RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,962
Posts: 5,391,653
Members: 24,719
Currently online: 572
Newest member: terkarivish

TrekToday headlines

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Dorn To Voice Firefly Character
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

No ALS Ice Bucket For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Free Star Trek Trexels Game
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

New Trek-themed Bobble Heads
By: T'Bonz on Aug 21

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19


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.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old September 11 2009, 11:37 PM   #196
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

PhasersOnStun wrote: View Post
Once again, great analysis! I have to say, a good analysis is one from which the reader has actually learned something, and I must admit I'd not looked at ST:TMP in this light before—so I feel like I did learn something. Thank you!
Once again, and if I didn't articulate it fully before: my thanks.

You'll have to excuse me for being blunt now, but hopefully, it's not without reasonable context. There are some factual errors you made, which I desire to correct, so bluntness may be apropos, and I also don't want to divert this thread too far from its course, which, if I keep blathering on about ST:TMP, I may do.

Without further ado:

PhasersOnStun wrote: View Post
2001 begins with about 5 minutes of music against a blank screen. I'd never seen that before, and to be honest, doesn't capture me. But it was a unique feature of the film. That ST:TMP is the only other movie I've seen that does that, to me indicates a cheap attempt to stylistically echo or copy a superior movie. And if it didn't capture me in 2001, it flat out pissed me off in ST:TMP. I couldn't hit the FF button on my remote fast enough.
"2001" does not begin that way. It starts with a musical overture, "Thus Sprake Zarathustra", by composer Richard Strauss, recalling the philosophical work by Nietzsche, and this music is set to geometry/imagery (the Earth, the moon and the sun), and this lasts for just over a minute, before the film essentially "begins". Musical overtures used as film overtures precede "2001" by several decades. ST:TMP was not copying "2001", but was merely continuing a rich cinematic tradition consistent with its epic style. Other famous films with overtures, older than "2001", include: "King Kong" (1933), "Gone With The Wind" (1939), "Ben-Hur" (1959) and "Lawrence Of Arabia" (1962). ST:TMP's director, Robert Wise, had even used an overture for one of his earlier films, "West Side Story" (1961). Sorry to say, but you seem very ignorant of film history.

PhasersOnStun wrote: View Post
Speaking of the music, this is another minor detail that pulled me out of the film, but I'm a musician, that's my excuse (I used to teach college English in my full leather and spikes). Music is very often used to set the mood, and also very often musical themes follow characters. But every time something unexplained either happened or was being discussed, there was this jarring percussive synth bass "BWOOOOOOAAAAAAAM" accompanying it.
The instrument you describe was not "percussive synth bass", but a brand new instrument in its own right (a innovation that should have helped net Jerry Goldsmith's astonishing score the Oscar, but I digress). Designed by Craig Huxley, it was dubbed "The Blaster Beam", and was a 15-foot long narrow metal box, equipped with low, electronically-amplified piano strings, played by striking the strings with a polished artillery shell casing and mallet. Here is a video of the creator demonstrating his baby:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fu...#video_details

PhasersOnStun wrote: View Post
I'll be the first to admit that these are all stylistic, not really philosophical complaints. But then if a movie doesn't move me, I generally won't give it the time to unravel its message. 2001 did, ST:TMP did not. I will completely admit that I've never looked at ST:TMP in the light you have shown it, you have inspired me to rewatch it and look at it in a new light.
In my opinion, your perception of the film is mired by your lack of knowledge and understanding, which is all too common. I don't mean to sound rude, but your comments about the film's style, its music and its characters do not inspire me with confidence; I doubt you'll enjoy ST:TMP any more than you did before. Good luck, though.
Cryogenic is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 12:53 AM   #197
davejames
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Sac, Ca
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

childofdarkness wrote: View Post
OK, I loved the movie and enjoyed it immensely. However, should I ever stop to think about the premise, it may begin to bug me.
A Romulan miner who loves his homeworld sees it in danger. Evidently only one fellow (Spock) offers a solution that even has ahope of working. His attempt fails, and the world is destroyed. The aforementioned Romulan miner then loses it and decides that he simply must kill the only guy who even tried to help. He somehow manages to take a mining ship back in time and in retaliation for a well-meant attempt that failed, attempts to destroy all worlds related to Spock.
Heh heh, that's been bugging me forever too. Everyone tries to tell me that the death of his family made Nero go bugnuts insane somehow, but I'm just not buying it-- at least the way it's presented in the movie.

