Paramount hands the new Star Trek movie to J.J. Abrams: Benedict Cumberbatch is cast in new sequel

If they were trying to make the action scenes "cool and epic", they succeeded IMO! My palms were sweating during the aerial drop and the platform fight, and my heart was in my throat in the opening 10 minutes. TWOK has some great stuff in it, but nothing with anywhere near the level of emotional resonance and power of this film.

That said, if you want to compare the villains on a 1:1 basis, I will absolutely agree that Khan is a more sympathetic, compelling and interesting villain than Nero.

 

On a character level? Sure. But on an sf, exploration of the human condition level, V-Ger is awesome.

 

That doesn't really bother me.

TMP reminds me of nothing so much as a far more compelling meditation along the lines of 2001.

 

Any more opinions of this movie?

 

It was really, really good, but the climax was not as exciting or as satisfying as I had hoped. I've decided to give it 4 stars and put it under Wrath of Khan, modifying my initial higher (4 1/2 star) rating.

 

As primarily a Star Wars fan I can recommend this to other Star War Fans.

The movie has some moments that reminded me of Star Wars.

I don't want to give away spoilers, but I guess I can black them out

Vulcan getting blown was equivalent to Alderan getting blown up. The battlefield commission from Pike of Kirk reminded me of Vader promoting Piett to Admiral. Some of the aliens were Star Wars like. This Kirk reminds me a little bit of Hans Solo

What makes this movie a real success is that when Captain Kirk takes the ship to warp at the end of the movie you want to see this group of people in action together again. What is there next adventure in space going to be? Just like in the Star Wars series you wanted to see these characters again in action and in battle and interacting with each other.
This new Star Trek movie is the same, and I can defiantly say I never felt that way about the previous 10 Star Trek movies.
But I always felt that way about every Star Wars movie.

Go see it, I am sure you will enjoy it.

 

Well said, B_J33! It's nice to agree on something for a change, ain't it?

 

I loved Star Trek. One of my favorite films, and an adventure film I'd put on the same level as Star Wars. Just well shot, well acted, good action, great characters. It was just pure win.

Also, I think the best thing about Trek now, if they continue on with the series, is the fact that it takes place in an alternate timeline. What this signifies to me is that characters are free to be killed off. Sulu, McCoy, ect.; since this timeline is different from the earlier series, the dramatic tension can be cranked up since these characters could potentially die. I'm not saying I want them to die, but I suspect one or two will eventually, and it won't just be Spock again (maybe). It will be someone we don't expect.

 

BTW, I've enjoyed The Wrath of Kahn, Generations, First Contact, and Nemesis, but more on a basis of "that was good, but I wouldn't watch it again". Star Trek is very different, because I will own the DVD, and I will watch it again and again.

 

This (the highlighted part) is a really good point, that I haven't heard anyone point out yet.

 

Spock and Uhuru should have a child together. three quarters human and one fourth Vulcan, the child is raised on earth, bullied by the all the human children for being an emotionless logic nerd.

 

Highly rated by all

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/?name_order=asc

T-Meter Critics - 95%

Top Critics -91%

RT Community -88%

 

You forget the most blatant of Star Wars references: Pike to Sulu "Punch it!"

 

My review: http://jeditrilobite.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/i-like-this-ship-its-exciting/

 

I don't think anyone thinks it *isn't* worth watching...?

 

I think it's nostalgia that's rocketing this from a really good movie to those crazy-high reviews.

Don't get me wrong, the people who put this together are GOOD. It's the LOST creative team in a lot of ways fer pete's sake. But I think the averages would be closer to 80-85% if it was some lesser-known genre or a new film.

Mind you, it would be no less good.

 

Nostalgia and relief, plus the advantage of being able to hold it up next to "The Phantom Menace" for prequel comparison.

 

This was much better than TPM.

 

Wow, I think I'm in the minority concerning the new Trek. Seems like all they did was combine a few Trek trademarks with a bunch of generic action sequences. Sure, it was fun at times to see new actors attempt to pull off familiar characters, but all too often this film came across as almost a parody to me. I get that Scotty should be a bit comical, but I don't think every line of dialogue should have to set up the obvious "lol!" Similarly, I'm okay with Sulu's fencing background, but I think it was suspiciously wacky when the character pulled out a magic sword of some sort (which drew a fair bit of derisive laughter in the theater I was at)and started busting ninja moves. And while I was never enough of a Trek fan to point out the intricacies of Star Fleet advancement, I found it jarring that all these young cadets were instantly placed into such important positions on the fleet's flagship. I feel like I could go on and on with the negatives (Kirk and Spock being oh so coincidentally dumped on that monster planet, young Kirk rocking out to the Beastie Boys, Kirk's unavoidable tendency to hang off ledges, Scotty's water tank ride), while the only thing that really worked for me was Winona Ryder as Spock's mom.

This film is nowhere near franchise high points like Kahn, Undiscovered Country, or First Contact. I'm not even sure it's better than the worst Trek. Final Frontier is hated, for instance, but I found that film to be vastly more interesting in both conception and execution than this latest reboot.

Hell, at the risk of a severe backlash (on a Star Wars-based board of all places ), I think The Phantom Menace was vastly superior to the new Trek. Lucas's film may feel stilted and unsure where it's going or who exactly it's targeting, but Menace still feels like something only it's creator could conjure in both a negative and a positive sense. It felt like something new.

The new Star Trek, on the other hand, feels like the type of mass-produced action romp that could sustain any "hip reboot" provided a few tweaks are made to the script.

Okay, though, I'll give you that the green chick was hot.

 

Nostalgia and relief, plus the advantage of being able to hold it up next to "The Phantom Menace" for prequel comparison.

True. But given Paramount had to go to these creators instead of thier old standbys like Berman makes me confortable enough that, given my choices in 1995-1999, I knew what the better franchise of the two was.

If Trek had people like this working on the franchise from Star Trek V on or the launch of TNG, the entire enterprise (no pun intended) would be several times the product it turned out to be.

I'll never be able to see another epsiode of Voyager without throwing something at the screen. Not that I ever really stopped myself from doing that anyway. But now I'm 100% certain there's better Trek to be had instead of 99.9%.

 

On the Star Trek boards many of the arguments against the SW prequels are being made towards the new Trek.

In one of my posts I referenced TFN but not by name.

 

I think that is rather close-minded. Perhaps these people simply know what they like? I liked the original Trek, and I really enjoyed the new film, but I get that some fans might have a different opinion. What I liked about TOS was the characters, the chemistry between the characters, and the action; the sci-fi story concepts I didn't really care about one way or another. Not everyone felt this way, and I can see how the new film with its accent on crowd-pleasing fast-paced fun and action over Big Ideas might rub them the wrong way.

 

Star Wars compared to Star Trek

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1910892