-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
Star Trek
- Thread starter Anamnesis
- Start date
pontalba
Well-Known Member
I'd love to see it on the big screen, but will have to wait for the DVD. In the mean time, there is a novelization out today.
I know I'll like the movie, I've seen enough trailers to see that. I never, ever thought anyone could be Kirk besides Shatner. From the trailers, this new guy does a great job.
I know I'll like the movie, I've seen enough trailers to see that. I never, ever thought anyone could be Kirk besides Shatner. From the trailers, this new guy does a great job.
pontalba
Well-Known Member
I'm one of those hard core Shatner fans, but this guy, Pine, from the trailers I've seen brings the original cowboy feeling of Shatner to the part. Plus, he's easy on the eyes.
Logically speaking, Shatner can't play Kirk anymore, so we improvise.
I'd go if I could, but it probably isn't possible.
Robert
Active Member
I'm one of those hard core Shatner fans, but this guy, Pine, from the trailers I've seen brings the original cowboy feeling of Shatner to the part. Plus, he's easy on the eyes.
Logically speaking, Shatner can't play Kirk anymore, so we improvise.
I'd go if I could, but it probably isn't possible.
If you're one of 'those', then you'll appreciate the casting. There was a little thing or two I didn't care for, but that's best discussed after you've seen it.
abecedarian
Well-Known Member
We saw it Sunday. Loved it! They did a marvelous job with casting. Zachary Quinto as Spock was amazing. Fun.
Robert
Active Member
I thought the character of Chekov was a lot stronger then it was in previous movies/tv shows.
abecedarian
Well-Known Member
Yes, showed more personality. I'm sure we'll rent this one for the kids to see as soon as it's available. They aren't as enamored with the Star Trek series as us though.
Robert
Active Member
I think the old Chekov was known more for mistakes and poor knowledge of history then of being of any real value. The new Chekov is intellegent and seems to have much to contribute.
I haven't purchased a video in a long time. Perhaps this one will be my first Blue Ray DVD to be followed by the Hobbit whenever it arrives.
beer good
Well-Known Member
OK, I'm not a trekker, though over the years I've probably seen most of the original series and movies, and bits and pieces of all the other series.
And I found the reimagined Star Trek both better and worse than I'd expected. I think the basic problem the movie has is that it doesn't know whether to be a prequel to the original series or a reboot for a new one; if you look at the more successful reboots of recent years (yer Spider-Mans, yer Battlestar Galacticas, both Batman franchises (discounting the non-Burton Burtons), and at least the first new Bond movie), one of the things you'll notice is that they usually wipe the slate clean and start over. Yes, there might be dozens of references for the fans of the old versions to enjoy (I loved Kirk's deadpan "Yeah... right" to a redshirt exclaiming how he couldn't wait to "kick some Romulan arse"), there might even be a few cameos for the old actors, but generally speaking the new versions stand on their own legs and tell their own story, acknowledge that it's a different age, not just by giving the characters different haircuts and use better special effects.
They do not, usually, have Adam West or Roger Moore running around like Yoda dispensing bits of wisdom, as Leonard Nimoy does here.
On the other hand, Star Trek '09 shares one problem with most of the other reboots; it's so focused on how the characters became what they are that they barely have time to be. And while I like that it focuses on the characters... do we need to see eight-year-old Spock getting bullied by his vulcan classmates? No, we do not, but the plot demands it. Like with, say, Iron Man you get the feeling that the story proper won't start until the next movie and all you saw in this movie (with its plot-for-plot's-sake and its Evil Alien 1A villain) was just a prologue setting up something else - and indeed, Star Trek ends on the classic opening line. To boldly go where no man has gone before... too bad they're all too aware that they have gone there before, and assume that the audience know where they are going next.
Taken together, it produces a curious effect; part loving homage, part brand-spanking new action movie where the actors try to imitate old characters that feel out of place among all the CGI effects. They belong to a different time period, and apart from some of the dialog and the simplistic plot, Star Trek '09 never really recaptures the wacky charm of the original. That said, the character interaction is good. Karl Urban is wonderfully over the top as McCoy ("Are you out of your fulcan' mind?!?"); Quinto's Emo Spock is pretty spot-on; and while he occasionally comes across as an insufferable brat, Pine's Kirk works better than I thought he would. There are scenes where he brings the same kind of calm insanity to the character that Shatner did, if considerably more lightweight.