Certainly, after 25 long years, it should start to dawn on him that "oh yeah, Spock actually tried to HELP save my world!"

I mean, Khan holding a grudge against Kirk all those years I understand. Kirk was the one who marooned him on the planet (not to mention the fact Khan was an egocentric madman from the start). But the vendetta here just doesn't ring true nearly as well.
davejames is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 01:19 AM   #198
Middle Earther
Commodore
 
Middle Earther's Avatar
 
Location: BC, Canada
View Middle Earther's Twitter Profile
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

ummmm.....What Cryogenic said!

Seriously, though, excellent comments!
__________________
A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams
Middle Earther is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 01:49 AM   #199
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

Cryogenic wrote: View Post


PhasersOnStun wrote: View Post
Speaking of the music, this is another minor detail that pulled me out of the film, but I'm a musician, that's my excuse (I used to teach college English in my full leather and spikes). Music is very often used to set the mood, and also very often musical themes follow characters. But every time something unexplained either happened or was being discussed, there was this jarring percussive synth bass "BWOOOOOOAAAAAAAM" accompanying it.
The instrument you describe was not "percussive synth bass", but a brand new instrument in its own right (a innovation that should have helped net Jerry Goldsmith's astonishing score the Oscar, but I digress). Designed by Craig Huxley, it was dubbed "The Blaster Beam", and was a 15-foot long narrow metal box, equipped with low, electronically-amplified piano strings, played by striking the strings with a polished artillery shell casing and mallet. Here is a video of the creator demonstrating his baby:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fu...#video_details
A photo of the whole instrument may be seen here. (It looks like a metal descendant of one of Harry Partch's invented instruments, but I am not certain about this.) Craig Huxley, its inventor/designer, may be better known to Trek fans as Craig Hundley.


Cryogenic wrote: View Post

"2001" does not begin that way. It starts with a musical overture, "Thus Sprake Zarathustra", by composer Richard Strauss... and this lasts for just over a minute, before the film essentially "begins".
The music, although it does function as an overture to 2001, is more an introduction to a twenty-five minute piece, the whole of which carries the title Also Sprach (This Spake) Zarathustra. It is the first of nine sections and has a duration of about a minute and a half, though the timpani enters at the start almost inaudibly and the organ chord at the close fades out for nearly twenty seconds.
__________________
Dinosaurs are just really, really big chickens.

Last edited by M'Sharak; September 12 2009 at 02:00 AM.
M'Sharak is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 06:13 AM   #200
Larraby
Lieutenant
 
Larraby's Avatar
 
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

So far, there are 10 pages of comments in regards to the scenes that are deemed 'cringe worthy'.

Although there are some people who are truly nitpicking, the majority of the comments deal with problems involving major parts of the plot in the movie. This begs the question, do people continue to still believe that the storyline was well written?

If anything, this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the foundations of this movie.
Larraby is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 06:15 AM   #201
JuanBolio
Admiral
 
JuanBolio's Avatar
 
Location: Florida Keys, USA
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

Larraby wrote: View Post
So far, there are 10 pages of comments in regards to the scenes that are deemed 'cringe worthy'.

Although there are some people who are truly nitpicking, the majority of the comments deal with problems involving major parts of the plot in the movie. This begs the question, do people continue to still believe that the storyline was well written?

If anything, this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the foundations of this movie.
It had holes and lacking aspects. Major ones, even. Still a cool movie.
__________________
Never fear! JuanBolio wuz here!

