Star Trek (2009) - Opens May 8th

In summary, the new Star Trek movie is set in the future and features an angry Kirk. Some reviews say it's good, others say it's bad. But either way, it's supposedly worth going to see.
  • #71
Ivan Seeking said:
To me that looks like something from the 1980's.



Get used to it. It gets worse as you get older. But for a real comparison, look at the early ST TOS episodes. Even the early episodes of TNG were filled with kids playing on the bridge.

What are you talking about, Captain Picard had gray hair in every episode...the cast of TNG was def. NOT as young as this cast, not even close.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
mheslep said:
Yes, others feel just as you do Cyus:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film


Wait for the DVD, per ONN it will have two hours dedicated to interplanetary diplomacy.

Ha.ha.ha...someone already posted this link.

Edit: Wait, that was you. I saw it the first time...
 
  • #73
I saw it the other night, and I was (kinda) disappointed as well.

The characters are decent, and the CGI is outstanding. The plot is pretty thin, though. It's basically an extremely one-dimensional battle between good and evil, with novice kids manning the controls while coming of age -- a storyline which has been beaten to death. It fits right in with the Terminator and Transformer franchises. Even worse, many plot elements seem tossed in simply to justify yet another futuristic CGI action scene.

I did enjoy the much more realistic, mechanical rendering of the ships, though. The TNG series never showed any real machines -- no real wires or pumps or bulkheads, just glass panels with light-up buttons. Perhaps that was done to suggest that the technology was so advanced as to be unrecognizable, but I think it was probably done just to save enormous production cost.

I got pretty annoyed with the lighting. The bridge is probably the most inhospitable place to work I've ever seen. It's literally covered with dozens or hundreds of super-bright point light sources pointing in every direction. It would drive anyone nuts in ten minutes flat. Even worse, they constantly exaggerate the "shininess" of the whole film by putting huge, distracting CGI lens flares in virtually every shot. I find it hard to believe that cinematographers in the 24th century would not know how to use lens hoods. Much of the film is shot with these faux-amateur techniques (camera shake, hunting, etc.), probably borrowed from Battlestar Galactica, where they are used in much gentler ways. The techniques are simply overused here, to the point of being outright annoying.

Overall, it's one of the most enjoyable movies released this year, but I would not pay to see it again.

- Warren
 
  • #74
st-tng.jpg


TNG cast, adults.

http://mymediahype.com/blog/wp-content/themes/onyxportal/images/top/startrek.jpg

Star Trek movie cast, kids.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #75
Cyrus said:
st-tng.jpg


TNG cast, adults.

Sure, if you look at the cast from the seventh season.

Try this.
sttng_seasonone_04.jpg


or here
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3162740736/ch0001464

And I remember that Deanna had this really cute knee-sock thing going.
 
  • #76
Ivan Seeking said:
Sure, if you look at the cast from the seventh season.

Try this.
sttng_seasonone_04.jpg


or here
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3162740736/ch0001464

And I remember that Deanna had this really cute knee-sock thing going.

Please, you are looking at riker. He wasn't the captain. Jean luke was older even back then. In the current movie, its the captain that's young, along with everyone else. Plus, data is a robot, so he isn't any younger or older. Fail.

Edit: Are you kidding me? Even in the imdb link riker isn't half as young looking as in this movie!
 
  • #77
Ivan Seeking said:
To me that looks like something from the 1980's.

Or at least what someone in the 80's thought a futuristic bridge would look like. But that's the point, you have to play to the audience. An 80's audience would likely be uncomfortable with a real futuristic bridge.

It reminds me of a story I heard about an actor that tried to wear an mustache style that was authentic to the time period he was supposed to be in, and all the audience could do is snicker at what they thought of as a strange mustache.
 
  • #78
Cyrus said:
What are you talking about, Captain Picard had gray hair in every episode...the cast of TNG was def. NOT as young as this cast, not even close.

That may be true, but we are talking about Kirk here. He was barely more than a kid when he started in both universes. In this one, he was due to wait three more years for a commission.
 
  • #79
Janus said:
Or at least what someone in the 80's thought a futuristic bridge would look like. But that's the point, you have to play to the audience. An 80's audience would likely be uncomfortable with a real futuristic bridge.

It reminds me of a story I heard about an actor that tried to wear an mustache style that was authentic to the time period he was supposed to be in, and all the audience could do is snicker at what they thought of as a strange mustache.

Yep. That gets back to what I was saying about going too far into the future. In fact, already Trek falls behind what we might expect for HMIs [human-machine interfaces]. You have to talk to the computer, or even worse, push touch pads? How quaint. Surely it will all be thought controlled! :biggrin:

One thing that used to kill me in TNG was how Deanna and Beverly liked to do 1980's style aerobics in 80's style leotards.

The first series is so far behind in computer technology that it becomes laughable. In fact it struck me one day that in many respects, young people wouldn't even understand why it seemed so futuristic at the time.
 
