RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,394
Posts: 5,505,515
Members: 25,130
Currently online: 425
Newest member: OneOfFour

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


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, 09:41 PM   #1606
ITElf
Vice Admiral
 
ITElf's Avatar
 
Location: ITL
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

J. Allen wrote: View Post
Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Sky wrote: View Post
His wife got "the planet" in the divorce and his bones were all that she left him.
Which is a dumb way to get a nickname. Furthered by the fact that for decades the explanation was that it was derived from the military nick name for a doctor - Sawbones.
My nickname is "Chase", and it was given to me by my friends in high school. You know why? I chased tornadoes during the summer months. There are many derivations for the name "Chase", mine is for one. There can be others. The same applies to "Bones".


J.
And now the image of you chasing a wee tornado around a tree in the manner of Homer Simpson chasing a squirrel (complete with high pitched laugh) will be forever burned into my mind.

__________________
"Closed this morning as Ravenscroft, the bakery's dog, sprained his mouth whistling round a corner."
- Tockleys Bakery
ITElf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 10:08 PM   #1607
Santa Claus
Believe
 
Santa Claus's Avatar
 
Location: J. Allen's Rooftop
Send a message via ICQ to Santa Claus Send a message via AIM to Santa Claus Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Santa Claus Send a message via Yahoo to Santa Claus
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

ITL wrote: View Post
J. Allen wrote: View Post
Trekker4747 wrote: View Post

Which is a dumb way to get a nickname. Furthered by the fact that for decades the explanation was that it was derived from the military nick name for a doctor - Sawbones.
My nickname is "Chase", and it was given to me by my friends in high school. You know why? I chased tornadoes during the summer months. There are many derivations for the name "Chase", mine is for one. There can be others. The same applies to "Bones".


J.
And now the image of you chasing a wee tornado around a tree in the manner of Homer Simpson chasing a squirrel (complete with high pitched laugh) will be forever burned into my mind.

And apparently mine as well now.

J.
__________________
---------
"I believe... I believe... It's silly, but I believe." - Susan Walker
---------
❄ A Joyful Holiday Season to You All! ❄

Santa Claus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 10:10 PM   #1608
George Bailey
The Revd's Oldman
 
George Bailey's Avatar
 
Location: Bob The Skutter
View George Bailey's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

J. Allen wrote: View Post
ITL wrote: View Post
J. Allen wrote: View Post

My nickname is "Chase", and it was given to me by my friends in high school. You know why? I chased tornadoes during the summer months. There are many derivations for the name "Chase", mine is for one. There can be others. The same applies to "Bones".


J.
And now the image of you chasing a wee tornado around a tree in the manner of Homer Simpson chasing a squirrel (complete with high pitched laugh) will be forever burned into my mind.

And apparently mine as well now.

J.
Damn you both to hell. Now I just have a J. Allen running around in my head going "Tee hee, tee hee hee hee"
__________________
You sit around here and you spin your little webs and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money. Well, it doesn't, Mr. Potter. In the whole vast configuration of things, I'd say you were nothing but a scurvy little spider!
George Bailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 10:15 PM   #1609
ITElf
Vice Admiral
 
ITElf's Avatar
 
Location: ITL
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

J. Allen wrote: View Post
And apparently mine as well now.
J.
Bob The Skutter wrote: View Post
Damn you both to hell. Now I just have a J. Allen running around in my head going "Tee hee, tee hee hee hee"
My work here is done.

__________________
"Closed this morning as Ravenscroft, the bakery's dog, sprained his mouth whistling round a corner."
- Tockleys Bakery
ITElf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 11:02 PM   #1610
Snaploud
Admiral
 
Snaploud's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: My review of Star Trek 2009 (fan speaking to casual ppl)

crucifixion wrote: View Post
Are those supposed to be Klingons? They kind of look like a half-breed between TOS Klingons and TNG Klingons.
Snaploud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2009, 11:04 PM   #1611
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]

I think they're wearing helmets.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 12:08 AM   #1612
startrekwatcher
Rear Admiral
 
