Spoiler-ific Movie Discussion Thread
#1
Posted 10 May 2009 - 06:55 PM
Here is a place to discuss all the juicy details of the movie without worrying about giving something away.
#3
Posted 10 May 2009 - 07:26 PM
#4
Posted 10 May 2009 - 08:52 PM
#5
Posted 10 May 2009 - 09:24 PM
#6
Posted 10 May 2009 - 10:26 PM
If they hadn't used him as the captain of the Kelvin, I would have said that actor would have been a cool Khan. Honestly though, I don't want to see Kumar or Khan for that matter. Let Kirk piss some new villain off by sleeping with his woman
Hooray!!!
Oh and Goth, remember Sybock was the older brother to Spock. So we're not really sure if he was killed on Vulcan or that the events of STV will happen as they did in the original universe
Maybe we should move all of those spoiler posts over to this thread. Here's something that should clear things up for you Dav. Look on the brightside, Kirk is still the youngest Starfleet captain and the only cadet to beat the Kobayashi Maru. Given he saved the freakin' planet and proved to be cool under pressure, I can see that.
#7
Posted 10 May 2009 - 10:34 PM
#8
Posted 11 May 2009 - 01:53 AM
#9
Posted 11 May 2009 - 03:47 AM
You know, I get some of what DavAnthony is saying.
What's really new with this movie? It didn't really have me thinking about anything. In fact I went with a friend who wasn't a Trek Fan, and while we both enjoyed the film (we really did, we thought it was fun!), we thought there were huge holes in the plot, and much of it was forced. I had to explain the real motivation of Nero (I read the back story comic) because my friend came away thinking his revenge motivation against Spock was a bit weak.
In the end it's about a revenge driven antagonist (like Khan) that goes back in time (like the Borg Queen) to use it's "Death Star" like technology (Red Matter) to destroy Vulcan and Earth.
For myself (and my friend) the scene with young Kirk stealing and destroying his step-fathers car didn't sit right. It doesn't set him up to be a leader of men, a great captain, he comes off as a jerk IMO. Arrogant & self centered, without concern for the pain or hurt that he will cause to himself or others. That's not someone who inspires people to follow them. That's not a leader of men, women, or whatever... That's never been the James T. Kirk I've seen.
In particular, the Science was particularly bad in many scenes, which you can read about here. So it's more "fi" then Sci-Fi for me, and that's a bit of a disappointment as it was one of the things that Star Trek really prided it's self and attempted to do well.
That being said some of the positive.... I loved the way the bridge looked, and really loved the way engineering looked! I've been in many industrial plants and power plants, and personally, I think all the busy pipes and wires and such are much more realistic.
I thought the movie successfully re-introduced the friendships of Kirk, McCoy and Spock, and it did so with some smart and at time witty dialog. If there is one thing I walked away from that movie with, that was it.
I also really liked Simon Pegg as Scotty. Again one of the great things about TOS, was you had actors, like Doohan, that looked like your every day guy. Not a GQ guy, not a perfect smile, etc.
Overall, I was able to put aside that this isn't the Star Trek that I knew, or that I think Roddenberry envisioned, but it's probably the Star Trek he originally pitched the the corp suites... a space western, where star ships replace horses and zap guns replace 6-shooters. It took 40 years, but they finally got what they wanted all along
#10
Posted 11 May 2009 - 04:37 AM
I think this is a result of not having his StarFleet Officer father there to guide him as he grows up. Even though events were changed, his destiny was still a constant, to become a Star Fleet Captain. He went the hard way, but he still made it. Yes, i agree with above comment about Kirk becoming a Captain right out of the Academy. The story must have been written by someone who was never in the military or had ever wached a military drama before, because no one ever gets their own command right out of the Academy. There needs to be years of experience going through the other ranks before your ready for that huge responsibility.
#11
Posted 11 May 2009 - 04:38 AM
Also do not forget that Pike went from Capt to Adm. Even Rear Adm is no less then 3 jumps.
