Ah, well, fair enough then. I can see where you're coming from there (I sorta came in the the tail end of this... debate).
The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
Ah, well, fair enough then. I can see where you're coming from there (I sorta came in the the tail end of this... debate).
I just wish he'd go elsewhere with his spam that has infected this thread. How many times can someone say the same thing over and over again?
let's see post #1783, is it too late to say "I liked it, not a bad way to spend two hours"?
Is that thing spewing time back into the universe?
"...so what is it?"
I have seen that descend into hundreds of posts before. I better stop there.
Just a quick response to the 'Generation ADHD' comments, I have a mate with that who went to see the movie. He said he couldn't follow it. Nothing important there... but it made me laugh and think of here.
Somebody punch him out.
I don't get it, I thought it was easy enough to follow. I thought the battle scenes worked well, and while it had a bit of a frantic pace I didn't think it was at all overwhelming.
I just thought it was brilliant - I've read so many Generation ADHD/Film fr ADHD comments that the one guy I know who's both seen it and has ADD was completely lost. I think I found it more amusing as I've seen such comments said to throw a recycled insult instead of 'Just wasn't my thing.'
With the pace... on my second viewing it felt a lot slower. Maybe because I knew what was coming and the hype was over as I'd already seen it, but it just felt less frantic.
I agree, when I saw it for the third time it felt fairly slow by usual action film standards.
The pacing was pretty spot on imho. Not difficult to follow, didn't move too quickly and wasn't confusing at any point. Decent edit.
Well everyone I've seen it with have all said that they enjoyed it, none of them seemed confused by it at any point, so if bona fide trekkies are having it a problem that's down to their own bias not things inherent to the film.
The only pace issue I had was the fact that my 2hrs and 6min felt a lot shorter than that.
Agreed. Did not feel like a 2hr film.
Must be all that youthful energy given off by the cast. I'm used to wrinklies in trek, dammit, it must have thrown my body clock.
The movie did move quickly. My only pacing disappointment was at the end, their escape from the black hole seemed too rushed. I mean Scotty didn't really DO anything, just kinda ran around claiming he was "givin' it all she's got" then core eject and they're out.
We all know they're gonna be ok, but could have extended the jeopardy just a tad (or even teased that the timeline may even be 'corrected') I'm fine on subsequent viewings, it just felt TOO quick the first time.
We all know they're gonna be ok, but could have extended the jeopardy just a tad (or even teased that the timeline may even be 'corrected') I'm fine on subsequent viewings, it just felt TOO quick the first time.
Some comments about the frenetic nature of the film.
I read no spoilers, read no interviews and avoided all trailers for this film. So I went into it cold with no idea what was in store for me when I first saw it on Friday and I do think that it takes two viewings to take it all in--the first time through I was so busy being pummeled by information at a rapid fire pace that I really couldn't enjoy the film on its own. I was trying to keep track of the chronology of events and trying to absorb everything as well as trying to rationalize elements that were not making sense. Now if you were aware of plot details beforehand you wouldn't have had this problem.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, ten years ago this would have irritated me but in recent years I've come to accept it as the standard format for a lot of entertainment. Shows like Lost or Heroes have conditioned me to adopt a different approach to this new contemporary style of entertainment viewing, tempering my attitude and learning to go with the flow. So I'm used to having a bunch of information imparted to me at breakneck speed as well as jumping around chronologically and from one thread to the other in a dizzying manner. Shows choose to throw it at you and leave it up to you to fill in the texture and depth that ten years ago was actually included on screen. For the most part they have no interest in really opening up a scene or extending it beyond just a quick flash. I think generally that's fine when the scene is expository or plot-related but hurts the most when it is a character scene.
Before I've appreciated what just happened and while I'm in the middle of taking it in they are already on to something else. At times it can be maddening to keep up. At least at home if I didn't catch some bit of dialogue or I'm still thinking about what just took place I can rewind or pause but here it's "moving on!" I certainly don't want a show to drag but I think they could slow down a bit.
That's fine when I'm at home capable of using my remote to pause the film as I afford myself the time to reflect on what is happening or to be able to replay a bit of dialog that is spoken so rapidly I need to hear it again. But at the theatre I'm unable to do this. Same goes for the ability to slowly advance the battle sequences to appreciate fully the choreography of the scenes.
That's why I went back a second time where I was going in with a lay of the land as it were and could follow the story much easier. It also allowed me to focus on the film itself instead of the first time through where I felt like instead of the writers laying it all out for me so I could just sit back I had to assemble the story first then enjoy it.
Just my two cents.
Last edited:
I went to see the movie a few days ago, I had been debating with myself whether I was going to take the plunge and go and see it because I have not been optimistic since first details came out all the way thorough to seeing the trailers. I figured that I might as well go see it with my youngest brother since he wanted to see it anyway. I decided not to post an opinion until I had gathered my thoughts together properly.
