Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Startrek the Movie (was forum=28)Follow

#1 May 16 2009 at 11:14 AM Rating: Decent
So seen it 2 times now ready to discuss it. Curious about what everyone else thinks about it. My first thought is wow it sorta kills 2/3 of the original Startrek series just in one movie, yet creates new legs that could either become more movies or create a whole new series.

Edited, May 16th 2009 7:17pm by Soulrunner
____________________________
Without the Past there is no Future.

80 Thief, 80 Dancer, 80 Bluemage, 78 rng? What happened to no child left behind?
Thief AF3 gimmie gimmie gimmie

[ffxisig]196869[/ffxisig]
#2 May 16 2009 at 11:19 AM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
http://wow.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=5

Nice avatar, though.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#3 May 16 2009 at 11:20 AM Rating: Decent
/sigh what is the point of paying for premium if the Search function does not work? I swear I searched before posting.
____________________________
Without the Past there is no Future.

80 Thief, 80 Dancer, 80 Bluemage, 78 rng? What happened to no child left behind?
Thief AF3 gimmie gimmie gimmie

[ffxisig]196869[/ffxisig]
#4 May 16 2009 at 11:23 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,328 posts
Liked it. Didn't like most other "Star Trek" enterprises, though, so there's that.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#5 May 16 2009 at 8:52 PM Rating: Good
Liked it. Didn't like most other "Star Trek" enterprises, though, so there's that.

I thought the movie was fantastic. It did a really good job of setting itself up a new universe free of the lore requirements of the old one, while still maintaining a star trek feel.

Also I really enjoy watching all the die hard trekkies work themselves into a lather about the fact that their beloved universe was just destroyed :D
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#6 May 16 2009 at 10:54 PM Rating: Good
I liked the new enterprise, it looks more like a decendant of Archer's ship than the original. Granted the first enterprise was simply a few pipes, cardboard, and 2 trash can lids with christmas lights attached.
____________________________
Without the Past there is no Future.

80 Thief, 80 Dancer, 80 Bluemage, 78 rng? What happened to no child left behind?
Thief AF3 gimmie gimmie gimmie

[ffxisig]196869[/ffxisig]
#7 May 18 2009 at 7:21 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,593 posts
/shrug I've hinted at my issues with this film in other threads, but I may as well post an "official" comment here.

It's at best about halfway up the stack when rated against other Trek films.. While I suppose there might be some original Trek fans who are upset with the treatment of the characters (although I've yet to run into any), the real issues with this story have nothing to do with fanboism, and a whole lot to do with it just not being a very well made film. In fact, I'd argue that the characters and their treatment within the plot and new timeline were by far the *best* thing about the film. It was entertaining to see a fresh take on those characters, watch them interact, hear dialog that is funny only because we know the "future" of these characters, and see various "signature" actions. Heck. I thought that McCoy essentially stole the entire film.


My problems with the film came in two varieties: Stylistic and realistic.


The stylistic issues were with the film techniques. Doing effects shots using short cuts, close in shots, with tons of action and moving bits, while introducing artificial camera jitter is IMO a horrible technique. It's becoming more popular, although I'm not sure why. By the time you can figure out what the heck you're looking at, you've skipped on to the next scene.

It's a technique used by directors when they don't have a good effects budget. It's a short cut. You keep the audience from having time to focus on any one image on the screen long enough to notice the flaws (especially with CG effects). It's annoying because you feel like you're bouncing around. It's also a cheat, and is stupid to do when you *do* have a large effects budget. So you spent the time and money on great special effects, but no one can see them? How stupid is that?

The tendency towards "too close" shots makes it hard to really feel the whole scene. This is really about style. Good directors know how to get the viewers eye to follow the action from cut to cut so that it all appears seamless and flows well. Bad directors jump from cut to cut. Guess which one this was? It makes the entire action seem jarring. So you see a close up of the front of the Enterprise, with a bunch of weapons firing. What are the firing at? Well, we can assume it's the bad guys, but we can't see it. Then we cut to the other ship firing a bunch of "thingies". What at? Well, we can assume it's the Enterprise, but we can't be sure. Then we see explosions and what not. All are disconnected from eachother.

It's just plain bad directing and bad editing.

