High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource > General Chit Chat > At The Movies and Movie Discussions
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

At The Movies and Movie Discussions A place to discuss movies in the theater, movie theater technology and 3D Technology.

Marlowe at the Movies: STAR TREK (Paramount/Bad Robot)

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-11-2009, 11:56 PM   #1
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default Marlowe at the Movies: STAR TREK (Paramount/Bad Robot)



NOTE: Varying degrees of plot discussion and spoilers below.

Just returned home from finally seeing one of the hottest box office launches of the summer season -- one possibly set to break some records if the numbers continue to rise. I have been a rabid fan of the original show and then of the original crew motion pictures (up until The Undiscovered Country) and I was able to tolerate (in small amounts) The Next Generation show and its film versions. However, I could never allow myself to get into the spinoff series like Enterprise or Voyager; to me, these just weren't Trek or Roddenberry's vision in any way, shape or form, and I know original fans will understand what I'm talking about.

And so because it's been awhile -- not since Nemesis have we seen a Trek adventure on the big screen -- I went into this "prequel reboot" by JJ Abrams with some skepticism. The online vibes for this one have been absolutely staggering and border on the insane depending on which fan site you visit and indulge in its excessive blogging. You want to know something? I didn't really care for it, friends -- now before you whip out your hand held phasers and take a shot at me, let me say that I'm sure I may find some better karma for it when it arrives on home video.

I really wanted to like it -- but knowing beforehand that Abrams changed much of the Trek "logic" () and rules of its previous universe created by people like Roddenberry and Nick Meyer just made it more difficult on me to really "accept" this as a reboot for this franchise. Alas, as I feared, this film is really aimed at a demographic that in no way, shape or form was raised on the original series or films -- no matter that familiar characters like Spock, Kirk and McCoy are splashed all over it. But I'm getting a bit ahead of myself here...let me break down what I didn't like about it for those reading this as a review before they go see it.

I know the consensus has been that Abrams just nailed the cast perfectly here -- but I disagree. Perhaps Spock was spot-on as a younger Starfleet science officer, but I simply could not believe this was a young James Kirk we were watching. The recklessness of his character was overkill in my opinion, and the whole thing just had too much of a "modern edge" to it in suggesting this was a look back at Starfleet in its "roots." I had the biggest issues with the young McCoy, who in my opinion would have seemed better as the younger Chekov with a Russian accent, and the young Scotty and Uhura -- I just didn't buy either of them. The introduction of engineer Montgomery Scott was goofy in its delivery, and the whole love story between Uhura and Spock was absolutely ridiculous -- but I'll get to that. Also, the sequence where Kirk is ready to give his Tiberius Stiffy to one of those green female aliens we love so much when Uhura walks in and begins undressing down to bra and panties seemed completely and utterly as if Abrams was trying just too damn hard...this is supposed to be the origins of Trek with a buff, muscular Kirk making out with a green chick as modern rock music plays in the background? Do they honestly want us to believe that? It was as if the filmmakers couldn't resist adding some 20-something sex drama lifted right from Alias or any number of shows recently seen on the WB to the "new and improved" Trek for the "i-Pod Generation." Whatever.

To be honest, I didn't even care for the opening title sequence; I felt it was weak and could have been better. Abrams changes the Trek universe at the get-go, setting up a plot that really had nothing to do with the Enterprise origins with Captain Chris Pike based on TV show episodes like "The Menagerie" and "The Cage." The attempt to connect the Pike character with Kirk's beginnings and their relationships with the rest of the well-known crew was there, but it was mingled with a sub-plot involving some vengeful Romulans who travel in a massive ship reminiscent of the vessel from Nemesis and who also create a black hole which changes space and time; somewhere in this mess of a story is the idea that a parallel universe has been created -- one in which Leonard Nimoy returns as an older Spock so he can speak to a young James Kirk and then to a younger version of himself later on. The whole thing was campy and ridiculous to me; it almost seemed as if Abrams was lifting a bunch of themes from different Treks along the way -- the "Nexus" idea from Generations, the alien costuming and battleships from Nemesis, the parallel universe angle from the "Mirror, Mirror" episode of the original show...the comparisons can go on and on.

