Saturday, May 16, 2009

Star Trek Movie

So, we saw it.

Remember Ruger's recent, cryptic teasers about "rebooting a classic?" Maybe they should take lessons from the Star Trek franchise. I'm not sayin' it's a must-see-asap but it gets the job done; there are plenty of nits for the hardcore Trekker to pick and the usual disregard of physics, economics and common sense, not to mention command discipline and the promotion process within a military service; but it's a movie, f'pity's sake, and it does a pretty good job of tellin' a big, shiny story, which is what movies do. Go see it. Set your phaser on "fun." And meet the original crew all over again.

6 comments:

B.S. philosopher said...

meh...

Literally just came back from seeing it. My wife wore her Enterprise shirt. I left my pointy ears and commbadge at home...

It's better than all of TNG movies, and better than #5 and #1 of the original cast. It doesn't approach TWOK or even #3. I forget, is this new one an even or odd numbered film? Or is it both?

They muck about too much with continuity, even taking into account the parallel universe/time travel angle. Sarek is much more fatherly and understanding in this film than he was in TOS.

I was a little disappointed, but the killer CGI and ass-kicking that Bill Shatner hadn't been capable of since 1969 took the edge off. Eric Bana as Nero was a lame villain.

Hopefully the next movie that they do will be TWOK to this one's ST:TMP.

John B said...

How to properly punish JJ Abrams for his overweening hubris.....

I know! Let's make him do it as a five year series.

Captcha = helimom. Mom traded a minivan for a Huey Cobra???

Lorimor said...

Call me a heretic, but I'd much rather see a flick with the cast from "Enterprise" put on the big screen.

'specicially if little T'Pol was running about in her usual form fitting outfits.

Back to the topic at hand. I'd rate this film as a solid "so-so." Like too many films today, it relies far too much on CGI to make up for a thin plot.

D.W. Drang said...

Better than I expected. The discussion thread at Schlock Mercenary is running 130+ comments, and disposes of many of the nits which have been picked. However, it was definitely established in TOS that no one knew that Romulans were descended from Vulcans until Mark Leonard had his depth-charge dual with NCC1701 in which ever episode that was. I won;t say it ruined the movie for me--I got over being that big a fan of Star Trek decades ago--but it was a plot point they could have dealt with if they had cared, along with the fact that Cardassians and Ferrenghi were also unknown at this point in the original Trek universe.

S*I*G*H

Tam said...

I really really wanted to hate it, but I was having too much fun.

The nitpicky Hard SF/Mil SF fan in me kept saying "But... but... but...", but my inner Space Opera fan said "Shut up and enjoy the movie."

Assrot said...

It was sold out when I went to my local theater this weekend so I went for "X-men Origins: Wolverine" instead.

I'd give the X-men movie 7/10. It was okay but the other X-men movies were much better.

I'm hoping the Star Trek movie is good. I've been a hardcore Trekker since day one back in 1966.

I could care less if a movie makes sense. I'm there to be entertained with all the cool gadgets and fine babes and weird aliens, etc.

I need common sense when I read a book. When it comes to TV or a movie I could care less so long as there is lots of action, suspense and stuff exploding all over hell. Oh and don't forget the babes with green skin.

Anybody looking forward to the new Terminator movie?

:-)

Joe