Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

*** Official STAR TREK (2009) Discussion Thread


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
655 replies to this topic

#1 of 656 OFFLINE   Stephen Orr

Stephen Orr

    Screenwriter



  • 1,105 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 1999

Posted May 06 2009 - 07:39 AM

Two negative reviews have dropped RT to 96% with 54 total reviews. After reading the negative one, I really didn't understand their dislike for what's basically a crowd-pleasing, big budget, what-the-Star-Wars-prequels-should-have-been summer popcorn movie. They seemed to be negative just to be negative.

That said, Imax on Friday at 7, baby! Tickets are in the glove compartment!

#2 of 656 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer



  • 5,558 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted May 06 2009 - 09:53 AM

two and a half stars from ebert.
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#3 of 656 OFFLINE   Brent M

Brent M

    Producer



  • 4,486 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2001

Posted May 06 2009 - 10:09 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
two and a half stars from ebert.

This is the same guy that gave Van Helsing 3 stars. I respect Ebert, but some of his reviews can be very perplexing. Even though I haven't seen Star Trek yet I'm willing to bet every dollar I have(and even some of my vital organs) that it's a thousand times better than the steaming pile that was Van Helsing.
"If you're good at something, never do it for free."

#4 of 656 ONLINE   Steve Christou

Steve Christou

    Executive Producer



  • 14,439 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000
  • Real Name:Steve Christou
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted May 06 2009 - 10:23 AM

Posted Image Did Ebert really give Van Helsing 3 stars? Thats great, I love Ebert, so unpredictable. Some of you young guys have already made up your minds this is the greatest ever Star Trek film before you'd even seen it. A Star Trek movie directed by a Star Wars fan, I'm sure it'll be action packed, and the old series is back on tv again, it's all good. Posted Image

Dave hören... auf, wille stoppen sie Dave... stoppen sie Dave... Mein gehirn geht... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin ängstlich Dave... Guter Nachmittag. Ich bin ein HAL 9000 computer. Ich wurde funktionsfähig am HAL-Betrieb in Urbana, Illinois auf January 12 1992.


Lord of the Hubs


#5 of 656 OFFLINE   Jason_V

Jason_V

    Producer



  • 4,841 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2001
  • Real Name:Jason
  • LocationBothell, WA

Posted May 06 2009 - 10:54 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent M
This is the same guy that gave Van Helsing 3 stars. I respect Ebert, but some of his reviews can be very perplexing. Even though I haven't seen Star Trek yet I'm willing to bet every dollar I have(and even some of my vital organs) that it's a thousand times better than the steaming pile that was Van Helsing.

With all respect to Ebert, he either didn't watch the movie closely enough or didn't understand it.

One of his complaints is why crew members skydive onto a drilling platform instead of beaming. That is very explicitly explained before the sequence occurs. He also whines about the use of warp speed and how it makes the galaxy smaller. Warp speed goes ALL the way back to Jeffrey Hunter in The Cage.

(He also rails on the use of time travel and how it happens in this movie. Dude...seriously? You're complaining about something we know nothing about?)

But whatever. I saw it, I very much liked it as a fan and a critic.

#6 of 656 OFFLINE   Brent M

Brent M

    Producer



  • 4,486 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2001

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Christou
Posted Image Did Ebert really give Van Helsing 3 stars? Thats great, I love Ebert, so unpredictable.


Yes, unfortunately he did.

Van Helsing :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews
"If you're good at something, never do it for free."

#7 of 656 OFFLINE   SilverWook

SilverWook

    Screenwriter



  • 1,601 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2006

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:22 AM

Movie critics should fess up when they make a bathroom run, or hit the snack bar, and miss a plot point or two. Posted Image

And seriously, without warp speed (or hyperspace) we wouldn't have most science fiction stories period!

#8 of 656 OFFLINE   PaulDA

PaulDA

    Screenwriter



  • 2,583 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 09 2004
  • Real Name:Paul
  • LocationSt. Hubert, Quebec, Canada

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
two and a half stars from ebert.
However, on balance, it remains a positive review (just not an enthusiastic one). If anyone wants to know what it's like when he writes a clearly negative review, read his review of Wolverine.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.

