The size difference didn't seem that extreme in the preview. Though, that poster has the wrong date on it. The movie is opening on the 17th, not the 15th. So, if that's wrong, I wonder what else is wrong.
The date is correct, 15th may for the IMAX screening, and the poster is official.
Visual effects don't make a movie good, in my opinion. In fact, I watched a movie last night that proved that. (great effects, so-so plot and poor script)
No, I haven't seen that. It was the 2011 version of The Three Musketeers. It's a very loose adaptation of Dumas' original story. Like I said, it had great effects, a kinda dumb plot and bad dialog. I prefer the 20 year old Disney version with no special effects and a good story and script (and better actors.) I wasn't expecting much, though, that's why I recorded it off of HBO instead of paying to see it.
I'm expecting about that much from the new Star Trek movie, but we'll see.
you mention star trek II and III, i was not a fan of II but III is a damn good film, shame that the battle between the enterprise and the BOP couldn't be longer with more action though.
Not...a fan of Wrath of Khan? Wow...that's possible? LOL! I thought only my eleven-year-old daughter (who insists she's not a geek despite her obsession with Harry Potter and Percy Jackson) was resistant to TWOK. It's cool, though, we all love what we love. I know a lot of Trekkers who can't stand Search for Spock, but I love it to pieces.
honestly that film is NOT BAD. infact it's pretty damned good once all that cr*p at the start is over and you get to the part where the shielding platform thing rises out of the water.
as far as wrath of khan goes i have seen far worse films but it just doesn't stand out as a really great one.
probably going to see the new trek film in the next few days(out on 9th in britain), should anyone want to know what i think i will post after i've seen it(unless you are desperate not to have spoilers).
Please remember to use spoiler tags when sharing your views and I'm sure everyone will be happy.
I think the trilogy within the Trek films, TWOK, TSFS and TVH are the best of the series. For one thing, we got a follow-up to Space Seed, which had an ending that left it open for a sequel. We got to see Khan dealt with ultimately and we got some great action. Plus, we found out Kirk was a dad and there was the emotional turn of Spock's death. I know Star Trek III isn't the most popular, but I think it's a damn fine movie. The story is good, science gone wrong and the return of Spock. Plus, the scene where Kirk finds out David is dead is some of the best acting I've ever seen William Shatner do. And we get to see just how far Kirk and his crew are willing to go to save one of their own, even if they do think he's dead at that point. Also, the movie shaped how Klingons would be portrayed from that point forward. For the first time, they had individual brow ridges and armor and their language started to take shape. Then Star Trek IV was a fun romp in the past. I love seeing 23rd century heroes bumbling about on 20th century Earth. I love that they took up the humor level after the seriousness of the first three films. And, of course, the end is great where Kirk and company gets (mostly) out of hot water, with the exception of Kirk's "punishment," a grade reduction to the rank he should have been the entire time and command of the Enterprise-A. I love the big reveal with the flyover of the Excelsior's saucer, which was blocking the view of the Enterprise-A. I think all three films are just fantastic. Of course, I like all of the Star Trek films to date, even JJ Trek, but those three stand out above the rest for me.
yeah they make a good trilogy, they link together well, all that business with spock saying things such as "the hell ..." is rather funny in IV and III is very good overall. big reveals are often very nice sequences. my favourite trek film(as you may know) is nemesis which i think is amazing.
I love the trilogy of films that they did with TOS crew, you did not get a large gap between stories and just continued. Unlike with TFF and TUC. We know there is large gap between the films where Kirk and co have another five years mission. yet we have no idea happened in that time.
It would have been nice that they did that with TNG crew.
One of the good things about that trilogy was that they could be seen as stand alones as well. TSFS give a recap of what happened in TWOK for those that had not seen it.
While there was no need with TVH as it worked without knowing what happened in TWOK and TSFS because those storylines are needed to know what going on in it.
(TVH was also the first Trek film I ever saw.)
Special effects wise, the film was good. As for the actual story and feel of the film I would say it was just an average film, not spectacular, but not dire. I don't put it in the same league as the original The Wrath of Khan film and would just say it is an enjoyable way to kill a few hours.
i watched it on friday 10th, the effects were damned brilliant and in 3d with surround sound during one of the scenes it actually felt like things were flying past my head. i thought that to avoid severely spoiling the rest for you i would put it at the end of a link. that link is below...
