The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by Agent Richard07, Apr 30, 2009.

?

Grade the movie...

  1. Excellent

    707 vote(s)
    62.7%
  2. Above Average

    213 vote(s)
    18.9%
  3. Average

    84 vote(s)
    7.5%
  4. Below Average

    46 vote(s)
    4.1%
  5. Poor

    77 vote(s)
    6.8%
  1. jkladis

    jkladis Moderator Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    My friend, who has some decent screen time as an extra (cadet) said months ago "looks like fanwank" then later "looks excellent". This film succeeds at fulfilling just about every expectation, touched on every continuity direction (including reverse). It pulled in the majority of the fans while also rekindling its mass appeal. What an accomplished piece of work.

    I had a great time -- exciting. Serious, funny, sad, excellent characters. Nothing too deep, but thank God they didn't go that route -- too early.

    My investment in the fandom is about 30 years, so yeah, I had a hard time swallowing a lot of this. But I'll take in a repeat viewing (gotta bolster that sequel) and refine my opinion.

    I gave it an above average grade for Excellent quality work minus old curmudgeon fan (with an open mind).
     
  2. Mr. Chubbykins

    Mr. Chubbykins Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    Mr. Chubbykins
    I hate this film.

    I thought it was a great piece of cinema - in just the first 10 minutes, JJ got me really upset that George died! I thought it tied in very well with accepted Trek "rules" - all of the continuity differences made sense in the context of the timeline change caused by the black hole. I thought the new cast were perfect - no-one felt out of place.

    I could have loved this film if they had just gone for "parallel universe" instead of "alternate timeline". As all true (aka borderline-OCD) Trek fans know, parallel universes like the Mirror Universe continue alongside the "standard" universe. Events that happen there don't replace those that happen in the "standard" universe. But when a time-travel event takes place that results in an alternate timeline, like the stranding of Tasha Yar in the past in "Yesterday's Enterprise", the new reality is the "standard" universe. And in the new film, it was an alternate timeline that was created.

    All of the events depicted in TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY will never happen. Kirk will never defend Spock's loyalty to Stiles when they first see Romulans. Spock won't grapple with his first command on the Galileo shuttlecraft and he'll never give that delighted cry of "Jim!" when he realises he didn't kill his friend on Vulcan. Sarek and Spock will never tease Amanda in Sickbay. I could go on, but I'm starting to get even more depressed than when I came out of the cinema.

    Does anyone else think Parallel Universe would have been a better idea? Would that teeny, tiny script change have left a better taste in your mouth?
     
  3. Cyke101

    Cyke101 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Y'know, for the vast majority of people (including the writers), parallel universe and alternate reality are synonymous. If you're arguing for a parallel universe, there's still 40 yrs of Trek continuity that will be ongoing in other forms of media.

    Just as a black hole is a quantum singularity, a rose is still a rose by any other name (woo! A trek cliche and a mainstream cliche rolled into one!)
     
  4. eriklatranyi

    eriklatranyi Ensign Newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Re: A personal take on... that movie

    The negative comments can be summed up so far:

    1) Typical Star Trek fan nit-picking of EVERY movie.
    2) The desire for the return of Shatner and the original cast even though that can happen in later movies.
    3) The thinking that what happens today in military academies must also happen in the 23rd century.
    4) Contrarians (which explains many in point 1 above)
     
  5. Kelso

    Kelso Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 3, 2001
    Location:
    On the destruct button until the last minute!
    Do you work for The Onion?

    :lol:
     
  6. Cyke101

    Cyke101 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Re: A personal take on... that movie

    It seems that Spock quit Kolinar before anything could affect him. Who's to say he didn't quit Kolinar in the prime universe? When we saw him fail to pass Kolinar in TMP, he was already in his 40s. He could have quit it twice (frankly, I'm so pleasantly surprised that a reference to the much-maligned TMP was even mentioned here).

    Why not? There could be more to space travel for doctors than we think. It's not unlike the current military system in the US with an accelerated program for those who qualify. McCoy spent 3 years at the Academy, as opposed to the X+ years that modern military docs have to progress.
     
  7. eriklatranyi

    eriklatranyi Ensign Newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    The idea that going back in time "fixes" the timeline is your first mistake, I believe.

    There are those who believe that once an event is encountered with multiple potential outcomes that alternative timelines automatically exist for each possible outcome. Viewers are only watching a single timeline (and in the case of a "fix") a timeline that diverted to an alternative outcome.

    This would mean there are trillions and trillions of timelines out there as almost every event has another potential outcome.

    Lastly, the movie addresses the issue of fate in a unique way that is all Star Trek.

    It is fate that this crew end up together....even when all events are pulling them apart.
     
  8. Cyke101

    Cyke101 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Heck, if you want to count the Mirror Universe, that means we already have three examples of the crew destined to serve together.
     