You know what the biggest problem of this project was? Although this ran for two and a half hours, it just felt rushed -- in no way did we really get to see the true "origins" of Starfleet, or how Kirk went through the Academy in his training; the Kobiashi Maru training test, while interesting, was short and "lacking" -- the fact that Abrams went as far as to include this tidbit for fans was nice, but the sequence itself was unsatisfying. There was an odd feel to the film, as well as an odd pacing in my view; sometimes, the plot got way too modern with a young Kirk speeding in a car in Iowa, barely being able to see over the steering wheel, while the Beastie Boys' "Sabotage" blasts in the background...what? This isn't Star Trek people. The boy is then chased down by a speeding robotic "police officer" (hinting at the fact that we're in a future of some kind) while a futuristic Iowa pulsates in the distance...I don't know; this is not how I envisioned James T. Kirk as a boy on his farm in Iowa when Shatner mentions it so many times during the run of the show and films.

An interesting opening attempt by Abrams, though, gives us a glimpse into the Starfleet world before Kirk was even born -- remember the lead terrorist that takes Robert Downey Jr. hostage in Iron Man? He plays the captain of a ship carrying Kirk's father as an officer. When this mysterious Romulan ship attacks, the captain must board the alien vessel in order to save his crew, but Kirk Sr. ends up commanding for a few moments -- just enough to send his wife and child to safety as he sacrifices himself. The boy, of course, grows up to be the James Tiberius Kirk we know and love, but I am uncertain of how much accuracy is delivered by Abrams here. It seems the material is vague and unreferenced in the fact that according to Starfleet "history" and the basis of the Trek world, is this what really happened to Kirk's father...or is it another "loose interpretation" much like Heath Ledger's Joker from The Dark Knight?

From there, we are introduced to a James T. Kirk that has grown up and is the ultimate ladies' man which he grows into during the Shatner years; again, the props here are awkward in that the "bars" Kirk frequents in Iowa just don't look like anything out of Trek. At one of these places, a brawling, cocky Kirk gets man handled by a bunch of Starfleet bad asses, but continues trying to hit on a young, rather sexy Uhura in her red mini dress and go-go boots. Kirk also catches the attention of Captain Christopher Pike, in command of the USS Enterprise, who talks him into joining Starfleet Academy based on his father's devotion to the service. Once again...I just don't know how much of this is "true" or "accurate" according to the initial Trek universe -- sure, you can argue that Abrams is using suspension of disbelief here to take the franchise in an all-new direction and that these things don't matter...but original concept fans would be bothered by some of the inconsistencies and awkward presentation we have here. Yes -- Pike was the original commander of the Enterprise, but according to the original show, Spock served under Pike and Kirk had nothing to do with the situation at that time. I suppose it could be argued that Abrams is simply creating a scenario that could have taken place, in that Kirk was aboard the original Enterprise at the same time Spock and Pike were, and that's how things came to be...but it was a bit off-putting. There was a clever reference, though, to Pike being in a wheelchair at the end of the film, which is a direct acknowledgement of the Pike that was in the chair in "The Menagerie."

At any rate, Kirk decides to take Pike's suggestion of joining Starfleet and hops aboard the transport taking the cadets to headquarters, where he meets Leonard McCoy, medical officer. The McCoy character, in my opinion, was one of the most out-of-place pieces here; you just can't see this guy growing up to be DeForest Kelley. Meanwhile, in a more interesting segment, we see a young Spock being made fun of by his other Vulcan classmates for being part Human -- something always referenced to. However, again, I don't think they nailed the Sarek or Amanda characters of Spock's parents right at all. I didn't buy Spock's father as gearing up to age into Mark Leonard's role, and the decision to do what they did to Spock's mother (who looked nothing like the character in the show or The Voyage Home) didn't thrill me either. As hinted at in the show and in some of the original films, Spock decides to decline entrance into the Vulcan Science Academy and chooses to go to Starfleet, assigned to USS Enterprise.

The attack by the Romulans on Vulcan forces an emergency that puts Kirk, Spock and McCoy together on the Enterprise under Pike's command; this is where the story went awry for me and I found myself actually wondering how much more time was left to the film -- something I never thought I would have done. In some strange Abrams attempt to yarn a new Trek tale, the Romulans, as I reported, create a black hole (First Contact anyone?) which spits the crew back and forth between the future, past and present -- or so I thought. Somewhere along the way, a young James Kirk is dropped on a planet where he is attacked by huge alien creatures and runs into an old Spock, played by the great Leonard Nimoy, of course. While a clever angle and touch by Abrams to bring some familiarity to the project, Nimoy's deliveries and conversations with the young Kirk and then with himself later on were just silly. Meanwhile, Pike is taken "hostage" by the Romulans on their ship (remind you of First Contact once again?) where a creature is inserted into his body so he may give up the defensive positions of Federation zones (does this sound anything like it was lifted from The Wrath of Khan?).

Somehow, someway, Kirk ends up being "assigned" captain of the Enterprise after Spock takes command when Pike is captured, and then the old Spock tells the young Kirk he must find a way to bring Spock's emotions out of him to the point that he will be in violation of behavior for acting commanding officer...got all this? The young Kirk returns from the planet he ran into Spock on, and revs Spock up to the point that Spock belts him around -- and I mean belts him (this was a direct lift from the original episode "Shore Leave" I believe, where the crew is exposed to "spores" in flowers that affect their minds)...Spock must be relieved of command, so Kirk is placed in the captain's chair -- but the logic behind this is really bizarre. All of a sudden, Scotty's onboard beaming people up, and Chekov, Sulu and Uhura are all calling him "captain" when there was no real advance of command authorized, especially considering the fact that Kirk wasn't even supposed to be on the ship in the first place. It was just too rushed and bizarre to me.

Then there's the issue of the ship itself -- as much as character in the films and shows as the actors themselves, and perhaps more so, the Enterprise has always been a sleek, sexy ship, running rings around designs like the Reliant or Excelsior; NCC-1701 and then all the designs up to NCC-1701-D of The Next Generation were all great looking Starfleet battlecruisers. But I don't know exactly what Abrams did with the ship for this prequel reboot -- it's like a goofy, swollen hybrid of the original TV series Enterprise and the one from the first few film versions. The warp drive effect also didn't impress me, showing ships that warp out into space with no blur of colors or anything. The interior of the ships in this film were also strange...the inside of the Enterprise was randomly pieced together with bits from the bridge of the TV show ship coupled with weird variations of the film series. There were accurate touches by the design team with things such as the little gooseneck lamps above the consoles, as the bridge appeared in the Pike episodes of the original show, but the production design for the interior sets was just plain weird.

Then, there's the animal attraction between Spock and Uhura...when did this ever happen? What's the deal with an emotionless Spock making out with a sexy young Uhura on the turbolift? This was extremely odd. And what was the deal with the ridiculously odd fitting Chekov character? There's no way I would have believed this kid would have grown to be Walter Koenig. The little accurate references to things like Sulu knowing how to fence were nice, but at the end of the day, this whole thing just felt, for lack of a better term, strange. In an ending that simply highlights all the mayhem and rushed pacing that came before it, Kirk returns to Starfleet in San Francisco where he is appointed captain of the Enterprise while a wheelchair-bound Pike congratulates him...but there are a few problems here: What about the creature the Romulans put in Pike's body to control him? And there was no "rite of passage" for Kirk before he becomes captain? He just becomes captain of a starship without any other previous experience in space...and that's it? As I said, there were many rushed, unexplained elements of Abrams' Star Trek, and while it may have been a genuine attempt to tell an origin story and perhaps re-energize this franchise for a new generation, fans of the original concept are left wondering what happened, balking at a motion picture seemingly made for an audience used to ingesting a steady diet of shows like Smallville, Alias, X-Files and all the entrants of a WB network roster.

