New Movie: Star Trek 11 in 2008

[Galaril]

Star Trek the early years sounds promising. With the guy from Lost writing and direct this could be good.

hhttp://entertainment.tv.yahoo.com/entnews/eo/20060421/114567498000.html

[amdaily]

Ya to no Berman
Na to early years
and Na to Abrams. I hate the fucker/ What's his name from B5 should have got his shot at Trek. Or that other guy who is working on 24 now.

[bosshogg23]

Read about that yesterday, good news IMO. Glad to see the franchise didnt take several years off like was speculated.

[Franklinnoble]

Bah. Sounds like 'Star Trek: 90210'

[amdaily]

Bah. Sounds like 'Star Trek: 90210'

Indeed. I hope it fails so it will finally take several, needed, years off.

[Schmidty]

Crap news.

I want more ST: TNG or even a ST: DS9 (my favorite) movie.

[DaddyTorgo]

read about that yesterday too. UGH. if you wanna talk about putting a nail in the coffin of the franchise, that oughta do it. UGH.

[amdaily]

Crap news.

I want more ST: TNG or even a ST:DS9 (my favorite) movie.

Agreed. The one series (DS9) that was interesting from the start to the end and it gets no respect :mad:

[Young Drachma]

There needs to be DS9 movie, with Sisko back where he belongs. But this time, as an Admiral. After all, the guy ran a whole station and they had the nerve to originally not have him as a Captain.

Anyway...you're right. It gets no respect at all.

[Coffee Warlord]

Ya to no Berman
Na to early years
and Na to Abrams. I hate the fucker/ What's his name from B5 should have got his shot at Trek. Or that other guy who is working on 24 now.

J Michael Straczynski was the B5 dude. And what sucks is he actually expressed interest in doing a Trek series not too long ago. And was shot down.

Fuckers. He coulda done it quite well.

But yes. DS9 REALLY improved as it went along, mainly, I think, because it took a page out of B5: Continual plotlines. For the most part, no particle of the week, no deflector dishes, etc etc. That, and they finally started making the Federation falllable.

[Franklinnoble]

I agree that Star Trek needs a few more years off. I wouldn't miss it if it took the next decade off, and let some new blood come into the picture.

[Coffee Warlord]

I agree that Star Trek needs a few more years off. I wouldn't miss it if it took the next decade off, and let some new blood come into the picture.

I don't even think it necessarily needs time off. It just needs 1) a fresh writer/director and 2) to not have ANYTHING to do with the old characters.

[Abe Sargent]

Agreed. The one series (DS9) that was interesting from the fourth or fifth season to the end and it gets no respect :mad:


FIXED!



-Anxiety

[bosshogg23]

Im curious what people think time off would do to improve the quality or lack thereof with Star Trek.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

In its article Friday that broke the story, Variety didn't use the "P" word, but the trade paper made the Abrams movie sound very much like one, noting it'll show Kirk and Spock's "first meeting at Starfleet Academy and [their] first outer space mission."

Maintaining calm is author Win Scott Eckert, who has been collecting, compiling and otherwise straightening out Starfleet chronology since he was a boy back in the 1970s, and has the 184-page Star Trek Annotated Timeline to show for the effort. He, for one, is looking forward to the new movie, and isn't worried it'll wreak havoc with Kirk and Spock as fans know them.

"There is really very little that is Trek "canon" [meaning, info gleaned from the TV shows and movies] about these characters' early careers," Eckert said in an email interview Friday. "So, I can't see any reason why this prequel would not fit into canonical Trek continuity."
Maybe they kiss..

[sabotai]

They need to make a movie involving Q!

[SFL Cat]

I think they need to give Star Trek a 10-15 year break. Its not like they need to do anything new for a while. After all, they have reruns from 5 series now that they can run...over...and over....and over.....and over.

[bbor]

Dork alert!!!!!!!

[bbor]

Dola

I'm really looking forward to this movie.

I own all of them

:D

[bosshogg23]

Dola

I'm really looking forward to this movie.

I own all of them

:D

But have you visited Star Trek Experience? :cheesy:

[Bad-example]

Voyager is the series that really gets no respect. Truly a shame, because some of the writing was superb.

I want more ST: TNG or even a ST: DS9 (my favorite) movie.

I agree that a Next Gen/DS9/Voyager era movie would be the best choice. They could use characters from all three series.

A Q movie, though...well, I am not sure how they would explain how the immortal Q (John DeLancie) turned into a 50+ year old mushy potato of a man. Maybe if they used a new actor.

[SFL Cat]

Dork alert!!!!!!!

Friggin' Klingon.

[Galaril]

Voyager is the series that really gets no respect. Truly a shame, because some of the writing was superb.

I agree that a Next Gen/DS9/Voyager era movie would be the best choice. They could use characters from all three series.

A Q movie, though...well, I am not sure how they would explain how the immortal Q (John DeLancie) turned into a 50+ year old mushy potato of a man. Maybe if they used a new actor.


I miss Seven of 9.;)

[Bad-example]

Heh...me too. The episode where the doctor tries to coach her on dating was great!

[saldana]

But have you visited Star Trek Experience? :cheesy:

yes. yes i have.

anyway, i cant wait to see who they come up with to play a teenage kirk and spock...i swear to god if sean william scott gets anywhere near this movie i am taking my starfleet academy bumper sticker off (ok, im not that bad, but i have been to the star trek exp. and thought it was awesome)

[Fonzie]

They need to make a movie involving Q!

Yes yes.

This was all but promised in the series finale when he said, "See you...out there!"

[IwasHere]

Bah. Sounds like 'Star Trek: 90210'
I thought someone already tried this idea with Space Above and Beyond?

[JeffNights]

I thought someone already tried this idea with Space Above and Beyond?

Now Am I alone when I say Space was not that bad of a show?

[TazFTW]

Now Am I alone when I say Space was not that bad of a show?

Nope, I liked it.

[ice4277]

Im curious what people think time off would do to improve the quality or lack thereof with Star Trek.

I guess I could understand, maybe from a commercial standpoint, that a long time off could build more desire for a new product. Right now it seems there is more ambivalence than anything else.

But from a creative standpoint, yeah, I don't think time would be the difference. They just need to come at things from a new angle, catch up with the times. The last couple series seem very sterile and boring compared with newer fare such as Firefly and Galactica. They definitely need a new group of people in charge.

[IwasHere]

Do we have any readers out there. I still enjoy the books very much.

Reading the Dominion Wars and what Picard and his crew were up to during this time was great. I also really enjoy the Cross over books. Q-Squared was fun seeing how the Squire of Gothos was actually a young Q in training. Peter David is my favorite Trek author.


BTW. I am still waiting for my Quantum Leap movie!

[Barkeep49]

What I find interesting is that this isn't the first rumored Trek project. That was the one where they were going to bring in the guy from Gladiator, but the script he turned in was so terrible they shelved the whole project.

[sterlingice]

But from a creative standpoint, yeah, I don't think time would be the difference. They just need to come at things from a new angle, catch up with the times. The last couple series seem very sterile and boring compared with newer fare such as Firefly and Galactica. They definitely need a new group of people in charge.

That I'd definitely agree with. Enterprise should have been good. The premise was there- show what happened at the very beginning: people go into space, people meet all the characters for the first time, all the aliens, etc. And it just never really goes anywhere- it just lacked writing and directing skill.

Voyager, well, that was kindof crappy to begin with. Had a few good episodes, but, on the whole, when you're cross promoting with your big chested character and WWF, which your station also carries, it's just time to give up.

(Tho I love how people vastly overrate Firefly, it's almost comical.)

SI

[Schmidty]

(Tho I love how people vastly overrate Firefly, it's almost comical.)

SI

I totally agree with that. It's a decent show, but people act as if it's the greatest show in television history.

[kcchief19]

anyway, i cant wait to see who they come up with to play a teenage kirk and spock...i swear to god if sean william scott gets anywhere near this movie i am taking my starfleet academy bumper sticker off (ok, im not that bad, but i have been to the star trek exp. and thought it was awesome)
I think the worst case scenario would be Ben Affleck.

I have also been to The Star Trek Experience and I thought it was pretty cool. I was three days removed from a bout with stomach flu, so it's a miracle that after eating lunch there I was able to make it through the ride without incident.

[kcchief19]

I guess I could understand, maybe from a commercial standpoint, that a long time off could build more desire for a new product. Right now it seems there is more ambivalence than anything else.

But from a creative standpoint, yeah, I don't think time would be the difference. They just need to come at things from a new angle, catch up with the times. The last couple series seem very sterile and boring compared with newer fare such as Firefly and Galactica. They definitely need a new group of people in charge.
See, that's why I'm actually encouraged by this. While I'm not completely sold on Abrams as being the guy to pull it off (Armageddon, anyone?), I think this is the direction to go -- get someone with creativity outside the Star Trek family and play in a new sandbox.

I hear the calls for a DS9 or Voyager movie, but those are movies that wouldn't have any appeal outside the hardcore fans -- which we have determined is a $43 million gross based on the last outing of the TNG. There is no appeal outside the diehards for this one. A fresh take from a hot, creative writer might be able to pull in the more casual fans.

The thing about going back to the past is I think it makes making the movie appeal to fans without being distracting is impossible. I think that bothered people about Enterprise -- I know it bothered fans I talked to. The original series had low-grade graphics and sets -- If you make a $500,000 Star Trek movie today, it's going to look like it took place a thousand years after the original series. To keep fans from bitching about how the movie looks out of chronology, the story and creativity has to be out of the park.

[IwasHere]

S
The thing about going back to the past is I think it makes making the movie appeal to fans without being distracting is impossible. I think that bothered people about Enterprise -- I know it bothered fans I talked to. The original series had low-grade graphics and sets -- If you make a $500,000 Star Trek movie today, it's going to look like it took place a thousand years after the original series. To keep fans from bitching about how the movie looks out of chronology, the story and creativity has to be out of the park.
I don't get this.

I know the Jetsons are set in the far off future of 2003, but I still watch them.

[samifan24]

I grew up watching ST:TNG and loved the run from about season 3 onward. However I have very little interest in watching a "prequel." I'm excited that Berman is not associated with the project, though.

[Coffee Warlord]

Now Am I alone when I say Space was not that bad of a show?

Ups and downs. The first few episodes were excellent, it hit a major rut in the middle, and I don't remember the last few episodes before it croaked.

[BrianD]

I totally agree with that. It's a decent show, but people act as if it's the greatest show in television history.

It was a very good show with great potential. The fact that it died an untimely death will make it seem even better. People love a fallen hero.

[Raiders Army]

I guess the people who dressed up as stormtroopers for Stars Wars have something to look forward to besides the next Harry Potter movie.

[bosshogg23]

I guess the people who dressed up as stormtroopers for Stars Wars have something to look forward to besides the next Harry Potter movie.

Damn im watching Harry Potter currently, own some Star Trek movies and dig Star Wars.

Someone trying to say something? :D

[DaddyTorgo]

guess the people who dressed up in black and gold for another losing season have nothing to look forward to.

fixed it for ya :D

[BrianD]

Damn im watching Harry Potter currently, own some Star Trek movies and dig Star Wars.

Someone trying to say something? :D

And I'm currently on Episode 4 of a full Star Wars marathon. There is nothing wrong with us. :)

[Raiders Army]

Damn im watching Harry Potter currently, own some Star Trek movies and dig Star Wars.

Someone trying to say something? :D
Maybe something about those people who dress up and wait in line for movie premieres. ;)

[Raiders Army]

fixed it for ya :D
We'll see. Talk to me in December.

[Kodos]

http://imdb.com/title/tt0796366/fullcredits

I missed this the first time around. Matt Damon as Kirk?


And to echo the other Q fans, we need a Q movie! And I would definitely see another Next Generation movie.

[Fonzie]

http://imdb.com/title/tt0796366/fullcredits

I missed this the first time around. Matt Damon as Kirk?


And to echo the other Q fans, we need a Q movie! And I would definitely see another Next Generation movie.

A Q movie must happen. Make it so!

[Bee]

Matt Damon is too good of an actor to play Kirk.

