• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pre screening of new Star Trek tonight

Gathomas88 said:
It was alright. I definitely think it was better written and conceived than "Into Darkness," and avoided making a lot of the same mistakes (less formulaic, more original, fewer irritating plot elements that defy all scientific fact and common sense, and it didn't blatantly rip huge chunks out of earlier - far better - Trek films in order to try and cash-in on blind nostalgia). Unfortunately, however, it also made a lot of brand new mistakes, particularly regarding it's handling of the film's villain.

Basically, they seemed to have been very concerned with hiding the identity of the actor playing the villain. For that reason, they covered him in a metric crap-ton of make up, and had him behave nothing like his usual self. That left him feeling a bit stilted and under-developed.

I mean... Kudos to them on this much...

I really didn't know that was Edris Elba until the very end (though I did guess at the twist surrounding him fairly early on).

However, it still felt like a bit of a waste of a damn fine actor, his abilities, and his potential to contribute to making the film more memorable.

Apart from that, my only complaints would be that the action sequences moved a bit too fast to track a lot of the time (particularly seeing it in 3D), and that the overt focus on retro music was somewhat distracting and over the top. The alien girl's "you killed my father" scene felt a bit tacked on and unnecessary as well, and I think McCoy needs to be played like a bit less of a one-dimension caricature.

On the whole, however, I think I'd give it about a 7. The first is still the best, but this wasn't bad either.

Additional thoughts:

- Interesting to see them delve so heavily into the lore of "Enterprise" for the backstory of their plot here, seeing as how that's generally regarded as being the "Redheaded Stepchild" of the franchise.

- Who were the pink alien girl and the other alien guy who served as Krall's lieutenant? Were they Starfleet officers who had transformed themselves as well, or aliens he'd picked up along the way?

- Kind of disappointed that the new, replacement, Enterprise seems to look exactly like the old one. Why not branch out a little?
Click to expand...



Personally, I think Zachary Quinto and Keith Urban do very well as Spock and McCoy, and I feel a sense of TOS chemistry between them on screen.

We just got back from seeing it.

I'd have to say it is one of, perhaps THE, most visually spectacular movies I've ever seen, equaling or surpassing SW2&3. It was certainly exciting and action packed. The Yorktown starbase was just... pure awesome. Incredibly appealing and beautiful as well.


There are some plot holes and a couple cliches, but you'll have that in a reboot.

Perhaps I'm just showing my age though when I must say I feel the new version, while good, has lost a little something... TOS certainly had its stinkers and its Ed Wood moments, but also had episodes that were deep and thoughtful, even sublime. Those were peaks, granted, not everyday things... but I haven't quite seen the reboot yet equal City of the Edge of Forever, or Mirror Mirror, or even Space Seed/Wrath of Khan.
It's still much better than most of the drivel Hollyweird puts out, and well worth watching.


On the ground, at the base, it looked like Krall had at most a few dozen ships, maybe a hundred men. In space, his ships were like a cloud of black sand, as if there were thousands or millions of them. So where did they all come from? Where did he get all the cannon-fodder to crew them, on this supposedly desolate planet peopled only by castaways? Big plot hole.

Why, after looking like a cross between a Babylon5 Narn and a Enterprise NX-01 Suliban did the villain resume a relatively human appearance?

And did we REALLY have to crash and destroy the Enterprise, yet again? Hasn't that been done enough?

And exactly when the frack did McCoy learn to fly a fightercraft? He hates flying.

But mostly I looked over this stuff and still enjoyed the film.
 
I watched it today, and I give this movie a 9/10. Really enjoyed it. I loved the characters and the action sequences, and really I don't have much to complain about with this movie.

Great job J.J Abrams. :thumbs:
 
Goshin said:
Oh dear...



:D
Click to expand...

I raise your Star Trek facepalm with a Stargate facepalm. :mrgreen:

78d9bb1532c96f4d1846fecec1bed8cb.jpg
 
Goshin said:
Personally, I think Zachary Quinto and Keith Urban do very well as Spock and McCoy, and I feel a sense of TOS chemistry between them on screen.

We just got back from seeing it.

I'd have to say it is one of, perhaps THE, most visually spectacular movies I've ever seen, equaling or surpassing SW2&3. It was certainly exciting and action packed. The Yorktown starbase was just... pure awesome. Incredibly appealing and beautiful as well.


There are some plot holes and a couple cliches, but you'll have that in a reboot.

Perhaps I'm just showing my age though when I must say I feel the new version, while good, has lost a little something... TOS certainly had its stinkers and its Ed Wood moments, but also had episodes that were deep and thoughtful, even sublime. Those were peaks, granted, not everyday things... but I haven't quite seen the reboot yet equal City of the Edge of Forever, or Mirror Mirror, or even Space Seed/Wrath of Khan.
It's still much better than most of the drivel Hollyweird puts out, and well worth watching.


On the ground, at the base, it looked like Krall had at most a few dozen ships, maybe a hundred men. In space, his ships were like a cloud of black sand, as if there were thousands or millions of them. So where did they all come from? Where did he get all the cannon-fodder to crew them, on this supposedly desolate planet peopled only by castaways? Big plot hole.

Why, after looking like a cross between a Babylon5 Narn and a Enterprise NX-01 Suliban did the villain resume a relatively human appearance?

And did we REALLY have to crash and destroy the Enterprise, yet again? Hasn't that been done enough?

And exactly when the frack did McCoy learn to fly a fightercraft? He hates flying.

But mostly I looked over this stuff and still enjoyed the film.
Click to expand...

Yeah. That's actually what I mostly enjoyed about the film. It did go a long way towards recapturing a lot of the optimistic wonder Star Trek has traditionally been known for, especially in the first forty-five minutes or so, and when they introduced the station. It started getting a bit more shaky as the action kicked off, but I'd still definitely classify it as being a step in the "right" direction.

