What's keeping me out of the theatre....

[ST-One]

One of my co-workers saw the movie in the last couple days. This is a very sharp guy, a published poet, he has admired Kurosawa and Jean Renoir for forever and has a film knowledge that in many ways makes mine seem superficial.

But he is somebody who only knows TREK generally. He watched TOS and TNG, a bit of the others, and has seen the movies once or twice.

This very sharp guy came out of this movie thinking that Vulcan had blown up in the original timeline as well.

Just how vague or impressionistic is this mind meld, that a major story point like that can be rendered less than clear to somebody who keeps his head in the game when watching movies?

He's the only person I've spoken with at any length about it so far. The other two people at work who saw it just said it had lots of action and was funny.

I'd say that your co-worker's mind isn't as sharp as you think it is.
Nothing in that mindmeld even suggests that Spock is still in the other universe.
Hell, he tells (and it is shown) that he arrives in 2258, gets captured and then marooned on Delta Vega. It couldn't be more clear.

 

[Masao]

And, for that matter, why are you here to throw up a post like that? Isn't there an entire forum where you get to shit on all the other fans who disagree with you and get away with it? MUST you come into a thread that's obviously about people not sold on the movie?

Vance: Less id, more superego, please.

 

[T'Bonz]

You're just making it easier to stay away from here for more and more of the time.

If you can't behave, well then, that won't sadden me.

 

[Gepard]

One of my co-workers saw the movie in the last couple days. This is a very sharp guy, a published poet, ...
Just how vague or impressionistic is this mind meld, that a major story point like that can be rendered less than clear to somebody who keeps his head in the game when watching movies?

I'd say that your co-worker's mind isn't as sharp as you think it is.
Nothing in that mindmeld even suggests that Spock is still in the other universe.
Hell, he tells (and it is shown) that he arrives in 2258, gets captured and then marooned on Delta Vega. It couldn't be more clear.

Yeah, that's...what? I'm no published poet, but even I wasn't confused about what Spock Prime was telling Kirk. (Now, what it did to the structure of the movie is a whole other issue. But then I guess it wouldn't be Star Trek without a massive gob of exposition somewhere in there to bring the narrative to a screeching halt.) It's about as unsubtle as a brick to the head: Spock literally narrates a condensed version of the Countdown comic in detail, and we see a montage of those same future events unfold on screen.

And, not to be rude, but there's something kind of dick-waving about bringing up some buddy's esoteric interests when trying to argue a minor point of contention about a movie. Wouldn't it have worked just as well to say that the one person you talked with about the meld scene ended up confused and could we clarify?

-Marshall, finding narrative flaws.

 

[Pindar]

I could have been wrong about the film. Sadly in a way, I wasn't. It was worse than I suspected.

Is there nothing at all in new film you liked/didn't hate.

There were plenty of things in it I didn't like, but Karl Urban was outstanding as McCoy.

I just wondered what you thought about his portrayal of the good doctor.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

One of my co-workers saw the movie in the last couple days. This is a very sharp guy, a published poet, ...
Just how vague or impressionistic is this mind meld, that a major story point like that can be rendered less than clear to somebody who keeps his head in the game when watching movies?

I'd say that your co-worker's mind isn't as sharp as you think it is.
Nothing in that mindmeld even suggests that Spock is still in the other universe.
Hell, he tells (and it is shown) that he arrives in 2258, gets captured and then marooned on Delta Vega. It couldn't be more clear.

Yeah, that's...what? I'm no published poet, but even I wasn't confused about what Spock Prime was telling Kirk. (Now, what it did to the structure of the movie is a whole other issue. But then I guess it wouldn't be Star Trek without a massive gob of exposition somewhere in there to bring the narrative to a screeching halt.) It's about as unsubtle as a brick to the head: Spock literally narrates a condensed version of the Countdown comic in detail, and we see a montage of those same future events unfold on screen.

