The Official: Niners What did You Think of the ST Movie Thread
- Thread starter Photon
- Start date
I'll just repost what I said in the other forum because I'm tired of trying to say the same thing in a new and different way.
I can easily enjoy a rip-roaring action adventure film replete with all variety of explosions and battles. However, I prefer the plot to hold together. When I first watched the film so much is going on that while I saw some problems I really didn't see the deficiencies in the film to the degree I did later because everything is moving so fast, maybe too fast. But once you see the film again or you sit back and try to make sense of all the stuff in the film and actually analyze the story the film really starts to have problems. Maybe the writers thought that with the whirlwind of events that occur in the film that you wouldn't catch on but I like to examine the story especially when it comes to these films or tv series that go out of their way to cover a lot of ground as it tends to be the preferred style these days.
I did love the exciting visual effects sequences--the Narada vs the Kelvin, Spock's ramming of the Narada with the ship from the future--, the epic visuals--Vulcan's destruction-- and inventive stunts like the atmospheric jump to the drill. I loved the updates on the TOS uniform. The colors were vibrant and rich and looked good on everyone. I didn't mind the cosmetic license the designers took with the Enterprise from either the interior or from the outside. I loved the clean white look and have ever since seeing it on the Prometheus from Voyager's "Message in a Bottle" and the Engineering set paid homage to the original and looked like I envisioned if it had a bigger budget. The Enterprise was a beauty to behold as was the Narada.
All the actors were well cast. I thought Chekov, McCoy, Kirk, Spock and Amanda did an excellent job capturing the mannerisms and essence of their original counterparts. Uhura felt a little different. On TOS, she was more of a gentle wilting flower or damsel-in-distress. Here she had a bit of spunk and sass which wasn't a bad thing. Scotty was a little over-the-top for my tastes. Doohan's Scotty was light-hearted and fun but Pegg needed to pull it back. From what little we saw this crew had chemistry and I liked all of them. In fact, I liked them so much I would have liked them to have had more focus. If there was one thing that I felt was missing was the emotion. Trek is at its best when mixing its humanity with the action. Even weaker Trek films like Generations or Insurrection had those moments of reflection that were pretty much absent here. This was mostly jumping from one action piece to the next with little time to absorb what happened.
I started to come to this conclusion when I realized I had intellectually recognized that the writers did something pretty bold and destroyed Vulcan yet it didn't emotionally register. It wasn't carry the kind of shock and impact it really should have viscerally. This is afterall a founding member of the Federation and a world that has been part of Trek since the beginning yet its destruction carried about as much resonance as a nameless planet of the week or destroying a planet in a video game. It wasn't a grim sequence a la ENT's "Twilight". It seemed the writers wanted to do something big and decided to destroy Vulcan but they didn't do enough to do the idea the justice it deserved. Heck, DS9 manged to generate more reaction from me with just hearing that Betazed was occupied by the Dominion on DS9. As I was trying to figure out why it donned on me that there was so much else going on around it got lost in the mix--it was just one of a thousand plot points. I think they crammed too much material into these two hours. By trying to do so many things none of them really receive the kind of development they deserved.
Yes, they tried to capture the loss with Spock in his scenes with Uhura and with Sarek but they didn't succeed for me. Not enough had been done to give those scenes the kind of richness demanded of them. And for a long time fan such as myself feeling this way I can only imagine the lack of resonance by the uninitiated who are just introduced to this race and its world. Same with Amanda's death, you really have to earn those emotional payoffs and just destroying a planet or killing off Spock's mother, which was a little iffy in its execution, doesn't automatically guarantee those expected responses especially since Amanda had sum total of about a minute of screentime and comes off no better than a redshirt. We had no reason to invest in it.
I also thought Nero was more of a plot device than a flesh and blood adversary. I would have liked more interesting/intriguing definition to his motivations. And while I didn't mind the time travel aspect to the story but could it have been any more basic. It preserves TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT and allows from here on out for Abrams to play around and bring in races that in the original timeline couldn't appear and do shocking things like destroy Vulcan which I was surprised by but I would have liked a more interesting scenario than simply Romulus being destroyed by a super nova. It felt like a big chunk of relevant information was missing in order to be able to understand why Nero was doing what he was doing. It was wafer thin. And it turns out there was something missing. What is up with shows or films providing supplemental and critical information regarding the storyline in extraneous sources like webisodes, podcasts, comic books, interviews. If it is important don't relegate it to someplace other than the actual film. Apparently that is what happened here. It was too bad we didn't get to see more of the late 24th century than the very brief glimpses via Spock's mind meld. It looks like there is some peace between the two worlds so to some extend Spock's efforts worked just how far we'll probaby never know.
Obviously, the writers didn't want to drag too much backstory from the Trek canon into the film but would it have been that confusing with a bit of exposition imparted to Kirk to catch up the new comers. I don't think so.
