The Star Trek Spoilers Thread

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
Skippy
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Skippy » Thu May 07, 2009 10:54 pm

Anyone notice a few influences? Firefly in the space shots with the lack of sound and the way the camera moved and such. Then Futurama when Scotty was going round the tubes, I liked that. Even if it wasn't meant to be a reference I like to think it is. The other Futurama one I wasn't too sure about was the whole "I never thought of space being the thing that's moving" because it could have been Futurama taking influence from Star Trek itself :lol: I'm not a trekkie and damn proud.

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Peter Crisp » Thu May 07, 2009 10:54 pm

MCN wrote:
LewisD wrote:So, I'm wanting to watch this new film, having never really been into star trek.

But why the strawberry float can't I find any torrrents?


Give it time, the advance screenings were only today.

Also, did anyone else watch it expecting a big Deus Ex Machina at the end that never came? I think that surprised me more than anything else, and it showed that it was no longer Brannon Braga in charge.


I had that fear for a while and it would have completely destroyed the film for me.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Vermin
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: TimeGhost

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Vermin » Thu May 07, 2009 10:55 pm

You'll love Ebert's review, Hexx.

Time travel as we all know, is impossible in the sense it happens here, but many things are possible in this film. Anyone with the slightest notion of what a black hole is, or how it behaves, will find the black holes in “Star Trek” hilarious. The logic is also a little puzzling when Scotty can beam people into another ship in outer space, but they have to physically parachute to land on a platform in the air from which the Romulans are drilling a hole to the Earth’s core. After they land there, they fight with two Romulan guards, using ... fists and swords? The platform is suspended from Arthur C. Clark’s “space elevator,” but instead of fullerenes, the cable is made of metallic chunks the size of refrigerators.


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997

User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Hexx » Thu May 07, 2009 10:57 pm

PsychoPriest wrote:Anyone notice a few influences? Firefly in the space shots with the lack of sound


I thought that was the shittest bit.

One scene - person gets sucked out into the silence of space...haunting and chilling.

4 scenes (or 40seconds, no scenes longer than 10seconds in this film ;)) later - space battle full of pew pew pew action and SoundFX

:lol:

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Peter Crisp » Thu May 07, 2009 10:58 pm

They have to parachute as the transporters were blocked though and they said that so many times even I got the message.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
SEP
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by SEP » Thu May 07, 2009 10:58 pm

Gil-Martin wrote:You'll love Ebert's review, Hexx.

Time travel as we all know, is impossible in the sense it happens here, but many things are possible in this film. Anyone with the slightest notion of what a black hole is, or how it behaves, will find the black holes in “Star Trek” hilarious. The logic is also a little puzzling when Scotty can beam people into another ship in outer space, but they have to physically parachute to land on a platform in the air from which the Romulans are drilling a hole to the Earth’s core. After they land there, they fight with two Romulan guards, using ... fists and swords? The platform is suspended from Arthur C. Clark’s “space elevator,” but instead of fullerenes, the cable is made of metallic chunks the size of refrigerators.


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997


He obviously wasn't paying attention. The drill had a dampening field, preventing transport or communications. And it was Vulcan's core they were drilling into in that scene.

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Hexx » Thu May 07, 2009 10:59 pm

Gil-Martin wrote:You'll love Ebert's review, Hexx.

Time travel as we all know, is impossible in the sense it happens here, but many things are possible in this film. Anyone with the slightest notion of what a black hole is, or how it behaves, will find the black holes in “Star Trek” hilarious. The logic is also a little puzzling when Scotty can beam people into another ship in outer space, but they have to physically parachute to land on a platform in the air from which the Romulans are drilling a hole to the Earth’s core. After they land there, they fight with two Romulan guards, using ... fists and swords? The platform is suspended from Arthur C. Clark’s “space elevator,” but instead of fullerenes, the cable is made of metallic chunks the size of refrigerators.


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997


Pft.

