Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > So much for the Star Trek Movie

So much for the Star Trek Movie (Page 6)
Thread Tools
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 02:28 PM
 
Here's what I don't get:

 

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 02:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
Here's what I don't get:

 
Remember your 4th Dimensional-thinking lessons from Back to the Future II, though -- the future events will be occurring in the already-screwed-up timeline. In order for things to go back the way they were, you'd have to go back in time to the point where the timelines diverged.
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 03:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
There will also be much more major changes as the dominion war from DS9 could be lost because no romulans to side against them to things we can never think of as Vulcan was a major player in the Federation.
Never mind all of the scientific and technological knowledge that Spock Prime brings to this earlier time. Given how drastically the original timeline has been altered, he doesn't seem squeamish about sharing what he knows.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 05:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Andrew Stephens View Post
Cast were great, effect pretty good, Quinto and Pegg were stand out, knowing winks to TOS and movies all present and correct but an emotional content of zero. In short, whizz bang, laugh, gee, wow. No feelings in it.
I felt the opposite... I never cared about Kirk or his family before this film nor felt any real friendship between him and Spock before. They always talked about it but I never believed it. I've loved TOS for 35 years but I think this film did bring a new emotional depth which is really saying something in light of the director.

Originally Posted by Andrew Stephens View Post
 
Yeah I remember being scared shetless of the Borg in TNG and the First Contact and in Voyager. Even Kahn was scarier. This Romulan guy was a little too insanely theatrical to be believed but the repeat of the bug trick was the lowest point in the film I think or maybe the falling-down ice monster.

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 05:39 PM
 
 


I've never been a Trek fan, but the movie was fun. Just do yourself a favor, don't go see it with a physicist. The constant "That's not right" and "Oh whatever"stuff gets old fast.
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 05:57 PM
 
You know, I remember when plots didn't have holes....

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 06:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by ThinkInsane View Post
 


I've never been a Trek fan, but the movie was fun. Just do yourself a favor, don't go see it with a physicist. The constant "That's not right" and "Oh whatever"stuff gets old fast.
 
Going to a Star Trek movie with a physicist who isn't willing to treat it as a movie means that they weren't playing fair with you. Or you knew that ahead of time and went with them anyway... Either way, it takes away from the fun. My son said he had a few distractions watching Wolverine because he kept noticing anachronisms in the montage... But he let it go and just enjoyed it for the live action comic book it was.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 08:44 PM
 
I'm not even a physicist and the physics kind of bothered me. It's not little niggling details — it's the most basic facts, things that I learned when I was eight, like what a black hole is and how gravity effects things.

But the worst part is that it's not even consistent. One time the "red matter" creates a black hole and it sends Spock and Nero back in time. OK, fine, black holes are time machines. It's a fantasy world and you can establish your own rules. But then at the end, another black hole from the same batch of red matter starts crushing things like a real black hole? That's not even bad physics, it's just plain nonsense. It's like if the enemy phasers suddenly started shooting out daisies instead of energy bolts for no apparent reason.

Still enjoyed the movie overall, though.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
 
Going to a Star Trek movie with a physicist who isn't willing to treat it as a movie means that they weren't playing fair with you. Or you knew that ahead of time and went with them anyway... Either way, it takes away from the fun. My son said he had a few distractions watching Wolverine because he kept noticing anachronisms in the montage... But he let it go and just enjoyed it for the live action comic book it was.
 


I knew what I was getting into, I just have a limited pool of nerd friends to choose from. He behaved himself pretty well through the movie, at least after the first time he commented and I stood up pointed in his face and yelled "You will shut the **** up for the rest of the movie" in front of a packed theater. The laughter clammed him right up. Embarrassment is a powerful tool, and I wield it like a hammer! The girl a couple of rows back who yelled "yeah b****!" was a huge help in that regard. It was on the way to the bar afterwards that I got my physics lesson

One of my biggest problems with Star Trek has always been time travel story lines. I just don't like them. The only reason I watch Enterprise is because it's on before SG1. Well, that and I think the NX-01 was the coolest looking Enterprise. I've never really cared for the design of the ship, from TOS through TNG. Even so, I still thought the new movie was fun. It could have been better, but it certainly could have been worse.
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Oneota View Post
 
 
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by starman View Post
You know, I remember when plots didn't have holes....
Euripides?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
But the worst part is that it's not even consistent. One time the "red matter" creates a black hole and it sends Spock and Nero back in time. OK, fine, black holes are time machines. It's a fantasy world and you can establish your own rules. But then at the end, another black hole from the same batch of red matter starts crushing things like a real black hole? That's not even bad physics, it's just plain nonsense. It's like if the enemy phasers suddenly started shooting out daisies instead of energy bolts for no apparent reason.
Maybe it had to do with quantity? Dunno.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 10:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Maybe it had to do with quantity? Dunno.
perhaps the time travel black hole had something to do with a combination of the red matter and the super nova.
     