I think the best way for me to judge the film is to focus solely on three things; the story, the characters and the acting. Special effects, amongst other things don't necessarily make a good movie or a bad movie, they simply serve to illustrate the story in my view. So with that criteria I will now get to what I thought of the movie.
First the story; to break it down it is essentially a revenge story about a man who intends to carry out the destruction of worlds belonging to people (particularly Spock) who he blames for destroying his own world. Sounds pretty reasonable to me, however the circumstances surrounding this motivation are somewhat flimsy. Romulus is facing destruction because the systems sun is about to go nova, and future Spock tries but fails to prevent the disaster. Yet despite Spock trying to help his people, Nero is driven to revenge. This motivation doesn't make sense to me at all; with or without Spock or the federations help, the Romulans would have and should have evacuated the home world in any event, the empire isn't restricted to its own system after all. Why that never happened wasn't answered in the film. Another answer that I didn't get was why didn't Spock use the time travel to go backwards to before the nova happened and warn the Romulans that his actions had failed.
I couldn't empathise or feel anything emotionally towards Nero, he was just one-dimensional. At least with Khan, while he became a megalomaniac I could empathise with the sheer anger he felt after being left on a planet that became uninhabitable claiming the lives of some of his people as well as his wife. I felt something for him despite him going on the rampage.
Next the characters and acting; to me the overall impression I got was that most of the characters were incredibly dumbed down or non-existent. I couldn't warm to any of them except for Spock.
For me Kirk's character is the most assassinated, I found him to be an obnoxious shithouse throughout whole the film. Particularly during the Kobayashi-Maru scenes, he sat there and didn't give a shit that he was cheating, it was all a joke to him. He wasn't making a point (even though he claims he was) he just wanted to have a big laugh and a joke. Kirk in this film was rebellious, but unlike the true Kirk from the original series he wasn't a rebel with any moral convictions or principals, he was rebellious just... because.
McCoy, despite the good impersonation of Deforrest's interpretation of the character by Karl urban, he never really had much to do, which was a bit of a shame since it was the Kirk-Spock-McCoy relationship that was key to the previous films and series, his part should have been more prominent.
Spock was the only main character I liked for the most part. I thought the conflict between his Human and Vulcan sides was handled very well indeed and nicely acted by the guy who played him. He had gravitas and screen presence, he was very convincing to me.
The rest of the main cast were unmemorable impersonations of the proper characters from the original series. Scotty was too lightweight, Sulu too clichéd, and Chekhov too irritating. The only exception was Uhura who I felt was slightly more than a simple dolled up phone operator.
So after looking at all that it is time for me to write about some of the other aspects of the film.
In a nutshell, this film IS a reboot, of that I am 100% certain, had they just come out and said it in the first place, it would have saved a tenner or so of cash.
The problem I had with it is that even without this time travelling bullshit concocted story there is no way the film would have been consistent with continuity. The ship was wrong inside and out and that is just for a starter. It is one thing to disregard character traits, ship design and established events and story lines that defined continuity throughout the 4 series and 10 previous films. It is another thing to ignore some of the core principals of what makes Trek, Trek.
The biggest indication of it is when I saw and heard the blatant product placement. *Sigh. * The whole point of there being a federation and starfleet in our future is that humanity (and like-minded alien members) has put aside its pettiness and become more enlightened (not perfect people but certainly better than we are now) as a species. Having these examples of capitalism in the 23rd century points to the fact that in Abrams' Trek universe, greed is still alive and kicking.
It goes against everything that trek was about. As does the action bias in the movie. Some of it was completely unnecessary and smacks of something from a Star Wars movie than from a Trek movie.
I don't really like to talk much about the special effects, as it has no bearing on the quality of the movie, but for sure I liked some of the aspects of the VFX. In particular I liked that the ships moved like an object with a huge mass would in space. I also liked the warp effect, not so much when the ship enters it, but exits it, the animators made a good job of making the effect look convincing. Same with the transporter effects, I quite liked them. The use of different colours of the phaser beams made it easy to see if the stun or kill setting was used which was a small touch I liked. I also liked the shuttles, not the design but the way they they were used as a multi-purpose craft instead of a glorified taxi.
So in conclusion, this film was quite clearly aimed at a mainstream teenage audience judging from the dialogue alone, let alone the bloody awful rock music, a music genre I despise. The quick pacing and action bias is is indicative of Paramount's focus towards entertaining the fickle general movie audience, who once the initial novelty factor wears off (maybe after one or two movies later) will move onto something else. There was nothing for my mind to chew on, nothing I could really get emotional about. Just a lot of WTF moments, nausea from the terrible cinematography (if you can call it that), a badly written nonsensical story blended into two hours of noise. Had it not been for the loose association with Trek, this film would have been rightly condemned by critics as another style over substance sci-fi shoot-em-up.
I have debated the final grade for two days and my final decision is Poor.
