Jump to content

Home

Star Trek (Pic Heavy)

HerbieZ

By HerbieZ
in Ahto Spaceport Cantina

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 206
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Yar-El Newbie

Yar-El

Posted
Posted
Yesterday when I saw Quantum of Solace, they had a trailer for the new Star Trek movie. It looks pretty epic, and I'm somewhat interested in seeing it. Despite the fact, that I don't really know much about Star Trek. :p
It reminds me of when Star Trek movies meant something. You can watch the same movies over and over again; however, you walk away with a new take on the films. Most Star Trek movies remind people about what it means to be human, fight for honor, and think beyond one's self. You walk away feeling rejuvenated. This new movie feels that way.

 

I'm not bothered by the canon changes. I think this movie has the potential to bring people back to that moment when Star Trek made people feel something.

 

The Dark Knight brought me into a very dark place; however, what I really wanted was a movie of hope and triumph. I love the movie to death, but I think its time I return to Trek.

 

Star Wars movies don't make me feel anymore; however, that is not actually a bad thing to have happen. I'm not apart of the prequel generation of Star Wars fans; thus, I shouldn't be upset with George's new journey. Star Trek speaks to me on more of an adult manner. I know it can be boring to some people; however, I think it makes those movies timeless. Similar to the original triology of Star Wars.

 

This movie is going to be a blast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astrotoy7 Newbie

Astrotoy7

Posted
Posted

lolz... give Abrams Trek and ya get big explosions, in space. Sure the trailer looks ok, but I hope they remember to put some story in along the line ;) The essence of Trek has surely always been humanity's journey in a diverse and dangerous galaxy... Let's hope all of Abrams' 'BANG! POW! & WHOOSH!' doesn't kill that, or drown it out...

 

Still, I hope the movie does well, as it could mean a new Trek series :)

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astrotoy7 Newbie

Astrotoy7

Posted
Posted
saw the trailer on fri. It looks...interesting. I'm more worried about what's in production right now. None of the movies coming out looked any good but this.

 

But theres always some nice TV shows :) Not to mention the upcoming SW Live Action series. CW is fun too, in the interim.

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarfieldJL Newbie

GarfieldJL

Posted
Posted

 

Okay while it looks like a more modern movie, I've found several problems with it now.

 

Discrepencies

  1. When the Enterprise NCC-1701 was first launched James T. Kirk was late pre-teens, early teens. In fact when he finally became Captain he was the youngest Captain in Star Fleet History. When he finally became a Captain he had already served on a ship before he was on the Enterprise (reference from a ToS episode)
  2. The Romulans had been quite ever since the Federation's founding all the way up to a Particular ToS episode, in fact nobody even knew what a Romulan looked like until ToS. Even the Enterprise Series stayed true to that.
  3. Why is every hallway, etc. white? Heck even the First Trek movie had more color and detail than what I'm seeing.
  4. Spock as a raging lunatic, uh WTH? Spock is a half-vulcan, he has extreme control over his emotions, unless they are throwing Pon Farr into this (which the Vulcans had managed to keep offworlders from knowing about until sometime in ToS), that's just messed up.
  5. The First Captain of the NCC-1701 was Captain Robert April (there are multiple references regarding whom the first captain was). If you look at the Novel Best Destiny which I believe is one of the few novels that is canon because it ties a lot of things together, including why Kirk ended up joining Star Fleet years later (his father was in Star Fleet Before he was). In fact James T. Kirk's father served under Captain Robert April. Also there is a reference from Star Trek III about the ship being well over 20 years old.
  6. The Second Captain of the NCC-1701 was captain Christopher Pike, whom was in the pilot episode "The Cage" and in the only two-part episode in the entire ToS series. At the time Spock was the second officer, not first officer.
  7. Spock wasn't a member of the crew until late into Captain Robert April's command at the earliest, we know he joined the crew by the time Captain Christopher Pike was in command. (canon)
  8. Dr. McCoy didn't join the crew until sometime after the prior Doctor retired after Captain Christopher Pike left, Dr. Leonard H. McCoy then joined the crew, but this was after Kirk lost his friend Gary Mitchell. (canon)

 

Things that are relatively accurate:

  1. Where the NCC-1701 was built, it was on Earth around San Francisco, not sure if that's where they are building it in the movie plot.
  2. Uniforms look relatively accurate, with acception to the Captain's uniform.
  3. Spock was born on Vulcan (though why they are showing his birth makes absolutely no sense to me, nor why they have to refilm it (go to the film vaults and look at Star Trek V)).

 

lolz... give Abrams Trek and ya get big explosions, in space. Sure the trailer looks ok, but I hope they remember to put some story in along the line ;) The essence of Trek has surely always been humanity's journey in a diverse and dangerous galaxy... Let's hope all of Abrams' 'BANG! POW! & WHOOSH!' doesn't kill that, or drown it out...

 

I'm actually hoping that they manage to completely and irrevocably destroy the entire secondary hull in this movie. Seriously, I could think of so many ways they could have used the original design and simply retexture and update it. Supposedly they had found it to be extremely dangerous in space so a lot of the plain hull could have been explained as armor for goodness sakes.

