Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
VaBeachGuy

Star Trek (2009) Reviews

22 posts in this topic

With the premier of Star Trek XI less than 2 days away I know that everyone that sees the movie will want to talk about it and write some reviews of it so I thought it might be a good idea to have a forum just for reviews.

 

If you go to the movie and write a review, please keep in mind that some people (both members and visitors) may not have seen it yet. So if you give away any plot info or spoilers just be sure to use the Spoiler box. That way those people that haven't seen the movie will have the option of whether or not to read key details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I was about to post that this is the best Star Trek movie I've ever seen.. :P I had alot of fun watching it..It exceeded my expectations..I thought it ROCKED..But go watch it and see for yourself..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also exceeded my expectations too. And imo nothing is as bad as Star Trek V. I will see it one more time before I write a full review. And I second Mike: Go see it yourselves and judge it for yourself!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

easily the best Star Trek movie since First Contact. I absolutely loved it and already plan to see it a second time and maybe even a third in theaters :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely the best Star Trek movie. period. A successful gamble to "reboot" the franchise. Easily the most enjoyable time I've ever had at the movies, and my wife & I too plan to see it again, possibly in IMAX. This ain't your father's Star Trek, and I'm 50 years old, and a fan since my youth. J.J. Abrams did a fine job, as did all of the cast.

Edited by Len_A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:
How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

I completely understand those concerns with the movie and agree, as a "stard alone" movie it was a really good movie though. With the title of "Star Trek" though it can't really be a "stand alone" movie.

 

Also let's remember to put any plot info into a spoiler (use the "Insert Special Item" drop down to find the spoiler). We don't want to spoil key points for people that haven't seen the movie yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

Click for Spoiler:

the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

Click for Spoiler:

they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
, and they shouldn't.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

There is a reason for that. Real-world technology has advanced faster than Roddenbury thought it would. For example, we now have cell phones that can take pictures and send text messages and even synch with a computer and are better communications devices than the 23rd century communicators. So naturally things are going to have a different look and functionality in the new movie than TOS canon. Forcing the state of technology in the movie to take a step back just to give the appearance of staying with TOS canon wasn't really an option since the goal was to reach a wider audience than the TOS purists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

exactly

 

Click for Spoiler:

it's been established in the new film that this is now an alternate reality due to Nero's time travel, so I am sure that the destruction of Vulcan is only the beginning of what will change. I don't think it's that big of a deal and opens up a door to a new Trek. What would Spock have been like if there was no Vulcan? We'll find out. I understand that some dont like the change, but it is an excuse for the writers of the next film to make the movie they want to without worrying about canon all of the time. This movie did fine with the canon and respected Trek, but at the same time added something new
Edited by Stephen of Borg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

Click for Spoiler:

the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

Click for Spoiler:

they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
, and they shouldn't.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

Indeed it has.

 

 

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

There is a reason for that. Real-world technology has advanced faster than Roddenbury thought it would. For example, we now have cell phones that can take pictures and send text messages and even synch with a computer and are better communications devices than the 23rd century communicators. So naturally things are going to have a different look and functionality in the new movie than TOS canon. Forcing the state of technology in the movie to take a step back just to give the appearance of staying with TOS canon wasn't really an option since the goal was to reach a wider audience than the TOS purists.

Exactly correct.

 

 

exactly

 

Click for Spoiler:

it's been established in the new film that this is now an alternate reality due to Nero's time travel, so I am sure that the destruction of Vulcan is only the beginning of what will change. I don't think it's that big of a deal and opens up a door to a new Trek. What would Spock have been like if there was no Vulcan? We'll find out. I understand that some dont like the change, but it is an excuse for the writers of the next film to make the movie they want to without worrying about canon all of the time. This movie did fine with the canon and respected Trek, but at the same time added something new

 

QFT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

Click for Spoiler:

the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

Click for Spoiler:

they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
, and they shouldn't.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.

Two words: Alternate Timeline.

 

And seriously? The horrible example of changing the past you throw out there is six million people NOT being exterminated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

Click for Spoiler:

the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

Click for Spoiler:

they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
, and they shouldn't.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.