Oh. And the Romulan ship was just dumb looking. For a whole assortment of reasons. In a universe with transporters and tractor beams, who in their right mind would design a "mining ship" that looks like that? Anyone? Nope. There would be no reason at all. You'd make a big box to hold your cargo, and strap engines and crew quarters onto it. And you'd make it just big enough to be cost effective to haul whatever it is you're chopping into pieces and putting in the hold. That ship was way too big for apparently no reason other than "it looks cool that way".

And while talking about said mining ship, let's start shifting to the "realistic" aspects here. I get that this is a ship from the future and all that, and weapon systems in the future are more powerful, but it's still a freaking mining ship. I can accept that future weapons systems might be designed to more easily penetrate older shields and whatnot (prompting the continual "OMG! Our shields are useless!!!" responses in the film). However, if we presume that the primary armaments for this mining ship might be mines/torpedoes intended for breaking up asteroids or something, and we also assume that said asteroids (even those in the future) don't normally have any sort of shields, it would be kinda silly to design your asteroid breaking bombs with the latest in shield penetration technology. This does somewhat assume some need for cost effectiveness, but the very fact that this is a mining ship, and people work on it, kinda assumes that they'd want to do things like "mining" in the most cost effective manner possible and not outfit their ship with stuff that would presumably be a thousand times more expensive than needed to do the job.

More on the ship. Why a big freaking chain? Really? In the future, they can't come up with any better technique for drilling a big hole than lowering this giant chain halfway to a planets surface and firing a big beam out of it?

And why do they need it anyway? Wouldn't dropping the black-hole-making super material just onto a planet do the trick? Is there some special magic that drilling a big hole does? Cause I'm not seeing it.

And why does it interfere with sensors, communications, transporters, etc? I know it's a plot device so as to prevent them from just using the transporter to do anything. Although, apparently the writers forgot or didn't know the whole "Can't transport through shields" bit, so they invented some other reason they couldn't do this. Um... Why? I get that you're doing a "reboot", but could you at least learn something about how the tech in the universe you're rebooting works?

Final bit on the ship. Um... Why didn't anyone else think to just fire their weapons at the chain? Didn't they go through some ridiculous gyrations to take out the drill, so that they could prevent it from interfering with the transporters, so they could beam the captain back, despite the aforementioned "forgot about shields" thing? Why? Apparently a tiny little ship could have taken out that chain with a single volley, but no one thought to do that earlier? I get that a whole fleet got wiped out by this thing, but there isn't a single ship or ground defense station on either Vulcan or Earth that could have done the trick? They contrived the entire ridiculous thing, pretty obviously so they could have the "Fight on the drill platform" scene, and for no other reason. Sorry. That's just stupid.


The Enterprise. Look. No matter how "retro" you want things to look by showing rooms full of pipes instead of the usual Trek corridors and control panels, there's just no way anyone would design a freaking space ship with that much massive amounts of empty unused space. We're inside a ship. That extra 100 feet of space up above the pipes and machines could (and should) be filled up with other decks of the ship. It was just a poor visual effect, for no reason other than someone thought it would look cool, and spent apparently zero time thinking about it outside of that.


The whole plot thingie. Ok. Here's the problem. If the star that's going to go Supernova is inside the same planetary system as Romulus, collapsing it into a black hole isn't actually going to do much. Everyone on the planet is still going to die. So that's not a solution, is it? And if the supernova is *not* inside the same planetary system, then it's probably at least 2-4 light years away. So. When Spock gets there just a bit too late to prevent the explosion, said Romulan mining captain (and why is he there) should just head off to go rescue his wife and family. Afterall, he's just got several years to do it. Instead of goes on a revenge spree to avenge a death that hasn't actually happened yet, and which he has all the power in the world to prevent.


This is the entire explanation for the plot. So basically, there's no reason for any of this to be happening, except that the writers were apparently too stupid to think of any of a million much smarter and more interesting back-stories. I get that this is just backstory, and honestly up until the point of Spock explaining things, I was ok with the film (some stylistic issues aside), but that just put the whole thing over the top into "Why didn't we just leave those writers on strike and let smarter people do their jobs" mode.

They honestly couldn't come up with a better explanation? Really? It just comes out like someone barfed up a bunch of ideas, then they wrote them on slips of paper, randomly drew them out of a hat, and then glued them together to make a story and then had to just make up reasons for it all to kinda make sense. It's bad. Really really bad. If it had more enjoyable effects, I might be able to ignore that, but probably not, and it didn't, so it's moot anyway.


This film is better than some Trek films, only because the character writing was quite good (most of the time anyway). It was engaging, and "fun". For that reason, it's above say Star Trek 5, above 9, probably above 10 (I never saw it), and roughly equal to 7 (the one where Kirk dies), 3, and 1. So yeah. About halfway in terms of ranking. It has nothing to do with being a fan of the older series' and films. It would be a bad film if it was the first Star Trek film or TV show ever done. Heck. I'm willing to wager, if it wasn't for so many people wanting it to succeed, and more were just judging it on the merits of it as a science fiction film, this would have been some B grade "straight to video" production. I've seen a ton of crappy sci-fi that was better than this. They just didn't have the "Star Trek" name on it...

Edited, May 18th 2009 8:24pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#8 May 19 2009 at 5:01 AM Rating: Good
Dude, you must have forgot Star Trek 4 as one of the bad ones. New Star Trek was 100% better than that.

You CAN'T have possibly thought the whole "Save the whales cause they can communicate with the Alien!" plot wasn't one of their worst.

I know we don't agree on much, but please tell me you agree with that.

I can't be finding myself thinking you're even crazier than I all ready do after all these years.

My head will explode.

Edited, May 19th 2009 9:01am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#9 May 19 2009 at 1:52 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,593 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Dude, you must have forgot Star Trek 4 as one of the bad ones. New Star Trek was 100% better than that.

You CAN'T have possibly thought the whole "Save the whales cause they can communicate with the Alien!" plot wasn't one of their worst.


Sorry to burst your bubble, but no. I actually quite enjoy that particular Star Trek film. The probe was looking for confirmation that whales existed. It wasn't just about communication (they even explained this in the film as to why they needed real whales and not just recorded whalesong). Once you accept the premise that there is this ancient species which seeded planets with whale-like life forms and comes back to check on them to see if they're doing ok, the rest of the story is consistent with that premise.

The problem I had with the latest film is that the premise *wasn't* consistent. With anything. It just plain made no sense. Not in a "Gee. I don't believe that powerful aliens could be whales" sort of way, but in a "Gee. There's just no possible way that set of events could have occurred" sort of way.


I don't have a problem with plotlines which require accepting some pretty wild premises. I *do* have a problem with plotlines which require people to do things that don't make a lick of sense, or which violate the rules of the world in which the story takes place.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#10 May 19 2009 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
20,362 posts
Meh, I didn't like the paradoxes within paradoxes. How come old Spock still remembered his existing life/timeline? Wouldn't things in his past change?

Meh. Time travel. Only the HHGTTG ever got it right.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#11 May 20 2009 at 4:05 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,920 posts
catwho the Pest wrote:
Meh, I didn't like the paradoxes within paradoxes. How come old Spock still remembered his existing life/timeline? Wouldn't things in his past change?

Meh. Time travel. Only the HHGTTG ever got it right.


It's basically Back to the Future kind of paradox and parallel worlds.

____________________________


#12 May 20 2009 at 4:34 PM Rating: Good
Gave Up The D
Avatar
*****
11,254 posts
catwho the Pest wrote:
Meh, I didn't like the paradoxes within paradoxes. How come old Spock still remembered his existing life/timeline? Wouldn't things in his past change?

Meh. Time travel. Only the HHGTTG ever got it right.


It wasn't so much as the past of his universe, but that he crossed into the past of an alternate version of it. One, it seems, that managed to avoid being conquered by the evil goatee creatures.
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#13 May 20 2009 at 8:37 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,507 posts
Has this been posted yet in a ST thread? If not, it is now.

http://www.wimp.com/treksteals/
____________________________
◕ ‿‿ ◕
#14 May 21 2009 at 3:01 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,920 posts
Vataro, Eater of Souls wrote:
Has this been posted yet in a ST thread? If not, it is now.

http://www.wimp.com/treksteals/


A bit vague though, not all that good a comparison imo.

Kirk knew his real father, Luke didn't. Luke fought against the Empire, controlling known universe, not so in Star Trek in which it was one ship.