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 03:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
perhaps the time travel black hole had something to do with a combination of the red matter and the super nova.
i'm gonna go with this explanation. especially considering that in Star Trek IV, simply slingshotting yourself around a sun was enough for time travel. maybe in the star trek universe, stars have some special amount of chroniton particles or something.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 04:48 AM
 
supernova + blackhole(s) = wormhole ? if i remember the dialogue correctly.....
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 09:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
But the worst part is that it's not even consistent. One time the "red matter" creates a black hole and it sends Spock and Nero back in time. OK, fine, black holes are time machines. It's a fantasy world and you can establish your own rules. But then at the end, another black hole from the same batch of red matter starts crushing things like a real black hole? That's not even bad physics, it's just plain nonsense.
Huh? Where does the black holes start crushing things? I might have missed it but it seemed that Nero and his ship was just sent to a different timeline again and not crushed. I thought this was part of the typical "main baddie dies, but not really" plot point.

And seriously, the way some of you discuss The Onion was bloody spot on:
http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...star_trek_film

Are you f*cking incapable of enjoying yourselves?

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 10:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
I thought this was part of the typical "main baddie dies, but not really" plot point.
Actually, Kirk has them fire everything they have at Nero's ship as it enters the black hole, so I'm pretty sure he's done permanently.

But yeah, with all the carping so many people are doing, you kinda wonder how the movie is making so bloody much money...

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 10:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Are you f*cking incapable of enjoying yourselves?
You don't think nerds picking apart movies is enjoyable? Yes we'd enjoy the movie even more if it was written a little tighter but discussing it afterwards is part of the fun. Sorry if it ruins it for you dude.

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 11:05 AM
 
What I don't understand is why so many critics are saying "The plot line is lacking and the villain is hollow, but it's awesome anyway." Usually, the big name critics give summer blockbusters with that type of description about the plot and a major character just tepid reviews, even if the effects and action sequences are top notch. It's the geeks and lesser known reviewers and what not that give movies like that good reviews. In the end you may get an overall recommendation to see the movie, but nothing like we've seen with Star Trek. With Star Trek, even the big name reviewers are giving it high marks, in spite of the numerous plot holes, and we've hit an RT score of 96%. That's very impressive for a summer blockbuster, and beats out even The Dark Knight. TDK is a movie that won Heath Ledger an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, and The Dark Knight did not have many criticisms about the plot.

I guess plot is starting to matter less and less to people these days.
( Last edited by Eug; May 10, 2009 at 11:23 AM. )
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 01:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Are you f*cking incapable of enjoying yourselves?
Well, let's see. The last sentence of the post you quoted was "I still enjoyed the movie overall." My mini-review when I saw it last weekend was mostly positive. I would say yes, I probably am capable of enjoying myself.

It's called "nuance," you see. I can have good feelings about a movie overall and still feel like part of it was crap. Very few things are 100% good or 100% bad.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 01:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
What I don't understand is why so many critics are saying "The plot line is lacking and the villain is hollow, but it's awesome anyway." Usually, the big name critics give summer blockbusters with that type of description about the plot and a major character just tepid reviews, even if the effects and action sequences are top notch. It's the geeks and lesser known reviewers and what not that give movies like that good reviews. In the end you may get an overall recommendation to see the movie, but nothing like we've seen with Star Trek. With Star Trek, even the big name reviewers are giving it high marks, in spite of the numerous plot holes, and we've hit an RT score of 96%. That's very impressive for a summer blockbuster, and beats out even The Dark Knight. TDK is a movie that won Heath Ledger an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, and The Dark Knight did not have many criticisms about the plot.

I guess plot is starting to matter less and less to people these days.
Critics have never cared that much about plot. If they had, they'd stop praising the trite crap that always wins Oscars. It seems to me they usually prefer character-driven films.

Also, you have to keep in mind that this movie's score will be skewed by the fact that it's Star Trek. That could count against it because critics don't like sci-fi, but they also love things that have a sort of "heritage" to them, throwbacks and such. So it was pretty likely they'd go to one extreme or the other. If you look at the "Top Critics" and "RT Community" scores, you'll find they're a bit lower — still good, but not as good.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 01:45 PM
 
Yeah, it was easy to get caught up in all of the good parts of the movie when I was watching it in a packed theater last night, but the more I think about it the less impressed I am, for all of the reasons already discussed. I also think: did we really need another rogue Romulan plot right after Nemesis? Every scene with the villain was tedious.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 03:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
And seriously, the way some of you discuss The Onion was bloody spot on:
http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...star_trek_film
"Gene Rodenberry was the hack who created Star Trek back in the 40's. Or something."