And, not to be rude, but there's something kind of dick-waving about bringing up some buddy's esoteric interests when trying to argue a minor point of contention about a movie. Wouldn't it have worked just as well to say that the one person you talked with about the meld scene ended up confused and could we clarify?

-Marshall, finding narrative flaws.

Unless one is well-versed in SF conventions, the idea of alternate time-lines, universes, realities, etc. can be a bit of a stretch. I can see an otherwise brilliant person being tripped up by a (largely useless) concept we nerds mastered with reading Marvel Comics What If? or DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths. I think it says a lot about how thoroughly SF tropes have invaded the mainstream thata trifle like this Star Trek movie can casually toss around such outlandish and potentially confusing concepts.

 

[ST-One]

I'd say that your co-worker's mind isn't as sharp as you think it is.
Nothing in that mindmeld even suggests that Spock is still in the other universe.
Hell, he tells (and it is shown) that he arrives in 2258, gets captured and then marooned on Delta Vega. It couldn't be more clear.

Yeah, that's...what? I'm no published poet, but even I wasn't confused about what Spock Prime was telling Kirk. (Now, what it did to the structure of the movie is a whole other issue. But then I guess it wouldn't be Star Trek without a massive gob of exposition somewhere in there to bring the narrative to a screeching halt.) It's about as unsubtle as a brick to the head: Spock literally narrates a condensed version of the Countdown comic in detail, and we see a montage of those same future events unfold on screen.

And, not to be rude, but there's something kind of dick-waving about bringing up some buddy's esoteric interests when trying to argue a minor point of contention about a movie. Wouldn't it have worked just as well to say that the one person you talked with about the meld scene ended up confused and could we clarify?

-Marshall, finding narrative flaws.

Unless one is well-versed in SF conventions, the idea of alternate time-lines, universes, realities, etc. can be a bit of a stretch. I can see an otherwise brilliant person being tripped up by a (largely useless) concept we nerds mastered with reading Marvel Comics What If? or DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths. I think it says a lot about how thoroughly SF tropes have invaded the mainstream thata trifle like this Star Trek movie can casually toss around such outlandish and potentially confusing concepts.

Even if you don't understand the concept of alternate universes, that film makes it unmistakably clear where and when the events in this film take place.

We see Vulcan imploding into the black hole.
Then we see old Spock telling Kirk how he got to Delta Vega: he makes it more than clear that he accidentally travels to the past, gets captured by Nero and witnesses the destruction of Vulcan that we have seen a few minutes earlier ourselves.

It's not the fault of the movie that trevanian's co-worker didn't pay attention.

 

[Gepard]

Unless one is well-versed in SF conventions, the idea of alternate time-lines, universes, realities, etc. can be a bit of a stretch. I can see an otherwise brilliant person being tripped up by a (largely useless) concept we nerds mastered with reading Marvel Comics What If? or DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths. I think it says a lot about how thoroughly SF tropes have invaded the mainstream thata trifle like this Star Trek movie can casually toss around such outlandish and potentially confusing concepts.

Fair point. The area where the scene has some issues would definitely be the pacing; like the rest of the film, they present the information pretty fast. If one weren't up to speed on some of these ideas, it might be a lot easier to lose track of what's going on. That said, when I took my family to see the film, my mother, who's not a sci-fi aficionado in any sense, didn't come away from the movie that kind of confusion about what happened when. That also said...

Even if you don't understand the concept of alternate universes, that film makes it unmistakably clear where and when the events in this film take place.

We see Vulcan imploding into the black hole.
Then we see old Spock telling Kirk how he got to Delta Vega: he makes it more than clear that he accidentally travels to the past, gets captured by Nero and witnesses the destruction of Vulcan that we have seen a few minutes earlier ourselves.

It's not the fault of the movie that trevanian's co-worker didn't pay attention.

...also a good point. The information is there. I thin kit more likely that his coworker just missed a point or let his mind wander at a crucial moment or something.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

ST-One does indeed make a good point. Still, I think the altered time-line stuff convolutes this movie in a wholly unnecessary way.

