Star Trek (2009)

[wolfgirl]

New Star Trek movie

I just saw the newly released Star Trek movie, and I have to tell you: IT ROCKS!!
It's more or less a "prequel"--the main characters are those from the original series. But they did such a great job with the characters; giving them very real, interesting personalities, while keeping the original sense of the characters intact. The acting was awesome, the plot line was great, and the special effects were incredible. I got to see it on an IMAX screen, too.
You'll get to see Leonard Nimoy in this, too--but I don't want to give away too much of the plot.

 

[Rodders]

So, if this movie is Zero, can we expect the next ones to be 1, 2 (etc) again?

 

[Shadow Trooper]

Re: New Star Trek movie

Hi wolfgirl, welcome to the Chrons

Thought I would let you know there is a thread already alive concerning the new Star Trek movie. It is in the Star Trek Movies area under the title "I just saw Star Trek (zero)....".

As it has a spoiler alert on it you can give us a blow by blow opinion of your thoughts. Once again, welcome to the Chrons

 

[Dave]

I've merged these threads together Wolfgirl, and welcome to the Chrons!

So, if this movie is Zero, can we expect the next ones to be 1, 2 (etc) again?

Star Trek (Zero) - I think it's more Star Trek (Alt)

In the cinema I was mentally making a list of all the retcons I was going to complain about here. (It was getting to be a very long list without any paper to hand) and then they blew it all away by the revelation that this was an alternative universe and there was going to be no reset button this time around.

So, where does that leave us - are they now seriously going to rewrite the whole of the original series, with a 129? year old Spock around making knowing winks about what will happen next?

Quite a lot of history did happen on Vulcan though - so I'd agree with Blackrook on that point.

And can I get a refund on my book, 'The Star Trek Chronology'?

As for the film itself, I thought it was pretty good. Very Pacey, full of action, and didn't rely too much on special effects. Plenty of in-jokes - Olsen was wearing a red spacesuit, Kirk banged his head, Spock gave Scotty a formula from the future - and other humour - The lights on to reveal the woman is an Orion.

I didn't think much of Scotty's little friend, and I didn't think much of Simon Pegg at all really. And I also have to agree with the Uhuru-Spock thing.

It is certainly worth seeing.

 

[Lady of Winterfell]

I just saw this movie yesterday and really enjoyed it. I am one of the few people who hasn't watched any of the shows, so there was nothing for me to compare it to.

The only thing that bothered me was the constant 'lens-flare' effect. I thought it was way overdone and quite distracting throughout the movie. Besides that though, it was great.

 

[Huttman]

While discussing this film with some friends, I think I know what really bugs me about it. I gave my review earlier, and it still stands, but this one issue does not, nor will ever unless they change it in the next film, settle well with me. It's an alternate time line, right? Every time they had a time travel episode (and there were quite a few), they bent over backwards not to contaminate the time line. If they did, they went all out to fix the damage that had occured. So this renegade Romulan destroys a federation ship, countless Klingon warships, the planet Vulcan, the planet Romulus is also somehow destroyed by accident, and old Spock just accepts it? He would be one of the few to be able to fix it.
Perhaps Spock's death in Star Trek II did not settle well with some, but they handled that issue so well it is by far one of the best in the series and lo and behold he comes back in the next film. I will still enjoy many aspects to this movie, but I think it was a poor desision to create such huge callous story elements for the wow factor or plot development. I have a feeling that the creators will not change this alternate time line in an attempt separate themselves from the original canon for creative freedom and re-activating a so-called drab series. I hope I'm wrong on that because I am not opposed to the re-imagining of the story. BSG did it very well while remaining quite true to the original.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

I still stand by what I said about this movie. The worst I've seen since Cloverfield.


Stick with the shows and the old movies. They were far, far better.

 

[Dave]

I have a feeling that the creators will not change this alternate time line in an attempt separate themselves from the original canon for creative freedom and re-activating a so-called drab series. I hope I'm wrong on that because I am not opposed to the re-imagining of the story. BSG did it very well while remaining quite true to the original.

I think that is exactly why they did do that. As I said earlier, I had a very, very long list of changes from Canon; some that would not be obvious to younger trek fans i.e. Sulu was initially a Physicist not a Pilot. I can't see how they could have any creative freedom at all without changing some of these things. I personally didn't want any of them changed, and that was precisely the reason I was against this prequel. I almost didn't go and see it, but I was convinced by someone it was a great film. (I also still regret not going to see 'Wrath of Khan' because I disliked 'The Motion Picture' and didn't want to make the same mistake again.)

I still stand by what I said about this movie. The worst I've seen since Cloverfield.
Stick with the shows and the old movies. They were far, far better.

This is not the best of the 11 films, but it has to be in the top half. I liked 'Cloverfield' for it's originality. This was a little too cliched with a Romulan coming back from the future.

Everyone I've spoken to would much rather see an old cast back in a film, any old cast! - I think the facts are that they are too old, and too expensive. Didn't Simon Pegg say he worked for free on this (mind I wouldn't have paid him either!)

 

[steve12553]

There is a lot of comment of changing of the Canon but since the Romulan ship changes the timeline in Act 1 Scene 1, the Canon still exists or rather co-exists with all that comes after. As to the reference to Kirk being a stupid jock in the original series he was supposed to be 35 at the very beginning. Since Nero waits 25 years for Spock after coming through on the day Kirk was born, this Kirk is 10 years younger than the one in the series and will still likely mature into someone similar to the mainstream timeline Kirk allowing for a different set of expeiences. The fact that some of the original actors are dead and the rest are approaching 80, I don't see how else we can have more of the good thing that so many of us craved for so long without "rebooting" it like this.

