Looks like it may have already come out, saw 04/07/09 on one site, and amazon shows shipping. I'll have to stop by the local B&N or Borders tomorrow.
http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Cou...d_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239159085&sr=8-1
World Premiere/Advance screening discussions [SPOILERS GUARANTEED]
- Thread starter M'Sharak
- Start date
Looks like it may have already come out, saw 04/07/09 on one site, and amazon shows shipping. I'll have to stop by the local B&N or Borders tomorrow.
http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Cou...d_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239159085&sr=8-1
So, if ya scroll back a few pages, ya can see that I was at the event here in Austin last night, with Leonard Nimoy and the three writers in attendance.
Here's the swag I got from that event.
That's the movie poster, pre-signed by Leonard Nimoy, the sign that was on my reserved seat, which I got Mr. Nimoy to sign on his way back to the stage after the movie, and the wristband that got me the reserved seat & the movie poster.
Aww man that's awesome! I wish they had enough swag to go around for the non-members. Was an awesome night though can't really complain.
They did, sort of. I was hopin' to get a second poster for Dayton Ward, and hangin' out with a couple of other geeks. After all the folks with wristbands left, there were still posters & t-shirts. Kevin got a signed poster and a t-shirt, while Genevieve & her friend each got a signed poster.
And I got an extra poster that will be en route to Kansas City this weekend.
I didn't notice a strong accent.
Kirk's mother has evacuated the Enterprise during childbirth with an open comm link to George. He hears Kirk being born and they discuss naming him.
They were colorful and "stronger" in appearance, kind of like ENT uniforms but in different colors.
They did, sort of. I was hopin' to get a second poster for Dayton Ward, and hangin' out with a couple of other geeks. After all the folks with wristbands left, there were still posters & t-shirts. Kevin got a signed poster and a t-shirt, while Genevieve & her friend each got a signed poster.
And I got an extra poster that will be en route to Kansas City this weekend.
AWWW! Should've gone with my gut and stuck around.
Spock launches an assault in Prime Spock's ship, and releases the red matter into the ship causing a singularity to form. Then Kirk blasts the hell out of it after Nero refuses to surrender. Nero was waiting for Prime Spock, he waited around for 25 years I believe. The singularity had different time travel effects for Nero/Spock
How did McCoy get his nickname, 'Bones'? (am I being a pest yet?)
Not at all.
He made a comment to Kirk when they first met on the Cadet shuttle, I don't remember the line but it had something to do with bones, it stuck.
Sounds like an....interesting movie.
So....Kirk is basically a "suspended" cadet that ends up as "relief" captain at the end because Pike is injured? Why the lack of senior staff?
Do they not arrive until....Tuesday?
So....Kirk is basically a "suspended" cadet that ends up as "relief" captain at the end because Pike is injured? Why the lack of senior staff?
Do they not arrive until....Tuesday?
Honestly, I can't stand this whole thing. I seem to share the same sentiments, or similar ones, of Jeffries and some others. My reasons are, I think, probably what's really bugging those of us who don't like this on a deep level. It took a while to figure out exactly how to put this all into words, but hopefully it makes sense:
Basically, the characters in the series from now on are not the same characters as in the original series. Now I have no problem with new sets of characters. The problem is that they are alternate versions of the ones we know.
Trek fans have spent decades with these people, just like we have spent decades with our families, friends, and loved ones. Of course the Trek characters are only fiction, and the point is not to try to give them equal value as those real people in our lives - this would be rather disturbing, actually. One similarity, however, is important. We love our family and friends because of all of the shared experiences we have had with them. We were there for the hard times, the good times, the funny times, the sad times, and all the other kinds of times as well. We were there for their births, funerals, marriages, etc. etc. If something happened to your best friend, or to your mother, and he or she were replaced by a clone identical in every single way except for the lack of those same experiences, not only would you not love the clone, but you would probably consider it an abomination and a tremendous offense to the memory of that person who you loved so much.
That’s what these “new” characters are to those we know and love. Not only do I have, in all honesty, less than zero concern for them, but they offend me deeply. They’re not real people, so there is quite obviously a limit here (so please do not accuse me of holding fictional characters as important as real people ), but to the degree that one can care about a fictional character, I am deeply hurt and offended by these facsimiles.
Let me add one more point, which does not so much add to my argument but adds a context to it. That is, why couldn’t the franchise have been re-invigorated without changing things? The only argument I have seen from those who support the reboot is that Star Trek had grown stale and needed to be reinvigorated. That’s a perfectly reasonable stance. However, there is not a single aspect of the excitement that is surrounding this film that could not have been generated without the reboot. Have any of the small canonical changes really contributed to the film’s being highly anticipated? Was it not possible to update the visual style without changing history? Couldn’t the story be just as big, have just as big a production, and just as popular a director if it told the origins of the crew as we knew them?