As far as Nimoy's Spock's inclusion it might have been handled better. When I heard he was going to be in the film and that we would see the origins of the TOS crew it seemed an interesting way to merge these is to have Spock on his deathbed remembering these individuals and reflecting on his life maybe via a mindmeld with someone. I think that might have been more interesting and certainly more poignant. Given that this in all liklihood will be the last time we ever see Old Spock I would have liked a more satisfying use of him other than as a plot device and a more satisfying sense of closure akin to Sarek's sendoff in "Unification". Here they left it open. I can understand why he wouldn't have attempted to open another hole given he had no idea where it would end up and I understand why the writers didn't bring up the slingshot from Star Trek IV. But if this is ever the last time we see Old Spock it's disappointing that he didn't receive a better curtain call. And I found it a tad too convenient Kirk runs into Old Spock and then Scotty the way they did but I like Scotty's little alien buddy.
The nods to ENT I could have taken it or left. I guess the writers didn't feel the need to honor Balance of Terror since everyone knew Romulans and Vulcans related and looked identical. I liked the idea of the Narada being a mining vessel--ties into Remus being a mining world. Nice tip of the hat to Pike being wheelchair bound. I didn't really like the updated transporter effect. At first I thought the teaser took place in the 24th century because the uniform reminded me of those worn in the "All Good Things" future. And what good is looking like a Romulan do if Spock is wearing a Starfleet uniform when he beamed over to the Narada. I guess Abrams decided to go back to Romulans looking like Vulcans without the forehead ridges. That's fine.
The Spock/Uhura romance I don't know what to make of it. It didn't get in the way but I'm not that into the idea but then we didn't get a lot of insight into and I thought the Orion looked awful.
I guess my one complaint is it lacked substance and despite all these issues I had fun and enjoyed myself but it wasn't all it might have been. It was too simple and bare bones without a lot of meat. As an action film it works as a Trek film it has its issues so I'm torn. I'd probably give it 2.5 stars out of 4.
I personally think Trek works better as a tv series. Most of the time after seeing a Trek film I leave not completely satisfied. The last one that really worked was Star Trek 6. This film is okay. It's not the best Trek film ever. It has issues that prevented me from being completely engrossed in the film as it unfolded. It's entertaining on a superficial level but it has its issues.
I can easily enjoy a rip-roaring action adventure film replete with all variety of explosions and battles. However, I prefer the plot to hold together. When I first watched the film so much is going on that while I saw some problems I really didn't see the deficiencies in the film to the degree I did later because everything is moving so fast, maybe too fast. But once you see the film again or you sit back and try to make sense of all the stuff in the film and actually analyze the story the film really starts to have problems. Maybe the writers thought that with the whirlwind of events that occur in the film that you wouldn't catch on but I like to examine the story especially when it comes to these films or tv series that go out of their way to cover a lot of ground as it tends to be the preferred style these days.
I did love the exciting visual effects sequences--the Narada vs the Kelvin, Spock's ramming of the Narada with the ship from the future--, the epic visuals--Vulcan's destruction-- and inventive stunts like the atmospheric jump to the drill. I loved the updates on the TOS uniform. The colors were vibrant and rich and looked good on everyone. I didn't mind the cosmetic license the designers took with the Enterprise from either the interior or from the outside. I loved the clean white look and have ever since seeing it on the Prometheus from Voyager's "Message in a Bottle" and the Engineering set paid homage to the original and looked like I envisioned if it had a bigger budget. The Enterprise was a beauty to behold as was the Narada.
All the actors were well cast. I thought Chekov, McCoy, Kirk, Spock and Amanda did an excellent job capturing the mannerisms and essence of their original counterparts. Uhura felt a little different. On TOS, she was more of a gentle wilting flower or damsel-in-distress. Here she had a bit of spunk and sass which wasn't a bad thing. Scotty was a little over-the-top for my tastes. Doohan's Scotty was light-hearted and fun but Pegg needed to pull it back. From what little we saw this crew had chemistry and I liked all of them. In fact, I liked them so much I would have liked them to have had more focus. If there was one thing that I felt was missing was the emotion. Trek is at its best when mixing its humanity with the action. Even weaker Trek films like Generations or Insurrection had those moments of reflection that were pretty much absent here. This was mostly jumping from one action piece to the next with little time to absorb what happened.
