Star Trek!

Didn't realize they were opening yesterday until we took a look at the online listing and saw showings as early as 7 PM. We hit a 7:50, and it was fantastic. I like me some Trek, though my preference ran towards Next Gen, but this new film had plenty of fresh content without loosing what makes Star Trek such a wonderfully hopeful universe.

Plenty of action from start to finish, brilliant casting (I think Pegg as Scotty was my favorite), surprisingly funny in parts and really neat to look at, I like that they played more with how there's really no "up" in space when it came to picking angles for the exterior shots. The plot explains canonical differences with the familiar Trek universe quite tidily, and while the science aspect is kind of thin, I thought that gave it a feel reminiscent of the original series.

I'm eager to see it again, there's plenty to enjoy and I'm hopeful for some good sequels.

the next movie was greenlighted before this one was released.... so there will be at least one sequel

I saw it also, definitely good. I can see how some trek types might get a bit twisted in how the mucked with the "canon" of Star Trek, but they did justify it.

I have seen the original series, all the movies and some of TNG. It has a lot of little references to the original series (even a subtle "red shirt" kind of scene). The story line was OK. It was a bit of a rushed, slightly contrived sort of assembly of the original crew.

Lots of good characters. As for the originals: Kirk, very well done and does NOT try to be like Shatner at all (which is good). Spock is very good (looks a LOT like him). Bones is OK, he tries to act too much like the orginal character and it comes off as a bit of a parody. Chekov certainly has a better Russian accent than the original. Sulu is good but I could have gone for a bit more of a "Japanese looking" actor. Scott is good (Pegg), certainly a lot more goofy than the original.

Some of the plot choices were a bit iffy, especially one involving Ohura (wandered WAY off from the series). A lot of good action.

One thing I was saying to myself in the first few minutes during an action scene was: stop shacking the F'ing camera!!!!! I really hate that style of filming, I would really like to see what is going on!

like with X-men, cheap tickets on monday

aircooled wrote: One thing I was saying to myself in the first few minutes during an action scene was: stop shacking the F'ing camera!!!!! I really hate that style of filming, I would really like to see what is going on!

Indeed. Not that I think Cloverfield would have been a passable movie without all the camera issues, but I prefer not to get dizzy watching a movie, even a bad one. Smooth movement can be just as exciting darnit!!

However, I have not seen Star Trek so I'll reserve judgement until afterwards. Abrams has raised my ire many times before however, so I'm going in with low visual expectations.

"One thing I was saying to myself in the first few minutes during an action scene was: stop shacking the F'ing camera!!!!! I really hate that style of filming, I would really like to see what is going on! "

Or the dreaded ... spin one camera around two characters as they have an intense dialogue!

Even worse when it is timed wrong and the camera is on the non speaking actor...

I've not seen Star Trek yet, just one of my pet peeves

Haven't seen it yet but I second the shaky camera stuff. I couldn't tell what in the heck was going on while watching the latest Bond film.

"Wait a min. He hit who with what to cause that?"

Don't forget the latest Bourne movie (which may be the one that started it all)...on the big screen it could make you seasick...

I just got back, and as a life-long Trekkie, I have to say I was very, very impressed. I was going in with low expectations, but I was really blown away by it. Yeah there were parts I didn't like (like the direction Uhura was taken) but overall I think everyone was done justice.

I was particularly worried going in with the new design of the Enterprise. The story has always been as much about the Enterprise as it is her crew, and the pre-released photos of the design upset me, with some proportional issues (primarily the engineering hull being too far forward.) However, the shots used in the movie really downplayed the differences, and really delivered what I expected out of the Enterprise; that being that shes the most beautiful spacecraft to ever grace a big or small screen. I was very happy with the Enterprise, and the rest of the movie followed suit in exceeding my every expectation.

I just got back from seeing it too. I loved it. Enough said.

I'm more of an original series fan, and my wife prefers Next Gen, but we both liked it quite a bit. When Star Trek works, it works because you love the characters. And because you love the characters you'll excuse all the plastic rocks an sketchy science in the universe.

I was terrified that this was going to be "Star Trek 90210," but I think everyone involved brought the right amount of reverence to each part, without turning them into SNL parodies. Karl Urban (McCoy) and Simon Pegg (Scotty seemed to be having the most fun, although the performance all around were top notch. I would have liked, however, to have seen a little more of Eric Bana's bad guy. Every time he's on screen he's just chewing the scenery to shreds, but the character is not much more than a disposable bad guy archetype designed to flesh out the narrative. Bana was good enough that he could have easily been a major part of the franchise, had the character been written as part of the world a little more, and not just a device.

The true measure of how good the movie is, though, is that the fans are accepting it. Just think about the size of the balls it takes to create this story. Abrams basically took four decades of Star Trek history and said "Guess what, none of this really happened." You need prescription pants to house balls of that size. The fact that this hasn't set of a firestorm of nerd rage the likes of which we haven't seen since Jar Jar is a testament to good writing, good acting, and an adherence to the basic principles that make folks love this universe to begin with.

