Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Star Trek **Contains Spoilers**


Darth Biscuit

Recommended Posts

OK, I went to see this last night... I wish to discuss this but there is no way to discuss without spoilers... don't read ahead if you don't want to hear it...

Overall as a stand alone movie it was pretty good, B- maybe...

I guess it wouldn't be a proper Star Trek movie if all the other ships aren't in this quadrant and the trainees have to take over...

The green, redheaded Orion chick Kirk is fuging is hot as hell, as is Uhura...

I thought the actors that played Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Scotty did a great job of making those characters very much like the ones from the original series.

Chekov and Sulu kinda sucked... and although Uhura was hot, she was just OK.

The effects were spectacular although I didn't like the constant camera angles where the light kept washing out the picture, weird... in fact the whole film was "over exposed," or something, too bright in spots and too dim in spots...

Eric Bana as the Romulan villain was not good, he's a worse overactor than Shatner...

I guess the worst thing to me was that the whole movie was essentially an alternate universe/alternate timeline... kind of a cop out in my opinion.

I'm interested to see what others who saw it thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't agree with any of the negative things in that post.

the only negative to me was how frigging loud the tazer blasts were in my theatre. everyone on the row in front of me were plugging their ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw it, really enjopyed it. Kirk, Spock and especially McCoy were great. Agreed, Chekov sucked. Great action adventure, didn't enjoy the slow down when "old" Spock appeared. The thought of Spock nailing Uhura with the "Green Hammer" cracks me up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the worst thing to me was that the whole movie was essentially an alternate universe/alternate timeline... kind of a cop out in my opinion.

I don't think it was a cop out at all.

In fact, I think it was a clever way to explain how we can go back to when the crew was young and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen it yet. Probably Monday. But time travel / alternate universes are always a cop out. It's just another way of Rick Berman changing what Gene Roddenberry built and now that he is dead, this is the only way Berman can attach his name to the beginning. I hated Enterprise the changing of ST history that was going on in that. But I will see the movie and comment more...

I really hate Rick Berman though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I went to see this last night... I wish to discuss this but there is no way to discuss without spoilers... don't read ahead if you don't want to hear it...

Overall as a stand alone movie it was pretty good, B- maybe...

I guess it wouldn't be a proper Star Trek movie if all the other ships aren't in this quadrant and the trainees have to take over...

The green, redheaded Orion chick Kirk is fuging is hot as hell, as is Uhura...

I thought the actors that played Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Scotty did a great job of making those characters very much like the ones from the original series.

Chekov and Sulu kinda sucked... and although Uhura was hot, she was just OK.

The effects were spectacular although I didn't like the constant camera angles where the light kept washing out the picture, weird... in fact the whole film was "over exposed," or something, too bright in spots and too dim in spots...

Eric Bana as the Romulan villain was not good, he's a worse overactor than Shatner...

I guess the worst thing to me was that the whole movie was essentially an alternate universe/alternate timeline... kind of a cop out in my opinion.

I'm interested to see what others who saw it thought...

JJ's vision was to call it Star Trek as if it was the first one. Thus the reason behind the backstory for Kirk and Spock.

In fact, you can tell he was paying a little homage to Richard Donner and the first Superman movie with the thorough intro to the characters childhood.

Heck even some long shots looked like Superman. The corvette scene was just like Clark Kent sprinting ahead of the car thru the Kansas landscape.

Ahh the film part. It was shot 2:35 1 to go away from the norm of digital to accentuate the very lights you talk about.

They wanted to make the film more crisp and vibrant and not give in to regular CGI stuff that we see alot of.

Example of this is old John Carpenter films Pay attention to when a light is in direct path of the camera, the light twinkles and seems even bigger, just a neat little trick.

I'm not a Trekkie. Saw about the first 4 Trek films. Of course most of the tv series.

JJ gave the series a great launching point to wherever.

Overall a very good film and I predict this movie will be the highest grossing film of the year.

I say it finishes with 265 domestic and 230 foreign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it was a cop out at all.

In fact, I think it was a clever way to explain how we can go back to when the crew was young and go from there.

i can see how it could be considered a cop out, but it just didn't feel like one.

I guess I could have explained more/better on the "cop out" comment. I realize that they had to do something to explain the timeline changes, etc., for the big things particularly like the death of Kirk Sr., and the destruction of Vulcan, etc, but I thought that instead of making up a good back story for Kirk, Spock and the gang with a more plausible history that fit in the original story, they took the easier route of doing a alternate universe/timeline as a plotline.

I did qualify my statements as a "stand alone" movie, because I really think they did it this way as almost a re-invention of Trek. They really can go in any direction they want now as well, so it will definitely make them more $$$.

I will also say that this movie was FAR better than the last 8 or so other Trek movies by a LONG shot...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I could have explained more/better on the "cop out" comment. I realize that they had to do something to explain the timeline changes, etc., for the big things particularly like the death of Kirk Sr., and the destruction of Vulcan, etc, but I thought that instead of making up a good back story for Kirk, Spock and the gang with a more plausible history that fit in the original story, they took the easier route of doing a alternate universe/timeline as a plotline.

I did qualify my statements as a "stand alone" movie, because I really think they did it this way as almost a re-invention of Trek. They really can go in any direction they want now as well, so it will definitely make them more $$$.

I will also say that this movie was FAR better than the last 8 or so other Trek movies by a LONG shot...

I liked the alternate time line scenario. I would have hated it if they were just doing a back story. Plus all the Trekkie's would have eaten it alive every time they missed a step. This way they get a clean start and a fresh look to an old series.

I think it's the best Star Trek movie since the Wrath of Khan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it was. Fantastic work and yes, a trekkie like me would be happy to point out the problems, but the movie needed them to succeed and be great, and it did.

It is so great to be able to look forward to more Trek after Brannon/Braga "killed" it.

For the sequel: LETS SEE HARRY MUDD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the alternate time line scenario. I would have hated it if they were just doing a back story. Plus all the Trekkie's would have eaten it alive every time they missed a step. This way they get a clean start and a fresh look to an old series.

I think it's the best Star Trek movie since the Wrath of Khan.

Oh Gawd, yes, it was the best ST movie since Khan. We said that in the parking lot right after seeing it. Khan #1, Star Trek #2. I absolutely loved this movie. I rate it up there with movies like Stargate, the start of a new franchise. The Uhurra/Spock hook up surprised me but I liked it.

I don't understand all the disdain for the small amount of movie time that was spent with time travel in the movie. It wasn't anything complicated or mysterious, the old worm hole theory. It didn't need any explaining, the theory has been around for so long.

George Kirk is my hero. :patriot:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George Kirk is my hero. :patriot:

Yeah, that opening was awesome. Certainly one of the best I've ever seen. The way they set it up---you knew that the SFX were better, you knew the camera work was better, and the sounds were better, but it somehow still FELT like the exact same phaser blasts that the Enterprise has shot for the last forty years.

And you new it really wasn't your daddy's Star Trek after that lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...