TREK XI - Images, Footage, Trailers, Enterprise, Discussion, etc. Thread (WARNING: SPOILERS)

[lint]

Well, i just saw the movie, and for the most part what i think about the movie has properly been explained by Newman,
One thing that i just couldn't wrap my head around was the "Make out" scenes between Uhura and Spock.
It just didn't seem right..

[Nebula]

hmm IMO I would match the two ships shuttle bay doors to get the size...

Not the best idea since the shuttlebay of the new E is pretty big compared to the 1701 and the A, what with the "racks" of shuttles.

Not really I direct you to a picture of the TMP Enterprise's shuttle bay here
http://bc-central.net/forums/index.php/topic,2174.msg109558.html#msg109558

that shuttle bay looks quite close to the JJ-Ents size... (enough for racks of shuttles as ya put it.)

[blaXXer]

Okay folks, I guess almost everybody has seen it by now - so let's rate it, on its own merits as a movie. It being set in a new continuity and all. Fire away, folks. Please specify your vote in a post in this thread.

[lint]

Gave it a solid .4
All in all i wouldn't care if i ever saw it again, And i did actually get bored in the cinema a few times.

[Bones]

Spock or any other Volcan didn't raise their eyebrow like they did in ST1,2,3,4,5,6 etc. etc. etc. also I had that strange feeling I'm looking at young Tuvok :?

Alternate universe WTF JJ ?!?!?!? :shock: so what now ? consider old school Trek never happened ?! :shock:

old Spock's vessel was making the same noise as gen. Grievous wheel pod seen on Utapau when he was escaping Obi-Wan

Enterprise phasers looked more like turbolaser barrage yet it was cool

A WINDOW instead of viewscreen !!!???

Engineering was strangely big for considerably small section to fit in (not to mention space for cargo holds and shuttlebay/hangar)

Kelvin shuttlebay was about 2 times wider inside than on the outside, you could clearly see it when evac shuttles were leaving...

Karl Urban did a great job in playing his role thumbs up for him

I laughed my a$$ off when Kirk corrected Uhura during KM test : "Starfleet has ordered us to rescue them ... captain" Uhura and Bones rolling their eyes LOL

Chekov and his 'wiictor wiictor' or 'Kurk has landed' funny guy :lol:

Also I like new look of Romulans, those tatoos and everything tho Nero was poor captain...

that's about it now, I liked it, kinda like Star Wars Trek but still good movie.

[blaXXer]

Spock or any other Volcan didn't raise their eyebrow like they did in ST1,2,3,4,5,6 etc. etc. etc. also I had that strange feeling I'm looking at young Tuvok :?

Oh well, spock was still great, IMO.

Alternate universe WTF JJ ?!?!?!? :shock: so what now ? consider old school Trek never happened ?! :shock:

No, it still happened. Old Spock is proof of that.

old Spock's vessel was making the same noise as gen. Grievous wheel pod seen on Utapau when he was escaping Obi-Wan

I liked that noise.

Enterprise phasers looked more like turbolaser barrage yet it was cool

Indeed it was.

A WINDOW instead of viewscreen !!!???

About time

Engineering was strangely big for considerably small section to fit in (not to mention space for cargo holds and shuttlebay/hangar)

We don't have deckplans, yet ;)

Kelvin shuttlebay was about 2 times wider inside than on the outside, you could clearly see it when evac shuttles were leaving...

Considering how awesome Captain Robau is, more power to him.

Also I like new look of Romulans, those tatoos and everything tho Nero was poor captain...

You should read the Countdown comics, everything is explained there.

[martyr]

spock does raise his eyebrows.

wen pike and kirk leave the ship and pike tells spock not to damage it its 'brand new'

spock then raises his eyebrow

[UPD Equinox]

The problem with that movie... is well... where do i start!?

As a stand alone movie it would have been good. Calling it star trek was bad. Simple fact was that it WASN'T trek. It didnt have any of the standard trek values, it indulged only a small part of star trek lore, and there was way too much humour in it.

The major problem was that they made it a movie for the masses, thats a problem because you have to dumb it down for people that havnt seen the original series, they however tried to incorporate elements of classic trek into it to make it relate with the original fans which just came off looking like it was trying too hard. A lot of the classic lines just came off as being either silly or missplaced. (In particular the line old Spock says to kirk seconds after he meets him -"I have been and always shall be, your friend." It simply sounded jarring with the scene.)

The ship's weapons were too much like that of a battleship than a ship of exploration (the hundreds of phaser cannons....) They still havnt fixed the problem of scale.... the ship looks much too small on the outside to house all the equipment that they showed inside of it.

The fight scenes had the same modern day look of 'the-camera-guy-was-on-crack-that-day'. which is completly anti typical of trek movies.