  • #80
Ivan Seeking said:
Yep. That gets back to what I was saying about going too far into the future. In fact, already Trek falls behind what we might expect for HMIs [human-machine interfaces]. You have to talk to the computer, or even worse, push touch pads? How quaint. Surely it will all be thought controlled! :biggrin:

One thing that used to kill me in TNG was how Deanna and Beverly liked to do 1980's style aerobics in 80's style leotards.

The first series is so far behind in computer technology that it becomes laughable. In fact it struck me one day that in many respects, young people wouldn't even understand why it seemed so futuristic at the time.

Yeah, when I saw one episode of TOS, kirk was like, "let me use my space radio phone, it has no wires". I was like...WTF. Then he got into his "automobile" and "drove" to his "space" "ship" after punching in his password to a "computer".

I don't know about what you said though. The movie 2001 was 10x better than star trek TOS.

In fact, the set looks a LOT like star trek TNG!
 
  • #81
Cyrus said:
I don't know about what you said though. The movie 2001 was 10x better than star trek TOS.

In fact, the set looks a LOT like star trek TNG!

Um, 2001 was supposed to have taken place in 2001, IIRC.
 
  • #82
Ivan Seeking said:
Um, 2001 was supposed to have taken place in 2001, IIRC.

And it was a lot more futuristic than star trek, in some ways.
 
  • #83
Cyrus said:
Yeah, when I saw one episode of TOS, kirk was like, "let me use my space radio phone, it has no wires". I was like...WTF. Then he got into his "automobile" and "drove" to his "space" "ship" after punching in his password to a "computer".
I'm just curious. What episode was this? It was repeatedly shown in the series that Kirk had no idea how to operate automobiles.
 
  • #84
Cyrus said:
And it was a lot more futuristic than star trek, in some ways.

They also got most of it wrong. But the point was that 2001 presented the world of 2001 from the perspective of 1965 or so. In TNG we were talking about 2350 [or something] as viewed from 1987. So I don't see what one has to do with the other.

While I too loved the movie, 2001, it is not the kind of material that could keep an audience for long. That is what I see as the paradox of good sci-fi for the theater or television: We are limited by the need for a broad appeal.

My newest favorite sci-fi movie is Primer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_(film)

but it would never carry a large audience.
 
Last edited:
  • #85
slider142 said:
I'm just curious. What episode was this? It was repeatedly shown in the series that Kirk had no idea how to operate automobiles.

I was trying to make Ivan feel old by making things from the future everday.
 
  • #86
Ivan Seeking said:
My newest favorite sci-fi movie is Primer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_(film)

but it would never carry a large audience.

I saw that movie on netflix instant play. Feels like something that was shot by a bunch of kids with an awesome idea and no budget. I loved it.

I agree with Cyrus that the cast of the new movie looks too young. It was like they just walk onto this new ship and take charge. Kids in space! I was expecting Spicoli to enter the scene any second and yell 'Surf's up dudes! Woah!'

I enjoyed it, but I don't have the enthusiasm for it that some do. Great CGI. I didn't know space was so colorful.
 
  • #87
Cyrus said:
I don't know about what you said though. The movie 2001 was 10x better than star trek TOS.


This is a little bit a of an unfair comparison, You're talking about a film with a 10.5 million dollar budget, compared to to a TV show shot at $185,000 an episode(A smaller budget than "Mission Impossible", which was filming next door. There were times when Star Trek literally went through MI's trash to find things to use as props or set decoration). Add in the fact that each episode only had a lead time of a few weeks from start of shooting until air time, and 2001 took 28 months for the same thing.

Of course to be fair, we should use the production time and costs of the Star Trek pilot (where they had to build everything from scratch.). But even then, 2001 cost 17 times as much and took 16 times longer to make.
 
  • #88
Huckleberry said:
I saw that movie on netflix instant play. Feels like something that was shot by a bunch of kids with an awesome idea and no budget. I loved it.

If you haven't seen it yet, you should checkout The Man From Earth. But do yourself a favor and do not look at any plot summaries ahead of time.

Seriously, I can understand all of the objections. I guess for me it was more about the direction the series would take. I have high hopes.

It is noteworthy that many of the canned plots alluded to earlier were first canned on Star Trek. This points to what I see as another problem for sci-fi: It is increasingly difficult to think of new and more exotic ideas. While they can always play to the dramas and moral dilemmas, exotic new ideas [for the screen] are the hallmark of Trek.
 
  • #89
Ivan Seeking said:
It is noteworthy that many of the canned plots alluded to earlier were first canned on Star Trek. This points to what I see as another problem for sci-fi: It is increasingly difficult to think of new and more exotic ideas. While they can always play to the dramas and moral dilemmas, exotic new ideas [for the screen] are the hallmark of Trek.

They need to quit it with the time travel thing. Its getting really really old.
 
  • #90
TheStatutoryApe said:
They need to quit it with the time travel thing. Its getting really really old.