I started to come to this conclusion when I realized I had intellectually recognized that the writers did something pretty bold and destroyed Vulcan yet it didn't emotionally register. It wasn't carry the kind of shock and impact it really should have viscerally. This is afterall a founding member of the Federation and a world that has been part of Trek since the beginning yet its destruction carried about as much resonance as a nameless planet of the week or destroying a planet in a video game. It wasn't a grim sequence a la ENT's "Twilight". It seemed the writers wanted to do something big and decided to destroy Vulcan but they didn't do enough to do the idea the justice it deserved. Heck, DS9 manged to generate more reaction from me with just hearing that Betazed was occupied by the Dominion on DS9. As I was trying to figure out why it donned on me that there was so much else going on around it got lost in the mix--it was just one of a thousand plot points. I think they crammed too much material into these two hours. By trying to do so many things none of them really receive the kind of development they deserved.
Yes, they tried to capture the loss with Spock in his scenes with Uhura and with Sarek but they didn't succeed for me. Not enough had been done to give those scenes the kind of richness demanded of them. And for a long time fan such as myself feeling this way I can only imagine the lack of resonance by the uninitiated who are just introduced to this race and its world. Same with Amanda's death, you really have to earn those emotional payoffs and just destroying a planet or killing off Spock's mother, which was a little iffy in its execution, doesn't automatically guarantee those expected responses especially since Amanda had sum total of about a minute of screentime and comes off no better than a redshirt. We had no reason to invest in it.
I also thought Nero was more of a plot device than a flesh and blood adversary. I would have liked more interesting/intriguing definition to his motivations. And while I didn't mind the time travel aspect to the story but could it have been any more basic. It preserves TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT and allows from here on out for Abrams to play around and bring in races that in the original timeline couldn't appear and do shocking things like destroy Vulcan which I was surprised by but I would have liked a more interesting scenario than simply Romulus being destroyed by a super nova. It felt like a big chunk of relevant information was missing in order to be able to understand why Nero was doing what he was doing. It was wafer thin. And it turns out there was something missing. What is up with shows or films providing supplemental and critical information regarding the storyline in extraneous sources like webisodes, podcasts, comic books, interviews. If it is important don't relegate it to someplace other than the actual film. Apparently that is what happened here. It was too bad we didn't get to see more of the late 24th century than the very brief glimpses via Spock's mind meld. It looks like there is some peace between the two worlds so to some extend Spock's efforts worked just how far we'll probaby never know.
Obviously, the writers didn't want to drag too much backstory from the Trek canon into the film but would it have been that confusing with a bit of exposition imparted to Kirk to catch up the new comers. I don't think so.
As far as Nimoy's Spock's inclusion it might have been handled better. When I heard he was going to be in the film and that we would see the origins of the TOS crew it seemed an interesting way to merge these is to have Spock on his deathbed remembering these individuals and reflecting on his life maybe via a mindmeld with someone. I think that might have been more interesting and certainly more poignant. Given that this in all liklihood will be the last time we ever see Old Spock I would have liked a more satisfying use of him other than as a plot device and a more satisfying sense of closure akin to Sarek's sendoff in "Unification". Here they left it open. I can understand why he wouldn't have attempted to open another hole given he had no idea where it would end up and I understand why the writers didn't bring up the slingshot from Star Trek IV. But if this is ever the last time we see Old Spock it's disappointing that he didn't receive a better curtain call. And I found it a tad too convenient Kirk runs into Old Spock and then Scotty the way they did but I like Scotty's little alien buddy.
The nods to ENT I could have taken it or left. I guess the writers didn't feel the need to honor Balance of Terror since everyone knew Romulans and Vulcans related and looked identical. I liked the idea of the Narada being a mining vessel--ties into Remus being a mining world. Nice tip of the hat to Pike being wheelchair bound. I didn't really like the updated transporter effect. At first I thought the teaser took place in the 24th century because the uniform reminded me of those worn in the "All Good Things" future. And what good is looking like a Romulan do if Spock is wearing a Starfleet uniform when he beamed over to the Narada. I guess Abrams decided to go back to Romulans looking like Vulcans without the forehead ridges. That's fine.
The Spock/Uhura romance I don't know what to make of it. It didn't get in the way but I'm not that into the idea but then we didn't get a lot of insight into and I thought the Orion looked awful.
I guess my one complaint is it lacked substance and despite all these issues I had fun and enjoyed myself but it wasn't all it might have been. It was too simple and bare bones without a lot of meat. As an action film it works as a Trek film it has its issues so I'm torn. I'd probably give it 2.5 stars out of 4.
I personally think Trek works better as a tv series. Most of the time after seeing a Trek film I leave not completely satisfied. The last one that really worked was Star Trek 6. This film is okay. It's not the best Trek film ever. It has issues that prevented me from being completely engrossed in the film as it unfolded. It's entertaining on a superficial level but it has its issues.
I was thinking the same thing. Except they should have put him in there with hair to show that he was younger.
