Support NeoGAF

[Cheebo]

And that's only a couple of plotholes I've named. There are lots of them. Like the supernova reaching Romulus almost instantly, Nero not doing anything for twenty-five years, Nero knowing when and where Spock would show up, to name a few more.

Not once is it implied the supernova hit Romulus almost instantly.

Spock stated when the sun went Supernova it was charted that it would cross Romulus on it's path and he started to try to come up with a solution to save Romulus. But by the time he did it was too late. Clearly he wouldn't be able to meet with Romulus government (which was shown on screen),come up with a solution to the supernova, and acquire a vessel immediately after the sun wen't supernova.

You are really reaching here.

 

[StopMakingSense]

Because it's ridiculous to selectively choose which ships have shields and which don't? Especially in the same battle? Why does a Romulan warbird, one of the most impressive ships of that era, get dissolved by a single phaser by one of these turrets as if they didn't have any shielding at all, but these turrets and the shield generator itself have them?

There are effectively 2 types of shields in Star Trek - skin and bubble. And they are used interchangeably throughout.

 

[Divvy]

Because the black hole is separated by miles of rock? All I'm saying is that, from my perspective, they're both equally difficult circumstances. If you can escape a black hole with an explosion, I don't see why you couldn't teleport a person away that's separated from one by miles of rock.

Well it's a black hole and it emits various forms of radiation and particles. I agree that the exploding the warp cores ending was bullshit and not needed though.

Because the Warbird's shields were already drained and the episode only showed what happened after its shields went down. I have no idea what point you're trying to make. I already said it was dumb in DS9, but can be rationalized as I have done. I'm applying the same standards to both forms of mediums. What more do you want?

I'm pretty sure they weren't facing any resistane before the turrets came online so I don't know where the shields could have been drained, but fair enough, this is neither here nor there and I think we deviated far from the initial point.

There are effectively 2 types of shields in Star Trek - skin and bubble. And they are used interchangeably throughout.

I'm aware of both but when you look at any of the large scale battles in DS9, the ships are clearly lacking any shields and taking hull damage.

 

[JB1981]

What do Trek fans think of the director's edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture ?

 

[The Librarian]

Not once is it implied the supernova hit Romulus almost instantly.

Spock stated when the sun went Supernova it was charted that it would cross Romulus on it's path and he started to try to come up with a solution to save Romulus. But by the time he did it was too late. Clearly he wouldn't be able to meet with Romulus government (which was shown on screen),come up with a solution to the supernova, and acquire a vessel immediately after the sun wen't supernova.

You are really reaching here.

Um...what? Do you know basic science? How in the world am I reaching? You do know the star that went supernova was 500 light years away from Romulus, right? And that the ejection speed of a supernova DOESN'T move at the speed of light, right? Which means Spock and crew would've had over 500 years to solve the problem. Meaning there's no way it could've reached Romulus as fast as it did. Hell, it wouldn't have reached Romulus in Spock's lifetime. Then there's also the point that Spock still deployed a blackhole after Romulus was destroyed...for whatever reason.

Well it's a black hole and it emits various forms of radiation and particles.

True, but the radiation has to penetrate all that rock and whatever material the planet is made of.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

What do Trek fans think of the director's edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture ?

I was at Comic-Con the summer they announced it, and at the time, people seemed universally happy it was happening. Robert Wise was there, talking about the changes he wanted to make, all that.

Watching it, though - I dont' think the film is really affected all that much by the changes. It got a cosmetic pass, and some of those cosmetic additions are okay, but overall - I personally can't say I really prefer one cut over the other.

I think most Star Trek fans would put on the Director's Edition over the theatrical if given the choice, but either way, the movie isn't really helped OR hurt by the changes.

Plus the fact the SFX updates were done in standard def means there probably won't be a hi-def version of it, so it'll end up becoming an expensive asterisk in Star Trek movie history as we move forward. I can't imagine Paramount ponying up the dough to take another run at it after the Director's Edition failed to really improve feelings on the film to any measurable degree.