#9 of 656 OFFLINE   Jason_V

Jason_V

    Producer



  • 4,841 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2001
  • Real Name:Jason
  • LocationBothell, WA

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulDA
However, on balance, it remains a positive review (just not an enthusiastic one). If anyone wants to know what it's like when he writes a clearly negative review, read his review of Wolverine.

But when you use quite clear plot points as a condemnation of the movie, there's a huge problem.

#10 of 656 ONLINE   Steve Christou

Steve Christou

    Executive Producer



  • 14,439 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000
  • Real Name:Steve Christou
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:56 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent M
Yes, unfortunately he did.

Van Helsing :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews


Well he does admit it was silly, and fun. Which is how I saw it. Posted Image

He thought Star Trek was fun too, he just wasn't blown away by it. Hmmm he gave Wolverine just 2 stars, maybe Ebert's getting a bit grumpy and mean in his old age. Posted Image

As for best Star Trek movie soundtrack, easy - Star Trek The Motion Picture - by the late great much missed Jerry Goldsmith.

Dave hören... auf, wille stoppen sie Dave... stoppen sie Dave... Mein gehirn geht... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin ängstlich Dave... Guter Nachmittag. Ich bin ein HAL 9000 computer. Ich wurde funktionsfähig am HAL-Betrieb in Urbana, Illinois auf January 12 1992.


Lord of the Hubs


#11 of 656 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,372 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted May 06 2009 - 02:00 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Orr
Two negative reviews have dropped RT to 96% with 54 total reviews. After reading the negative one, I really didn't understand their dislike for what's basically a crowd-pleasing, big budget, what-the-Star-Wars-prequels-should-have-been summer popcorn movie.
I think that's the problem. What is expected from Star Wars is not what is expected from Star Trek. As someone whose connection to Star Trek is limited to the occasional rerun in syndication (and more recently Spike), I think the movie looks entertaining as hell and can't wait to catch it in IMAX. For someone like Ebert who has sat through all of the previous movies that achieve varying degrees of mediocrity, though, the dumbing down of the franchise and sudden lack of concern for scientific plausibility is probably pretty disappointing.

#12 of 656 OFFLINE   Chris Will

Chris Will

    Supporting Actor



  • 748 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 07 2003
  • Real Name:Chris WIlliams
  • LocationMontgomery, AL

Posted May 06 2009 - 04:03 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverWook
And seriously, without warp speed (or hyperspace) we wouldn't have most science fiction stories period!
Hey, a movie without warp speed could be pretty fun. Just think about it, the Enterprise leaves Earth orbit with a young fresh crew to go fight Nero. Title card... "30 Years Later" they finally reach Nero and the battle begins. Only now you have Shat, Nimoy and the rest of the old gang (those still with us) playing the roles again because the crew aged so much! Of course the sequel will have to be another reboot because the crew will be dead by the time they get back to Earth.

This time tomorrow I will have finally seen Star Trek!!!!

#13 of 656 OFFLINE   Kevin Hewell

Kevin Hewell

    Screenwriter



  • 1,979 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 28 2003

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:42 PM

Quote:
Nero as a villain is a flat, predictable and forgettable character, and merely serves his purpose. Like a mixture of Dr. Soran, Khan and Shinzon. He basically is a prop piece.

The film wasn't really about Nero, though. It was about our favorite characters played by new actors and the character interactions between them.

#14 of 656 OFFLINE   Oliver_A

Oliver_A

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 126 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2006

Posted May 06 2009 - 11:59 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Hewell
The film wasn't really about Nero, though. It was about our favorite characters played by new actors and the character interactions between them.

You actually did read my review, didn't you?

#15 of 656 OFFLINE   Sean Laughter

Sean Laughter

    Screenwriter



  • 1,385 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 03 1999

Posted May 07 2009 - 12:04 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Hewell
The film wasn't really about Nero, though. It was about our favorite characters played by new actors and the character interactions between them.

I won't be seeing this until tonight (IMAX!! Yay!!!), but it still would be nice to have a Star Trek film that got a villain right. Yes, yes, we can argue about Khan, who was great for what he was, but he really doesn't have that much more going for him, character-wise, than Shinzon or Alien God, unless you want to count one extra episode of backstory. I mean, don't get me wrong, I can't stand Nemesis, but (remembering I've yet to see the film) I really don't see how Nero is anymore interesting or less a Khan-copy than Shinzon was.