Not sure if that would ruin the great look of the character, but Quark did say in "Who Mourns for Mourn?" that, "he still had his hair back then" talking about when he first came to DS9. I know it's a little far-fetched to throw him in there like 100 years before his time period, but no one ever explained how his species ages and if they could do a "Lost" reference in that scene, they could have certainly thrown the Niners a bone. Unfortunately, maybe they just aren't DS9 fans. Uhura did mention Cardassians in the scene, but those started in TNG and I once read Abrams say he'd only seen "Star Trek" and "Star Trek: The Next Generation".
I enjoyed STXI on an 'entertainment' level, but as has been stated, the plot didn't stand up to scrutiny, really. I'm hoping for a bit more depth now that Abrams is done with the backstory.
I still think Trek works better on TV than as a movie, you can devote time to more than one or two character arcs in several seasons worth of TV episodes, and you can tell a greater variety of stories. And DS9 is the best of the best, still, in that regard!
I still think Trek works better on TV than as a movie, you can devote time to more than one or two character arcs in several seasons worth of TV episodes, and you can tell a greater variety of stories. And DS9 is the best of the best, still, in that regard!
Plot was a little short but this had to be done if the franchise is to survive. We got to have new fans; we have to have a new interest in Trek or its gonna die on the vine. Perhaps this will clear the way for a Paramount-Sci Fi pilot or mini series.
Centered at DS9 that would involve starships: Voyager, Titan, Enterprise-E and Prometheus.
Centered at DS9 that would involve starships: Voyager, Titan, Enterprise-E and Prometheus.
I read somewhere that Spock Prime did some type of mojo to preserve the present TL, so yeah its possible to backbuild from our present line
To repeat myself, why would they go back to the old, stale timeline?
/\ They won't. As much as I would want them to, they won't go back to the "Prime" timeline in TV or movies. It's simply not an option anymore. In order to bring in a new audience, they had to basically put aside 40-some years of backstory and start anew. Making shows or movies in the Prime timeline will just confuse the issue a lot more and end up turning people off Trek.
I say TV and movies, because I'm sure (and I hope) that they will continue putting out Prime timeline stories in book format, but I think that's about as much as we're going to get now. Not that I find anything wrong with that, but that's just me.
I say TV and movies, because I'm sure (and I hope) that they will continue putting out Prime timeline stories in book format, but I think that's about as much as we're going to get now. Not that I find anything wrong with that, but that's just me.
I don't think anyone should close their mind to the option.
The prime timeline came with a load of baggage. I've said it elsewhere, I'm sure of it, but if you do an arc per season in a new setting, the first one dealing could easily set the tone for the destroyed Romulus Nero left behind. That could be done in a way which explains the difference to the general audience, which isn't as stupid as we'd like to believe, and set a new stage for something that seperates itself completely from TNG's era.
I came up with an idea or three that'll work and I'm just me. A good writer (or team of) can come up with something that'll work, and if they wanted to push into TV whilst the movies were on (which could be a bad plan) they might want something different to whats being played on the big screen.
The prime timeline came with a load of baggage. I've said it elsewhere, I'm sure of it, but if you do an arc per season in a new setting, the first one dealing could easily set the tone for the destroyed Romulus Nero left behind. That could be done in a way which explains the difference to the general audience, which isn't as stupid as we'd like to believe, and set a new stage for something that seperates itself completely from TNG's era.
I came up with an idea or three that'll work and I'm just me. A good writer (or team of) can come up with something that'll work, and if they wanted to push into TV whilst the movies were on (which could be a bad plan) they might want something different to whats being played on the big screen.
Strictly speaking, that's not a physical property of antimatter.
It's a property of the warp coils, which fortunately everyone has had the good sense not to try to describe in detail.I agree, and I'm not really criticizing using red matter, and, indeed, I'm glad that this time around they ascribed imaginary properties to something that's actually imaginary. Like I said in another thread, it's ice-nine. Just believe in it.
Though speaking of which, I'm kind of surprised they didn't use strange matter as their phlebotinum--being maybe (very slightly) closer to real science than red matter--and do a true ice-nine scenario. I think it would've made a more interesting visual effect... then again, turning into a more stable form of matter doesn't usually involve going back in time. (Neither does a black hole, I guess, it usually involves being crushed long before you hit the event horizon, but it is popularly associated with time travel.)
For whatever it's worth, I also suggest Nero's motivation could have been strengthened if Spock hadn't just failed to save Romulus but somehow been instrumental in the disaster which destroyed it... like Picard with his anti-time, but with no Q to help him.
Saw the movie tonight, found it mediocre at best. It seems most of my own personal criticisms have been voiced already, though maybe I'll have a fresh take on some of the film's problems.
Bottom line, I felt like I was watching James Bond in space, to pen a crude analogy. The plot, the villain, the character development, it all took a backseat to the sheer amount of action that drove the movie.