 

[maharg]

Natural space phenomena that have effects that propagate at FTL speed are basically a dime a dozen in trek. I don't think it was intended to be a 'normal' supernova. And even normal supernovae have effects that eventually reach into the tens of lightyears.

There's bad science in ST09 for sure, but people focus on some really pointless things sometimes.

 

[Divvy]

Anyways back on topic. How's the soundtrack for this movie? Does it match the amazing one from the first movie?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

most of it is up on YouTube already.

 

[Divvy]

most of it is up on YouTube already.

Oh, right, totally forgot to look.

<3 Giacchino

EDIT: actually, are there spoilers in the song titles?

 

[lastplayed]

Source? Or is this something you've come the conclusion of after seeing various evidence?

It's been pretty well established in various movies and TV episodes, and since the Federation formed before the events of the Kelvin, we have no reason to believe it's any different in Abrams' universe.

 

[Dead Man]

Natural space phenomena that have effects that propagate at FTL speed are basically a dime a dozen in trek. I don't think it was intended to be a 'normal' supernova. And even normal supernovae have effects that eventually reach into the tens of lightyears.

There's bad science in ST09 for sure, but people focus on some really pointless things sometimes.

I don't know, when something is the instigation for the whole story, it makes sense to think about it a bit I think.

 

[maharg]

I don't know, when something is the instigation for the whole story, it makes sense to think about it a bit I think.

Ok. So let's think about, say, Inner Light. Apparently this civilization lives in basically mud huts but can make a slower than lightspeed space probe (launched with chemical rockets no less!) that can not only scan an alien spaceship through its super-advanced forcefield of a shield but also telepathically take control of a person on board it and embed an entire lifetime of thoughts into him. Does this strike you as a likely progression of technology?

It doesn't matter because the story is good and you probably liked it (I'm assuming, because most people do). But the premise of it is bunk, as is the premise of a lot of good SF. I'm not saying you have to LIKE ST09 because other SF (including Trek) has stupid premises, I'm just saying that you may as well just stick with the fact that you didn't like it instead of holding it to a higher standard post-facto.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Natural space phenomena that have effects that propagate at FTL speed are basically a dime a dozen in trek. I don't think it was intended to be a 'normal' supernova. And even normal supernovae have effects that eventually reach into the tens of lightyears.

There's bad science in ST09 for sure, but people focus on some really pointless things sometimes.

You could justify anything if you're willing to do the right mental gymnastics, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect them to give at least a brief explanation for it given that supernovas are real things and are nothing like 09 seems to imply. Especially given that it's core to Nero's motivation. Then again, st09 has no problem with axing scenes that give him any kind of depth, to the point where you have to assume he's literally insane to make sense of his actions.

 

[Dead Man]

Ok. So let's think about, say, Inner Light. Apparently this civilization lives in basically mud huts but can make a slower than lightspeed space probe (launched with chemical rockets no less!) that can not only scan an alien spaceship through its super-advanced forcefield of a shield but also telepathically take control of a person on board it and embed an entire lifetime of thoughts into him. Does this strike you as a likely progression of technology?

It doesn't matter because the story is good and you probably liked it (I'm assuming, because most people do). But the premise of it is bunk, as is the premise of a lot of good SF. I'm not saying you have to LIKE ST09 because other SF (including Trek) has stupid premises, I'm just saying that you may as well just stick with the fact that you didn't like it instead of holding it to a higher standard post-facto.

I don't know that it is a higher standard post facto, just that you have had more time to examine it after viewing. People like to talk about movies, they like to discuss the merits of them, and when people (not necessarily the film makers) use science to say something is plausible, it is not unreasonable to examine that.