Brilliant throw away line.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 05:04 PM
 
As a Star Trek film, I didn't like it at all. As a general sci-fi action flick, I liked it. The film was enjoyable, but only if I don't associate it with Star Trek.

I'd have to agree with The Onion.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 06:00 PM
 
Enjoyable as a whole, nothing really moving...even with billions of dead Vulcans. Honestly liked Jims dad better than Jim himself (despite the same actor) and really still can't understand the need for a Spock/Ohura romance.

The only part that bothers me is some black holes make you time travel, others destroy you? How would one know which black hole is which? Maybe planet Vulcan got teleported through space and time.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 06:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
Enjoyable as a whole, nothing really moving...even with billions of dead Vulcans. Honestly liked Jims dad better than Jim himself (despite the same actor) and really still can't understand the need for a Spock/Ohura romance.
Yeah and did they get together before the Romulans started changing historical events or did the black hole somehow alter the entire universe and change things before Nemo got to Vulcan? Because that would mean that in TOS things didn't work out with them but there was a history between them that we didn't know anything about until now.

Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
The only part that bothers me is some black holes make you time travel, others destroy you? How would one know which black hole is which? Maybe planet Vulcan got teleported through space and time.
Say that's not bad. That means that Vulcan could turn up in StarTrek III The Search for Spock's Mom

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by mrtew View Post
Yeah and did they get together before the Romulans started changing historical events or did the black hole somehow alter the entire universe and change things before Nemo got to Vulcan? Because that would mean that in TOS things didn't work out with them but there was a history between them that we didn't know anything about until now.
The timeline diverged when Nero appeared to the USS Kelvin, which was well before Uhura and Spock met.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 08:41 PM
 
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 08:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
That and the 25 years of searching for spock really bugged me.
 
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 09:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
What I don't understand is why so many critics are saying "The plot line is lacking and the villain is hollow, but it's awesome anyway." Usually, the big name critics give summer blockbusters with that type of description about the plot and a major character just tepid reviews, even if the effects and action sequences are top notch. It's the geeks and lesser known reviewers and what not that give movies like that good reviews. In the end you may get an overall recommendation to see the movie, but nothing like we've seen with Star Trek. With Star Trek, even the big name reviewers are giving it high marks, in spite of the numerous plot holes, and we've hit an RT score of 96%. That's very impressive for a summer blockbuster, and beats out even The Dark Knight. TDK is a movie that won Heath Ledger an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, and The Dark Knight did not have many criticisms about the plot.

I guess plot is starting to matter less and less to people these days.
Sheldon, is that you?

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 09:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
The only part that bothers me is some black holes make you time travel, others destroy you? How would one know which black hole is which? Maybe planet Vulcan got teleported through space and time.
I think it's likely Vulcan got sent through time.

However, by "Vulcan" I mean "the tiny pieces of debris that made up that planet formerly known as Vulcan."
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 10:10 PM
 
Estimates are $72.5 million box office receipts for the first weekend. Pretty good, but Wolverine actually did much better, at $85 million.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: God's Country
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 10:21 PM
 
I'm not even going to bother reading through six pages of people arguing about this or that.

I just got home from seeing it (boyfriend took me on a date tonight <3), and I have to say that it was pretty damn awesome. The casting choices were quite good, although I cannot figure out for the life of me why they chose Winona Ryder for Spock's mother. What the hell? Also, a huge WTF at the Spock/Uhura thing. That was just lame.

I really enjoyed it. The special effects were fab, there was plenty of humor (I loled, at any rate)...I give it a 9.5/10...right up there with Star Trek: Nemesis.

I think Shatner is hilarious, but I'm kind of glad they didn't give him a cameo in this one - his brand of flair just wouldn't have fit with the whole plot.

I'll be interested to see if this cast lineup does another Trek movie.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2009, 11:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
I really enjoyed it. The special effects were fab, there was plenty of humor (I loled, at any rate)...I give it a 9.5/10...right up there with Star Trek: Nemesis.
Just wanted to make sure you said Star Trek: Nemesis on purpose and didn't mean a different Star Trek movie altogether.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 12:15 AM
 
We have a bunch of new trekkie haters here. The new ST is much, MUCH better than the older version. Good riddance to old rubbish!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 12:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Ratm View Post
We have a bunch of new trekkie haters here. The new ST is much, MUCH better than the older version. Good riddance to old rubbish!
I wouldn't say it's better. It's certainly different.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 12:48 AM
 
Different for the better for sure. Don't let nostalgia cloud your vision.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sudbury, ON
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 01:19 AM
 
Loved it!!

But, a few quirks (historically-speaking):

Spock does NOT kiss! (the scenes with him and Uhurou (don't know how to spell her name)) irked me. It just seemed wrong.

I recall when Spock was visited by both his father & Mom on deck in one of the movies. (Maybe on mushrooms, not sure)

The Vulcan planet has always existed.

Question: The tv series 'Enterprise', is that before Kirk?