As far as the Characters go.... Spock was good but showed too much emotion. (way too much) Uhura was far too much of a bad girl instead of acting like a a junior officer. Chekov's accent was over the top, and Sulu seemed to take on the roll of security gaurd rather than helmsman/weapons officer. Of special mention i think should be Scotty, (simon pegg) I think he did a excellent job in his role and did very well as a serious character especially considering his previous satirical movie roles.

Now dont get me wrong, I thought all of the actors did an exceptional job in their particular roles. They just had a very bad script to work with. Overall a lot of the dialogue seemed missplaced and awkward and some of the concepts seemed very silly and at odds with established Trek.

All in all i think it would have been a very good movie if it had been given a different name and some of the dialogue had been changed. As a trek movie it came off as being half assed and very bad Nemesis remake. It had just the right amount of comedy for a movie, but far too much for a Trek movie and it came off as making the crew seem silly and unproffesional.

For those of you that argue "its a re-imagining", thats fine.. but why would you bother? Star trek was a powerful show at the time because it had moral messages wrapped in genuine science fiction concepts put into a tv show with strong and charismatic characters that the audience could relate to. To remake something that was such a original concept is just... pointless... you loose everything in the remake that was so special about the original.

I personally think Roddenberry would be renouncing his involvement in trek if he had been alive to see this. Thats my 2cents anyway. I would like to hear more feedback on this.

[mckinneyc]

The problem with that movie... is well... where do i start!?

As a stand alone movie it would have been good. Calling it star trek was bad. Simple fact was that it WASN'T trek. It didnt have any of the standard trek values, it indulged only a small part of star trek lore, and there was way too much humour in it.

The major problem was that they made it a movie for the masses, thats a problem because you have to dumb it down for people that havnt seen the original series, they however tried to incorporate elements of classic trek into it to make it relate with the original fans which just came off looking like it was trying too hard. A lot of the classic lines just came off as being either silly or missplaced. (In particular the line old Spock says to kirk seconds after he meets him -"I have been and always shall be, your friend." It simply sounded jarring with the scene.)

The ship's weapons were too much like that of a battleship than a ship of exploration (the hundreds of phaser cannons....) They still havnt fixed the problem of scale.... the ship looks much too small on the outside to house all the equipment that they showed inside of it.

The fight scenes had the same modern day look of 'the-camera-guy-was-on-crack-that-day'. which is completly anti typical of trek movies.

As far as the Characters go.... Spock was good but showed too much emotion. (way too much) Uhura was far too much of a bad girl instead of acting like a a junior officer. Chekov's accent was over the top, and Sulu seemed to take on the roll of security gaurd rather than helmsman/weapons officer. Of special mention i think should be Scotty, (simon pegg) I think he did a excellent job in his role and did very well as a serious character especially considering his previous satirical movie roles.

Now dont get me wrong, I thought all of the actors did an exceptional job in their particular roles. They just had a very bad script to work with. Overall a lot of the dialogue seemed missplaced and awkward and some of the concepts seemed very silly and at odds with established Trek.

All in all i think it would have been a very good movie if it had been given a different name and some of the dialogue had been changed. As a trek movie it came off as being half assed and very bad Nemesis remake. It had just the right amount of comedy for a movie, but far too much for a Trek movie and it came off as making the crew seem silly and unproffesional.

For those of you that argue "its a re-imagining", thats fine.. but why would you bother? Star trek was a powerful show at the time because it had moral messages wrapped in genuine science fiction concepts put into a tv show with strong and charismatic characters that the audience could relate to. To remake something that was such a original concept is just... pointless... you loose everything in the remake that was so special about the original.

I personally think Roddenberry would be renouncing his involvement in trek if he had been alive to see this. Thats my 2cents anyway. I would like to hear more feedback on this.

Couldn't have said it better myself! :lol:

[limey BSc.]

The problem with that movie... is well... where do i start!?

As a stand alone movie it would have been good. Calling it star trek was bad. Simple fact was that it WASN'T trek. It didnt have any of the standard trek values, it indulged only a small part of star trek lore, and there was way too much humour in it.

The major problem was that they made it a movie for the masses, thats a problem because you have to dumb it down for people that havnt seen the original series, they however tried to incorporate elements of classic trek into it to make it relate with the original fans which just came off looking like it was trying too hard. A lot of the classic lines just came off as being either silly or missplaced. (In particular the line old Spock says to kirk seconds after he meets him -"I have been and always shall be, your friend." It simply sounded jarring with the scene.)

The ship's weapons were too much like that of a battleship than a ship of exploration (the hundreds of phaser cannons....) They still havnt fixed the problem of scale.... the ship looks much too small on the outside to house all the equipment that they showed inside of it.

The fight scenes had the same modern day look of 'the-camera-guy-was-on-crack-that-day'. which is completly anti typical of trek movies.