Indeed, the final proof lies in the fact that the vast majority of those who are contributing to the excitement - the non-Trekkie types that so many Trek fans are so excited are beginning to care about Trek - do not even know it’s a reboot. So far as they are aware, it’s the same Trek it always was, just done bigger, better, and with more explosions and sex appeal. Yet they are still extremely excited about the film.
Thus, the biggest tragedy is that this was not in any way necessary! What is it for? What’s the point? The need?
Basically, the characters in the series from now on are not the same characters as in the original series. Now I have no problem with new sets of characters. The problem is that they are alternate versions of the ones we know.
Trek fans have spent decades with these people, just like we have spent decades with our families, friends, and loved ones. Of course the Trek characters are only fiction, and the point is not to try to give them equal value as those real people in our lives - this would be rather disturbing, actually. One similarity, however, is important. We love our family and friends because of all of the shared experiences we have had with them. We were there for the hard times, the good times, the funny times, the sad times, and all the other kinds of times as well. We were there for their births, funerals, marriages, etc. etc. If something happened to your best friend, or to your mother, and he or she were replaced by a clone identical in every single way except for the lack of those same experiences, not only would you not love the clone, but you would probably consider it an abomination and a tremendous offense to the memory of that person who you loved so much.
That’s what these “new” characters are to those we know and love. Not only do I have, in all honesty, less than zero concern for them, but they offend me deeply. They’re not real people, so there is quite obviously a limit here (so please do not accuse me of holding fictional characters as important as real people
), but to the degree that one can care about a fictional character, I am deeply hurt and offended by these facsimiles. Let me add one more point, which does not so much add to my argument but adds a context to it. That is, why couldn’t the franchise have been re-invigorated without changing things? The only argument I have seen from those who support the reboot is that Star Trek had grown stale and needed to be reinvigorated. That’s a perfectly reasonable stance. However, there is not a single aspect of the excitement that is surrounding this film that could not have been generated without the reboot. Have any of the small canonical changes really contributed to the film’s being highly anticipated? Was it not possible to update the visual style without changing history? Couldn’t the story be just as big, have just as big a production, and just as popular a director if it told the origins of the crew as we knew them?
Indeed, the final proof lies in the fact that the vast majority of those who are contributing to the excitement - the non-Trekkie types that so many Trek fans are so excited are beginning to care about Trek - do not even know it’s a reboot. So far as they are aware, it’s the same Trek it always was, just done bigger, better, and with more explosions and sex appeal. Yet they are still extremely excited about the film.
Thus, the biggest tragedy is that this was not in any way necessary! What is it for? What’s the point? The need?
Final proof?
I've been a trek fan for over twenty years, more than two thirds of my life. I love the characters just as much as everyone else. I don't need or want a retread of a story that's already been told. I don't want something that just leads up to a foregone conclusion.
"Oh yeah... everything's gotta work out alright because we already know it works out alright."
This movie dispenses with the obvious and leaves mystery and uncertainty in its place. It is a cinematic triumph, and in my opinion, the best thing that has happened to Star Trek in thirty years.
I love Star Trek. Everyone is entitled to her own opinion, and I respect yours. You will be missed.
Captain X
Rear Admiral
Which is why Titanic did so horribly at the box office, right?
Video review. Don't know if it has spoilers, because I can't open it at work, so I'll put it here to be safe.
http://media.theage.com.au/national/breaking-news/first-star-trek-review-467031.html
http://media.theage.com.au/national/breaking-news/first-star-trek-review-467031.html
that's kinda a false comparison. titanic wasn't about the boat. it was about leo and kate. no one knew what was going to happen to those two characters. i wrote a whole thread earlier today about how i think tragedy works best on an interpersonal level. while this film does do the whole world destruction angle, its strength is in the one-on-one sorrow, pity, and then triumph.
Captain X
Rear Admiral
The movie also didn't have to be specifically about placing those characters in danger of death, either. If the story was interesting and compelling enough, no one would care if they already knew everything was going to be fine at the end of the movie. To an extant, that could be said of any episode or movie, because with very few exceptions, even at the end of multi-episode story arcs, everything turned out fine. And as much as I hate it, Twilight is declared to be all kinds of awesome despite the fact we knew the reset button was going to be pushed the second we saw Earth explode.
Similar threads
