Star Trek Into Darkness

aircooled wrote: I thought I heard that a lot of Hollywood movies play in English in Germany. Might be wrong though.

I know I was always able to find German commercial movie theatres playing movies in English when I was stationed there, but that might just be because I was looking close to a US military installation (The Kaiserslautern/Ramstein area).

I live in Germany and in the big cities, you can find multiple theaters playing movies in "OV" (original version). Some things will just always be lost in translation, and most Germans I know would rather see the movie in its original language, even if it needs subtitles.

JoeyM wrote:

gimpstang wrote: I am I the only one who doesn't like the new Treks?

yes.

Its just nice to see a new spin on things, not to mention it is considered a "parallel universe" to the original series. Then again, I actually liked the latest series "enterprise".....

JoeyM wrote:

gimpstang wrote: I am I the only one who doesn't like the new Treks?

yes.

no.. i couldn't stand the new Trek movie when i saw it in the theater.. i was excited- i've seen every Trek movie since Undiscovered Country in the theater and the only reason i sat thru the whole thing was because it cost like $9 to see it and i was going to sit thru it no matter what..

someone said it's a "parallel universe"... not quite- i saw one website not long after the first one came out that pointed out the many reasons that it was a totally different reality than the original Trek incarnations..

My father watched Star Trek quite religiously when I was younger. I tried to watch, but found it slow and the acting meh/stale.

The new "series" fits my media wants much better. And I'm the kind of guy who enjoys movies with no real action.

I am going to buy all of the Star Trek seasons on blueray though and watch them so I can form a better opinion. I may have a better appreciation for it now.

Also, acting and directing wise, the first "new" movie was above and beyond 95% of revamps/retellings of all the other movies that have come out lately. How you can be mad about someone doing justice to a series is beyond me. It may not follow the cannon perfectly, but at least it is a pretty good movie

I was raised a trekkie when TNG was starting up.

I'm ok with, but not a big fan of, the new stuff. I understand how it is cannon and I like that, but the "morality play" that made Star Trek what it was is gone. To me it feels shinny but hollow.

That said I will see it in theaters withing a week or 2 of opening.

Watched the reboot on TV a couple of years ago and wasn't all that impressed. I'll give Darkness a try at the theater but I'm not optimistic. Looks like an excuse to blow a lot of crap to smithereens.

Didn't like Pine as Kirk but loved Urban as McCoy and Quinto as Spock.

neon4891 wrote: I was raised a trekkie when TNG was starting up. I'm ok with, but not a big fan of, the new stuff. I understand how it is cannon and I like that, but the "morality play" that made Star Trek what it was is gone. To me it feels shinny but hollow. That said I will see it in theaters withing a week or 2 of opening.

This is my general opinion as well, I just couldn't place that feeling into words. The new ones are more action movies.

neon4891 wrote: I'm ok with, but not a big fan of, the new stuff. I understand how it is cannon and I like that, but the "morality play" that made Star Trek what it was is gone. To me it feels shinny but hollow.

Yeah, I agree with this sentiment. I actually even predate TNG and the various spinoffs, and never really got into them, though from the ones I've seen they did seem to fit the flavor of the original original series.

I enjoyed watching the parallel reboot new whatever Star Trek as a movie, but I didn't find it particularly... trekkie , for want of a better word.

Kind of like Iron Man 3 which we just saw last night - entertaining enough, but not really Marvel enough.

I like the new one, I liked the original, I liked Next Generation...until the episode where they had to quit using too much warp speed because it was bad for the universe. I do so love being preached at in my entertainment.

I've seen... a lot.

I'm not impressed with Mr Lens Flare and Star Trek lite. I did like Quinto and Urban, however.

Streetwiseguy wrote: until the episode where they had to quit using too much warp speed because it was bad for the universe.

that plot development in and of itself wasn't so bad, it's just that they didn't DO anything with it. I think it was hardly referenced for the remainder the show's run.

stroker wrote:

Streetwiseguy wrote: until the episode where they had to quit using too much warp speed because it was bad for the universe.

that plot development in and of itself wasn't so bad, it's just that they didn't DO anything with it. I think it was hardly referenced for the remainder the show's run.

warp speed only affected the quantum fluctuations of the unobtanium temporal something somethings in that particular area of space... they could have probably fixed it by reversing the polarity of the deflector dish or something...

i'm one of those people that think they should have explored the DS9 section of the universe instead of doing a reboot of the original story... there was so much potential that in that storyline that they just kind of left hanging when they ended that series and they never made any movies out of it..

novaderrik wrote: someone said it's a "parallel universe"... not quite- i saw one website not long after the first one came out that pointed out the many reasons that it was a totally different reality than the original Trek incarnations..