Captain
Fleet Captain
Commodore
Rear Adm
Vice Adm
Adm
Fleet Adm
C in C (Commander in Chief)
#12
Posted 11 May 2009 - 05:01 AM
Also, I'd like to note that in most organizations such as star fleet, disclosure of an intimate relationship between a superior and subordinate would be mandatory, and re-assignment of one, or the other would be done simply to avoid even the appearance of a violation of integrity or code of ethics. In other words, Uhura would not have been assigned under the command of Spock, and for Spock to do so suggests a real issue with his ethics. Ironic because he basically accuses Kirk of said same violation. But perhaps that is the point?
#13
Posted 11 May 2009 - 06:14 AM
#14
Posted 11 May 2009 - 06:39 AM
Another apt comment my non-trek friend made was why did both Spock and Kirk go over to the Romulan ship... obviously we both understand that it promotes our heroes in the story plot, but, we both agreed, that Pike made better and more realistic command decisions when he sent Sulu and Kirk to disengage the drilling platform.
When your the Capt, you deligate those tasks. As Pike says... "Your not even supposed to be here..." so it makes sense to send him. But once Kirk has command, he should have delegated the away mission. His 1st priority should have been to the ship and crew.
Ok, that's a nit, and in keeping a balance with giving praise, as wells as a crit... It made all the sense in the world to make Uhura a linguistics expert. This is truely in the style of Hosi, ala Enterprise, and it makes sense that your comm officer is more then justa switchboard operator. That was something that Ent fixed, and I was delighted to see it carried forward.
#15
Posted 11 May 2009 - 07:40 AM
1. While drunk and bloodied on a bar floor Kirk is told he can have his own ship 4 years after graduating the academy. That, to me, seems like a ridiculuously short amount of time to begin with. So apparently his "aptitude test scores" place him on a fast track to begin with.
2. Starfleet lost several ships and (presumably) their captains when they disptached (was it 7?) ships to Vulcan. So they are shorthanded and in need of ships immeadiately (again, presumably).
3. Pike has a man-crush on Kirk from the start, to the point that he makes him second in command as he's leaving the ship. So really he wasn't promoted from cadet to captain, he was promoted from suspended cadet to commander, then to captain, LOL. And, imo it's fair to assume that Pike had a hand in choosing his own replacement.
4. Kirk fought and defeated the biggest threat to Starfleet up to that point. He proved that he could command and that the crew followed him. Why replace him with someone else and possibly lower the morale of the crew that just saved the Federation?
Anyway, just my .02.
#16
Posted 11 May 2009 - 07:53 AM
Hang on!
ENT cannon is still in play! The Xindi threat seems to have been just as great... both were in for destroying the earth!
#17
Posted 11 May 2009 - 08:08 AM
ENT cannon is still in play! The Xindi threat seems to have been just as great... both were in for destroying the earth!
LOL, I knew I should've qualified that statement with a IINM. In any case, it was a huge threat, one that several ships and their captains couldn't handle together, much less on their own.
#18
Posted 11 May 2009 - 09:10 AM
The Donster: To not like it makes them ****heads wink.gif
Very Classy Donster. The thing I find amusing is that in this whole "discussion" about the merits of this movie I have not once resorted to calling some one retarded, or a ****head (as THE donster just did in a round and about but obvious way). Have I said that perhaps they are being affected by the continual Dumbing Down of entertainment and what the masses consider to be good-Yes. However that isn't a personal attack, it's a comment. There's is a difference. It seems with the SNL skit that Donster linked to where he bascially tole me that I'm a ****head (once again great argument strategy there THE Donster) But it seems that they even got good Ole' Leonard Nimoy telling people that if you don't like this movie that "you just don't get it, your a ****head or your fat and retarded looking" like the two Trekkies they had on the show.
Donster thank you for proving my point though. I've been stating that Star Trek has been watered and dumbed down and you resorting to an action that you felt would be clever proved my point of people behaving and therefore acting in the direction of the lowest common denominator that sadly this movie seems to of attracted.
#19
Posted 11 May 2009 - 09:23 AM
Well, if Spock can't even save his mother, I doubt he can save his (1/2) brother!
