JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Probably not a discussion we need to have all over again, though that IS what the Internet's for, soooo...I applaud the way Abrams and friends handled the film. I totally see why it would bother some people, and it certainly has some plot holes (though not as many as some suggest), and it never makes the slightest attempt at capturing the cerebral, philosophical tone that the franchise had in the beginning...but it was exactly what was needed to rejuvenate Star Trek at this point. And it did a very nice job of rebooting the franchise in a way that didn't pave over the original timeline or pretend it didn't exist...and most importantly to me, it focused on the friendships. Star Trek only interests me when I like the people involved, and I like watching them interact and seeing how their relationships unfold. TOS and the good original cast films do this quite nicely, so I really enjoy them...most of the rest of Star Trek doesn't really get me interested in the characters, so I don't bother. The 2009 Star Trek doesn't have that problem.oh please data it has more plot holes than you care to admit. To deny they exist is tantamount to lying. The story line is abysmal. It's stupid and retarded. It's so poorly concieved and an insult to Star Trek fans of old. Yes it did get the comradere correct. The friendships within the film were very well done. Sadly the science and the logic were all wrong, and it did not need to be. Star Trek 2009 succeeded in the casting. The exterior look of the Enterprise. The breathing new life into the franchise.Star Trek 2009 failed in the science, logic, the story and the music. It also failed in the interior look of the Enterprise.I-beams and concrete in space, what idiot thought that was a good idea.JJ says he won't do the next film unless the script is right. After the ending of Lost, can the man be trusted? After Super 8 I'm willing to give him another chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 As the old guard I had no problem with any of the film. It was much better than 5 of the previous Trek films that came before it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Joey whines about plot holes in the first film all the time, but never says what they are. I've seen the film 3 or 4 times and never noticed any gaping plot holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Oh they are there but no more than some of the other ridiculous plot devices from prior Trek films. And i still don't understand how people can claim to be fans of good orchestral music yet thumb their nose at Trek's score. Oh well to each their own I suppose. It won't stop me from enjoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 As the old guard I had no problem with any of the film. It was much better than 5 of the previous Trek films that came before it.I wish that were true, but it was not better than the Undiscovered Country or First Contact. And all 11 previous films had better scores. the film treated spock as if he were a moron. Seriously if Spock is going to save Romulus from a Supernova, how did the supernove get to Romulus before Spock got to the Supernova?How could Spock see the destruction of Vulcan in Stereoscope from Delta Vega?What are the odds that Kirk would be put down on a planet just minutes from his best friend in the universe and another short distance from another of his closest friend?Why go back in time after Spock, when you can go back in time and correct the mistake? Why drill into a planet when a black hole on the surface will have the same effect?On a separate note, we (Dave and I) were discussing the likely hood that there will only be 1 sequel. Just figuring that Chris Pine is on the verge of becoming a huge star. Anton Yeltsin is also becoming a star in his own right. Zoe Saldana will be busy with Avatar. K Urban is getting more and more work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 As the old guard I had no problem with any of the film. It was much better than 5 of the previous Trek films that came before it.I wish that were true, but it was not better than the Undiscovered Country or First Contact. He didn't say THE 5 previous films, he said 5 OF the previous films.And all 11 previous films had better scores. I'd rather listen to Gia's Trek score than 4, 6, or Generations any day of the week.the film treated spock as if he were a moron. Seriously if Spock is going to save Romulus from a Supernova, how did the supernove get to Romulus before Spock got to the Supernova?Supernovas are unpredictable. He wasn't ready in time.How could Spock see the destruction of Vulcan in Stereoscope from Delta Vega?Why wouldn't he be able to?What are the odds that Kirk would be put down on a planet just minutes from his best friend in the universe and another short distance from another of his closest friend?You can argue that is bad writing, but it's not a plot hole.Why go back in time after Spock, when you can go back in time and correct the mistake?You cannot control where the black hole takes you. Neither person who went in even know if they'd come out alive!Why drill into a planet when a black hole on the surface will have the same effect?Maybe it wouldn't have the same effect. We don't know exactly how Red Matter works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 The whole series is flawed from the point that James Kirk appears to be the only captain capable of doing anything in Starfleet. If they were smart they would clone him and do away with the Academy.Why did Picard waste his time going back to Kirk and the exact same spot in the nexus when all he needed to do was send Kirk back to The Enterprise B to stop Soran there?Why did Starfleet send a broken down Enterprise for a massive rescue operation in Trek V when there are other ships available?How could an army of 10 overrun an entire Starship?Why would Starfleet insist on sending a newly refitted ship that hasn't even been tested to intercept V'Ger?How could Kirk steal a Starship without the entire fleet going after him?How could the Klingon's not notice a patch on Kirk's shoulder when the entire audience can see it?Why didn't the Borg go back and destroy humanity when the world didn't have the capability to launch anything into space?I could go on and on and on..