Am I the only one who was dissapointed by the new Star Trek film?
Like all Star Trek fans I was looking forward to the new film.
However I rapidly became aware that the films was redefining all/most of the parameters that made the TOS/TNG great. The reason being that the film makers wanted to make star trek more relevant to todays younger generations.
Star Trek holds quite a unique position in that most people know Star Trek even if you don't like it. Everyone has head of Captain Kirk for instance. This makes the previously created boundaries (started in TOS and developed in TNG,DS9,Voyeger,Enterprise and the many previous films) important and not available to the whole sale changes that this new film does. I don't want to put people off this film as you should make your own mind up.
I would be interested to hear other peoples thoughts.
Love The Onion's take on the new release (and yes, I'm a Star Trek fan!)
What is Star Trekk (about)?
As a non-Trekky, could this film interest me?
Have to say I loved it. As did our Dep Ed, Dom. Sure, the plot got a bit silly in places, and Simon Pegg as Scotty was a bit OTT, but otherwise great.
momo72:What is Star Trekk (about)?
It's about 1 k...
As a non-Trekky, could this film interest me?
Dunno, do you generally have any interest in things that happen in outer space?
the_lhc:momo72:What is Star Trekk (about)?It's about 1 k...
As a non-Trekky, could this film interest me?Dunno, do you generally have any interest in things that happen in outer space?
Does one need background knowledge of the Star Trek saga in order to follow what's going on or who the protagonists are/what they're up to? As I said, I know zilch about the Trek. Oh yes, guy with pointy ears. Still in the movie?
momo72:Does one need background knowledge of the Star Trek saga in order to follow what's going on or who the protagonists are/what they're up to? As I said, I know zilch about the Trek.
Well it's a prequel, designed to re-introduce the characters, as played bby a bunch of people you've probably never heard of, so no, I'd imagine it's pretty accessible to non-fans.
Oh yes, guy with pointy ears. Still in the movie?
Yup, he's in it. Twice.
Not seen it yet, but might do today. If anything, it might even be a good way to start off watching the whole thing from; this, then the original series, TNG, Voyager, Deep Space Nine, Enterprise...
Surely, if being strictly chronological, you'd need to watch Enterprise first? 
(Mind you, that could put you off the whole, er, enterprise...)
I haven't seen 'Star Trek' yet, but I saw 'Wolverine' last night and was dissappointed with that. In fact, all big blockbuster comic book or action movies have left me feeling like that for a few years now. The last one I can think of that I really enjoyed was 'Spiderman 2'.
I get excited about all these films, but, when it comes to viewing them, at some point during the film I get bored and disengage, having the feeling that I've seen it all before.
'Wolverine' wasn't a bad film, but I found myself clock watching after the first hour.
Is anyone else feeling this way? or am I the only one that is comic book movied-out?
As a prequel, it doesn't/can't work as it completely changes the timeline.Wiping out the second most important Federation race - how can the TOS episode "Spoke Amoke" work for instance, Tuvok (Voyager) now doesn't exist etc..
It also suffered the same problem that Enterprise had in that the "heroes" where all young inexperienced put in a situation that their training only barely prepared them for. In the series Kirk was at least 10 years older the say Checkov,and had a number of years experience under his belt. All the characters would have passed through the academy at different times and if its anything like the arms service in this country/America, they wouldn't have meet up with each other prior to being on the Enterprise (TOS).Given the size of space, star fleet would have been massive with alot of personal.
All the background and culture built up in the all the TV episodes/films- the rich tapestry and history has effectively been torn up and thrown in the bin.
As a science fiction action film it great but as a science fiction film with the name star trek - well.More action less content. The idea of a realy big super nova need a black hole to protect a planet is very laughable. If it was that big its explosion would have created a black hole of its own.
In my opinion it was thin, the characters seem very 2 dimensional and Checkov was plain irritating !
I just saw "The Wrath of Khan" a few day ago on TV, that pushed the boundaries of the Star Trek theme in a constructive way without actually causing damaged.Watching TWOK really showed how bad Star trek was.
