I like the movie, but a couple of things that bugged me are: Spoiler 1. Why are there so many scene of guys grabbing onto the ledge trying to climb up? How many literal cliffhanger can there be in a non-mountain-climbing film? 2. Why exactly did they shoot Kirk onto the ice planet again? Isn't there a brig or something to lock him up in? 3. So... Old Spock was gonna risk letting Earth get destroyed becasue it's so important to have young Spock and Kirk figure things out on their own an forge a relationship? Huh?
Spoiler 1. I don't think that scene demonstrated he was a bad ass. It demonstrated he was a childhood miscreant. He might have been a little more bad ass if he wasn't endangered by his own lack of geographical knowledge. 2. I think later scenes do a much better job of establishing him as the alpha dog. 3. Again, that he's endangered by his own stupidity, coupled with the fact that nothing ever comes from that day's events, makes the whole scene feel very pointless. They didn't even do as good a job in the film as they did in the trailer making the leap look dramatic. 4. Why is there a massive straight-sided canyon cut in the middle of the Iowa countryside anyway? (To go back to my complaint about the lack of attention paid to the setting.)
Spoiler 1. I think the scene was actually intended to begin the image of him in a world without his father. As for not knowing his geography, I was under the impression he did it on purpose. I don't remember him getting startled when he saw the cliff or anything. I think he was doing it to get at his stepdad/uncle/whoever was on the phone. 2. Agreed. 3. Stuff does come from it. They are establishing who he is as a character as a youth. They then shoot to Spock to establish who he is as a character as a youth. We then seem them both progress. I think you are supposed to see that they are more alike than either knows. 4. Legit
Solid film. I haven't watched anything Star Trek related in a while but this got me back into the series in terms of waiting for future movies with this franchise. 8.5/10
I'd be excited if Khan got incorporated into the next film, but would be incredibly distraught if they tried to remake Wrath of Khan. You can't jump into WoK without paying attention to the backstory that led to his coming after Kirk. And that Trek episode would be weak sauce on the big screen. I could see a revisitation of Khan working though. Team Abrams has proven they can rework the material nicely. Evan
Not only that, but Khan was all about these *aging* characters, 20+ years after we got to know them in the original series. Trying to remake it *now* with this new setting and cast would be a huge mistake. They have given us already the most likely lynchpin for what will drive the next movie - the almost-extinct Vulcans trying to establish a new home, as well as Klingons that are going to be hopping mad at the Romulans (and more than likely everyone else as well, as, well, Klingons are just a rather testy lot on the best of days, and having a 47-ship armada completely wiped out in one fell swoop is not likely to improve their moods). So you have potential war, strife for the struggling Vulcans, and a completely open galaxy in which to play. My guess would be that, after this movie established the *characters*, the next movie will establish the universe, and more specifically the Federation (the Prime Directive, etc, which could come into play re the Vulcans establishing a new home) and its opposites, the Klingons and Romulans. It could even end up with an encounter with the Organians, with the end of the movie leaving us with the Organian Peace Treaty. As a story arc, WoK was really about the end of those characters. The reality was that there was still money to be made after that, and thus more increasingly bad movies. This latest reboot has a LONG way to go before it gets to stories about the ends of these characters. However, don't count out at least some small bit establishing it as a possibility in the future - ie the rise of a genetically-engineered race of super men, ruled by a 'Khan' back on Earth, and their subsequent banishment into space.. something liek that. Just a little foreshadowing. Ah well, interesting to speculate about it all at least.
I knew I wasn't the only one who thought the lens flares were a little distracting. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/iAaX8Aq6smQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iAaX8Aq6smQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
i just got home from seeing this and it was good..not great. Spoiler i've always had problems with the time travel thing. it's getting a little ridiculous in star trek. A.) everything that happened in previous movies no longer mattered B.) you can always fix things by going back in time... so, what's the point. love simon pegg though.
Spoiler Point B doesn't apply to the villain for some reason. Instead he would rather multiply the effort involved in going back in time to save his planet by destroying multiple other planets, while leaving his planet to die(again). I give this movie a 7/10
I saw it yesterday and thought it was pretty good. It was definitely one of the better Trek films. The overall production and special effects were really good. Besides the film starting off without the traditional music, it still felt like Trek so I'm not sure how audiences that didn't like Trek before now identify with it (I guess because the cast is not a bunch of old farts now?). It was a little strange watching all these kids run the Enterprise after watching older folks run it before. I was looking for a "Babies on Board" sign. I like how they spun an alternate reality. I think there was an Archer reference or two in there (were they referring to Jonathan Archer (first captain of Enterprise) as now Admiral Archer?)...but didn't refer to the first Enterprise (or latest TV series) at all. Did that even happen according to this film? I assume that it did happen but it wasn't really clear to me from watching this film. The film touched on each character, made obvious references to let the audience tie them to their old school counterparts, and brought them all together eventually...but I thought character development was still lacking in the end. It was mostly your typical formulaic action film which worked but felt a little hollow when it was all said and done. The next film, in my opinion, needs to dive a little deeper. This one scratched the surface and laid the groundwork.
