[CharlesS]

Here's what I don't get:

 

Shouldn't this timeline damage be self-repairing? The whole time-travel thing that created the whole mess was caused by Spock the first time around, but now he knows not to do that. So presumably when the whole supernova thing occurs the next time around, Spock will follow a more logical course of action and cause this whole movie not to happen.

[Oneota]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Here's what I don't get:

 

Shouldn't this timeline damage be self-repairing? The whole time-travel thing that created the whole mess was caused by Spock the first time around, but now he knows not to do that. So presumably when the whole supernova thing occurs the next time around, Spock will follow a more logical course of action and cause this whole movie not to happen.

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.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

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.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Andrew Stephens 

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 

 

Lotta people died in the film (billions on Vulcan) but no real emotional kick. Some sense of doom would have been nice. ...Should have been more menace with the Romulan ship vs the fleet. The TV series did it better vs the Borg.

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.

[ThinkInsane]

 

I was sad to learn that Scotty killed poor little Porthos

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.

[starman]

You know, I remember when plots didn't have holes....

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ThinkInsane 

 

I was sad to learn that Scotty killed poor little Porthos

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.

 

Can't have been Porthos-it would be way too long past his lifespan. And he's not dead, he just hasn't rematerialized yet...

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.

[Chuckit]

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.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

 

Can't have been Porthos-it would be way too long past his lifespan. And he's not dead, he just hasn't rematerialized yet...

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.

 

Who's to say Phlox didn't come up with some way to give Porthos an unnaturally long lifespan?

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.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Oneota 

 

On the one hand, I friggin' loved this movie and will probably see it again in theaters. On the other hand, it does raise some issues about canon, no doubt. I mean, it's not like we were ever going to see another TNG-based movie, nor one based on DS9 or Voyager, so the fact that those story lines are effectively erased from the canon's timeline isn't the end of the world. Except, well, I guess it kind of is the end of their world. You know? From now on, whenever I watch a TNG or DS9 episode, in the back of my mind, it'll be like "yeah, except this didn't happen in the 'real' timeline because that crazy friggin' Romulan erased this timeline."
I'm just not sure yet how I feel about that.

 

I have a strong feeling that the sequels will clean most of that up, but it sure will piss off some Trekkies in the... *ahem*... mean time.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

You know, I remember when plots didn't have holes....

Euripides?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

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.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

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.

[Demonhood]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

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.

[Hawkeye_a]

supernova + blackhole(s) = wormhole ? if i remember the dialogue correctly.....

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

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?

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

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...

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

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.

[Eug]

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.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

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.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Eug 

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.

[SpaceMonkey]

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.

[Andrew Stephens]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

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.

[olePigeon]

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.

[sek929]

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.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by sek929 

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 

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

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

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.

[sek929]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfzuR...eature=related

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

That and the 25 years of searching for spock really bugged me.

 

Nero was supposed to have been captured by the Klingons and locked away on that prison planet, and his crew comes to break him out.

This is why they have the "random" attack on the Klingon prison planet that makes no sense out of context.

This was all likely cut due to time.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Eug 

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?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by sek929 

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."

[Eug]

Estimates are $72.5 million box office receipts for the first weekend. Pretty good, but Wolverine actually did much better, at $85 million.

[shifuimam]

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.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

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.

[Ratm]

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!

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Ratm 

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.

[- - e r i k - -]

Different for the better for sure. Don't let nostalgia cloud your vision.

[dzp111]

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)

[Cold Warrior]

Yes, it's before.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

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.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

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.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

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.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

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!!!!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by goMac 

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.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

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.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

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?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

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.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

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 - - 

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.

[Eug]

I just saw it the other day on TV: Wrath of Khan remains my favourite Trek movie of all time.

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

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.

[starman]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

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.