You seem to be suggesting that people should only talk about certain aspects of a movie, and not others. Personally, I didn't like it as soon as I watched it (ST09), and to not be able to talk about the things that I thought were sub standard because other people do like it strikes me as not being very fun at all.

Having just looked up Inner Light, that would be something I talked about afterwards, as being something that was stupid. Why should I not be able to do that just because the rest of the episode was good?

 

[Divvy]

The plot holes were pretty big, ESPECIALLY pertaining to how little of the supernova and Nero's motivations were explained. But I forgive the movie for that somewhat because I hear they were screwed over by the writer's strike.

 

[maharg]

You could justify anything if you're willing to do the right mental gymnastics, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect them to give at least a brief explanation for it given that supernovas are real things and are nothing like 09 seems to imply. Especially given that it's core to Nero's motivation. Then again, st09 has no problem with axing scenes that give him any kind of depth, to the point where you have to assume he's literally insane to make sense of his actions.

My point really has more to do with the fact that it's almost certainly not *why* anyone would dislike ST09. It's an event that happens before the story really begins and is only there to give the barest motivation to the character's actions. It could have been a giant space monkey and it would have made no difference.

It's just the kind of nitpick that people come up with AFTER they decide they dislike something.

I don't know that it is a higher standard post facto, just that you have had more time to examine it after viewing. People like to talk about movies, they like to discuss the merits of them, and when people (not necessarily the film makers) use science to say something is plausible, it is not unreasonable to examine that.

You seem to be suggesting that people should only talk about certain aspects of a movie, and not others. Personally, I didn't like it as soon as I watched it (ST09), and to not be able to talk about the things that I thought were sub standard because other people do like it strikes me as not being very fun at all.

Having just looked up Inner Light, that would be something I talked about afterwards, as being something that was stupid. Why should I not be able to do that just because the rest of the episode was good?

I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm trying to say anything about what people can or can't talk about. Talk about it all you want, it still seems like by far one of the silliest criticisms of the film possible to me. There's things that happen in the main action of the film that matter far more and are far worse. And if I think it's silly, I have as much right to talk about how silly it is as you do to talk about it in the first place.

 

[JB1981]

I was at Comic-Con the summer they announced it, and at the time, people seemed universally happy it was happening. Robert Wise was there, talking about the changes he wanted to make, all that.

Watching it, though - I dont' think the film is really affected all that much by the changes. It got a cosmetic pass, and some of those cosmetic additions are okay, but overall - I personally can't say I really prefer one cut over the other.

I think most Star Trek fans would put on the Director's Edition over the theatrical if given the choice, but either way, the movie isn't really helped OR hurt by the changes.

Plus the fact the SFX updates were done in standard def means there probably won't be a hi-def version of it, so it'll end up becoming an expensive asterisk in Star Trek movie history as we move forward. I can't imagine Paramount ponying up the dough to take another run at it after the Director's Edition failed to really improve feelings on the film to any measurable degree.

Ahh so THAT's why the DC is not available on blu. I did not know that. How silly of them
to make the updates in standard def lol

 

[FullMetalx117]

Anyone else seeing this in IMAX?

 

[JB1981]

Anyone else seeing this in IMAX?

Thought about it but honestly I don't even like IMAX. Saw TDKR in IMAX and really did not enjoy the experience. The screen is too close and the non IMAX scenes looked weird

 

[witness]

Anyone else seeing this in IMAX?

Yes sir. Seems that's the way to see it since 30 minutes were shot with imax cameras and from the sound of it the 3D was really well done.

 

[drunkendonuts]

Up at paramount studios tonight to watch an advance screening in 3d (I worked on the conversion, hope y'all enjoy it!) I can't wait to watch!

 

[a secret-boss]

Just saw it. really enjoyed it. A lot people clap at certain scenes.

 

[Dead Man]

I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm trying to say anything about what people can or can't talk about. Talk about it all you want, it still seems like by far one of the silliest criticisms of the film possible to me. There's things that happen in the main action of the film that matter far more and are far worse. And if I think it's silly, I have as much right to talk about how silly it is as you do to talk about it in the first place.

