New Trek early reports.

POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 18:09
VIEWED: 10494
PAGE 5 of 8

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE

CALHOUN

Friday, May 8, 2009 4:01 AM

Just got back from the new Trek movie.. I liked it!! nay.. I LIKED IT ALOT!!!

It stayed true enough to all the other Trek but it was more as well. My only real gripe was the space battle action scenes were too fast, phasers, photons and explosions all happening too fast to really see.

It definitely left me wanting more. Bring on the next one!!!

STEAMER

Friday, May 8, 2009 4:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
In TMP, is Commander Willard Decker (Stephen Collins) related to Commodore Matt Decker ( William Windom) from The Doomsday Machine? I haven't seen TMP in a long while so I forget if any relationship is mentioned.

Yes, they were father and son - it was mentioned in several sources but not explicitly on screen. (I took it to heart a bit since TDM is my livelong favourite Trek episode ever.) If it was brought up on screen, the scene and/or the dialogue was deleted - but it would have been interesting if Decker Sr.'s death was referred to and then went on to shadow Kirk and Decker Jr. for the rest of the movie.

Hey, JewelStaiteFan....where was that Thurs 7pm showing of yours? There was one in my area, too. Small 'verse?

I liked the movie. I really liked the movie. I would have written it differently (and if I were J.J. I'd steer clear of Star Trek conventions for a while), but for the most part the characters were spot-on. Karl Urban, for one, has McCoy down cold. I had my issues with the story, but I thought the dialogue and the acting were brilliant. Of course you know the whole reason for

Select to view spoiler:

Nero skewering history and creating an alternate timeline

was just so the fat-asses at Paramount could make a whole new series of movies featuring the old gang with new faces - give them half a chance to milk it and they'll milk it to the 23rd century and beyond. :P

Serenity flies
At a hundred per
Is Wash nervous?
Tsai-bu-shr!
FIREFLY

Captain of the New England Browncoats
http://www.myspace.com/nebrowncoats

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Friday, May 8, 2009 5:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Steamer:

Hey, JewelStaiteFan....where was that Thurs 7pm showing of yours? There was one in my area, too. Small 'verse?

Serenity flies
At a hundred per
Is Wash nervous?
Tsai-bu-shr!
FIREFLY

Captain of the New England Browncoats

My 7pm was at Tri-City Cinema, for Quinnesec, Kingsford, Iron Mountian MI. The theater had sound problems, I'll likely see it again in a better theater. I liked it, didn't have any problem with the story, they did a great job of tying all loose ends together from all the shows and films.

VECTREXER

Friday, May 8, 2009 5:46 AM

Star Trek review! Will be scanning my ticket stub for a review update later. Here is what I wrote on the stub:
* Visual A
* Action C+
* Timing d
* Pacing F
* Plot D
* Plot is one big string of Star Trek clichés!
* Boring!
* Wait for the Video!
* Don't spend your $11.00. (Century Theaters, Daly City, CA)

The theater was in perfect form btw. Only the movie had issues.

I predict that Star Trek will not be a counted as a big win for this weekend.

Overall this "reboot" of Star Trek does not fulfill the promise of Star Trek as a series. Bleak outlook. Forced Comedy. Thoughtless and implausible action and plot development. Even for a cheesy SciFi flick.

Scene to scene the film appears as a collage rather than a montage. As to my rating the pacing as an F. The reason I give it this score is this. Most films give you a break in between the emotional sequences or the action sequences. There are scenes that act as interludes so that you can absorb or react to what you just saw. The interludes also allow you to come down from your highs so that you can react to and appreciate the next scenes presented. Neither JJ Abrams nor any of the editors understands this bit wisdom. Instead, they run up Star Trek to warp speed and leave it there as they zoom from one implausible scene to the next. The very height of poor directing and editing.

I rate Starship Troopers as more fun and enjoyable than Star Trek

Bits of advice. If you go to Star Trek then do two things.
1) Go to the IMAX showing to get the best visual possible.
2) (and do this no matter what) Get food for the movie. Your tongue and mouth will need to provide some distraction for your brain during this movie.
I rate Starship Troopers as more fun and enjoyable than Star Trek

Bits of advice. If you go to Star Trek then do two things.
1) Go to the IMAX showing to get the best visual possible.
2) (and do this no matter what) Get food for the movie. Your tongue and mouth will need to provide some distraction for your brain during this movie.

I've enjoyed the hell out of Star Trek for long time (30+ years). The producers can shove this version up their black hole.

As I mentioned above, this is one film that you can wait on for the video.

Serenity definitely kicks Star Treks' ass!