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I agree with Joe that Star Trek (2009) is filled with faults and laziness at the script level. It might be one of the worst scripts ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Mark's list points out why Time Travel stories are generally a bad idea. I hope all the sequels made to the Trek reboot completely avoid any form of time travel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I agree with Joe that Star Trek (2009) is filled with faults and laziness at the script level. It might be one of the worst scripts ever.No I think Insurrection, Nemesis, V and Generations are just as bad if not worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 No, script wise they are better (though far from brilliant).Star Trek (2009) is saved from it's appalling script by it's other aspects though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I agree with Joe that Star Trek (2009) is filled with faults and laziness at the script level. It might be one of the worst scripts ever.No I think Insurrection, Nemesis, V and Generations are just as bad if not worse.those 4 plus 2009 all suffer from piss poor villains. I still mourn Kirk's horrifically lame death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 No, script wise they are better (though far from brilliant).Star Trek (2009) is saved from it's appalling script by it's other aspects though.I beg to differ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Well, you are entitled to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Picard is > Pine's Kirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I still mourn Kirk's horrifically lame death.Captain Kirk died on the bridge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Well, you are entitled to be wrong.So are you my friend.Picard is > Pine's KirkUntil Picard can win a fist fight mano a mano, he's not close to any Kirk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Huh what on earth do you mean?The problem with the Star Trek (2009) story is the amount on incredible and unlikely things that have to happen to eventually get Kirk in the Captain's chair. It's infantile, and they don't even try and mask it. Good movie though, any film with Neil in it can't be bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crocodile 7,982 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Huh what on earth do you mean?The problem with the Star Trek (2009) story is the amount on incredible and unlikely things that have to happen to eventually get Kirk in the Captain's chair. It's infantile, and they don't even try and mask it. And they already said the fact that it happened so quickly might be a plot point for the new film.Karol - who liked (but didn't love) the 2009 film Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Huh what on earth do you mean?The problem with the Star Trek (2009) story is the amount on incredible and unlikely things that have to happen to eventually get Kirk in the Captain's chair. It's infantile, and they don't even try and mask it. Good movie though, any film with Neil in it can't be bad.God you seem like a boring person to have conversation with in real life. You're one of those people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Huh what on earth do you mean?The problem with the Star Trek (2009) story is the amount on incredible and unlikely things that have to happen to eventually get Kirk in the Captain's chair. It's infantile, and they don't even try and mask it. Good movie though, any film with Neil in it can't be bad.God you seem like a boring person to have conversation with in real life. You're one of those people.so you're one of "those" persons who settles for sloppy writing.Stefan is one of "those" people that is in a unique subset of people with very few numbers. He is a rarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt C 452 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Picard is > Pine's KirkI prefer Pine's Kirk and Captain Janeway over Picard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Ah look, another wrong opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 In the end, all any of us can do is "settle" for Abrams' Star Trek as presented in 2009.We can choose to not watch it or buy the disc. We can boycott it. We can disown it. We can hate it. But we cannot unmake what has been made by people we don't work for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I have no problems with the fact the movie exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Tee-hee. Existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Huh what on earth do you mean?The problem with the Star Trek (2009) story is the amount on incredible and unlikely things that have to happen to eventually get Kirk in the Captain's chair. It's infantile, and they don't even try and mask it. Good movie though, any film with Neil in it can't be bad.God you seem like a boring person to have conversation with in real life. You're one of those people.so you're one of "those" persons who settles for sloppy writing.Stefan is one of "those" people that is in a unique subset of people with very few numbers. He is a rarity.Joey, this is the series that employs an entire fleet that is conveniently off some place else any time something remotely