Originally, Romulans are half Vulcan and half Klingons (with the forehead ridges). (Hybrids sorta)
.................................................. .................................................. ..................................www.DNCH.com

.................................................. .................................................. .......................www.daniel.poirier.com
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 01:24 AM
 
Yes, it's before.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 01:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Different for the better for sure. Don't let nostalgia cloud your vision.
Nah. The new Trek and and Kahn are now deadlocked for first place. Don't flush tradition just to be trendy.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 01:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by dzp111 View Post
Loved it!!

But, a few quirks (historically-speaking):

Spock does NOT kiss! (the scenes with him and Uhurou (don't know how to spell her name)) irked me. It just seemed wrong.

I recall when Spock was visited by both his father & Mom on deck in one of the movies. (Maybe on mushrooms, not sure)

The Vulcan planet has always existed.

Question: The tv series 'Enterprise', is that before Kirk?


Originally, Romulans are half Vulcan and half Klingons (with the forehead ridges). (Hybrids sorta)
This movie is a franchise "reboot", it seems. Everything after Enterprise could be different.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 01:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
This movie is a franchise "reboot", it seems. Everything after Enterprise could be different.
Not necessarily true, in since Enterprise itself is based on future events, so Enterprise itself is also up for grabs.

For example, if Picard never takes command of the E, he never fights the Borg in the past, the Borg never crash on Earth, and never attempt to send a signal signaling the collective to Earth, thus changing an event in Enterprise.
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 01:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by goMac View Post
Not necessarily true, in since Enterprise itself is based on future events, so Enterprise itself is also up for grabs.

For example, if Picard never takes command of the E, he never fights the Borg in the past, the Borg never crash on Earth, and never attempt to send a signal signaling the collective to Earth, thus changing an event in Enterprise.
But, the Borg wouldn't have encountered the Federation that soon if not for Picard (and Q). ARRGGGHHHH!!!!
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 02:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by goMac View Post
I think it's likely Vulcan got sent through time.

However, by "Vulcan" I mean "the tiny pieces of debris that made up that planet formerly known as Vulcan."
But the ships went through intact. That seems like it was a destroying black hole rather than a time machine black hole. Like Demonhood said, it must just be that stars have magic time powers in this series.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 02:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Nah. The new Trek and and Kahn are now deadlocked for first place. Don't flush tradition just to be trendy.
Not flushing tradition. Khan has not aged as well as you think it has.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 02:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
But the ships went through intact. That seems like it was a destroying black hole rather than a time machine black hole. Like Demonhood said, it must just be that stars have magic time powers in this series.
I believe if you opened a black hole in the middle of a ship, it too would have been destroyed.

Why is this so hard to grok for some?

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 03:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
I believe if you opened a black hole in the middle of a ship, it too would have been destroyed.

Why is this so hard to grok for some?
Um…yes. And yet a black hole failed to cause any damage whatsoever to two ships. That's what we were talking about. Like, two days ago. Now we're talking about Vulcan.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 07:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Nah. The new Trek and and Kahn are now deadlocked for first place. Don't flush tradition just to be trendy.
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Not flushing tradition. Khan has not aged as well as you think it has.
Seriously, I was going to say.... I remember Khan as having been one of the best movies EVER and held it in that esteem for many many years, but I rented it again recently to show someone how good Star Trek movies "used to be" and was quite shocked. It's just terrible by any modern standard. It's as hokey as those 50's movies that my mom says are so great. Makes me think that moviemaking has improved exponentially over the years and that even the lamest modern movie would be celebrated as a revolution in the history of film if released 20 or 30 years ago. For example, imagine if this new Star Trek movie had come out instead of "The Motion Picture" back in the 70's. Not just the geewhiz special effects (I still prefer analogue actually) but the way the story keeps moving along rather than the snail's pacing of the old one. Try watching Kahn again and you'll be amazed at how nothing happens for 15 minutes at a time again and again and how nobody says anything remotely intelligent at any point.

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 07:14 AM
 
I just saw it the other day on TV: Wrath of Khan remains my favourite Trek movie of all time.

Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
I really enjoyed it. The special effects were fab, there was plenty of humor (I loled, at any rate)...I give it a 9.5/10...right up there with Star Trek: Nemesis.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2009, 07:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by mrtew View Post
Seriously, I was going to say.... I remember Khan as having been one of the best movies EVER and held it in that esteem for many many years, but I rented it again recently to show someone how good Star Trek movies "used to be" and was quite shocked. It's just terrible by any modern standard. It's as hokey as those 50's movies that my mom says are so great. Makes me think that moviemaking has improved exponentially over the years and that even the lamest modern movie would be celebrated as a revolution in the history of film if released 20 or 30 years ago.
Trek II is a classic for a reason. I think you were looking for CGI and got a good story.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:33 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2