Star Trek RELOADED... *ahem* (SPOILER ALERT OBVIOUSLY)

NoLongerNoLonger
edited May 2009 in Movies and Shows
It is pretty damn awesome. I'm not going to say much more, but everything was PERFECT.

The only thing I'm disappointed by is that there were no Klingons, and that was perfect too, because something that isn't there can't have flaws.
«1

Comments

  • Drooling IguanaDrooling Iguana
    edited May 2009
    Before this movie, the only Star Trek film not to feature Klingons in any way was Wrath of Khan. A possible pattern?
  • HamelinHamelin
    edited May 2009
    Movie was amazing, and all the casting choices were wonderful.

    Especially Scotty.
  • illithid235illithid235
    edited May 2009
    ESPECIALLY Scotty. I concur... great movie.
  • mariomario
    edited May 2009
    J.J. Abrams has, beyond all my expectations, renewed my faith in the franchise. Sad that he had to destroy all the canon (except Enterprise) in the process, but on further contemplation, this is exactly what Star Trek needed. Now that they can start fresh, they're no longer bound by the ridiculously convoluted story and can redevelop the characters in interesting new ways. I fully support this, and already eagerly anticipate the next film featuring this cast.

    The only character I didn't like was Chekov. The "nuclear wessels" stuff isn't all that funny anymore, and his attempts to mimic the character's vocal stylings made him difficult to follow at times.

    Also: Spock and Uhura?! I was shocked, but... I approve.
  • illithid235illithid235
    edited May 2009
    I agree totally about the "wessels" thing... apparently the actor was trying to remain faithful to the original character. But I would have much preferred just a straightforward Russian accent.
  • kukopankikukopanki
    edited May 2009
    I have never been involved with any aspect of the Star Trek universe at all! Will I like this film?
  • mariomario
    edited May 2009
    Yes! The movie uses a time travel mechanic to effectively wipe out all events of almost every single Star Trek story ever written, so it truly is a clean start. It's a solid standalone scifi/action flick as a result. Recommended!
  • DrLeopoldStrabismusDrLeopoldStrabismus
    edited May 2009
    So does this mean that the Oceanic 6 CAN change events in the past?

    I was mad when Future Spock was talking to Kirk after they met Scotty; told him that Present Spock could never see him. This never made sense to me in time-travel stories - ESPECIALLY BttF.

    Later, however, FS told PS that this was all just a lie because Kirk is stupid and gullible. I came right there!

    My only concern - what is to become of Capt. Jean-Luc Picard!
  • mariomario
    edited May 2009
    More importantly, what of Tuvok? With six billion vulcans dead in the past, odds are he was never born! *sobs*
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited May 2009
    Wasn't he already born in the time of Kirk? He's old in Voyager. Like 80-100 or something.
  • mariomario
    edited May 2009
    He was somewhat coy about his age in Voyager. I don't recall if they ever definitively pinned it down. But you give me hope!
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited May 2009
    There was that one episode where he was having flashbacks and going insane and shit. So he had a memory where he was on a ship in the old uniform and said he was either 35 or 53 or something. I don't know what the time difference is between the Kirk says and those other ones.

    EDIT of: Holy fucking shit! Some people have a lot of free time on their hands. But we now reap the benefits of their long preparations. Looks like he's about 110 years old in Voyager.
  • mariomario
    edited May 2009
    According to Memory Alpha, Tuvok was born in 2264, but Vulcan was destroyed in 2258 in the new timeline. Sob!
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited May 2009
    It says he was born on the lunar colony. Did it go boom with the planet?
  • illithid235illithid235
    edited May 2009
    Hmm... I don't think they mentioned a lunar colony.
  • VoltageVoltage
    edited May 2009
    kukopanki wrote: »
    I have never been involved with any aspect of the Star Trek universe at all! Will I like this film?

    I have no background in Star Trek, I saw it, and it is easy to understand due to the whole time line restart/origins thing. It was a great movie, truly.
  • Drooling IguanaDrooling Iguana
    edited May 2009
    I saw it today. The first half or so of the movie was decent, but things started to go downhill fast as soon as they set foot on the Enterprise and I was bored out of my mind through the mindless flashy lights and explosions that made up the ending.

    Also, while I won't say that Nero is the worst villain in Star Trek film history (since there's been some pretty fierce competition for that title in the last few movies) he was still right down there with Shinzon et al.

    I definitely won't be seeing this movie again and will be ignoring the inevitable sequels when they come.
  • KhanFusionKhanFusion
    edited May 2009
    I was definately relieved when the movie didn't suck. The previews looked retarded, after all...
  • HamelinHamelin
    edited May 2009
    Uhura's green roommate was hot. Discuss
  • VoltageVoltage
    edited May 2009
    She certainly was. Her red hair was a nice complement to that green skin.
  • Professor MacJakeProfessor MacJake
    edited May 2009
    The movie was good. Good, not great.

    Casting was pretty good, especially Winona Ryder who really stole the screen as Spock's mother. Heh. Heh heh. Get it?
  • DrLeopoldStrabismusDrLeopoldStrabismus
    edited May 2009
    Oh shit was that Winona?
  • Drooling IguanaDrooling Iguana
    edited May 2009
    She got old!

    Like Shawn.
  • FangédFaerieFangédFaerie
    edited May 2009
    I just have one thing to say: Karl Urban as Bones.

    Besides, the previews made it worth going, regardless. Who here doesn't want to see GI Joe? or the next Transformers?
  • SilverwardSilverward
    edited May 2009
    Me.
  • NoLongerNoLonger
    edited May 2009
    Same.
  • waitingfortheencorewaitingfortheencore
    edited May 2009
    I don't want to see them.... But I will anyway.
  • HamelinHamelin
    edited May 2009
    Whatever. You know Transformers 2 will be extremely sparse when it comes to, well, good plot or writing, but damned if it won't look extremely awesome.
  • Drooling IguanaDrooling Iguana
    edited May 2009
    Judging by the trailers it's going to look a lot like Transformers 1, which was the antithesis of extremely awesome.
  • mariomario
    edited May 2009
    Yeah, I didn't find the original Transformers awesome-looking in any way. Unless you like watching robots watching people dry-hump.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2023