Re: My review of Star Trek 2009 (fan speaking to casual ppl)

crucifixion wrote: View Post
Now, to be fair, there was a prequel comic that came out that explained it,
What is there to be fair about? I hate it when shows or films provide critical information everywhere else but in the actual film. I shouldn' have to read an interview where the producer explains stuff or watch a webisode or read an online comic. That said, even if what you describe was to be included it still isn't that interesting either.
4. Nero’s logic. OK, so if we have to rely on the comics to understand a part of the movie (like what they did for 25 years) then we also have to accept the comics for what they say is Nero’s motivation. He is mad at Spock because Spock wasn’t fast enough to get the Red Matter to the Super Nova to stop it before it destroyed Romulus. I mean, really? He should be mad at the universe for having the Super Nova. But I guess he’s mad that even though Spock tried to help, his help wasn’t good enough, so now he has to pay. Would’ve been nice if they explained the backstory a little more and that Nero and Spock were friends before and they were working together to save Romulus.
This isn't very good either.
5. Red Matter. I don’t what it was or where it came from. It was clearly a MacGuffin device. But it looked like big Stapes “easy button” to me. I’m glad they didn’t explain what it was since they would have gotten into techobabble that has turned the casual fan away from Trek, but still. They need Red Matter to prevent a Black Hole. Yeah, that’s intellectually stimulating.
I could care less about accurate science in entertainment.
Really, at the end of the day, you can defend them all and they don’t contribute negatively to the movie. The movie overall was great.
No, at best the film is decent certainly not great or excellent and part of the reason why is because some of those issues do contribute negatively to the film.
If they explained these issues, it might have dragged the movie. I think there was a lot of stuff going on and they did the best they could to make the movie appeal to the masses.
I don't mind that this film was mindless action fun but even mindless action fun should have good writing and some essential elements like providing exposition on certain key elements like the villian's motivation. This film had a villian as a plot device with vague, unsatisfying motives. It had a great cast but didn't give them enough focus. I don't mind the fact that there was a lot of stuff going on but I think there was too much going on. The writers crammed too much into the film and in the process failed to really do a lot of those elements justice. It wouldn't have brought the film to a screeching halt if they made some scenes and moments last a little longer in order to give them depth and resonance. It would certainly have allowed for a nice break from all the unremitting action. Instead, the film was like a rapid firing of a list of bullet points that resulted in gutting the emotion of two of the film's biggest moments--the destruction of Vulcan and the death of Amanda and its impact on Spock. They didn't gloss over them or omit acknowledgment of those events but the way they chose to address them was too fast and shallow and not that much more satisfying than if they had ignored them.

We hardly saw Amanda or saw much of the Spock/Amanda relationship. Had they chosen to focus a little more time on the life of Spock including his relationship with his mother, this would have been worthwhile setup for her death later in the film.

I know Braga and Moore felt Generations had too many demands placed on it with the studio providing a laundry list of required elements they wanted included in the film and I have to say this was an issue with this film. There was like a dozen different ideas in the story, any one of which, could have been sufficiently developed into an interesting story instead of throwing all of them at you in a half-realized lacking manner.
1. Kirk eating the apple
2. Pike in a wheelchair-
3. Chekov and his speaking.
4. McCoy with his “Dammit I’m a Doctor, not a (insert line)”
5. Scotty with his “I’m giving it all she’s got captain” line
6. Sulu with the fencing- in the original series, there was a famous scene with him fighting off the bad guys and he was showing his swordsmanship
7. Random names- ships like the Farugut and people like Nurse Chapel and stuff that were only mentioned in throwaway sentences that regular people could care less about, meant a lot since the writers were showing they did respect the original history
I appreciate these touches but they don't get a lot of points from me to overcome other issues with the film.
startrekwatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 12:12 AM   #1613
lawman
Commander
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

crucifixion wrote: View Post
So once the fans started realize we do need new blood and we need new direction, they appreciated the little rumors of this movie they knew. Now that the movie is out, it’s completely flipped and it’s about 90/10 with the 90% of those who loved the movie. Those 10% are those hardcore losers that refuse to accept change...

There were a ton of things in this movie that didn’t make sense or were just flat out dumb...

If they explained these issues, it might have dragged the movie... Even the Spock-Uhuru relationship; that was the only thing I hated, but then I realized there was no love element for the girls and understanding that this was a movie for the masses, I could deal with it.

...the best thing I liked is that the casual fan can actually say they liked it. Which means, that the sequel, which they just announced will be out in 2011, will bring back these new fans... the stigma that was associated to it, has been removed and any future Star Treks that have Abrams or Orci/Kurtzmans names attached will elicit a positive response from most people now. And to accomplish that from just one movie, for such a bad stigma that it had, that is why this is what it is: Best. Reboot. Ever.
Crucifixion, unlike other posters, I'm not going to criticize you for posting a long review. I am, however, going to take issue with a few points.

Your review seems to be based on the premise that the audience pool can be divided into "hardcore fans," who unless they like the film are "losers [who] refuse to accept change," and "the masses," who apparently can't handle complex stories, long movies, or exposition. It seems a bit insulting all around.

You point out several aspects of the story that, as you note, simply didn't make sense. In contrast, most of the things you describe liking amount to mere easter eggs, moments designed to evoke classic Trek. I honestly can't see how that outweighs a bad story. To me, all it suggests is that a movie that was more like classic Trek would have been more enjoyable. (At least to you. Certainly to me.)