[kcchief19]

http://imdb.com/title/tt0796366/fullcredits

I missed this the first time around. Matt Damon as Kirk?


And to echo the other Q fans, we need a Q movie! And I would definitely see another Next Generation movie.

I think the worst case scenario would be Ben Affleck.
Although I think Damon would be hated by the fanboy community, I don't hate the idea of Damon as Kirk for one major reason -- he's not Ben Affleck.

[ice4277]

On a somewhat related note, I went to the Star Trek Experience when I was in Vegas this past weekend. It was pretty fun. They had a lot of props from the old shows, and the simulators were pretty well done.

[Barkeep49]

I think Damon is a good actor and so I'd give him a chance as Kirk, though I have trouble picturing it working well.

[HomerSimpson]

And to echo the other Q fans, we need a Q movie! And I would definitely see another Next Generation movie.
You would run into the same problem you had with Data, Brent Spiner.

Do you piss off all the Hardcore Trek fans and recast the role of "Q", John Delance, or do you just ignore the fact the he is now to old for the role and piss off the othe half of the Trek fans.


Those treks fans are just never happy. First they want you to be true to the Science behind their characters, and then they demand that you not recast any of these characters. Sorry people, you can not have it both ways.

[Kodos]

I think with some makeup and a personal trainer, Delancey would be fine. In fact, I don't think another actor could play Q with the same success that he has had.

[BrianD]

On a somewhat related note, I went to the Star Trek Experience when I was in Vegas this past weekend. It was pretty fun. They had a lot of props from the old shows, and the simulators were pretty well done.

Did you have a Warp Core Breach in Quark's Bar? 5 kinds of rum in a smoking fish-bowl...yum. :)

[WSUCougar]

I think with some makeup and a personal trainer, Delancey would be fine. In fact, I don't think another actor could play Q with the same success that he has had.
Agreed

Or the plot line could have something to do with Q (or the Continuum) aging.

[tanglewood]

Isn't Q like really, really old anyway? Would it matter if he looked the same age a couple of hundred years apart?

[WSUCougar]

Well, he's immortal and omnipotent, plus he's merely taking human form, so the theory is he would always choose the exact same appearance.

[ice4277]

Did you have a Warp Core Breach in Quark's Bar? 5 kinds of rum in a smoking fish-bowl...yum. :)

Unfortunately, no. I saw it, but didn't have the time to get one. Not to mention, the national Star Trek convention was there this weekend as well, so the line to that place was crazy.

[Fonzie]

Well, he's immortal and omnipotent, plus he's merely taking human form, so the theory is he would always choose the exact same appearance.

Yup. Although, he could "age" himself just for kicks, like he did in the series finale.

And let's not forget that Data evidently has the option to make himself appear older, as was also seen in the serires finale (his streak of gray hair). So there's some precedent if he wishes to participate in the human experience of aging along with his friends.

[Fonzie]

Dola-

Did you have a Warp Core Breach in Quark's Bar? 5 kinds of rum in a smoking fish-bowl...yum. :)

Those things are dangerously good.

[BrianD]

Dola-



Those things are dangerously good.

I'll say. I had one the night before my wedding and managed to get myself sick the day of the wedding. Fortunately the wife didn't know about that until much later. :)

[Barkeep49]

Script has been completed. I have grave doubts about the project when JJ Abrams states "I would actually prefer [that] people don't know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind."

In other words? This is not a movie for people who like Star Trek.

[BrianD]

Script has been completed. I have grave doubts about the project when JJ Abrams states "I would actually prefer [that] people don't know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind."

In other words? This is not a movie for people who like Star Trek.

With the current Hollywood trend of going back to the beginning and reinventing popular series (Batman, Superman, Bond), this isn't terribly surprising. I'm not overly happy with this news, but they might be able to pull it off.

[Barkeep49]

I agree an origin story isn't surprising, but I don't think JJ Abrams is the one who is going to do it right.

[Mustang]

"I would actually prefer [that] people don't know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind."

In other words? This is not a movie for people who like Star Trek.

Who doesn't know Star Trek?

If they don't know Star Trek then they most likely likely don't like science fiction movies in the first place and will have no interest in seeing this anyways..

[Coffee Warlord]

On a somewhat related note, I went to the Star Trek Experience when I was in Vegas this past weekend. It was pretty fun. They had a lot of props from the old shows, and the simulators were pretty well done.

You were in Vegas this weekend as well? Damn, wish I had known. I was also in town, losing money hand over fist.

Did you get to experience the awe inspiring power of the talking Star Trek toilet? :)

[Karim]

I own all the movies, and the entire Voyager series (which I've watched twice). I could never get into TNG; Picard was just too much of a pussy to be believable as a starship captain.

Good to see the franchise isn't dead yet...

[Cuckoo]

Casting news on this... Young Spock cast, and Nimoy will appear as well.

hxxp://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/27/people.leonardnimoy.ap/index.html

SAN DIEGO, California (AP) -- Leonard Nimoy isn't through with Spock yet.

The 76-year-old actor will don his famous pointy ears again to play the role in an upcoming "Star Trek" film due out Christmas 2008.

"This is really going to be a great movie. And I don't say things like that lightly," Nimoy told a gathering of 6,500 fans Thursday at Comic-Con, the nation's largest pop-culture convention.

He greeted the crowd with a Vulcan salute.

Nimoy was joined by the newly named young Spock, "Heroes" star Zachary Quinto, who bears an uncanny resemblance to Nimoy.

Both Spocks were introduced by the film's director and co-producer, J.J. Abrams.

"This is a series I loved as a kid," Abrams said, acknowledging that he was "more of a 'Star Wars' kid than a 'Star Trek' kid."

"This matters so much to so many people," he said. "I'm honored to be here and do this."

While the character of Captain Kirk has yet to be cast, Abrams said that William Shatner, who played the role in the original TV series, would likely also have a part in the film.

"It has to be worthy, of him and of you," Abrams told fans, adding that production is slated to begin in November.

One fan asked Nimoy what he thought of his "replacement."

"It was logical," the actor said dryly. He then closed with Spock's classic line: "Live long and prosper."

[rkmsuf]

It would be awesome if Spock and Kirk met on a plane that crashed on a remote island.

[Kodos]

"RKMSUFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF!!!"

[sterlingice]

It's going to be hard to see that guy as anything other than Sylar, tho.

SI

[Galaril]

So the cast is just about set with Chris Pine (who the fuck is he?) and the rest of the key roles set. I think the cast so far selected was great but this kid Chris Pine I don't know.

http://omg.yahoo.com/chris-pine-inks-deal-as-young-capt.-kirk-in-next-star-trek/news/3224

[saldana]

karl urban as mccoy? not sure i like that casting.

[Bubba Wheels]

I own all the movies, and the entire Voyager series (which I've watched twice). I could never get into TNG; Picard was just too much of a pussy to be believable as a starship captain.

Good to see the franchise isn't dead yet...

Agree, Shatner and Mulgrew are the only two Captains worth watching.

[Bubba Wheels]

So the cast is just about set with Chris Pine (who the fuck is he?) and the rest of the key roles set. I think the cast so far selected was great but this kid Chris Pine I don't know.

http://omg.yahoo.com/chris-pine-inks-deal-as-young-capt.-kirk-in-next-star-trek/news/3224

Fascinating. William Shatner is succeeded in his role by Chris Pine, just as Captain Kirk succeeded Captain Chris(topher) Pi(k)e on the Enterprise.

[Coffee Warlord]

Agree, Shatner and Mulgrew are the only two Captains worth watching.

...

Voyager and Worth Watching should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Avery Brooks rocked, however. The later seasons of DS9 were excellent.

[sterlingice]

...

Voyager and Worth Watching should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Avery Brooks rocked, however. The later seasons of DS9 were excellent.

I always kindof liked DS9 but never really was much of a Trekkie otherwise (tho I'm enjoying watching TOS in syndication over the past year).

I just can't believe someone who liked TOS and Voyager- seems like such an odd mix. I've seen a lot of TNG + Voyager fans but not TOS + Voyager.

SI

[DaddyTorgo]

...

Voyager and Worth Watching should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Avery Brooks rocked, however. The later seasons of DS9 were excellent.

sweet christ yes he did.

little something my friend and I put together:


http://thequad.hotlinehq.com/andy/

random episode generator for DS9, to help me decide which episodes to watch once i'd watched the whole series through 2x on DVD.

speaking of which, might be about time to go for time #3...or sweet hell...to compress them to watch on my mp3 player.

[Galaril]

I actually enjoyed the last series Enterprise with the Quantum Leap guy who's name eludes me right at the moment. I thought especially the first two seasons were pretty good but really had acrappy ending season where everyhting got crammed in the last couple of episodes.

[Bubba Wheels]

...

Voyager and Worth Watching should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Avery Brooks rocked, however. The later seasons of DS9 were excellent.


Didn't like the concept of Voyager, but Mulgrew as Janeway was more "Kirk-like" than the others, never afraid of a fight. Brooks might have made the grade but to be honest he gets lost in the ensemble and is really more of a 'part-player', at least in the beginning years. TOS will always stand alone as best, however, probably why they are going back to it for the movie.

[Passacaglia]

...

Voyager and Worth Watching should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Avery Brooks rocked, however. The later seasons of DS9 were excellent.

He was good in American History X, too. And yeah, DS9 rocks.

[samifan24]

Agree, Shatner and Mulgrew are the only two Captains worth watching.

Wow so I guess you've never watched DS9 then. The best Trek by far and I grew up watching TNG.

[StarBuck]

I'm still hurting that they did not ask Bill Shatner to star. :-/

[Galaril]

I am wondering if this came out last night? And if so has anyone seen it? I want to go but if I go I would like to take my 7 year daughter and am wondering if it is alright for kids that young or is there cursing and nudity?

[DaddyTorgo]

i thought about going last night, but there was just a 7pm show and then a later show and i didn't want to have to rush to the 7pm and be out as late as the later, so i'm going tonight now that it's officially open and there's more shows.

already bought my tickets for the 7:45 show!

[DaddyTorgo]

i'll let you know what i think galaril

[RendeR]

I'm going tonight at 10:30.

[RendeR]

Oh and voyager was by far the worst Star Trek Creation.

TOS is of course the classic show then Ds9 is the best modernization of the series.


Enterprise was awful with the exception of the scenes that had the vulcan chick in them.

[DaddyTorgo]

I'm going tonight at 10:30.

shall i let you know before it starts for you what i thought? :lol:

[terpkristin]

I am wondering if this came out last night? And if so has anyone seen it? I want to go but if I go I would like to take my 7 year daughter and am wondering if it is alright for kids that young or is there cursing and nudity?

Saw this and thought of you: 10 Things Parents Should Know About the New Star Trek | GeekDad (http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2009/05/10-things-parents-should-know-before-seeing-the-new-star-trek/)

In particular,

4. It’s PG-13. How PG-13 is it?
There are several fight sequences with blood, none of them are particularly graphic. Several crew members die in various ways, such as being sucked out into space. Also, there is a brief torture scene. Again, none of these scenes are particularly graphic. Overall the violence was much tamer than most PG-13 movies I have seen.
Regarding sex and sexuality, there is one scene with Kirk and a woman making out in their underwear. Another crew member enters and strips down to her underwear. The actually make-out scene is very brief, and the scene isn’t all that erotic.
In one scene, Kirk very distinctly says “Bull****.” I didn’t notice any other bad words, but there could have been a few of the more tame ones.
Overall the movie felt more toward the PG end of the scale rather than close to the R side, but of course each parent needs to make their own choice. I feel that 10 and up could handle the film easily.
If you would like more detail on exactly what the “bad” content is, check out this review (http://www.commonsensemedia.org/movie-reviews/star-trek#) at Commonsense media (http://www.commonsensemedia.org/).

I probably won't see it til next week sometime, when I'm back home after travel and Mother's Day, and I expect that by then, you'll have the answers you need. :)

/tk

[RedKingGold]

This thread is proof that Star Trek fans are more likely to get banned from FOFC than non Star Trekfans.

:D

[Galaril]

Saw this and thought of you: 10 Things Parents Should Know About the New Star Trek | GeekDad (http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2009/05/10-things-parents-should-know-before-seeing-the-new-star-trek/)

In particular,


I probably won't see it til next week sometime, when I'm back home after travel and Mother's Day, and I expect that by then, you'll have the answers you need. :)

/tk


Thanks. I guess i am less worring about the movie being inappropriate then she just not liking the scifi genre yet. I may try to geta babysitter for our 2 year old and 7 and take my wife instead. THANKS.

[Galaril]

i'll let you know what i think galaril

Thanks Daddy.

[fantom1979]

I saw the movie last night and I am still forming an opinion. I will probably see it again this weekend.

Overall, I thought the movie was very well done. If I had walked in without ever seeing anything Star Trek, I would have enjoyed it. (I have been a Star Trek fan since the mid 1980's).

The recasting of the major players I think was very well done. Bones and Spock were excellent. Checkov and Scotty were a little over the top, but weren't show stoppers.

I really don't want to give anything away here, since I know alot of you will be seeing the movie this weekend. I will just say that if you are a Star Trek fan, there will be several scenes that make you go "wtf".

Minor Spoiler:


My wife, who is a part time Star Trek fan, was crying 10 minutes into this movie. Be prepared

[fantom1979]

Dola...

Here is a link to the Star Trek message boards, where quite a few people are talking about the new movie. Be warned... there are spoilers throughout that board...

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?act=SF;f=6

[JediKooter]

Just got back from seeing it.

Best Star Trek movie in my opinion. Can't wait to see a sequel and I'm a huge Star Wars fan.

My only complaint was Checkov. The actor playing him, just didn't seem right, even though he had the accent down pretty good.

Uhura is smoking hot in my opinion.

The guy playing Spock, nailed it. I'd like to say more about the crew, but, I think it would be too spoilerish.

Leonard Nimoy looks like my grandfather now. Different hair cut and different ears though, but, my grandfather was a Navy man like Spock.

I would pay to see this movie again.

Oh and this movie is essentially a reboot of the franchise, so keep that in mind...

[Tigercat]

Saw it last night on IMAX, fantastic. Anyone who has a chance to see it on IMAX should do so. Its not traditional Star Trek. But then again, the best Star trek movies generally aren't traditional "Star Trek."

What this movie IS is the best Space Opera movie ever. Good drama, GREAT action, and all the little things (set pieces, special effects) are done with reason. This isn't sterile sets and environments like old Star Trek, the engine rooms of these ships are actual industrial engine rooms, full of cooling pipes and metal bulkheads.

All in all, it isn't deep (hopefully the future movies will have more substance) but is one of the top Sci Fi spectacles of all time.

[Toddzilla]

I was expecting this to be really really good because of JJ Abrams, and even better based on the reviews coming out of the sneak preview in Texas a month ago, but seeing the movie actually blew that all away. Superb from beginning to end. 10/10

[rowech]

Saw it tonight...loved every second of it. The guy playing Spock should get an academy award.

[Schmidty]

Is this suitable for a very mature 7 year old who's not afraid of anything?

[DaddyTorgo]

I saw the movie last night and I am still forming an opinion. I will probably see it again this weekend.

Overall, I thought the movie was very well done. If I had walked in without ever seeing anything Star Trek, I would have enjoyed it. (I have been a Star Trek fan since the mid 1980's).

The recasting of the major players I think was very well done. Bones and Spock were excellent. Checkov and Scotty were a little over the top, but weren't show stoppers.

I really don't want to give anything away here, since I know alot of you will be seeing the movie this weekend. I will just say that if you are a Star Trek fan, there will be several scenes that make you go "wtf".

Minor Spoiler:


My wife, who is a part time Star Trek fan, was crying 10 minutes into this movie. Be prepared


I agree. There were 2-3 things about the movie that just like...totally bugged me and threw me off about the movie. Like you said - if I wasn't a fan I would have liked it from the standpoint of a generic sci-fi movie, but those few things...idk.

[lerriuqs]

Is this suitable for a very mature 7 year old who's not afraid of anything?
Gee...I thought you were older than 7 Schmidty... ;)

[Schmidty]

Gee...I thought you were older than 7 Schmidty... ;)

Damn, my secret is out!! I've been posting here since the sperm hit the egg. :)

[fantom1979]

I cant think of anything in the movie that would be bad for a mature 7 year old.

[Tigercat]

I think the worst might be Kirk starting to make out with a green alien woman and then Uhara undressing, but neither cross the line into nudity or any kind of real sexual content.

Beyond that its just typical scifi violence and one chase scene with potentially scary monsters.

[DaddyTorgo]

and the time where the guy on the drill gets the sword put thru his chest from behind by the guy playing sulu

[Cringer]

Is this suitable for a very mature 7 year old who's not afraid of anything?

Just watched both Star Trek and Wolverine with the 9 year old daughter. Star Trek was perfectly fine for the young, a couple bad words and a couple girls half naked as said above is the worst. My daughter loved it. She also loved the Transformers preview.

It was much better then I thought it would be, I didn't have much hope for it. I thought it did Star Trek proud and then some. I liked it better then Wolverine.

[cubboyroy1826]

I saw this tonight and must say while i have watched the different incarnations of Star Trek i have never been a huge fan. For me this movie just rocked. I really liked the actors that they picked to play the original characters and thought the whole movie was very well done. This is definitely not your daddy's Star Trek.

[AgustusM]

I was very surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Was not really a fan growing up - but was very pleasantly surprised. My 11 year old son absolutely loved it.

[Galaril]

I was very surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Was not really a fan growing up - but was very pleasantly surprised. My 11 year old son absolutely loved it.

I haven't seen it but I think if you have a boy(s) 7 or older they will love it but a girl no matter the age probabbly won't.

[Cringer]

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude, I just said my 9 year old daughter loved it. By daughter I mean girl, not a girlie boy.

[RendeR]

Just did a review of it on facebook, I will be seeing this movie again, probably a couple more times. I'm thrilled. I went in with fears about a lot of things and honestly, while its going to take a little getting used to, I simply cannot wait for the next installment.


MORE PLEASE, K Thnx!


And yes, the initial prelude is a bit gut wrenching, but after that its a pretty standard/mild action film.

I am a fan. Long Live Star Trek!

[Young Drachma]

I enjoyed it. I mean, I hated the historical deviations, but in some ways...enjoy the reboot as a way to get back into the series. Though I'd much prefer a DS9 movie, to be honest.

[Young Drachma]

Dola --

The folks on that message board take their Trek seriously.

[Pyser]

the progression in this thread from hate to love is fascinating

[Chief Rum]

Hmm, curious, can anyone tell me what they found so jarring historically (and in particular near the beginning)?

I would do that in spoiler form. I have seen it. I am a Star Trek fan, so I am generally familiar with the history, although I would guess I don't remember as much detail as some.

My side thought to the potential "surprises" people are talking about is this...

From the moment Nero goes back in time, this is no longer in the same "timeverse" as the original Star Trek. Really, a whole new timeline has been created, meaning that all of the stories told in previous stories now exist in that other timeline, and this is a new line with untold stories.

On that basis, I was less troubled by the destruction of Vulcan (my guess as the biggest eyebrow raiser) as I would have been otherwise. I can accept that this happened to Vulcan in this timeline, while it continues on in the other, original timeline.

From a story telling perspective, of course, the new timeline is pretty brilliant actually. Means we can't necessarily expect that we're building to the same end (Generations, etc.), as we were before.

[fantom1979]

Well, I could list a lot of things that are wrong with this movie as far as Star Trek cannon.... but most if not all could be explained away with the alternate timeline storyline...

The list, just off the top of my head:

- Not sure about the beginning... I just assume you are refering to George Kirk's death... which of course does not happen in the old universe.
-- Vulcan and its people are a major part of the Star Trek universe... this movie pretty much removed them from it.
-- Kirk has now taken over the Enterprise about 10 years earlier then he did
-- Spock and Uhura?????
-- Romulains were mostly unknown to Star Fleet until TNG, in this movie it seems like they know each other quite well.
-- Chekov wasn't on the Enterprise at the beginning of the TOS...
-- Somehow Kirk and Scotty transported onto a ship traveling at warp, that was quite a distance away... they cant even do that during TNG.


Now, don't get me wrong.. The stuff listed above are merely observations... I am not complaining. My personal view is that I would have preferred to have seen a sequal to Nemesis, so they could have wrapped up that series, and cleaned up the death of Data.... but I know that if Star Trek had continued on the path they were heading on, Star Trek would have died (if it wasn't already dead).

I would much rather have Star Trek in this form, with new actors and a new "universe", then no Star Trek at all.

[Tigercat]

The way I see it, pretty much any change in this movie from what happened in the original star trek universe can be explained by the polluted timeline.

An alien ship with Romulans (I am sure the Vulcans probably relented and admitted their connection with Romulans when they see recordings of a super-technology Romulan ship...) that attacks and destroys a federation ship is significant enough to alter Federation policy, and therefore through the butterfly effect change any small to major detail in the whole galaxy.

[rowech]

Well, I could list a lot of things that are wrong with this movie as far as Star Trek cannon.... but most if not all could be explained away with the alternate timeline storyline...

The list, just off the top of my head:

- Not sure about the beginning... I just assume you are refering to George Kirk's death... which of course does not happen in the old universe.
-- Vulcan and its people are a major part of the Star Trek universe... this movie pretty much removed them from it.
-- Kirk has now taken over the Enterprise about 10 years earlier then he did
-- Spock and Uhura?????
-- Romulains were mostly unknown to Star Fleet until TNG, in this movie it seems like they know each other quite well.
-- Chekov wasn't on the Enterprise at the beginning of the TOS...
-- Somehow Kirk and Scotty transported onto a ship traveling at warp, that was quite a distance away... they cant even do that during TNG.


Now, don't get me wrong.. The stuff listed above are merely observations... I am not complaining. My personal view is that I would have preferred to have seen a sequal to Nemesis, so they could have wrapped up that series, and cleaned up the death of Data.... but I know that if Star Trek had continued on the path they were heading on, Star Trek would have died (if it wasn't already dead).

I would much rather have Star Trek in this form, with new actors and a new "universe", then no Star Trek at all.

You're the kind of person I wondered about with this movie. I like Star Trek have seen all the movies, all the old episodes, and a lot of TNG ones. However, you thought of things I wouldn't have. I wonder how many hardcore fans will look at this and cringe whereas I think they should be counting their lucky stars (pun intended) as they now have Star Trek not only reborn but reborn into a world with extremely young characters who can make many movies, a world that is different from the first so that now you have the ability to make massive story changes ala the one you mention about Vulcan...etc. Just adds the ability to give the new series it's own world, it's own identity, its own story lines.

[fantom1979]

I agree with you completely.... I was worried about seeing the movie. I was concerned that JJ Abrams would shit all over the Star Trek universe. But I was more concerned that this movie would suck, and Star Trek would be done for a generation.

If this movie turns out to be a commercial success, the possibilities are endless. Sequels, TV Shows, etc...

IMDB already has the next Star Trek movie listed:

Untitled Star Trek Sequel (2011) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1408101/)

[fantom1979]

Dola,

I am seeing a lot of rumors about the potential sequel fixing the Star Trek timeline. I think that would be a HUGE mistake. Now that they have gone down this road, I really hope they dont use a Star Trek type solution (time traveling fixers, Q, going through another worm hole, etc, etc) to fix it.

I am actually very interested to see where this vision of Star Trek goes, and if they "fix" it, I really think you are going to lose any new fans that you just picked up.

p.s. I really hope this is the last star trek movie with time travel. 3 out of 11 movies is enough.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Dola,

...
p.s. I really hope this is the last star trek movie with time travel. 3 out of 11 movies is enough.

I thought the proper ratio of all things doable was 7 of 9.

[mh2365]

I thought the proper ratio of all things doable was 7 of 9.

well done

[Galaril]

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude, I just said my 9 year old daughter loved it. By daughter I mean girl, not a girlie boy.

Sorry, I missed your post. I was going to qualify my statement that girls under 9 may not care for this movie.

[Schmidty]

Sorry, I missed your post. I was going to qualify my statement that girls under 9 may not care for this movie.

My daughter loves sci-fi and fantasy, so I guarantee that she'll like it.

[DanGarion]

Wife and I absolutely loved it (she never watched Star Trek and isn't a big Sci-Fi fan). 10 out of 10 all the way. One of the best Sci-Fi movies I've seen in a long time.

Everything JJ Abrams touches is gold and this just continues that.

Some neat JJ Abrams "comic" world stuff from the movie, the mention of Slusho when Uhura was ordering drinks at the bar. Also the use of Red Matter, total flashback to Alias.

I thought the story was perfect for a series reboot, there was no better way to make this their own story then to have some type of timeline change. All the picks for the characters were nearly perfect the movie was just pure fun and action packed. Would love to see a deeper sequel, but this was a perfect story to start it all up!

[DaddyTorgo]

Well, I could list a lot of things that are wrong with this movie as far as Star Trek cannon.... but most if not all could be explained away with the alternate timeline storyline...

The list, just off the top of my head:

- Not sure about the beginning... I just assume you are refering to George Kirk's death... which of course does not happen in the old universe.
-- Vulcan and its people are a major part of the Star Trek universe... this movie pretty much removed them from it.
-- Kirk has now taken over the Enterprise about 10 years earlier then he did
-- Spock and Uhura?????
-- Romulains were mostly unknown to Star Fleet until TNG, in this movie it seems like they know each other quite well.
-- Chekov wasn't on the Enterprise at the beginning of the TOS...
-- Somehow Kirk and Scotty transported onto a ship traveling at warp, that was quite a distance away... they cant even do that during TNG.



Other thoughts by me - may be updated later also:


--The Kirk/Spock fistfight on the bridge just felt WAYYYYYYYYYY off. WAYYYYY off. And frankly a cop-out. Like you're not a talented enough writer to make the scene have that outcome just using words, without using violence? LAME.
--The engine room scenes bothered me - I didn't like the physical layout of them with all the conduits and water and all that. And I saw nuclear-symbols on one of the pipes - wtf?
-- "Red Matter" - wtf???



I agree with fantom's observations. I'm...I'm torn. The longer I sit and think on it, the more I dislike it to be honest.

Now let me try to explain why. Using time-travel to alter the past and essentially place us in an "alternate timeline" is essentially a big "fuck you" to all the fans, saying "we don't care about all the years that you spent getting attached to the other timeline, we're just going to wipe it out in 2 hours."

It's a judgement on the value of our time as fans.

Honestly, if they wanted more of an "action film" why not do a "mirror universe TOS origins" type of movie or something? Then you could have fistfights and sex and etc.

[Neon_Chaos]

Great movie.

10/10.

My girlfriend, who doesn't follow Star Trek at all, loved it. Heck, it even got a nice round of applause here when the credits rolled.

I'm glad they finally decided to do a reboot through the time-travel storyline. We can now completely forget about the past and they can retell new epic stories with the same characters that existing fans know and love.

They've introduced Star Trek to a whole new generation of fans, and I hope they keep up with it.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I'm glad they finally decided to do a reboot through the time-travel storyline. We can now completely forget about the past and they can retell new epic stories with the same characters that existing fans know and love.

They've introduced Star Trek to a whole new generation of fans, and I hope they keep up with it.

So for the next movie, if someone in the cast wants more money they can do a new reboot with another time travel & start it anew once agin.

So no Captain Pike in this film?

[Neon_Chaos]

So for the next movie, if someone in the cast wants more money they can do a new reboot with another time travel & start it anew once agin.

So no Captain Pike in this film?

Captain Pike was there.

edit:

I think Trek fans should thank their lucky stars that this movie might have just single handedly saved the franchise from being completely shelved.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I'll still wait to Netflix this film.

[Cringer]

I think Trek fans should thank their lucky stars that this movie might have just single handedly saved the franchise from being completely shelved.

I kind of agree. There hasn't been much going on with Star Trek for a while now. Next Gen was the last Star Trek project that really mattered to me. Voyager was ok, but nothing I cared about too much, not like the original movies, show, and Next Gen anyways. Enterprise wasn't even worth watching. Deep Space Nine was probably in the Voyager category for me, though I know others liked it a lot.

[jeff061]

Good to hear the good reviews. When the previews first came out I thought it looked good. But the ads ramping up to release made it look like just another CGI vomiting action movie.

I'll have to check it out.

[DaddyTorgo]

I think Trek fans should thank their lucky stars that this movie might have just single handedly saved the franchise from being completely shelved.

in some sense yes

[rowech]

Other thoughts by me - may be updated later also:


--The Kirk/Spock fistfight on the bridge just felt WAYYYYYYYYYY off. WAYYYYY off. And frankly a cop-out. Like you're not a talented enough writer to make the scene have that outcome just using words, without using violence? LAME.
--The engine room scenes bothered me - I didn't like the physical layout of them with all the conduits and water and all that. And I saw nuclear-symbols on one of the pipes - wtf?
-- "Red Matter" - wtf???



I agree with fantom's observations. I'm...I'm torn. The longer I sit and think on it, the more I dislike it to be honest.

Now let me try to explain why. Using time-travel to alter the past and essentially place us in an "alternate timeline" is essentially a big "fuck you" to all the fans, saying "we don't care about all the years that you spent getting attached to the other timeline, we're just going to wipe it out in 2 hours."

It's a judgement on the value of our time as fans.

Honestly, if they wanted more of an "action film" why not do a "mirror universe TOS origins" type of movie or something? Then you could have fistfights and sex and etc.

Wow.....couldn't disagree with you more. I think the way they did things was brilliant. They were able to tell the loyal fans, nothing's changed...all of that stuff still happened. Just not in this timeline.

In addition, I think the fight on the bridge had to happen. We're not talking about 45 year old characters. We're talking about 20 year old characters -- both with massive egos.

[DaddyTorgo]

Wow.....couldn't disagree with you more. I think the way they did things was brilliant. They were able to tell the loyal fans, nothing's changed...all of that stuff still happened. Just not in this timeline.

In addition, I think the fight on the bridge had to happen. We're not talking about 45 year old characters. We're talking about 20 year old characters -- both with massive egos.


"not in this timeline" to me = "you wasted your time caring about the other timeline" essentially

[Chief Rum]

"not in this timeline" to me = "you wasted your time caring about the other timeline" essentially

I think I agree with rowech more than you. Especially since stuff from the other timeline led to this, and the old Spock was part of that transition.

[Kodos]

"not in this timeline" to me = "you wasted your time caring about the other timeline" essentially


That's a bit melodramatic. You still got to enjoy all the others. It's not like someone is coming to your house and confiscating your DVD collection of Star Trek stuff.

[Comey]

"not in this timeline" to me = "you wasted your time caring about the other timeline" essentially

Could not disagree more.

[DaddyTorgo]

it's just a cop-out to me i guess

[Young Drachma]

I'm fine with them doing what they could to reach out to a broader audience, even at the expense of hard core fans. After a while, it can be hard to separate canon from fan fic and leaving a lot of fans in the cold in terms of not being able to really keep up with the stories.

That said, I'd much rather see them evolve the story line a bit and not spend a lot of time with the Enterprise, because they're eventually going to get into trouble with all of the mucking with the timeline they've done.

And I wasn't really a fan of future Spock showing up as he did. But I can see how it unified things for the unintiated.

[Buccaneer]

I don't have any interest in Star Trek (at least not since the early movies) but after reading the wiki page, I was amazed at how bad the latter movies were. Sounds like they had to do something drastic or else this franchise would have existed solely for hard-core nostalgia.

[Young Drachma]

BA Review: Star Trek | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/)

[DaddyTorgo]

Roger Ebert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert), gave the film 2.5/4 stars and said, "The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action."<sup id="cite_ref-155" class="reference">[156] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29#cite_note-155)</sup>


I guess that's my complaint. It's not about ideals or philosophy anymore. It's just like any other action-movie franchise...heavy on style and light on substance.

I can understand the "need" for the time travel reboot, particularly after reading this interview INTERVIEW: Star Trek Writers Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci | TrekMovie.com (http://trekmovie.com/2009/04/30/interview-roberto-orci-alex-kurtzman/) and seeing that it was well thought-out, but that doesn't mean I have to embrace it.

I have to say I did very much enjoy the special effects and the visual style (with the exception of the engine room)

[DaddyTorgo]

hmmm (from another board)

This is not a prequel. Characters are those from TOS, but they are for about 15 minutes into the movie, probably less. It appeared clear from the very beginning that noone was trying to give us neither a prequel nor a different point of view on something that had already been done. This is not how Abrams would like you to see Star Trek (the Universe), but how he saw it.

It's a different Universe, a different timeline, with characters that started with same names (and thus known histories) but that will now (eventually, and I frankly hope so) develop in a completly different way. He opened a new door, but what is important, he didn't close the old one.
That "original" universe is still there for us to cheris and eventually to play with. It was in the hands and minds of the fans even before this movie, with no "official" product being produced, and it is still exactly there.





At that point, the movie is on such a wildly different timeline that I think it requires a much higher burden of entertainment than what I required from the earlier movies. Beyond being set in an alternate, unfamiliar universe, the story is just kinda stupid. The timetravel is arbitrary. Nero is a seething, 1-dimensional villain that makes me long for the complexity & gravitas of Shinzon. There are major logic leaps, like Kirk going from suspended stowaway to acting first officer in the space of a few minutes, or Scotty going from hitchhiker (who abandoned his post) to chief engineer in about the same time. And why was Kirk marooned on an ice planet rather than just put in the brig?

[terpkristin]

Heck, it even got a nice round of applause here when the credits rolled.

Completely unrelated, but unless you're at a premier or a screening where the actors are there, this is one of my biggest pet peeves of movie-going. Who the f are you clapping for, the film guy for not screwing up hitting play?! :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:


/tk

[CleBrownsfan]

Completely unrelated, but unless you're at a premier or a screening where the actors are there, this is one of my biggest pet peeves of movie-going. Who the f are you clapping for, the film guy for not screwing up hitting play?! :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:


/tk

Have you ever clapped at a sporting event on TV? If so, are you clapping that the cable/satellite company didn't screw up your connection. I understand why people clap at the end of the movie (BTW I am not one of them).

On topic - I am not a Trekie fan at all and I loved the movie. I do understand die-hards would take offense of the "cop out" of the time travel but I loved it. Reminded me a little of what is happening on Lost ;)

[DaddyTorgo]

Have you ever clapped at a sporting event on TV? If so, are you clapping that the cable/satellite company didn't screw up your connection. I understand why people clap at the end of the movie (BTW I am not one of them).

who claps at sporting events on tv too?

[CleBrownsfan]

who claps at sporting events on tv too?

When you're a Browns and Indians fan - you really don't have the opportunity lately ;)

[DaddyTorgo]

lol

[DaddyTorgo]

you're also from Cleveland

[Calis]

I just got back from seeing this. I've never seen a prior Star Trek movie, and only seen a handful of episodes and didn't care for them. I also am not a fan of Lost at all, so the JJ Abrams angle didn't save it for me. The only experience I really have with the universe was playing some Next Generation game on I believe it was the Genesis. That game rocked.

The people who put together the trailer did an excellent job though, and I was actually pretty excited to see this. Overall I'd say it was a very fun summer blockbuster type movie. Great special effects, some good one-liners, and decent acting for the most part.

Obviously I don't have the least bit of interest in the timeline or any tinkering they did with it. It did come across quite obviously in the movie though that this alternate world was setup specifically to get out of any issues with that.

My fiance went and was even less excited than me, but she ended up absolutely loving it. She wants to see it again and even wants to check out more Star Trek stuff now.

I'd say it's pretty successful and just what that franchise needed. I think fans should be happy with anything at this point, as it could not have been at a lower point. I think you'll see a lot of things spun off due to this movie.

[DaddyTorgo]

I just got back from seeing this. I've never seen a prior Star Trek movie, and only seen a handful of episodes and didn't care for them. I also am not a fan of Lost at all, so the JJ Abrams angle didn't save it for me. The only experience I really have with the universe was playing some Next Generation game on I believe it was the Genesis. That game rocked.

The people who put together the trailer did an excellent job though, and I was actually pretty excited to see this. Overall I'd say it was a very fun summer blockbuster type movie. Great special effects, some good one-liners, and decent acting for the most part.

Obviously I don't have the least bit of interest in the timeline or any tinkering they did with it. It did come across quite obviously in the movie though that this alternate world was setup specifically to get out of any issues with that.

My fiance went and was even less excited than me, but she ended up absolutely loving it. She wants to see it again and even wants to check out more Star Trek stuff now.

I'd say it's pretty successful and just what that franchise needed. I think fans should be happy with anything at this point, as it could not have been at a lower point. I think you'll see a lot of things spun off due to this movie.

I guess. For me the proof will be in the sequel's though. If the sequel's continue to be as intellectually-vapid as this I'll be done with it. Star Trek was never supposed to be so "dumbed down." It was always "thinking person's sci-fi"

[Calis]

I guess. For me the proof will be in the sequel's though. If the sequel's continue to be as intellectually-vapid as this I'll be done with it. Star Trek was never supposed to be so "dumbed down." It was always "thinking person's sci-fi"

I would like to see this. I guess my enjoyment came from having almost zero expectations so I can understand being disappointed. In fact one reason I enjoyed it was for once I had no prior history and could enjoy it for what it was with no expectations.

I would love to see one that was a bit more "high-brow" though. The action scenes I actually found myself losing interest in and was waiting for more dialog or character development. I'd like to see it tackle something a little meatier, but this is quite clearly intended as a summer popcorn flick, and I'm guessing from the audiences I saw out there it's going to do very well so I would expect more of the same.

[DaddyTorgo]

exactly - and intellectually i can understand the need to make this movie this way in order to show paramount that the franchise is still viable and that they should back a sequel, just at some point i'd like it to be a little more high-brow

[Schmidty]

I don't have any interest in Star Trek (at least not since the early movies) but after reading the wiki page, I was amazed at how bad the latter movies were. Sounds like they had to do something drastic or else this franchise would have existed solely for hard-core nostalgia.

There wasn't a ST:TNG movie that I didn't enjoy at least a little, especially First Contact. I guess I'm easy to please since I tend to not over-analyze things in movies of the fantasy and sci-fi genre.

[DaddyTorgo]

*shrug* maybe i just went into this movie with expectations too high or something

[Buccaneer]

I guess that's my complaint. It's not about ideals or philosophy anymore. It's just like any other action-movie franchise...heavy on style and light on substance.



Dude, it's JJ Abrams.

[Tigercat]

The problem with the Star Trek movies is that for them to succeed on a large level, they often have to deviate from "Star Trek." Star Trek I and IV were probably the most successful that are in line with the core principles that are "Star Trek" and yet I wouldn't call a probe attacking Earth(both movies) the ideal plot start for a movie with Roddenberry's Star Trek vision, regardless of what happens afterwords in the plot.

Final Frontier and Insurrection had the most ideal "Star Trek" plots, but were perhaps the two worst movies in the series. Wrath of Kahn is perhaps the best Star Trek movie, but, like the new Star Trek, was a space opera at heart. (WoK did perhaps have more of the Star Trek vision behind it though.)

I guess what I am saying is, the movies all deviate to some degree, and to get the maximum amount of people interested and behind these characters, the makers of this movie chose to give it one of the biggest deviations into action movie/space opera.

[GrantDawg]

I guess what I am saying is, the movies all deviate to some degree, and to get the maximum amount of people interested and behind these characters, the makers of this movie chose to give it one of the biggest deviations into action movie/space opera.


Absolutely. And it'll make new fans and lots of money, which is what it is all about (it is a business). But for me, it was "eh." Casting was outstanding, and I would love to see a regular series with these actors playing the beloved characters in deeper story lines. But since the series is now just another empty, vapid action movie, I'll probably just catch the sequels whenever they hit cable. I just don't enjoy action movies like I did when I was young. Oh well.

[DaddyTorgo]

Absolutely. And it'll make new fans and lots of money, which is what it is all about (it is a business). But for me, it was "eh." Casting was outstanding, and I would love to see a regular series with these actors playing the beloved characters in deeper story lines. But since the series is now just another empty, vapid action movie, I'll probably just catch the sequels whenever they hit cable. I just don't enjoy action movies like I did when I was young. Oh well.

yah

[Racer]

I went and saw this today having never seen a Star Trek movie or TV episode before. I thought it was good, not great. I'd probably give it a B or B+.

[Tigercat]

Absolutely. And it'll make new fans and lots of money, which is what it is all about (it is a business). But for me, it was "eh." Casting was outstanding, and I would love to see a regular series with these actors playing the beloved characters in deeper story lines. But since the series is now just another empty, vapid action movie, I'll probably just catch the sequels whenever they hit cable. I just don't enjoy action movies like I did when I was young. Oh well.

As an addendum, with the care that this crew put into the characters (for the most part) I would be shocked if they don't intend to have stronger traditional star trek themes in the sequel.

If they do only make only shoot em up SciFi movie's out of this franchise, then shame on them. There is room to do better than that.

[SFL Cat]

Thought the story and main villian were lame. However, I enjoyed it for what it was, a summer Star-Wars-esque popcorn action flick. I thought Karl Urban NAILED McCoy. Quinto was a decent Spock. Pine as Kirk...rather meh IMO!

[SFL Cat]

DOLA

I can see where Daddy Torgo is coming from. For the most part, I absolutely despise reboots. It's like someone rewriting Harper Lee's "To Kill A Mockingbird," to make it more politically correct or more "relavant" to modern readers.

[DaddyTorgo]

here's a good explanation of a scene that really struck me as totally jarring, even notwithstanding all the time travel stuff, just very "untrue" to the whole idea of Star Trek:

And speaking of emotional compromise, the scene that left the worst taste in my mouth was Kirk pushing to Spock to the brink. Now, Kirk, Scotty, and we, the audience, know that Kirk's doing this for good reason. But no one else on that bridge knows. All they see is a guy trying to make a man who has just lost his planet and his mother lash out. I could only think as I saw this scene, that if I were on that bridge, I would figure Kirk as either a sociopath who would do anything to get the center seat, including breaking a man on the worst day of his life, or someone so pissed off and "emotionally compromised" himself at being marooned on Delta Vega that he shouldn't be running their lives, either.

[Ryche]

Urban definitely most "nailed it" as far as the characters. I thought it was a lot of fun, even with some holes that have to be overlooked (how did the future black hole send vessels back in time) Wife enjoyed it too coming from a background where she really likes TNG and can't stand the original series.

I don't know if Star Trek movies really work when they try getting too intellectual. The two best original movies were based on revenge (Wrath of Khan) or comedy (Voyage Home) Neither was really that deep. It seems that when they tried very deep stories, it just didn't work in a movie format. The series were much more appropriate for this as the characters and plots had more time to develop over multiple episodes.

[RendeR]

I guess. For me the proof will be in the sequel's though. If the sequel's continue to be as intellectually-vapid as this I'll be done with it. Star Trek was never supposed to be so "dumbed down." It was always "thinking person's sci-fi"

I'm actually kinda stunned by your reaction to this movie.

First off, the original time line was dead, Star Trek itself was dead, no more stories, no more anything. We had 5 series, some awful cartoons and 10 movies to sit back and re watch ad infinitum on TNT and TBS with their overloud commercials. Honestly, the characters you know and love so much were being bastardized and destroyed as it was.

Now I will agree that the overall "campiness" really needs to go. I was not thrilled with scotty nor the seeming push at one liners, the humor just got pushed a bit too hard.

As for being dumbed down, I didn't see that, but your idea that the old timeline was a "thinking mans sci-fi" is beyond ludicrous. Every single series and every single movie was filled with vapid "I can see the next 5 scenes coming a mile away" type writing and filming. In 40 years of Star Trek I imagine if I look hard I might find a score of episodes or even moments that were truly a "thinking mans sci fi".

This movie doesn't degrade the past, it includes it, it says the stories you know and love, the universe that you grew up knowing and understanding CREATED this new beginning, this new chance for ongoing stories with a chance to see what these characters could be "IF" things happened another way.

Obviously there are things they need to tweak, but to think this new beginning in some way shits on the fans? The only reason it exists is because of the fans, and with this new beginning is a chance to carry on Rodenberry's vision and create NEW fans, because dare I state the obvious, the current batch is getting OLD.

Its like playing a video game, you've played it for years and you have an entire world built up that you have understood from the beginning, and its BORING. So lets hit teh rest button and do it all over again.

"What far better dreams I may have dreamt, had I but dreamt something....else."

[fantom1979]

and yet I wouldn't call a probe attacking Earth(both movies) the ideal plot start for a movie with Roddenberry's Star Trek vision, regardless of what happens afterwords in the plot.

I might be completely missing the point, but Roddenberry wrote Star Trek I.

[RendeR]

here's a good explanation of a scene that really struck me as totally jarring, even notwithstanding all the time travel stuff, just very "untrue" to the whole idea of Star Trek:

And speaking of emotional compromise, the scene that left the worst taste in my mouth was Kirk pushing to Spock to the brink. Now, Kirk, Scotty, and we, the audience, know that Kirk's doing this for good reason. But no one else on that bridge knows. All they see is a guy trying to make a man who has just lost his planet and his mother lash out. I could only think as I saw this scene, that if I were on that bridge, I would figure Kirk as either a sociopath who would do anything to get the center seat, including breaking a man on the worst day of his life, or someone so pissed off and "emotionally compromised" himself at being marooned on Delta Vega that he shouldn't be running their lives, either.

I assumed that the previous scenes with Spock going all anal retentive and stupid as to dropping Kirk off on delta vega made the rest of the crew realize he was fucked in the head and also realized that kirk was doing what he was for a reason.

but perhaps I overthink things ;)

[RendeR]

I might be completely missing the point, but Roddenberry wrote Star Trek I.


Indeed, I actually saw both of those movies as being very "Gene ROdenberry-ish" He was always about the unknown coming up in our face and finding a way to deal with it.

[DaddyTorgo]

I'm actually kinda stunned by your reaction to this movie.

First off, the original time line was dead, Star Trek itself was dead, no more stories, no more anything. We had 5 series, some awful cartoons and 10 movies to sit back and re watch ad infinitum on TNT and TBS with their overloud commercials. Honestly, the characters you know and love so much were being bastardized and destroyed as it was.

Now I will agree that the overall "campiness" really needs to go. I was not thrilled with scotty nor the seeming push at one liners, the humor just got pushed a bit too hard.

As for being dumbed down, I didn't see that, but your idea that the old timeline was a "thinking mans sci-fi" is beyond ludicrous. Every single series and every single movie was filled with vapid "I can see the next 5 scenes coming a mile away" type writing and filming. In 40 years of Star Trek I imagine if I look hard I might find a score of episodes or even moments that were truly a "thinking mans sci fi".

This movie doesn't degrade the past, it includes it, it says the stories you know and love, the universe that you grew up knowing and understanding CREATED this new beginning, this new chance for ongoing stories with a chance to see what these characters could be "IF" things happened another way.

Obviously there are things they need to tweak, but to think this new beginning in some way shits on the fans? The only reason it exists is because of the fans, and with this new beginning is a chance to carry on Rodenberry's vision and create NEW fans, because dare I state the obvious, the current batch is getting OLD.

Its like playing a video game, you've played it for years and you have an entire world built up that you have understood from the beginning, and its BORING. So lets hit teh rest button and do it all over again.

"What far better dreams I may have dreamt, had I but dreamt something....else."

i understand your point, and honestly maybe by the time the sequel is released i'll share it, but right now i'm just a little let-down by it I guess. i can see myself sharing some aspects of your point already, but I'm just not all the way there.

[RendeR]

i understand your point, and honestly maybe by the time the sequel is released i'll share it, but right now i'm just a little let-down by it I guess. i can see myself sharing some aspects of your point already, but I'm just not all the way there.



Good I'd hate to have to hop a train and beat yer ass until you agreed with me ;):D:D:D:D

[DaddyTorgo]

lol

[DaddyTorgo]

it's funny, cuz i love all the "alternate universe" trek novellas that i've read (not mirror universe, but the new "shattered mirror" collections), so maybe it was less of that aspect of it that bugged me and more of the stuff like the fistfight on the bridge, or just haphazardly blowing up vulcan almost as an afterthought, or the spock+uhura romance?

[RendeR]

I agree with you on the destruction of Vulcan, they really glossed over that way too easily. The race that discovered Earth had warp capability and helped humanity stretch its legs in space....are now orphans...and well, ok, lets move on with life...definitely could have been written better.

The fist fight made sense to me, Kirk was a firey passionate young cadet/officer, this is recounted many times in the old setting.

The Romance sorta threw me at first, but then I remember the TOS episode where everyone gets infected by something that makes the act all drunk and stupid, and Nurse Chapel professes the fact that she's always been in love with Spock. I think they took that idea and decided to see what happens if Spock never gets his full Vulcan teachings in and has to deal with his emotional side.

[RendeR]

I certainly won't argue that there are no holes or over the top items that need addressed, but for what this movie is, a new beginning, a new doorway as someone else mentioned for us to walk through and rediscover this universe again, I think it really was spot on.

[darkenigma510]

"not in this timeline" to me = "you wasted your time caring about the other timeline" essentially

You must not like sci-fi then.

[fantom1979]

I think the difference is (at least with Star Trek), is that the timeline always got fixed. Yesterday's Enterprise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yesterday%27s_Enterprise_%28TNG_episode%29) and Year of Hell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_Hell) are good examples of that. This does not look like it will be "fixed". A lot of Star Trek fans are having a hard time with that. I think I have come around (at least I have come around more than DaddyTorgo, I think), but I cannot blame them for being upset.

[Peregrine]

Of course the timeline won't be fixed - now they have carte blanche to make whatever they want happen - klingons turn out to be peaceful allies of the Federation? Sure, why not - alternate timeline. Need a few more planets destroyed, go for it. It's the screenwriter's dream - they can ignore all the past stuff and just do whatever they feel like.

[rowech]

Of course the timeline won't be fixed - now they have carte blanche to make whatever they want happen - klingons turn out to be peaceful allies of the Federation? Sure, why not - alternate timeline. Need a few more planets destroyed, go for it. It's the screenwriter's dream - they can ignore all the past stuff and just do whatever they feel like.

And t his will sound crazy but they can also feel free to kill major characters.

[Cuckoo]

And t his will sound crazy but they can also feel free to kill major characters.

And this is the point for the writers. Drama can't be successful unless there is risk. The audience won't be as invested in the suspense without a real possibility of harm, and the alternate timeline allows the writers to eliminate the notion that no matter what happens, all will be alright in the end.

[DaddyTorgo]

And t his will sound crazy but they can also feel free to kill major characters.

i don't doubt that that's coming - depending on your definition of "major"

[samifan24]

I have to say I really enjoyed the movie, everything except the aforementioned destruction of Vulcan, which I agree they glossed over too quickly. Otherwise I though this was an accessible reboot of a great franchise and yes, I hope it brings in new fans to Trek.

[DanGarion]

And t his will sound crazy but they can also feel free to kill major characters.

No! I want an exact rendition of all old episodes and movies and these new movies just to contain the new actors.... How can they change everything!!!!!

:rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:

/jk

[kcchief19]

I guess. For me the proof will be in the sequel's though. If the sequel's continue to be as intellectually-vapid as this I'll be done with it. Star Trek was never supposed to be so "dumbed down." It was always "thinking person's sci-fi"
I have no idea what movie you watched. Other than the "rebooted" timeline, a lot of this was classic Trek, warts and all.

You have silly sci-fi concepts like time travel, red-matter created singularities and babbling on about transwarp and transporter mathematics. It's almost like Abrams swiped a classic TNG script. For fans of the old series, there was plenty of morality debate lessons on cheating vs. the no-win scenario and quoting of Star Fleet regulations. Thankfully we didn't have any violations of the Prime Directive to argue about.

The idea that Star Trek is a "thinking person's sci-fi" is just bizarre to me. Star Trek have always been pop-culture sci-fi. Star Trek was always at its worse when it takes itself too seriously. Star Trek as a morality play is fine but if we're going to be elite snobs about it, Star Trek was never a thinking-man's anything -- it had all the sublety of a kick in the nuts. The morality plays and methaphors were allways pretty transparent and not all the well disguised.

I say all of this being a huge Star Trek fan. I wasn't sure what I'd make of this. But of the 11 movies, I'd be tempted right now to put it at No. 1 on my list. The first movie was OK but not great. II, IV and VI were the best with the original cast. III was a disaster based entirely on fixing the ending of Wrath of Kahn. V was an unmitigated abortion. The TNG movies were decent, although there were as many turds as blossoms in there too.

[kcchief19]

Roger Ebert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert), gave the film 2.5/4 stars and said, "The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action."<sup id="cite_ref-155" class="reference">[156] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29#cite_note-155)</sup> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29#cite_note-155)
I guess that's my complaint. It's not about ideals or philosophy anymore. It's just like any other action-movie franchise...heavy on style and light on substance.
hmmm (from another board)At that point, the movie is on such a wildly different timeline that I think it requires a much higher burden of entertainment than what I required from the earlier movies. Beyond being set in an alternate, unfamiliar universe, the story is just kinda stupid. The timetravel is arbitrary. Nero is a seething, 1-dimensional villain that makes me long for the complexity & gravitas of Shinzon. There are major logic leaps, like Kirk going from suspended stowaway to acting first officer in the space of a few minutes, or Scotty going from hitchhiker (who abandoned his post) to chief engineer in about the same time. And why was Kirk marooned on an ice planet rather than just put in the brig?
From Roger Ebert's 2-star review of Nemesis:I'm sitting there during "Star Trek: Nemesis," the 10th "Star Trek" movie, and I'm smiling like a good sport and trying to get with the dialogue about the isotronic Ruritronic signature from planet Kolarus III, or whatever the hell they were saying, maybe it was "positronic," and gradually it occurs to me that "Star Trek" is over for me. I've been looking at these stories for half a lifetime, and, let's face it, they're out of gas.
I'm only picking on you for the material you quoted because it reflects a revisionist history of the Star Trek movies. Trek fans hated Nemesis -- as did everyone else. Shinzon was a pitiful excuse for a villain, a bad-guy concept recycled from some bad refected scripts for a Cathy Lee Crosby guest appearance.

Sincerely, I'm guessing you're a Trek fan who really wants to hate this. Understandable, there are a lot of Trek fans who fit into that category. Personally, I would have liked to see a prequel that fit into the original universe too. But like the Star Wars prequels, that wouldn't be as good as the originals.

If you can divorce yourself from the idea of Star Trek universe and timeline, there's a lot to like about this movie. Plenty of homages to the original series.

In fact, my only real complain is that the homages may be a bit too true to the original. Everyone seems like they are doing an impersonation of the person they are playing a bit too much. I'd like to see them make this roles more their own than simply do Shatner doing Kirk.

[DaddyTorgo]

idk that i could put it at #1...no way it beats out II or IV or VI - not even sure it beats out First Contact IMHO, although it probably beats out the rest

[DaddyTorgo]

I think I am just irritated that it didn't fit into the original timeline - although as a storyteller i can uderstand the reasoning it can't.

just wish maybe they'd taken it, fit it into the original timeline and then done 1 more sequal (on the 5 year first mission say), and then introduced a parallel crew to follow or something.

no reason it needed to be rebooted - still plenty of stories that could have been told

[Young Drachma]

I want a DS9 movie.

[samifan24]

I want a DS9 movie.

Benjamin Sisko was the man.

[sterlingice]

I want a DS9 movie.

I would have been in favor of that, but it's never going to happen. Then again, they wrapped it up fairly tidy at the end (minus the Emissary plot- glaring problem- but that's an argument for another time). It got a proper sendoff, mostly

SI

[sterlingice]

I liked it a lot. Saw it on an IMAX here. Paid homage without being too much of fan service. Quinto was excellent but anyone who had watched Heroes already knew that would probably be the case. The guy playing Kirk does a decent job, too, I thought but as my wife said, "it's not exactly a complex role"- hard to be good, hard to screw up. As has been said, Urban just nailed it. I thought the casting was a good job all around.

Played a little more fast and loose with the science than Star Trek is typically used to but I'm also not someone who cares so much about that. Just don't bludgeon me with huge plot holes and this one did a good job with avoiding that (except for the "tossed on the ice planet part TO FIND KEY PLOT DEVICE"- that was hokey and inconsistent). Nero's kindof a crappy villain but that's not new to the Star Trek movies. Khan was from the series and the Borg queen was just an extension of the Borg and those were probably the two most "notable" movie villains.

I'd like to see it again to get some second thoughts. I enjoyed it, but I'm curious if it loses something upon another watching- is it good for a summer action movie (keep in mind the scale) or just really shiny and well polished?

SI

[Young Drachma]

Benjamin Sisko was the man.

This.

[RendeR]

idk that i could put it at #1...no way it beats out II or IV or VI - not even sure it beats out First Contact IMHO, although it probably beats out the rest

In fairness you cannot compare this to any of the previous movies OTHER than I and First Contact. Because it, like those two was the introductory movie to a new series of movies and as such it ranks very well. I think its better than I and pretty equal to First Contact.

Movies II, IV, and VI already had a depth of character to fall back on in the movie side of it, let alone the old series. SO its not fair to compare a raw beginning to a polished vehicle for trek storytelling.

I think I am just irritated that it didn't fit into the original timeline - although as a storyteller i can uderstand the reasoning it can't.

just wish maybe they'd taken it, fit it into the original timeline and then done 1 more sequal (on the 5 year first mission say), and then introduced a parallel crew to follow or something.

no reason it needed to be rebooted - still plenty of stories that could have been told

Technically DT, they DID take this from the original timeline, think through it again. Everything in this movie happened BECAUSE of the original timeline, Spock was there to give us the convenient truths =)

As to the notion that no reboot was needed and there were still stories to tell? hogwash, Star Trek was a stagnant pool of fetid muck just waiting to be forgotten without this movie.

[kcchief19]

I think I am just irritated that it didn't fit into the original timeline - although as a storyteller i can uderstand the reasoning it can't.

just wish maybe they'd taken it, fit it into the original timeline and then done 1 more sequal (on the 5 year first mission say), and then introduced a parallel crew to follow or something.

no reason it needed to be rebooted - still plenty of stories that could have been told
I think the evidence is to the contrary. TNG was a HUGE shot of adrenaline to the franchise that the films drained from it, especially V. DS9 had a lot of problems and I was never a fan, even during the Dominion War arc. To jumpstart the franchise again, they shot Voyager to the Delta quadrant to throw out the rules and create a new environment. By the time Enterprise and Nemesis rolled around, it was clear that crew was out of ideas.
In fairness you cannot compare this to any of the previous movies OTHER than I and First Contact. Because it, like those two was the introductory movie to a new series of movies and as such it ranks very well. I think its better than I and pretty equal to First Contact.

Movies II, IV, and VI already had a depth of character to fall back on in the movie side of it, let alone the old series. SO its not fair to compare a raw beginning to a polished vehicle for trek storytelling.
First Contact was the best of TNG movies but it still wasn't a great movie. Kahn was the best of the bunch because it had character and action. IV and VI were good popcorn movies but I don't think they were as good as this.
Technically DT, they DID take this from the original timeline, think through it again. Everything in this movie happened BECAUSE of the original timeline, Spock was there to give us the convenient truths =)
I reverted to my nerd roots this evening and started looking at exactly this line of thought and checking out the Trek wiki. It's actually brilliant and makes me appreciate this movie any more. Really, it's not a "reboot" -- with Spock, we know that what actually happened is that the moment Nero's ship traveled through the black hole and destroyed the Kevlin and killed George Kirk, he created an alternate timeline. Up until then, everything that happened in the movie is faithful to the orginal Roddenberry timeline. Creating an alternate reality rather than "re-imagining" of the original is not necessarily an original take (see Terminator) but it is remarkably well done.

[DaddyTorgo]

i guess...i guess *shrugs* just idk...can't help thinking about the old timeline that i guess we'll never get to play in again and that makes me sad

[JonInMiddleGA]

just wish maybe they'd taken it, fit it into the original timeline and then done 1 more sequal (on the 5 year first mission say), and then introduced a parallel crew to follow or something.

+1

Wife wants to see this one, son will go see pretty much anything as long as there's fresh popcorn. I'll end up going but with very little enthusiasm I'm afraid.

[kcchief19]

i guess...i guess *shrugs* just idk...can't help thinking about the old timeline that i guess we'll never get to play in again and that makes me sad
I wouldn't bet on that. There was less chance to see the old timeline before this movie than there is now. The franchise was dead creatively and financially, with the money being the most important part. If the movies are a success, there will be incentive to go back to TV and you have an excellent chance of seeing the original timeline there.

I'll admit in that respect I don't much see any difference regarding the timeline. TNG had almost nothing to do with the TOS aside from the stray reference. DS9 had a lot of crossover with TNG but Voyager was very much a standalone show that could have taken place anywhere and had no connection to the original characters. Enterprise had a lot of backstory that made it appealing to Trekkies but no one else.

[Schmidty]

Nothing to do with the movie, but I think I'm a backward in that I hated Voyager, thought TNG was very good, really liked Enterprise, and absolutely loved DS9.

[Buccaneer]

Having seen at least a few episodes of each, as well as reading their premises, I thought TNG was quite good, DS9 was mediocre at best (the earlier episodes were passable) but the others sucked. Contrarily, I thought the TNG movies were quite bad (but not as bad as I and V). At least this new movie offers something new and different.

[fantom1979]

I loved Star Trek VI, I think part of it was that fact that there was no one main villain. General Chang was listed as the main villain, but they were fighting everyone, including officers inside of Starfleet.

Villains:
Star Trek I -- V'ger
Star Trek II -- Khan
Star Trek III -- Kruge
Star Trek IV -- Unnamed Alien Probe
Star Trek V -- Sybok and maybe God...
Star Trek VI -- Chang, starfleet officers
Star Trek VII -- Soran, Duras Sisters
Star Trek VIII -- Borg
Star Trek IX -- Son'a
Star Trek X -- Shinzon
Star Trek XI -- Nero

[Cringer]

I need to see some of those Star Trek movies again. I have not seen most of them in so long I don't remember much except for II and the travel back in time for a whale one (IV?). The whale one was horrible IMO

[samifan24]

Having seen at least a few episodes of each, as well as reading their premises, I thought TNG was quite good, DS9 was mediocre at best (the earlier episodes were passable) but the others sucked. Contrarily, I thought the TNG movies were quite bad (but not as bad as I and V). At least this new movie offers something new and different.

I have never heard anyone that watched DS9 ever describe the early episodes as good and the later ones as bad. I thought DS9 really hit its stride in season 4 when Worf arrived and then when the Dominion War really took hold. Two of my favorite episodes were "Far Beyond the Stars" and "In the Pale Moonlight" and I believe both were in seasons five and/or six.

[fantom1979]

I need to see some of those Star Trek movies again. I have not seen most of them in so long I don't remember much except for II and the travel back in time for a whale one (IV?). The whale one was horrible IMO

2 through 4 were kind of a story arc. II is where spock dies, III is where they save Spock, and IV is where they go back in time to get the whale. Most Star Trek fans consider IV to be one of the better Star Trek movies, but I think you would have to be a Star Trek fan to fully appreciate that movie. There are a lot of little side jokes going on, mainly referring to Spock and his coming back to life.

[Cringer]

2 through 4 were kind of a story arc. II is where spock dies, III is where they save Spock, and IV is where they go back in time to get the whale. Most Star Trek fans consider IV to be one of the better Star Trek movies, but I think you would have to be a Star Trek fan to fully appreciate that movie. There are a lot of little side jokes going on, mainly referring to Spock and his coming back to life.

Yeah, I remember the rough outline of III with Spock coming back, just can't remember details at all. IV to me, just the whole whale story I didn't like, the time travel was somewhat lame to me as well I guess. I just am not a huge fan (like a trekkie) I guess, though I have seen them all and given every show a try, I just haven't watched the movies more then a couple times for most of them. And it's been a while.

My daughter and I will watch Star Trek stuff when we see it on though. She even likes the original show so we will watch that. Not Enterprise though. :)

[kcchief19]

Interesting ... I'm looking at the ratings on IMDB:

1. Star Trek 2009 8.6
2. Wrath of Kahn 7.8
3. First Contact 7.6
4. Voyage Home 7.3
5. Undiscovered Country 7.2
6. Search for Spock 6.5
7. Generations 6.4
8. Insurrection 6.4
9. Nemesis 6.4
10 The Motion Picture 6.2
11. The Final Frontier 4.9

Reasonably close to how I would rank them. I'd slide VI ahead of IV and put III after Insurrection.

The thing about IV and the whales is that it's funnier than the other films which helps it out. The plot is a little goofy and the morality play is less than subtle though.

My dislike of III is tainted by the fact that it was completely unnecessary and insipid. The film was entirely built on the premise of fixing the ending of II so they could make IV since Nimoy initially said he would never do another Star Trek film and they killed him off. That's why I hope to never seen another TNG movie -- the while killing Data and transferring his conscious to B4 has Search for Spock all over it. I don't want to see that continue.

[Neon_Chaos]

95% freshness rating on Rotten Tomatoes

Star Trek Movie Reviews, Pictures - Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/)
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[sterlingice]

I have never heard anyone that watched DS9 ever describe the early episodes as good and the later ones as bad. I thought DS9 really hit its stride in season 4 when Worf arrived and then when the Dominion War really took hold. Two of my favorite episodes were "Far Beyond the Stars" and "In the Pale Moonlight" and I believe both were in seasons five and/or six.

You don't really hear the early episodes as being better very often. I heard a roommate of mine say it once- he really liked the Maquis plot and didn't care for the war. I dunno. I guess I could see it, but, frankly, when the Dominion hit the scene is when the show really took off.

SI

[DaddyTorgo]

You don't really hear the early episodes as being better very often. I heard a roommate of mine say it once- he really liked the Maquis plot and didn't care for the war. I dunno. I guess I could see it, but, frankly, when the Dominion hit the scene is when the show really took off.

SI

There were some early episodes I liked a whole lot - and frankly the earlier stuff got a lot more interesting to me after I read the Pocket Books 3-book series on the occupation (the name escapes me at the moment but i have them at home).

One of the earlier episodes I love love loved for example, was Season 1's "Captive Pursuit". Not to mention "Duet" which IMHO probably belongs on a Top 10 list of the series' episodes. And that's just Season 1. Season 2..."The Wire" and "Crossover" and maybe "The Collaborator" but that's about it. IMHO this was the weakest season of DS9 I guess.

[Buccaneer]

Since I really don't like sci-fi, I was speaking from a watchability point of view - mainly the interaction between characters. Once they really get into a bizarre, incomprehensible (to me) aliens and inter-gallactic stuff (presumably the Dominion arc), then it's a turn off. But my opinions don't matter - it was just to compare to the movies.

Can someone post the same movies list, except ranked by Rotten Tomatoes?

[Neon_Chaos]

Since I really don't like sci-fi, I was speaking from a watchability point of view - mainly the interaction between characters. Once they really get into a bizarre, incomprehensible (to me) aliens and inter-gallactic stuff (presumably the Dominion arc), then it's a turn off. But my opinions don't matter - it was just to compare to the movies.

Can someone post the same movies list, except ranked by Rotten Tomatoes?

Here...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_iv_the_voyage_home/news/1818899/total_recall_star_trek_by_tomatometer

Wrath of Kahn is 90%, First Contact is 91%
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[RendeR]

Its interesting to see how highly "The Voyage Home" (ST:IV) is rated. I've always believed its the second worst movie in the entire collection after "Final Frontier" (ST:V) Terrible writing, campy (even for ST) humor, cliched time warp resolution and breaking every rule the Federation ever created in messing with the timeline.

I simply hate that movie. I'll watch Final Fronteir or the Cartoon series before I chose the Voyage Home.

[DaddyTorgo]

Its interesting to see how highly "The Voyage Home" (ST:IV) is rated. I've always believed its the second worst movie in the entire collection after "Final Frontier" (ST:V) Terrible writing, campy (even for ST) humor, cliched time warp resolution and breaking every rule the Federation ever created in messing with the timeline.

I simply hate that movie. I'll watch Final Fronteir or the Cartoon series before I chose the Voyage Home.

I think it got rated so highly because of the whole 80's aspect of it. Like "imagine this is going on right now!" kind of thing.

[Cuckoo]

Its interesting to see how highly "The Voyage Home" (ST:IV) is rated. I've always believed its the second worst movie in the entire collection after "Final Frontier" (ST:V) Terrible writing, campy (even for ST) humor, cliched time warp resolution and breaking every rule the Federation ever created in messing with the timeline.

I simply hate that movie. I'll watch Final Fronteir or the Cartoon series before I chose the Voyage Home.

Just as I was about to hit "reply," RendeR took care of it for me. :)

[mh2365]

I'm skipping a lot of the posts in this thread so forgive me if I am repeating anything ...

I'm two days removed from seeing this movie. If I was 15 or so inclined I would've seen this movie about 30 times in the theater. I can honestly say in my 41 years I have never enjoyed a movie as much as I did this one. (not saying it is the best movie, just the one I enjoyed the most) I am on the fringe of being a Trekker, I've seen pretty much every episode and every movie that has been put out there.

As a huge fan I think it is grossly misleading to say that Abrams just said "fuck you" to all the fans. If he was doing that then he wouldn't have put all the Easter Eggs to the fans in that he did. Even to the point of Scottie transporting Admiral Archer's prized beagle somewhere. He didn't have to do that to reboot the franchise.

What he did have to do is provide an alternative timeline because if not where does it go from there? You can't really do the Batman reboot and just remake the movies only darker because Star Trek isn't about being dark. If he had just made a movie about them in cadet school then Kirk takes command of the Enterprise and they are done making movies.

Now with the things he set in motion with this movie they could do an unlimited amount of sequels. As long as Abrams is doing them then they will be stellar.

Because of this now you have Bryan Fuller wanting to bring Star Trek back to TV and you have the hottest movie of the summer.

I say well done JJ ... of course I am also in the camp that thinks every thing he touches is gold.

[CleBrownsfan]

I never really watched Star Trek growing up and I have an Amazon gift cerfificate from Christmas and I'm thinking about getting one of the two:

Star Trek: The Original Series (http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Original-Season-Blu-ray/dp/B001TH16DS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1242057986&sr=8-2)

or

Star Trek: Original Motion Picture Collection (http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Original-Collection-Frontier/dp/B001TH16DI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1242057986&sr=8-1)

which one should I get??

~thanks

[DaddyTorgo]

ooooh

I might have to say the series. If you get the motion picture collection then you have at a minimum 1/3 of it that is made up of "clunkers (III and V)" where if you get the series (assuming you can deal with the special effects) there are far fewer "clunkers" in terms of storyline

[JediKooter]

I'll say it again, the new Star Trek is the best Star Trek movie out of all of them. I'll have to watch Wrath of Khan again though now that I thinkn about it.

I really like the original series a lot and I like the Next Generation. The other shows, I'm more just 'eh' on. The one thing that I did get completely sick and tired of was the Borg. Like anything, it was ok at first, but, they kept using them way too much in my opinion.

If I had to put things in order:

1. Star Trek
2. Wrath of Khan
3. Voyage Home
4. Search for Spock
5. First Contact
6. Undiscovered Country
7. The Motion Picture
8. Generations
9. Nemisis
10. Final Frontier
11. Never saw Insurrection

I think because I'm not a super Trekkie, I'm less likely to feel insulted or whatever it is because things are in a different timeline now.

People who say there's no Star Trek morals or life lessons or whatever it is, must have completely missed the opening scene. I think that was classic Star Trek right there. As for Spock fighting Kirk...no problems at all with that, everyone knew that Kirk was a hot head, undisiplined and didn't follow orders. As for Kirk getting his ass kicked time and time again, well, he's still young and lacks the experience of the Kirk we were introduced to back in 66.

