RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,110
Posts: 5,400,258
Members: 24,744
Currently online: 514
Newest member: Ohwowmelody

TrekToday headlines

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
Excellent 706 62.70%
Above Average 213 18.92%
Average 84 7.46%
Below Average 46 4.09%
Poor 77 6.84%
Voters: 1126. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 12 2009, 03:12 AM   #1516
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Feofilakt wrote: View Post
indranee wrote: View Post
Feofilakt wrote: View Post

Qualities, not quality. Attributes, not good/bad.

huh?
We are going in circles.

You stated the qualities (read, attributes) of the original series was a more philosophical nature, yes?

I agreed. Trek has a philosophical tone to it, it possesses that attribute.

How is the attribute "Trek has a philosophical tone" now in debate when taken into concert? I am not following.
oh okay. I'm eating, watching MSNBC/TNG/the WH Congressional stuff/talking on the phone and posting. figures I got confused.

yes, Trek is philosophical. yes, we agree.

my point is that you can't hold this movie to the standards of the best Trek eps just as you cannot hold the worst trek eps responsible for bringing down the overall quality of Trek. the fact that Trek brings a certain aura of undeniable depth cannot stipulate that ALL Trek be that way. just as Spock's Brain was part of All-Trek (and a guilty pleasure in itself, at least for me), so is this movie.

the best part of this movie is the fact that it promises newer Trek of quality that we BOTH want. and, hopefully, now that this movie has been deemed a general success, we shall get that which we both want.
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 03:27 AM   #1517
AJBryant
Fleet Captain
 
AJBryant's Avatar
 
Location: Indiana
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

erebus wrote: View Post
The fast promotion seems indicative of a rich advanced and inclusive culture that practices advancement by INTRINSIC merit and not by class or traditionally hierachical impositions; i.e. not by arbiturarily imposed (possibly even job-conflicting) concerns like politics, religion, class background, fashion or money/profit/corporate considerations.
Yeah, screw experience. That's not important at all.

Are you *serious*?
__________________
Abba Anthony [St. Anthony the Great] said, "A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us.' " -- Wisdom of the Desert Fathers
AJBryant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 03:33 AM   #1518
DarthPipes
Rear Admiral
 
DarthPipes's Avatar
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

When it comes to Kirk's promotion, I say just embrace the mythos. Kirk's quick rise is the stuff of legend.

If you need another reason to justify it, consider this. Starfleet just lost seven starships with seven commanding officers. Vulcan is gone and the larger part of their fleet is in some system apparently engaged with another enemy. You have Klingons, Romulans, and maybe Cardassians at the gates. Kirk was incredibly successful in stopping an advanced enemy from saving the Earth. Like someone said, you don't give him a mop and have him start at the bottom. He's earned his shot at the top seat.
DarthPipes is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 04:00 AM   #1519
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Agent Richard07 wrote: View Post
I saw the movie a second time in IMAX.

- Loved the intro even more. That part of the movie really captured the essense of TOS the way the Kelvin encounterd something strange out in deep space. THAT's pure Star Trek right there.

- I loved how they muted all the sound as the Kelvin was about to hit the Narada and played a musical piece over it. It created a very nice effect.

- I finally heard McCoy call out to Nurse Chapel.

- I found myself warming up to Bruce Greenwood's Captain Pike a lot more. Loved seeing him in that Motion Picture-style admiral's uniform too.

- I got a lot of other minor details I missed the first time.

- I started to entertain the possibility that the Vulcan we know wasn't the one that was destroyed in this movie and that the one we've always seen was actually the new planet they settled on. That idea kinda went away though.
I watched the movie again today in IMAX as well.