I was a bit confused on a lot of that as well. I think the deal is that all of Krall's footsoldiers were robotic drones, mostly stored in underground hangars. That's why they were so readily willing to sacrifice themselves en masse. His lieutenant and the pink girl were probably other survivors from the Franklin, who had taken on alien appearances like Krall (he mentioned only 'three' crew members being left in the recording Kirk and Uhura watched, IIRC). The movie just did a poor job explaining it, because they kind of skimped on developing the villains in general.

I also think Krall takes on the appearance of whatever species' energy he happens to absorb. That's why he started looking more human after he started feeding on the Enterprise's crew.

The whole bit with Spock and McCoy commandeering the fighter was confusing in general. It was like... They were on the Enterprise, and then, all of the sudden, they were in an escape pod, in a blur of motion I could barely follow. Then, equally all of the sudden they collided with an alien fighter and somehow managed to figure out how to eject the pilot and learn how to fly the thing in another blur of motion I couldn't really follow, and only lasted like a second or two at most. That whole thing just needed to be slowed down a bit.

I didn't necessarily have a problem with them blowing up the Enterprise, per se. However, if they're going to do that, they need to justify it by giving us an updated model. The ship looked almost exactly the same. I think the only difference was that it was gun-metal gray this time, instead of white. Frankly, I'm not even really sure about that.
 
Last edited:
Your Star said:
I raise your Star Trek facepalm with a Stargate facepalm. :mrgreen:

78d9bb1532c96f4d1846fecec1bed8cb.jpg
Click to expand...



ROFL. I've watched some Stargate and enjoyed it, mostly the original series and SG Atlantis. :)
 
Moot said:
What's funny about Star Trek is that it was a failed TV series in the 60's that didn't become popular until they started showing the re-runs in the afternoon after kids got out school. It's amazing how the franchise has evolved over the years and gotten even more popular.
Click to expand...

As a kid in the 70s I have fond memories of the after school lineup of Star Trek, Gilligan's Island and Hogan's Heros.
 
Winchester said:
As a kid in the 70s I have fond memories of the after school lineup of Star Trek, Gilligan's Island and Hogan's Heros.
Click to expand...



I had to explain Sergeant Schultz, Colonel Klink and "I see nothing! I know nothing!" to my 20yo son. :D
 
Goshin said:
I had to explain Sergeant Schultz, Colonel Klink and "I see nothing! I know nothing!" to my 20yo son. :D
Click to expand...

I liked ting better than the original Star Trek. They were good but tng was better.
I liked the first couple of seasons of deep space nine then they just went stupid with the whole dominion.

I really thought they lost focus on everything.

Voyager uggg
Enterprise I just didn't even bother.
 
ludin said:
I liked ting better than the original Star Trek. They were good but tng was better.
I liked the first couple of seasons of deep space nine then they just went stupid with the whole dominion.

I really thought they lost focus on everything.

Voyager uggg
Enterprise I just didn't even bother.
Click to expand...



I grew up with TOS, literally, so I have a nostalgic fondness for the original series. I'll grant the production values and FX were cheesy by modern standards, but at the time it was close to state-of-the-art. There's a new version out where they take TOS episodes and subtly update some of the FX, mostly the space scenes, and it is cool. I just think some of the TOS storylines were really great, deep thinker stuff. Of course there were some stinkers too.


I had to get used to TNG slowly. Season 1 mostly sucked. I used to blame David Gerrold for that, but I did some digging and found out that it was actually Rodenberry who was at fault, apparently the Great Bird of the Galaxy started believing his own press and decided he was the Prophet of the Future... he came up with a vague utopian vision where humanity had evolved beyond greed, fear, jealousy, selfishness, and so on, and ordered their society accordingly. The characters tended to come off as bland when they weren't seeming arrogant and aloof. They were hard to relate to and the stories were mostly a bit lackluster, and people tried to tell Gene this but he was paranoid about maintaining control. As his health worsened and others took over, the writing and stories got better, the characters were made more human and relatable, and the show improved.

I got back into it during season 2 and came to enjoy it thoroughly. They did some very good stories, like Darmok and Jhelad at Tenagra, The Flute and many others.



I seem to be one of the few people that will admit enjoying Star Trek: Enterprise. It took some getting used to, and the "temporal cold war" long-arc storyline was a bit.... messed up... didn't like the final episode much either... but on the whole I enjoyed it a lot. The 'early days of exploration' feel was well done and something I liked, along with how they were learning as they went and making up plans off the cuff, prior to Starfleet and the Federation and the Prime Directive.


Voyager just never grabbed me. I watched most of the first season then lost interest.

DS9 was ok but I only watched sporadically after season 2.
 
Goshin said:
I grew up with TOS, literally, so I have a nostalgic fondness for the original series. I'll grant the production values and FX were cheesy by modern standards, but at the time it was close to state-of-the-art. There's a new version out where they take TOS episodes and subtly update some of the FX, mostly the space scenes, and it is cool. I just think some of the TOS storylines were really great, deep thinker stuff. Of course there were some stinkers too.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the remastered episodes of TOS with top notch special FX is awesome, those episodes are far superior to the sludge that comes out these days.
 
Well my wife and I saw it, and both liked it, kind of a fun adventure story.
 
Goshin said:
ROFL. I've watched some Stargate and enjoyed it, mostly the original series and SG Atlantis. :)
Click to expand...

Probably my favorite show of all time. For sure my favorite sci-fi show.
 
Saw it yesterday with the family and we all really liked it. however...

I thought the method of defeating the enemy was kinda hokey. Music.....really?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom