star Trek ships look silly.

[Reply #392 on:]

Was Star Trek prop makers just lazier?

More than a decade earlier, and made for television.
Eat my arse, Lucas-lover.

Awesome vid, Ralph.

Star Destroyers are indeed armed with shields,

I'm going to assume their invisibility means they're weaker.

And they have, like, 20 or 40 turbolaser cannons. Which are big.

Big and gay. Phaser beats laser and turbobeats turbolaser. Lasers just burn things. Phasers.... phase things.

And it will win the battle because Star Trek ships look silly.

You look silly.
There would be a lengthy battle with both vessels severely damaged until Enterprise ejects her critical warp core into the Destroyer's path and fucks off while the thing goes nova. The Destroyer wouldn't back off from the exploding core because they'd all be like "Retreat? At our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances!" And Kirk would be fucking Leia.
NERDGASM!

[Reply #393 on:]

Was Star Trek prop makers just lazier?

More than a decade earlier, and made for television.
Eat my arse, Lucas-lover.

Oh please, don't get me started on my criticism of Lucas.  I suppose you are right though.  The later versions of Star Trek have the ships an awfully lot more detailed.  But I suppose the Star Wars versions are simplistic at best.

[Reply #394 on:]

Star Wars ships were awesome, I'll admit that. Really cool models. The CGI ones not so much.

[Reply #395 on:]

Then there are my buds in Finland - the Star Wreck crew are planning a sequel to Star Wreck VI: In The Pirkinning - things are in pre-production (they have to finish Iron Sky first), a Star Trek vs. Star Wars parody is a definite possiblity (this is from Samuli himself), complete with fanatical fans (from both sides).

[Reply #396 on:]

Hey Ralph can I have a link to watch Star Wreck online?

[Reply #397 on:]

Hey Ralph can I have a link to watch Star Wreck online?

First off, click this: http://www.ironsky.net/ then play the movie poster.  Holy crap, Samuli is going all-out on Iron Sky!

Second, Star Wreck is @ www.starwreck.com but SW VI: Pirkinning isn't available on-line because they are selling the DVD (Imperial Edition) in the UK and USA through a major distributor so Samuli had to take the links down (as part of the deal to release it via the distributor).

Edit:  Captain Picard takes on The Empire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNxhrPaaCA4

[Reply #398 on:]

I want to see Star Trek again. But there's no big movie to see with it until June, but I haven't seen X-Men Origins yet, and Night at the Museum 2 looks like it could be fun.

[Reply #399 on:]

Mmm, was considering seeing it again too. Possibly this tuesday, just to take it all in for a second time.