New Star Trek movie

[Barthheart]

Saw it this afternoon. Great fun. Great characters. Great story. Great effects. But it ain't Gene Rodenberry's Star Trek.

Well done for a fresh start.... from a long time Trekker.

[JudgeDredd]

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

Sometimes it sucks being a dad! [:D]

[PunkReaper]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

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

Sometimes it sucks being a dad! [:D]

Remember she chooses your care home........

[Barthheart]

ORIGINAL: Punk Reaper

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

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

Sometimes it sucks being a dad! [:D]

Remember she chooses your care home........

LOL![:D]

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Well, I've just seen the movie, and Shatner must be green w/envy over Nimoy's minor role.

But wasn't there something odd about the young Spock? Maybe it's just me...

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
Well, I've just seen the movie, and Shatner must be green w/envy over Nimoy's minor role.

But wasn't there something odd about the young Spock? Maybe it's just me...

Not you, but Maureen Dowd in todays NYT editorial; "red" matter, "read" matter: what's a vowel between friends.

[Erik Rutins]

Let's not reinject politics into this, please.

[Paul Vebber]

Saw it, and had high hopes that were not disappointed. The way they opened the door to a new interpretation of the familiar characters and new Trek 'canon' was a McGuffin that has been a bit overused, but then that overuse has been firmly established in the Star Trek Canon anyway, so...

I that the acting was very good, did not agree that Spock was featured to an unnatural extent based on the story line, and thought it a good mix of action and character development for the genre.

Must see in my eyes and I look forward to the apparent sequel (s).

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Paul Vebber
... Must see in my eyes and I look forward to the apparent sequel (s).

It has been reported that the new cast has already signed-on for 2 more movies.

[Marauders]

I am a Trekker, and I was a Trekkie before there were Trekkers.  I had high hopes for this film, as I am a huge TOS Trek fan, and I really liked Cloverfield.  I hoped that Trek would get away from the crap that was Voyager and Deep Space Nine.
 
So what did I think of the new film?  Well, I will start by saying that my wife loved it, and she isn't quite the Trek fan that I am.  For myself, I just cannot give a great review to this film.  It is a good film, but not great.  (*** potential spoiler alert ***)
 
I could go into many reasons, but the greatest is that this film has turned Star Trek into an alternate universe Trek.  Nothing that came before it in TOS matters anymore.  It is a cheap comic book approach to writing, and that really ruined the whole premise of the film for me.  For a casual fans, it isn't a big deal, but for old TOS Trekkies and some Trekkers, it is.
 
So there it is, Star Trek 2009 is a fun movie.  It has action and effects, but it is more what NBC wanted for Trek than what Gene Rodenberry wanted.  I guess for a new start, that's ok, but it is no longer TOS in anything but the names of the characters.
 

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

I could go into many reasons, but the greatest is that this film has turned Star Trek into an alternate universe Trek.

We have seen that happen many times before. For Batman (without counting cartoons & comics) it has happened TWICE!

[Zap]

Hollywood is such a whore for the buck. Priority is to alter things its what sells and I guess action is what sells nowadays.

[Arctic Blast]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

I am a Trekker, and I was a Trekkie before there were Trekkers.  I had high hopes for this film, as I am a huge TOS Trek fan, and I really liked Cloverfield.  I hoped that Trek would get away from the crap that was Voyager and Deep Space Nine.

So what did I think of the new film?  Well, I will start by saying that my wife loved it, and she isn't quite the Trek fan that I am.  For myself, I just cannot give a great review to this film.  It is a good film, but not great.  (*** potential spoiler alert ***)

I could go into many reasons, but the greatest is that this film has turned Star Trek into an alternate universe Trek.  Nothing that came before it in TOS matters anymore.  It is a cheap comic book approach to writing, and that really ruined the whole premise of the film for me.  For a casual fans, it isn't a big deal, but for old TOS Trekkies and some Trekkers, it is.

So there it is, Star Trek 2009 is a fun movie.  It has action and effects, but it is more what NBC wanted for Trek than what Gene Rodenberry wanted.  I guess for a new start, that's ok, but it is no longer TOS in anything but the names of the characters.

At this point that's almost the road they had to take, if for no other reason than to make people completely forget the last 2 series (or the last movie) EVER HAPPENED. [:D]

[gunny]

Unfortunately I read all those coffee table text books with the complete backdrop history of the ST universe. So any deviation on the "future" history ruins it for me. The Enterprise series was the absolute worst in that respect.

