The new Star Trek movie is...

[Arnwyn]

I cared that you suggested people raving about the film were dupes. Perhaps because I've been raving about it for several days now? I sense a connection...

Whoops on your part, then.

I mentioned it, actually, based on that early preview that was shown somewhere in Texas (Dallas?), when Leonard Nimoy suddenly appeared and surprised everyone by showing the new movie instead of Wrath of Khan (which they were originally there for). It was featured in G4's Attack of the Show, actually, in an interesting interview (well, as interesting as Kevin Pereira can get! ), and he posed a very good question. Everyone was raving like a near lunatic about it, and Kevin suggested that maybe it was the circumstances that led to a somewhat... unobjective... view of the movie. The person they were interviewing denied it (unsurprisingly), but based on what he said, others said, and some footage, I think the evidence showed clearly otherwise. So yeah, I'll throw in a little harmless speculation on that, now that I've seen the movie for myself (couldn't before).

I'm glad some people happened to have enjoyed the new ST more than Wrath of Khan, though. (Even if it's not better. ) Ah, the internet. Sometimes it's tough for people to adequately express themselves.

Did I miss the part of your post where took back the suggestion that people raving about the film were dupes?

Arn, I don't care if you enjoyed it.

But you should care that I enjoyed it, if you want your point (alternately: wild accusation) to make any sense whatsoever. I said I enjoyed it (8/10, no less!) - am I, therefore, accusing myself of being a dupe? Think hard.

You seem to be hung up on this. Maybe you shouldn't read/respond to my posts any more, as they clearly, to my eyes, bug you in some way and maybe you're taking some stuff personally. Sorry, in any case.

[/hijack]

 

[Umbran]

But the Hollywood studios regularly assume that people are advertising dupes, desperate, or easily captivated by shiny (exploding) things. We may disagree on whether we individually think this film falls in that category. But to think that people will fall for that type of thing doesn't make make someone a crank, it means they realize what the studio execs realize and profit from.

Realizing that people will have a greater tendency to like a thing with lots of flash, and the outright statement that strongly positive statements come from being brainwashed by marketing are qualitatively different. One is noting the tendency of the market, the other is a direct accusation of lack of ability to control one's own mind - it rides rather too close to, "if you don't agree with me, you are stupid."

I was not terribly thrilled with it when it was said. Nobody should expect the mods to tolerate any more similar suggestions in here.

 

[Pbartender]

I'm glad some people happened to have enjoyed the new ST more than Wrath of Khan, though. (Even if it's not better. ) Ah, the internet. Sometimes it's tough for people to adequately express themselves.

Certainly it is.

For my part on this particular point...

Of all the Star Trek movies, I think I enjoy The Wrath of Khan, The Voyage Home and this most recent reboot all equally enough that I can only say that I like all the other Trek movies less. At the same time though, I admit that I like all three of those movies for completely different reasons, and that it would be thoroughly unfair to compare them.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Honestly, I never really watched any of the original Star Trek series or its movies, other than the first movie and the whale movie. I grew up watching occasional episodes of The Next Generation. I haven't seriously watched anything Star Trek related since.

I loved this movie. It was a lot of fun, and brought back just about everything I honestly liked about Star Trek, without many of the things that I didn't like.

I mean, I never even really remembered the doctor before this movie, and I completely forgot about the existence of Chekhov (I thought the new Chekhov was original to the movie at first), but in a way this movie introduced me to these characters in a new way for the first time, and I really enjoyed it.

 

[shilsen]

It wasn't. Then again, I never found Trek to be particularly thoughtful (or, rather, I found it thoughtful and dumb in equal measure, with lots of punching).

Hah! Nice description. I just found this movie much higher on the dumb.

To be honest, I'm not sure what my expectations were. All I can say is that I left the theater beaming (pun un... never mind), feeling the film reminded me of everything (mostly) I liked about Star Trek in the first place.

I think that's basically it for me. A lot of that stuff isn't what I liked about Star Trek, plus what I liked about Star Trek watching it in the 80s wouldn't do it for me in 2009.

