DescentBB

Seemed to start off a little too similar to the first movie in the rebooted series, but it was good.

There were a couple hiccups in the writing that basically violated the star trek universes internal laws and consistency of physics in order to set up drama. Without giving it away, I will say that the villain was bland and generic villain guy and wasn't a very interesting character. Actually he could have been a cardboard stand that shoots lasers or a genocidal toy robot and it might have been a more interesting character. Basically the writing of the overall plot was pathetic and only existed as an excuse to show off the high quality special effects and action fights.

It is really sad because the interactions of the core cast can be fairly interesting without having to throw them at generic genocidal villain boss #267 with a super extra powerful ship that is painted in menacingly black just for good measure.

Krom, I respect your wisdom and excellent knowledge of all things "nerdy," but have you ever seen an actual Star Trek episode or did you forget how perfectly corny the bad guys were?

No, I remember how corny many of the villains were in the original series. I'm more remembering TNG and DS9 where the villains were deeper and more interesting characters fairly often.

Or like the original episode where the whole thing was the Enterprise being held at the mercy of this big intimidating scary alien with shifty eyes, and it all turned out to be a dummy, the real alien was a tiny little guy that was friendly and had just been testing the Enterprise to see if they were good or evil.

Basically the villain in this movie wasn't a character at all, he was a plot device to set up various action scenes and fights.

I respectfully disagree, I think he was true to the TOS villan in attitude and premise. Cold, ruthless, emotionless, brilliant, and strong.
I also like how the characters are growing, and I don't mean the actors I mean the actual characters, and I love the references and tie-ins to original movie.

Krom pretty much summed up every review I've heard or read. The writing was broken. BADLLY. The actor, Benedict Cumberbatch (villian) did a fantastic job, he was all those things Cuda, but not because of Abram's writing or directing.

Rewriting one of THE best trek movies of all times is lame. We can expect similar things with Star Wars.
I probably won't be going to see this one, nor any others.

Yeah, I think Benedict Cumberbatch did a excellent job with what he was given. It is just that no matter how good the actor is, if the writing for his character is one dimensional crap, that is what the character will be. From what I remember of the TOS version of him, he was ruthless, brilliant, strong, but most importantly charismatic. This writing of him managed to make him a nearly invincible superman but forgot the whole charisma part.

Also Spock was bad ass.

Dunno......

It worked for me. You've got to remember, this is not your fathers star trek. Don't do it a disservice by trying to make it such. If you looked at it as a stand alone movie it was well done.

Alas, where is Q when you need him.

CUDA wrote:Dunno......

It worked for me. You've got to remember, this is not your fathers star trek. Don't do it a disservice by trying to make it such. If you looked at it as a stand alone movie it was well done.

Everything but the writing was well done. When I say bad writing, I'm talking about stuff like how when the engines break down the Enterprise abruptly plummets out of orbit, crashing into its own gently floating debris field in the process. It makes you wonder why exactly the Enterprise fell, but all the bits and pieces of the hull that had been blasted off were still floating about weightlessly and in no apparent danger of suddenly plummeting from orbit. That wasn't internally consistent, it was the writers pen blatantly moving stuff on the screen to set up drama and tension, and it is just plain bad writing. Stuff happens not because of any in-universe reason, but because the next bit of drama requires said stuff or the director cant move the story forward. So basically you can say that writing team vomited on the script and it knocked the Enterprise out of orbit. I'd complain about any movie doing something dumb like that.

The writing of how the transporter worked or didn't work is similarly broken, it works over absurd distances (light years) between separate star systems perfectly fine when the writing wants it to, but needs direct line of sight to pick someone up from a couple kilometers away at other times. Or someone is moving so you can't beam them up, except when they break into a run as soon as you start trying to beam them up, or you can beam someone down on to the same moving platform just fine. Durrrrrrrr.

