Its mostly a taste thing, I loved it for mystery and adventure in space.
Star Trek 11 or just plain 'Star Trek'
- Thread starter The Dutch Ghost
- Start date
UncannyGarlic said:I've watched the majority of the show (missed a few episodes here and there) and can safely say that it sucks. I'm not seeing where this morally objectionable plot line comes it, it was a pretty standard affair for Sci-Fi TV shows. As for being dark, it tried but it really didn't succeed all that well, DS9 did a much better job. The only season with major plot arcs that didn't involve time travel was the final one, which used a conflict within the vulcans to partially explain away the crappy acting and writing of the vulcans in the series. The series was plagued with bad writing, bad acting, bad choice in setting, bad plots (for the most part), and nasty breaches in canon. Had the acting and either the plots or the writing been good, it would have had a shot but the show was a bloody disaster.Maphusio said:And for those of you badmouthing Enterprise, watch all four seasons and tell me that was not the most interesting Star Trek series of them all? I would think NMA forum goers would appreciate Enterprise due to is morally objectionable dark and twisted story line. Yes there is time travel, almost all sci-fi shows entertain the idea of time travel. Or maybe its the captain you don't like? If its any consolidation, for 2.5 seasons he gets the living shit beat out of him.
I've heard too many speak your exact thoughts. I am one of the few that feel the exact opposite. I own every season of Star Trek and love them all dearly but Enterprise was different. It went off plot lines that ran so deeply they would span for an entire season.
I never once noticed any twist in the star trek canon that stretched what had all ready been etched in stone by the treks before. In fact, I feel Enterprise reinforced existing trek canon.
I don't believe enterprise suffered from bad acting at all. If someone wants bad acting, watch STNG seasons 1 & 2.
As for the dark story line, I felt it pretty morally objectionable when the captain decided to start raiding innocent ships for their supplies. If the series were to progress on it would have became even more dark and dramatic with the Federation Romulan war. I hold out hope that when J.J. starts filming the new Star Trek TV show that he settles on that time period. Braga mentioned that J.J. wants to shoot during or near Kirk's days, my hope is that he settles for prior to.
News on the money this new film has pulled in.
http://tinyurl.com/prsb4y
S
Stag
Guest
...Why would you put that in a tinyurl?
requiem_for_a_starfury
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Sorry but you can not compare a single video game, tv show or book to a franchise that spans forty three years worth of television, films, books, games and whatever else. Star Trek covers the entire spectrum from crap to brilliance and can not just be dismissed as a single entity.Stag said:
There's lots of differences which minor by themselves really begin to add up. The design of the ship, the speed of the ship, the introduction of phasers, the borg, the ferengi, the attitude of the Vulcans (explained later but still a cloud over the earlier series) and so on. And you know how people can get over the details, IIRC one of the producers said that things were different because the Enterprise and the Borg going back in time in First Contact affected the time line. I'm sure that if they had actually shown that happening in a short montage at the begining of the pilot episode people wouldn't of cared so much about the changes and just given the show more of a chance.
I liked Enterprise as a whole and felt the acting, writing, cast, sets and special effects were generally strong, certainly head and shoulders above the recent BSG reboot but still it had lots of problems and made some really bad decisions which hurt it.
They pretty much had that problem pretty much from The Next Generation onwards, a lot of technology 'invented' for The Original Series to save money like the transporters (because they couldn't afford to film a shuttle landing every week) led to a lot of TNG, Deep Space Nine and Voyager episodes becoming, how will Federation technology break down/be thwarted this week? How many episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager would of been over in five minutes if the transporters or sensors or whatever were working properly? Okay Voyager had an excuse with not being able to pop into the nearest Starbase for a pitstop between episodes but no matter what damage they took or new technology they had to up/down grade to the ship was back to pristine condition by the end of each episode. For me this was Enterprise's biggest mistake, instead of getting away from the super-duper technology by the end of the first series, if not the pilot they had introduced much of the technology that was common place in the other shows. Whenever the writers found themselves in a corner they'd just pull out another old Trek faithful to save the day.The Dutch Ghost said:
My love for Trek has long burned out so I don't really care what they do with it, I hope I will enjoy the film but I'd rather be watching series 5 of Farscape or Series 2,3,4 & 5 of Firefly than yet another reboot or remake.
Though saying that I'm really getting pissed off about this sense of entitlement or ownership from new fans to a franchise. Whenever a show/game has been relaunched lately there seems to be a lot of new fans going oh I always wanted to watch/play 'x' put couldn't get past the 'y' or didn't like 'z' and producer/director/developer 'a' is so going to make this better than it was, and 'b' is so much more immersive. And if existing fans don't like it then they are haters, old fuddy-duddies that can't let go an move on with the times. It's all 'it's mine now, nah nah nah nah nah. It's not your's any more it's mine mine'.