CALHOUN

Friday, May 8, 2009 6:40 AM

Quote:
Vectrexer wrote:
Thursday, May 07, 2009 19:46
Star Trek review! Will be scanning my ticket stub for a review update later. Here is what I wrote on the stub:
* Visual A
* Action C+
* Timing d
* Pacing F
* Plot D
* Plot is one big string of Star Trek clichés!
* Boring!
* Wait for the Video!
* Don't spend your $11.00. (Century Theaters, Daly City, CA)

The theater was in perfect form btw. Only the movie had issues.

I predict that Star Trek will not be a counted as a big win for this weekend.

Overall this "reboot" of Star Trek does not fulfill the promise of Star Trek as a series. Bleak outlook. Forced Comedy. Thoughtless and implausible action and plot development. Even for a cheesy SciFi flick.

Scene to scene the film appears as a collage rather than a montage. As to my rating the pacing as an F. The reason I give it this score is this. Most films give you a break in between the emotional sequences or the action sequences. There are scenes that act as interludes so that you can absorb or react to what you just saw. The interludes also allow you to come down from your highs so that you can react to and appreciate the next scenes presented. Neither JJ Abrams nor any of the editors understands this bit wisdom. Instead, they run up Star Trek to warp speed and leave it there as they zoom from one implausible scene to the next. The very height of poor directing and editing.

I rate Starship Troopers as more fun and enjoyable than Star Trek

Bits of advice. If you go to Star Trek then do two things.
1) Go to the IMAX showing to get the best visual possible.
2) (and do this no matter what) Get food for the movie. Your tongue and mouth will need to provide some distraction for your brain during this movie.
I rate Starship Troopers as more fun and enjoyable than Star Trek

Bits of advice. If you go to Star Trek then do two things.
1) Go to the IMAX showing to get the best visual possible.
2) (and do this no matter what) Get food for the movie. Your tongue and mouth will need to provide some distraction for your brain during this movie.

I've enjoyed the hell out of Star Trek for long time (30+ years). The producers can shove this version up their black hole.

As I mentioned above, this is one film that you can wait on for the video.

Serenity definitely kicks Star Treks' ass!

You are entitled to your opinion of course, though it should be shoved inside that same black hole you spoke of..

as for editing.. your post needs a little of that.

as for editing.. your post needs a little of that.

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Friday, May 8, 2009 6:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Vectrexer:
Star Trek review! Will be scanning my ticket stub for a review update later. Here is what I wrote on the stub:
* Visual A
* Action C+
* Timing d
* Pacing F
* Plot D
* Plot is one big string of Star Trek clichés!
* Boring!
* Wait for the Video!
* Don't spend your $11.00. (Century Theaters, Daly City, CA)

The theater was in perfect form btw. Only the movie had issues.

I predict that Star Trek will not be a counted as a big win for this weekend.

Overall this "reboot" of Star Trek does not fulfill the promise of Star Trek as a series. Bleak outlook. Forced Comedy. Thoughtless and implausible action and plot development. Even for a cheesy SciFi flick.

Scene to scene the film appears as a collage rather than a montage. As to my rating the pacing as an F. The reason I give it this score is this. Most films give you a break in between the emotional sequences or the action sequences. There are scenes that act as interludes so that you can absorb or react to what you just saw. The interludes also allow you to come down from your highs so that you can react to and appreciate the next scenes presented. Neither JJ Abrams nor any of the editors understands this bit wisdom. Instead, they run up Star Trek to warp speed and leave it there as they zoom from one implausible scene to the next. The very height of poor directing and editing.

I rate Starship Troopers as more fun and enjoyable than Star Trek

Bits of advice. If you go to Star Trek then do two things.
1) Go to the IMAX showing to get the best visual possible.
2) (and do this no matter what) Get food for the movie. Your tongue and mouth will need to provide some distraction for your brain during this movie.
I rate Starship Troopers as more fun and enjoyable than Star Trek

Bits of advice. If you go to Star Trek then do two things.
1) Go to the IMAX showing to get the best visual possible.
2) (and do this no matter what) Get food for the movie. Your tongue and mouth will need to provide some distraction for your brain during this movie.

I've enjoyed the hell out of Star Trek for long time (30+ years). The producers can shove this version up their black hole.

As I mentioned above, this is one film that you can wait on for the video.

Serenity definitely kicks Star Treks' ass!

i would disagree with all your conclusions.

MACBAKER

Friday, May 8, 2009 9:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

i would disagree with all your conclusions.

What she said! Other than the A for visuals, I couldn't agree less with your grades. Did you see the same movie? Did you even try to go in with an open mind?

