Saying it here because it probably doesn't need its own thread.
For all the talk that these three movies have been a "TOS reboot", they're actually chock full of more references and reused elements from the TOS movies, which were a reboot of a reboot of a- well, you undestand.
Is it because non-fans are more likely to have seen the movies than the show? And they can go - "Aha! There it is!" at any of the throwbacks without it going over their heads?
Possibly. The first two are definitely more influenced by the movies. Beyond is more tv TOS but still has a healthy amount of nods to the movies.Saying it here because it probably doesn't need its own thread.
For all the talk that these three movies have been a "TOS reboot", they're actually chock full of more references and reused elements from the TOS movies, which were a reboot of a reboot of a- well, you undestand.
Is it because non-fans are more likely to have seen the movies than the show? And they can go - "Aha! There it is!" at any of the throwbacks without it going over their heads?
Possibly. The first two are definitely more influenced by the movies. Beyond is more tv TOS but still has a healthy amount of nods to the movies.
Enterprise A? Enterprise destruction? Trek V crew photo? Kirks birthday with Bones? Revenge seeking madman villain(again)?Like what? (I think I missed them.)
Enterprise A? Enterprise destruction? Trek V crew photo? Kirks birthday with Bones?
Revenge seeking madman villain(again)?
Like what? (I think I missed them.)
This might have already been discussed, but is there an attempt at explaining why it appears that an exposure to the vacuum of space doesn't lead to depressurization of environments? There are a lot of scenes in the movie where a wall gets torn over or some is ejected into space and they don't explode, neither do people still in the ship explore. Krall is ejected into outer space and doesn't explode. None of these people are wearing pressurized space suits, so I was very confused. Is this somehow addressed or it's one of those "let's not think about it" moments?
No one would explode if exposed to the vacuum of space. That is a common misconception, largely perpetuated by movies. There would be an expansion of water vapour in your body and significant swelling, but it would not be enough to cause your epidermal layer to burst.This might have already been discussed, but is there an attempt at explaining why it appears that an exposure to the vacuum of space doesn't lead to depressurization of environments? There are a lot of scenes in the movie where a wall gets torn out or some person is ejected into space and they don't explode, neither do people still in the ship explode. Krall is ejected into outer space and doesn't explode. None of these people are wearing pressurized space suits, so I was very confused. Is this somehow addressed or it's one of those "let's not think about it" moments?
The lungs would explode (especially if someone drew a breath--exhaling is the better option), but only internally. They did avoid showing the ballooning, but actual exploding would not happen in real life.Hmm, I'm pretty sure lungs would expand and explode if they had any air in them. I guess skin could hold without being ruptured, but it would still balloon, which we don't see in those scenes, particularly the close up of Krall
Nope.I am curious, was there ever a novelization done for this movie?
thanks. pity there wasn't. not usually one for novelizations but a book for this one would have been admittedly interesting.Nope.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.