I just saw Star Trek and I can say, without a doubt, it was the best of the

[WCGreen]

series...

A real good blend of the geek and action that make this a movie that crosses over into the mainstream.

It was a great ride that I didn't want to end.

[orestes]

1. I think Khan was better, but i agree with your general sentiment.

This was a pretty damn good Trek.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I am so looking forward to seeing this one!

As an early Trekkie, those stories are sacred to me...well, nearly.

Glad you had fun too!

:D

[Liberal_in_LA]

4. early Trekkie here also... or Trekker.

:)

[Frank Cannon]

5. Much as I loved Wrath of Khan, I liked this one a little more

This one gets extra points for having a young cast of mostly unknowns who not only had the guts to take on those iconic roles, but kicked ass doing so. And the incredible special effects were just the icing on the cake.

[Orsino]

7. This one's a better movie, overall.

Almost none of the ponderous writing and wooden acting of previous Trek films, and plenty of thrills.

[leeroysphitz]

3. It was a fine film. I loved it and will go see it again soon but I'm with Orestes...

W.O.K. will always be my favorite.

[Skittles]

6. I loved it and look forward to more

they resurrected Star Trek in FINE FORM! :thumbsup:

[Deja Q]

8. Would you explain what's geeky about it?

Apart from some time travel waffle that's written so generically that even G W B could understand it without needing to see it a brazillion times be told what how many are in a brazillon...

It seemed a generic action piece, sponsored by Budweiser, Nokia, and the car company that little baby Kirk steals and crashes... :eyes:

The actors were good; how the characters were written bugged me more.

Nice to see some people saying more than blind "it was the best movie ever and I hated the original star trek!" routines; I've been on the internet and in real life trying to make people understand that if you're going to remake a movie, keep the creator's original spirit involved or else it's better to make a new franchise entirely. Paramount wanted the name "Trek" to bring in money, because the thought of anything new probably scared them silly. But I digress.

There was a LOT more to the real Kirk than the one-sided macho high school punk oaf displayed in that movie. (For which even the Kobyashi Maru scene was camped up for comedic effect. Yuck. is the writing too wimpy to take itself seriously?)

For now on, I'm adding the prefix "Nu" to the characters because they are not the same people.

I loathed the scene where NuScotty is told he hadn't invented ___ yet. Was the writer so fond of Trek IV that he just wasn't able to come up with that scene all by himself?

Ditto for when Romulan baddie Nero ("Nero"? Who's next, "Caesar"?!) puts a brain busting beetle into NuPike's head. Gee, another plot "borrowing" afoot?

NuChekhov and NuSulu were relegated to total caricatures. Anyone who saw (and remembered) "Star Trek V" will notice the same caricature-like treatment given to Sulu and Chekov.

NuUhura's point was to drool all over Spock.

Spock's plot starts out as what was told in "Journey to Babel" (season 2, 1967) and expanded upon. Actually, the Spock development I liked. Which is why I dropped the prefix. :)

McCoy seemed mostly in character too, but then we didn't see enough of him.

The movie relies on superficial action and superficial characters to make it through. There is no depth that the original series had. The movie itself is a parody with nice special effects. But then comes the ending, which is a real insult to Gene Roddenberry.

It's all over the internet that Abrams never got into the original Trek... http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/may/07/jj-abrams-interview-star-trek and the nmber of purportedly fan-pleasing references and set pieces "borrowed" from the previous 10 movies (and 300+ TV episodes) only goes to show there isn't a shred of original thought in the movie. If it wasn't for the pretty f/x sequences, and the fact I wanted to tell people I watched the whole thing so they'd stop telling me in a patronizing fashion "I think you should go and see the movie", I would have walked out of this inane drivel halfway through - I wish I had, as the ending was such an insult.

Why do remakes have to be so parochial, when not insulting those who created the franchises in the first place? Gene would not have been pleased. Then again, he wasn't happy with Trek VI and they dedicated that one to him on his deathbed anyway... Hollywood isn't known for having a soul...

P T Barnum was right, there's one born every minute. Lots of people love this new, vapid remake - that even tells the audience they're in a new alternate reality, so why must this be a "Trek" movie in the first place? It just isn't. The characters readily prove that.

[Kitty Herder]

10. I like your prefix "Nu," for the characters. Mind if I use it?

But I'm going to use it for the new Spock, too. There can be no new Spock in my mind.

I was prepared to absolutely hate the new movie, so I was pleasantly surprised. It was great fun. Having said that, I share most of your criticisms.

I was roped in by the action, special effects and the nostalgia, despite myself. But the next day, I felt terribly sad, as if the Star Trek I'd loved since I was a child had died.

[WCGreen]

11. First of all, the whole premise of a different reality is pretty Geeky to at least

most of us...

Also, the development of the technology from Pikes ship to the Enterprise was pretty cool. It showed that it all wasn't hyper clean and that little touch of the plastic cold barriers on the shuttle was cool.

The Red Matter was a nice touch. You knew what it was capable of doing with out having anyone spend ten minutes explaining the intricacies.

As for Sula and Chekhov, I thing they pretty well caught the exuberance of youth. Most kids that age, especially one's immersed in a star fleet like structure are going to be a little unidimensional; THEY ARE STILL TEENAGERS.

I think those touches you scoffed at were really, at least to this "casual" fan who has seen every episode as well as every movie, a nice homage to the old series, movie and TV show.

And I suspect that this series will only get better and that a whole new lode of fans will discover the fun of Star Trek.

Remember, it was just an Oater in Space, a Wagon Train to the Stars, a fun movie that was meant for all to enjoy not just a shrinking base of hard core fans.

So get your DVDs and watch at home while the rest of us embrace the new series and go boldly into another group of writers and actor take us to places unknown.

[In_The_Wind]

9. Thanks for the info, Chris.

It sounds like I should break my wait until I can rent it rule for this one.

[Radical Activist]

12. What was the moral message?

It's not a Trek movie without a moral message of some kind. Otherwise I thought it was great.

[WCGreen]

14. Blow up as much shit as you can....

Moral, it's just not nice to blow up planets to resolve personal issues...

[MilesColtrane]

16. Killing someone out of revenge is OK, as long as they are really, really bad.

[Shine]

13. Yup, it was pretty great.

we saw it with the kids and even though they didn't have the same sort of cultural reference points of recognizing the lines we'd grown up with (ie, "Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a physicist!")they still enjoyed it, too.

Fun flick. :thumbsup:

:hi:

[WCGreen]

15. I have to say it was a really good and entertaining flick...

One of hte best action films I have seen in a while, on par with Batman and Iron Man...