The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' 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. Cdr MacDuff

    Cdr MacDuff Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    The new Star Trek was a fun popcorn action movie. A nice summer blockbuster. I think it was a bit low on the drama, explorations and/or social commentaries. Lets say it was lower on that chapter than 12 Monkeys, Batman Returns or even The Island (comparable summer blockbuster action movies). I would call this movie Star Trek troopers. Because it remind me a lot about Starship Troopers, a movie which I also liked, in its scope.

    It has great action and humor. As a Star Trek fan, I liked the way it introduced the characters that we already know. I liked the way they met each other I think it was done in a humorous way. The action was good and the general story was a bit simple, but was only a back story to introduce the Star Trek characters that we know in this reimagination.

    I liked the parachute action sequence and the platform battle. The Uhura and Spock relationship was a nice twist. A Uhura/Kirk relationship would have been so predictable and lame. No relationship at all wouldn't have pleased hollywood executives. The battle inside the Nero ship was less good, but I liked the "I have your gun" line, even if in reality Kirk would probably have fallen in the pit. The Ice Planet monsters were ok too and a good way to introduce Spock, even if the coincidence is hard to believe. The transport at a great distance at warp speed was far fetched though. But having McCoy transported in a water tube was funny.

    Overall it was an entertaining action popcorn movie with a good dose of humor.
     
  2. Too Much Fun

    Too Much Fun Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    What did McCoy say about "bones" when he first meets Kirk that was supposedly the origin of that nickname? I've been wondering for a long time why Kirk calls him "Bones", and when this movie finally offered an explanation, he said his dialogue too fast for me to hear it! Did anyone catch that?
     
  3. Sky

    Sky Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    His wife got "the planet" in the divorce and his bones were all that she left him.
     
  4. warrior34

    warrior34 Cadet Newbie

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Gotta admit, I left the theatre pretty disappointed that the movie gutted everything I knew about Star Trek. After reading a few of these posts, however, I think I've progressed through all the stages of grief and have achieved some level of acceptance. The movie isn't chapter 11 of an ongoing story; it's chapter 1 of a new story, and that's probably a good thing. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
    [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Unfortunately, the story isn't particularly good thus far. Underneath the fantastic graphics and interesting moments (the scene with the Orion coed is going to make me tingle for years) is a pretty weak plot that is definitely not up to Star Trek standards. I suppose that's forgivable in this instance, as the purpose of the movie was to introduce the new cast and storyline, but another movie like this will test my loyalty to the Federation.[/SIZE][/FONT]
     
  5. Jim Steele

    Jim Steele Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Location:
    Croydon
    (emphasis mine)

    You've pretty much summed up exactly how I feel in those two sentences. Excited for the future, despite being unimpressed with the present.
     
  6. Bob The Skutter

    Bob The Skutter Complete Arse Cleft Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Location:
    This island Earth
    Should we be looking to Transformers 2 for indications of where Star Trek 2 might go?
     
  7. Jim Steele

    Jim Steele Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Location:
    Croydon
    "Star Trek 2: THINGS FLY INTO BUILDINGS QUITE A LOT

    A MICHAEL BAY FILLAM"

    I dunno, I guess Abrams might feature some fucked masonry.

    You know what, screw everyone on the internet. I fucking loved Transformers!
     
  8. Bob The Skutter

    Bob The Skutter Complete Arse Cleft Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Location:
    This island Earth
    I really enjoyed Transformers too, I was just saying it is half the writing team responsible for both Transformers 1 and 2, as well as Star Trek 1 and 2.
     
  9. Jim Steele

    Jim Steele Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Location:
    Croydon
    Screw you the most Bob.

    You know why.

    Ah.

    I didn't know that. That explains... a lot. Transplanting an old 80s cartoon into an excuse for Michael Bay to blow shit up is a piece of piss compared to writing a compelling Star Trek flick.

    Get tae fuck, as Scotty (nearly) said.
     
  10. Bob The Skutter

    Bob The Skutter Complete Arse Cleft Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Location:
    This island Earth
    It's because I said I found ZR sexy isn't it? Don't worry Jim, he means nothing to me.
     
  11. indranee

    indranee Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
    yep, it's a great, rollicking, joyous bildungsroman of a movie. the fact that so many Trekkies have a problem with it is very, very telling.

    we need to let go. seriously. Trek is now out there. thataway. it's out of our hands. let it go, people.
     
  12. Bob The Skutter

    Bob The Skutter Complete Arse Cleft Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Location:
    This island Earth
    If we let it go, and it comes back to us then it was meant to be. If it doesn't it wasn't right in the first place... Is that what you're trying to say?
     
  13. lawman

    lawman Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    An interesting little debate has popped up late in the thread! Let's consolidate...

    Indranee, what I hear you hollerin' here is that you're not even trying to be objective. You have a soft spot for it because it's labeled "Star Trek," and are therefore willing to credit the film with the attributes of the best of past Trek even when it doesn't actually demonstrate them. You're admitting to a double-standard.