I would have to see this again at home to determine if it could grow on me, and if I will purchase the Blu-ray Disc.

On a positive note, though, fellas, there's plenty of eye candy here with the female Starfleet officers wearing those mini-dress uniforms shorter than you've ever seen...

Last edited by Peter Marlowe; 05-12-2009 at 05:21 PM.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 11:49 AM   #2
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

It was suggested that perhaps budgetary restraints was the factor behind some of the interior shots of the Enterprise and such, but according to all accounts, Abrams had near Carte Blanche to create this prequel reboot.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 04:51 PM   #3
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Bump...For Tvine...

Also...I wanted to stress, 'Vine, that one of the most ridiculous and senseless portions of the film comes when "little boy Kirk" (played by that annoying blonde, long-haired kid) is driving the sports car in Iowa and "Saboutage" by the Beasties is blasting in the background...absolutely out of place and awkward.

You know what else bothered me, now that I have been thinking about it in greater length? I can recall the original teaser trailers for this film -- in theaters and then on Paramount/Abrams home video titles like Cloverfield -- and those teasers suggested that we'd actually be seeing the real, genuine beginnings of Starfleet, with the Enterprise being built outside SpaceDock or at a shipyard...one teaser even included the words "UNDER CONSTRUCTION" at the end, suggesting to me at least that this may have been a sub-title consideration and the angle was going to be on the actual building of the ship and other ships in the 'fleet. We didn't really see this in the film, and there wasn't a great deal of time or effort placed on the ship itself -- we see the boarding party enter NCC-1701, and there are some cool fly-bys, but I was hoping for something as dramatic as when Scotty takes Kirk around the newly outfitted ship in The Motion Picture.

Last edited by Peter Marlowe; 05-12-2009 at 05:27 PM.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 05:50 PM   #4
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,730
Default

Quote:
And there was no "rite of passage" for Kirk before he becomes captain? He just becomes captain of a starship without any other previous experience in space...and that's it?
It was rushed but I guess it follows that whole 'you cant deny destiny' type theme. History was changed forever yet SOMEHOW the original crew ended up together(with a little help from old spock)

And they had to make Kirk captain, its not like starfleet was gonna say 'oh you were just a temporary captain and pike was just kidding when he made you first officer.' Plus Pike became admiral in the end, there was no way he was gonna deny kirk being a captain after he saved him.

As for emotionless spock I think the big change in this story is that after vulcan was destroyed and he lost his mom, he no longer is 'emotionless' and the human side of him is more prevalent than before. Had vulcan not be destroyed Uhura would have had nothing to do with him like in the original.

Last edited by DonnyDC; 05-12-2009 at 05:54 PM.
DonnyDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 06:05 PM   #5
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonnyDC View Post
It was rushed but I guess it follows that whole 'you cant deny destiny' type theme. History was changed forever yet SOMEHOW the original crew ended up together(with a little help from old spock)
The pacing felt rushed in that before I knew it, we were at the credits rolling, and Kirk was spinning in the captain's chair like a cackling little child, and I was like "What just happened?" I thought more development of the history of Starfleet could have been explored, but instead we got a buff, young Kirk speeding around Iowa like straight out of a Lois & Clark episode or something, hitting on Uhura, making out with the obligatory green alien...I don't know; something just wasn't handled right IMO. Plus, as I mentioned in the review, I understand Abrams was taking liberties here with changing the Trek universe a bit, and that's what most people who enjoyed the film are sticking to and swearing by, but I would have enjoyed a more accurate portrayal of the events leading to Kirk's captain ranking, and everything that went down with Pike and the original cast before Kirk even came into the picture -- this kind of information is readily available in dozens of Trek geek "bibles" which go deep into the culture and "exact timeline" of happenings in this world. Even at the Las Vegas Hilton Hotel, there is an attraction there called "STAR TREK: THE EXPERIENCE," and before you enter the simulator ride, you walk though a Star Trek"museum" which features a huge timeline that documents EVERYTHING that took place and WHEN in the Trek universe. I would have liked it better if something in this method was followed more accurately; rather, it seemed to me that Abrams simply went with a familiar Trek reference -- such as "Captain Christopher Pike" -- and it didn't really matter how it was handled.