In the end, the conclusion seems to be that the movie redeems itself simply by getting Trek out there again in the popular consciousness, and never mind whether it's any good. I just don't understand that attitude. Unless the story's good, why should I care whether it's out there, much less whether it's popular?
__________________
Blogging on pop culture and politics at SmartRemarks
lawman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 12:38 AM   #1614
Claudia
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Sector 001
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

I rate ST11 "average". It was visually stunning, great special effects, lots of humour - but it was lacking in character-buildup and... quite plainly, in a plot. I mean there's no slow investigating what Nero really wants or how he can be defeated - Spock Prime tells us everything we need to know in about 2 minutes. That's it. And it's also not a point in the movie's favour that Nero came across awfully like Shinzon. Two movies with Romulans, and both times the writers aren't able to actually present a decent Romulan villain...

I definitely hoped for more "slow" scenes - instead there was one action-sequence after another, with a bit of humour mixed inbetween. Again, not that that's necessarily a bad thing, but it's not what I hoped for, either. Characterwise things seemed sometimes a bit rushed - Spock leaves the bridge, practically hating Kirk's guts, after a little heart-to-heart with his father he returns and that's the beginning of the great friendship?!? I mean, Kirk had the advantage of the mindmeld, so he knew Spock - but Spock, what's the reason for this 180° turn?

And as stated in another thread: Why display Spock and Uhura's relationship in quite this way? I don't mind this relationship (even if I was quite taken aback by it because in TOS I just didn't see *any* kind of chemistry between those two characters) - but why have them kissing, especially in the transporterroom? Doesn't that contradict everything Spock ever tried to portray?

Well, enough about negative criticism. On to the positive:

- the whole cast... I didn't find any actor/character that didn't fit in (unfortunately not many of them really had the opportunity to shine)
- the humour: Granted, Chekov was over the top, OTOH... well, he wasn't if you recently watched the first episodes he appeared in. And Kirk's womanizing, the whole Kobayashi Maru-test... well, it has been quite some time since I've last laughed so hard in a movie
- of course, seeing Leonard Nimoy again, hearing some of his most famous phrases again... my ST-fan heart beat a bit faster in those moments
- the new possibilities this movie opens up - the aftermath for the remaining Vulcans, but also for the Federation in general.... well, there's a whole new universe to explore now.

I'm definitely looking forward to a possible next movie - although I hope that one won't rely quite as much on action as this one. I do hope for some moral dilemma that won't be quite as straight-forwardly solved.
__________________
"You're my superior officer. You are also my friend. I have been and always shall be yours." (Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan)
http://nicky2910.booklikes.com - updated 12/11/14: Foul Deeds Will Rise by Greg Cox, 4/10
Claudia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 01:26 AM   #1615
JoeD80
Captain
 
Location: Los Angeles
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

lawman wrote: View Post
So, IOW, two things that should be serious plot points are dismissed with throwaway lines of dialogue that require viewers to swallow implausible premises... but you don't consider this lazy writing.
Writing implausible scenarios is not the same thing as lazy writing, which was the whole point of my post long ago.

Last edited by JoeD80; May 13 2009 at 01:43 AM.
JoeD80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 01:35 AM   #1616
Borgminister
Moderator
 
Location: California
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

lawman wrote: View Post

In the end, the conclusion seems to be that the movie redeems itself simply by getting Trek out there again in the popular consciousness, and never mind whether it's any good.
It did both, granted with not the most complex or satisfying story. The introduction to Star Trek characters and universe was handled magnificently.

Next film won't have to waste time on that aspect, thus the story will be better.

Like it or not, there is a Trekkie stigma, which this movie is in the process of wiping away. That done, cast and crew introduced, the next installment will be that much stronger.

Unless the story's good, why should I care whether it's out there, much less whether it's popular?
Story was good, not excellent. And if Trek isn't popular, then "It's dead, Jim".

Let's put it this way. All the 90210, Academy kiddie fears weren't realized, the Enterprise ship was treated with respect, nods aplenty were featured for the average fan, and a new range of the movie-going public fell in love with iconic characters all over again.

I'm filled with optimism about the future, and that's good.
Borgminister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 01:57 AM   #1617
Squiggy Claus
Rampant Sexist
 
Squiggy Claus's Avatar
 
Location: Up Squiggy's Coal Chute.
View Squiggy Claus's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy Claus
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Bacl wrote: View Post
Saw it today.

This was not Star Trek.

These could have been any characters, in any science fiction setting. There was nothing Star Trek about this movie.

Product placements for Budweiser and Nokia? Give me a fucking break.
I know!


