Anyone else changed their opinions from bad to good?

[Gojulas]

I popped the DVD of the movie into the player a couple nights ago; first time I've watched it in over a year. Surprisingly, I found that I actually enjoyed the movie now.

When it first came out, I was stone-cold against it. I didn't think it was "Star Trek" and that it just didn't have the right feel. But I don't know if it was the passage of time, lack of any new Star Trek, or just the fact that I'm seeing the movie as a movie and without really going into it to be critical of it.

I've still have a few nitpicks with it, just like I do with any of the Star Trek movies. It's not perfect, but it's not the worse Trek movie ever made. It is actually a fun little space-opera sort of film if you just go along for the ride.

 

[BlobVanDam]

First time I watched it at the cinema, I disliked a lot about it, but I was never against it. I watched it again recently and enjoyed it a fair bit more, although I do still have the same qualms with it, but I found they were slightly less of a bother. But I'm a lot more accepting and receptive of the idea of the reboot than I was at the time. Either way there was no doubt I'd be watching the sequel.

 

[Gojulas]

I think I was expecting something more slow, sedate. Even the most action packed of the TOS movies had these breathers, these pauses in the action. This movie feels more like they floor the gas from the first frame and don't let up. Not a bad thing in a movie, just a bit different for a Trek movie.

 

[PopBoy]

Well I loved this one at the cinema for a number of reasons but different aspects came out when i revisited it recently. Mainly how I didn't mind Scotty at first glance but when watching it on DVD, he started to annoy me. In the, dare i mention it, Neelix kind of why. I thought the acting abilities of the rest of the cast really was brilliant first time around and returning to it Zoe Saldana proves to be the solid performer of them all. In the movie, I didn't feel the vastness of space that the DVD managed to convey.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

With repeated viewings it's gone from good to excellent for me. Although I have no problem with Simon Pegg at all - I still find his portrayal of Scott to be the least convincing and most poorly cast in the movie, and is my main "gripe." Less silliness, more miracle worker next time please.

 

[BlobVanDam]

With repeated viewings it's gone from good to excellent for me. Although I have no problem with Simon Pegg at all - I still find his portrayal of Scott to be the least convincing and most poorly cast in the movie, and is my main "gripe." Less silliness, more miracle worker next time please.

I'm not sure it was a poor casting choice. To be honest, he barely got enough screen time for me to make up my mind about that. That's my main gripe with the movie. The secondary characters were quickly introduced and just used for their one gag line.
I'm expecting they'll have more time in the second movie now that all of the characters have been introduced and brought together.

 

[Jeri]

I saw the movie in IMAX and really loved it that way; but still when I got the blu-ray at home, there was something really good about it on a 50-inch screen. I don't know how to describe it; it's like it was easier to manage or something.

 

[Aashlee]

I loved it in the theatres. Watching it at home, I like it even more. Each time I watch, I see something new. The more I watch Chris Pine, the more I see how he captured the essence of Kirk -- there's a great deal of subtlety in his portrayal that one might not catch upon first viewing.

When my husband and I first saw "First Contact," we hated it, absolutely hated it. When we watched it again a few months later, it was like watching a different film. In fact, we enjoyed it very much. Reviewing the reason why we didn't like it the first time around, we figured that at the time we went to the theatre opening, we were in the midst of building a new room on the house, we had just broken off a long-term friendship with another couple... heck, we were just plain cranky.

I think that attitude affects one's perceptions, and for those who were skeptical about the new movie, it may have affected their perceptions similarly until they could let the idea of this reboot soak in. So, I'm not surprised that many people would change their minds about it, as my husband and I did with "First Contact."

By the way, after "The Wrath of Khan" and "Star Trek" (2009), "First Contact" is my third-favorite Trek movie.

 

[Captrek]

I was underwhelmed at first, because the characters were "wrong.". My attitude toward the film had warmed as I have come to think of it as a reimagining instead of a sequel. If NuStarbuck can be a woman, then NuUhura can have a permanent chip on her shoulder and NuMcCoy can be grumpisimo and go through life without ever cracking a smile.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Two years ago, I went in and expected to be floored. I love all of Star Trek, even Voyager and Enterprise, so I was expecting to love this newest incarnation as well. Imagine my shock to find out I didn't like it and still don't.

My biggest gripes:

• Defeat Nero and go instantly from pariah-Cadet to freaking Captain?
• Shrinking Universe Symdrome #1: So Scotty's transporter can beam you onto a starship that's going at warp. But wasn't the Enterprise hundreds of light years away? Ever heard of transporter range?
• Shrinking Universe Symdrome #2: Spock Prime saw the destruction of Vulcan from the ice planet?
• Virtually no character moments.
• Wall-to-wall action, cut at dizzying speed, no time to breath at all.

I have nothing against NuTrek opening a new timeline, but please give us characterisation, leave out all the nonsensical stuff bordering on carelessness and don't cater to three-second attention spans. Star Trek never needed that, and it never will.

Every time I rewatch the film, I just get more frustrated. Mostly by the fact that we'll probably never again get any Star Trek that isn't like this.

