New Star Trek movie

[RedArgo]

From watching the preview I would have never guessed that was GI Joe. It looks positively awful. I hope my kids don't want to see it.

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

"Finigan"

[;)]

Yep, that's him. That was a great episode; "me back, I think me back is broken" Finigan-excellent trick, and old "Jimmy boy" fell for it.[;)]

I agree it is too bad that he is not included in this new film, but I will see it anyway.

[ilovestrategy]

ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast

Finally got a chance to see this over the weekend...really liked it! My only complaint was the preview for the horrid looking GI Joe movie, which took my inner child behind the woodshed and beat the living crap out of him.

Dude! I hear ya! I was trying to figure out what movie this could possibly be and thought "NOOOOOOOOOO" when the GI JOE title came up!

[Arctic Blast]

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast

Finally got a chance to see this over the weekend...really liked it! My only complaint was the preview for the horrid looking GI Joe movie, which took my inner child behind the woodshed and beat the living crap out of him.

Dude! I hear ya! I was trying to figure out what movie this could possibly be and thought "NOOOOOOOOOO" when the GI JOE title came up!

That seemed to be pretty much the universal response in the theater, too. Most of the people were around my age (so they probably played with GI Joe or at least are aware of it from childhood)...when the title came up, there was kind of this collective "WHAT?!" and looks of horror. [:D]

[SS Hauptsturmfuhrer]

I only made it a little ways into the new star trek movie before I couldn't take it anymore.  I was getting too bored and irritated by it.   Instead, I watched Outlaw Josey Wales and it was really good with some fresh, creative story telling.   I like Clint Eastwood and I'll be sure to avoid anything to do with star trek after this experience.  I hope there are other Clint Eastwood movies I haven't seen yet.

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: SS Hauptsturmfuhrer

I hope there are other Clint Eastwood movies I haven't seen yet.

Gran Torrino is a fairly new one. It is a very good movie-a drama, but with some LOL points.

[RedArgo]

Hey Judge,

I thought this message seemed familiar. You are being quoted by a spam bot. You should be proud.

ORIGINAL: E RPM SOFT.COM

Well, who's the lucky bugger...going to the cinema this afternoon...yippeeee....to see....Hannah Montana! WTF!?

Sometimes it sucks being a dad!

[JudgeDredd]

Nice. As if any of my posts are worth repeating!

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Doggie

My nostalgic TV memories are in the 60's. By the 1980's "stupid" became the latest entertainment fad. Westerns were out, miltary themed shows were out. Hippie cops who wanted to take it to the man were in. Dedicated left leaning doctors were in. Dirtbag lawyers were in. See LA Law. Stephen King was in, and everybody knew businessmen and government agents from "the shop" were the real villians. Soldiers were either neo nazis in league with corporate fascists if they were officers, or a bunch of dumb asses if they were stupid enough to join up as enlisted men.

Science Fiction went from classic Ray Bradbury to idealistic liberal scientists who struggled in vain to save mankind from the evil American military industrial complex.

Star Trek; the Next Generation brainwashed a whole generation. Liberals in space. We had only to reach out and understand the Klingons. The Borg were evil, but they were also victims. Every drone was once a peace loving "citizen of the Universe" until they were assimilated. But there are no homeless on Borg cubes. The drones are happy to serve the collective. The only real villians are the Ferengi, stupid capitalists with bad teeth, like rednecks.
On board Enterprise the best and the brightest are science officers. The lowly enlisted crewmen serve only the interests of the federation, and are happy to change the sheets after Klingon mating rituals for no pay.

Spies don't bother with commies or stinking savages from Arabia anymore. Jack Bauer started out working for a liberal black president, the only honest guy among a sea of crooked Republicans and and whack job Generals. He can torture people because he's a liberal, and liberals are always right. Everything they do is for the betterment of mankind. And in the end, it's always some American businessman who is behind the terrorist plot, the muslims are merely unknowing tools.

And to think there are some people who think Hollywood is full of communists. Why, that's just crazy talk.

[:D]

[Marauders]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
just lost the plot with all the spin offs. I didn't watch one episode of Enterprise or Babylon 5 nor Deep Space 9. The only one I kind of got on with was Voyager and even then, it just seemed a spin off.

Whoah, sorry man but lumping Babylon 5 in there with the rest is practically a crime. B5 is not a Star Trek spin-off, though you could argue that DS9 was a B5 spin-off. Anyway, if you haven't seen a single episode of B5 rent the DVD collection and watch at least Seasons 1-4 and then report back. Ok, you've got your assignment. [;)]

Erik, that is dead right.

I was actually part of the "V" and original Babylon 5 topics back on GEnie. J. Michael Straczynski took us dozen or so "irregulars" from concept to production in those years. It was great being able to see a television series being developed from start to finish like that.

Straczynski brought the concept, characters, and plotline of Babylon 5 to Paramount and was turned down, but DS9 went into development soon afterward and actually released before Babylon 5. Straczynski, as a long time screenwriter, was livid about the similarities in Deep Space 9 and Babylon 5 down to even some of the character names. Of course, Paramount never got the in-depth plotlines (wheels within wheels), so Deep Space 9 was never as good as Babylon 5, but one often sees them lumped together as Trek based space station series even though Babylon 5 was not.

[Marauders]

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: E
No, it isn't our Star Trek. It was an alternate timeline. I am curious, what did you find was against the "artist's original vision?"

Wasn't there something called a Prime Directive? Not to interferes in the natural development a civilization? Yet going back in time and changing events potentially changes the natural development of all civilizations.

Who does really discover transparent aluminum?