Let's first look at Nero. He was a completely one-dimensional villain, and he had a very bare-boned motivation fuelling his hatred towards the Vulcans. To draw an apt comparison, look at Gal Dukat, the founders, even Weyoun. These villains have all sorts of conflicts, backstory, and are presented in such a way that you can sympathize for them as much as you can despise them. Nero had none of these traits, he might as well have been a generic sci-fi villain out of a comic book.
As for the action scenes, they really pushed your suspension of disbelief. Kirk's mother giving birth in the middle of the battle that gets Kirk's father killed? Quite the coincidence, and you'd think the doctors attending the mother would seem a little more worried about their own lives while they're boarding an escape pod leaving a ship on the brink of destruction. Then there was that scene where Zulu and Kirk were fighting on some sort of slanted platform. Why wasn't anyone using a phazer here? How could any of them keep their balance? Then we have things like Scotty getting beamed into a water turbine, Kirk almost getting eaten by an alien on the snowy planet he was exiled to, Kirk and Spock beating the Romulans in a gunfight despite being outnumbered say, 10 to 1, and the laundry list goes on. You can hopefully see where I draw the James Bond analogy from by now.
The plot is obviously riddled with issues. What the hell is red matter, and what does it have to do with creating black holes? How can someone as delinquint and self-destructive as young Kirk be thrust into the position of captaining a star fleet ship? What's the point of Uhura and Spock's love relationship? When will Trek examine its own time travel theories and realize it possesses innumerable problems? If McCoy made Kirk sick intentionally, couldn't the authorities have ordered Kirk to get medical treatment on Earth, or in another ship? If Spock resigned his command for being mentally unfit, why didn't he reassert his initial position once he came back?
And this isn't even the nitpicky stuff. The children Vulcan in the beginning of the movie were just reciting memorized formulas, which isn't proof of their intelligent nature. Their intentions were good, but you have to portray these kids as critical thinkers, not as mindless drones. Beaming a person onto a ship at warp speed has all sorts of issues, but I'll only focus on a minor detail. If their beaming co-ordinates were so imprecise that Scotty got sent into a water tank, then why would they risk the transport at all? There's the strong possibility that Kirk or Scotty would've been transported into a wall of the ship or something and have died instantly. Why does Kirk run onto the bridge to tell Pike about the Romulan attack? He could've just used a comm system, or done a site-to-site transport. What are the odds that Kirk would've been beamed on the same planet as old Spock, no less close enough in a planet probably tens of thousands of kilometers in cirumference, and stumbled upon him inadverdently? If Chekov’s voice was so hard to understand when broadcasted, couldn’t the universal translator modify it to make it easier to understand? Speaking of which, Chekov’s (presumably) Russian accent was completely over-done to the point where it was culturally insensitive.
Even the characters didn’t satisfy me. Kirk starts off as an over-exaggerated renegade stereotype, and ends that way. Too many other characters were either under-used or sacrificed for the purpose of comic relief. The only really appreciable character was Spock, but even then his portrayal was somewhat inconsistent, and the logic-emotion conflict came off as inauthentic.
I can’t say the actors were bad, but they still leave me yearning for more composed, less mainstream-appeasing performances. It’s difficult to explain, but I’m not big on the free talking, nonchalant, superficial personalities that overwhelm mainstream cinema these days. I miss the more eloquent, sophisticated dialogue you could find in TNG, which gave a stronger impression that space travellers were elegant and respectful towards the hierarchy of command, and gave emphasis towards the finer points of human valor. The earlier Treks felt as though we were dealing with genuine space travelers, not a bunch of belligerent, un-disciplined teenagers who happen to be part of a ship’s crew.
Overlooking all these flaws, it was a good action flick, but not really anything more than that. The ending of the movie gave me chills because it was the only moment that really payed homage to the Trek I’ve come to appreciate. Aside from that, the only reminders of Trek I could find were the saucer designs of the ships, certain staple technologies like transporters and the TOS characters. Interchange some of those things with different sci-fi and you could easily pass this movie off as anything but Trek. I guess I’m trying to say that the writing was too sloppy to truly pay homage to the series. There were just far too many signs that this was an intended blockbuster hit, with some trademark Trek things injected into the movie to draw in the hardcore Trek crowd.
I tend to agree with the following quotes, which summarize most of what I’ve said above
Bottom line, I felt like I was watching James Bond in space, to pen a crude analogy. The plot, the villain, the character development, it all took a backseat to the sheer amount of action that drove the movie.
Let's first look at Nero. He was a completely one-dimensional villain, and he had a very bare-boned motivation fuelling his hatred towards the Vulcans. To draw an apt comparison, look at Gal Dukat, the founders, even Weyoun. These villains have all sorts of conflicts, backstory, and are presented in such a way that you can sympathize for them as much as you can despise them. Nero had none of these traits, he might as well have been a generic sci-fi villain out of a comic book.