 

The ship looks too advanced, it looks more advanced the the USS Excelsior NX-2000 from Star Trek III or the Enterprise-B from Generations, heck it almost looks on par with the Enterprise-D.

 

The saucer section looks fine, but the rest of it looks like a kitbash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yar-El Newbie

Yar-El

Posted
Posted

GarfieldJL,

 

I'm a Star Trek purest myself; however, there comes a time where you have to let it all go. I also had a problem with the ship's Nechells, but I'm looking past the differences in design. I started watching Star Trek way back in the 1980s, and I also see the alternations in storyline and other elements. Modernization is only natural at this point. Its looks like an impressive film, and hopefully it will be just as exciting as the trailer. I have high-high hopes for this movie; thus, I'm keeping an open mind about how it all plays out.

 

Does it really mater that the design was modernized? It is a stretch from what we have seen; however, this is a good way to carry on the tradition of Star Trek. Enjoy the ride while it lasts; therefore, don't worry about the changes because we may never see another.

 

They didn't pull a Lucas style prequel, so you have to give him a plus for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astor Newbie

Astor

Posted
Posted
Okay while it looks like a more modern movie, I've found several problems with it now.

 

Discrepencies

 

<long list>

 

If it's a re-imagining, none of that even matters. If it isn't, I'm not going to refuse to see it - people are getting way too worked up.

 

I love Star Trek - but the line has to be drawn somewhere - you'll never enjoy it if you're constantly looking for reasons to pick faults in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedHawke Newbie

RedHawke

Posted
Posted
# Where the NCC-1701 was built, it was on Earth around San Francisco, not sure if that's where they are building it in the movie plot.

Uh ok? How they get the ship into space?

 

Ships in Trek are built in orbiting spacedocks, or do they have some sort of anti-grav system, and if so then why all the worrying about atmospheric entries (until Voyager ayway)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astrotoy7 Newbie

Astrotoy7

Posted
Posted
Uh ok? How they get the ship into space?

 

Ships in Trek are built in orbiting spacedocks, or do they have some sort of anti-grav system, and if so then why all the worrying about atmospheric entries (until Voyager ayway)?

 

Initial build stages are done on Mars at the surface based Utopia Planitia Spaceyards.

 

Utopia_Planitia.jpg

 

above is screengrab of UPS from TNG, you can see sections of a galaxy class ship being assembled across it.

 

The NX01 didnt have the ability to land, but its not unimaginable for a ship that can travel beyond the speed of light to have anti grav thrusters(if they really wanted it to!!)

 

That seems to be what theyre implying with this ship anyway ;) Unless the whole thing gets transported up by other means

 

My query is > is kirk on the Utopia Mars colony in this shot?

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth_Yuthura Newbie

Darth_Yuthura

Posted
Posted

I've seen every single DS9 and most of Voyager and Next Generation episodes. I thoroughly enjoyed these three seasons because they were well-written and truly escalated the series to its greatness.

 

I also don't regard Enterprise any higher than TOS because they lacked the luster of the 24th century era. They shouldn't go back and correct the past... move forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astrotoy7 Newbie

Astrotoy7

Posted
Posted
@ Astro: Isn't the hull of that Galaxy class ship a training facility?

 

perhaps... you tell me! (and give a reference)

 

Im just trying to figure out if there is any precedence for land based ship construction in the Trek Universe :p We all know the references to the orbital construction areas but we dont have much to go on for the era the new movie covers.

 

This grab Ive taken from the trailer shows Enterprise taking off from spacedock - whether that is Mars spacedock ? I dunno > the planet below doesnt look like mars, so maybe (in the film), the Enterprise is being built on earth after all :) =More canon rape :Dspacedock.jpg

 

Alot of Trek nerds closet space engineers are already in violent debate about the whole built on the ground issue. the explanation I like is that Abrams simply wanted to do the launch this way, to set his movie apart from the original Trek (1st) Movie. Abrams himself has said he is making this movie to create 'future trek fans' more than just to cater to existing fans. I personally think thats a decent outlook for a director in this situation to have. If you set out to please every trek fan from the last 40 years, youd be in whole bunch o' hurt :p

 

Edit: now this is bad news :( talk about shameless promotion - CPU despots manufacturers intel have an official site related to the new trek movie

 

*spits in disgust* :xp: must you soil everything intel?

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astrotoy7 Newbie

Astrotoy7

Posted
Posted
@ Astro: I don't know, I just remember someone telling me recently that it was.

 

lolz, thats possible. I just cant find any reference to it. The Trek wikis dont mention it. That TNG episode "parallels" (one of my faves) that had that image of UPS merely mentioned "they build starships there" as part of a dream sequence type thingy.

 

Itd be interesting to know ; maybe something in Trek book EU? But you should know that "someone told me..." doesnt count as a good reference..

 

someone told me that George Lucas is making Ep 7-9 y'know , and is doing the voice of a crate opening in the upcoming KOTOR3 :D

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...