Yeah, Scotty was definitely referring to Jonathan Archer. Enterprise should still be canon as Nero enters the timeline after the series has ended, but I wouldn't hold my breath on much of it ever being addressed outside of one-line fanboy service references. Interesting to note that the destruction of the Kelvin has apparently set off a chain of events that has led to Federation vessels being at least one generation ahead of where they were in the original timeline (or maybe I'm reading too much into it and the changes are only cosmetic).
I think it has more to do with technology today. Somewhere JJ mentioned how the iPhone is more impressive and more advanced than the communicator in the original Star Trek series, so they are taking the approach of what will be possible in the future based on what we've achieved and what we know can be improved. I'm still not digging the use of Beastie Boys in the movie, but some people have pointed out that it might be an elaborate but subtle jab at Shatner because he has a funny way of pronouncing "sabotage," it sounds like "sabataage." <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nlOTRxt-dIw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nlOTRxt-dIw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Not to defend it, but I think the flares were primarily used on the Enterprise set. Maybe it was symbolism
Just got back from seeing this. Extremely good flick. 8/10. Scotty was easily the best part of the movie. And Karl Urban was spot-on as Bones.
I've now seen it twice and read the Countdown comic book, and i think both are extremely well done. I really like most of the cast, though I don't know about the caricature issues, and loved the script. (Before this movie I have not seen any of the series and only First Contact and Nemesis, so I have virtually no pre-notions of the Star Trek world, etc). Spoiler First, I'm tired of everyone talking about the time travel aspect. They even state it in the movie, the main thing that happened is moving into an alternate reality!!! Here's the way I understood it. To stop the supernova in the Original Star Trek world, they used Vulcan technology Red Matter to create what they thought would be singularity or black hole. The Red Matter though is only the catalyst for the reaction. By itself it cannot make singularity, it requires a lot of energy or matter from a secondary source to create the singularity. The singularity created burns up the energy/matter source that was used to create it (the supernova, Vulcan planet, and the Romulan ship). The flaw in all this plan was that they expected to create a black hole singularity, when in reality they created a temporary worm hole. While similar, a worm hole according to popular theory would allow for a ship, person, etc, to transfer through time and space, and in this movie between alternate realities as well(think Far-Scape science + Sliders science), and would burn out very quickly. If this is the proper way to understand what happened then that explains: 1. A supernova with enormous energy that can be used to form a true wormhole that take old Spock + Nero & Romulans to an alternate reality where there is no super-nova, just the two ships. No supernova because its energy was used to make the singularity, again the red matter is simply the catalyst. 2. A planet that HAS TO BE DRILLED TO THE CORE, to produce enough energy to create a singularity that burns up the matter , creating a temporary worm-hole which the Enterprise and Nero's ship escape. 3. The romulan ship which is strictly matter interacting with the red matter directly, (i.e. with some energy but not a whole lot) that destroys the ship, creating a much weaker singularity because there isn't a whole lot of matter to start the reaction and it is in matter form, not energy form. So then second why did the Romulan ship and Nemoy go through the worm hole and end up at different times in the alternate universe instead of at the same time? Well, again the movie stated it when Scotty stated "I never thought to think of space as what is moving". So if you take the assumption of space-time as a continuum that has to be balanced, and that what really moved into the wormholes was the space of those two ships. You cannot just add more space to different universe without affecting time aspect as well, which would cause a large mass or amount of space to have a large effect on time (going backwards to the kirks birth), and a smaller amount of space to have a smaller effect on time, Spock coming back 25 years later. Lastly, again I have not seen the original series or movies to really know how Spock acted or interacted. But given the premise of this movie, since you are dealing with alternate universe, and not simply the past, there is no reason for Spock (or Uhura or Bones or anyone else), to act as they did on the original series. Any event, choice, or decision could have be altered from the original universe causing all kinds of consequences resulting in the differences. Is this a cop-out to give them more freedom in this movie? Of course it is, but this will give them a much better ability to write better scripts and potentially develop the characters, while staying true to many of the aspects of the original characterizations without being a slave to them. If they were to have everyone, act the exact same, it would likely stifle their creativity in any new movies they may make (it is the same thing that happens after you make 2-3 sequels of a movie because it becomes harder to really flesh out the character more than people expect and make the quality of the movie the same or even better). Sorry, about the wall of text.
Saw the movie Saturday night in Imax. No matter how you slice it, it's a freaking awesome action sci-fi movie, up there with Aliens. Must see, must own. Going to read the prequel comic as soon as I can.