Also, since when can Winona Ryder play a character who has a 25-ish-year-old son? Am I that old?!?
Also also,
Because, y'know, the original series was always so good about things like that. :roll:
All that said, whatever else Trek may or may not have been over the years, it was always entertaining. And Star Trek certainly entertains. After a slightly shaky start it keeps up the pace, delivers action and humour with many a character conflict. Kirk has sex with green-skinned women, Spock does the Vulcan neck pinch, Scottie beams people to and fro, and it gets the job done. Sure there's no real point to updating a series whose main selling point was its anachronistic charm, it's not like Star Trek has anything new to tell us these days. But hey, stuff blows up.
And I found the reimagined Star Trek both better and worse than I'd expected. I think the basic problem the movie has is that it doesn't know whether to be a prequel to the original series or a reboot for a new one; if you look at the more successful reboots of recent years (yer Spider-Mans, yer Battlestar Galacticas, both Batman franchises (discounting the non-Burton Burtons), and at least the first new Bond movie), one of the things you'll notice is that they usually wipe the slate clean and start over. Yes, there might be dozens of references for the fans of the old versions to enjoy (I loved Kirk's deadpan "Yeah... right" to a redshirt exclaiming how he couldn't wait to "kick some Romulan arse"), there might even be a few cameos for the old actors, but generally speaking the new versions stand on their own legs and tell their own story, acknowledge that it's a different age, not just by giving the characters different haircuts and use better special effects.
They do not, usually, have Adam West or Roger Moore running around like Yoda dispensing bits of wisdom, as Leonard Nimoy does here.
On the other hand, Star Trek '09 shares one problem with most of the other reboots; it's so focused on how the characters became what they are that they barely have time to be. And while I like that it focuses on the characters... do we need to see eight-year-old Spock getting bullied by his vulcan classmates? No, we do not, but the plot demands it. Like with, say, Iron Man you get the feeling that the story proper won't start until the next movie and all you saw in this movie (with its plot-for-plot's-sake and its Evil Alien 1A villain) was just a prologue setting up something else - and indeed, Star Trek ends on the classic opening line. To boldly go where no man has gone before... too bad they're all too aware that they have gone there before, and assume that the audience know where they are going next.
Taken together, it produces a curious effect; part loving homage, part brand-spanking new action movie where the actors try to imitate old characters that feel out of place among all the CGI effects. They belong to a different time period, and apart from some of the dialog and the simplistic plot, Star Trek '09 never really recaptures the wacky charm of the original. That said, the character interaction is good. Karl Urban is wonderfully over the top as McCoy ("Are you out of your fulcan' mind?!?"); Quinto's Emo Spock is pretty spot-on; and while he occasionally comes across as an insufferable brat, Pine's Kirk works better than I thought he would. There are scenes where he brings the same kind of calm insanity to the character that Shatner did, if considerably more lightweight.
Also, since when can Winona Ryder play a character who has a 25-ish-year-old son? Am I that old?!?
Also also,
if you have a weapon that can produce a black hole... why bother drilling a hole to the planet's core to use it? Why not just, y'know, drop it on the ground?
Because, y'know, the original series was always so good about things like that. :roll:
All that said, whatever else Trek may or may not have been over the years, it was always entertaining. And Star Trek certainly entertains. After a slightly shaky start it keeps up the pace, delivers action and humour with many a character conflict. Kirk has sex with green-skinned women, Spock does the Vulcan neck pinch, Scottie beams people to and fro, and it gets the job done. Sure there's no real point to updating a series whose main selling point was its anachronistic charm, it's not like Star Trek has anything new to tell us these days. But hey, stuff blows up.
abecedarian
Well-Known Member
Hmm...wonder how THIS Kirk would handle his Trouble With Tribbles?
Robert
Active Member
It's an alternate universe. Perhaps Cyrano Jones and his tribbles will be elsewhere.
pontalba
Well-Known Member
I seem to recall reading somewhere, the actors have signed on for two more movies. What I'd really like is another television series.
AIE: There have to be tribbles!!!
Robert
Active Member
I just hope they don't make Kirk politically correct.
pontalba
Well-Known Member
ROTFALOL those two terms cannot belong in the same sentence!