Are people nowadays less critical or they simply don't care for a story that at least makes sense so long as there're plenty of flashes and bangs?
What really did it for me was the "being frozen for 300 years". How shocked was I to have learned the whole world missed out on a eugenics war that happened in the 1960s. :rolleyes:
Khan? I thought Benedict's character's name was "John Harrison?"
"it contains the usual, highly idiotic, sound in space mistake along with reactionless drives and ships performing motions that WILL KILL anyone onboard without some form of acceleration damping."
Heck, the movie Apollo 13 has sound in space... for dramatic effect mostly...
Reactionless drives? Elaborate...
Well, in Star Trek, vessels have inertial dampeners...
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB 1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD 32 GB RAM Windows 11 Pro
Are people nowadays less critical or they simply don't care for a story that at least makes sense so long as there're plenty of flashes and bangs?
What really did it for me was the "being frozen for 300 years". How shocked was I to have learned the whole world missed out on a eugenics war that happened in the 1960s. :rolleyes:
Ever hear of rounding up?
even in space seed Khan was supposed to have left earth in 1996, attack the new film for stuff it created as much as you like, but don't attack it for things that were established in the original show
They went to all the work of saying this is not a reboot but a split universe from the Prime one which we love. They say this happened with the Kelvin incident yet have Kirk born in space. However it has been established that Kirk was born on Earth, so what the hell is his mother doing onboard the Kelvin and pregnant with him, and where the hell is Kirk older brother when both Parents onboard the Kelvin?
Secondly, Khan did a runner from Earth with some of his people towards the end of the eugenics war which happened in the mid 90Aâs on the SS Botany Bay.
The Botany Bay, was found by the Enterprise during it first five year mission under the command of Kirk. Which is still to happen in this new timeline, so how the hell is Khan running around if he still asleep on the Botany Bay some where in deep space?
even in space seed Khan was supposed to have left earth in 1996, attack the new film for stuff it created as much as you like, but don't attack it for things that were established in the original show
That's the problem isn't it? I honestly don't care they've omitted the Botany Bay and what not and add in new stuff, I would actually prefer it. But if you're gonna make a reference, how about you put some common sense into it like updating the timeline so that it makes sense?!
So an old TV show made in the 60s referred to a war that happened in 1996, which as of now is already outdated....which part of "old" and "outdated" didn't they get??! Why not have the Eugenics War in the 2050s or the 2100s? The writing is idiotic it's ridiculous.
They went to all the work of saying this is not a reboot but a split universe from the Prime one which we love. They say this happened with the Kelvin incident yet have Kirk born in space. However it has been established that Kirk was born on Earth, so what the hell is his mother doing onboard the Kelvin and pregnant with him, and where the hell is Kirk older brother when both Parents onboard the Kelvin?
Secondly, Khan did a runner from Earth with some of his people towards the end of the eugenics war which happened in the mid 90’s on the SS Botany Bay.
The Botany Bay, was found by the Enterprise during it first five year mission under the command of Kirk. Which is still to happen in this new timeline, so how the hell is Khan running around if he still asleep on the Botany Bay some where in deep space?
Easy. Starfleet expanded their exploration efforts after the Narada-incident and found Khan's ship. It's explained that way in the movie.
That's the problem isn't it? I honestly don't care they've omitted the Botany Bay and what not and add in new stuff, I would actually prefer it. But if you're gonna make a reference, how about you put some common sense into it like updating the timeline so that it makes sense?!
So an old TV show made in the 60s referred to a war that happened in 1996, which as of now is already outdated....which part of "old" and "outdated" didn't they get??! Why not have the Eugenics War in the 2050s or the 2100s? The writing is idiotic it's ridiculous.
So they can't win then can they?
They stay faithful to the original material then they look stupid for talking about a war we know didn't happen, they alter the original material and they get berated for breaking with established canon.
That's the problem isn't it? I honestly don't care they've omitted the Botany Bay and what not and add in new stuff, I would actually prefer it. But if you're gonna make a reference, how about you put some common sense into it like updating the timeline so that it makes sense?!
So an old TV show made in the 60s referred to a war that happened in 1996, which as of now is already outdated....which part of "old" and "outdated" didn't they get??! Why not have the Eugenics War in the 2050s or the 2100s? The writing is idiotic it's ridiculous.
So they can't win then can they?
They stay faithful to the original material then they look stupid for talking about a war we know didn't happen, they alter the original material and they get berated for breaking with established canon.