I actually said "alternate reality."

Streetwiseguy wrote: ...until the episode where they had to quit using too much warp speed because it was bad for the universe....

You may not have seen the original but it was VERY political for its time. Different politics of course, but it was one of the things that made the show so relevant.

I always loved the idea that the Federation represented the US, the Klingons the USSR and the Romulans, the (then) some what mysterious Chinese who are visually simailar to the logical Vulcans (Japanese maybe).

I did not watch TNG much but I thought the point of shark jumping was the heavy use of the holo deck, which started to get a bit rediculous.

The holodeck isn't a whole lot different from today's deep immersion video games, now, is it? Not bad for 30 years ago.

I'd sure like it if DS9 were available in reruns today - lots of NG on various channels, but I really liked DS9. Never got into Voyager much, but liked all of the other series.

I didn't find the holo decks rediculous as a concept, just the over use of them so that Star Trek episodes seemed to be more about some silly detective game / story then sci-fi that it was.

The original series had some pretty silly ones also of course. The parallel earth / US that somehow had the exact same constitution was pretty painful in its absurdity.

Osterkraut wrote:

novaderrik wrote: someone said it's a "parallel universe"... not quite- i saw one website not long after the first one came out that pointed out the many reasons that it was a totally different reality than the original Trek incarnations..

I actually said "alternate reality."

yeah, it doesn't work that way, either, for reason i can't quite remember... something about a lot of stuff already being different at the point where the timelines were allegedly supposed to diverge. Kirks origin was completely different than the canon, and something about Spock...

but of course i've also seen sites that explain it away with the different time travel paradoxes that were left wide open from episodes of Enterprise and Voyager...

aircooled wrote:

Streetwiseguy wrote: ...until the episode where they had to quit using too much warp speed because it was bad for the universe....

You may not have seen the original but it was VERY political for its time. Different politics of course, but it was one of the things that made the show so relevant. I always loved the idea that the Federation represented the US, the Klingons the USSR and the Romulans, the (then) some what mysterious Chinese who are visually simailar to the logical Vulcans (Japanese maybe). I did not watch TNG much but I thought the point of shark jumping was the heavy use of the holo deck, which started to get a bit rediculous.

Yeah, but it didn't really matter how political it got, Kirk was always willing to shove a photon torpedo up someones ass.

But do want this.

You've seen this, right?

Audi Commercial

Streetwiseguy wrote: Yeah, but it didn't really matter how political it got, Kirk was always willing to shove a photon torpedo up someones ass.

And always looking for a way to lose his shirt

novaderrik wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

novaderrik wrote: someone said it's a "parallel universe"... not quite- i saw one website not long after the first one came out that pointed out the many reasons that it was a totally different reality than the original Trek incarnations..

I actually said "alternate reality."

yeah, it doesn't work that way, either, for reason i can't quite remember... something about a lot of stuff already being different at the point where the timelines were allegedly supposed to diverge. Kirks origin was completely different than the canon, and something about Spock... but of course i've also seen sites that explain it away with the different time travel paradoxes that were left wide open from episodes of Enterprise and Voyager...

In the movie Spock literally said it's an alternate reality (creating what a Star Wars nerd would call "G-canon"). Kirk's origin is different from the main/prime Star Trek reality in that his dad dies and he grows up without a father. There are other differences too, the size and configuration of the Enterprise being one that a lot of people take issue with (this was explained that the Kelvin's scans of Nero's ship made it back with the shuttles and provided the Federation with technology that wasn't in the prime reality). Nero's appearance and subsequent attack on the Kelvin is the point where the J.J. Abrams reality diverges from the canon established by TOS. You may have also heard the term "established a new timeline" or "alternate timeline" tossed around. Exact same thing. The only observable sticking point is the the Kelvin, though because we've never seen the Kelvin before we don't have anything but an assumption that a prime-Kelvin would look different. Because of Spock's in-movie discussion pegging J.J. Abram's Star Trek as an alternate reality, any further discussion on if it is or is not is nothing but fanboy masterbation.

Here's a non-canon (unlike Star Wars, only the live-action TV series and movies in Star Trek are canon) look at the timeline:

Thank you for spelling that "canon" instead of "cannon".

Jim Pettengill wrote: I'd sure like it if DS9 were available in reruns today - lots of NG on various channels, but I really liked DS9. Never got into Voyager much, but liked all of the other series.

+1. I'm up for a DS9 movie. Let's pay for a script instead of the Special Effects, though...