Star Trek 11 or just plain 'Star Trek'

UniversalWolf said:
Are we talking about this movie again? Hilarious!

I think Star Trek died after Wrath of Khan, and this movie ressurected it as a "popcorn blockbuster". Excellent description.

I wonder whether there's a Wrath of Khan DVD available with the episode from the original series where Khan is introduced. I'd buy that, actually.
Click to expand...

Well, you could always watch that episode legally here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDboDUfbAe8



Well it's obviously not fair but that's life. Can you really blame me though? Star Trek got famous before I was born. By the time I would have been old enough to appreciate Star Trek everyone I knew thought it was lame and there was a social stigma attached to liking it. I even remember asking my dad as a kid if Star Trek was any good and he said "The original series was good but these new ones are crap" or something like that.
Click to expand...

And as for you...

http://www.youtube.com/show?p=Zk2dX5DnW_c

Enjoy...
 
UniversalWolf said:
I think Star Trek died after Wrath of Khan, and this movie ressurected it as a "popcorn blockbuster". Excellent description.
Click to expand...
It started going downhill from there.
Especially by the fourth one (the save the whales ones), they had settled into a sit-commy type of characterization. It was almost like a Married with Children episode with the obligatory humor. You know the same old jokes about the same people (Kelly's a slut, Bud wacks off, Kilngons are smelly and Spock just doesn't get it ho ho).
That fourth one could've been any formulaic Hollywood movie and they just superimposed Start Trek over it.

I will say, I did like how they serialized the first 4 or so movies, they were connected and sequential and you got the sense that the series was still dynamic, still going somewhere.
The latter ones were all pretty much standalone pieces, not truly sequels.
 
Cimmerian Nights said:
It started going downhill from there.
Especially by the fourth one (the save the whales ones), they had settled into a sit-commy type of characterization.
Click to expand...
Oh man, is that a bad movie. Emotionally painful.
 
Gravedigging a bit here but I just watched the movie and had to see what people thought here.

I thought the movie was great but I just couldn't wrap my head around certain things that have already been mentioned here.

I'll let the amazing coincidences and the wrong science pass but I just could not understand Nero's motivations for the life of me. What the hell did he want from Spock and how would destroying the Federation save Romulus??? Weren't they the ones trying to help? It makes no sense to me.
 
maximaz said:
I'll let the amazing coincidences and the wrong science pass but I just could not understand Nero's motivations for the life of me. What the hell did he want from Spock and how would destroying the Federation save Romulus??? Weren't they the ones trying to help? It makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...

That's called being blind because of your loss, and being stupid. The need of revenge is the only thing on your mind, but you haven't thought it through.

That's the way I see it in the movie.
 
I understand being blinded by rage but for 25 years? It's not like he was acting on impulse.
 
maximaz said:
I understand being blinded by rage but for 25 years? It's not like he was acting on impulse.
Click to expand...

It is a good thing those things are not canon but you should see what kind of stuff they pull off in the "Star Trek Nero" comic.

This tells what Nero and co have been doing in the twenty five years between their appearance in the new timeline and "Star Trek".

When some of his crew discover that they are in a point of time in which Romulus still appears they suggest going back home and living out their lives, and perhaps try to change history to save the planet.

Nero doesn't want to but allows them to leave on a shuttle only to destroy it, telling those who stayed with him that Romulus is dead and that revenge is all they have or some bullshit.

However they are then attacked by Klingons from that era who managed to get onboard because Nero's ship is not fully functional because of the time travel journey.

They manage to capture the ship and bring Nero and co to Rura Penthe (from Star Trek 6) were they are tortured and questioned about the nature of their ship and the technology, while they conveniently hold the ship in orbit around the planet but don't bother to do much study of their own.

Nero and co manage to escape and suddenly they ship is whiskered to the other side of the galaxy.
Apparently their ship has become self aware and another self aware machine entity; V'ger (from Star Trek The Motion Picture) wants to meet it.
That is how far the story went.

Most of it is idiotic but still sounds more interesting than the actual movie.
 
I never read the comic, but Eric Bana seemed wasted in the movie playing a b-movie villain archetype.

I finally got around to watching it, and in it's own way it was fun.

The thing that bothered me the most was unrelated to anything Star Trek.
It's just that the movie had this real pandering kind of melodrama to it, it was bordering on Armageddon levels of schmaltz. It was non stop soap-opera type swerves. A lot of contrived drama just to pander. There were lots of :roll: parts. Not my cup of tea ST or not.

But fun in it's own way. Which is almost a genre shift really. Like a cross-genre cover song.
 
I'd understand a comic being dumb but this is such a big movie and otherwise it was actually quite good so these nonsensical story elements really surprised me.

It's been awhile since I've watched a new sci fi movie that kept me interested like ST and I loved how it wasn't just a reboot but sort of a sequel at the same time. I know nothing about Star Trek but I thought that was a clever way to restart it. There were some shockingly obvious blunders, however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top