 

[Gepard]

ST-One does indeed make a good point. Still, I think the altered time-line stuff convolutes this movie in a wholly unnecessary way.

Shit. Are we all politely agreeing on stuff? That can't happen; it's against the natural order.

Quick, get T'Bonz and trevanian in here so they'll fight! The fate of the universe depends upon it!

 

[ST-One]

ST-One does indeed make a good point. Still, I think the altered time-line stuff convolutes this movie in a wholly unnecessary way.

This I agree with.
I had hoped for a true 'reboot'.

But they obviously felt it necessary to connect Star Trek to all the Treks of the past. And I think they managed to do that in a way that should please a majority of those of us who are already fans without scaring off or boring to death the normal movie-goers.

 

[Michael]

I had hoped for a true 'reboot'.

Yeah, me, too. The time travel element is one thing I really could have done without. Not because I dislike time travel plots per se (as many seem to do), but because it really felt like it was shoe-horned into the movie to justify Leonard Nimoy's appearance and (more importantly) provide an in-universe reason for the reboot. It would have been much more ballsy on the writer's part to just tell the story (a good story) and disregard any fictional canon. Because, personally, I couldn't care less why everything looks different and unfolds in a different way.

Shit. Are we all politely agreeing on stuff? That can't happen; it's against the natural order.

Yeah, the thought scares me, too.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

You're all a bunch of assholes! Assholes, I say! Asshoooooooooooooooooles!

(Natural order restored.)

 

[Kirk1980]

That feels better. The tenor was becoming positively academic before that.

I too will join in for wishing we had had a true reboot.

It would have potentially saved this movie a lot of grief and contrivances.

 

[RAMA]

There are now more theaters showing the movie that you guys can ignore (exciting, I know..), from 3849 to 3860 in its second week.

The sad little ST movie is grossing $27,179 per engagement as compared to $8,207 for Wolverine. Almost $117 million in 8 days domestically. Almost $50 million internationally with openings yet in Japan, China, and India. $167 million.

ST-One does indeed make a good point. Still, I think the altered time-line stuff convolutes this movie in a wholly unnecessary way.

Its the other way around, the time travel element was used once and the writers will not revisit it (according to interviews). It is there so we have a familiar universe to watch, but they no longer HAVE to worry about exact future events. The universe can now have more danger and stories because they are not limited by canon. What do they do in this new universe? Well Romulus and Vulcan are destroyed. It tells you right there that the new ST timeline will be exciting and different. It was a perfect solution.

RAMA

 

[Therin of Andor]

They didn't go that route because they were either lazy and didn't care or they didn't know how. And if they think that they did go the "fun and smart" route then they just proved themselves incompetent.

Balderdash. It was made by the creators of "Lost" and "Cloverfield", both innovative and successful crowd-pleasers, and we got exactly the movie they promised. They weren't lazy, they did care, and they weren't incompetent.

And I absolutely loved "Master and Commander", "The Dark Knight" and "Casino Royale". And "Star Trek". (Disliked "Quantum of Solace".)

You've been saying for years (even in your sig.) that ST ended for you in 1979. That's tough for you, but your decision to make. 1979 was the beginning for me, and I've enjoyed riding out all the highs and lows ever since, and doing the research on what came before TMP.

 

[Kirk1980]

RAMA, I ask once again... what is the point of telling us how much the movie is making? Neither Warped or anybody else who doesn't like what they've heard of this movie have claimed that they're going to make a dent in the film's profitability.

It's more about what's keeping people (in their obvious minority which you discount out of hand) who enjoy Trek out of theaters where NEW Trek is being played.

But hey, if it makes you feel good.

Yes, that's a lot of money.

 

[Therin of Andor]

In the case of Trek XI I was bummed already by the many things they've changed that I didn't agree with that I wasn't predisposed to support the project with my cash.

