New Star Trek Film (no spoilers)

JCBoney · Post by **JCBoney** » Sat May 09, 2009 12:20 pm

Saw it. Enjoyed the hell out of it. Good job, JJ Abrams.

DuBeers · Post by **DuBeers** » Sat May 09, 2009 12:48 pm

Falconer wrote:Like Firefly, that was cool.

Firefly was the greatest.

grodog · Post by **grodog** » Sat May 09, 2009 12:58 pm

Heather and I saw it last night, and enjoyed the film---it was fun and entertaining, but neither of us are hardcore Trek fans. It seemed a bit more "generic action movie" to me---in particular in the fighting scenes (both man-to-man and starship battles)---but that is the result of the directing style vs. a fault of the subject matter. I gave it 7/10, Heather a little less.

WereSteve · Post by **WereSteve** » Sat May 09, 2009 7:05 pm

Saw it ... fair to middlin SciFi flick ... but definitely not TOS in theme or spirit ...

Palmer · Post by **Palmer** » Sat May 09, 2009 8:22 pm

Ahbrams Trek is to the original series as 4E is to OD&D.

JDJarvis · Post by **JDJarvis** » Sat May 09, 2009 9:19 pm

Saw it tonight, it was pretty darned good. It felt like a TOS movie to me. Kirk gets his butt kicked and he makes Kirk expressions. Yeah Kirk, I said it the character was actually Kirk. Different actor playing the character.

No one was going to make an original series storyline movie with the old cast anymore after all.

My only complaint is Kirk was in more then one fistfight and didn't have his shirt ripped open to reveal his flabby chest muscles.

JDJarvis · Post by **JDJarvis** » Sat May 09, 2009 9:25 pm

James Maliszewski wrote:No need to apologize. "Re-imaginings" are just a sore spot with me.

Yeah it's sort of like someone publishing "original" D&D campaign setting material that is tied to a previously existing setting , despite how well crafted and cool it is it really isn't original and couldn't possibly hold a candle to what was done before...

TRP · Post by **TRP** » Sat May 09, 2009 10:10 pm

Big thumbs up.

ETA: For reference in my tastes:

Original Star Trek: The Gold Standard
Deep Space Nine: Pretty Good
Enterprise's last season: Pretty Good
Enterprise & ST:TNG: Mediocre at their best
Voyager: The Pits

The Movies: nothing really worthwhile after Save The Whales and nothing actually good after Search For Spock. Wrath of Khan being The Gold Standard for the films, of course.

This new Star Trek film rates below only Wrath of Khan, IMO.

blackprinceofmuncie · Post by **blackprinceofmuncie** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:03 pm

TheRedPriest wrote:This new Star Trek film rates below only Wrath of Khan, IMO.

This is my reaction too. Vintage, kick-ass Trek.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:06 pm

Based on so many positives, I'm going to see this tonight (still reluctantly, I can't get past that first bad preview with kirk driving his motorcylce). If it is as good as you guys have said, lets hope they manage to keep the same team of writers and director for the next film.

JCBoney · Post by **JCBoney** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:08 pm

AxeMental wrote:Based on so many positives, I'm going to see this tonight (still reluctantly, I can't get past that first bad preview with kirk driving his motorcylce). If it is as good as you guys have said, lets hope they manage to keep the same team of writers and director for the next film.

Keep this in mind: take the movie on its own merits.

James Maliszewski · Post by **James Maliszewski** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:42 pm

JDJarvis wrote:Yeah it's sort of like someone publishing "original" D&D campaign setting material that is tied to a previously existing setting , despite how well crafted and cool it is it really isn't original and couldn't possibly hold a candle to what was done before...

I find it hard to argue with this, but I'm weird that way.

James Maliszewski · Post by **James Maliszewski** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:46 pm

Semaj Khan wrote:Keep this in mind: take the movie on its own merits.

The film trades on its association with a venerable and much beloved TV and movie series. If its creators want it to be judged on its own merits, I feel they should have come up with something wholly original. I don't see anything wrong with either praising or critiquing the new film in relation to what's gone before.

Post by **Falconer** » Sun May 10, 2009 5:06 pm

It’s like with The Lord of the Rings — I honestly tried to disassociate it with the books, but found it impossible. When a character on screen introduces himself as “Aragorn,” for example, I can’t not compare him with the real one.

I dunno, I think I might be happiest just not going to see ST-XI. At least I’ll be smug in my old-school purism. ;-)

BlackBat242 · Post by **BlackBat242** » Sun May 10, 2009 6:50 pm

Well, the thread title says "no spoilers", so I can't tell you what makes me really hate this movie.

Other than the Pike/Kirk stuff is so "out-of-regs" that it would have been the end of Pike's career... and Kirk's personal "desertion of assigned post" would have had him booted from SFA and Starfleet in general... emergency or no.

Not to mention "I want to re-write the entire Federation history and future the way I want it to be" attitude of the perpetrators of this crap....

If you really want to know, read my post here:
http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopi ... 436#p26436

The dream is ended, the song silenced, the laughter gone.