*** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread - Page 9

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Did Wesley Crusher just get f***ed then?

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Well Wesley never graduated that we saw... but;

Remember the TNG episode, I think it was the one with Worf and his alternate realities. In one of them Wesley had stayed in starfleet and was now a (real) bridge officer on board the Enterprise. So that works out too, mostly.

I think Crusher had to repeat a year or something too, he covered up that Tom Paris murder.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Yeah, but the Red Shirt with the "Kick some Romulan Ass" comment got killed a few seconds later -- classic Trek. I just couldn't help but laugh at the Galaxy Quest moment.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Some thoughts since many of you have covered the major points.

I liked it... not loved it... but liked it. It was indeed a fun movie with lots of TOS references to amuse and/or delight us old fans.

Unfortunately, the main problem is with the story which is trying to explain the origin of the crew, while going through the usual protagonist/antagonist strucure, all in a two hour time frame. Thus, plausability and common sense are thrown out the window. It requires a massive suspension of disbelief. A symptom of this is the rise of Kirk to Captain of the flagship so soon. But what else as do you expect since you want everything to end with everyone in their proper place by the end of the movie. There are other examples that others have sited throughout this thread... the coincidences and contrivances so won't go through that here.

Unimpressed with the Bones explanation as it is just short for "sawbones", but they tried to be cute.

The romance of Uhura and Spock came out of nowhere. The romance itself is not a problem however, it changes the character of Spock greatly. I'm not sure for the better either as he seems to display his emotions when he deems appropriate. While the universe where these characters may change abit to fulfill a reboot, you shouldn't change one of the main characters that is by now iconic and part of the core to the formula that made Star Trek. Hmmm...now we have a Vulcan with passion... maybe the next movie he will have a goatee.

Checkov would have been better placed in the second movie. Just a thought.

I didn't get a sense of the universe Star Trek existed in relation to Roddenberry's vision of the future. If this is a reboot, these elements need to be reintroduced as they help make up the core of Star Trek. I didn't see any type of hopeful future, no references to any challenges overcome... basically I didn't feel as if there was any type of Utopia that Earth was supposed to have become.

Of course, that is an element of science fiction of which this film had none. Disappointing, but not unexpected. This was a basic popcorn action ride and in that it succeeded. It was an entertaining movie.

I'm sure it will make a fine Blu Ray and I look forward to it. That said, if someone comes over and asks to watch Star Trek, it is not this movie I will be reaching for.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Uhhhhhh so....

Cardassia is mentioned way before it was discovered, Kirk gets the Enterpise 15 years early, Bones nickname has nothing to do with old sailing ship doctors but is because of his divorce, The Enterprise is built on the ground....Spock and Uhura..WTF???

I liked Kirk and McCoy, and thought it looked great.


Thats about the only positive things I can say about it. I'm attempting to forget I ever saw it.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

3 viewings and loving it more each time.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Me too, Lou. I'm still writing up my thoughts on it. I could write for hours on the score alone, but this really isn't the place to do that.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Oooooo - please PM me with a link to wherever you do end up putting your thoughts!

Love to read them. I'll be out of town the rest of the week so it may be difficult for me to check in regularly.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Lou,

Hi. Oh, I'll be posting my thoughts on the new film; it's just that a lengthy post on the musical score probably ought to be placed elsewhere. But sure, I'll send that along to you if you wish.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Track 5 ("Enterprising Young Men") is amazing, especially in the context of the film.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Slightly off-topic but for fans of Michael Giachino's score for Trek, his album with selections from Lost: Season Four comes out tomorrow.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Chris,

Thanks for the heads-up.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

I'd be interested too and there are probably going to be others. Maybe you could just post a link. If not, please PM me as well.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Scott,

I look forward to your thoughts on the film too.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

i liked it too and am surprised at the less than gentle welcome it is getting here at htf. i am really waiting for your write up.

i am not going to get into the whole debate though. except one thing. many of you have stated that the music of the movie was uninspired. wtf???? if anyone knows anything about TOS then you would know that much of the score is an interpolation of themes from TOS. i really enjoyed the score as many of the pieces seemed to be referencing themes from TOS.

i grew up on sci fi. i had a sci fi household. both my parents watched everything sci fi especially star trek. my mother was so excited to see this and was extremely pleased with the result.

i have seen it twice now and both times the theater was over 90 percent full.

i am not sure what many of you missed but i was pleased with the film. as for rodenberry's vision. hmmm.... i am sure that is what spock alpha's role was about. especially in his monologue to spock beta in addition to nimoy closing the film with the passage from the opening credits of TOS.

the film managed to:

-reboot series with energy
-establish credibility with new actors in established characters
-make it all familiar
-use nimoy to bridge it all together in a plausbile fashion

and people still have a need to complain.

i think some people just have a need to be contrary.

oooops. i said i wasn't going to get into it.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

HILARIOUS

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

No, from what I've gathered from multiple sources, you aren't the minority in the least. There is a contingent of cheesed off fans, and I'm not saying it's anyone here, who are predictably upset about the movie.