Also the cast had moments where they behaved like idiots because otherwise the writers wouldn't be able to set up the drama, like they had already established that the villain was a nearly invincible superman, so why is it they accept that stunning him once is good enough to then stand around like a bunch of idiots picking their asses thinking he won't just get back up in a couple seconds and take care of their ass picking problem with his boot. If you didn't see that coming, I would question if you were even watching the same movie I was.

I like the characters, the cast, the setting, the special effects. I do not like the director or the writers. What I don't like about the movie has nothing to do with it being Star Trek, it has to do with it just having terrible writing.

I will be seeing this tomorrow. Also, I love Cumberpatch in Sherlock

Krom wrote:

CUDA wrote:Dunno......

It worked for me. You've got to remember, this is not your fathers star trek. Don't do it a disservice by trying to make it such. If you looked at it as a stand alone movie it was well done.

Everything but the writing was well done. When I say bad writing, I'm talking about stuff like how when the engines break down the Enterprise abruptly plummets out of orbit, crashing into its own gently floating debris field in the process. It makes you wonder why exactly the Enterprise fell, but all the bits and pieces of the hull that had been blasted off were still floating about weightlessly and in no apparent danger of suddenly plummeting from orbit. That wasn't internally consistent, it was the writers pen blatantly moving stuff on the screen to set up drama and tension, and it is just plain bad writing. Stuff happens not because of any in-universe reason, but because the next bit of drama requires said stuff or the director cant move the story forward. So basically you can say that writing team vomited on the script and it knocked the Enterprise out of orbit. I'd complain about any movie doing something dumb like that.

The writing of how the transporter worked or didn't work is similarly broken, it works over absurd distances (light years) between separate star systems perfectly fine when the writing wants it to, but needs direct line of sight to pick someone up from a couple kilometers away at other times. Or someone is moving so you can't beam them up, except when they break into a run as soon as you start trying to beam them up, or you can beam someone down on to the same moving platform just fine. Durrrrrrrr.

Also the cast had moments where they behaved like idiots because otherwise the writers wouldn't be able to set up the drama, like they had already established that the villain was a nearly invincible superman, so why is it they accept that stunning him once is good enough to then stand around like a bunch of idiots picking their asses thinking he won't just get back up in a couple seconds and take care of their ass picking problem with his boot. If you didn't see that coming, I would question if you were even watching the same movie I was.

I like the characters, the cast, the setting, the special effects. I do not like the director or the writers. What I don't like about the movie has nothing to do with it being Star Trek, it has to do with it just having terrible writing.

I would agree with you if it was a documentary. But this is fiction. Anyways I enjoyed it

I get it! I now understand exactly why we disagree on Benghazi so much... It is because my standards for what I'll accept from fiction are just that much higher than yours.

Here's the thing that strikes me of stupid throughout the entire franchise. All these smart people running around like four year olds in a ship that breaks down CONSTANTLY, and they refuse to learn from experience. Essentially a group of four year old semi-sociopaths who don't care about their equipment and panic every time something goes wrong. It's astounding when you think of it.

That’s Star Trek, right from the beginning it was never about the technology or real physics…it was a soap opera set in space…at least that’s the premise for the original series.

I haven’t seen this one, but if the writing is that bad…no special effects in the world can make up for it.

As a summer "block buster Action" movie, it was good if what you're in for is eye-candy a constant action. There's nothing wrong with that. That's what I'm looking for in Iron man 3 (and a decent story).

As a Star Trek movie, it was a mess. Yeah, it's science fiction so technically "anything goes", but that justifies art for art sake.
Abram's cares nothing for cannon or continuity. If I hadn't grown up with Star Trek. If I weren't a Sci-fi enthusiast. If I weren't a logically minded individual then yeah, I'd be able to look over a director/writer's manhandling of an entire franchise.

Like i said, the Start Wars fans had better go buy their night mouth guards because they're going to grinding their teeth big time.

I understand that folks are going to thoroughly enjoy this movie for their own reasons, I'll probably come to like too .... eventually..... after I've been tied down and made to watch 20 or 30 times.