I don't understand what the Prime Directive has to do with the movie in question. Nor how it relates to even the question I posed? The bad guys didn't pledge allegiance to the Prime Directive. Not to mention the alternation of the timeline, by the bad buys, occurred before the birth of key characters. But had the good guys been the one's to go against it in the movie, you need only watch some TOS to realize they almost always threw it aside (although sometimes they'd give it the nod and rationalize doing so).

(*** spoiler alert ***)

There are also plot holes. Anyone familiar with the Nerdvana Annihilation theory will know that Spock, knowing before hand that the Romulans would go back in time to both capture the time machine and destroy Vulcan, would go further back in time to make sure this did not happen.

Spock could also likely prevent the people of Romulus from their future fate, as could the bad guy Romulans in the film. Given the option to either destroy Vulcan or save Romulus, which is the more likely and more logical conclusion for the Romulans?

Then again, perhaps Spock can't. If Vulcan was destroyed in the past, as in the film, one would not have it available in the present or future to travel back and stop the events in the present universe, ergo Romulus and Vulcan would stay destroyed even if Spock wanted to change it. That assumes that Spock does not find another way to travel back through time, and we know he likely will. In any case, the Romulans would likely save Romulus first and make this point moot.

[SS Hauptsturmfuhrer]

Wow you really get into the star trek stuff.  I think it would just put me to sleep.

[E]

ORIGINAL: SS Hauptsturmfuhrer

Wow you really get into the star trek stuff. I think it would just put me to sleep.

Not so different from wargaming... it's all mental masturbation.

[morganbj]

I thought the movie was pretty good, but not perfect by any means.  They tried to faithfully show how the characters got together for the TV series, but there were very implausible story line elements.  To me the most eggregious was making a cadet first officer of the E.  Somehow, this just doesn't seem logical, especially given the situation in the story when it happened.  Then immediately commissioning him as a starship captain?  Sure seems like the beaurocracy would make him serve a few years before that happened.  I would think he would have to be a communications specialist, propulsion engineer, head of security, or something before being promoted to first officer.  Instead, he goes straight to the head of the line.   Sorry, don't buy it, even though he's supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.  (Once you see the movie, this will probably make more sense.)
 
The characters were relatively true to form and looked remakably like the original cast, well, as much as could be expected.  My wife, who's NEVER seen much of the original series now wants to see all the episodes, corny as they will seem to be now.  Let's face it, cardboard controls and plywood walls don't compare to what is done today, and the old external shots are just plain cheesy.
 
Some of the visual effects in the movie were quite stunning due to the increase in computer graphics over the years.  The outside shots of the space ships all looked as if they were real, with very few detectable flaws.
 
To me, the biggest downside was the gratuitous violence/action.  Obviously there had to be some, indeed, perhaps even quite a lot, but it was almost never ending once the action sequences got started.  Don't get me wrong, I like that sort of thing, but it could have been toned down a little with more character development substituted.
 
But, I think it was certainly worth the money and would probably be fine for all those except the die hard trekkies who will find many, many errors and odd juxtapostions with the timeframes, characters, etc.  So, if you can get to a cheap matinee, I'd go for it.
 

[Capt. Harlock]

They tried to faithfully show how the characters got together for the TV series,

Actually, no they didn't, and there's the rub. It was made clear in the movie that we now have a different timeline. Literally from Kirk's birth, things have changed. All bets are off. Things might turn out as they did in the original TV series -- or they might not. The episodes "Journey to Babel" and "Amok Time" will certainly be different.

[E]

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

They tried to faithfully show how the characters got together for the TV series,

Actually, no they didn't, and there's the rub. It was made clear in the movie that we now have a different timeline. Literally from Kirk's birth, things have changed. All bets are off. Things might turn out as they did in the original TV series -- or they might not. The episodes "Journey to Babel" and "Amok Time" will certainly be different.

Why focus on the potentially negative? Try the potentially positive! ...Maybe "Spock's Brain" or "And the Children Shall Lead" or "The Way to Eden" will be different!!

[Capt. Harlock]

Why focus on the potentially negative?

"Vulcans do not speculate."
--Spock, from TOS

Because it is not "potentially negative", it is certainty. The two episodes I mentioned cannot, repeat cannot, happen as they did if we accept the events of the movie.

[E]

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

Why focus on the potentially negative?

"Vulcans do not speculate."
--Spock, from TOS

Because it is not "potentially negative", it is certainty. The two episodes I mentioned cannot, repeat cannot, happen as they did if we accept the events of the movie.

"There are always possibilities"
--Spock, from TOS

How do you know that XII will not erase XI and restore the timeline? It's Sci-fi... ANYTHING can happen. Heck, death doesn't even count in Sci-fi!

Even if your two episodes are erased, the erasure of the three I mentioned would more than balance the scales. In fact that's a 3 to 2 tip in favor of positive! It's all good.

(not to mention Star Trek XI cannot REALLY erase the episodes on your DVD's... so you can still keep your episodes intact no matter what JJ Abrams does)

[Marauders]

"There are always possibilities" --Spock, from TOS

 
Agreed, and logical. 

How do you know that XII will not erase XI and restore the timeline? It's Sci-fi... ANYTHING can happen. Heck, death doesn't even count in Sci-fi!

 
I suspect that may be so.

Even if your two episodes are erased, the erasure of the three I mentioned would more than balance the scales. In fact that's a 3 to 2 tip in favor of positive! It's all good.

 
It doesn't work that way.  TV series are great because of the great episodes.  Amok Time and Journey to Babel are top five episodes.  Eliminating them will not be balanced by eliminating some of the worst episodes.  One can always not watch the bad episodes.
 
For the premise to work, one has to say that Star Trek (2009) and its sequals will be equal to or better than Amok Time, Journey to Babel, and anything else eliminated from the TOS space/time continuum.  I don't believe that will be the case.