  9. pookha

    pookha Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Location:
    pookha
    as long as some of the priesthood either left the planet or were already off the planet most of the traditions will be preserved.


    from what orci has said that is how he views it no matter if the term alternate has been used.

    the whole intent was that what happened before still happened.

    now they have this different branch off of the stream of the time line.

    nothing has been wiped out.

    as people have said trek for a long time had alternate/parallel universes going at the same time.

    heck if moonves who hates trek were ever to leave as head of the tv side of things you still might get a series set in the the classic verse.

    what is interesting is most non fans or fans not buried in trek seem to grasp this.
    that the star trek they have seen still exists.
    well as much as a work of fiction can exist.
    ;)
     
  10. Mr. Chubbykins

    Mr. Chubbykins Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    Mr. Chubbykins
    I'm not talking about real-world physics theories. Start that and we'll end up asking why we can hear the space battles :lol:. I'm talking about how Trek has always treated timetravel. The logic of "Yesterday's Enterprise" may make theoretical physicists twitch, but that treatment has been very consistent across all versions of Trek.

    And according to Trek rules, the future we have watched has been wiped. Call me a crazed fanatic if you like, but that makes me sad.
     
  11. Cyke101

    Cyke101 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    No it doesn't. It continues on in books and video games and other ways, maybe a TV show down the line or so. The writers outright referenced "Parallels" on TrekWeb as an example of how split timelines can co-exist. The Mirror Universe continued to thrive across two additional spinoffs after Kirk and Co. left it. Nothing's been wiped out.
     
  12. Agent Richard07

    Agent Richard07 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2001
    The Dark Knight showed that it could be done.
     
  13. eriklatranyi

    eriklatranyi Ensign Newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
     
  14. SalvorHardin

    SalvorHardin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    Star's End
    The Dark Knight was sequel to a movie that had already done the job of resurrecting the Batman franchise.
    Which is Star Trek's main goal here.

    Maybe Star Trek's sequel will play the DK role now that (as things so far indicate) Trek seems to be recovering from past failures.
     
  15. Snaploud

    Snaploud Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    Excellent

    Two nit-picks:

    1. I hated the way they messed with the ranking system (allowing Kirk to go from cadet to captain being the prime example).

    2. How did Nero know that he killed Kirk's father? That guy made very little sense. He seemed to just fill the plot when needed (including doing nothing for 25 years...).
     
  16. Mr. Chubbykins

    Mr. Chubbykins Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    Mr. Chubbykins
    Ooh, a Trek-logic counter-arguement. Cool!

    Right, just did a quick double-check of "Parallels". Mmm... okay, I see where you and Bob Orico ( http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob...-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/ ) are coming from. But my interpretation of Trek-logic is that the events in that episode did not involve timetravel, and were more closely related to the rules Trek applies to the Mirror Universe. This quote from the article was pretty relevant:
    *hits head on keyboard* This isn't like deciding Klingons would look scarier with cooler prosthetics, this is like saying physics precludes faster than light travel so they've decided turn the Enterprise into a generation ship. It seems if Kirk had paid more attention in Basics of Quantum Mechanics class he could have decided to live happily ever after with Edith, safe in the knowledge that "his" future timeline was just fine. Somewhere.
     
  17. Cyke101

    Cyke101 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Say, perhaps, a Nexus of some sort? Then again, one man's cabin is another man's subconscious-Freudian-expression-for-his-familial-need fantasy. ;)
     
  18. indranee

    indranee Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
    Re: A personal take on... that movie


    you've no reason to be.

    ALL those things did and do and will happen... in the other timeline. the original one. and, I keep trying to say this, given necessity, we can see it happening if we choose to (in dvds etc AND on screen). JJ and crew can easily show us the original timeline if they want to.

    I have no idea why people are so upset. cheer up, people, Star Trek is back and kicking.
     
  19. jamestyler

    jamestyler Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Seconded! I left for a second viewing yesterday and there are almost three hundred new posts! I barely got through a third of that trying to catch up.

    I went with a non-Trek fan yeserday and she came back converted. The film started at 5:15 (so 5:30 really) and she was still talking about it until the early hours of the morning about how good it was, how much she loved the actors and how all her buried memories of the original popped up. She was almost in tears at the Kelvin sequence and was hooked throughout.

    My dad also saw it for the first time and sent me his thoughts, which were:

    May be geeky, but considering at times all me and my dad had in common (he pretty much raised me on it) was Star Trek it feels great to know he loved it too.
     
  20. Ravager

    Ravager Ensign Newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    I was BLOWN away! I loved it.
    I loved the way they Warped. The sound in the theater was amazing.

    Chris Pine had me laughing my but off with the Kirk Impressions (William Shatner).



    Also Is there a thread discussing ships seen in the movie?