Even I know the transporters where blocked due to interference from the drilling beam :fp: They repeated that several times (presumably because they were aware people in the audience would have disengaged brains :P)


A better question is why the hell the needed to drill at all - surely a black hole on the surface would have been as devasting (after all, the Jellyfish didn't have no Drill). Or why all 3 people couldn't carry the explosives..

I know know, disengage brain before watching...

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Peter Crisp » Thu May 07, 2009 11:01 pm

Hexx wrote:
PsychoPriest wrote:Anyone notice a few influences? Firefly in the space shots with the lack of sound


I thought that was the shittest bit.

One scene - person gets sucked out into the silence of space...haunting and chilling.

4 scenes (or 40seconds, no scenes longer than 10seconds in this film ;)) later - space battle full of pew pew pew action and SoundFX

:lol:


Do you honestly expect a space battle to be portrayed in silence?

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
SEP
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by SEP » Thu May 07, 2009 11:01 pm

Hexx wrote:
Gil-Martin wrote:You'll love Ebert's review, Hexx.

Time travel as we all know, is impossible in the sense it happens here, but many things are possible in this film. Anyone with the slightest notion of what a black hole is, or how it behaves, will find the black holes in “Star Trek” hilarious. The logic is also a little puzzling when Scotty can beam people into another ship in outer space, but they have to physically parachute to land on a platform in the air from which the Romulans are drilling a hole to the Earth’s core. After they land there, they fight with two Romulan guards, using ... fists and swords? The platform is suspended from Arthur C. Clark’s “space elevator,” but instead of fullerenes, the cable is made of metallic chunks the size of refrigerators.


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997


Pft.

Even I know the transporters where blocked due to interference from the drilling beam :fp:

A better question is why the hell the needed to drill at all - surely a black hole on the surface would have been as devasting (after all, the Jellyfish didn't have no Drill). Or why all 3 people couldn't carry the explosives..

I know know, disengage brain before watching...


Anyone who has ever played a war game knows that the engineers carry the explosives. That's like asking why the modern infantry can't fly helicopters.

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Hexx » Thu May 07, 2009 11:02 pm

Peter Crisp wrote:
Hexx wrote:
PsychoPriest wrote:Anyone notice a few influences? Firefly in the space shots with the lack of sound


I thought that was the shittest bit.

One scene - person gets sucked out into the silence of space...haunting and chilling.

4 scenes (or 40seconds, no scenes longer than 10seconds in this film ;)) later - space battle full of pew pew pew action and SoundFX

:lol:


Do you honestly expect a space battle to be portrayed in silence?


If you've just done a scene contrasting the chaos/noise inside the ship during a battle with the silence outside, while "chillingly" showing a persons death as they're sucked out?

I think it might be a good idea yes.

User avatar
Harry Bizzle
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Harry Bizzle » Thu May 07, 2009 11:03 pm

I don't know what the strawberry float Hexx is talking about. Either I'm one of the casual trekkies he's talking about (probable) or he's trying too hard for some 'serious trekkie' cred. I'm betting a little of column A, a little of column B.

All I know is out of my Trek experience (limited to TNG, Voyager, Enterprise and Voyager), that was the best Star Trek I've ever seen. By far.

As my friend put it when we last discussed out love for Trek, it's odd that we're so passionate for something where you don't watch an episode and go "That was awesome," rather we come away from them thinking "yeah. That was mildly entertaining. Think I might watch another one." This is the one where I came away thinking it was awesome.



As for Ebert, I thought the inability to communicate or beam while the drill was in operation was explained? And that the black holes were not your average black holes.

instagram: @habiz
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Peter Crisp » Thu May 07, 2009 11:03 pm

MCN wrote:Anyone who has ever played a war game knows that the engineers carry the explosives. That's like asking why the modern infantry can't fly helicopters.


I thought everyone in the armed services was trained to SAS level.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Vermin
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: TimeGhost

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Vermin » Thu May 07, 2009 11:04 pm

Hexx wrote:
Gil-Martin wrote:You'll love Ebert's review, Hexx.