Of course, judging from their posts(elsewhere), I've come to the conclusion that this contigent intended to hate the new movie from the word go, and either they're rather unobservant or they haven't actually seen the movie, as the contingent gets the details pretty wrong. Metacritic's full of these people, pretty much every post < 5 is one of them, it's kinda entertaining to read as they get so much wrong.

Check out metacritic, it really is kinda funny.


You're thinking of linear time. Think of it like Quantum Physics, alinear time. In other words...

At every point where an event occurs, time splits, with each possible event occuring in a different timeline. Meaning, imagine flipping a coin. A number of timelines spawn, one where you decided at the last second to not do it, one where it landed heads in your hand, one tails, one where you dropped it and it landed heads, etc, etc.

That's the same principal behind this. The existing timeline wasn't overwritten, a new timeline was spawned.

If it helps to have more of an explanation how this could possibly occur, in a singularity, all rules of time are off. Singularities actually warp time. So in effect, the warping effect can preserve the existing timeline from disturbance while spawning a new one.

Take your pick, Quantum Physics or Singularity Theory, both are existing solid theories in the real world, and they'll both handle the paradox.


But that's the most entertaining part, he doesn't. He knows how it should pan out, but events have been disturbed sufficiently that they can actually work out much differently.

Butterfly effect and all. Dozens of klingon warships were destroyed when they shouldn't have, Vulcan was destroyed, entire federation ships destroyed, no Pike-in-a-box. The timeline's disrutped, so familiar events can actually play out much differently. Someone who discovered something important may be dead, Sisko's key ancestor may have died. Perhaps the Klingon who shot Kirk's son is dead. Perhaps Nero found Khan and reactivated him, perhaps he redirected the Doomsday machine, perhaps he sent a flare for the borg.

Everything's familiar, but not necessarily the same. Events can precede much differently, and it's a sure guarantee for some variant that tackles a pre-existing Trek with much different results.

So much can happen, just the loss of Vulcan alone makes the federation significantly more vulnerable and creates a loss of reputation. Will all planets still turn to the federation when a key member's planet was destroyed? Can the federation still repel a Klingon or Romulan invasion?

It's a whole different avenue now.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

IIRC, Pike actually made passing reference to something to this effect in his 'recruitment speech' to Kirk in the bar, along the lines that Kirk had something in him that modern-day Starfleet seemed to have lost, and no doubt in furtherance of that, had made Kirk first officer to Spock's captain when Pike left for Nero's ship. And once Kirk saved the day, between him and Spock Prime, I suppose they talked The Powers That Be of Starfleet into giving Kirk command of the Enterprise permanently.

I suppose I can accept the idea of Kirk leapfrogging to captaincy on the above basis, but of the flagship?? They could have made Enterprise "just another ship" and not the flagship of the whole of Starfleet, which would make it a tad more believable. Also, I think it's hard to try and read that the ceremony was 'a few years later' -- they're all still wearing those cadet uniforms (the brown/orange jumpsuits). Granted there's the possibility that the famous yellow/blue/red shirts are on-ship duty uniforms, and they were wearing dress uniforms, but that doesn't seem likely since the cadets were running around what appeared to be their day-to-day business wearing those uniforms, whilst Spock's uniform at the academy was the black number.


I'd agree with the latter point as well, but the bigger nitpick is how can Spock Prime see what's happening to Vulcan from another planet? Even if the planet is in the same solar system? Just as we here on Earth don't see Jupiter or Saturn as nice big round orbs in the sky.


Not that I personally have a problem with it, but I seem to remember reading (or seeing) somewhere an explanation that Russians don't mix and mangle Vs and Ws in English, it's apparently the Polish that do so. But they deliberately maintained this, since Chekov in TOS did so.

Just as between the Chinese and Japanese, apparently one pronounces Rs as Ls and the other Ls as Rs, but I can't remember which is which -- and no just because I'm Chinese doesn't mean I personally know, I don't mangle either...