Folks, spend your money seeing this on a big screen! Don't wait for the Blue-ray or the DVD. Preferably, see it in a iMax or mega screened theater, with digital projection!

I'm a nit-picky hardcore fan, old enough to remember Star Trek during it's first run on NBC in the late sixties. I went in with a cautious attitude about this "new" Star Trek.

I certainly didn't like certain design elements, like the ship, the "Apple Store" bridge set, and the chromed out props. Still don't love them, but the designs are slowly growing on me. Still think the Enterprise from ST:TMP is the best looking E ever!

Story; yeah there are some weak plot points, but overall no worse than other Trek movies of the past. The pacing was fast and it kept the story moving! I did like seeing these classic characters grow into their familiar positions. For a prequel movie, this seems to be the only one that has done it right.

Casting: Pine and Quinto are fine as Kirk and Spock. Quinto looks like a young Nimoy, but he brings his own style to the character, while still being Spock! Pine thankfully does not play Kirk like Shatner. I love the Shat, but no one can play the character his way, without it coming off as a parody. Pine does bring in some of Kirk's swagger and confidence, and he's got the chops to lead this franchise!

Zoe Saldana as Uhura gets to do far more than poor Nichelle ever got to do, and she VERY sexy in the role! Uhura is a brilliant woman who finally gets to do more than open hailing frequencies!

Karl Urban's performance as Bones is simply amazing! Any Deforest Fans (like myself) will be moved by how well he seems to channel Mr. Kelly.

John Cho is wonderful as Sulu. I love the "parking brake" scene, and Sulu gets a chance to kick ass too!

Simon Pegg as Scotty, is clearly there lighten the mood. His accent is dead on Scottish, and he treats the role with respect due Mr. Doohan's engineer.

The one sore spot for me was Yelchin's Chekov. His accent was so thick it hard to understand at times.

The supporting cast is brilliant. Bruce Greenwood as Pike is the perfect father figure, and he played the character with the same gentle but stern nature that Jeffery Hunter brought to the role.

Chris Hemsworth and Jennifer Morrison as Kirk's parents do fine with their brief roles, and Winona Ryder as Spock's human mother Amanda works better than I would have expected.

Ben Cross as Sarek was slightly disappointing, but only because Mark Lenard became the quintessential template for vulcans! Even an actor as good as Cross, seemed to have trouble filling those legendary shoes!

Eric Bana was also a bit of a disappointment, but only because he gets so little screen time. What I did see I liked. He plays Nero with a casual delivery that was almost Ledgeresque in how he made it look easy. This is not a typical over the top Trek villain.

Some have compared Nero to Shinzon in Nemesis! On the surface this seems correct. Yes, they both are from Romulus, and yes, they both have reasons for vengeance, but their styles are completely different. Shinzon was another in a long line of self important over the top villains. Nero is more subtle and contained, like a bomb that could blow at any time.

Lastly, Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime. Yeah, he's showing is age. More so than even Shatner. Who cares! It was great to see him play Spock again, and his actions are pivotal to the whole movie and to this new time line.

Overall, this movie was one big amazing thrill ride! It delivered in so many ways. Is it perfect? No! Does it work? Yes!

If you can't get past the changes, and accept this version, then take it for what it is, an alternate reality. Ignore it, and keep watching the classic shows and movies.

I'll still watch the classic Trek, but I

CALHOUN

Friday, May 8, 2009 10:26 AM

Well said Mac!

NAVYSEILS

Friday, May 8, 2009 11:29 AM

I saw it last night and I can say that I was very impressed. I never got all that into star trek, but I've seen enough that I knew who everyone was, and in my opinion they did a pretty good job of bringing out a modern take on the classic series. If you're on the fence about it, I'm another vote for the crowd saying give it a shot.

JONGSSTRAW

Friday, May 8, 2009 12:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Steamer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
In TMP, is Commander Willard Decker (Stephen Collins) related to Commodore Matt Decker ( William Windom) from The Doomsday Machine? I haven't seen TMP in a long while so I forget if any relationship is mentioned.

Yes, they were father and son - it was mentioned in several sources but not explicitly on screen. (I took it to heart a bit since TDM is my livelong favourite Trek episode ever.) If it was brought up on screen, the scene and/or the dialogue was deleted - but it would have been interesting if Decker Sr.'s death was referred to and then went on to shadow Kirk and Decker Jr. for the rest of the movie.

Thanks a lot for your response. For some reason I never really thought about their same names before, but the other night I watched Doomsday Machine, which I hadn't seen in a while. Really a superior episode.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE