Sorry, didn’t mean to offend you. I never thought of the man as a great talent though…he had one very good idea and milked it for all it was worth, nearly killing it in the end.
No one is feeling the grave-spinning vibration under their feet because the sound of movie cash registers opening and closing is drowning it out.
Welcome to the SDMB. Stay a while, I like you.
I boil the success of the movie to the characters. I think they nailed it, and even if they aren’t 100% what was originally created…who cares? I like what these guys have done. I don’t really subscribe to the “sacred cow” view of film and art. Anything can be modified and adapted to increase it’s appeal. Sometimes it can backfire (Most agree the Star Wars reedits weren’t as good as the originals), but I think they succeeded in this case.
There are plot holes, but most science fiction has plot holes…and goodness knows Trek has about a million of them. I think I’d give this movie a strong 3 or 31/2 out of four stars. I hope the next movie contains all of this movie’s fun with some of the better plots and social commentary of the best trek stories.
What I can’t get is why Ebert doesn’t like it. I think sometimes he can really coming into a movie with an opinion already in mind. Read this excerpt from his review of The Phantom Menace (which he gave *** 1/2 stars) :
“As surely as Anakin Skywalker points the way into the future of “Star Wars,” so does “The Phantom Menace” raise the curtain on this new freedom for filmmakers. And it’s a lot of fun. The film has correctly been given the PG rating; it’s suitable for younger viewers and doesn’t depend on violence for its effects. As for the bad rap about the characters–hey, I’ve seen space operas that put their emphasis on human personalities and relationships. They’re called “Star Trek” movies. Give me transparent underwater cities and vast hollow senatorial spheres any day.”
And now from his review of Star Trek:
"The special effects are slam-bam. Spatial relationships between spaceships are unclear because the Romulan ship and the Enterprise have such widely unmatched scales. Battles consist primarily of jump-suited crew members running down corridors in advance of smoke, sparks and flames. Lots of verbal commands seem implausibly slow. Consider, at light warp speeds, how imprecise it would be to say “At my command … 3 … 2 … 1 …” Between “2” and “1,” you could jump a million galaxies.
I thought about these things during “Star Trek” because I could not help myself. I understand the Star Trek science has never been intended as plausible. I understand this is not science fiction but an Ark movie using a starship. I understand that the character types are as familiar as your favorite slippers. But the franchise has become much of a muchness. The new movie essentially intends to reboot the franchise with younger characters and carry on as before. The movie deals with narrative housekeeping. Perhaps the next one will engage these characters in a more challenging and devious story, one more about testing their personalities than re-establishing them. In the meantime, you want space opera, you got it."
There are some criticisms for star trek in there…but you can certainly apply any of them to Star Wars as well.
Surbey, “stay a while?” I’ve been a member here for 9 years!
And I just got finished re-watching one of my favorite “Star Trek” movies:
Galaxy Quest which I think has a lot in common with the new Star Trek movie in that
it’s just rollicking good fun.
And I read Ebert’s review too and I don’t know how carefully he watched the movie because there were some nitpicks he made that
are explained in the movie at least twice. For example, he can’t understand why they have to space dive onto the platform if they
can transport ship to ship in warp. Well, the reason they have to space dive is to disable the beam so that the transporter will work again.
And ship to ship warp transporting doesn’t happen until later when Spock introduces it to Scotty who hadn’t come up with the technique yet.
So what’s with the “guest” moniker?
I’d ask Aes, but he likes to pick on me.
I’m a guest, too. It’s a long story involving a bottle of aldebaran whiskey, a visiting Horta dignitary, and the ship’s stores of reserve dilithium crystals.
We’re guests because it is free*. Until about a year(?) ago, I paid ($12/yr?) because that was the only was to use the Search (such as it is). But now it’s free, so we stay guests.
*Free as in “free pizza”, not as in “free speech”.
Spin, old man. Spin. I love this universe, and the movie moves fast enough to jump over the numerous plotholes without slowing down. I have to see this in IMAX.
I’m just waiting on Bluray. Those battles were very detailed, I just can’t get that definition in the theatre. No IMAX in my part of the world, maybe find a digital showing…
Ebert is infamous for this. In many of his reviews it’s clear he either wasn’t paying attention, or got up to get snacks or take a piss or something, because he misses huge chunks of plot or makes errors that nobody who watched the whole movie should make.
We saw t in digital at Rave. Meh.
I did see it in digital. It was amazing. Those Vulcan eyebrows were not just make-up. You could see each individual hair. Even when it wasn’t such a close-up shot.
I understand why actors and actresses are panicking about how visible every flaw becomes.
Yeah, off topic, but I just noticed that my status says “guest.” I was a paying member until they made it optional. I guess that “member” status finally wore off.
Maybe I’m just used to digital C-Band.
Well, here are a few examples:
The planet Vulcan is destroyed.
Spock’s mother is killed.
Spock is shagging Uhuru.
Those three alone totally destroy ST:TOS and a lot of TNG as well.
Sadly, that is true.
And welcome to the SDMB!
It doesn’t contradict Canon. It’s an alternate timeline. It was brought up in the film. Think of this as if Yesterday’s enterprise actually didn’t revert to normal. It’s just a different version.
Thank god! How is anyone expected to keep up with 40 years of Star Trek Lore. Let’s jettison it and try again. Maybe this time it will be more self consistent.
Actually, by having it in the movie and being explained that it’s part of different timeline that began during Kirk’s birth, rather than canon-raping, it IS canon. Remember how Tasha Yar was dead, but then came back but then was put back in the past but then she had a half-romulan daughter? Different timelines. Hell, remember when Worf kept switching universes? We’re just following a different possibility now.
They could watch the episodes and movies. They could speak with Trekkers.
I resent Scotty being comic relief, although that started in another movie. I resent having everyone at the academy at the same time. I resent Kirk being given command without even being an ensign. I resent Kirk being under Spock’s command. I believe all these things fellate with the alacrity of an eighteen year old French whore.
I resent my spell checker being unable to spell “fellate”.
They could make some gawd damn Poul Anderson movies.