Star Trek

[Winchester]

[quote name='Arpy' post='1863274' date='May 9 2009, 11:29 PM']... I saw someone criticizing the original series for being too "cerebral" ...I for one think I [i]liked[/i] the cerebralness.[/quote]
[img]http://www.boingboing.net/images/_images_slideshow_2007_11_gallery_star_trek_monsters_tmmugato.jpg[/img]

[Apotheoun]

That episode (entitled: [i]A Private Little War[/i]) dealt with the moral issue of whether or not the Federation should supply more advanced weapons to the "hunter-gatherer" side in a cultural / economic conflict on the planet Neural, since the Klingon Empire had started supplying more advanced weapons to the people living in villages. So in spite of the "dumb" ape-like costume, the episode's main story element was rather cerebral.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Winchester]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1863718' date='May 10 2009, 07:38 PM']blah blah blah albino monkey[/quote]

[cmotherofpirl]

YES! I have some quibbles with some minor points, but it gets at least an 8 of 10 from me. we are going back to see it tomorrow, there was no later show tonight. It ranks with the wrath of khan and Search for Spock.

but I will miss Vulcan.
Mene Sakkhet Ur Seveh

[ReinnieR]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1862562' date='May 9 2009, 08:42 AM']I saw it Thursday night... it was amazing! I love the original series, and the character dynamics were perfect. though I did NOT like how they did the Kobiyashi Maru... but I can chalk that up to timeline differences, in my mind the way he hacked the computer was always just something that would make things possible, not easy. like Bones once said to Kirk when he had destroyed the Enterprise and stranded them and had said 'my God, what have I done'... and Bones responded "what you had to do, what you always do: turn death into a fighting chance to live."... Kirk should've only been able to make a small tiny tweak to the simulation. but I can chalk it up to his different timeline giving him a different mindset maybe. haha

anyway, I think we need to make a spoilers-included thread to discuss, among other things, the ending![/quote]
I saw it thursday night too. look at the time i started the thread.


[quote name='Aloysius' post='1862562' date='May 9 2009, 08:42 AM']oh, and I was thinking about this and the thought just dawned on me... why in blazes didn't they just have William Shatner play Kirk's FATHER?? duuuuh.[/quote]

That would've been a GREAT idea!!!

[CatherineM]

[quote name='ReinnieR' post='1863996' date='May 10 2009, 11:53 PM']That would've been a GREAT idea!!![/quote]

Shatner would have to play his grandfather.

[ReinnieR]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1864001' date='May 11 2009, 02:01 AM']Shatner would have to play his grandfather.[/quote]
Shatner's age is still young in the 23rd century.

[Arpy]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1863691' date='May 10 2009, 03:02 PM']

A young Winona Ryder?

NO!!!

That is Nellie Oleson (Alison Arngrim) from NBC's [i]Little House on the Prarie[/i] (1974-1983).[/quote]
The relevance escapes me, but that's not surprising given that I was nowhere near being born at that time.

[kafka]

speaking of Winona Ryder, didnt Spock's mother in the new one look a bit like Winona Ryder?

[Arpy]

[quote name='kafka' post='1864016' date='May 10 2009, 09:35 PM']speaking of Winona Ryder, didnt Spock's mother in the new one look a bit like Winona Ryder?[/quote]
She [i]was[/i] Winona Ryder.

[SaintOlaf]

[quote name='Arpy' post='1864020' date='May 11 2009, 02:43 AM']She [i]was[/i] Winona Ryder.[/quote]

[kafka]

well I should say that would explain it.