Obviously you are not making rules about what people can talk about, but when someone says 'It is stupid to talk about x' it generally means they wish people wouldn't talk about x.

Just because it is a criticism you don't share does not mean it is an inherently silly criticism. A poor set up for a plot is a poor set up for a plot. It doesn't really matter when you decide it is poor. It may only be on reflection after having watched the movie some time ago. Doesn't mean they are only complaining about x because they don't like the rest of the movie.

It is a small thing, sure. And a common type of thing in movies. Doesn't mean it isn't worth talking about.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Natural space phenomena that have effects that propagate at FTL speed are basically a dime a dozen in trek. I don't think it was intended to be a 'normal' supernova. And even normal supernovae have effects that eventually reach into the tens of lightyears.

There's bad science in ST09 for sure, but people focus on some really pointless things sometimes.

According to the Star Trek Online backstory the supernova was supposed to have been engineered by the Iconians, so we can explain it away as a result of technological magic.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

According to the Star Trek Online backstory the supernova was supposed to have been engineered by the Iconians, so we can explain it away as a result of technological magic.

 

[derFeef]

Just saw it. really enjoyed it. A lot people clap at certain scenes.

What, people do that? I never experienced that.

 

[Jables Swan]

What, people do that? I never experienced that.

Not sure if serious but this

 

[derFeef]

Not sure if serious but this

Austrians are prim and boring.
I experience laughs, screams and sometimes even one liners like "did you see that? holy fuck!", but never applause.

 

[Dommo]

What, people do that? I never experienced that.

Not sure where you live but in Australia, it's not a common thing. Apparently it very much is in the US, primarily for big blockbusters. It sort of blew my mind that this kind of thing happens. I'm torn on it. On one hand, I think it would make the film seem like an event and has the capacity to be incredibly memorable just because of the great energy in the theatre. On the other, I kind of just want to watch the film.

 

[Jables Swan]

Austrians are prim and boring.
I experience laughs, screams and sometimes even one liners like "did you see that? holy fuck!", but never applause.

I'm with you mate. (Australians for me though.)

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Not sure where you live but in Australia, it's not a common thing. Apparently it very much is in the US, primarily for big blockbusters. It sort of blew my mind that this kind of thing happens. I'm torn on it. On one hand, I think it would make the film seem like an event and has the capacity to be incredibly memorable just because of the great energy in the theatre. On the other, I kind of just want to watch the film.

We don't get much of it in the UK but I remember when I went to see one of the Shrek movies the audience laughed so loud and for so long that I couldn't hear the dialogue shortly afterwards. I find it just a little bit obnoxious.

 

[Solo]

Seeing it in 3 days. Excite!

 

[cbox]

A coworker of mine recently suddenly passed away. He was a huge trek fan and talked about it endlessly day after day. He was incredibly excited for this movie but sadly won't be able to watch it. The company we work for generously rented out the entire theatre on release day and offered everyone a ticket in his memory. Here's to hoping this movie rocks!

 

[Dead Man]

A coworker of mine recently suddenly passed away. He was a huge trek fan and talked about it endlessly day after day. He was incredibly excited for this movie but sadly won't be able to watch it. The company we work for generously rented out the entire theatre on release day and offered everyone a ticket in his memory. Here's to hoping this movie rocks!

Damn. That is a truly awesome gesture by the company.

 

[voodooray]

A coworker of mine recently suddenly passed away. He was a huge trek fan and talked about it endlessly day after day. He was incredibly excited for this movie but sadly won't be able to watch it. The company we work for generously rented out the entire theatre on release day and offered everyone a ticket in his memory. Here's to hoping this movie rocks!

That's a very nice gesture by your work place. If there's room, see if you can suggest keeping free the best seat in the house in their memory. If you liked the 2009 reboot, you'll love this one.

