Seen Star Trek

[soundmotor]

Originally Posted by prisoners

and after seeing T4 last night I loved it even more. My god was T4 bad. The worst sequel of any genre since Blues Brothers 2000.

So I'll infer that T3 was better than T4?

[soundmotor]

Originally Posted by Sandy G

Astounding. It was 40 yrs ago this year that TOS went down in flames, a victim of high production costs & low ratings (But they were NEVER very good to begin with). Who'd a-thunk that a basically failed sci-fi TV series would go on to become a worldwide cultural phenomenen ?

You sir can go stand on that side of the room.

[dew042]

I thought it was wery wery good.

dew.

[prisoners]

Originally Posted by soundmotor

So I'll infer that T3 was better than T4?

I have to say T3 was less offending as T4. By "offending" I mean that while it wasn't a very good film, it didn't make me angry, only disappointed. T4 on the other hand, makes me want to boycott everything that the writer, director, and studio ever create from here on out.

[Bigerik]

Originally Posted by ducati_EL34

Please explain how it was not true to the original characters. Please tell me you did not think Kirk was a boyscout, in either time line...

Nope.

[M Jarve]

I've seen it twice now, and I am very pleased with it. TNG will always hold the special place in my heart, but this movie has raised my interest in TOS and the pre-NextGen movies.

I imagine that, before too long, they'll do some similar treatment for TNG's characters, and perhaps we'll really see Picard and Kirk swap places with Picard's youth spent in quiet and serious study...

[soundmotor]

Originally Posted by prisoners

I have to say T3 was less offending as T4. By "offending" I mean that while it wasn't a very good film, it didn't make me angry, only disappointed. T4 on the other hand, makes me want to boycott everything that the writer, director, and studio ever create from here on out.

Rotten Tomatoes, thumbs down, IMDB, thumbs up. Based on my own reaction to the films I've seen, I seem to follow IMDB trend so I think I am going to like it.

[prisoners]

Please report back after seeing it.

[BigNate]

One word I keep seeing in a lot in the posts is "fun," and I have to agree. So much science fiction since The Matrix has been dark, depressing, doom and gloom, the future will be horrifying, etc. It was nice to root for the good guys, laugh a little, and enjoy a Sci-fi (sorry, Harlan Ellison) movie for once instead of leaving it thinking "I hope that's not how the future turns out."

(SPOILER ALERT, DON'T READ ANYMORE IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT)

I would like to tell JJ Abrams that we're all now officially sick of time travel plots though. I've had my fill of that stuff on Lost. And I think Abrams even knows we're tired of it, as witnessed by Kirk saying, "Spock, going back in time and changing things is cheating."

All in all though a big

[Kegger]

Saw it last week, liked it quite a bit, excelent movie. (as others have said, entertaining)
Went with 2 friends who 1 thought it was a very good movie and other thought excelent.

---------

Saw T4 tonight, liked it, thought it was a pretty good movie, To me star trek was better.
Went with 2 friends who 1 thought it was a very good movie and other thought excelent.

[SoCal Sam]

I just bought the sound track by Michael Giacchino. Beautifully recorded, especially the Fench horn opening.

[Robie]

Saw Star Trek yesterday with my college daughter who was seeing it her second time. Unfortunately, my one piece Star Fleet uniform was at the cleaners. A total of 3 people in the theater at 3:45 on a Wednesday afternoon.

I'm surprised how much I liked it. Lots of reissues lose too much in the new story lines and rely solely on making the story more relevant and adding special effects. While there was "lots-o-action" throughout, I'm surprised how much I liked the casting particularly when you project TOS characters back in time. The characters are played a bit over the top but that could be chalked up to youthful exuberance too. In the end, I found them very credible.

IMO, the opening Corvette scene was a bit cheesy but thrilling, but exactly the kind of thing you'd find in the original TOS (but without the special effects). Although the story was a bit murky in parts, the action and character interaction carried it along very well.

Definitely worth seeing, IMO even if you are not a TOS fan.

[mech986]

Originally Posted by Robie

Saw Star Trek yesterday with my college daughter who was seeing it her second time. Unfortunately, my one piece Star Fleet uniform was at the cleaners. A total of 3 people in the theater at 3:45 on a Wednesday afternoon.

I'm surprised how much I liked it. Lots of reissues lose too much in the new story lines and rely solely on making the story more relevant and adding special effects. While there was "lots-o-action" throughout, I'm surprised how much I liked the casting particularly when you project TOS characters back in time. The characters are played a bit over the top but that could be chalked up to youthful exuberance too. In the end, I found them very credible.

IMO, the opening Corvette scene was a bit cheesy but thrilling, but exactly the kind of thing you'd find in the original TOS (but without the special effects). Although the story was a bit murky in parts, the action and character interaction carried it along very well.

Definitely worth seeing, IMO even if you are not a TOS fan.

***Spoiler alert***

The Corvette scene, at least in the movie, is edited and shown differently than depicted in the novelization, which may or may not follow the original screenplay. It is never clear which is "most correct" or "new canon". Anyway, according the to audiobook version of the novelization, young Jim Kirk lives with his stepfather in Iowa. Contrary to what is suggested in the movie, Jim Kirk has a brother, George Kirk (presumably Jr.?) who is older, maybe exiting teen years. George Kirk would correspond to George "Sam or Samuel" Kirk, seen in a TOS episode. George is in an argument with his stepfather and storms off the farm after talking with Jim, who is washing the Corvette. Although the Corvette now "belongs" to the stepfather, in reality it was George Sr.'s antique car, so it is a material tie to the kids real deceased father. The stepfather is going to get it spiffed up to sell, inciting the boys anger. George leaves and is headed down the road outside the farm. Jim takees awhile to build up his anger to act but starts the Corvette and takes off - not clear (yet) what he intends to do with it (the look before you leap attitude Captian Pike referes to later).

You'll recall Jim passing and yelling "Hey Johnny" to a slim older boy on the road from his farm - that would be George Jr., his brother in the novel. When he is pursued by the aerocop (my tm, he turns sharply right and crashes through a fence gate of a restricted area and guns the Corvette engine. In my mind, he know exactly where he is and what he's going to do - destroy the Corvette so his stepfather cannot profit from it. My belief is bolstered by the fact that Jim accelerates toward the chasm ahead (downshifts and guns the engine) while jumping out at the last second.

We'll have to see if there was any deleted scenes on the DVD release to confirm the above that is depicted in the novel.

Bart

[Robie]

Thanks for the background, it now makes more sense. I was groping for a reason it was included other than an attempt to somehow make it more "relevant." Wish that info was somehow conveyed in the film. Regardless, featuring some type of "flashback technology" is a recurring theme on all of the Star Treks.

[prisoners]

Thanks Mech, that makes everything fit much better. I remember Kirk referencing his brother in the original series episode titled "Operation Annihilate". Your explanation of the Corvette significance makes sense.