As for the action scenes, they really pushed your suspension of disbelief. Kirk's mother giving birth in the middle of the battle that gets Kirk's father killed? Quite the coincidence, and you'd think the doctors attending the mother would seem a little more worried about their own lives while they're boarding an escape pod leaving a ship on the brink of destruction. Then there was that scene where Zulu and Kirk were fighting on some sort of slanted platform. Why wasn't anyone using a phazer here? How could any of them keep their balance? Then we have things like Scotty getting beamed into a water turbine, Kirk almost getting eaten by an alien on the snowy planet he was exiled to, Kirk and Spock beating the Romulans in a gunfight despite being outnumbered say, 10 to 1, and the laundry list goes on. You can hopefully see where I draw the James Bond analogy from by now.
The plot is obviously riddled with issues. What the hell is red matter, and what does it have to do with creating black holes? How can someone as delinquint and self-destructive as young Kirk be thrust into the position of captaining a star fleet ship? What's the point of Uhura and Spock's love relationship? When will Trek examine its own time travel theories and realize it possesses innumerable problems? If McCoy made Kirk sick intentionally, couldn't the authorities have ordered Kirk to get medical treatment on Earth, or in another ship? If Spock resigned his command for being mentally unfit, why didn't he reassert his initial position once he came back?
And this isn't even the nitpicky stuff. The children Vulcan in the beginning of the movie were just reciting memorized formulas, which isn't proof of their intelligent nature. Their intentions were good, but you have to portray these kids as critical thinkers, not as mindless drones. Beaming a person onto a ship at warp speed has all sorts of issues, but I'll only focus on a minor detail. If their beaming co-ordinates were so imprecise that Scotty got sent into a water tank, then why would they risk the transport at all? There's the strong possibility that Kirk or Scotty would've been transported into a wall of the ship or something and have died instantly. Why does Kirk run onto the bridge to tell Pike about the Romulan attack? He could've just used a comm system, or done a site-to-site transport. What are the odds that Kirk would've been beamed on the same planet as old Spock, no less close enough in a planet probably tens of thousands of kilometers in cirumference, and stumbled upon him inadverdently? If Chekov’s voice was so hard to understand when broadcasted, couldn’t the universal translator modify it to make it easier to understand? Speaking of which, Chekov’s (presumably) Russian accent was completely over-done to the point where it was culturally insensitive.
Even the characters didn’t satisfy me. Kirk starts off as an over-exaggerated renegade stereotype, and ends that way. Too many other characters were either under-used or sacrificed for the purpose of comic relief. The only really appreciable character was Spock, but even then his portrayal was somewhat inconsistent, and the logic-emotion conflict came off as inauthentic.
I can’t say the actors were bad, but they still leave me yearning for more composed, less mainstream-appeasing performances. It’s difficult to explain, but I’m not big on the free talking, nonchalant, superficial personalities that overwhelm mainstream cinema these days. I miss the more eloquent, sophisticated dialogue you could find in TNG, which gave a stronger impression that space travellers were elegant and respectful towards the hierarchy of command, and gave emphasis towards the finer points of human valor. The earlier Treks felt as though we were dealing with genuine space travelers, not a bunch of belligerent, un-disciplined teenagers who happen to be part of a ship’s crew.
Overlooking all these flaws, it was a good action flick, but not really anything more than that. The ending of the movie gave me chills because it was the only moment that really payed homage to the Trek I’ve come to appreciate. Aside from that, the only reminders of Trek I could find were the saucer designs of the ships, certain staple technologies like transporters and the TOS characters. Interchange some of those things with different sci-fi and you could easily pass this movie off as anything but Trek. I guess I’m trying to say that the writing was too sloppy to truly pay homage to the series. There were just far too many signs that this was an intended blockbuster hit, with some trademark Trek things injected into the movie to draw in the hardcore Trek crowd.
I tend to agree with the following quotes, which summarize most of what I’ve said above
I don't think the writers consistently made the choice with this in mind, but Kirk not being able to do site-to-site transport is consistent with the "Star Trek" episode where Spock says site-to-site transport on a ship has never been attempted before. Obviously this was no longer a problem by the time of the TNG era. I don't remember which episode this is from, which annoys me, because I'm sure I've seen it recently.
That's the only point of yours I want to offer a counterpoint for. I enjoyed the movie, but I think your criticisms are all fair and understandable. I may agree with them, yet somehow most of them didn't bother me as much as I watched the movie. I guess my affection for the original characters allowed me to overlook them, although I was irritated by how contrived the time travel element was and disappointed by how one-dimensional Nero was and how unconvincing his grudge against Spock was.
I just saw it performed in the DS9 episode Dramatis Personae, so yeah, it's possible in the 24th.
Just saw the movie.