This has been an official JuanBolio post. You are now stronger, smarter, and a better human being for having read it. Congratulations.
JuanBolio is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 11:52 AM   #202
number6
Vice Admiral
 
Location: number6 has left the village through some inexpicable hole in the ground to head the corporation.
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

Larraby wrote: View Post
So far, there are 10 pages of comments in regards to the scenes that are deemed 'cringe worthy'.

Although there are some people who are truly nitpicking, the majority of the comments deal with problems involving major parts of the plot in the movie. This begs the question, do people continue to still believe that the storyline was well written?

If anything, this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the foundations of this movie.
If anything this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the level to which people will sink to trash and nitpick a film they've chosen to see multiple times. Anyone who has that much to say about every little thing that's "wrong" about this movie, has obviously invested a great deal of time and expense to the effort.
number6 is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 01:37 PM   #203
Good
Commander
 
Good's Avatar
 
Location: Pumpkin Center, North Carolina
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

SilentP wrote: View Post
True, but what's more fun and dramatic to watch?
This, sir, is why most Hollywood movies and TV shows these days are are complete ass. Realism, common sense and continuity are buried in "what's more fun" until my suspension of disbelief gets up and goes to find the popcorn.

A line or two of dialogue would have solved the problem.

"We'll need volunteers with hand to hand combat training because the energy from the drill is dampening energy weapons."

No, we'll just have the characters forget their sidearms because it will be "cooler!"
__________________
"Fate goes ever as it must"
Good is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 01:37 PM   #204
Search4
Commander
 
Search4's Avatar
 
Location: New Jersey, USA
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

number6 wrote: View Post
If anything this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the level to which people will sink to trash and nitpick a film they've chosen to see multiple times. Anyone who has that much to say about every little thing that's "wrong" about this movie, has obviously invested a great deal of time and expense to the effort.
You know, this is well said. I've seen it a number of times now (airplanes are very convenient for this) and its a fun ride. Just enjoy it for what it is - a popcorn movie.

It's not the TOS Kirk or Spock. Yes, Kirk is different, no father. Yes, they made the bridge the Apple store, Engineering looks like a brewery and no one even mentions that Communications looks like a series of fermenting tanks covered with little laser spirals. Yes, they didn't need a succession of Russian-doll ice monsters eating each other... and wouldn't they be full and not bother with Kirk? And dammit, Jim, warp in and phaser the drill over earth would have been a pretty successful plan.

But it was successful, popular, and achieved massive growth in the fan base - great! Hopefully the next one will continue that trend. AND be a tighter, more true to the characters, film.
Search4 is online now  
Old September 12 2009, 01:50 PM   #205
Phily B
Fleet Captain
 
Phily B's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
View Phily B's Twitter Profile
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

I'm still confused as to why Pike warped into a trap after being told he was warping into a trap and agreeing.
Phily B is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 04:29 PM   #206
PhasersOnStun
Lieutenant Commander
 
PhasersOnStun's Avatar
 
Location: Orange County, CA
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

Cryogenic wrote: View Post
Sorry to say, but you seem very ignorant of film history.
No need to apologize, you are absolutely correct—I am very ignorant of film history.

However, I believe that a movie should stand or fall on its own merits. To personalize that statement, in my case knowing film history is great for context, but the individual work of art needs to appeal to me itself.

An example of that is the "synth bass" sound that pulled me out of the movie. I appreciated learning that in fact it was "the blaster beam" and the instrument does look quite interesting in its own right! However, I still felt that they way it was used in the film was quite overwrought. One shouldn't require foreknowledge of the uniqueness of the instrument to appreciate how the composer uses it. And if I did appreciate how a composer used the sound, it wouldn't matter to my enjoyment if it was the Blaster Beam or a Casio keyboard from a drug store.