 

[cbox]

That's a very nice gesture by your work place. If there's room, see if you can suggest keeping free the best seat in the house in their memory. If you liked the 2009 reboot, you'll love this one.

It really is! I wasn't always a trek fan, I used to watch TNG with my older brother growing up but it was mainly something that was on, rather than something I went out of my way to watch. Abrams really sparked my interest with the new flick as he did with so many others, so I'm assuming I'll love this version - I've done a media blackout so everything should be fresh when we all head over later this week.

 

[Wilbur]

I've never seen anything with the name Star Trek outside of the 09 reboot. Not a thing. Apart from that gif of Shatner going fucko. I can't exactly remember ST09 because I saw it drunk and went to Nandos after, ate what must have amounted to at least two battery farms, and then fucked off home. So I haven't been hyped for this one at all apart from Cumberbatch being in it. Like, at all. The trailers just looked like explosions, I'm generally not fussed about any of the mythology so couldn't be happy or pissed at any rumours. It just existed as an upcoming film.

Saw it today.

It's the best Star Wars movie ever.

Like, it's just fucking top notch blockbuster entertainment. It looks beautiful, it's one of the few films I've seen since Avatar (which I loathed) wherein you really get a sense that a lot of money has been spent on this and none of it is wasted. It sounds great. It's acted more than competently by most and knocked out of the park by a few - Cumberbatch, Weller, Greenwood and Quinto are all superb. Saldana and Eve are so fucking hot I wanna make a Vulcan sign and finger bang them both at the same time. It was exciting and loud and colourful and funny and made sense and didnt sag in the middle.

And it was directed the hell out of. The problem with Star Wars is that it's built up this mythology because it was so different, because every director and critic starting today was the right age for it. And pretty soon the OG Wars won't have that effect because it'll be things like LOTR. And hopefully this Trek. And hopefully the new Star Wars. Because its in the right fucking hands with JJ Abrams.

Sculli, you're banned right now LOOOOOL WHAT FOR YOU OAF. But when you return, join me in the BJ of JJ.

 

[Karak]

I've never seen anything with the name Star Trek outside of the 09 reboot. Not a thing. Apart from that gif of Shatner going fucko. I can't exactly remember ST09 because I saw it drunk and went to Nandos after, ate what must have amounted to at least two battery farms, and then fucked off home. So I haven't been hyped for this one at all apart from Cumberbatch being in it. Like, at all. The trailers just looked like explosions, I'm generally not fussed about any of the mythology so couldn't be happy or pissed at any rumours. It just existed as an upcoming film.

Saw it today.

It's the best Star Wars movie ever.

Like, it's just fucking top notch blockbuster entertainment. It looks beautiful, it's one of the few films I've seen since Avatar (which I loathed) wherein you really get a sense that a lot of money has been spent on this and none of it is wasted. It sounds great. It's acted more than competently by most and knocked out of the park by a few - Cumberbatch, Weller, Greenwood and Quinto are all superb. Saldana and Eve are so fucking hot I wanna make a Vulcan sign and finger bang them both at the same time. It was exciting and loud and colourful and funny and made sense and didnt sag in the middle.

And it was directed the hell out of. The problem with Star Wars is that it's built up this mythology because it was so different, because every director and critic starting today was the right age for it. And pretty soon the OG Wars won't have that effect because it'll be things like LOTR. And hopefully this Trek. And hopefully the new Star Wars. Because its in the right fucking hands with JJ Abrams.

Sculli, you're banned right now LOOOOOL WHAT FOR YOU OAF. But when you return, join me in the BJ of JJ.

What now? I am thinking its just a typo or maybe you are teasing?
EDIT: No its a typo I think. Good stuff.