Here's what I thought:
- Way better than all the TNG movies combined, however, since they don't have any good qualities, that is not saying much.
- I think I saw more character development for the characters in this one movie than in the entire TNG series + TNG movies combined, which again, isn't saying much since the entirety of TNG had almost zero character development. Point is simply, it's a vast improvement over the TNG movies.
- Generic plot with no thought required.
- Generic one-dimensional caricature of a villain.
- Very hammy and hackneyed how all the named characters have to be sure to get several "Look at me, I'm a superhero!" moments. I understand why the director did this, like he said, you have to give the audience a reason to care about the characters. However, cramming all those every character is a superhero moments into a 2 hour movie isn't possible to do without coming across looking silly.
- Spock banging Uhura and no explanation is given as to why (unless I missed something); also comes across as hammy - a needless attempt to sex it up in a 90210/Melrose Place kind of way. I find this to be an insult to the intelligence that Trek is supposed to have.
- Why the heck does the Romulan ship do nothing for 2 - 4 minutes (or however long it was...point being it was a ludicrously long time) whilst Kirk Sr. is suicide bombing his ship into it...they have the power to disable the transporters and totally decimate the ship; yet 2 - 4 minutes isn't enough time to prevent a suicide bombing collision? Yeah right.
- Why the *beep* would they maroon Kirk on a hostile planet and put his life in jeopardy instead of just throwing him in the brig? Plot contrivance that makes no sense whatsoever.
- Very insulting how they try to canonize ENT yet both not even mention, and implicitly erase DS9.
- Way inferior to DS9, which has all the good things this movie has, only has them better, and has intelligence as well.
- Spock learning that the human way is better than the Vulcan way is also very insulting IMO. The most fascinating thing about the Spock of TOS is that he thinks the human way is wrong and his own way is superior. Why even bother calling him a Vulcan if they are just gonna turn him into a human.
- Why does Spock's father have a British accent (or whatever it is)...makes no sense; they could have got a much better actor for that role.
- The acting of the main crew was very good, especially for unknowns.
- The Starfleet Captain who got terminated near the start felt like he was phoning in his performance, should have got a much better actor there.
- The shakycam during all action sequences was extremely annoying, and made it impossible to properly appreciate the ILM work. Every time I see shakycam in a supposedly professional film, I want to scream that the director: "Learn to direct!!!"
- The young Kirk actor (the one who drives his foster dad's car into a cliff) sucked really badly, could have got a much better actor for that role as well.
- The Pike actor did an amazing job. That actor could have carried any of the Trek TV serieses as Captain.
- It's great how they brought back the humor and conflict of TOS, which TNG murdered. On the other hand, they also over-did it in the new movie and forced it too much.
- They definitely could have made a much better movie, with the same tone and style as the movie they made, out of DS9 and its characters with 7 years of excellent development already built up.
Here's what I thought:
- Way better than all the TNG movies combined, however, since they don't have any good qualities, that is not saying much.
- I think I saw more character development for the characters in this one movie than in the entire TNG series + TNG movies combined, which again, isn't saying much since the entirety of TNG had almost zero character development. Point is simply, it's a vast improvement over the TNG movies.
- Generic plot with no thought required.
- Generic one-dimensional caricature of a villain.
- Very hammy and hackneyed how all the named characters have to be sure to get several "Look at me, I'm a superhero!" moments. I understand why the director did this, like he said, you have to give the audience a reason to care about the characters. However, cramming all those every character is a superhero moments into a 2 hour movie isn't possible to do without coming across looking silly.
- Spock banging Uhura and no explanation is given as to why (unless I missed something); also comes across as hammy - a needless attempt to sex it up in a 90210/Melrose Place kind of way. I find this to be an insult to the intelligence that Trek is supposed to have.
- Why the heck does the Romulan ship do nothing for 2 - 4 minutes (or however long it was...point being it was a ludicrously long time) whilst Kirk Sr. is suicide bombing his ship into it...they have the power to disable the transporters and totally decimate the ship; yet 2 - 4 minutes isn't enough time to prevent a suicide bombing collision? Yeah right.
- Why the *beep* would they maroon Kirk on a hostile planet and put his life in jeopardy instead of just throwing him in the brig? Plot contrivance that makes no sense whatsoever.
- Very insulting how they try to canonize ENT yet both not even mention, and implicitly erase DS9.
- Way inferior to DS9, which has all the good things this movie has, only has them better, and has intelligence as well.
- Spock learning that the human way is better than the Vulcan way is also very insulting IMO. The most fascinating thing about the Spock of TOS is that he thinks the human way is wrong and his own way is superior. Why even bother calling him a Vulcan if they are just gonna turn him into a human.
- Why does Spock's father have a British accent (or whatever it is)...makes no sense; they could have got a much better actor for that role.
- The acting of the main crew was very good, especially for unknowns.
- The Starfleet Captain who got terminated near the start felt like he was phoning in his performance, should have got a much better actor there.
- The shakycam during all action sequences was extremely annoying, and made it impossible to properly appreciate the ILM work. Every time I see shakycam in a supposedly professional film, I want to scream that the director: "Learn to direct!!!"
- The young Kirk actor (the one who drives his foster dad's car into a cliff) sucked really badly, could have got a much better actor for that role as well.
- The Pike actor did an amazing job. That actor could have carried any of the Trek TV serieses as Captain.
- It's great how they brought back the humor and conflict of TOS, which TNG murdered. On the other hand, they also over-did it in the new movie and forced it too much.
- They definitely could have made a much better movie, with the same tone and style as the movie they made, out of DS9 and its characters with 7 years of excellent development already built up.
Last edited:
An explanation for Uhura and Spock being together? What do you want, an explanation for affection and love? Would have been a pretty philosophic movie then.
Also, how is their relationship an attempt to sex it up? Because they showed them hugging and kissing?
I see you missed the Cardassian Sunrise then. It is supposed to be a nod in DS9's direction.
Deep Space Nine is also a television series consisting of seven years worth of episodes. I don't see how anyone can successfully compare it to a two-hour feature film.
Yeah, but who would have paid to watch that? I mean, besides a few internet fans?
I feel like they didn't put enough effort into it
they could have made the movie they did and STILL made a good star trek movie.
Edit
by this, I mean, they could VERY easily have given it the depth, and detail star trek is meant to have, the "canon fodder" if you will, yes, it's a pun.
the depth would not have been hard, and choosing a costume designer who had never seen a star trek movie was B.S. Choosing to dis-use the starfleet insignia independent of the enterprise insignia was disingenuous, and abrahms saying the film wasn't for the fans was just rubbing it in
not to mention choosing orci, for god sakes, ORCI?
end edit:
they didn't.
and it wasn't because they weren't capable, we've all seen these peoples resume's and know they are capable of VERY elaborate, overcomplicated work.
it was because they either didn't care, or didn't want to, to spite the trekkie community, which, is kinda bullshit, because star-trek did a lot to keep paramount afloat in some dark times for that company.
they could have made the movie they did and STILL made a good star trek movie.
Edit
by this, I mean, they could VERY easily have given it the depth, and detail star trek is meant to have, the "canon fodder" if you will, yes, it's a pun.
the depth would not have been hard, and choosing a costume designer who had never seen a star trek movie was B.S. Choosing to dis-use the starfleet insignia independent of the enterprise insignia was disingenuous, and abrahms saying the film wasn't for the fans was just rubbing it in
not to mention choosing orci, for god sakes, ORCI?
end edit:
they didn't.
and it wasn't because they weren't capable, we've all seen these peoples resume's and know they are capable of VERY elaborate, overcomplicated work.
it was because they either didn't care, or didn't want to, to spite the trekkie community, which, is kinda bullshit, because star-trek did a lot to keep paramount afloat in some dark times for that company.
I thought the movie was decent, a bit better that mediocre. To be honest, I didn't think about the movie much two days after having seen it. The only time I think about it now is when I visit this BBS.
On the other hand, as has been posted earlier, it was better than all of the TNG movies. It also easily had the best cineamatography and special effects of any Trek movie. I'm also happy that it's doing well and I find the fact that so many people enjoyed it very promising. I look forward to the sequels because I'm optimistic I'll like the next one more than this one.
On the other hand, as has been posted earlier, it was better than all of the TNG movies. It also easily had the best cineamatography and special effects of any Trek movie. I'm also happy that it's doing well and I find the fact that so many people enjoyed it very promising. I look forward to the sequels because I'm optimistic I'll like the next one more than this one.
A somewhat fun no brainer.
A kind of Wrath of the Menagerie.
How could Ambassador Spock destroy a star by just dropping some RED MATTER into it while the Romulans had to drill into the core of a measly planet? Last I heard stars were A LOT BIGGER than planets.
But without that drill Kirk and Sulu and the RED suit wouldn't have had to parachute into their fight scene.
There was a little Of Men and Gods in there too. Vulcan destroyed and Uhura marrying a Vulcan. A Federation with a shortage of Vulcans? How illogical!!!
psik
A kind of Wrath of the Menagerie.
How could Ambassador Spock destroy a star by just dropping some RED MATTER into it while the Romulans had to drill into the core of a measly planet? Last I heard stars were A LOT BIGGER than planets.
But without that drill Kirk and Sulu and the RED suit wouldn't have had to parachute into their fight scene.
There was a little Of Men and Gods in there too. Vulcan destroyed and Uhura marrying a Vulcan. A Federation with a shortage of Vulcans? How illogical!!!
psik
Similar threads