They stay faithful to the original material then they look stupid for talking about a war we know didn't happen, they alter the original material and they get berated for breaking with established canon.
That's what you get for rebooting Star Trek and did a shabby job about it.
They stay faithful to the original material then they look stupid for talking about a war we know didn't happen, they alter the original material and they get berated for breaking with established canon.
Pretty much. It's one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenarios because Trekkies are a fickle bunch and some will find pretty much anything to whine about.
The sad part: All of you people who cried and whined about Enterprise and Nemesis, these movies are your fault. You whined and cried so much and Nemesis and Enterprise did so badly that Paramount finally listened and decided to shake things up by bringing in "new blood" and rebooting the entire thing. So, if you whined about that stuff and you're whining about the new movies, don't. It's your fault that Star Trek has come to this.
Pretty much. It's one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenarios because Trekkies are a fickle bunch and some will find pretty much anything to whine about.
The sad part: All of you people who cried and whined about Enterprise and Nemesis, these movies are your fault. You whined and cried so much and Nemesis and Enterprise did so badly that Paramount finally listened and decided to shake things up by bringing in "new blood" and rebooting the entire thing. So, if you whined about that stuff and you're whining about the new movies, don't. It's your fault that Star Trek has come to this.
Problem is, the people who whined about Enterprise and Nemesis got what they wanted with JJ Trek and then some. Whereas people like me who LOVED Nemesis and Enterprise (except the 2nd part of Season 4) loathe the new Trek, not for its detracting from the source but the way it was executed/directed/produced/perceived/portrayed.
What amazes me is we've now got 2 camps of Trekkies (die hard or otherwise) - those who like the reinvigorated iteration of the franchise and those who dislike it for its inconsistencies with the established canon. But little do they think about the greatness of a new Trek that can stand on its own without relying on irrelevant homages dotted all over the place while at the same time preserve the core values which made people love Star Trek in the first place. Is it too much to ask for the best of both worlds?
Problem is, the people who whined about Enterprise and Nemesis got what they wanted with JJ Trek and then some. Whereas people like me who LOVED Nemesis and Enterprise (except the 2nd part of Season 4) loathe the new Trek, not for its detracting from the source but the way it was executed/directed/produced/perceived/portrayed.
What amazes me is we've now got 2 camps of Trekkies (die hard or otherwise) - those who like the reinvigorated iteration of the franchise and those who dislike it for its inconsistencies with the established canon. But little do they think about the greatness of a new Trek that can stand on its own without relying on irrelevant homages dotted all over the place while at the same time preserve the core values which made people love Star Trek in the first place. Is it too much to ask for the best of both worlds?
The thing is, some people hated Nemesis and Enterprise and they hate the new films. I don't get it, because it's like you say; they're getting what they asked for.
Technically, there are at least three camps, because there are those of us who like it all. Me, I'm an uber Trekkie. I have every series, every movie and even some fan films. I never saw the problem that a lot of people have with Nemesis and Enterprise, I love them both. Nemesis was a lot of fun and a great ending to the TNG films. Enterprise was a great prequel series, I hate that it only did four seasons. (I was watching Broken Bow this morning) Aside from the shows, I also read the books and comics, I play the games, and I, of course, model Star Trek ships. While I don't love what JJ has done, I do enjoy the first film. Granted, it's different, but I like it. I haven't seen the new one yet, it doesn't get released until Friday over here, but I'll see it at some point. I may go to the theater, I may wait for the Blu-Ray, it depends on my finances over the next few months.
Posts
The date is correct, 15th may for the IMAX screening, and the poster is official.
Hahahaha, ONLY twice as big.
Ah, I see. I just keep seeing the stupid TV spots with the 17th on them, so I thought that was the only opening date.
With the way they "scale" things, I'm not really surprised that's an official poster.
I'm expecting about that much from the new Star Trek movie, but we'll see.
Not...a fan of Wrath of Khan? Wow...that's possible? LOL! I thought only my eleven-year-old daughter (who insists she's not a geek despite her obsession with Harry Potter and Percy Jackson) was resistant to TWOK. It's cool, though, we all love what we love. I know a lot of Trekkers who can't stand Search for Spock, but I love it to pieces.
as far as wrath of khan goes i have seen far worse films but it just doesn't stand out as a really great one.
probably going to see the new trek film in the next few days(out on 9th in britain), should anyone want to know what i think i will post after i've seen it(unless you are desperate not to have spoilers).