Yeah, well, the first time that chronometer wheel began rolling backwards on the Enterprise, it was quite a moment. :biggrin:
 
  • #91
Huckleberry said:
I saw that movie on netflix instant play. Feels like something that was shot by a bunch of kids with an awesome idea and no budget. I loved it.

Note also:
Grand Jury Prize, Sundance Film Festival in 2004[18]
Alfred P. Sloan Prize for films dealing with science and technology, the 2004 Sundance Film Festival[18]
Best Writer/Director (Shane Carruth) at the Nantucket Film Festival in 2004[19]
Best Feature at the London International Festival of Science Fiction in 2005[20]
wiki
 
  • #92
Ivan Seeking said:
Note also:
Grand Jury Prize, Sundance Film Festival in 2004[18]
Alfred P. Sloan Prize for films dealing with science and technology, the 2004 Sundance Film Festival[18]
Best Writer/Director (Shane Carruth) at the Nantucket Film Festival in 2004[19]
Best Feature at the London International Festival of Science Fiction in 2005[20]
wiki

I'm going to watch it myself. The synopsis I read sounded great.
 
  • #93
TheStatutoryApe said:
I'm going to watch it myself. The synopsis I read sounded great.

Like Huckleberry, I ran across it on Netflix. What a great surprise! It is probably the most worthy treatment of the subject of time travel [from a logical point of view] that you will ever see in a movie.
 
  • #94
Ivan Seeking said:
Like Huckleberry, I ran across it on Netflix. What a great surprise! It is probably the most worthy treatment of the subject of time travel [from a logical point of view] that you will ever see in a movie.

I used to think the following movie did a wonderful job of explaining time travel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/A9miqKm0aB0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/A9miqKm0aB0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

But then again, I think I was 6 years old when I first saw it.

"What are the people like? Ahhhhhh. mmmm... The shape of things to come. It's lovely Yvette Mew Mew." :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #95
Ugh, I just saw it today. Can I have my money back?
 
  • #96
gravenewworld said:
Saw. Liked it. Never watched 1 episode of Star Trek. Never watched a single Trek movie before this one.
Then I definitely suggest watching Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That will explain some references in the new movie that you missed.

Hey, I was tutoring one of my math students earlier this week, a 9th grader. We had both seen Star Trek last weekend, and I mentioned how cool it was that they had Leonard Nimoy in the movie. Her response was, "who's Leonard Nimoy?" :bugeye: :eek:
 
  • #97
Also watch "The Naked Time" from the original series for another reference. Heck, watch all three seasons.
 
  • #98
Redbelly98 said:
Then I definitely suggest watching Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That will explain some references in the new movie that you missed.

Hey, I was tutoring one of my math students earlier this week, a 9th grader. We had both seen Star Trek last weekend, and I mentioned how cool it was that they had Leonard Nimoy in the movie. Her response was, "who's Leonard Nimoy?" :bugeye: :eek:

She was only about two years old when the last Trek movie came out. Spock's ears are almost old enough to be her grandparents.
 
  • #99
Janus said:
I know that one reviewer lamented the fact that the score didn't make use of the original series theme until the very end, but I thought its use was pitch perfect.
Up to that point, they were doing an "origin" story. It wasn't until then that all the set pieces reached their familiar positions from the TV series. So it was appropriate to wait to use the series theme until then.
Did you notice whenever an elder Vulcan was conveying words of wisdom or encouragement, Chinese http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huqin" ).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #100
Ouabache said:
Did you notice whenever an elder Vulcan was conveying words of wisdom or encouragement, Chinese http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huqin" ).

When you pay attention to the score of any film you will often find it a bit cheesy in several places. I have been recently watching Babylon 5 and found myself shaking my head alot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #101
Redbelly98 said:
Then I definitely suggest watching Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That will explain some references in the new movie that you missed.

Hey, I was tutoring one of my math students earlier this week, a 9th grader. We had both seen Star Trek last weekend, and I mentioned how cool it was that they had Leonard Nimoy in the movie. Her response was, "who's Leonard Nimoy?" :bugeye: :eek:

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, according to Robot Chicken:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Xga_wchTpW8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Xga_wchTpW8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Le wrath di khan said:
Khaan! Khaan! KHAAAN!
http://animated.ytmnd.com/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #102
:smile:
Love the starships being carried around by the crew.
 
  • #103
Redbelly98 said:
Hey, I was tutoring one of my math students earlier this week, a 9th grader. We had both seen Star Trek last weekend, and I mentioned how cool it was that they had Leonard Nimoy in the movie. Her response was, "who's Leonard Nimoy?" :bugeye: :eek:

Last fall, I polled a class of about 100 first-year (university) physics students (non-physics majors), and over half the students had never seen an episode of the original Star Trek series.
 

Similar threads

Can 3D Modeling Bring Classic Star Trek and Looney Tunes Together?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Can Evolved State: Dichotomy Capture Your Imagination?
Replies
1
Views
3K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 257)
Replies
5
Views
3K
Why is the U-2 nicknamed the Dragon Lady?
Replies
4
Views
7K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top