In my defense I grew up in the late 80s and 90s when she was the leading lady of the time (not to mention every boys dream) so I wasnt ready for her having a non-leading role.

oh the trauma

Edited May 11, 2009 by kafka

[Apotheoun]

I think I am going to call this movie . . . Star Trek: Generation Y

I must admit that I am not happy with the whole idea of rebooting the Star Trek franchise, but that is not my main concern, because I can always watch the old version of the show. There are of course over 700 episodes of Star Trek and ten feature films, and I'm sure they will always be available in some media format. But after watching the new film a second time I began to see some flaws in the new story itself, and below are some of the questions that came to my mind:

[spoiler]1. Can a supernova consume the galaxy? Not likely! One star blowing up and then consuming hundreds of billions of stars! Okay.
2. Spock (the original) leaves Romulus in order to shoot the "red matter" (whatever that is) into the supernova in order to cause it to collapse into a black hole, but while he is [i]en route[/i] to the supernova Romulus -- his point of departure -- is destroyed by it as it expands, while (original) Spock is perfectly safe in his ship. So was Spock flying away from the supernova when he left Romulus? And if so, why was he flying away from it in order to get to it? And if he wasn't flying away from the supernova, but was flying toward it, how did he survive the expansion of the supernova while his point of departure (i.e. Romulus) was obliterated?
3. After Nero destroys the USS Kelvin, why did the Federation simply ignore him (and his very threatening ship) for 25 years?
4. Why did (original) Spock upon exiting the temporal distortion simply surrender to Nero, when he could have rammed his small ship into Nero's in order to prevent him from getting a hold of the "red matter"?
5. Which brings up another question: Why was (original) Spock carrying so much "red matter" on his little ship, when it took only a drop the size of a pea to destroy the supernova?
6. Nero after taking (original) Spock into custody, leaves him on the planet Delta Vega, so that he can watch the destruction of Vulcan, which he sees by simply looking up into the sky: how close is Delta Vega to Vulcan? In the movie it looks like Vulcan orbits Delta Vega (or vice versa). With the proximity of the two planets as it is depicted in the film, shouldn't Delta Vega have been sucked into the Vulcan black hole?[/spoiler]

These are just a few of the questions I thought up after watching the film a second time. That said, as long as a person doesn't think too much about the story (i.e., as long as he turns off his brain for a couple of hours), and simply veges out on the special effects he should be able to enjoy himself, while getting a headache from all the lens flares.

Edited May 11, 2009 by Apotheoun

[CatherineM]

Maybe old Spock surrendered because he is still attempting to re-unite Vulcans and Romulans.

[SaintOlaf]

Another thing to think about...

[spoiler] If the star going super-nova would destroy Romulus, wouldn't causing the star to disappear into a black hole also destroy Romulus? Certainly a star close enough to a planet to consume it in a super-nova would have some effect on the planet's orbit, and life on the planet... destroying the star wouldn't necessarily have saved Romulus in the first place.[/spoiler]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='SaintOlaf' post='1864220' date='May 11 2009, 11:06 AM']Another thing to think about...

[spoiler] If the star going super-nova would destroy Romulus, wouldn't causing the star to disappear into a black hole also destroy Romulus? Certainly a star close enough to a planet to consume it in a super-nova would have some effect on the planet's orbit, and life on the planet... destroying the star wouldn't necessarily have saved Romulus in the first place.[/spoiler][/quote]
In the movie [spoiler]it is a major (or as I call it -- a magical) supernova that is somehow capable of devouring the whole galaxy, but if it were the Romulus systems own star (i.e., its sun), then yes . . . to cause it to collapse into a black hole would destroy Romulus anyway.[/spoiler]

One other thing: a supernova does not have to be artificially turned into a black hole; instead, it automatically creates a black hole.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Apotheoun

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1864085' date='May 11 2009, 03:49 AM']I think I am going to call this movie . . . Star Trek: Generation Y

I must admit that I am not happy with the whole idea of rebooting the Star Trek franchise, but that is not my main concern, because I can always watch the old version of the show. There are of course over 700 episodes of Star Trek and ten feature films, and I'm sure they will always be available in some media format. But after watching the new film a second time I began to see some flaws in the new story itself, and below are some of the questions that came to my mind:

