Star Trek

nyarlothothep

I re-watched this film last night, well half of it. Normally I find one's opinion of a film is more true to form after the hype dies down whether externally or in one's own mind, and returning to it later can yield more insights as to what one likes or dislikes about it in addition to getting more nuanced views on these things. So I still think Star Trek gave a much need injection of energy into a stale franchise, some of the scenes worked very well, such as kirk driving a cadillac while listening to the beastie boys, yes its a stupid scene but at the same time the pacing of the scene combined with actual 20th century rock music, which seems to be absent in the trek universe was somehow apt for a future galactic conqueror like Kirk while also giving the scene an in your face kind of energy. Furthermore the character of Spock was a study in pathos, there were some excellent emotional scenes, Kirk's mercurial birth, the destruction of Vulcan, the examination Spocks outsider status. This vibrancy of the film contrasted with the staid by the numbers routine which had become commonplace by the the time of VOY, ENT and the last two TNG films. Also the time travel element wasn't so annoying as the first time I had seen it, the concept was quite interesting, whereby a future enemy wipes the boards with their enemies in the past.

Now onto the criticisms I still hold. Kirk was an asshole, not the dignified Alexander-esque character which Shatner defined, but a bratty sociopathic loud mouth who served only himself. Spock was the films whipping boy, didn't see the last hour but remember Kirk being a douche to him after he had lost his planet and mother! Then he assumes command which must have stung. Red matter was a deus ex god substance which wasn't explained, Spock coincidentally meets Kirk on the Ice Planet but what were the odds?! The plot didn't make a whole lot of sense, but then TOS never really made much sense to begin with at times, eg Abraham Lincoln in Space, Apollo in Space, Space Hippies, Harvey Mudd, Rock creatures etc. That said Kirk becoming captain in less than 2 hours was ridiculous, the time travel explanation via red matter was absurd. Also it felt like a trek movie for the 2 second attention span audience, a lot of films are like this, there wasn't really any big deep questions to be answered and despite Spock's character exploration the film was centered on action primarily as opposed to being a character piece, which is fine except it felt a bit superficial.

Overall it was a film I think which needed to be made to burst open the stagnant box which trek had imprisoned itself in, its a lot more compelling to watch than say Nemesis or Generation and it feels like a real film with proper effects and set pieces as opposed to being like an extended episode in anamorphic. But the next film would be preferable if it were deeper, with less of an asshole Kirk combined with epic action sequences where needed rather than being constant.

Kiith

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Now onto the criticisms I still hold. Kirk was an asshole, not the dignified Alexander-esque character which Shatner defined, but a bratty sociopathic loud mouth who served only himself. Spock was the films whipping boy, didn't see the last hour but remember Kirk being a douche to him after he had lost his planet and mother! Then he assumes command which must have stung.

To be fair to Kirk, he was a bit of an asshole at the start, but the only reason he was a douche to Spock after the destruction of Vulcan and the death of his mother was to show that he was emotionally involved, and needed to step down as captain. And the only reason he did that was cause future Spock told him to.

boris232

Regarding the red matter stuff etc. I believe there was a series of magazines released in the States called Star Trek Countdown. I think the story involved a lot of the TNG characters.

It acted as a sort of prequel to the film. Never saw them on the shelves here though. Would have helped especially with non-core fans.

boris232

Here is a link to it on Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Countdown

Cookie_Monster

what I hate most about that film is Pegg and the engine room. Which is a petty cause Pegg is usually epically good.

that line at the end... "Dylithium chambers at maximum" :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

senordingdong

****ING LENS FLARE!!!

norrie rugger

If a film NEDES a prequel comic to explain things, then the film is a badly told story.

Pride Fighter

Basically my instincts as a fan of Trek all my life say waaaaagh I hate this film.

However, I am a huge fan of turn my brain off sci-fi and action films like Total Recall, Starship Troopers, The Running Man, Demolition Man. I felt the new Trek was in the same vane. It was really entertaining and a good film. However, I think there are so many holes in the new franchise of it a series re-working would be very very hard to explain.

DrumSteve

I liked the lens flare.

nyarlothothep

DrumSteve wrote: »

I liked the lens flare.

The Lens Flare is a legitimate effect for space shots, its going to happen as a camera passes at an angle to a light source or if the light source is blocked by an object like a planet or ship.

senordingdong

Yeah but it was over used to bejaysus.

I too watched the film recently and my original feelings stand, the film was nothing but good looking.

nyarlothothep

senordingdong wrote: »

Yeah but it was over used to bejaysus.

I too watched the film recently and my original feelings stand, the film was nothing but good looking.

When I became aware that he overuses lens flare I noticed it in every scene, I agree its overused by Abrams and it just looks needlessly flash after a while.

Klingon Hamlet

I felt that both Kirk and Spock were douches in the first half----remember Spock's callous remark to Kirk about his father's death. at the assembly regarding Kirk's cheating. Kirk was constantly trying to prove himself worthy of command and came across overly cocky because he didn't have the same upbringing as Shatner-Kirk...no father to encourage him, a (step-father?uncle? they never say) who is oppressive and mean, and a life gone astray.