important happens. You expect me to start playing the "sloppy writing" card now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I mean this isn't the case of Star Wars with Luke being the last Jedi left to defeat the Empire, the Academy trains hundreds of Captains to command Starships.Why do they even bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yes but those are just lazy plot moments that can be easily forgotten. In Star Trek (2009) the laziness and infantile-ness is in full display troughout most of the movie.The Wrath Of Khan is a wonderfully thoughtful movie that has a few sloppy plot points.Star Trek (2009) is like a clown-fight on steroids in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Mind over matter.If you don't mind. It doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 That is the philosophy of an idiot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 It's a matter of perspective. Once you swallow the pill that is one torpedo blowing up a small moon....everything else is easy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 You'll be a great Cloud user! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I fully expect the Cloud to go the way of the Death Star! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I'm still waiting for Skynet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I need a vacation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Back to the topic of this thread, here's the latest update on the progress of the script. It's an interview with Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof, and they talk about a whole bunch of stuffhttp://trekmovie.com/2011/06/11/star-trek-sequel-writers-give-script-update-promise-no-remake-talk-vulcan-arcs-more/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yes but those are just lazy plot moments that can be easily forgotten. In Star Trek (2009) the laziness and infantile-ness is in full display troughout most of the movie.The Wrath Of Khan is a wonderfully thoughtful movie that has a few sloppy plot points.Star Trek (2009) is like a clown-fight on steroids in comparison.Be that as it may, the movie never tries to be anything else. It never tries to come across as the new Wrath of Khan. That makes it all the easier to accept.Yes, it begs of the viewer to ignore logic and science for the sake of feel and atmosphere, and maybe abuses that complicity, but one never feels cheated or like the victim of a lazy studio meeting when watching it.It's a simple game: if you play it, you're rewarded with candy. If you don't, you can move on without feeling offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 This movie has apparently fallen 6 months behind in pre-production.Good job Paramount. You brought back a dead franchise, only to kill it by spacing out the next movie 4 years later, just enough time to let viewer apathy to set in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trent B 337 Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 I don't mind if the movie doesn't come out until next year. I'd rather they take the time to film it good and edit stuff down that they don't need in the film, rather than rush it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wycket 36 Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Problem is though that there's not even a finished script yet according to the writers. If they don't start soon there's no way in hell its coming out next year. I imagine May 2013 as the most likely release date at this point. Its a shame, but I'd rather them take time and get it right than rush and mess it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datameister 2,037 Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Obviously, it would have been great to get a quality sequel in a timely fashion, but I, too, am more interested in the quality than in the timely fashion. Who knows if it'll do well, but if they deliver a solid film a few years down the line, I won't complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 No new news on a sequel movie, but there's a game coming out written by Orci and Kurtzmanhttp://www.slashfilm.com/video-game-bits-michael-fox-back-future-game-star-trek-game-drop-2012-star-wars-kinect-trailer/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Small update from JJ Abrams: He says the film COULD still hit that June 2012 release datehttp://trekmovie.com/2011/06/15/jj-abrams-star-trek-is-six-months-behind-admits-might-be-spread-too-thin/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 with subpar VFX? because that just next year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Meanwhile Simon Pegg says its filming this fallhttp://www.cinemablend.com/new/Simon-Pegg-Says-It-s-Common-Knowledge-That-Star-Trek-2-Probably-Shoots-This-Fall-25195.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Nikki Finke predicts that production will start on January and that Paramount is giving Star Trek 2's release date to G.I. Joe 2.This shouldn't affect the casting, apparently.http://www.deadline.com/2011/07/jj-abrams-directing-star-trek-2-but-g-i-joe-sequel-will-get-his-july-29-2012-release-slot/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 JJ Abrams officially confirmed to direct Star Trek sequelhttp://www.slashfilm.com/jj-abrams-officially-commits-star-trek-sequel/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneBuckFilms 319 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Can't wait to hear what Michael Giacchino does with his themes for the sequel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,281 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Yea, I'm excited too - one of the few scores to look forward to in 2013 (I'm not expecting it to be ready in time for 2012) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now