 

[Messypandas]

I've never seen anything with the name Star Trek outside of the 09 reboot. Not a thing. Apart from that gif of Shatner going fucko. I can't exactly remember ST09 because I saw it drunk and went to Nandos after, ate what must have amounted to at least two battery farms, and then fucked off home. So I haven't been hyped for this one at all apart from Cumberbatch being in it. Like, at all. The trailers just looked like explosions, I'm generally not fussed about any of the mythology so couldn't be happy or pissed at any rumours. It just existed as an upcoming film.

Saw it today.

It's the best Star Wars movie ever.

Like, it's just fucking top notch blockbuster entertainment. It looks beautiful, it's one of the few films I've seen since Avatar (which I loathed) wherein you really get a sense that a lot of money has been spent on this and none of it is wasted. It sounds great. It's acted more than competently by most and knocked out of the park by a few - Cumberbatch, Weller, Greenwood and Quinto are all superb. Saldana and Eve are so fucking hot I wanna make a Vulcan sign and finger bang them both at the same time. It was exciting and loud and colourful and funny and made sense and didnt sag in the middle.

And it was directed the hell out of. The problem with Star Wars is that it's built up this mythology because it was so different, because every director and critic starting today was the right age for it. And pretty soon the OG Wars won't have that effect because it'll be things like LOTR. And hopefully this Trek. And hopefully the new Star Wars. Because its in the right fucking hands with JJ Abrams.

Sculli, you're banned right now LOOOOOL WHAT FOR YOU OAF. But when you return, join me in the BJ of JJ.

 

[Tookay]

What now? I am thinking its just a typo or maybe you are teasing?

He's saying it's basically a Star Wars movie and that JJ is perfect for SW because he basically made Trek into Wars.

 

[Karak]

He's saying it's basically a Star Wars movie and that JJ is perfect for SW because he basically made Trek into Wars.

Thanks. I must be tired.
However JJ needs to keep his hands away from Star Wars. Jezuz

 

[jett]

Well, the new Star Trek also reminded me a lot of the Star Wars movies.







The Star Wars prequels, I mean.

 

[Wilbur]

He's saying it's basically a Star Wars movie and that JJ is perfect for SW because he basically made Trek into Wars.

This. Not fussed about old Star Trek, don't really have an interest in catching up. The old Star Wars movies are good fun let down by their age showing, because - as fun as they are - I'm not of a generation where it blew my fucking mind, and I find it harder to suspend my disbelief when everything looks a bit cheap and shoddy. STID looked great, was great fun, and was basically just a proper good blockbuster. Me likey.

 

[Won]

And in an odd twist the new Star Wars movies will end up being like Star Trek movies.

 

[StopMakingSense]

O rad I finally got free tix off that FB promo after like 2 fucking weeks of entering. Free trek!

 

[nib95]

Saw it earlier and loved it. It was a bit cheesy, and some of the characters a bit weak (the main general and his daughter), but all the other main characters put in absolutely solid performances. Cumberbatch, oh my. Completely wrecked havoc with the role and stole the lime light every time he was on screen. Visually the film was gorgeous, the ships, planets, London in the future etc. Gorgeous. All in all, really entertaining and spectacular, much preferred it to Iron Man 3.

 

[Ashhong]

30 minutes of this was filmed in IMAX? dammit...now I have to spend extra...

 

[inm8num2]

JJ was on The Daily Show tonight. It's funny that he mentions in most of his interviews that he didn't like ST growing up and the conversation shifts to why he enjoyed SW. Then he talks about making a ST movie that is more appealing to wider audiences. Then the discussion focuses on SW, LOL.

ST fans must be steaming out of their ears.

 

[See You Next Wednesday]

JJ was on The Daily Show tonight. It's funny that he mentions in most of his interviews that he didn't like ST growing up and the conversation shifts to why he enjoyed SW. Then he talks about making a ST movie that is more appealing to wider audiences. Then the discussion focuses on SW, LOL.

ST fans must be steaming out of their ears.

Figures. His first Star Trek movie shitted up the franchise & this looks to be no different.