As far as the Characters go.... Spock was good but showed too much emotion. (way too much) Uhura was far too much of a bad girl instead of acting like a a junior officer. Chekov's accent was over the top, and Sulu seemed to take on the roll of security gaurd rather than helmsman/weapons officer. Of special mention i think should be Scotty, (simon pegg) I think he did a excellent job in his role and did very well as a serious character especially considering his previous satirical movie roles.

Now dont get me wrong, I thought all of the actors did an exceptional job in their particular roles. They just had a very bad script to work with. Overall a lot of the dialogue seemed missplaced and awkward and some of the concepts seemed very silly and at odds with established Trek.

All in all i think it would have been a very good movie if it had been given a different name and some of the dialogue had been changed. As a trek movie it came off as being half assed and very bad Nemesis remake. It had just the right amount of comedy for a movie, but far too much for a Trek movie and it came off as making the crew seem silly and unproffesional.

For those of you that argue "its a re-imagining", thats fine.. but why would you bother? Star trek was a powerful show at the time because it had moral messages wrapped in genuine science fiction concepts put into a tv show with strong and charismatic characters that the audience could relate to. To remake something that was such a original concept is just... pointless... you loose everything in the remake that was so special about the original.

I personally think Roddenberry would be renouncing his involvement in trek if he had been alive to see this. Thats my 2cents anyway. I would like to hear more feedback on this.

I 100% agree with just about everything in there! Why make a Trek film if you're going to take all of Trek's history, everything that makes Trek, Trek, and throw it out the window just to make some money.

You should read the Countdown comics, everything is explained there.

You shouldn't need a 4 part comic to explain a plot. If you do, then you need to get a new plot! Preferably one actually set in the Trek universe.

[blaXXer]

Well folks JJ said it best, he didnt want to be burdened with 40 years of way too much baggage. And too much humor? C'mon. You're supposed to enjoy this film...

[UPD Equinox]

I cant tell if thats sarcasm....

In case its not, let me reitterate what i just mentioned.

Well folks JJ said it best, he didnt want to be burdened with 40 years of way too much baggage. And too much humor? C'mon. You're supposed to enjoy this film...

If he didnt want to be burdened with 40 years of baggage... then WHY O WHY make another star trek movie!? and like i said before, i would have enjoyed the film on its own, but when taken in context of the original series, (which is wat it was meant to portray to an extent) it was terrible.

[blaXXer]

No, it wasn't. He wiped the slate clean because the stories that one was able to tell in this (old) universe were pretty stale as of late, remember VOY, ENT and NEM? I suppose you do ;)

And, quite honestly, TOS had lots of humor. Yes, it aint 60s humor and 60s sets anymore but its what TOS would be if it were being made today. And for that, it was awesome.

When did we become such a jaded bunch that canon matters over fun nowadays?

[blaXXer]

As a stand alone movie it would have been good. Calling it star trek was bad. Simple fact was that it WASN'T trek. It didnt have any of the standard trek values, it indulged only a small part of star trek lore, and there was way too much humour in it.

You don't like humor? And for chrissakes how much lore can one fit into one sigle movie without it being too full?

The major problem was that they made it a movie for the masses, thats a problem because you have to dumb it down for people that havnt seen the original series, they however tried to incorporate elements of classic trek into it to make it relate with the original fans which just came off looking like it was trying too hard. A lot of the classic lines just came off as being either silly or missplaced. (In particular the line old Spock says to kirk seconds after he meets him -"I have been and always shall be, your friend." It simply sounded jarring with the scene.)

Yeah, I'll give you that, that particular line made me go 'WTF'. I was way too cheesy for my taste. But as for the other nods, I think they were great.

The ship's weapons were too much like that of a battleship than a ship of exploration (the hundreds of phaser cannons....) They still havnt fixed the problem of scale.... the ship looks much too small on the outside to house all the equipment that they showed inside of it.

Well it'S supposed to be 800metres long. As for the warship stuff: Well shit changed. Simple as that.

The fight scenes had the same modern day look of 'the-camera-guy-was-on-crack-that-day'. which is completly anti typical of trek movies.

Didn't care for the shaky-cam much either, but that's films nowadays. It'S not a problem with this movie but with film-making in general.

As far as the Characters go.... Spock was good but showed too much emotion. (way too much) Uhura was far too much of a bad girl instead of acting like a a junior officer. Chekov's accent was over the top, and Sulu seemed to take on the roll of security gaurd rather than helmsman/weapons officer. Of special mention i think should be Scotty, (simon pegg) I think he did a excellent job in his role and did very well as a serious character especially considering his previous satirical movie roles.

Spock din't take Kohlinar, so there you have it. Uhura I liked, she did more in this film than in TOS combined. A strong female role. Thumbs up. Sulu WAS security chief in TOS, you know? ;) Chekov, well, he was funny.
And how was Scotty serious?