It was a simplistic and bombastic Trek where characters were very one-dimensional at times but I was shcoked by some events (Spock's mother's plunge to death in particular) and where I felt it did let me down with uts convenient throwing-together of characters (Kirk, Prime Spock and Scotty in twenty minutes??) I could not honestly conceive of an as-exciting way to bring the crew together, without requiring a 5 hour plodding-along film/miniseries.

This film is a reboot, but one which acknowledges the existence of its predecessor in a rather novel fashion. It is flashy, fun, and flawed. And I enjoyed the hell out of it:)

Johnny Storm

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

I felt that both Kirk and Spock were douches in the first half----remember Spock's callous remark to Kirk about his father's death. at the assembly regarding Kirk's cheating. Kirk was constantly trying to prove himself worthy of command and came across overly cocky because he didn't have the same upbringing as Shatner-Kirk...no father to encourage him, a (step-father?uncle? they never say) who is oppressive and mean, and a life gone astray.

It was a simplistic and bombastic Trek where characters were very one-dimensional at times but I was shcoked by some events (Spock's mother's plunge to death in particular) and where I felt it did let me down with uts convenient throwing-together of characters (Kirk, Prime Spock and Scotty in twenty minutes??) I could not honestly conceive of an as-exciting way to bring the crew together, without requiring a 5 hour plodding-along film/miniseries.

This film is a reboot, but one which acknowledges the existence of its predecessor in a rather novel fashion. It is flashy, fun, and flawed. And I enjoyed the hell out of it:)

Well said.

IMHO the real test is how well they do with the next movie. Will they build on the first one in a more adult and thoughtful way or .........?

_Kaiser_

Johnny Storm wrote: »

Well said.

IMHO the real test is how well they do with the next movie. Will they build on the first one in a more adult and thoughtful way or .........?

I can answer that - nope /:mad: (depending on your viewpoint) for the simple reason that they're out to make money, and if the audience wants "generic sci-fi action/comedy #225" (with references to an established franchise to pull in the fans.. if only to see how bad/good it'll be) then that's what they'll get!

Don't get me wrong, as a "generic sci-fi action/comedy blockbuster" it wasn't a bad film and I enjoyed it as that - plus it was easily better than Nemesis.. but it wasn't Star Trek imo.

Klingon Hamlet

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I can answer that - nope /:mad: (depending on your viewpoint) for the simple reason that they're out to make money, and if the audience wants "generic sci-fi action/comedy #225" (with references to an established franchise to pull in the fans.. if only to see how bad/good it'll be) then that's what they'll get!

Don't get me wrong, as a "generic sci-fi action/comedy blockbuster" it wasn't a bad film and I enjoyed it as that - plus it was easily better than Nemesis.. but it wasn't Star Trek imo.

In my opinion Trek has gone through several different "versions".

First was the pilot, a stoic, introspective and thought-provoking show that never truly came to fruition.

Then TOS, a more campy, simplified and idiosyncratic show full of character, fun exposition and cliffhangers.

Then the first film, very similar to the pilot, plus an orgy of special effects.

Second film brought in the almost submarine-like we're-in-this-together feel that stuck with the franchise a long time (a good thing I think). All thanks to Meyer, the crew became less about exploiting the stars and more fighting the darkness between them.

TNG brought in a lot more navel-gazing, plus somewhat of an arc-system to the characters near the end.

DS9 brought in serious arcs, and WAR. Lots and lots of war and doom and grit and determination.

The less said about Voyager, Enterprise and Nemesis the better---attempts IMHO to match contemporary scifi / drama and failed miserably.

The 2009 film was a hybrid of TOS's in-your-face exuberance, and Meyer's us-against-the-void adventure. Plus add a hundred million dollars' worth of effects, and a snazzy camera system, and you've got Star Trek.

I'd say many a fan bemoaned Khan's pulpy plot and grim universe.

And I'd say like Khan, this film will be heralded as the next breath of fresh air for an amazingly long-lived franchise (much like GoldenEye and Casino Royale boosted Bond.)

AngryLips

It's a shame that there's nothing likeable at all about Spock or Kirk in the reboot. In fact, it seems that they have gone out of their way to make both characters completely hateful.

Johnny Storm

AngryLips wrote: »

It's a shame that there's nothing likeable at all about Spock or Kirk in the reboot. In fact, it seems that they have gone out of their way to make both characters completely hateful.

I fully agree with you re Spock but I was happy enough with Kirk (and Bones)

Oafley Jones

Hated the fact that half the federation ships interiors were what seemed to be not-at-all disguised chemical/industrial plants, not to mention that said areas were vastly too big for the ships - even accepting the new ginormous Enterprise's size.

The engine rooms etc were also really at odds with the rest of the ships aesthetics.

norrie rugger

It.was the Budweiser brewery.
In terms of looks, what would you expect.an.engine room to pook like?

Klingon Hamlet

norrie rugger wrote: »

It.was the Budweiser brewery.
In terms of looks, what would you expect.an.engine room to pook like?

It sure beats this:

senordingdong

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Hated the fact that half the federation ships interiors were what seemed to be not-at-all disguised chemical/industrial plants,

I thought the enterprise bridge looked like an Apple store catering solely to homosexuals.

Klingon Hamlet

senordingdong wrote: »

I thought the enterprise bridge looked like an Apple store catering solely to homosexuals.

Just a brighter version of this really


PS I love the look between Pavel and Hikaru.