__________________
Out of hope.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 04:04 AM   #1520
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Agent Richard07 wrote: View Post
By the way, for those of you complaining about this thread being 70+ pages, you can go to your control panel and change your thread settings to display more posts per page. I only see 38 pages as of this posting.
Which changes nothing about the sheer number of posts.
__________________
Out of hope.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 04:49 AM   #1521
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

dkehler wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
dkehler wrote: View Post
Yes. So what makes Star Trek better than those other two movies other than featuring characters that we "know" much better? I suggest to you there is little to no difference. And that's too bad.
The character development in Star Trek is much better than in either of the other two. Star Trek's plot is its weakest element, but that's hardly a new development for Trek movies (not an excuse, merely an observation). I enjoyed ID4 as a summer popcorn movie (much like I enjoyed Star Trek) but I found Star Trek a superior film (though certainly not perfect). As for Armageddon, I did not connect with any of the characters, so, consequently, I did not enjoy it all that much. I'd rewatch ID4 but it's unlikely I'd revisit Armageddon.
I suggest to you that there was not any more character development in Star Trek than the other movies I mentioned. I suggest to you that you only think there was because the many, many hours of development that came before this movie, but don't really count because that was an alternative universe.
You can suggest all you want, but you would be wrong. I am not assessing the new movie's character development based on prior incarnations of Star Trek (films are more than a source of entertainment for me, they are a research interest and an ongoing element of my profession--I don't focus on genre films, except as cultural artefacts, but I have analyzed hundreds of films, including making note of character development. I feel quite confident about my statements regarding each of the three films in question here.).
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 04:51 AM   #1522
dkehler
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Ovation wrote: View Post
dkehler wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
The character development in Star Trek is much better than in either of the other two. Star Trek's plot is its weakest element, but that's hardly a new development for Trek movies (not an excuse, merely an observation). I enjoyed ID4 as a summer popcorn movie (much like I enjoyed Star Trek) but I found Star Trek a superior film (though certainly not perfect). As for Armageddon, I did not connect with any of the characters, so, consequently, I did not enjoy it all that much. I'd rewatch ID4 but it's unlikely I'd revisit Armageddon.
I suggest to you that there was not any more character development in Star Trek than the other movies I mentioned. I suggest to you that you only think there was because the many, many hours of development that came before this movie, but don't really count because that was an alternative universe.
You can suggest all you want, but you would be wrong. I am not assessing the new movie's character development based on prior incarnations of Star Trek (films are more than a source of entertainment for me, they are a research interest and an ongoing element of my profession--I don't focus on genre films, except as cultural artefacts, but I have analyzed hundreds of films, including making note of character development. I feel quite confident about my statements regarding each of the three films in question here.).
Really? Care to provide a comparative analysis?
__________________
David
dkehler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 04:54 AM   #1523
Feofilakt
Lieutenant Commander
 
Feofilakt's Avatar
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

indranee wrote: View Post
Feofilakt wrote: View Post
indranee wrote: View Post

huh?
We are going in circles.

You stated the qualities (read, attributes) of the original series was a more philosophical nature, yes?

I agreed. Trek has a philosophical tone to it, it possesses that attribute.

How is the attribute "Trek has a philosophical tone" now in debate when taken into concert? I am not following.
oh okay. I'm eating, watching MSNBC/TNG/the WH Congressional stuff/talking on the phone and posting. figures I got confused.

yes, Trek is philosophical. yes, we agree.

my point is that you can't hold this movie to the standards of the best Trek eps just as you cannot hold the worst trek eps responsible for bringing down the overall quality of Trek. the fact that Trek brings a certain aura of undeniable depth cannot stipulate that ALL Trek be that way. just as Spock's Brain was part of All-Trek (and a guilty pleasure in itself, at least for me), so is this movie.

the best part of this movie is the fact that it promises newer Trek of quality that we BOTH want. and, hopefully, now that this movie has been deemed a general success, we shall get that which we both want.
Ok, I understand now.

whew.

Yeah, I do hope the next Trek movie has some depth to it, but I remain pessimistic. JJ Abrams' track record is not stellar in this regard, and we must all remain aware that he is neither an intellectual or an artist. He is, above all else, a businessman and possesses a certain cunning as a result, but the things he produces/directs/writes will always be surfacey and appeal to the lowest common denominator. I have less respect for this guy than I do blokes like Spielburg, who at least put some soul into their films.