I didn't even like their take on the Enterprise- how ugly! And whats with an engine room that looks like the inards of a Midland factory from the 1960's. When you build a ship surly you must be cleaver with how you utilize the available storage space in the ship. The engine room was cavernous with a lot of empty space.
I didn't like the bridge, it didn't seem like that was the nerve centre of the ship.
I hope they don't make any more films! This is of cause only my very subjective opinion
Still haven't seen the new film (guess it'll be the Blu-ray for me then!), but after sitting through the series-5 finale of Lost last night, my feelings toward JJ Abrams are somewhat ambivalent right now. Series 6 better be mindblowingly good, or I may have to send him a bill for all the hours of my life i've wasted watching!
Anton90125:As a prequel, it doesn't/can't work as it completely changes the timeline.Wiping out the second most important Federation race - how can the TOS episode "Spoke Amoke" work for instance, Tuvok (Voyager) now doesn't exist etc.. It also suffered the same problem that Enterprise had in that the "heroes" where all young inexperienced put in a situation that their training only barely prepared them for. In the series Kirk was at least 10 years older the say Checkov,and had a number of years experience under his belt. All the characters would have passed through the academy at different times and if its anything like the arms service in this country/America, they wouldn't have meet up with each other prior to being on the Enterprise (TOS).Given the size of space, star fleet would have been massive with alot of personal. All the background and culture built up in the all the TV episodes/films- the rich tapestry and history has effectively been torn up and thrown in the bin. As a science fiction action film it great but as a science fiction film with the name star trek - well.More action less content. The idea of a realy big super nova need a black hole to protect a planet is very laughable. If it was that big its explosion would have created a black hole of its own. In my opinion it was thin, the characters seem very 2 dimensional and Checkov was plain irritating ! I just saw "The Wrath of Khan" a few day ago on TV, that pushed the boundaries of the Star Trek theme in a constructive way without actually causing damaged.Watching TWOK really showed how bad Star trek was. I didn't even like their take on the Enterprise- how ugly! And whats with an engine room that looks like the inards of a Midland factory from the 1960's. When you build a ship surly you must be cleaver with how you utilize the available storage space in the ship. The engine room was cavernous with a lot of empty space. I didn't like the bridge, it didn't seem like that was the nerve centre of the ship. I hope they don't make any more films! This is of cause only my very subjective opinion
Well, I never was a trekkie' in fact I don't think I've seen a single episode or film, but I had thought about going to see this.
You done a good job of putting me off going. Our local's usually got some moron using his phone and ruining the film for everyone so I'll wait until the Blu ray comes out.
Clare Newsome:Still haven't seen the new film (guess it'll be the Blu-ray for me then!), but after sitting through the series-5 finale of Lost last night, my feelings toward JJ Abrams are somewhat ambivalent right now. Series 6 better be mindblowingly good, or I may have to send him a bill for all the hours of my life i've wasted watching!
That doesn't sound good - I'm watching it tonight. I have to say series 5 has just not grabbbed me at all - I let 7 episodes slip by before managing to catch up over the past couple of weeks. Compare that to previous series when I was sad enough to follow the Lost forum discussions straight after each episode!
Anway, back on topic... erm, well, haven't watched Star Trek since the original I grew up with as a kid, so it's all lost on me (terrible pun)...
I'm assuming the film sets up an alternative timeline, otherwise, as Anton90215 says, it doesn't fit in with the series, or the other films.
I believe the filmmakers are saying it's a 'reboot', which means that everything that has happened before in the Star Trek universe is not necessarily guaranteed to happen again or with the same outcome (from imdb.com).
(By they way, I'm not saying I agree with it!)
I thought the new film was superb. It might not meet all Trekky requirements in terms of history and accuracy but the characters were very well portrayed and the film meshed together rather well (Perhaps with the exception of Scotty who seemed a little out of place. Still, he was great). The story was clever in how it leaves so much open for the future too. As a luke-warm Trekky, I'd give it 9/10.