Now dont get me wrong, I thought all of the actors did an exceptional job in their particular roles. They just had a very bad script to work with. Overall a lot of the dialogue seemed missplaced and awkward and some of the concepts seemed very silly and at odds with established Trek.

Established Trak became stale almost 10 years ago. Glad it's gone.

All in all i think it would have been a very good movie if it had been given a different name and some of the dialogue had been changed. As a trek movie it came off as being half assed and very bad Nemesis remake. It had just the right amount of comedy for a movie, but far too much for a Trek movie and it came off as making the crew seem silly and unproffesional.

Re-watch TOS. It had so much humor it was (almost) campy.

For those of you that argue "its a re-imagining", thats fine.. but why would you bother? Star trek was a powerful show at the time because it had moral messages wrapped in genuine science fiction concepts put into a tv show with strong and charismatic characters that the audience could relate to. To remake something that was such a original concept is just... pointless... you loose everything in the remake that was so special about the original.

No, no, no. TOS was cancelled after 3 seasons because it WASN'T strong. The Science was half-assed at best (it simply wasnt hard scifi, if you want that, read Asimov) and those high concepts were in only a few of thf TOS. Mostly it was action.

On a related note, did you even watch TOS?

[JimmyB76]

*threads merged*

btw - this is not a debate/post-nitpick thread...


edit - please allow me to elaborate... 

healthy debating and exchanging of ideas and views is perfectly ok, so long as it is respectful and mature and not heated...  already in this thread several times did people get heated and then start arguing and getting riled up...
also, please avoid nitpicking like every sentence someone posts, and commenting/debating with like every sentence someone posts...
respectfully and politely debating and arguing are two different things, i really would rather no one argue...  and i would rather there be no sarcastic or snotty tones when addressing each other...

[Trim]

You had the chance to see this yet Jimmy?  Sorry, I'm too lazy to go back and read all this crap since my last post.   :mrgreen:

[blaXXer]

*threads merged*

btw - this is not a debate/post-nitpick thread...


edit - please allow me to elaborate... 

healthy debating and exchanging of ideas and views is perfectly ok, so long as it is respectful and mature and not heated...  already in this thread several times did people get heated and then start arguing and getting riled up...
also, please avoid nitpicking like every sentence someone posts, and commenting/debating with like every sentence someone posts...
respectfully and politely debating and arguing are two different things, i really would rather no one argue...  and i would rather there be no sarcastic or snotty tones when addressing each other...

Hey there, Sparky, long time no see. Text-formatting, is all ;) You wouldn't wanna have a big wall of incomprehensible text in and out of that quote now would ya? ;)

[Darkthunder]

All my IRL friends that have seen the movie enjoyed it, both Trek fans and non-Trek fans alike.

The comic is meant for those of us "Trekkies" who desire to know everything there needs to be, whereas the average moviegoer has no need to read the comic. The average moviegoers wouldn't know who Picard, Data and Geordi are, so what point is it for them to read that, when they don't have to in order to enjoy the movie?

If you can set your mind to that this is now in an alternate timeline, it becomes a whole lot easier to swallow. Rather than spouting out a bunch of garbage that the ship doesn't look like it did in the 60s etc. Objects, People and events are inherently different in this timeline.

"Anything that can happen, does happen, in other parallel universes"

Our decisions determine the outcome of said universe. Whether we turn left at the intersection, or turn right. The outcome is inherently different depending on which decision we make. Yes, the USS Kelvin got destroyed which likely had a major impact on the universe that we know of. But how do we know, there weren't other things that happened differently prior to it's destruction? Perhaps the nazis won the 2nd World War, perhaps the Russians landed the 1st man on the moon etc. All these things taken into account, makes it very easy to accept that this movie is set in an alternate timeline, which may or may not be similar to the one we know.

Bottomline is, that due to essentially making a "blank slate", JJ Abrams and the writers are free to write new stories and adventures for our intrepid heroes. Either re-writing existing stories, or making brand new stories. Perhaps in this timeline, Kirk won't be killed off on Veridian III, and maybe John Harriman won't be such a wuss. The possibilities are limitless.

There are always... possibilities.

[martyr]

i saw this again ( a bit further away from the screen this time, i was right next to it the first time) yesterday. the only thing that got on my nerves were the lens flares, shaky cam and simon pegg as scotty.

the rest was awesome.

i think i'll get tingles every time i hear leonard nimoy speak the last lines.

[Darkthunder]

If they were to make a tv show out of this at some point (which seems quite likely), I would hope Paul Mcgillion replaces Simon Pegg as Scotty. It's not even certain all the actors from the movie would want to do a tv show. Zachary Quinto is busy with Heroes, so it might be difficult to fit both projects at the same time. Some actors may prefer doing movies instead of television.

Paul Mcgillion should've been Scotty all along, but instead he got a bit part in the new movie, some instructor at the academy, handing out assignments.