[morvwilson]

I saw the movie last night. Very nice! My wife, who is no sci-fi fan, also thought it was great.
I have to come down on the side of: no other choice side of the discussion.
There were too many botched plot lines from the past. They had to do something to break away from all the other tripe that has been put out over the years. It was getting pretty bad when I could relate more with the Klingons or the Ferengi than the Feds. [:D]

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

I could go into many reasons, but the greatest is that this film has turned Star Trek into an alternate universe Trek.  Nothing that came before it in TOS matters anymore.  It is a cheap comic book approach to writing, and that really ruined the whole premise of the film for me. 

Hmmm... the thought occurs that, far from being 'cheap', some of the best comic book writing was done when the authors did exactly that. Batman certainly springs to mind with both the Frank Miller and Alan Moore takes on the character, both of which heavily influenced cinematic 'rebirths'. It lets people be fresh and original; 'what came before' can just end up as a straight-jacket on creativity. The result is a movie (or comic book) that is 'canon', but also sends you to sleep half-way through.

[Tophat1815]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

I am a Trekker, and I was a Trekkie before there were Trekkers.  I had high hopes for this film, as I am a huge TOS Trek fan, and I really liked Cloverfield.  I hoped that Trek would get away from the crap that was Voyager and Deep Space Nine.

So what did I think of the new film?  Well, I will start by saying that my wife loved it, and she isn't quite the Trek fan that I am.  For myself, I just cannot give a great review to this film.  It is a good film, but not great.  (*** potential spoiler alert ***)

I could go into many reasons, but the greatest is that this film has turned Star Trek into an alternate universe Trek.  Nothing that came before it in TOS matters anymore.  It is a cheap comic book approach to writing, and that really ruined the whole premise of the film for me.  For a casual fans, it isn't a big deal, but for old TOS Trekkies and some Trekkers, it is.

So there it is, Star Trek 2009 is a fun movie.  It has action and effects, but it is more what NBC wanted for Trek than what Gene Rodenberry wanted.  I guess for a new start, that's ok, but it is no longer TOS in anything but the names of the characters.

I'm with your wife on this one. And don't even tell me that TOS didn't make going into the past its bread and butter. Not only did these guys pull this movie off but we could have a better Kirk in the long run as well.

[Marauders]

I'm with your wife on this one.

 
Fair enough. 
 

And don't even tell me that TOS didn't make going into the past its bread and butter.

 
Yes, but this one uses the alternate reality paradox so much to its advantage that it is no longer TOS.  If that is so, why even have the same characters?  Why not just create a film with the crew of the Potempkin, Lexington, Farragut, or other Constitution class starship?
 

Not only did these guys pull this movie off but we could have a better Kirk in the long run as well.

 
*** Spoilers ***
 
I didn't like Kirk as a young boy in this film at all.  He's a bastard, but what is worse is that he is a jerk as well.  This is much like the Verhoeven adaptation of Starship Troopers.  Are we supposed to have empathy for an anti-social loser? Hip-hop playin', car stealin', drunk bar fightin' Kirk is not a hero in my book.  I see too much of that kind of idiot in the real world to want to watch his cliche' story unfold on the big screen.  Oh wait, his dad died, give him a free pass and a get out of jail card.  Better yet, make him the first officer; no ... make that the Captain.  No thanks.
 
You know, I'm liking this Kirk less and less as I think about this film.
 

[JudgeDredd]

Marauders

With regard to your ***Spoiler*** that's the exact impression I got just from the trailer...that the Enterprise had been handed over to a bunch of ASBO wielding, arrogant teenagers who would've looked better in hoodies than a Federation uniform...it's the exact reason I had mixed feelings about going to see the film.

Maybe that's what film makers are trying to do...show us that young people with "issues" can make something of their lives.

Then again, maybe I'm looking into it too much...I do know this...from the trailers, I didn't like the look of how they portrayed Kirk or Spock. Also, I've heard something about Spock in the film that, if true, has seemingly (for me) ruined what made Spock.

And to all the UK posters and anyone else that understood what I spoke about there, yes...I used the "routine" descriptives associated with the youth of our day. Sorry.

Part of me is glad I went to see Hannah Montana last night [&:]

[Barthheart]

JD, I had the same uneasy feelings you did after seeing the trailers and yet wen to see the film open minded.... but prepared to be disappointed.

I wasn't.

THis is not Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek. If that's all you want then I'd suggest just buying TOS on dvd and staying home.

Yeah it's a little corny in the "look at us troubled youngins make it good". But just a small spoiler ... they aren't all teens... only one is, the rest are 20 to 30 something.

But the film is great fun if you go to be entertained and not for a "history" lesson. It's kind of the same thing around here about wargames replaying history or giving you a chance to change it.

I think you'd enjoy the ride.