I think the best way for me to judge the film is to focus solely on three things; the story, the characters and the acting. Special effects, amongst other things don't necessarily make a good movie or a bad movie, they simply serve to illustrate the story in my view. So with that criteria I will now get to what I thought of the movie.
First the story; to break it down it is essentially a revenge story about a man who intends to carry out the destruction of worlds belonging to people (particularly Spock) who he blames for destroying his own world. Sounds pretty reasonable to me, however the circumstances surrounding this motivation are somewhat flimsy. Romulus is facing destruction because the systems sun is about to go nova, and future Spock tries but fails to prevent the disaster. Yet despite Spock trying to help his people, Nero is driven to revenge. This motivation doesn't make sense to me at all; with or without Spock or the federations help, the Romulans would have and should have evacuated the home world in any event, the empire isn't restricted to its own system after all. Why that never happened wasn't answered in the film. Another answer that I didn't get was why didn't Spock use the time travel to go backwards to before the nova happened and warn the Romulans that his actions had failed.
I couldn't empathise or feel anything emotionally towards Nero, he was just one-dimensional. At least with Khan, while he became a megalomaniac I could empathise with the sheer anger he felt after being left on a planet that became uninhabitable claiming the lives of some of his people as well as his wife. I felt something for him despite him going on the rampage.
Next the characters and acting; to me the overall impression I got was that most of the characters were incredibly dumbed down or non-existent. I couldn't warm to any of them except for Spock.
For me Kirk's character is the most assassinated, I found him to be an obnoxious shithouse throughout whole the film. Particularly during the Kobayashi-Maru scenes, he sat there and didn't give a shit that he was cheating, it was all a joke to him. He wasn't making a point (even though he claims he was) he just wanted to have a big laugh and a joke. Kirk in this film was rebellious, but unlike the true Kirk from the original series he wasn't a rebel with any moral convictions or principals, he was rebellious just... because.
McCoy, despite the good impersonation of Deforrest's interpretation of the character by Karl urban, he never really had much to do, which was a bit of a shame since it was the Kirk-Spock-McCoy relationship that was key to the previous films and series, his part should have been more prominent.
Spock was the only main character I liked for the most part. I thought the conflict between his Human and Vulcan sides was handled very well indeed and nicely acted by the guy who played him. He had gravitas and screen presence, he was very convincing to me.
The rest of the main cast were unmemorable impersonations of the proper characters from the original series. Scotty was too lightweight, Sulu too clichéd, and Chekhov too irritating. The only exception was Uhura who I felt was slightly more than a simple dolled up phone operator.
So after looking at all that it is time for me to write about some of the other aspects of the film.
In a nutshell, this film IS a reboot, of that I am 100% certain, had they just come out and said it in the first place, it would have saved a tenner or so of cash.
The problem I had with it is that even without this time travelling bullshit concocted story there is no way the film would have been consistent with continuity. The ship was wrong inside and out and that is just for a starter. It is one thing to disregard character traits, ship design and established events and story lines that defined continuity throughout the 4 series and 10 previous films. It is another thing to ignore some of the core principals of what makes Trek, Trek.
The biggest indication of it is when I saw and heard the blatant product placement. *Sigh. * The whole point of there being a federation and starfleet in our future is that humanity (and like-minded alien members) has put aside its pettiness and become more enlightened (not perfect people but certainly better than we are now) as a species. Having these examples of capitalism in the 23rd century points to the fact that in Abrams' Trek universe, greed is still alive and kicking.
It goes against everything that trek was about. As does the action bias in the movie. Some of it was completely unnecessary and smacks of something from a Star Wars movie than from a Trek movie.
I don't really like to talk much about the special effects, as it has no bearing on the quality of the movie, but for sure I liked some of the aspects of the VFX. In particular I liked that the ships moved like an object with a huge mass would in space. I also liked the warp effect, not so much when the ship enters it, but exits it, the animators made a good job of making the effect look convincing. Same with the transporter effects, I quite liked them. The use of different colours of the phaser beams made it easy to see if the stun or kill setting was used which was a small touch I liked. I also liked the shuttles, not the design but the way they they were used as a multi-purpose craft instead of a glorified taxi.
So in conclusion, this film was quite clearly aimed at a mainstream teenage audience judging from the dialogue alone, let alone the bloody awful rock music, a music genre I despise. The quick pacing and action bias is is indicative of Paramount's focus towards entertaining the fickle general movie audience, who once the initial novelty factor wears off (maybe after one or two movies later) will move onto something else. There was nothing for my mind to chew on, nothing I could really get emotional about. Just a lot of WTF moments, nausea from the terrible cinematography (if you can call it that), a badly written nonsensical story blended into two hours of noise. Had it not been for the loose association with Trek, this film would have been rightly condemned by critics as another style over substance sci-fi shoot-em-up.
I have debated the final grade for two days and my final decision is Poor.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
- Poll