They replaced Spock's irony and loneliness with barely-concealed anger. I liked it. It seemed a viable interpretation of the character.

I think it's viable but it didn't do much for me. The 'original' Spock is actually one of the things from TOS that I'd have loved to see again. He was always my favorite character, by far. Kirk never did much for me, nor Bones.

The change to Spock also led to one of the things that I thought was a weakness of the movie - even though it tried to do the old logic (Spock) vs. emotion (Kirk) opposition/pairing, it didn't work because Spock wasn't really logical in the movie. One quick example - Spock originally doesn't want Uhura on the Enterprise because it may look like impropriety. The supposedly logical Vulcan is more concerned about appearances rather than the fact that she's competent?

What would have been an acceptable display of her competencies?

Actually having some major (no, the one in the movie doesn't do it for me) plot point being unraveled by her. Think of all the stuff done by female characters (including the ones who don't shoot stuff) on BSG, for example. Now there's a show which handles gender in the future well, and I'm probably spoiled by it because I want to see that kind of quality.

Also, I don't buy that her being compassionate to Spock somehow reduces the character. It humanizes both of them. Needing to refrain from showing a woman being compassionate is just as ugly artifact of gender stereotyping.

You misunderstood me. I don't think there's anything wrong with showing a woman or a man being compassionate. I just didn't think her compassion (which was one of the few things setting her apart from the other characters) was enough to round her out, and I'd say the same if they had shown Bones expressing it.

Well, nothing aside from translating a plot-critical bit and standing up to a James T. Kirk pickup line (without hectoring or lecturing).

As I said above, it didn't seem that crucial a plot point to me, esp. in comparison to the other stuff that happened in the movie. Her ignoring Kirk's pickup lines was something I liked, unsurprisingly. I'm actually looking forward to seeing if they do anything interesting with her romance with Spock.

Wouldn't dream of it. I'll be screening 1st season TOS: "Space Seed", "City on the Edge of Forever", just the classics.

Sounds interesting. I've seen all of the 1st season, or most of it, but I never know/remember the episode names so I'm not sure which ones those are.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

Certainly it is.

For my part on this particular point...

Of all the Star Trek movies, I think I enjoy The Wrath of Kahn,

NGAAAAAAARGH!

It's Khan, not "Kahn"! This misspelling seems to be everywhere recently, and it's making me tear my hair out. Khan, Khan, KHAAAAAAAAAAAN!



(Nothing personal with you, Pbartender; your post was just the straw that made my cup run over. )

 

[Pbartender]

NGAAAAAAARGH!

It's Khan, not "Kahn"! This misspelling seems to be everywhere recently, and it's making me tear my hair out. Khan, Khan, KHAAAAAAAAAAAN!



(Nothing personal with you, Pbartender; your post was just the straw that made my cup run over. )

Excuse my typo...

It's an easy one to make, when you're typing fast.

EDIT:

Psst! I fixed it just for you...

 

[Umbran]

It's Khan, not "Kahn"!

But wait! Imagine if it was Kahn! "The Wrath of Kahn" (as in Madeline Kahn) - kind of like a cross between Blazing Saddles and Trek... and no, "Spaceballs" doesn't count!

 

[Brown Jenkin]

But wait! Imagine if it was Kahn! "The Wrath of Kahn" (as in Madeline Kahn) - kind of like a cross between Blazing Saddles and Trek... and no, "Spaceballs" doesn't count!

As long as there was still some Rich Corinthian Leather somewhere in the movie.

 

[SkidAce]

Why the sad face? Blockbuster Star Trek is a good thing (particularly when it means a talented bunch of people are going to be given large sums of money to make more...).

You speak with wisdom, I was just still in shock.

On a serious note, I agree that a "bigger" film can be beneficial to the franchise. I do worry that sometimes mass appeal takes films or books or games into directions change the flavor from the originals. But that is a risk we take with innovation. So full speed ahead I say.