Ok.. I'm done ranting. Cheers all. don't forget the popcorn.

Who saw this in 3d Imax or just 3d? Was it done well for that?

Here is a web review of what Abrams does with his productions. For the most part I can see this. "Bob" also did a scathing review of the movie (SPOILERS) and goes "apeshit fanboy".

Well if you're going for reality in space star trek was never it. B5 and BSG were much more into realism then startrek ever dreamed of, especially the physics of space travel

Krom wrote:No, I remember how corny many of the villains were in the original series. I'm more remembering TNG and DS9 where the villains were deeper and more interesting characters fairly often.

Or like the original episode where the whole thing was the Enterprise being held at the mercy of this big intimidating scary alien with shifty eyes, and it all turned out to be a dummy, the real alien was a tiny little guy that was friendly and had just been testing the Enterprise to see if they were good or evil.

Basically the villain in this movie wasn't a character at all, he was a plot device to set up various action scenes and fights.

I haven't seen the movie yet, but from what I've seen in reviews and trailers, and from watching the first J.J. Abrams ST movie, I've got to agree with you on his trend in Star Trek. Don't these writers have any imagination? Isn't the megalomaniac evil destroyer villain getting a little tired and old already? There were some far superior villains in the TV series, like Q and the Borg, or even from some of the books from the STOS offshoot series, like Star Trek Vanguard. The Shedai were pretty darn terrifying and they would have been a great application of CG. All these were interesting and new, not some rehashed evil human nut-job bent on wiping out other humans as a plot line. I guess it does make for great special effects for the mentally limited though.......

Krom wrote:I get it! I now understand exactly why we disagree on Benghazi so much... It is because my standards for what I'll accept from fiction are just that much higher than yours.

are you saying what the president said about benghazi is fiction

CUDA wrote:

Krom wrote:I get it! I now understand exactly why we disagree on Benghazi so much... It is because my standards for what I'll accept from fiction are just that much higher than yours.

are you saying what the president said about benghazi is fiction

I knew you would say that.

Krom wrote:

CUDA wrote:

Krom wrote:I get it! I now understand exactly why we disagree on Benghazi so much... It is because my standards for what I'll accept from fiction are just that much higher than yours.

are you saying what the president said about benghazi is fiction

I knew you would say that.

LOL Cuda, you're so easy!

btw, just saw Ironman 3 in 3d. Very nice. Great story, great twists.

CUDA wrote:Well if you're going for reality in space star trek was never it. B5 and BSG were much more into realism then startrek ever dreamed of, especially the physics of space travel

Never got into BSG much, but I did snag all but the first season of B5 at Freddy's for 6 bucks apiece!

Duper wrote:LOL Cuda, you're so easy!

btw, just saw Ironman 3 in 3d. Very nice. Great story, great twists.

I loved it! Did you like the 70's tv style theme song during the ending credits?

So I just got home from watching Star Trek. I loved the movie, love the characters but I'm tired of all the rehash of old stuff. This story was a different take on the original but was still good. Overall I enjoyed it very much and hoping to see more.

I just watched the movie and I thought it was great. You have to remember this isn't the same time frame as the original movies, this is at least 25 years earlier in the timeline. And as far as the villain being shallow plot too compared to DS9 and whatnot, you can only do so much character dev in 2 hours vs 7 seasons.

The only think I found that was a bit too little disguised was what they used for the case on spocks cold fusion device at the beginning of the movie. It was clearly a modified case for coax cable coil-packs. I post a picture of the one in the back of my truck tomorrow. Of course, thats probably something only a cable guy would spot!

That's hilarious. I tried finding a picture of spock's freeze bomb.
This is the best pic I could find:

here is pics of the coilpack case.


http://www.midnightsquadron.com/capm/coilpack1.jpg

http://www.midnightsquadron.com/capm/coilpack2.jpg

haha.. you're right!