Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by Agent Richard07, Apr 30, 2009.
Relax cupcake it was a joke.
Someone else made the same stuffed Porthos comment on a friends LJ - the thought amused me.
Saw this opening matinee with the wife, and then took her and my daughter to see it, the next day. Enjoyed it both times. Rated it "excellent," although it would only get 90-95 if the grading was wider.
Lots of ridiculous stuff in there, but you know what, I've spent most of my life picking apart Star Trek, and for those above who had criticisms: nothing in your comments couldn't be applied to all your preferred versions.
Frankly, Abrams made a far better film than any of you could, and you don't have to pay: I paid, twice.
Great fun, looking forward to owning the DVD. Bring on part 2.
I don't get this attitude at all. I can't cook as well as Gordon Ramsay, but I know a shit sandwich tastes like shit.
Not that Trek 11 is wholly analagous to a shit sandwich. Just saying, it's absurd, and a total non argument to point out that a bunch of opinionated dudes on a Trek forum are incapable of directing a multi million dollar summer blockbuster. Doesn't make a negative view any less valid than a positive one. Is Joss Whedon the only person qualified enough to dislike a TV show?
A few posters were quite rightly complaining earlier on that some people can't seem to criticise the film without having a dig at, or insulting the intelligence of those who happened to enjoy it. Well, it goes both ways. Surely it's not hard to just accept that some folks simply didn't like the film as much as you did, without getting into a pissing match? Some people are even getting personal/hostile. It's insane.
It's just a fucking movie, people.
Also, why credit it solely to JJ Abrams when he was the director, what about the writers, the actors, the editors, the DoP, etc etc.
Besides, I liked the film, but because I'm not a director/writer/producer I can't pick some nits?
Heresy, burn him.
On that topic, my issues with the film are mainly down to the writers. Abrams did a great job imho.
(and no, I don't think I could have wrote a better film...)
What? It's not like movies are important. Videogames, on the other hand... shit, anyone disses Half Life 2 and I'll be all up in your face. Bitch.
Me, too, the problems I have, most of which I am so glad to see new Trek, I can over look but they are writing problems. And at the risk of being punched, I liked the lens flares... when I finally noticed them after the complaining in this thread. It reminded me of the Firefly "lets light it within the set" lighting.
But this isn't just any movie we're talking about, it's STAR TREK, you miserable excuse for a trekkie.
you couldn't have written a better one, either.
Jim, your thoughts are as equally valid as the next person.
No, if it was this kind of movie, we'd see bigger numbers at the box office. However, I am intrigued by the idea, and wholly recommend implementing it.
Though ten times as retarded...
Bob though, he's the brains of this whole operation. Just you wait.
Ah, just spotted that. It was all part of MY ACT I swear.
not my fault he keeps following you around!
Or he could just, y'know, be posting in the same thread.
The writer's strike was right around the time of production, so probably not many. They were locked into whatever script they had when the strike started.
Just saw the movie last night with my wife (who is not a ST fan). We both enjoyed the movie immensely!
Here are a few of my observations - The "look" of the movie seemed to be a fair blend of NuBSG (camera shake), Star Wars (old Spock's "Jellyfish" ship and Scotty's little side-kick) and TOS homages - an interesting combination, but it worked for me.
The actors - Greenwood was awesome as Pike! Karl Urban was superb as McCoy (even my wife commented in that regard) and I thought Pine was a great non-Shatnified Kirk. I liked Pegg as Scotty, though he seemed a bit hyper. I was a bit disappointed in Quinto as Spock (though he certainly looks the part). Not too keen on the actors portraying Sulu and Chekov. Uhura was great! Nero - Meh, Bana seemed manic-depressive - nice makeup, though. Leonard Nimoy did a nice job as an elder Spock.
The Enterprise seems HUGE! Fitting for the flag-ship of the fleet. I also liked the glimpses of other the other starships - some interesting designs. I was somewhat disappointed in engineering - it looked more like a sewage treatment plant than the engine room of a starship. The bridge was nicely done, though a bit on the bright side.
The plot was interesting and entertaining. Not quite sure about sucking Vulcan into a black hole, but it is a reboot after all. Certainly, I found the story gripping - it held me all the way through.
A few things I found odd - why jettison Kirk to Delta Vega, why not throw him in the brig? And the monster chase on said planet was kinda cheesy. Then, Kirk happens to end up in the one cave on an ENTIRE PLANET where Spock happens to be hanging out. Plausible? Not really. But beside the aforementioned and a few minor nit-picks, I loved the movie. And, for the first time since I saw the original Star Wars (Ep. 4) back in 1977, I plan to go see it a second time. I almost never see a movie twice in theatre.
Can't wait for it to come out on Blu-Ray!
my guess: 1) it showed nuSpock's mental state: he was definitely not as logic-ruled as he would have liked to assert. and 2) he knew Kirk would find a way out of any brig on the ship.
nice review, btw!
The brig wasn't due to be installed until Tuesday.
Also, when he Kirk first appeared didn't Spock say that as a stowaway they would be within their rights to throw him off the ship?
Separate names with a comma.