Let's just hope the next movie is appealing visually -and- has more substance
Feofilakt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 04:59 AM   #1524
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

dkehler wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
dkehler wrote: View Post
I suggest to you that there was not any more character development in Star Trek than the other movies I mentioned. I suggest to you that you only think there was because the many, many hours of development that came before this movie, but don't really count because that was an alternative universe.
You can suggest all you want, but you would be wrong. I am not assessing the new movie's character development based on prior incarnations of Star Trek (films are more than a source of entertainment for me, they are a research interest and an ongoing element of my profession--I don't focus on genre films, except as cultural artefacts, but I have analyzed hundreds of films, including making note of character development. I feel quite confident about my statements regarding each of the three films in question here.).
Really? Care to provide a comparative analysis?
Not at this late hour (I'm procrastinating from my marking) but if you're willing to wait a few days while I finish up my administrative drudge work for this term, I'll gladly revisit the subject. If you don't wish to wait, then all I can say is that my shelf full of film theory and criticism books (worn with cracked spines), my graduate work on film and history and my ongoing use of film as a teaching tool make me more qualified than most (not all, but most) people I encounter with regards to judging various elements of films. For the moment, though, it's back to marking essays.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 05:31 AM   #1525
pookha
Admiral
 
pookha's Avatar
 
Location: pookha
View pookha's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

[QUOTE=dkehler;2940992Star Trek, this latest movie, has little/none of the things that you listed as reasons why you like Star Trek. Yet you seem to be judging the new movie much higher than you would have otherwise simply because it has the name Star Trek on it.

That does not mean that I think that everything that ever made Star Trek good is in every Star Trek episode or movie.[/QUOTE]


to you it dosnt have those qualities..
some of us though do see them in this movie.
why some cant let it at that i dont know.
instead those of us who did find meaning in the move are insulted.
what ever...

perhaps it should be put in trek terms..

some of the trek themes in the movie..
to do justice to the full potential of every individual of the Body

Without freedom of choice, there is no creativity. Without creativity, there is no life.
__________________
avatar by
?
pookha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 06:03 AM   #1526
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Feofilakt wrote: View Post
indranee wrote: View Post
Feofilakt wrote: View Post

We are going in circles.

You stated the qualities (read, attributes) of the original series was a more philosophical nature, yes?

I agreed. Trek has a philosophical tone to it, it possesses that attribute.

How is the attribute "Trek has a philosophical tone" now in debate when taken into concert? I am not following.
oh okay. I'm eating, watching MSNBC/TNG/the WH Congressional stuff/talking on the phone and posting. figures I got confused.

yes, Trek is philosophical. yes, we agree.

my point is that you can't hold this movie to the standards of the best Trek eps just as you cannot hold the worst trek eps responsible for bringing down the overall quality of Trek. the fact that Trek brings a certain aura of undeniable depth cannot stipulate that ALL Trek be that way. just as Spock's Brain was part of All-Trek (and a guilty pleasure in itself, at least for me), so is this movie.

the best part of this movie is the fact that it promises newer Trek of quality that we BOTH want. and, hopefully, now that this movie has been deemed a general success, we shall get that which we both want.
Ok, I understand now.

whew.

Yeah, I do hope the next Trek movie has some depth to it, but I remain pessimistic. JJ Abrams' track record is not stellar in this regard, and we must all remain aware that he is neither an intellectual or an artist. He is, above all else, a businessman and possesses a certain cunning as a result, but the things he produces/directs/writes will always be surfacey and appeal to the lowest common denominator. I have less respect for this guy than I do blokes like Spielburg, who at least put some soul into their films.