I realize this is all taste, so I make no objective judgements. For example, "Sabotage" by the Beastie Boys is one of my favorite songs. I loved hearing it in STXI, in the context of the upgraded 20th century car stereo loaded with "period" music. The song gets my blood pumping, certainly the goal of the music in the scene. But I fully understand and appreciate others who have complained it pulls them out of the movie. "Horses for courses" as they say.
PhasersOnStun is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 08:59 PM   #207
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

Implying a man's opinion about a movie has less value because he is less educated about movie history is... I don't agree with that.
JarodRussell is offline  
Old September 12 2009, 09:20 PM   #208
number6
Vice Admiral
 
Location: number6 has left the village through some inexpicable hole in the ground to head the corporation.
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Implying a man's opinion about a movie has less value because he is less educated about movie history is... I don't agree with that.
It's demeaning.
number6 is offline  
Old September 13 2009, 02:38 AM   #209
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

BillJ wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
...
You know... as much as I love this movie, I can't say any of the points above are off-base.
Thank you, BillJ. And thank you to the others who have tended gracious remarks in my direction. I appreciate them all.

However, OneBuckFilms has shown that several of my assertions are, indeed, just that -- off-base. On the other hand, I still feel I have a strong case. I will now deal with his thoughtful comments in turn:

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
1) The awful inflatable hand and "numb tongue" jokes that precede this segment really drag the movie down to the level of farce (and not good farce). I know, I know: I'm hardly the first person on the damn Internet to talk about this, but it's so incongruous with the dire transpirations driving the movie forward that it reduces the world of Trek to that of an SNL skit.
Actually, I found it pretty funny, and it added a sense of energy to the scene, keeping things light.
It was well-paced by Abrams and not without a certain deftness of hand (pardon the pun) in execution; I just feel that it's a little too silly and makes the world of Trek look frivolous, and, in a way, dramatically inert. Then again, one could charge that Abrams is using the vessel of comedy to bring Kirk down a peg or two, counter-balancing his cockier moments and encouraging in the viewer a level of sympathy, at least subliminally, because Kirk is placed in a situation that demands he endures these complications in order to do something heroic, rather than simply doing everything in his early Starfleet days effortlessly and painlessly. The sequence has a less obvious "purpose", then, but, aesthetically, I'm still wont to regard it with a measure of disdain. I guess it depends on the wiring of the individual.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
2) When Kirk bashes away (with bulbous fingers) on a computer terminal, looking for Uhura, how does he know she's even on board? In the embarkation scene (i.e. scene of the cadets boarding shuttles), Kirk protests that his name wasn't called, which means the viewer must infer he listened to everyone else being assigned, including Uhura -- and Uhura was assigned to the Farragut (this was only changed when Uhura admonished Spock and guilt-tripped him into changing his decision, which Kirk wasn't privy to).
Kirk likely had several antagonistic encounters, and Uhura was surprised at not being assigned. As far as Kirk was concerned, she was on board, as she likely would have told him in passing.
Right you are, OBF. I discovered I was also in error regarding my assertion that we must infer Kirk has heard every cadet being assigned; instead, the cadets are assembled in small groups, and Kirk and Uhura are in separate groups, so Kirk would only have only heard a handful of assignments being read, and Uhura's would not have been among them. Your own observations are well considered, too. In short, this isn't an error. Point rescinded.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
3) When Kirk does locate Uhura, he speaks in a very harried manner, unnecessarily putting Uhura on edge (not to mention her reaction to his cartoon hands). However, even as his articulation begins to fail, you can still clearly make out he's asking Uhura if the ship was "Romulan" -- yet Uhura, "unmatched in xenolinguistics", let alone contemporary American English, can't understand Kirk or this very distinctive noun, which Kirk has to say three times before she gets it.
Well, she's used to people, even in other languages, speaking mostly without impedement.
True, OBF, true. In the grand scheme of things, it's a minor contrivance at best, but I personally find it annoying, so, for me, my point stands. Hot as Zoe Saldana is, her Uhura is also such a drastic departure from Nichelle Nichols' that I find this moment particularly hard to swallow. I know, I know, it sounds like I miss the woods for the trees, but what I also miss is that sense of grace and mystery that Nichelle Nichols had. In a way, this moment rips the heart out of Uhura, not least because of the frantic exchange between her and Kirk, and the way Uhura seems to fight against making sense of Kirk until he gets his articulation tight enough for even an idiot to make sense of the word. In my book, it's pushed too far for the sake of extending an already tedious gag, and the character of Uhura suffers for it.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
4) Kirk, a lowly, sickly, black-clad and obviously non-commissioned individual, rushing to the bridge of the flagship vessel, and making it through the doors and into the heart of the ship's command centre, without meeting any resistance whatsoever, is something of a stretch. Although he's doing it for a good reason, seeing him argue with and talk over Spock while trying to get Pike's full attention also makes me cringe.