That is exactly the problem I have with Star Trek as well as a certain gaming franchise.
I have no problem with 'sharing', if more people like it the better, more people to talk about it with and the possibility of sequels.
But lately its all aimed at new people, and when older fans say something about it we get to hear how we expect everything to remain the same.
I sometimes think it would be better to destroy a beloved thing than passing it on to this generation of people.
Let them find their own damn identity instead of stealing it from others.
S
Stag
Guest
Yeah, but when you put things in tinyurls, it makes people paranoid and not want to click your links.
GENTLEMEN, BEHOLD! By adding "preview" to the address, you can see what address the tinyurl link redirects to! http://preview.tinyurl.com/prsb4yStag said:
Just do this instead of tiny url:
Which works out to this:
*comment about link here*
Code:
[url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jmwB06pPTqqezyOXdf8zysVgFrcwD982RM980]*comment about link here*[/url]Which works out to this:
*comment about link here*
S
Stag
Guest
Well, duh.
UncannyGarlic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
So after seeing it I have to say that it's a quite enjoyable movie and that I appreciate the Star Trek influence. That said, it takes a giant shit on canon, particularly aesthetically (no, I'm not suggesting that it should look like TOS did back in the day, more along the lines of STVI except better) and with the characters, basically reimagining all of them from the ground up.
It was an enjoyable Star Trek inspired movie but Star Trek, it was not. The whole thing felt like a giant action adventure fan-fic and if they choose to continue on this path then they better start using scripts with more of a point.
It was an enjoyable Star Trek inspired movie but Star Trek, it was not. The whole thing felt like a giant action adventure fan-fic and if they choose to continue on this path then they better start using scripts with more of a point.
Radwaster
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Finally saw this thing at the weekend.
Quite liked the casting myself but... [spoiler:0c6cf0b28e]a story that wipes out everything that has gone before except the Enterprise series sucks big time. Reset to zero is the feeblest possible option, unless they are planning to make 'correcting the timeline' the plot for the next movie or two.[/spoiler:0c6cf0b28e]
IMO there is better fanmade stuff about, for example:
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/episodes.html
Not better acted or better produced. Just better thought out.
Quite liked the casting myself but... [spoiler:0c6cf0b28e]a story that wipes out everything that has gone before except the Enterprise series sucks big time. Reset to zero is the feeblest possible option, unless they are planning to make 'correcting the timeline' the plot for the next movie or two.[/spoiler:0c6cf0b28e]
IMO there is better fanmade stuff about, for example:
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/episodes.html
Not better acted or better produced. Just better thought out.
The Dutch Ghost said:
Sorry for the snips...but it was these words of yours I really wanted to comment on since it is clear to me that many people obviously think that soldiers are meant to be brawny types with little or no brains at all. Many people also believe that in order to be a soldier you'll need to be a Rambo-sort of type. Nothing could be further from the truth.
A soldier needs to be relatively clam in stressed situations, be able to foresee how the enemy will react and act accordingly....and yes, if Star Fleet really goes looking for officers! in bars there is something very wrong with the whole mindset of Starfleet, I find.
It is the idea, though, that a young man having trouble obeying people and easily getting into a fight can be corrected or normalized in the military through the discpline in said military that this movie apparently has bought into whne they made the background story for Kirk...
welsh
Junkmaster
The Dutch Ghost said:
This is the problem of commercialized art.
You create an artistic vision, that draws favor from an audience, the audience and their favor has commercial value.
The item lives in their shared understanding of the thing, not in the vision of the artist. That fissure, between the artists vision and its commercial shelf-life undermines the creative process.
The vision begins to warp from what the artist envisioned, and transforms into something the owners believe the audience wants, and in the process the vision becomes corrupted.
But worse, because we live in a competitive commercial world, not only is that warped vision perpetuated, but competitive visions are quashed, potentially even those of the original artist.
Rather than create new art, new visions, the old vision becomes increasingly mutated in order for the owners to capture the audiences money, while new challengers are kept out of competition. Art, which should reflect culture, withers away and becomes increasingly prostituted.
This is why sequels generally suck, why they mutate into something else, and why producers (be they television show producers or video game producers) are just parasites and pimps.
Kilus said:
[spoiler:5d57f41e5e]For me it felt a little too much like a repeat of Voyager's "Year of Hell", even if the similarities were largely superficial.[/spoiler:5d57f41e5e]
I think the film was a step up from Insurrection and Nemesis, but there was nothing clever about it, nothing not seen before in Star Trek if you discount the whole pseudo-gratuitous "Look, we're seeing X for the first time! Again!" deal. Also what the heck is Sylar doing in space.
