Last Star Trek film officially highest grossing and attended film in Trek franchise
- Thread starter XiaNaphryz
- Start date
- Status
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Flawed but still totally awesome movie that helps me forget the pain of Transformers 2 and Terminator 4.
More please.
More please.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Regarding the International Numbers, Japan has given the movie it's highest honor. They anthropomorphized the ships..
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Oh god what have you done.DrForester said:
How About No
Member
WhatDrForester said:
wait I wouldn't be surprised by this
And is this an abnormally long wait for the DVD to come out? I swear this has been a long wait...
gamergirly
Member
I thought it was very good. And doesn't have ONE character dominating unlike some other movies. Gives it a multiple dimensional aspect. That's why I loved The Dark Knight so much. It wasnt all about Batman
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
It'll only have been like 6 or 7 months or so since the movie premiered. Wolverine hit DVD about 5 or 6 months after.How About No said:
Escape Goat
Member
"Couldn't you have waited 5 more seconds? He wasn't going to tell us who was behind the assassination!"
"You want to go back?"
"No! Its cold! Damn cold!"
lawl
"You want to go back?"
"No! Its cold! Damn cold!"
lawl
Escape Goat
Member
Mar_ said:
sex romp? star trek? What universe are you from!
bluescreenoflife
Banned
Mar_ said:
A trailer? Trying to make people think the movie is exciting? Get out!
bluescreenoflife
Banned
Mama Robotnik said:
"The line must be drawn HERE!"
Stewart is class, but honestly...
Star Trek XI >>> First Contact > Wrath of Khan >> Undiscovered Country
If you can make people who aren't fans of the franchise cry within literally 10 minutes of the film rolling, and applaud at the end, you've fucking succeeded. I could go on for hours about all the little flairs
LAWL GET IT
BattleMonkey
Member
george_us said:
Pretty much, the casting was so amazing and the production quality was top notch, if this looked like your standard Star Trek film visually and didn't involve such new talent, it would have been a pretty crappy film.
Son of Godzilla
Banned
It was pretty goddamn hokey. Kurtz/Orci definitely had too strong of a hand. But whatever, I'm sure it'll improve. And if not it ain't the biggest deal.omg rite said:
WyndhamPrice
Member
I think Lindelof's direct involvement in the next one will probably iron out a lot of writing issues.
Spotless Mind
Member
I think you meant create more issues. He's a shit writer.WyndhamPrice said:
bluescreenoflife
Banned
Spotless Mind said:
benjipwns
Banned
The script was pretty bad. Romulan pissed at main character he has ties to gets a big ship, wants to take revenge, and blow up everything in sight.omg rite said:
Did you like it when it was called Star Trek: Nemesis?
(At least that had a pretty solid space battle amid the dune buggies, psychic rape and fist fight over a bottomless pit.)
Or Chris Pine, Zach Quinto, Karl Urban and Bruce Greenwood?
What exacting was "well written" about the characters? Troubled kid who saves the day? Cocky dick who loses his mom and comes around?
bluescreenoflife
Banned
benjipwns said:
Characters need to stray from archetypes in order to be well written? So then 99% of movies are shit.
benjipwns said:
I'm not going to bother arguing when you obviously just don't like the story. I thought the time travel in order to split continuity was a great way to reboot the series without actually rebooting it.
Okay, but I do have to comment on this. How int he world were Chris Pine or Quinto "wasted?" They were the main characters and played their parts very well.
benjipwns
Banned
So I take it you loved Star Trek: Nemesis' story.omg rite said:
It was a stupid way to reboot it because they basically are just going to throw out anything they don't like about the old continuity or about the characters anyways so what's the point? To have Leonard Nimoy in the movie? To do time travel just because?
Should have had George Clooney build a time machine to go back to try and save his parents but it blows up in transit turning Bruce Wayne into Christian Bale. That's a great way to save the old Batman movie continuity while throwing all of it completely out and starting over!
Why not just call it like it is, "okay we've got this generic Sci-Fi action film but we're going to plaster a Star Trek skin on it to up the budget, and it's a different continuity and you don't need to know anything, so have fun with lasers and stuff!" Why did they even need the old continuity? It's the thing that throws all the plot holes into the story. (Especially since the only background for Nero is a lecture from Nimoy during one of those plot holes.)
I didn't say they were wasted. I said Bana was. Should have read "Or was it Chris..."
Spotless Mind
Member
Oh god that scene was so stilted and awful. I was embarrassed for Nimoy. :lolbenjipwns said:
The story was a mediocre rehash of many Star Trek tropes, but my real issue was the screenplay. It was a non-stop barrage of forced one liners and attempts at comedy. It was puerile and not much better than Orci and Kurtzman's Transformers dreck.
Spotless Mind said:
Completely agreed - how people can bash Transformers 2 (which is a very, very shitty movie) and yet gush about the virtues of Star Trek just baffles me. I really wanted the movie to be good, and it turned out to have a paper-thin plot with more plot holes than Heroes Seasons 2 and 3 combined.
Hopefully Damon Lindelof can write a serviceable screenplay for the sequel... (since the next one will likely make more money than Star Trek 2009)
Escape Goat
Member
how many times am i going to see the word "dreck" today? Its like someone said it and now everyone ahs to!
bluescreenoflife
Banned
benjipwns said:
Except that the old Star Trek timeline was beloved, and Batman Forever/Batman & Robin were complete and utter horse shit. So your analogy has more holes in it than the plot of Star Trek XI.
I can understand a more hardcore Trek fan than I being a bit miffed at some things that were lost in translation, but how the fuck was it a "generic sci fi movie" with a "star trek skin"? Every detail of the movie oozed "Star Trek but slightly more Hard Sci-Fi". What you say implies that if Star Trek never existed, this script could have been written exactly as-is, and it just would have had different names for everything. But this movie really couldn't have been written without all the Star Trek continuity that came before, even if it isn't relevant for the characters in the new time line.
bluescreenoflife
Banned
Spotless Mind said:
Ok, now you really just sound like a 50 year old TOS diehard that thinks the movie should have looked identical to the TV show, even though it's design was born out of limited resources, and thinks that this new movie has "erased" all of your great Star Trek moments with the new timeline, even though the DVDs are sitting right there on your fucking shelf.
You're now trying to mask this discontent that you would have felt no matter how this new movie turned out by jumping on the writing and acting like you just have way better taste than everyone. Transformers 2 was completely trite, but the one-liners in Star Trek weren't forced, and the comedy was actually enjoyable. Yes I know your opinion is the contrary, but if you look at the general response to the movie, yours is the minority report.
benjipwns
Banned
Uh, how?
It took the basic concepts of the series that everyone already knows from pop culture. Everything else was thrown out and it oozed "generic sci-fi action flick."
It took the designs of the series, yes, in making a ship called Enterprise, and a black girl named Uhura and an Asian named Sulu. And there's Romulans and Vulcans. And Vulcans are very logical. Those aren't really any different from the basics that are in Roddenbury's original ten page outline. I guess if that's all you need for something to "ooze Star Trek" then it did, but that still doesn't answer why tie it to continuity if you're just using the second chapter of Making of Star Trek?
It took the basic concepts of the series that everyone already knows from pop culture. Everything else was thrown out and it oozed "generic sci-fi action flick."
I'm not miffed at anything being lost in translation, I'm saying it's stupid to even tie it to the old continuity instead of simply taking the core basics and going somewhere else with it. Even if that somewhere is into a wall.
Other than the whole Nero comes through time with Spock that is lectured to us in two seconds, it couldn't? What else did it use the old continuity for?
It took the designs of the series, yes, in making a ship called Enterprise, and a black girl named Uhura and an Asian named Sulu. And there's Romulans and Vulcans. And Vulcans are very logical. Those aren't really any different from the basics that are in Roddenbury's original ten page outline. I guess if that's all you need for something to "ooze Star Trek" then it did, but that still doesn't answer why tie it to continuity if you're just using the second chapter of Making of Star Trek?
And in the end, neither one has anything to do with the films that came after.
bluescreenoflife
Banned
benjipwns said:
Gonna wait for "It's not canon!"
bluescreenoflife
Banned
benjipwns said:
You're asking me why the production team decided to do something (Not just do a Batman Begins reboot). I can't give you a definitive answer, but what I did try and say is that people who hold your view of the film would be satisfied by no answer they could give because you dislike the result.
Spotless Mind
Member
No. :lol I've only seen a handful of the original series and don't give a shit about the timeline or any of that stuff. I don't like Trek that much outside a few of the movies - First Contact, Undiscovered Country and Khan. I just thought it was an incredibly mediocre action movie, with a moronic screenplay. No amount of JJ Abrams flashiness and overuse of lens flare could hide that fact. Go ahead and keep jumping to conclusions. It's funny.bluescreenoflife said:
bluescreenoflife
Banned
Spotless Mind said:
I jumped to a conclusion because if you went to TrekMovie.com in the days after the movie's release, you could see hundreds of comments on the screenplay that read almost identically to yours, coming from the kinds of people I described. Spewing bile on writers because they try to write for a bit broader audience, when they are still infinitely more talented than Brannon and Braga who made a joke of Trek to the general public for the last 15 years. And these same people never cried so foul at something like Star Trek Insurrection.
benjipwns
Banned
But it's two separate issues. I don't care for the movie because it's simply an average at best movie, not Star Trek movie, not Star Trek anything, just in terms of being a movie.bluescreenoflife said:
And it's made worse because they for some reason wanted to tie it to the old continuity, and almost all the terrible plot holes that take it from an average and boring movie to a just plain bad movie come from that desire to tie it. I was simply asking if you could think of any kind of good reason to do it that way. I have no idea why anyone would think of this idea and used the Batman analogy as an extreme example to prove the point.
If they had ditched all the time travel bullshit, forgot about old Spock, made Nero some pissed off Romulan for some other reason would it have lost anything? Could they have spent more time giving Nero reason for his anger, could they cut out all the stupidity old Spock brought to the film, fleshed out more of the crew beyond their basic stereotypical concepts? Maybe. Maybe not. Depends on the writers I guess.
But still, I would have rather they completely rebooted it with zero ties to the old series outside of the basic outline of TOS. I think it probably it would have been better. There certainly would have been more interesting things happening. I'm interested in the next film because they don't have to bother with any of the stupid time travel crap. They are basically rebooting it, creating a whole new timeline and the old one only exists with old Spock hanging about Vulcan, otherwise the other one never existed anyway. So why didn't they just do that? Especially since they reduced the explanation, along with Nero's backstory, all to a lecture. While leaving all the plot holes it created all over the place.
omg rite said:
No it wasn't. It was stupid and written by shit writers.
Why was a MINING ship so gigantic and loaded with enough weapons to take out 47 military Klingon ships in no time? It makes no sense.
What was the logic behind Nero going back in time to kill all Vulcans because Spock wasn't fast enough to save his planet? How the hell did that prevent genocide? He just killed the only race who was willing to help.
How was a supernova a threat to the whole galaxy?
How does the blackhole easily transport spock and nero around at the start but completely wrecks the ship later on?
How was Captain Archers dog able to live till like 100 years old?
What was the logic behind Nero going back in time to kill all Vulcans because Spock wasn't fast enough to save his planet? How the hell did that prevent genocide? He just killed the only race who was willing to help.
How was a supernova a threat to the whole galaxy?
How does the blackhole easily transport spock and nero around at the start but completely wrecks the ship later on?
How was Captain Archers dog able to live till like 100 years old?
The movie was good but could have been ten times better with a better script.
benjipwns
Banned
To be fair, the first three are answered in the four issue comic prequel.
It's a BORG modified mining ship, for example. Oh, and Nero was really really really pissed. That's why he sat around for twenty-five years and never mellowed out or had anyone question his plan. Which is why it never occurred to take this 150+ year advanced technology and build the Romulan Empire into a galactic empire that would also know how to stop the supernova when it came up centuries later.
It's a BORG modified mining ship, for example. Oh, and Nero was really really really pissed. That's why he sat around for twenty-five years and never mellowed out or had anyone question his plan. Which is why it never occurred to take this 150+ year advanced technology and build the Romulan Empire into a galactic empire that would also know how to stop the supernova when it came up centuries later.
British Monsoon
Member
Huh, well there's no accouting for taste.
- Status