Well, the fact is that Gene Roddenberry has been gone a long time, and those that worked with him, and succeed him have delivered several products, movies and TV, that have had continually diminishing audience. No one knows what Gene Roddenberry would want now, and it's an unknown whether he could connect with a younger audience. The fact that Star Trek was Gene's brainchild is completely irrelevant. Audiences change. What appeals to that audience either changes or fails. And rewriting a piece of science fiction history doesn't come any where near being the same thing as trying to rewrite actual history, like World War II. Your service to our country, admirable as it should be, and notwithstanding, making a comparison between a work of fiction like star Trek and the real history of World War II was a bit ridiculous.

 

I'll repeat what I posted before: This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life. It's going to go a long way toward resurrecting Star Trek in the minds of a greater audience. Had they got hung up on please the minority of fans who are, in turn, hung up on the "canon", the likelihood of appealing to a wider audience goes way down.

 

I don't agree with your statement that this movie was a disgrace to Gene's memory, but if that's your opinion, well...so be it. I doubt that Paramount would have kept Gene around after the way the ratings on the various TV series and the box office receipts of the movies kept falling. Your reaction to movie brought one thing to mind - one commercial I saw for the movie last week that said "This isn't your father's Star Trek."

 

This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life. It's going to go a long way toward resurrecting Star Trek in the minds of a greater audience. Enjoy it or don't. Either way, this is now the direction Star Trek takes. Get used to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click for Spoiler:

How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

Click for Spoiler:

the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

Click for Spoiler:

they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
, and they shouldn't.

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.

Well, the fact is that Gene Roddenberry has been gone a long time, and those that worked with him, and succeed him have delivered several products, movies and TV, that have had continually diminishing audience. No one knows what Gene Roddenberry would want now, and it's an unknown whether he could connect with a younger audience. The fact that Star Trek was Gene's brainchild is completely irrelevant. Audiences change. What appeals to that audience either changes or fails. And rewriting a piece of science fiction history doesn't come any where near being the same thing as trying to rewrite actual history, like World War II. Your service to our country, admirable as it should be, and notwithstanding, making a comparison between a work of fiction like star Trek and the real history of World War II was a bit ridiculous.

 

I'll repeat what I posted before: This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life. It's going to go a long way toward resurrecting Star Trek in the minds of a greater audience. Had they got hung up on please the minority of fans who are, in turn, hung up on the "canon", the likelihood of appealing to a wider audience goes way down.

 

I don't agree with your statement that this movie was a disgrace to Gene's memory, but if that's your opinion, well...so be it. I doubt that Paramount would have kept Gene around after the way the ratings on the various TV series and the box office receipts of the movies kept falling. Your reaction to movie brought one thing to mind - one commercial I saw for the movie last week that said "This isn't your father's Star Trek."

 

This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life. It's going to go a long way toward resurrecting Star Trek in the minds of a greater audience. Enjoy it or don't. Either way, this is now the direction Star Trek takes. Get used to it.

Well I won't get used to it and you shouldn't either. I have news for you, it is the minority who decides the future of TV & Movie franchises in this world not the majority. Lots of great shows got canceled because of people like me and movies never saw sequals because of people like me, GET USED TO IT. And by the way when Gene was alive, he owned the rights to Star Trek so I assure you if he was still around this movie would have never been made.

Edited by kfowler5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gene's son has seen the movie and has given his approval, so we don't really know what Gene would have done. Not to mention the Kirk and Spock in Starfleet Academy has been floating around as a movie idea for years

Edited by Stephen of Borg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I won't get used to it and you shouldn't either. I have news for you, it is the minority who decides the future of TV & Movie franchises in this world not the majority. Lots of great shows got canceled because of people like me and movies never saw sequals because of people like me, GET USED TO IT. And by the way when Gene was alive, he owned the rights to Star Trek so I assure you if he was still around this movie would have never been made.

One, I loved it, so tough. Two, in what world does a minority of the audience decide the future of a for-profit venture like a movie. No, never mind. I don't want to know how you think. You have your opinion, and I have mine.