However, shortly afterwards I watched Twilight, making one of the two films seem awesome by comparison. I'll leave you to figure out which one.
UncannyGarlic said:
That's actually a good way to describe it. It's a bit disappointing because JJA was quoted in an interview as saying how Steven Spielberg had gone ape over how brilliant the script was (although not in those words).
My thoughts from another forum:
So, anyone else seen this? I loved it in the beginning but towards the end it dropped down to 'just' good. The rest is spoiler heavy so tread lightly.
SPOILERS
The movie felt as if there was an hour of set up missing, minimal exposure and leap straight into the action. Nero was explained in under a minute, red matter in about half less. I don't know if the movie retconned the Countdown comic, because Spock summarised its events in such a way that made him responsible for the destruction of Romulus.
In the comic Spock did everything he could to make the Romulan High Council aware of the danger but they just shrugged it off. Hell, Nero backed him up on the spot 'cause he had seen that ever-exploding star or whatever with his own eyes. Spock and Nero went to Vulcan for the red matter thingy but Vulcans could not reach a decision in time to save Romulus. When Nero had learned the news, he got his ship beefed up with, among other things, Borg (yes..) technology at some far-away Romulan shipyard. Nero, or the writers, forgot it was the Romulan High Council who doomed Romulus and decides to go after Spock for some reason. At the site were Romulus once was, Spock shot the red matter into the star and opened some singularity that threw his and Nero's ship into the TOS timeframe.
Spock's retelling in the movie was even more brief and that's approximately all the backstory you get.
Nero'd travelled through time first and was waiting for around 25 year for Spock to arrive. Nero then captured Spock and marooned him on Delta Vega from where he could clearly see Nero destroy Vulcan so Spock could feel his pain.
So, since Nero travelled back in time, did it not occur to him to warn the High Council about that exploding star? Instead he just sits there for 25 years waiting for Spock who is not really to blame for the destruction of Romulus? What the fuck?
That is my main gripe with the movie - almost no exposure, shakily motivated villain. Other thoughts in bulletpoints beause it's getting late, off the top of my head:
- amazing fx
- the cast worked, didn't bother me at all but..
- Sulu was kind of forgettable
- Chekov overdid the accent and felt the most different than the original, but the actor put a great spin on the character
- Karl Urban was absolutely awesome as McCoy, ideal match
- I cried manly tears when Leonard Nimoy appeared, loved the look when he saw young Jim (people unfamiliar with TOS probably won't appreciate it in the same way)
- didn't know what to think of Vulcan's destruction but, in the end, I think it will breathe a lot of fresh air into the universe
- 10 000 Vulcans left? Not sure if I recall the number correctly. Did Vulcans not bother to colonize other planets?
- the ending was so happy that the destruction of Vulcan felt totally insignificant
- Kirk offered to save Nero and his crew despite everything he'd done- very Star Trek
- Nero obviously refused and Kirk ordered Narada destroyed without blinking even once - not Star Trek
- Shinzon was so much better thought throught and developed than Nero
- edit - weren't Romulans nowhere near as strong as Vulcans?
/SPOILERS
It certainly was entertaining but is it the best Star Trek movie since Wrath of Khan? I'd say both are the strongest movies, but neither felt that much 'Star Trek' to me (not counting a certain sacrifice in STII). In fact, the only one that truely did was Insurrection, doing the right thing no matter the cost and stuff. The new Star Trek is by no means bad, it's great fun but a bit too fast for it's own good. I plan to go and see it again sometime soon.
So, anyone else seen this? I loved it in the beginning but towards the end it dropped down to 'just' good. The rest is spoiler heavy so tread lightly.
SPOILERS
The movie felt as if there was an hour of set up missing, minimal exposure and leap straight into the action. Nero was explained in under a minute, red matter in about half less. I don't know if the movie retconned the Countdown comic, because Spock summarised its events in such a way that made him responsible for the destruction of Romulus.
In the comic Spock did everything he could to make the Romulan High Council aware of the danger but they just shrugged it off. Hell, Nero backed him up on the spot 'cause he had seen that ever-exploding star or whatever with his own eyes. Spock and Nero went to Vulcan for the red matter thingy but Vulcans could not reach a decision in time to save Romulus. When Nero had learned the news, he got his ship beefed up with, among other things, Borg (yes..) technology at some far-away Romulan shipyard. Nero, or the writers, forgot it was the Romulan High Council who doomed Romulus and decides to go after Spock for some reason. At the site were Romulus once was, Spock shot the red matter into the star and opened some singularity that threw his and Nero's ship into the TOS timeframe.