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

As much as I liked the movie and want to see a sequel or three, I hope that any future movies do not feature time travel. Star Trek films have used that plot device far too many times.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

With this film the time travel sort of just fell into the background for me. In something like "First Contact" you have the protagonists always mentioning the "timeline this", "history that", "paradox blah blah", but here time travel is mainly just used as a way to get two characters in the plot into the story.

The main protagonists in the film aren't actively involved in any time travel so the film never really gets bogged down in it aside from arguably the one scene where they discuss the alternate timeline, which seems to me a forgivable thing given the need to at least mention the rationale used for how this doesn't necessarily destroy the canon everyone knows already.

The main action is definitely in the "here and now" of the story and there's not really any "oh look, person from the future/past being awkward in a time period they know nothing about" cliches.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

While I think it would be an interesting TV episode to see old Spock pumped for information (if they were going to a TV series, they'd have to deal with it), I hope they just keep him busy helping the Vulcan population and don't go that route in another movie.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Way, way off most topics in this thread, but:

I adopted my daughter from Russia two years ago. She is now fully fluent in English, but she still frequently pronounces her Vs as Ws. She has a few other transpositions too (she wears snickers and eats sneakers). Her best friend is a Polish immigrant, who does not transpose these sounds.

Maybe, some Russians do, and some don't. It is a vast country, whiy shouldn't there be regional accents like there are here in the big USA (and in small England, for that matter -- Manchester is very different from London). Hannah is from a very rural area 200 miles northeast of Moscow.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

I agree. Also, such a plot delves right into the canon minutia that this film gets them away from and what they wanted to get away from. This is being built as a film franchise, it needs larger brush strokes in terms of plot lines - unless they decided to start a 3-film arc or something (ie. Matrix, etc.) starting with the next film.

Plus, I get disturbing images of Nimoy being lowered onto what looks like a giant juicer when I hear "Spock pumped for information" so I think the production design would be a bit tricky.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

I agree that that Startfleet isn't what it was during TOS. Pike said it was peacekeeping and humanitarian aid. No it wasn't; it was an exploration and colonizing force similar to Great Britain in the 15th-18th centuries. The movie seemed to indicate The Federation knew a lot more space than they did in TOS. Plus there seem to be a lot more ships around in space than TOS indicated. The movie had more of a TNG feel of flying around known space than TOS had about exploring new space. Yes the movie was obviously in known space but everyone talked about space like it was well explored rather than a seriously large unknown.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

"and people still have a need to complain.
i think some people just have a need to be contrary."

And maybe some of us just didnt like it

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

i just look at it like this, yeah tos is great because it laid the foundation of what trek is, but we can't stay beholden to every detail they laid down.
according to some cannon history i've read they only had 9 ships of constitution class and hardly knew any space at all, this was from the view of the 60's and how fast they thought escalation of technology would take. if space travel was doable today im postive we'd have more than 9 big ships, we'd have dozens and hundreds of support ships.

look now 40 years later and how much more we already know about space and what's out there as far as systems. I dont agree with some of the changes in the movie because i feel they changed it to just change it, but i really enjoyed movie and the mold it had to break and im ready to go see it again.

I think they did a good job of taking the characters and the iconography of the ship and adjusted it to present knowledge of the future without the rose colored 60's glasses.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

I don't mean to single you out, but there seems to be a lot of fans who fail to grasp the concept of alternate reality, and just how monumental the changes can be.

Anything that differs between the alternate reality and the prime reality from before the Narada entered the blackhole is fair game for fans to nitpick (such as the uniforms, et cetera). However, literally *anything* after that event can be anything the movie's creators desire. Cardassia discovered before it was in the prime reality? That can easily be explained away by saying maybe there was some officer on the Kelvin that survived in the prime universe, and went on to captain his own ship. In the alternate reality, because he is dead, a different officer is captain, and that officer made the discovery.

The point being that there isn't a single thing off-limits for change after the alternate reality splinters off. Hell, maybe the great grand-father of the waiter who works at the Café des Artistes in Paris was on the Kelvin, and now that waiter will never be born, and years later, Picard decides to wait for Jenice, the two marry, and everything that happens in his life is different. It's like the TNG episode "Tapestry," writ large.

In sum, one federation ship gets destroyed and everything can change.

Re: *** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread

Oh you must be referring to that homage mess by Singer for Superman. There have been at least three responses on this thread that have reminded me of that debacle directly or indirectly. Simmer down Banner, simmer down you know how you get when you get angry