[spoiler]1. Can a supernova consume the galaxy? Not likely! One star blowing up and then consuming hundreds of billions of stars! Okay.
2. Spock (the original) leaves Romulus in order to shoot the "red matter" (whatever that is) into the supernova in order to cause it to collapse into a black hole, but while he is [i]en route[/i] to the supernova Romulus -- his point of departure -- is destroyed by it as it expands, while (original) Spock is perfectly safe in his ship. So was Spock flying away from the supernova when he left Romulus? And if so, why was he flying away from it in order to get to it? And if he wasn't flying away from the supernova, but was flying toward it, how did he survive the expansion of the supernova while his point of departure (i.e. Romulus) was obliterated?
3. After Nero destroys the USS Kelvin, why did the Federation simply ignore him (and his very threatening ship) for 25 years?
4. Why did (original) Spock upon exiting the temporal distortion simply surrender to Nero, when he could have rammed his small ship into Nero's in order to prevent him from getting a hold of the "red matter"?
5. Which brings up another question: Why was (original) Spock carrying so much "red matter" on his little ship, when it took only a drop the size of a pea to destroy the supernova?
6. Nero after taking (original) Spock into custody, leaves him on the planet Delta Vega, so that he can watch the destruction of Vulcan, which he sees by simply looking up into the sky: how close is Delta Vega to Vulcan? In the movie it looks like Vulcan orbits Delta Vega (or vice versa). With the proximity of the two planets as it is depicted in the film, shouldn't Delta Vega have been sucked into the Vulcan black hole?[/spoiler]

These are just a few of the questions I thought up after watching the film a second time. That said, as long as a person doesn't think too much about the story (i.e., as long as he turns off his brain for a couple of hours), and simply veges out on the special effects he should be able to enjoy himself, while getting a headache from all the lens flares.[/quote]
You must be an awesome person to go to the movies with

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='notardillacid' post='1866238' date='May 13 2009, 12:25 PM']You must be an awesome person to go to the movies with [/quote]
Ever since I suffered minor paralysis to the left side of my body after contracting viral encephalitis I rarely go out to the movies, because it is very difficult for me to move around and can be rather painful.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Mr.Cat]

Alright, I saw this movie and I will put this as politely and fairly as I possibly can. I am a [b]big[/b] fan of Star Trek, and I hated this movie.

If you want a movie full of [b]mindless[/b] action, [i]then it’s a movie for you[/i]. [spoiler]I mean honestly, if you want a black hole that travels through time and Romulus who don’t have the sense to evacuate a planet while they have time to build a WHOLE STARSHIP, [b]go for it[/b].[/spoiler]

If you want a movie with a coherent narrative, plots that make sense, actual Star Trek physics, characters that actually are similar to previous Star Trek characters, or anything similar to Star Trek at all, [u]then this absolutely is not a movie for you[/u].

But I will give the director a break, by his own admission he doesn’t know the Star Trek universe and wasn’t attempting to reproduce the Star Trek universe; in fact he is a big Star Wars fan and was intended upon presenting Star Wars in a Star Trek way. So in this sense, [i]I suppose he was a little successful[/i].

There were literally parts in the movie that I was laughing, because it just didn’t make sense, [spoiler]like transporting from Saturn to Earth AFTER the device that supposedly blocks transportation is deployed makes PERFECT sense. Anti-Star Trek fanatics sometimes comment that a slight breeze can make the transporters not work, but if you have a transporter that can take you from one side of a solar system to another but cant get through some gravity (which is everywhere in the universe) you got some conflicting problems.[/spoiler]

Whatever this was, [i]it was not Star Trek in my book[/i]. [i]I have had fever dreams that made more sense than this movie did[/i].

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Arpy' post='1863274' date='May 9 2009, 11:29 PM'][spoiler] Also, Spock/Uhura? Whaa? Illogical much? Was he in [i]pon farr[/i]? It befoozles.[/spoiler][/quote]

Which could come in useful if
[spoiler] there is a "Voyager" spinoff in the alternate timeline - they could be Tuvok's parents! [/spoiler] (which, by the way, has been one suggestion I have heard).