I went to see premiere night of ST V, with the same friends with whom I'd watched STs II, III and IV. Even though we strongly suspected we were going to hate much of ST V - and there was plenty in it that vindicated those suspicions - we still had a hilarious time, both during the film, and at dinner afterwards, dissecting it, and thinking up ways to heckle the screen at our next viewing. Plus, there were some unexpected good bits.

It's a very small amount of cash for a fun night with friends, even if it turns out to be a hideous film.

 

[RAMA]

RAMA, I ask once again... what is the point of telling us how much the movie is making? Neither Warped or anybody else who doesn't like what they've heard of this movie have claimed that they're going to make a dent in the film's profitability.

It's more about what's keeping people (in their obvious minority which you discount out of hand) who enjoy Trek out of theaters where NEW Trek is being played.

But hey, if it makes you feel good.

Yes, that's a lot of money.

The original intent of this thread and those like it at the time was to suggest they WERE going to impact the grosses. Up until the very release of the movie they naysayers were saying how badly it was going to do. So now the movie is satisfying the majority of the older demographic and has "legs" with the younger fans. I'd say that's a pretty good reason to keep posting how wrong they were, don't you think?

In the case of Trek XI I was bummed already by the many things they've changed that I didn't agree with that I wasn't predisposed to support the project with my cash.

I went to see premiere night of ST V, with the same friends with whom I'd watched STs II, III and IV. Even though we strongly suspected we were going to hate much of ST V - and there was plenty in it that vindicated those suspicions - we still had a hilarious time, both during the film, and at dinner afterwards, dissecting it, and thinking up ways to heckle the screen at our next viewing. Plus, there were some unexpected good bits.

It's a very small amount of cash for a fun night with friends, even if it turns out to be a hideous film.

Sadly I had a different experience, after the high of STIV, I went to the movie with my sister and her boyfriend(wow I was 19), an avowed LOTR and SW fan, and the movie proved to be a total embarrassment. It wasn't till STNG had vindicated the ST universe that I could get people to see ST movies with me.

So far I have seen ST(2009) with 8 people, 3 of which were not Trekkers and 3 who were only moderate fans.

RAMA

 

[Warped9]

ST-One does indeed make a good point. Still, I think the altered time-line stuff convolutes this movie in a wholly unnecessary way.

This I agree with.
I had hoped for a true 'reboot'.

But they obviously felt it necessary to connect Star Trek to all the Treks of the past. And I think they managed to do that in a way that should please a majority of those of us who are already fans without scaring off or boring to death the normal movie-goers.

There were moments in the film where I actually wondered about this. At one point the future Spock appears surprised that Kirk isn't already captain of the Enterprise. You could read that as the timeline this future Spock is from is different from the familiar TOS continuity where Kirk surely doesn't command the Enterprise only a few years out of the Academy. The way this is written and played out is rather muddy and possibly deliberately so. If that is the case then this is a true enough reboot and can be accepted as such.

I do agree that they could have done away with this whole alternate universe/time-travel angle and just have started with a clean sheet and not bother trying to explain it. It's been done in other franchises and it could have been here.

I think what Abrams was aiming for is what has been done often in comics, in the new BSG and in Doctor Who over the years. He's taken the basic elements of the so-called mythos of Trek and used them to his own purpose. In that sense then it is a true reboot.

So rather than get caught up in from where this future Spock came from why not just enjoy this restart on its own terms?

The original intent of this thread and those like it at the time was to suggest they WERE going to impact the grosses. Up until the very release of the movie they naysayers were saying how badly it was going to do. So now the movie is satisfying the majority of the older demographic and has "legs" with the younger fans. I'd say that's a pretty good reason to keep posting how wrong they were, don't you think?

RAMA

Speaking only for myself that is not so. The thread's intent was merely to state why I and I alone would stay out of the theatre. If other like-minded folks wished to chime in that was solely their choice.

If nothing else this movie has prompted me to revisit the previous Trek films since it's been quite some time since I've seen them. And time has a way of giving you a fresh perspective.