Also, it's good to see that Kirk really did become an astronaut mostly for the Tang.

jg

( small spoiler alert! ) I disapprove of movies that rely on time travel to make the plot feasible. It's a cheap trick that writers use way too often to just change the whole storyline. Beyond that, it was very interesting to see how the original Star Trek gang first met up. The "new" Spock is amazingly similar in appearance to the "old" Spock. Very good job with the casting. Overall, it's definitely worth seeing and has some very cool scenes. Thumbs up.

Even as a non-trekkie, I was actually pretty excited to see this. I think others have summed up my feelings pretty well, but I loved the movie!

I think if there was one thing that exceeded my expectations it was the whole "submarine in space" vibe from the crew / officers dialogue. I love me some submarine movies.

this is the only star trek I can stand

Wife and I saw it last night. I liked all the thowback dialog to the original. I was part of the TNG crowd growing up, never appreciated the original. I did like the fact that you got to see more of the industrial parts of the enterprise. TNG and others always seemed so 'clean'.

Agreed with the shaky camera stuff, let me see the damn scene! But overall a fun movie, wife said that we are going to buy that one when it comes to blu-ray.

jg said: Also, it's good to see that Kirk really did become an astronaut mostly for the Tang.

Must...resist! Can't ...hold out for long...

I've never seen a trek film. I think I got 15 minutes through an old William Shatner episode of the TV show when I was 7 and decided then and there that Star Trek sucked.

That said, the trailers for this one looks interesting.

Only way to start new story line without caring the baggage of the past. Change the future!

GameboyRMH wrote: Don't forget the latest Bourne movie (which may be the one that started it all)...on the big screen it could make you seasick...

I think the 2nd bourne movie was the wost...my wife had to leave the first time we attempted to see it, and took Dramamine the second time, and still felt queasy

Just came back from seeing it. No shortage of action. Stayed close enough to original story to be feasable. Didn't realize Winona Ryder was in it till the credits, didn't recognize her but when I found out it was her I saw it. She wasn't billed high. I try not to compare as techonology now doesn't even compare to technology of the original. Even the newer trek series. I always took them as seperate which made them more enjoyable to me. Great action movie though. Saw X-Men: Wolverine last week and thought the same thing. Very good as stand alone. Although Star Trek beats it in action.

literally just walked in the door from seeing it. I LOVED it. I have not ever seen an episode of Star Trek, or a movie...as a matter of fact, I used to make fun of a good friend for watching the shows...

as a stand alone movie it was very good. I enjoyed the plot, and I am familiar enough with pop culture to recognize the charachters. I think my favorite part of the movie was the casting, Simon Pegg is AWESOME!

Waaaay too much CGI!

Just kidding. I saw it tonight and I loved it! I can't wait for the sequel. I saw nothign wrong with the cinematography, but now that you point it out, I'll probably notice it next time I try to watch it. Thanks.

How about some of the previews? G.I. Joe is going to be fantastic, as is Transformers II. UP looks stupid, but it's Pixar and I'm sure it'll be a good flick.

I have to say I thought the exact same thing about the time travel. Science fiction wise, it is many time a "jump the shark" moment. To see it so prominently in the first (effectively) episode was a bit shocking. I have to wonder if they will need to dance around it in future movies.

I had sort of the opposite reaction to the engine room. To me it looked very much like those old cheap Buck Rodgers movies were they were obviously just shooting in some oil refinery somewhere to make the shot look "high tech". I don't consider it a good choice at all. I mean some of the stuff in there looked way out of place in a super high tech faster than light space ship.

Also I thought the bridge was way to bright. Just seemed a bit weird.

Nitpicky, but overall a good movie and a very good sign for what is to come. Of course with all movies (especially sci fi), the stories will need to be there. I really hope they don't start do ripoff (tribute / remake / retro mod) scripts of previous movies / shows.

confuZion3 wrote: G.I. Joe is going to be fantastic,

The GI Joe trailer confused me. At first I was all like "wow they're making a bioshock movie?" and then they got out the power armor and I thought "ok so this isin't bioshock it's crysis now?" Just as I was thinking "Bioshock vs Crysis? Those don't really have any reason to fight..." At that point somebody pointed out that it was GI Joe. I guess it just wasn't recognizable to me as GI Joe.

Who wants a body massage?

I have liked the original and TNG and I really liked the way this one adhered more to the original than TNG. It was a really good movie.

I was also concerned it would a 90210 type as well and was very pleasantly surprised. We had a group of about 12 people with a couple of real trekkies in the group and a couple who've never seen any type of Star Trek and everyone loved it.

The shaking camera didn't bother me at all. It was appropriate for the action, followed the way it used to be done so it kept some of the original flavor and wasn't over done.

Unusually non of the props, background or special effects got in the way of the enjoyment. Anything that was wrong was background enough that it would take a second viewing to be able to really pick nits over any of it.