Page 3 of 6
Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:23 pm
by TPRJones
Looks potentially very good, although I'm concerned about how much ground that trailer covered. I hope they aren't just speeding through a lot of action scenes and not taking much time for interesting character and story development.
What's with the ship with the over/under nacelles? That's unexpected.
Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:46 pm
by GORDON
I think that trailer must be marketed for the young audience that never saw a Star Trek movie in theaters. They KNOW the older fans are going to go see it, but they need the younger crowd. For that they need to show shiny things, flashing lights, and boobies, all of which were present.
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:05 am
by GORDON
Here is the trailer on the official site, not from a video camera.
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:37 pm
by TPRJones
This article does not bode well on several accounts.
It sounds like any sort of canon is going to be completely ignored. This worries me somewhat.
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:29 pm
by Malcolm
I been saying for years he's a fucking hack.
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:40 pm
by TheCatt
I can't remember the last time I cared that a Star Trek movie was coming out.
Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:07 pm
by GORDON
Shatner responds to the trailer.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:13 am
by GORDON
Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 2:22 pm
by Leisher
I think they should've found a way to get Shatner in this film.
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 4:06 pm
by GORDON
World premier got a 5-minute standing o.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009....remiere
Granted, these are trekkies... I just can't imagine that kind of response for Insurrection or Nemesis.
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 4:13 pm
by GORDON
From that page:
Well I was one of the lucky ones that attended the premiere in Sydney and i will quickly point out some thoughts i had of the movie.
What was good:
* Visually this movie is stunning IL&M did a fantastic job with creating the CGI setpieces
* The cast itself makes a faithful tribute to the original series crew often relying on familiar
mannerisms & quotes.
* The pace of the movie itself, more thrills, more energy, just simply fun.
* A surprising amount of humor which is something new for Star Trek
* Much better that a lot of the previous films in the franchise
What was bad:
* A lack of character depth for the rest of the crew (Uhura, Chekov, Sulu, Scotty) but they did a commendable job with what screen time they had.
* Nero (Eric Bana) was the weakest link of again because of lack of character development. You wouldnt really understand the motives of Nero actions unless you had familiarized yourself with the Star Trek: Countdown prequel comic.
* Plot: Orci and Kurtzman's story echoes similar comparisons to transformers that it the whole point of the film seems to get lost halfway through its runtime. The major plot device seems far-fetched than typical Star trek stories will make you believe in and requires a large leap of faith for some.
I fear because of its weak story this movie might receive a bashing from a lot of critics.
* For some Trekkies or casual fans a lot of the canon was changed in order to make this more movie more accessible. Some will find this movie something neither Trek or Star Wars but something entirely different
Summary:
Its not perfect but JJ Abrams has breathed new life into the dying franchise and hopefully (with some better writing) will keep this new trilogy smart,charming and thrilling and more importantly accessible to people who previously thought Star Trek was not for them.
Humor???
Yeah, if there was one flaw Wrath of Khan had, it's that it wasn't slap-sticky enough.
Expectations just went back down... which is probably a good thing.
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 8:49 pm
by Leisher
I really wish Hollywood would stop thinking that every film has to appeal to every demographic. Usually, this catering to the masses does nothing but ruin a film and franchise.
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 5:32 pm
by TPRJones
<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... tchable%27" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http://www.theonion.com/content/files/i ... d></object>
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 5:44 pm
by TheCatt
I saw that earlier today and was going to post it here. Hilarious.
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 1:13 pm
by Troy
Pretty good flick, but they spent a lot of character development on the Kirk and it made everyone else suffer, especially the bad guy, they mention his whole motive in like, one sentence.
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 3:50 pm
by Vince
Better than I expected, but had a few annoying spots. Best performance by a mile was Karl Urban as McCoy.
I'll add more if there's a spoiler thread made.
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 4:29 pm
by GORDON
Make one.
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 1:20 am
by GORDON
I really liked the flick. Two thumbs up.
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 1:27 am
by Vince
I really liked it as well. I've just figured out that they don't hold the same allure for me that they used to.
I think that died once I recognized that they lived in a socialistic utopia.
Went from Sci-Fi to fantasy at that point for me.
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 1:34 am
by GORDON
Well, maybe in this reboot they all get to be freedom-loving capitalists...