That would never happen in a Star Trek movie, would it.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy Claus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 05:01 AM   #1618
PiperMaru22
Lieutenant
 
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

I rate the film 'excellent' if only because it's restored my love of Star Trek.

It's been agony for me the last decade because I got fed up with Voyager, hated Enterprise, and don't even get me started on the last two TNG movies. Star Trek -TOS/TNG/DS9, these shows (and the first 8 or so movies) were some of the first media I can ever remember being exposed to. TNG is the first show I can ever remember watching, DS9 was the first show I ever watched that really made me think (and when I say think, I mean beyond "wow is Character A going to make it?", I'm talking "hmm...so when is it alright to fabricate evidence and convince your former enemy to join your side against what should be a common enemy?"), and TOS was probably the first show that I can remember where I truly cared about the characters and not just the plots or the 'message' or whatever.

TOS had some crazy and kooky stuff going on. Planets modeled after Nazis, the Chicago mob, the Roman empire, etc and so on. The effects were crap, plots often made no sense, and there was barely any suspense in it for me (this show spawned 6 movies that I adored, so I knew Kirk and the gang were never in danger). BUT for the last few years now TOS has been my favorite Star Trek show. You could say my first love was TNG, but my soulmate (to be all corny about this) was TOS. It was first and foremost about the characters.

Every Trek show had good and bad plots, engaging or boring story lines, obvious or subtle 'moral messages', and certainly each show had it's fair share of great and horrific actors -and while yes, each show had developed and unique characters, there was, and still is, just something I find magical about the crew of TOS.

I went into this movie expecting the worst. I was deeply offended they were recasting what I considered to be the best line up of iconic characters any incarnation of Trek had to offer, and that to top it off that the guy heading this project was frakin' JJ Abrams (creator of shows like Felicity, Alias, and Lost that all annoy me to no end). When this was first announced a few years ago -I knew it was doomed from the word 'go'.

I debated with myself for months (I'd say years, but it only got heated lately ;P) about whether or not I was even going to see this, let alone see it on opening day. But against my better judgement (and the judgement of my best friend who is a hardcore TOS fan) I went Friday afternoon anyways (and with said best friend).

I went in feeling anxious, still a little angry, and very much convinced that if nothing else, I'd have a fun time mocking what I felt would be a horrible movie (commercials and trailers only worsened my opinion as May 8 approached -I literally cringed watching the trailer in Watchmen, that's how dead set against this whole thing I was). I came out feeling happy, elated, euphoric, and amazed like I was a little kid again discovering Star Trek for the first time.

Was this movie perfect? Hell no. Nero's revenge plot makes absolutely no sense to me (yeah ok so Spock didn't get to Romulus on time, chill out, it wasn't on purpose, don't you have better things to worry about in Klingon prison for 25 years?!). Even though I choose to see this as an alternate timeline, the time travel stuff makes little sense to me. Oh and how convenient is it that Kirk just happens to run into the right cave and meet up with Prime Spock?! (Not to mention the planet reminded me of Hoth from Star Wars which was not what I wanted to be thinking about during a Trek film).

But despite its many flaws, this movie won me over. Chris Pine was Kirk, but without having to parrot Bill Shatner. Same for Quinto as Spock, Urban as McCoy, and the rest of the main cast. And not only were they able to somehow make the characters their own, without resorting to crap imitations, but the cast had fantastic chemistry with each other. Which is what TOS was at its core for me.

It was about how great the characters were and how much I loved the actors playing them. The plots and special effects (which I enjoyed in this film for being decent, but not 'in your face' like the recent Star Wars prequels) didn't mean much to me in the end -it was all about Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the rest of the gang and how they were going to work together and get out of whatever trouble they found themselves in. This movie, for me at least, captured that brilliantly.
__________________
"Spock, you haven't changed a bit. You're just as warm and friendly as ever." -McCoy

"Nor have you, Doctor, as your continued predilection for irrelevancy demonstrates." -Spock
PiperMaru22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 05:06 AM   #1619
Agent Richard07
Retired
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

I noticed that there was a reference to "Admiral Archer". If Scotty was referring to the Jonathan Archer we know, shouldn't he have been referred to as "President Archer"?
Agent Richard07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2009, 05:09 AM   #1620
Thrawn
Rear Admiral
 
Thrawn's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Squiggyfm wrote: View Post
Bacl wrote: View Post
Saw it today.

This was not Star Trek.

These could have been any characters, in any science fiction setting. There was nothing Star Trek about this movie.

Product placements for Budweiser and Nokia? Give me a fucking break.
I know!


That would never happen in a Star Trek movie, would it.
10 points, sir.
Thrawn 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 11:34 AM.

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