Let's just hope the next movie is appealing visually -and- has more substance
I'm not sure you do get my point.

my point is that you cannot judge THIS movie via Trek that has gone before. it's a new incarnation and deserves to be judged on its own merits. the fact is that JJ -- artist or not -- has infused this particular incarnation of Trek with a verve and style that begs to be recognized (and much to my delight -- it has, at that). whether that fits with these "times" just as TOS fit with ITS times is possibly the main determinant in its longevity.

art is subjective (and so are artists). you may think Spielberg is a notch above, I may not (speaking in generalities).

my point is all of you who are judging this movie based on your idea of what Trek should or should not be should take a deep breath and contemplate each and every one of those 79 episodes and the movies. Trek is by no means the yardstick of excellence.

but it is, to most of us, precious. let's not ignore that. none of are objective where Trek is concerned.
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 06:58 AM   #1527
tauzo
Lieutenant
 
tauzo's Avatar
 
Location: Vermont
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Hi! ... lurker here.

Just saw it a second time (I just had to check out the tribble!).

I gotta say... I still thought it was good (i voted excellent), but it lost a little of the shiny for me. First time through, I was so absorbed by the spectacle and charmed by the humor that I definitely overlooked some of the weaknesses. I'd maybe take it down to a 7 (from 8) [caveat: impossible to get a 10 from me, and 9s are super rare, so really 7 is more of a B+ than a C. I know, my grading system sucks.]

Still ... I'm very excited about the ensemble and the possibilities for the new universe. I was happy with pretty much everyone, except, sadly, Spock Prime. His dentures really bothered me. Does that make me a bad person?

I really hope they keep Pike. Great actor and great character.

And I hope they won't be shy about adding some more female characters to the 'new' NCC-1701 crew. (BTW - Is there any consensus on what are we calling this reality? Nu? New? II? Now? Beta? AK (After Kelvin) ... 'alternate' doesn't seem right since it's the new 'true' reality ... or something ... er, I digress)

'Nuther little TOS ref I hadn't noticed the 1st time: Mr. red suit 'expendable' ... that made me laugh. I'm sure there's a ton more that I missed. I'll have to mine the thread a little more .

Also - Did anyone else notice someone who looked remarkably like a Wesley Crusher at the con in one of the opening Enterprise scenes??
tauzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 07:05 AM   #1528
tauzo
Lieutenant
 
tauzo's Avatar
 
Location: Vermont
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

tauzo wrote: View Post
(BTW - Is there any consensus on what are we calling this reality? Nu? New? II? Now? Beta? AK (After Kelvin) ... 'alternate' doesn't seem right since it's the new 'true' reality ... or something ... er, I digress)
Nevermind ... I found the [ Name that Alternate Universe ] thread.
tauzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 07:46 AM   #1529
jealousblues
Lieutenant
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Wow this was great. Obviously not as good as TOS but nothing could be.

Fantastic movie.


I expected it to be soooo horrible
jealousblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 07:52 AM   #1530
CAPTAIN ELBOW
Cadet
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

This movie is a blessing for all loyal Star Trek fans. I took several people who hate
anything to do with Star Trek, and when it was over they were the ones praising
the movie and selling it to others. So don't be so analytical or negative, it's a
wonderful blow for the good guys. This movie has expanded the Star Trek fan base,
"I have fought a good fight, I have survived the course, I have kept the faith"
remember those biblical words spoken by the late Brock Peters in DS9.
Brock Peters (2 July 192723 August 2005; age 78) was an accomplished veteran actor of stage, film, and television. He played Admiral Cartwright in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home and Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, and later portrayed Captain Benjamin Sisko's father, Joseph, a restaurateur in New Orleans, on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.
In addition to his canon Star Trek roles, Peters voiced the role of General Mi'Qogh in the video game Star Trek: Starfleet Command III. His voice-over clips from this game were re-purposed for the fan video Borg War.

"Remember" as Spock would convey during a mind meld.
Oh by the way the 2009 Star Trek movie kicked major @#$&$@....
CAPTAIN ELBOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
grading & discussion, parallel star trek, vulcan

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.