Time travel as we all know, is impossible in the sense it happens here, but many things are possible in this film. Anyone with the slightest notion of what a black hole is, or how it behaves, will find the black holes in “Star Trek” hilarious. The logic is also a little puzzling when Scotty can beam people into another ship in outer space, but they have to physically parachute to land on a platform in the air from which the Romulans are drilling a hole to the Earth’s core. After they land there, they fight with two Romulan guards, using ... fists and swords? The platform is suspended from Arthur C. Clark’s “space elevator,” but instead of fullerenes, the cable is made of metallic chunks the size of refrigerators.


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997


Pft.

Even I know the transporters where blocked due to interference from the drilling beam :fp: They repeated that several times (presumably because they were aware people in the audience would have disengaged brains :P)


A better question is why the hell the needed to drill at all - surely a black hole on the surface would have been as devasting (after all, the Jellyfish didn't have no Drill). Or why all 3 people couldn't carry the explosives..

I know know, disengage brain before watching...


There's a hint of the Opus Dei about you going to watch this type of thing. Why bother? :lol:

User avatar
SEP
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by SEP » Thu May 07, 2009 11:04 pm

Peter Crisp wrote:
MCN wrote:Anyone who has ever played a war game knows that the engineers carry the explosives. That's like asking why the modern infantry can't fly helicopters.


I thought everyone in the armed services was trained to SAS level.


Sshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! We don't tell people that!

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Hexx » Thu May 07, 2009 11:04 pm

MCN wrote:Anyone who has ever played a war game knows that the engineers carry the explosives. That's like asking why the modern infantry can't fly helicopters.



:lol:

Ok MCN. Whatever you say.

It's not entirely retarded on a jump that 3 people are doing, and they've said will be nearly impossibly to hit, for only 1 of them to carry the explosives. Then again on a ship full of people they decided to send the captain (sorta), the pilot and a chap in a red shirt...

Meh. I suppose Sulu didn't have space as he had to carry his sword. Always helpful against enemies with guns...

User avatar
SEP
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by SEP » Thu May 07, 2009 11:07 pm

Hexx, you decided you didn't like this film a long time before you saw it, didn't you? You're the kind of trekkie who gives the rest of us a bad name.

Image
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Peter Crisp » Thu May 07, 2009 11:08 pm

Hexx wrote:Meh. I suppose Sulu didn't has space as he had to carry his sword. Always helpful against enemies with guns...



Come on if you are just going to pick up on things like that then almost no film ever made is going to be any good. He said he has Fencing training so I don't think it's entirely beyond the realms of possibility that he has a sword.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Hexx » Thu May 07, 2009 11:10 pm

MCN wrote:Hexx, you decided you didn't like this film a long time before you saw it, didn't you?


Um...no? See previous threads.

You're the kind of trekkie who gives the rest of us a bad name.


And thanks for sort of indicating this might be about your self image issues ("Look! Trek can be cool/appeal to mainstream").

I didn't quite know how to imply that without seeming a bit dickish, but that's sort of shown it nicely :)

Come on if you are just going to pick up on things like that then almost no film ever made is going to be any good. He said he has Fencing training so I don't think it's entirely beyond the realms of possibility that he has a sword


Oh course it's possible - It's pretty retarded given the situation.

But that's where "Turn of brain, and enjoy a fairly good action flick" comes into it.

Last edited by Hexx on Thu May 07, 2009 11:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by Peter Crisp » Thu May 07, 2009 11:12 pm

I'd actually rather like some criticism from someone who isn't Hexx as at least I could feel they would be giving the film a fair crack of the whip and not just pointing out every single little thing wrong and claiming that the films rubbish.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
SEP
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The Star Trek Spoilers Thread
by SEP » Thu May 07, 2009 11:13 pm

Peter Crisp wrote:I'd actually rather like some criticism from someone who isn't Hexx as at least I could feel they would be giving the film a fair crack of the whip and not just pointing out every single little thing wrong and claiming that the films rubbish.


Well so far, apart from Hexx, the film seems to be getting universal praise, even from non-trekkies.

Image

Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: finish.last, Xeno and 233 guests