Spock's retelling in the movie was even more brief and that's approximately all the backstory you get.
Nero'd travelled through time first and was waiting for around 25 year for Spock to arrive. Nero then captured Spock and marooned him on Delta Vega from where he could clearly see Nero destroy Vulcan so Spock could feel his pain.
So, since Nero travelled back in time, did it not occur to him to warn the High Council about that exploding star? Instead he just sits there for 25 years waiting for Spock who is not really to blame for the destruction of Romulus? What the fuck?
That is my main gripe with the movie - almost no exposure, shakily motivated villain. Other thoughts in bulletpoints beause it's getting late, off the top of my head:
- amazing fx
- the cast worked, didn't bother me at all but..
- Sulu was kind of forgettable
- Chekov overdid the accent and felt the most different than the original, but the actor put a great spin on the character
- Karl Urban was absolutely awesome as McCoy, ideal match
- I cried manly tears when Leonard Nimoy appeared, loved the look when he saw young Jim (people unfamiliar with TOS probably won't appreciate it in the same way)
- didn't know what to think of Vulcan's destruction but, in the end, I think it will breathe a lot of fresh air into the universe
- 10 000 Vulcans left? Not sure if I recall the number correctly. Did Vulcans not bother to colonize other planets?
- the ending was so happy that the destruction of Vulcan felt totally insignificant
- Kirk offered to save Nero and his crew despite everything he'd done- very Star Trek
- Nero obviously refused and Kirk ordered Narada destroyed without blinking even once - not Star Trek
- Shinzon was so much better thought throught and developed than Nero
- edit - weren't Romulans nowhere near as strong as Vulcans?
/SPOILERS
It certainly was entertaining but is it the best Star Trek movie since Wrath of Khan? I'd say both are the strongest movies, but neither felt that much 'Star Trek' to me (not counting a certain sacrifice in STII). In fact, the only one that truely did was Insurrection, doing the right thing no matter the cost and stuff. The new Star Trek is by no means bad, it's great fun but a bit too fast for it's own good. I plan to go and see it again sometime soon.
UncannyGarlic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Agreed but most weren't the original characters in anyway. They mostly did a good job but they all mostly completely reimagined the characters. I did have a problem with all of them being labeled as super geniuses, it just seems stupid to me when stories do that.The Idiot said:
Agreed, and he wasn't Sulu.The Idiot said:
My problem with Chekov was that the actor was too animated, especially in the head and face (seemed to struggle or work to talk or something).The Idiot said:
He was probably about as good as you could get but he still felt like he was really trying to immitate the character. The only point that really stuck out as bad with him was his "I'm a Doctor not as [insert occupation here]" line, it completely lacked impact because he had trouble immitating Deforest Kelly's iconic line.The Idiot said:
I didn't cry but it was certainly the best preformance in the movie, he was really outstanding.The Idiot said:
Agreed. The finishing off of Nero just felt completely wrong to me, didn't seem to fit their characters at all and the exchange they had was especially bad for this.The Idiot said:
I did not like the fighting in the ship with the massive falls and jumps, it felt out of place and very cartoonish.The Idiot said:
I'd add that I loved Scotty, he was hillarious and brillaint, even if his personallity was completely changed. Kirk was alright but again, completely different and I can't help but miss the big old ham... I didn't like how emotional they made the new Spock, it was far too frequent and not what I think of when I think of Spock (the rare emotional outbreak excepted, he rationalizes most of his emotional decisions when asked and doesn't act emotional when making them, something the new Spock was lacking).
welsh
Junkmaster
Thought about the Kirk v Picard discussion.
Picard was captain of the flag ship of the fleet and given jobs that really an Admiral should have. In many ways Picard is a Renaissance figure. So Picard would be, like, a captain of an aircraft carrier in the US Navy.
Kirk, was rougher, smaller crew, more of a renegade, more independent- smaller ship and at a time when star fleet is still growing. He's more like a destroyer captain .
Different types of captains for different ships. Still, I'd go with Kirk- more fun (and he gets laid more).
Picard was captain of the flag ship of the fleet and given jobs that really an Admiral should have. In many ways Picard is a Renaissance figure. So Picard would be, like, a captain of an aircraft carrier in the US Navy.
Kirk, was rougher, smaller crew, more of a renegade, more independent- smaller ship and at a time when star fleet is still growing. He's more like a destroyer captain .
Different types of captains for different ships. Still, I'd go with Kirk- more fun (and he gets laid more).