I still say First Contact had the best villain in any of the films because the Borg had a good amount of history and backstory in the universe, they were well used, and had history with the crew. They were also a villain people at the time were itching to see in a film since that was before Voyager ran the Borg into the ground.

Ebert's problems with this film also perplex me, because I remember seeing his First Contact review on the Siskel & Ebert show (as opposed to reading a print review) and he made no mention of taking issue with the time travel in that one. Obviously, they used warp drive in that film too, etc. Those seem likely highly odd things to be critical of in a freaking Star Trek movie for crying out loud.

#16 of 656 OFFLINE   Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer



  • 5,345 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted May 07 2009 - 01:02 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver_A
And I am actually being very critical here, I REALLY wanted to hate that movie.

Sorry, I wish I could appreciate your input but that statement invalidates everything you posted sadly. Plus frankly, I don`t get that type of mindset.
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#17 of 656 OFFLINE   Jason_V

Jason_V

    Producer



  • 4,841 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2001
  • Real Name:Jason
  • LocationBothell, WA

Posted May 07 2009 - 01:07 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Hewell
The film wasn't really about Nero, though. It was about our favorite characters played by new actors and the character interactions between them.

Agreed. He was there to set the plot in motion and had very little to actually do. Why does Trek have such an issue with the bad guy, anyway?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver_A
I had a hard time enjoying that film, because I was in a constant state of motion sickness due to the shaky camera "work". The film does not stop. EVERY scene (even character moments!) has a shaky camera constantly hurling around the sets. In action scenes, it gives you a claustrophobic feeling, and very little time to process what is actually happening on the screen, and in my book, this is far from being a good action movie, where everything flows nicely.

It was never more noticeable for me than in the first 20 minutes. The jerky camera, not knowing exactly what we were looking at and a bunch of new characters didn't work in that combination for me. Then there's one long shot on Vulcan where the camera is tilted on its side and straightens out as it zooms in...very odd choices. (Yeah, lots of closeups, especially early on...)

2014 Movie Diary on Letterboxd


#18 of 656 OFFLINE   Stephen Orr

Stephen Orr

    Screenwriter



  • 1,105 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 1999

Posted May 07 2009 - 01:18 AM

Yeah, all four of the "negative" reviews complain about how the movie is exactly what it is supposed to be. Go figure. There is absolutely nothing wrong with updating old franchises to reflect the times, and I wish critics would get over it. James Bond and Batman come to mind.

And although I haven't seen the movie yet, it sound likes the new Star Trek still honors Gene R's vision of a hopefully future, renegade Romulan not withstanding.

#19 of 656 OFFLINE   Oliver_A

Oliver_A

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 126 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2006

Posted May 07 2009 - 01:32 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou Sytsma
Sorry, I wish I could appreciate your input but that statement invalidates everything you posted sadly. Plus frankly, I don`t get that type of mindset.

And I don't get what you are actually trying to say here. I am wrong, because of my initial dislike of the trailer?

This invalidates NOTHING about my post. The film had good acting, the plot wasn't quite original (which isn't uncommon among Star Trek films, even the good ones) and bad camera work. It's a lot better than NEMESIS, so in the end, I was actually pleasantly surprised. So what's the problem? Did YOU actually watch it, or are you just having a random poke at me because you don't like my opinion?

#20 of 656 OFFLINE   Paul Arnette

Paul Arnette

    Screenwriter



  • 2,616 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 16 2002

Posted May 07 2009 - 01:35 AM

For anyone aching to know more about Nero, you can read the Star Trek prequel comic Countdown. While interesting, I don't really think the comic did all that great a job of providing additional motivation for him though.

Every Star Trek movie outside of The Wrath of Khan and First Contact, to a lesser degree, has had underwhelming villains. Am I willing to give this film a pass on this score based on how much exposition it has to setup in addition to getting itself out of the corner the previous movies painted themselves into.

Next time I won't be however, Star Trek II or whatever it winds up being called had better have a truly memorable villain that isn't a refugee from the Eugenics Wars. Posted Image
Universal Blu-ray Discs I will not be buying while they're offered only as Blu-ray + DVD 'flipper' discs:

The Jackal
, Out of Africa, and Traffic.


Back to Movies (Theatrical)



Forum Nav Content I Follow