Quote:
And they had to make Kirk captain, its not like starfleet was gonna say 'oh you were just a temporary captain and pike was just kidding when he made you first officer.' Plus Pike became admiral in the end, there was no way he was gonna deny kirk being a captain after he saved him.
I'm not SAYING that it should have gone down like that -- but again, the screenplay pacing was rushed in that he's just promoted to captain after "acting" as one toward the end of the film in a brief ceremony with Starfleet brass...it didn't feel anchored or explored correctly to me.

Quote:
As for emotionless spock I think the big change in this story is that after vulcan was destroyed and he lost his mom, he no longer is 'emotionless' and the human side of him is more prevalent than before.
But that's not the LEGEND of the character, nor was it what was in Roddenberry's original visions; while many disagree, I am holding to the fact that the sequence with Spock kissing Uhura was absolutely ridiculous -- the biggest problem with all the acting and setpieces is that the whole thing just felt way too "modern" for its own good, and I feared this was going to happen after people started to say that anyone who enjoys Lost, Alias, etc. is going to like this. It was like Star Trek meets a Banana Republic ad or something...beyond this, the interior shots of the bridge and such were randomly awkward; there were times I didn't even make out the front viewscreen at the front of the bridge because the effect was handled so awkwardly.

However, the member who mentioned the accuracies regarding the sonic "silences" such as during the hull breach and such was a good point, and well-taken.

Last edited by Peter Marlowe; 05-12-2009 at 06:16 PM.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 06:30 PM   #6
F91
Plasmatic
 
F91's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Posts: 2,780
Default

What was the budget for that review?? My god, I don't have THAT much time on my hands!!

LOVED the movie by the way....
__________________
"you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders." Jesse Ventura
Proud to be living in a hatt free zone.
F91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 06:32 PM   #7
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

I'm not even going to bother with a reply to that remark, because you have me on "Ignore" anyway, except to say that my review of this title is a grain of sand on the beach compared to people like Bill Hunt and others that own review sites who wrote such an in-depth analysis on the subject, your head would spin...
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 08:34 PM   #8
60 is the new 50
 
gossamer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Da Boogie-down Bronx
Posts: 590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Marlowe View Post
Bump...For Tvine...

Also...I wanted to stress, 'Vine, that one of the most ridiculous and senseless portions of the film comes when "little boy Kirk" (played by that annoying blonde, long-haired kid) is driving the sports car in Iowa and "Saboutage" by the Beasties is blasting in the background...absolutely out of place and awkward.
I didn't feel that way at all. The kid was actually very good in that scene. The scene is about what happens to a kid that doesn't have a role model and predictably becomes rebellious. I also felt "Sabotage" can be a song that can stand the test of time.
__________________
Panasonic TC-P60VT60 Plasma
Oppo BDP-103 Blu-ray Player
Scientific-Atlanta SA8300HD DVR
Apple TV 3 Streaming Box
Toshiba HD-A2 HD DVD
Onkyo TX-SR706 Receiver
Paradigm Cinema 110 Speaker System
Pioneer CLD-3070 LaserDisc Player
Panasonic DMRES15 DVD Recorder
JVC HR-S8000U S-VHS
gossamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 11:34 PM   #9
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gossamer View Post
I didn't feel that way at all. The kid was actually very good in that scene. The scene is about what happens to a kid that doesn't have a role model and predictably becomes rebellious.
That kid wasn't James Kirk -- at all. Have you ever read some of the descriptions of how he grew up in Iowa on the farm based on Star Trek fan "backstory fan materials"?

Quote:
I also felt "Sabotage" can be a song that can stand the test of time.
Absolutely not -- it was totally awkward and didn't belong in a Trek film; it just perpetuated the entire "way too modern, way too WB" vibe the film pulsated with.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2009, 04:13 AM   #10
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,730
Default

You guys might find this interesting.
http://www.comicmix.com/news/2009/05...e-annotations/

Heres a few
Quote:
- Spock mentions that his parents, as well as the Vulcan elders, will be present in the "Katric chamber." Vulcans refer to a person's soul and consciousness as their "katra." In Star Trek II: The Search for Spock, we first learned about the katra and that all Vulcans, when death is near, use their telepathic abilities to transfer their own katra into a friend who will then bring it back to Vulcan to be stored so that their accumulated knowledge will not be lost. Later, Spock remarks that the Vulcan elders now preserve his planet's culture, meaning that they now possess the katras (or most of the katras) that were accumulated in the temple.

- Kirk officially becomes the Captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 in the year 2258, three years after joining Starfleet Academy in 2255. In the original timeline, he was not given the Enterprise until 2264, 14 years after joining the Academy in 2250.

- Uhura is initially assigned to the U.S.S. Farragut. In the original series, Kirk stated that he served aboard the Farragut as a lieutenant after graduating from Starfleet Academy, some time after serving aboard the U.S.S. Republic as an ensign

- - "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." This statement was originally made by Sherlock Holmes. Spock himself said it in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, stating that it had been spoken by an ancestor of his. Since Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character in the Star Trek universe, Spock obviously meant that the author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was an ancestor of his.
And heres a couple for marlowe.
Quote:
- Spock Prime informs Kirk that he can replace the current Captain of the Enterprise if he can prove that the younger Spock has been emotionally compromised. Spock attempted a similar tactic against a superior officer in the original series episode "The Doomsday Machine."
Quote:
- Spock Prime giving Scotty a formula years before its invented is similar to something Scotty did in the film Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

Last edited by DonnyDC; 05-13-2009 at 04:19 AM.
DonnyDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2009, 08:52 AM   #11
F91
Plasmatic
 
F91's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Posts: 2,780
Default

I thought Sabotage was was a good fit. The car was older than the song and it make sense that it's owner would have a penchant for vintage things. Kind of like the guys at the car shows having beach boys music playing in their Mustangs.
Beach boys= Beastie boys? Coincidence?

Whatever the opinions of individuals about the film are , the writers did their homework and Know Trek. Whether or not they pleased every single Trek fan on the planet isn't even a debate that can be seriously entered. No one can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gossamer View Post
I didn't feel that way at all. The kid was actually very good in that scene. The scene is about what happens to a kid that doesn't have a role model and predictably becomes rebellious. I also felt "Sabotage" can be a song that can stand the test of time.
__________________
"you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders." Jesse Ventura
Proud to be living in a hatt free zone.
F91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2009, 10:49 AM   #12
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
tvine2000's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: vermont
Age: 64
Posts: 1,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Marlowe View Post
Bump...For Tvine...

Also...I wanted to stress, 'Vine, that one of the most ridiculous and senseless portions of the film comes when "little boy Kirk" (played by that annoying blonde, long-haired kid) is driving the sports car in Iowa and "Saboutage" by the Beasties is blasting in the background...absolutely out of place and awkward.

You know what else bothered me, now that I have been thinking about it in greater length? I can recall the original teaser trailers for this film -- in theaters and then on Paramount/Abrams home video titles like Cloverfield -- and those teasers suggested that we'd actually be seeing the real, genuine beginnings of Starfleet, with the Enterprise being built outside SpaceDock or at a shipyard...one teaser even included the words "UNDER CONSTRUCTION" at the end, suggesting to me at least that this may have been a sub-title consideration and the angle was going to be on the actual building of the ship and other ships in the 'fleet. We didn't really see this in the film, and there wasn't a great deal of time or effort placed on the ship itself -- we see the boarding party enter NCC-1701, and there are some cool fly-bys, but I was hoping for something as dramatic as when Scotty takes Kirk around the newly outfitted ship in The Motion Picture.
i would have to see the movie again,but i'll wait for the blu-ray.
i can tell you in some of the spin off series like voyager,there were at least 2 episodes,where they spoke off kirk and spock.one where janeway says kirk was quite the ladies man.now when tos was on tv they couldn't show that.i mean it was the 60's.there were changes in all the movies and spinoff series,to suit the story.so i'm no stranger to changes in the startrek canon.in the series enterprize there was a episode where they encounter the borg.enterprize was before tos.in this new movie i think jj gets away with it because its a new time line.so it goes with all time travel stories.i will say i respect your review because at least you went and saw it.some people hear didn't and still had something to say about.some trekkies said they wouldn't see it,how childless can one be.trekkies have been know to think somehow startrek is theres alone.as i said before paramount is all for what has happen with this movie and even nimoy said roddenberry would have liked the film.in closing i'll say i have always loved startrek and what it stands for.for me this new movie has done what it was mean't to do.the next movie will tell the story for me ''startrek to be or not to be.there was a few things in this movie that were real good .when pike tells kirk to do better then his father ,thats a huge message for 16 year old.a positive thing and what make trek stand apart from the rest of the scfi world.
again thanks peter for the review,and keep shaking up crew here at the hdf, tom
tvine2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2009, 09:37 PM   #13
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonnyDC View Post
You guys might find this interesting.
http://www.comicmix.com/news/2009/05...e-annotations/

Heres a few
And heres a couple for marlowe.
Thanks for providing them, but what do those have to do with how I saw this film's misguided attempts as a prequel or reboot? Even though many are saying this wasn't a prequel, BTW, it really is in that I saw an interview with Abrams on a satellite channel Sci-Fi Channel spinoff of some kind, and he mentioned it is indeed a telling of how the crew first came together -- he was hesitant to use the term "prequel" but he stated we should use our imaginations to fill in the blanks of that word...

At any rate, sure, there is a clear and obvious connection to things Spock has said and how they tie into films like The Undiscovered Country -- and that Sherlock Holmes quote, along with all the Klingon and Federation references to Shakespeare, were definitely accurate -- but that still doesn't explain the ridiculous license Abrams took with the whole Spock and Uhura making out in the turbolift thing, nor does it "fix" the choices made to appeal to a younger, more "raised on the WB network" demographic, such as Kirk banging the alien with shots of his buff chest while Uhura walks in and strips down to her panties...sure, it was great eye candy, but this isn't a film version of Alias or Lost -- the acting was odd and out of place for a Star Trek film. A kid in Iowa would be blasting a Beastie Boys song while a futristic-style metropolis of sorts glows in the distance? Ijust didn't buy it, I'm sorry.

I'll address some of the other issues from the other member below.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2009, 09:46 PM   #14
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by F91 View Post
I thought Sabotage was was a good fit. The car was older than the song and it make sense that it's owner would have a penchant for vintage things. Kind of like the guys at the car shows having beach boys music playing in their Mustangs.
Beach boys= Beastie boys? Coincidence?

Whatever the opinions of individuals about the film are , the writers did their homework and Know Trek. Whether or not they pleased every single Trek fan on the planet isn't even a debate that can be seriously entered. No one can.
It does indeed come down to a matter of opinion and preference, and I do not agree in any way, shape or form that Saboutage belonged in that sequence -- nor could I "believe" (even WITH suspension of disbelief which you must have) this kid could grow into anything remotely resembling the older Kirk character, immortalized by Shatner. Now, I DO understand that perhaps Shatner wasn't the only, fully realized concept for the Kirk character in the PLANNINGS of Star Trek and his looks could be conceptualized by anyone, but I just didn't buy it -- as I said, even the older Kirk in the film looked like he stepped out of an episode of Dawson's Creek or a GAP ad, and it just didn't make sense to me...furthermore, I will hold to the fact that the character's recklessness was completely overkill and exaggerated in this. Of course, it's my opinion, and I do recognize that I'm in the minority here -- on this site and at possibly every breakfast table in the world.

Quote:
Whatever the opinions of individuals about the film are , the writers did their homework and Know Trek.
I think this was the biggest mishap of the whole project, and something I attempted to stress in the review -- I don't think there was nearly enough research put into making this authentic enough to be "believable"...as I said, even at the Las Vegas Hilton's world-renowned "Star Trek Experience" attraction, there is a Starfleet timeline you can view, and it documents all happenings between the Federation and EVERY known alien in the Trek universe, plus the assignments of every character we all know to their respective ships and duties...Abrams didn't really rely on any of this information or background from what I was able to tell, instead piecing together parts of episodes and lore from films, such as Pike commanding the first Enterprise and then being resigned to a wheelchair and such.
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2009, 09:48 PM   #15
HDF's Resident Reviewer
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvine2000 View Post
i would have to see the movie again,but i'll wait for the blu-ray.
i can tell you in some of the spin off series like voyager,there were at least 2 episodes,where they spoke off kirk and spock.one where janeway says kirk was quite the ladies man.now when tos was on tv they couldn't show that.i mean it was the 60's.there were changes in all the movies and spinoff series,to suit the story.so i'm no stranger to changes in the startrek canon.in the series enterprize there was a episode where they encounter the borg.enterprize was before tos.in this new movie i think jj gets away with it because its a new time line.so it goes with all time travel stories.i will say i respect your review because at least you went and saw it.some people hear didn't and still had something to say about.some trekkies said they wouldn't see it,how childless can one be.trekkies have been know to think somehow startrek is theres alone.as i said before paramount is all for what has happen with this movie and even nimoy said roddenberry would have liked the film.in closing i'll say i have always loved startrek and what it stands for.for me this new movie has done what it was mean't to do.the next movie will tell the story for me ''startrek to be or not to be.there was a few things in this movie that were real good .when pike tells kirk to do better then his father ,thats a huge message for 16 year old.a positive thing and what make trek stand apart from the rest of the scfi world.
again thanks peter for the review,and keep shaking up crew here at the hdf, tom
Tom,

You are very welcome for the review, and thank you for your comments, and it has been fun debating all the differences we all have regarding our opinions of the film, but...

Why are you still not spacing your words and sentences??? Is there something wrong with your keyboard??? I will buy you another one if that's the case!!

Seriously though, I don't mean, at all, to "shake up the crew" here at HDF -- but I will shake you up if you don't start writing your sentences better!!

LOL. I'm just kiddin'...
Peter Marlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource > General Chit Chat > At The Movies and Movie Discussions
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting 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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads to Marlowe at the Movies: STAR TREK (Paramount/Bad Robot)
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Star Trek Rocks!!!!! lordofthesith At The Movies and Movie Discussions 55 06-11-2009 09:24 PM
Bad Star Trek HD-DVD Disc 6 ? ljgates High Definition Media 14 04-14-2009 02:56 PM
Star Trek: Season One, HD DVD will reach 100,000 units sold!!! neal77 High Definition Media 32 02-09-2008 10:54 PM
Star Trek movies ONLY coming to HD-DVD in 2007 plus LOTS more PFC5 High Definition Media 31 01-18-2007 05:47 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:36 PM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2004 - 2008, High Def Forum