And as Star Wars itself took ideas from older stories, it's a bit of a silly debate whether or not Star Trek was completely taken from Star Wars.
____________________________


#15 May 22 2009 at 2:12 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
20,362 posts

Firefox and Noscript wrote:
Flash required


KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN! Smiley: mad
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#16 May 26 2009 at 4:02 AM Rating: Decent
gbaji wrote:
The whole plot thingie. Ok. Here's the problem. If the star that's going to go Supernova is inside the same planetary system as Romulus, collapsing it into a black hole isn't actually going to do much. Everyone on the planet is still going to die. So that's not a solution, is it? And if the supernova is *not* inside the same planetary system, then it's probably at least 2-4 light years away. So. When Spock gets there just a bit too late to prevent the explosion, said Romulan mining captain (and why is he there) should just head off to go rescue his wife and family. Afterall, he's just got several years to do it. Instead of goes on a revenge spree to avenge a death that hasn't actually happened yet, and which he has all the power in the world to prevent.


You seem to have forgotten the crucial fact that a supernova is simply not capable of devastating an entire galaxy (which is the main reason why Spock decided to act). A system or two, maybe, but not an entire galaxy.


gbaji wrote:
The Enterprise. Look. No matter how "retro" you want things to look by showing rooms full of pipes instead of the usual Trek corridors and control panels, there's just no way anyone would design a freaking space ship with that much massive amounts of empty unused space. We're inside a ship. That extra 100 feet of space up above the pipes and machines could (and should) be filled up with other decks of the ship. It was just a poor visual effect, for no reason other than someone thought it would look cool, and spent apparently zero time thinking about it outside of that.


I agree with you in some regards. Certainly the Enterprise has a lot of empty space in it, with pipes and stuff, but, with respect, we really have no idea what all that stuff does. You have to take into account the fact that they need to purify their own water supply constantly, so that requires a lot of space. However, i personally think this is the best-looking Enterprise ever seen.


gbaji wrote:
And while talking about said mining ship, let's start shifting to the "realistic" aspects here. I get that this is a ship from the future and all that, and weapon systems in the future are more powerful, but it's still a freaking mining ship. I can accept that future weapons systems might be designed to more easily penetrate older shields and whatnot (prompting the continual "OMG! Our shields are useless!!!" responses in the film). However, if we presume that the primary armaments for this mining ship might be mines/torpedoes intended for breaking up asteroids or something, and we also assume that said asteroids (even those in the future) don't normally have any sort of shields, it would be kinda silly to design your asteroid breaking bombs with the latest in shield penetration technology. This does somewhat assume some need for cost effectiveness, but the very fact that this is a mining ship, and people work on it, kinda assumes that they'd want to do things like "mining" in the most cost effective manner possible and not outfit their ship with stuff that would presumably be a thousand times more expensive than needed to do the job.


With regards to the mining ship, your arguments as to the power of it's weapons is pretty inaccurate. I'm certain that if it were to go up against a "modern" ship, it wouldn't stand a chance, but it's fighting ships built more than 180 years before it's time, equipped with similar technology, so they wouldn't really have a chance of defeating it. Add to it the fact that they had the element of surprise throughout most of the movie, and it's understandable why it was able to do so well.

The movie has it's flaws, as do all movies. Some are massive, most are small. It's still a good movie, and we can only hope the next 2 (which the cast are signed up for) are much better.
____________________________
[wowsig]2537067[/wowsig]

Quote:
some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.


#17 May 26 2009 at 12:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Zaikimaliki the Vile wrote:
gbaji wrote:
The whole plot thingie. Ok. Here's the problem. If the star that's going to go Supernova is inside the same planetary system as Romulus, collapsing it into a black hole isn't actually going to do much. Everyone on the planet is still going to die. So that's not a solution, is it? And if the supernova is *not* inside the same planetary system, then it's probably at least 2-4 light years away. So. When Spock gets there just a bit too late to prevent the explosion, said Romulan mining captain (and why is he there) should just head off to go rescue his wife and family. Afterall, he's just got several years to do it. Instead of goes on a revenge spree to avenge a death that hasn't actually happened yet, and which he has all the power in the world to prevent.