Starfleet doesn't post guards like on a Romulan ship, and he probably had security clearance since he was in Starfleet, Cadet or not.
Right. Technically, there was nothing factually wrong about this moment, according to Trek lore, but it feels egregious when added to the list of things Kirk does with relative ease. In short, it's part of a larger problem, for me, at least, in which everything seems a little too convenient. And since Pike places the ship on Red Alert and raises shields but does little else, it still feels like Kirk's urgency comes to naught, making his frantic trip to the bridge seem a little skittish and overcooked in retrospect; rather than being all that dramatic, it just feels like a cloying way to introduce more movement into an already kinetic film. Just my personal take on matters.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
5) Why would Pike, a man who wrote a bloody paper on the original "lightning storm", not show the faintest hint of doubt or trepidation until super trooper James T. Kirk lectures him and makes him realise that he might want to get a clue? This is a blatant example of cheaply propping up Kirk's superior insight and mad skillz by making the rest of Starfleet, even its venerable captains, look like brain-dead, blithering idiots. It's a wonder anyone in Starfleet could even remember their own name before the advent of Kirk, let alone pass exams or conduct missions of exploration.
Because he was thinking about an emergency situation, not Kirk's father and a dissertation he wrote a while back. I'm a coder, and I can't remember code I wrote even 1 year ago without getting more than mention of an exception.
I'm 50/50 on this one. Perhaps, since Pike wasn't aware of the Klingon attack, even though he should have been, I shouldn't hold this against him -- that's the result of another contrivance, I suppose, and perhaps another example of one contrivance spilling over into another and amplifying how objectionable the milder contrivance intrinsically feels, which seems to be a recurring problem in STXI, particularly where its main plot is concerned. Intuitively, it's hard for me to strike this one, but maybe I should. I'm going to leave it standing for now, however; the sense that Pike, the "father" of the cadets and fresh blood of Starfleet, and, by extension, Starfleet itself, needs Kirk is too heavily confected, in my opinion, and many characters and moments seem badly tainted as a result.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
6) Uhura intercepted a transmission which involved the obliteration of 47 (ugh) Klingon war birds by one Romulan vessel, and she didn't think this was significant to report or pass on to anyone? How many ships were creamed by the Borg at Wolf 359? 39, right? And that was considered a massacre, was it not? Here, not only were a further eight ships destroyed, but they belonged to a warrior race, built and manned for battle, and this was done in the 23rd Century, by a single Romulan vessel, belonging to a species known for treachery. This should have put the fear of Zeus into these people, but then, I suppose if the distance to Vulcan, Starfleet's command structure and every other aspect of verisimilitude in this movie can be reduced to pap, why not be totally nonchalant about the decimation of entire fleets by a clandestine force, too?
She probably passed the information further up the chain of command, and the big event for Starfleet seems to be in the Laurentian System, so a prisoner escape, along with the destruction of many Klingon ships, may not have made major headlines.
This is one I really don't buy. I appreciate your intepretation, but I think an escape of such magnitude, by a shady race in a ship of unknown design, should have been all over Starfleet. I mean, Pike describes Starfleet to Kirk as "an humanitarian and peace-keeping armada" (which I have *major* problems with, but that's another discussion by itself), and if that's true in *this* Trek universe, and if Starfleet is already aware of Klingons and Romulans as major players in the galactic arena, as their inclusion, either peripherally (the Neutral Zone) or directly (war birds as aggressors) in the Kobayashi Maru simulation portends, not to mention the way they are casually name-dropped by others, including Uhura, then Starfleet should be very unsettled by this development and keen to acquire further information. Instead, the attack is treated as a trivial detail, with even Uhura, one of the few aware of it, retelling it in a gossipy way to her sex-obsessed friend, rather than giving it the serious inflection you'd think it would merit. I think my resistance to this aspect is a more fundamental grievance with the picture: it seems to compress and shrink the world of Star Trek down to the level of a TV soap opera; everything happens very quickly, with time and distances massively contracted, and big events are depicted with a casual gait and inevitable, even disaffected, air.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
7) The entire bridge argument and prelude to an action sequence is shot in close-up, and badly blocked and edited, to boot. When the argument begins, Kirk is roughly in the middle of the bridge, but by the end of the scene, just before the Enterprise drops out of warp, he's clutching a console at the rear of the bridge. Further, before he's shown clutching the console, another shot depicts him simply standing, as if waiting for an order, and his position relative to Spock also changes; in one shot, Spock is stood at Kirk's left, in the next, he's at Kirk's right. You have to watch closely, but it's very clumsily done, and I guess Abrams hoped his tossed salad style of photography and editing would confuse people too much to notice. Uhura also assumes her post amazingly fast, given that in less than ten seconds she: walks over to the console, relieves the crew member, dons the famous earpiece, scans for activity and asserts that she isn't picking up any transmissions -- talk about efficient.
Now this is something you have to be paying such close attention to to notice, and for something so badly blocked and edited, I found it very effective.
Films naturally contain errors of this fashion. Technically speaking, it is nothing out of the ordinary. Again, this one is no biggie, really, but again, it also seems worse for being surrounded by, and, in some senses, fed into, by other errors and problems. While I think STXI is better edited than it first appears, Abrams' framing and whole stylistic approach is very basic, almost crude. Yes, the cinema verite feel he brings to Star Trek is, to this extent, at least, new, and it *does* give STXI a "freshness" that helps it feel young and effervescent (the style also matching the youthfulness of the characters, then), but this same approach is also cliched, melodramatic and obvious. In my view, there is simply no need for so many close-ups, so many shaky shots, pans and zooms, so many lens flares .... so much TV-ness (this cinema verite style is now a common trope of TV, thanks to shows like "24" as well as Abrams' own "Lost"). And, at times, the style is not just constrictive, but simply overbearing, as in this bridge scene. That's why, when I realised it has no wide shots, I tried to make sense of the space the charactes inhabit, and that's when I discovered that Kirk and Spock's positions are disjointed, changing rapidly just before the Enterprise drops out of warp and arrives at Vulcan. When you see through the simple machinery of Abrams' tricks, the cheapness of the filmmaking becomes apparent, and I come away feeling that I've witnessed the tawdry illusions of a mountebank.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
8) Given that the Enterprise is still at warp and still heading towards this "trap", why doesn't Pike order an emergency stop to bring the ship short of Vulcan and send details back to Starfleet, or at least prepare the ship in an orderly fashion for battle, or even retreat? Instead, with all this foreknowledge, which amounts to jack sh*t in the end, they continue all the way to Vulcan and drop straight into the maelstrom, as Kirk predicted. Nothing changes. All Kirk's bluster amounts to is the screenwriters giving the character a platform from which he can demonstrate his supposed tenacity and brilliance of mind, which then leads to the major contrivance of Pike promoting him to second officer, allowing him to leapfrog into the captain's chair via another contrivance that isn't too far away.
Pike ordered Shields Up and Red Alert, since whatever was happening at Vulcan had to be dealt with. It was a decision made very quickly once they established a probable attack, and if anyone required assistance, it was likely to be of the emergency kind, where contacting starfleet would take too much time and likely cost lives, and not just Starfleet.
It still seems that Pike had an opportunity to drop out of warp before reaching Vulcan and he didn't take it. He may have been able to brief the rest of the crew, work out a way to maximise shield power and weapons (in lieu of temporarily going back to warp and completing the last step of the journey), and he may even have been able to formulate a plan for surprising or confusing the Romulan ship, rather than simply forsaking all of that and landing smack-dab in the middle of a floating graveyard, making things worse for his pilot who already had an unfortunate moment with the "parking brake", and not really giving the Romulans anything to worry about. The only reason the ship is spared destruction is because the maniac in the Romulan ship somehow feels Pike knows the codes for Earth's defences, although that didn't stop him from wasting all of the other ships (yes, yes, Nero discovers that this straggler is "The Enterprise!", but why should Pike know something the other captains didn't?), nor does wasting ships itself seem much of a problem for Nero and his seemingly invincible mining craft.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
9) When Pike orders that the Enterprise be dropped down underneath a piece of debris, Sulu has the silliest look on his face, which is very off-putting (although it's only a brief shot, almost subliminal), and then the Enterprise actually collides with another object, ripping plating and God-knows-what from the top of its saucer, in spite of the fact that a line of chatter that precedes this moment indicates that the "deflector shields are holding", and in spite of the fact that Sulu is meant to be a master pilot -- then again, Sulu did leave the "parking brake" on, so I suppose he can't actually be trusted to peel an orange, much less steer a starship. Personally, I just think the shot of the Enterprise sustaining visible damage was just put in to look cool, and not for any logical or weighty reason.
Actually, what was scraped off was NOT from the saucer, but one of the Nacelles, and may have been surface plating. The maneuver probably had to be done so quick that the Enterprise may not have been able to maneuver fast enough.
You're right here. It is the port nacelle that receives this damage, not the saucer. I was in error. With this in mind, I believe your interpretation is also more sensible than mine: the Enterprise is a beast in this version, and master pilot or not, it's doubtful that anyone could have done a better job when Pike gave the order. But I can't rescind my point. The reason begins with a question: it's a shame that the Enterprise got damaged so quickly, right? I can't help but feel that this is yet another thing that speaks to Abrams' need to mindlessly thrill and titillate, rather than tell a meaningful story where the ship is a character in its own right and you *feel* its every wounding and scar. Visually, the shot conveys a hint of that idea, but it's neither foreshadowed nor mentioned again, stripping it of any right to import (for me, at least).

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
10) "Divert auxiliary power from port nacelles to forward shields." This line makes absolutely no sense. Not only is the Enterprise clearly vulnerable from all angles, which leaves the idea of diverting power to *forward* shields looking stupid and redundant, but there are no port nacelles; there is precisely *one* nacelle at port and *one* nacelle at starboard, and that's it. Maybe the screenwriters meant for Pike to say "aft nacelles", but even the adjective "aft" would be redundant; there are only two nacelles and they're both at aft. Or, if the screenwriters really did mean to have Pike order that auxiliary power be diverted from *the* port nacelle to forward shields, then that's plain dumb, since the ship is under impulse and doesn't need *auxiliary* power going to either of its nacelles, let alone both, so why not divert as much of it to where it's needed? To me, it shows the lack of care and thought behind the picture.
Forward is the direction the Enterprise is heading in, auxiliary power was likely used to supplement mains power, and the power from one Nacelle was probably sufficient. Also, the Aux power may refer to power extracted from the hydrogen collectors at the front of the Nacelles.
Yes, but Pike says "port nacelles". Nacelles, plural. That's a mistake. Again, I don't think the Enterprise was treated in a very lady-like way. If you don't even know the basic design and beauty of a lady, how can you hope to faithfully represent her, and why should I care? I'm sorry if that sounds confrontational or belligerent; it's a small matter I find revealing of a bigger issue. I am reminded of a comment by Rutger Hauer, which I sometimes trot out, since I find it so exacting yet poetic: "film is about the small details". STXI isn't particularly mature or believable, let alone beautiful or sublime, for various reasons; an oversight like this is just so ... inelegant, to me, adding insult to injury.
Cryogenic is offline  
Old September 13 2009, 03:05 AM   #210
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: Moments that really made you cringe or disliked