You know, I get some of what DavAnthony is saying.
What's really new with this movie? It didn't really have me thinking about anything. In fact I went with a friend who wasn't a Trek Fan, and while we both enjoyed the film (we really did, we thought it was fun!), we thought there were huge holes in the plot, and much of it was forced. I had to explain the real motivation of Nero (I read the back story comic) because my friend came away thinking his revenge motivation against Spock was a bit weak.
In the end it's about a revenge driven antagonist (like Khan) that goes back in time (like the Borg Queen) to use it's "Death Star" like technology (Red Matter) to destroy Vulcan and Earth.
For myself (and my friend) the scene with young Kirk stealing and destroying his step-fathers car didn't sit right. It doesn't set him up to be a leader of men, a great captain, he comes off as a jerk IMO. Arrogant & self centered, without concern for the pain or hurt that he will cause to himself or others. That's not someone who inspires people to follow them. That's not a leader of men, women, or whatever... That's never been the James T. Kirk I've seen.
In particular, the Science was particularly bad in many scenes, which you can read about here. So it's more "fi" then Sci-Fi for me, and that's a bit of a disappointment as it was one of the things that Star Trek really prided it's self and attempted to do well.
That being said some of the positive.... I loved the way the bridge looked, and really loved the way engineering looked! I've been in many industrial plants and power plants, and personally, I think all the busy pipes and wires and such are much more realistic.
I thought the movie successfully re-introduced the friendships of Kirk, McCoy and Spock, and it did so with some smart and at time witty dialog. If there is one thing I walked away from that movie with, that was it.
I also really liked Simon Pegg as Scotty. Again one of the great things about TOS, was you had actors, like Doohan, that looked like your every day guy. Not a GQ guy, not a perfect smile, etc.
Overall, I was able to put aside that this isn't the Star Trek that I knew, or that I think Roddenberry envisioned, but it's probably the Star Trek he originally pitched the the corp suites... a space western, where star ships replace horses and zap guns replace 6-shooters. It took 40 years, but they finally got what they wanted all along
[/quote
Good points Gothneo. I like Simon Pegg I just didn't like them making Scotty as comedic as they did. I didn't mine Kirk being a jerk as a kid since they have to make him appealing to the smart ass generation that kids are nowadays. Also the transition from a jerk to a leader has happened to many people in the past who have become great leaders. There early years are marked by self-centerdness and self-glorification. Once time passes and they learn those approaches don't work they go the other direction.
I also think you hit the nail right on the head of how teens and young kids now have the feeling of entitlement. That you should just give them things and in their world it is completely reasonable that they should never have to work so to be a Cadet and go to Captain in the matter of a few days is the real world...frightening isn't it?
#20
Posted 11 May 2009 - 09:56 AM
The Donster: To not like it makes them ****heads wink.gif
Very Classy Donster. The thing I find amusing is that in this whole "discussion" about the merits of this movie I have not once resorted to calling some one retarded, a dickhead (as THE donster just did in a round and about but obvious way). Have I said that perhaps they are being affected by the continual Dumbing Down of entertainment and what the masses consider to be good-Yes. However that isn't a personal attack, it's a comment. There's is a difference. It seems with the SNL skit that Donster linked to where he bascially tole me that I'm a dickhead (once again great argument strategy there THE Donster) But it seems that they even got good Ole' Leonard Nimoy telling people that if you don't like this movie that "you just don't get it, your a dickhead or your fat and retarded looking" like the two Trekkies they had on the show.
Donster thank you for proving my point though. I've been stating that Star Trek has been watered and dumbed down and you resorting to an action that you felt would be clever proved my point of people behaving and therefore acting in the direction of the lowest common denominator that sadly this movie seems to of attracted.
At least we all paid to watch the movie so that we could make a good judgment instead of illegaly downloading it and posting such in the forums. Some people cant seem to make a biased judgment on this film due to the fact that they had already decided that they wouldnt like it. So instead they just try and pick apart everything and try and ruin it for everyone else.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users