 

BTW, for the rest of you - Star Trek made $7 million just last night alone - http://www.variety.com/article/VR111800338...yid=13&cs=1

 

From that article (and kfowler5, I think this will this annoy the living sh** out of you):

 

J.J. Abrams' reboot of the classic sci-fi franchise currently stands as the best-reviewed movie of the year, earning a 96% ranking on Rotten Tomatoes.
Edited by Len_A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget that this is just entertainment..so let's be entertained..I don't have a problem with the changes that were made for this film..and 7 million others seem to agree with me..and that was only opening night..I'm going to see it again this weekend..yeah, it's that good.. I need to see it again.. I wouldn't want a few picky fans to ruin future movies and series for the rest of us..seems like a familiar story..Just be happy that we are are getting great new Trek to enjoy..

 

My 2 cents..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to say, I loved the movie. The nods to Enterprise and TOS were great. One point I really want to make. They finally got the no sound in space thing right!!! Good good movie. Don't believe me? Go see it and decide for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without a doubt, Star Trek will end up as the number one movie this weekend: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30670662

 

Box office results

Estimated ticket sales for May 8-10

 

1. "Star Trek," $72.5 million.

2. "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," $27 million.

3. "Ghosts of Girlfriends Past," $10.45 million.

4. "Obsessed," $6.6 million.

5. "17 Again," $4.4 million.

6. "Next Day Air," $4 million.

7. "The Soloist," $3.6 million.

8. "Monsters vs. Aliens," $3.4 million.

9. "Earth," $2.5 million.

10. "Hannah Montana: The Movie," $2.4 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not yet seen this flim but I would like to add my two cents for what it is worth. I have seen every Star Trek show & movie. I think that the only show that I missed seeing every epiosde was the animated Star Trek. First of all I do not mind new actors in these roles. It does seem that this group meshes well and will add another aspect to these iconic charcters w/o detracting from them. I have read of a Spock/Uhura romance but I am waiting to see the flim before I make a comment on that. I do have a feeling that in introducing this element the writers of the script have made a fundamental alteration about the Vulcan character. Star Trek is not BSG. What has me ripped is this- this may be an alternate time line but come on destroying both Romulus & Vulcan -why??? I am happy that many Star Trek fans are enjoying this new movie but has anyone fully grapsed what has been thrown out of Star Trek with this movie? This alteration basically sweeps away most of DS 9 and Voyager. It makes a large portion of those Star Treks moot. I can understand that the producers of this movie do not want to be limited by what has gone before but to totally overthrow central and important elements of Star Trek is something that I think was not necessary.If one of the authors of the script claims to be a Star Trek fan then why kill off the Vulcans let alone the Romulans? There were many other avenues that could have been explored and a very good story developed. The problem with the past two Next Generation movies came out of the weakness of the plot not the background surrounding Star Trek. The last movie Nemesis almost made it over the home plate. I do think that the basic canon could have been kept while re introducing TOS to new viewers. Basically while Mr Abrams loves the time travel concept this movie tells me that everything I have seen or read never really happened in the Star trek universe. A current group of Star Trek novels has as the central theme a final battle with the Borg and the death of Admiral Janeway. I am reading Full Circle which deals with the aftemath of these events on the Star Trek universe and Voyager in particular. I am also reading The Good That Men Do an Enterprise novel. This novel "corrects" that awful last episode of Enterprise and sets the stage for the war with the Romulans. Although I am not happy about killing off Janeway it goes to show that just about anything can be done regarding Star Trek and its characters. I also wish that they had left the orginal Enterprise bridge in this movie. The TNG producers recreated the TOS Enterprise bridge for relics and it did not appear to be "outdated". The Enterprise epiosdes featuring the Constitution class Defiant lost in an alternate universe looked as futuristic as can be. Mr. Abrams appears from what I tell from watching interviews to be a thoughfull considerate intelligent person. Star Trek is now his responsibility and it will be interesting to see what he does with it. I know that many are glad that Rick Berman is out of the picture but I for one will not put him down. He along with the late Michael Pillar and Jeri Taylor have given us some very Star Trek over the years. I think that in the end Mr. Berman was burnt out. He sat in the captains chair for at least 15 years which is in the TV & movie industry a very long time . I am looking with anticipation to seeing this new Star Trek movie but this new Star Trek adventure will not erase for myself the last 4 shows that came after the TOS and the events in the movies. It would be great to see some of the current Star Trek novels fleshed out and made into TV movies. I doubt that this would happen but there is still much to explore in the 24th Star Trek universe in addition to the 22nd and 23rd centuries. BTW I wonder what Mr. Nimoy thought of Vulcan being turned into space rubble??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0