Finally, to deal with some pernicious charges against my character:

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
I could enumerate reasons why this film blows chunks all night, but I won't. I think ten points for five minutes out of a 2-hour movie is damning and draining enough. STXI gives me brain bleed -- and after INS and NEM, that's saying something.
You sir, are nitpicking to an unreasonable extreme, with a level of scrutiny that NO dramatic presentation can ever hope to pass.

In your case, Shatner's SNL statement of "Get A Life" might actually be applicable.
Nothing in the universe, let alone human thought, is without flaw, but there are better films than STXI, even in ST's own limited film canon. And I will happily submit that many dramatic presentations can *and do* stand up to my basic level of scrutiny, give or take niggles and eccentricities of one kind or another. STXI's sins are simply too numerous, too great, and of a kind too woeful, for me. The "Get A Life" refrain is so overdone it's untrue. Those in glass houses, my friend. Yes, that analysis of mine is, without wishing to sound self-serving, significantly more detailed than usual, but your comment is just a way of screwing someone over no matter what they do: if I'd said less, I'd just be another "basher" unable to articulate my opinions, or able to articulate them, but poorly; when I provide detail, I am then accused of "nitpicking" or even lacking a life. Honestly, you may want to try and move beyond petulant accusations. This is how good discussions are killed, in all spheres of human discourse, in all places and in all times.

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Implying a man's opinion about a movie has less value because he is less educated about movie history is... I don't agree with that.
number6 wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Implying a man's opinion about a movie has less value because he is less educated about movie history is... I don't agree with that.
It's demeaning.
Is that so, guys?

Firstly, what am I to make of your other post, if not to, then certainly about, me, number6?

number6 wrote: View Post
Larraby wrote: View Post
So far, there are 10 pages of comments in regards to the scenes that are deemed 'cringe worthy'.

Although there are some people who are truly nitpicking, the majority of the comments deal with problems involving major parts of the plot in the movie. This begs the question, do people continue to still believe that the storyline was well written?

If anything, this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the foundations of this movie.
If anything this thread has put a glaring spotlight on the level to which people will sink to trash and nitpick a film they've chosen to see multiple times. Anyone who has that much to say about every little thing that's "wrong" about this movie, has obviously invested a great deal of time and expense to the effort.
Seems you wrote that to demean, rather than contribute anything of substance to the discussion -- and to make your superciliousness clear, you helpfully included a laughing emoticon. If you think that that's a healthy way to present yourself, carry on; accordingly, I will see you as an aggressive hypocrite.

Secondly, I didn't necessarily imply that a particular person's subjective opinion on a film has "less value" simply because they're unaware of film history (though, in many senses, I think it does). I charged that PhasersOnStun was ignorant of film history after they made factually incorrect statements about "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" and its relationship with "2001: A Space Odyssey", which they conceded. Anyone can go back through our earlier exchange and see what was said and why it was said.

I don't appreciate my words being twisted. I'm aware it's par for the course on the Internet, but I'd still like to see it happening less than it does. Would you like it if I twisted your words? Probably not. Funnily enough, PhasersOnStun doesn't appear to have had any problems with anything I've said. It seems you have taken undue offense on their behalf, which I find specious in the extreme. You remind me of the paradigm of people people getting angry on behalf of religious adherents; "belief in belief", as Daniel Dennett calls it. That's a very dangerous road to go down, intellectually. Personally, I think you're a wee bit insecure, both of you. PhasersOnStun was man enough to take my remarks head-on, and we had a nice little discussion. If only the Internet always worked that way.
Cryogenic is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

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 02:47 PM.

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