 

[Nusent]

One of the biggest benefits of this movie is that it helped many people to familiarize with the star trek franchise. Even my girlfriend before 2009 thought star trek was geeky and boring. After the film, she fell in love with it and I showed her several episodes of TNG and Voyager, plus all the previous films. She says her favorite previous film is the Voyage Home.

I absolutely love the movie. period. I can understand why some of you strong fans find some negativity in this movie... but come on, it's just a movie to enjoy! No need to be extremely accurate.

 

[Distorted Humor]

I know a few people who after seeing this film, enjoyed it, and then found out that TNG and DS9 where great as well. I think it made Star Trek a little less geeky, which is not a bad thing.

I guess I hope Scotty is a little more serious and less for humor in the next film, but that a minor thing.

I liked the movie on the first viewing, so I can't say I am in the group of those who hated and liked it. I liked it then and Like it now. 2nd fave ST movie after Wrath of Kahn.

 

[Anticitizen]

I rewatched it for the first time recently (that is to say, the first time I've watched it since opening night).

To my dismay, the plot holes, mischaracterizations, and poor dialogue ('I got your gun LOL!') weren't fixed on the DVD.

I still despise it.

 

[Devon]

Shrinking Universe Symdrome #1: So Scotty's transporter can beam you onto a starship that's going at warp. But wasn't the Enterprise hundreds of light years away?

No.

Shrinking Universe Symdrome #2: Spock Prime saw the destruction of Vulcan from the ice planet?

Since it was near by, yes.

Virtually no character moments.

Spock and his father? Spock and Uhura? Kirk and Pike?

Wall-to-wall action, cut at dizzying speed, no time to breath at all.

Well on top of the "character" scenes, there were several.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Shrinking Universe Symdrome #1: So Scotty's transporter can beam you onto a starship that's going at warp. But wasn't the Enterprise hundreds of light years away?

No.

Then where were they going? They'd been at warp for all those hours that Pike was down on the ice planet. Were they going in circles?

Shrinking Universe Symdrome #2: Spock Prime saw the destruction of Vulcan from the ice planet?

Since it was near by, yes.

To see it the way he did, the ice planet must have been in the same system than Vulcan. Please let me know where the movie gave that impression.

Virtually no character moments.

Spock and his father? Spock and Uhura? Kirk and Pike?

Granted, but these all felt so - empty.

Wall-to-wall action, cut at dizzying speed, no time to breath at all.

Well on top of the "character" scenes, there were several.

Several what?

Man, I come here stating my opinion why I didn't like the movie, and instead of an informed argument what I get from you is a feeling of moping and those wonderfully final absolutes like "yes", "no" or "they did". I hate it when that happens.

Seeing that you did not quote what I said about Kirk's instant promotion, can I assume you're in agreement? Or did no monosyllabic answer come to mind?

 

[Devon]

Then where were they going? They'd been at warp for all those hours that Pike was down on the ice planet. Were they going in circles?

No, but probably not "hundreds of light years away" either.

To see it the way he did, the ice planet must have been in the same system than Vulcan. Please let me know where the movie gave that impression.

When Spock watched Vulcan's demise from the ice planet.

Granted, but these all felt so - empty.

I disagree.

Several what?

Sorry, several calm scenes.

I come here stating my opinion why I didn't like the movie,

Which is kind of ironic in light of the OP.

Seeing that you did not quote what I said about Kirk's instant promotion, can I assume you're in agreement?

Yes.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Not to turn this thread into a nitpicky one, but I thought the point of the "transwarp beaming" was that it was a magical formula from the future, and that exceeding normal transporter range was the whole point (as well as beaming from a relatively stationary start onto a ship at warp)

 

[UFO]

^I believe so. In fact wasn't that magical thing from the future number two?

 

[Patrickivan]

I went from liking it before it came out. To not like some of the rumours about it before it came out. To really liking it dispite hating some parts of it like the ship and some plot holes, (but there's no need to go into detail about).

I've bought it and watched it 10 times already. Proof to myself that if you forget everything about Real Trek, this movie is really fun and exciting to sit through. There's just no comparing Real Trek with New Trek and really, why bother... People just get all bent about it.

So yes- my opinion evolved and I'm looking forward to the next movie!

 

[M'Sharak]

Not to turn this thread into a nitpicky one, but I thought the point of the "transwarp beaming" was that it was a magical formula from the future, and that exceeding normal transporter range was the whole point (as well as beaming from a relatively stationary start onto a ship at warp)

That was exactly the point: transwarp beaming made it possible (albeit with a less-than-negligible uncertainty factor attendant) to exceed what were then (2258) believed to be the limits of transporter tech capability. What I especially liked was that, when Spockʹ laid the formula out on the display, Scotty was quickly able to grasp what was at work in the process, recognizing the bit which had up to then been escaping him in his own transporter experimentation.

^I believe so. In fact wasn't that magical thing from the future number two?

If you are marking red matter as Magical Thing #1, then yes, I believe so.