    Of course, it's probably safe to say all of us posting here have a soft spot for Trek. That's what got me into the theater. But that's as much of a benefit of the doubt as I was willing to extend. After that, the movie had to prove itself on its own merits... just like any past movie (or episode, or series) has had to do. More so, in fact, since it took such pains to set itself apart from any Trek that has gone before.

    And without the benefit of any holdover affection for past versions of these characters and concepts, taken on its own and assessed critically, it just doesn't hold up.

    In all fairness, though, I will admit that some of us, myself included, may have been not extra generous but instead extra critical precisely because it was Trek, and we can't completely avoid comparing it to affectionate memories of what had come before. ID4 and Armageddon are merely bad (but fun!) movies that stand on their own. This, however, is a bad movie that's also bad Star Trek. It's hard to avoid a greater sense of disappointment there.

    Dkehler and Feofilakt, I'm with you here (notwithstanding whatever credentials Ovation may possess, BTW). It seems clear to me that people are attributing to this film positive qualities that they associate with Trek in general, despite little evidence of those qualities in this film itself. Your analogy here, Feo, is particularly apt.

    And no, it's not logical. But sadly, one of the (few) thematic messages in this film (coming from Spock, yet!) seems to be "go with what feels good, not what makes logical sense." That seems to me to undermine a lot of what Trek at its best always stood for... but it's an attitude a lot of fans have cheerfully adopted about this movie.

    Indranee, I think what we're "trying to tell you" here is that "Spock's Brain" and other low points were not emblematic of the positive qualities we associate with Trek, and neither is this film. That kind of material is not what built the fan base. There were bad episodes; this is a bad movie. It's perfectly fair to say so.

    I don't see this movie promising future Trek of better quality. I agree that Abrams is about business first and foremost (never mind Paramount!), and at any rate his creative sensibilities were never a good match for Trek from the outset, by his own admission. What I foresee is more lowest-common-denominator stuff like this, with the "Star Trek" name on it but no "Star Trek" spirit in it.

    (And I don't really think that's what "fits with the times." If it were, that would be a very depressing statement about our culture.)

    Indranee, your statement here at the end seems at odds with where you started out... since your whole point was that you weren't judging this movie strictly on its own merits, because as a Trek fan you were predisposed to view it favorably. I think its critics have been assessing it on its own merits... and that seems to annoy a lot of its fans.

    I'd love to be pleasantly surprised by future films, but I don't expect it. For the time being, I expect the only place to find new Trek material of the kind I actually value will be in the novels.

    ---
    As for this...
    Do you really want to be analogizing yourself to the Borg, and this film's critics to free-thinking human beings?... That doesn't exactly paint an appealing picture of the "future" you want.

    BTW...
    Not this quick. He always had several years of history ascending through the ranks. Leapfrogging all of that isn't the legend, it's a retcon. (IMHO a very implausible one.)
     
  14. indranee

    indranee Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
    cute :p

    I'm saying enjoy the ride...
     
  15. indranee

    indranee Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
    lawman, I'm saying I had a soft spot for TOS, I've a soft spot for nuTrek.

    I'm saying this is only the beginning, just as Man Trap was. not great, but full of promise.

    I'm saying, stop overthinking it and enjoy the ride.

    let go of the hate, it'll only eat you up and spit you out.

    now, back to work. ;)

    ps. I disagree with you about JJ, but that's a whole other thread. I know... why don't you start one? we'll see how that goes.
     
  16. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    There's that, and there's the fact that you can't actually hold onto it by gripping harder.
     
  17. Bob The Skutter

    Bob The Skutter Complete Arse Cleft Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Location:
    This island Earth
    Speak for yourself. My grip is fantastic.
     
  18. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Keep believing that. :lol:

    [​IMG]
     
  19. lawman

    lawman Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    No hate for the movie, just disappointment.

    But this particular bit of advice? I get that a lot, and I do hate it.

    There's a newspaper cartoon my girlfriend clipped out a few years back and pinned to our bulletin board. A couple's sitting in a movie theater, and the screen displays a big message: "Caution: Applying logic and plausibility to summer movies will only annoy you and those around you. Just let it go." The woman says to the man, "I think it's their way of telling you to shut up, dear."

    It's a cute cartoon, but I can't do that. Whether or not anyone finds it annoying, or considers it "overthinking," logic and plausibility are standards I bring to pretty much any entertainment I approach. There's room for flexibility depending on the genre and style, of course (e.g., comedies play by different rules), but I can't set critical standards aside completely.

    And one of the things I always loved about Star Trek—not always, but at its best—was that it didn't ask me to. It was a thinking person's show.
     
  20. Borgminister

    Borgminister Admiral Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2001
    Location:
    California
    Were the Trek movies "thinking person's show"s?

    Just curious on your take. I think all of them were action adventures, not overly heavy on message.

    The television show is a different animal, and even that mix was uneven, if you take off your rose-colored glasses.