I'm actually glad that Abrahms didn't geek it out with a bunch technobable or mumbojumbo. If he had, you would have sat there trying to figure what the heck they just said instead of following the story or for some (and by some, I mean all the hard core Trekkies) people they would be more worried that on page 39 of the Starfleet tech spec, that he incorrectly pronounced something and that earlier versions of the transporters beeped twice instead of 3 times.

As for the comments about it being a 90210 version. I've never watched that show, but, if it is in reference to their ages...not sure how 40 or 50 years olds could pull off being in Starfleet academy. They are supposed to be in their late teens early 20s in the movie because they are just starting out their careers.

This was not a dumbed down version of Star Trek, it was Trekkied/nerded down version of Star Trek and I think by doing that, it just saved the franchise.

[samifan24]

This was not a dumbed down version of Star Trek, it was Trekkied/nerded down version of Star Trek and I think by doing that, it just saved the franchise.

I agree and this, to me, is the most valuable element of all for me as a Star Trek fan. This movie will probably spawn sequels and potential reinvigorate interest in a new Trek series, which was not possible before this movie.

[Qwikshot]

I never really watched Star Trek growing up and I have an Amazon gift cerfificate from Christmas and I'm thinking about getting one of the two:

Star Trek: The Original Series (http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Original-Season-Blu-ray/dp/B001TH16DS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1242057986&sr=8-2)

or

Star Trek: Original Motion Picture Collection (http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Original-Collection-Frontier/dp/B001TH16DI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1242057986&sr=8-1)

which one should I get??

~thanks


Get the series, buy Wrath of Khan...you should be fine.

[JediKooter]

I agree and this, to me, is the most valuable element of all for me as a Star Trek fan. This movie will probably spawn sequels and potential reinvigorate interest in a new Trek series, which was not possible before this movie.

That's exactly what I thought when I was walking out of the theater. As much as I rail on Hollywood for not coming up with anything original, I think this is one vehicle that would be good for a new tv series.

Shoot, Admiral Pike can now be an integral part of a series, which I think would be cool.

[fantom1979]

Get the series, buy Wrath of Khan...you should be fine.

If you are not familiar with the movies, I would think it would be difficult to watch Wrath of Khan without seeing Search for Spock. As much as Search for Spock kind of sucked, you really need that closure.

[kcchief19]

People who say there's no Star Trek morals or life lessons or whatever it is, must have completely missed the opening scene. I think that was classic Star Trek right there.
Exactly. There was plenty of morality play in the movie. The Koboyashi Maru and the no-win scenario test has been part of Star Trek lore for nearly 30 years and it was interesting to see how that was thread throughout this movie. We saw the origins of Kirk's philosophy that he doesn't believe in the no-win scenario, and we saw it's application in this movie. Kirk saved the day by taking risks and doing the right thing regardless of the rules. That's classic Trek.

[Warhammer]

I thought they did a very good job with it. In thinkin about the bestmovies, they were all pretty simple in regards to the plot. I think they achieved that in this movie, while leaving the door open for future installments.

I really dug the kind of retro look to the engineering spaces.

The only jarring scene was the Kobyashi Maru scenario. Not necessarily bad, but jarring.

[RendeR]

personally I think they kind of blew it on Kirk's personality after 3 years at the academy. he wouldn't still BE that obnoxious brazen asshole after 3 years, he'd have been shitcanned for it long before that. unless of course Pike keeps him safe.

[ISiddiqui]

Never a big fan of Star Trek, but I really, really liked this movie. Had great action, some good humor, and a decent cast. They even handled the time travel well.

As for a "big fuck you to the fans", you'd have to say similar to Batman fans then with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, no? It seems that reboots are the way to reinvigorate old series.

[fantom1979]

Just saw it for the third time (twice in the theater, once ummm not) and I am still enjoying the movie quite a bit. The part where Bones is treating Kirk when they first get on Enterprise has made me laugh every time.

[Qwikshot]

If you are not familiar with the movies, I would think it would be difficult to watch Wrath of Khan without seeing Search for Spock. As much as Search for Spock kind of sucked, you really need that closure.

Yeah, but I think most people know that Spock isn't dead, so knowing that, it's not as vital anymore to have closure since the character was brought back.

[DanGarion]

Pretty good article (as long as you can deal with some glaring typos) about how the movie fits in with the "Prime" timeline, etc.
Star Trek Movie Annotations - ComicMix news (http://www.comicmix.com/news/2009/05/12/star-trek-movie-annotations/)

[DanGarion]

Oh and this is for you DT.... ;)

<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/common/assets/onn_embed/embedded_player.swf?image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSTAR_TREK_article.jpg&amp;videoid=94844&title=Trekkies%20Bash%20New%20Star%20Trek%20Film%20As%20%27Fun%2C%20Watchable%27" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/common/assets/onn_embed/embedded_player.swf"type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSTAR_TREK_article.jpg&videoid=94844&title=Trekkies%20Bash%20New%20Star%20Trek%20Film%20As%20%27Fun%2C%20Watchable%27"></embed></object><br /><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film?utm_source=videoembed">Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'</a>

[DaddyTorgo]

lol

eh, i'm slowly coming around on it. i suppose it's the lesser of two evils.

[lerriuqs]

Saw the movie last night. Just loved it. Here's hoping they can get this movie series going strong.

[RendeR]

I fucking LOVE the onion. That was awesome.

"If I wanted to sit around watching young attractive people being active and exciting I'd watch sports" *cackle*

Gonna go watch this again tonight after gaming I think.

[DanGarion]

This videos keeps on coming...
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1910892&fullscreen=1" width="640" height="360" ><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"/><param name="wmode" value="transparent"/><param name="AllowScriptAccess" value="true"/><param name="movie" quality="best" value="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1910892&fullscreen=1"/><embed src="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1910892&fullscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="640" height="360" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><div style="padding:5px 0; text-align:center; width:640px;">Watch <a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1910892">My Favorite Movie (Star Trek vs. Star Wars)</a> and more <a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/videos" >funny videos</a> on <a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/">CollegeHumor</a></div>

[Schmidty]

I saw this with my wife and daughter today. We all loved it. We spent $36 to see it (with popcorn and sneaking in candy), and I can actually say that it was worth it for once. My wife liked it so much that she made us stay until all the credits were done to see if anything happened.

My only issue:

I don't like the Spock/Uhura thing. It just seemed forced and out of left field.

[RendeR]

I saw this with my wife and daughter today. We all loved it. We spent $36 to see it (with popcorn and sneaking in candy), and I can actually say that it was worth it for once. My wife liked it so much that she made us stay until all the credits were done to see if anything happened.

My only issue:

I don't like the Spock/Uhura thing. It just seemed forced and out of left field.


It did seem a bit forced, but I think that may be us as fans imposing our comfort level with the Spock character onto the new film. We're so used to the old Spock being through his total Vulcan studies and locking down his emotions, where as the new Spock hasn't had that opportunity and probably never will since his Planet no longer exists.


I spoiler tagged my response because of the way I said something. Don't want to ruin anything for any that haven't seen it yet.

[Desnudo]

I really enjoyed this movie. Probably the first time I've seen a two hour movie that didn't seem like two hours. The acting is what put it over the top. Great performances all around, especially the doctor.

[Butter]

Didn't like it. Didn't think the acting was any good AT ALL, surprised to see so much praise for it. Had no problem with the science or anything like that. I think this style of action adventure where everything works out just so for the heroes at all times just kind of gets on my nerves any more.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I saw this over the weekend. I really enjoyed it. It was a lot of fun. I thought the cast was fantastic. Kirk and Bones, in particular, just nailed the essence of the original characters. I thought Sylar was quite good as Spock too.

There were a couple of things I didn't like, for example, I thought the Scotty in the water tubes thing was completely unnecessary, especially since they just had that Kirk running from the snow monsters scene a few minutes prior.

I thought the opening scene was fantastic.

The one "big" issue I had was as follows:

The whole Spock "promises" to save Romulus background story for everything was very stupid. Unless I'm missing something, the events in the past unfolded as follows:

1. Star goes nova and people realize that the exploding star will destroy Romulus (and, presumably) some other planets.

2. Spock "promises" Romulus that he will save them. He spends time coming up with a plan - the red matter thing - to suck the nova into a black hole, thus saving Romulus.

3. After he coming up with this plan, Spock gets on a ship with the red matter and heads to save Romulus.

4. Oops! Too late! The super nova got their before Spock. Romulus is dead.

So, Spock failed to save Romulus because he was late? That's it. He some how miscalculated when the super nova would reach Romulus? Was there something else that delayed him that I am forgetting about? If not, I guess it was just the minute details of the timing of the whole thing that escaped him.

Even assuming something had delayed him, how is Spock's "promise" Romulus' Plan A? Sure, it's a decent Plan B, but how is Plan A not: "Evacuate as many people as we can from the planet because a super nova is coming to destroy us. Hopefully, someone can figure out something, but, if not, it's time to find a new Class M planet, folks." What did they do, just sit back, enjoy the view, sipping some Romulan Ale going, "Yep. That Super Nova is a comin', but Spock promised us he'd save us and promise is a promise. Yep, them Vulcans' is good on their word. Always have been, always will. Man, that super nova sure seems to be getting closer, pass me my shades."

[DaddyTorgo]

I agree HB. Seems pretty short-sighted. Especially when we've established that past-tech could save what...10 million Vulcans off the planet in a matter of minutes without any planning ahead.

[DanGarion]

I agree HB. Seems pretty short-sighted. Especially when we've established that past-tech could save what...10 million Vulcans off the planet in a matter of minutes without any planning ahead.

Agree, now that someone mentions this I remember thinking when I heard it was all Spocks fault, that I wonder what terrible thing he did. And all it was is that he promised to save them and he wasn't able to? WTF the Romulans deserved to die if they were that freaking passive about a planet ending event like that.

[Lathum]

Just saw this and thought it was amazing. Wife loved it also and was crying 10 minutes in as advertsed.

DT, I gotta be honest, you come off as sounding like a bitter sci fi geek who can'r come to terms with the fact that classics move on.

[DaddyTorgo]

Just saw this and thought it was amazing. Wife loved it also and was crying 10 minutes in as advertsed.

DT, I gotta be honest, you come off as sounding like a bitter sci fi geek who can'r come to terms with the fact that classics move on.

:D

prolly cuz that's what i am

[Lathum]

:D

prolly cuz that's what i am

GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[fantom1979]

<div><object width="480" height="381"><param name="movie" value="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/x930vt_william-shatner-snl-skit-get-a-life_fun&related=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/x930vt_william-shatner-snl-skit-get-a-life_fun&related=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="381" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br /><b><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x930vt_william-shatner-snl-skit-get-a-life_fun">William Shatner SNL skit Get A Life 1986-12-20</a></b><br /><i>Uploaded by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/efly2020">efly2020</a>. - <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/us/channel/fun">See more comedy videos.</a></i></div>

[DaddyTorgo]

William Shatner SNL skit Get A Life 1986-12-20 (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x930vt_william-shatner-snl-skit-get-a-life_fun)
Uploaded by efly2020 (http://www.dailymotion.com/efly2020). - See more comedy videos. (http://www.dailymotion.com/us/channel/fun)


yeahhh...still not very happy with him about that :mad:

[Kodos]

Sigh.

So we went to see this on Saturday, which took some doing, since we don't usually get to see movies these days due to our 4 month old baby. I was enjoying it, my wife who hates Star Trek was actually enjoying it, and then, as they are trying to disable the thing boring a hole into Vulcan....

... the theater had some sort of power issue, and the movie ended.

Sigh.

[DaddyTorgo]

Sigh.

So we went to see this on Saturday, which took some doing, since we don't usually get to see movies these days due to our 4 month old baby. I was enjoying it, my wife who hates Star Trek was actually enjoying it, and then, as they are trying to disable the thing boring a hole into Vulcan....

... the theater had some sort of power issue, and the movie ended.

Sigh.

I presume you'll at least get a refund?

I understand your larger point though about that being particularly obnoxious due to the difficulties in getting out to see a movie with the baby and all (how many tentacles does it have again?)