 

[dustinzgirl]

Am I the only person who hated the new Star Trek movie?

No, my hubby snored through the whole movie. He said it was the most, and I quote "Boring piece of crap flick you've ever drug me too."

I liked it fairly enough. But a few hard core Trekkies I've talked too were not very happy with it. Kind of like us Star Wars freaks picking apart the "new" Star Wars flicks, I guess.

 

[Dave]

I can't agree with your hubby. I might have not liked it for the changes it made, the actors they cast, some of the dialogue, and a whole load of other reasons, but it wasn't "boring". It is fast paced, action-packed and tightly edited right from the very beginning. There isn't five minutes without an explosion, a fast car, a bar room brawl, a sword fight, the destruction of a planet....

It is designed to attract a new audience to Trek, and while I don't agree that Trek needed that, that is exactly what it is doing.

 

[Scifi fan]

I think it was a good movie, with the references to the Kobayashi Maru, as well as other Canonical references. But, in the end, I wonder how long this can last, because all good franchises will come to an end. Even Star Trek.

I think there may be space for one or two more movies along this timeline, but, after that, it may be a good idea to put the thing to rest.

 

[Culhwch]

So, where does that leave us - are they now seriously going to rewrite the whole of the original series, with a 129? year old Spock around making knowing winks about what will happen next?

But he can't, he won't know what's going to happen next. And a few people keep saying that Romulus is gone, but it still exists in this reality, just not in Spock's...

I've never been a huge fan of Star Trek, though I have seen a fair few of the Next Gen crew's movies, and the odd episode of DS9, but I really enjoyed this. I don't think there was anything that really stood out as weak (to me), which is something of a new experience with these types of movies lately. I took it for what it was - a summer blockbuster, a popcorn flick aimed to a) make money, b) entertain and c) do justice to the source material, in that order.

 

[Dave]

But he can't, he won't know what's going to happen next.

You are correct, he won't know everything because the future could unfold in a different way, but some things will not change; more a case of what he knows that hasn't been discovered yet - there is a wormhole to the Gamma Quadrant situated near Bajor, and behind it the Dominion - the Borg are still coming - the Nexus still crosses the Milky Way ever 39 years.

 

[worldmaker]

But he can't, he won't know what's going to happen next. And a few people keep saying that Romulus is gone, but it still exists in this reality, just not in Spock's...

.... I took it for what it was - a summer blockbuster, a popcorn flick aimed to a) make money, b) entertain and c) do justice to the source material, in that order.

Romulous still exists, and likely more powerful now that (xxx) has gone - weakening the Federation(?), and won't be vaporised by the supernova for over a century(?), so there is plenty of time to warn them to evacuate safely, or use red matter to stop safely, possibly creating a different, strong kind of alliance(?).

So what will Spock do in this new parallel universe with all the forewarning? Will he act to strengthen the Federation against the Borg, amongst so many other horrors to come, or sit it out on the sidelines like a good little Hollywood character so the new "Regeneration" cast can have lots of fun?

The field for writing is wide open, if anyone can be bothered with it all.....

now hand me the popcorn.

 

[Shadow Trooper]

You are correct, he won't know everything because the future could unfold in a different way, but some things will not change; more a case of what he knows that hasn't been discovered yet - there is a wormhole to the Gamma Quadrant situated near Bajor, and behind it the Dominion - the Borg are still coming - the Nexus still crosses the Milky Way ever 39 years.

I think the main point is that nobody knows the extent of change at this point. It could be that apart from the changes seen in the film nothing else changes (except as an outcome of the film), or absolutely everything could change; or anything inbetween!(Bit like the premise behind the series Sliders).

Some change (due to the changes in the film) may make the Borg attack fluidic space earlier, and they're taken out by species 8472; therefore the Borg do not come!
If Kirk/Picard were able to change the path of the Nexus (possible altering the 39 year cycle) then what's to say an explosion set off by Species 8472, who have already eliminated the Borg threat, doesn't send the Nexus traveling somewhere completely different. And so on.....

It's a whole new world!

 

[Dave]

All true! My point was that should I go back in time to 1400 and alter the timeline, Columbus might never set sail and discover America. However, that wouldn't stop America being there, and someone would discover it at some point, and people would cross the Atlantic and settle there. I can still tell people that without knowing precisely when, but they may not believe me. Man would still walk on the Moon one day, but they probably wouldn't believe that either.

 

[steve12553]

Spock had to be quite old (even for a Vulcan) so his knowledge and possible intervention is not very likely. Also, being Spock, he probably would see the wisdom of not interfering.

 

[Urien]

I haven't seen this yet, but I do know the plot. It seems that Star Trek is having a Dallas Bobby in the shower moment... the future was all a dream.

 

[worldmaker]

... he probably would see the wisdom of not interfering.

Only if you consider it "Wise" not to intervene and avert disasters to come, would you really stand-by if you had the opportunity to prevent a prospective 9/11, or warn people of tsunami due to hit the coast in a few years?

Non-intervention in only an applicable philosophy if: a) you want to preserve the status quo of an uninterrupted timeline, and b) you are a non-dynamic personality who prefers to remain aloof. I suspect Spock could be drawn either way depending only on the whims of the scriptwriters now that "history" has been so disasterously dislocated.

Personally I'd opt for direct intervention if I knew what was to come.