You seem to have forgotten the crucial fact that a supernova is simply not capable of devastating an entire galaxy (which is the main reason why Spock decided to act). A system or two, maybe, but not an entire galaxy.


The official novelization elaborated more directly about what Spock meant by threatening the entire galaxy, as he meant that it would politically threaten the galaxy for one of the largest and most powerful empires in the Alpha/Beta Quadrants to be crippled by the loss of their home planet, which would lead to others (like the Klingons or the Breen) to come in and try to conquer what remained of the Romulan Star Empire. This would lead to confrontations and potentially an all out war that would undoubtedly drag the Federation into it. He didn't say it as in meaning that it would physically damage or destroy the entire galaxy, just that the sudden void of what was a previously major political power would result in a power struggle with several other collective organizations to try and take over.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
And while talking about said mining ship, let's start shifting to the "realistic" aspects here. I get that this is a ship from the future and all that, and weapon systems in the future are more powerful, but it's still a freaking mining ship. I can accept that future weapons systems might be designed to more easily penetrate older shields and whatnot (prompting the continual "OMG! Our shields are useless!!!" responses in the film). However, if we presume that the primary armaments for this mining ship might be mines/torpedoes intended for breaking up asteroids or something, and we also assume that said asteroids (even those in the future) don't normally have any sort of shields, it would be kinda silly to design your asteroid breaking bombs with the latest in shield penetration technology. This does somewhat assume some need for cost effectiveness, but the very fact that this is a mining ship, and people work on it, kinda assumes that they'd want to do things like "mining" in the most cost effective manner possible and not outfit their ship with stuff that would presumably be a thousand times more expensive than needed to do the job.


With regards to the mining ship, your arguments as to the power of it's weapons is pretty inaccurate. I'm certain that if it were to go up against a "modern" ship, it wouldn't stand a chance, but it's fighting ships built more than 180 years before it's time, equipped with similar technology, so they wouldn't really have a chance of defeating it. Add to it the fact that they had the element of surprise throughout most of the movie, and it's understandable why it was able to do so well.

The movie has it's flaws, as do all movies. Some are massive, most are small. It's still a good movie, and we can only hope the next 2 (which the cast are signed up for) are much better.


Again something that was left out in the movie but talked about in the novelization was that the Narada had been retrofitted with salvaged Borg technology that allowed them access to the more advanced weaponry, and attributed to the large and unconventionally asymmetrical design of the Narada as opposed to the streamlined Warbirds that the Romulans had deployed at that time.

Edited, May 26th 2009 4:55pm by Vlorsutes
____________________________
Lady Jinte wrote:

Vlorsutes' Negotiation Skill rises 0.2 points
Vlorsutes' Observant Parent Skill rises 0.3 points
Vlorsutes' Argument Diffusing Skill rises 0.1 points

#18 May 27 2009 at 10:06 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,455 posts
Vlorsutes, Lord of Stuff wrote:
Again something that was left out in the movie but talked about in the novelization was that the Narada had been retrofitted with salvaged Borg technology that allowed them access to the more advanced weaponry, and attributed to the large and unconventionally asymmetrical design of the Narada as opposed to the streamlined Warbirds that the Romulans had deployed at that time.


Even without that, shield technology alone had probably come far enough to laughingly shrug off the weapons of so far in the past, even on a simple mining vessel. I mean, they'd been working at developing shields capable of fighting back stronger and stronger phasers for that long, you'd think that old school technology wouldn't stand a chance of breaking through it without a massive output from multiple ships.
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#19 May 28 2009 at 10:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Yet another thing that was established in the novelization for the film was that some of the damage of the Narada, following the Kelvin ramming into it, was salvaged by Starfleet, studied, and to a degree reverse engineered for their own ships following the attack. As such, the Enterprise and the other ships made after the incident with the Kelvin and the Narada were built using this technology, making them far more advanced than their "Prime" counterparts. Granted the technology couldn't be adapted to the point of making their ships on equal footing with the Narada, but it did make them advanced in comparison to what they would have built otherwise.
____________________________
Lady Jinte wrote:

Vlorsutes' Negotiation Skill rises 0.2 points
Vlorsutes' Observant Parent Skill rises 0.3 points
Vlorsutes' Argument Diffusing Skill rises 0.1 points

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 31 All times are in CDT