I think the trilogy within the Trek films, TWOK, TSFS and TVH are the best of the series. For one thing, we got a follow-up to Space Seed, which had an ending that left it open for a sequel. We got to see Khan dealt with ultimately and we got some great action. Plus, we found out Kirk was a dad and there was the emotional turn of Spock's death. I know Star Trek III isn't the most popular, but I think it's a damn fine movie. The story is good, science gone wrong and the return of Spock. Plus, the scene where Kirk finds out David is dead is some of the best acting I've ever seen William Shatner do. And we get to see just how far Kirk and his crew are willing to go to save one of their own, even if they do think he's dead at that point. Also, the movie shaped how Klingons would be portrayed from that point forward. For the first time, they had individual brow ridges and armor and their language started to take shape. Then Star Trek IV was a fun romp in the past. I love seeing 23rd century heroes bumbling about on 20th century Earth. I love that they took up the humor level after the seriousness of the first three films. And, of course, the end is great where Kirk and company gets (mostly) out of hot water, with the exception of Kirk's "punishment," a grade reduction to the rank he should have been the entire time and command of the Enterprise-A. I love the big reveal with the flyover of the Excelsior's saucer, which was blocking the view of the Enterprise-A. I think all three films are just fantastic. Of course, I like all of the Star Trek films to date, even JJ Trek, but those three stand out above the rest for me.
as for spoiler tags, how exactly is that done?
And, of course, the end tag has a / before spoiler, like this: /spoiler (I didn't put it in the brackets so that it won't activate the tag
It winds up looking like this:
It would have been nice that they did that with TNG crew.
One of the good things about that trilogy was that they could be seen as stand alones as well. TSFS give a recap of what happened in TWOK for those that had not seen it.
While there was no need with TVH as it worked without knowing what happened in TWOK and TSFS because those storylines are needed to know what going on in it.
(TVH was also the first Trek film I ever saw.)
What a bull**** movie. Thanks for the review.
Heck, the movie Apollo 13 has sound in space... for dramatic effect mostly...
Reactionless drives? Elaborate...
Well, in Star Trek, vessels have inertial dampeners...
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
Ever hear of rounding up?
Secondly, Khan did a runner from Earth with some of his people towards the end of the eugenics war which happened in the mid 90Aâs on the SS Botany Bay.
The Botany Bay, was found by the Enterprise during it first five year mission under the command of Kirk. Which is still to happen in this new timeline, so how the hell is Khan running around if he still asleep on the Botany Bay some where in deep space?
That's the problem isn't it? I honestly don't care they've omitted the Botany Bay and what not and add in new stuff, I would actually prefer it. But if you're gonna make a reference, how about you put some common sense into it like updating the timeline so that it makes sense?!
So an old TV show made in the 60s referred to a war that happened in 1996, which as of now is already outdated....which part of "old" and "outdated" didn't they get??! Why not have the Eugenics War in the 2050s or the 2100s? The writing is idiotic it's ridiculous.
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
[video=youtube_share;4lpnEwTu2Zk]
I think he made one before, but I guess this is another video he made.
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
So they can't win then can they?
They stay faithful to the original material then they look stupid for talking about a war we know didn't happen, they alter the original material and they get berated for breaking with established canon.
So they can't win then can they?
They stay faithful to the original material then they look stupid for talking about a war we know didn't happen, they alter the original material and they get berated for breaking with established canon.
That's what you get for rebooting Star Trek and did a shabby job about it.
Pretty much. It's one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenarios because Trekkies are a fickle bunch and some will find pretty much anything to whine about.
The sad part: All of you people who cried and whined about Enterprise and Nemesis, these movies are your fault. You whined and cried so much and Nemesis and Enterprise did so badly that Paramount finally listened and decided to shake things up by bringing in "new blood" and rebooting the entire thing. So, if you whined about that stuff and you're whining about the new movies, don't. It's your fault that Star Trek has come to this.
Problem is, the people who whined about Enterprise and Nemesis got what they wanted with JJ Trek and then some. Whereas people like me who LOVED Nemesis and Enterprise (except the 2nd part of Season 4) loathe the new Trek, not for its detracting from the source but the way it was executed/directed/produced/perceived/portrayed.
What amazes me is we've now got 2 camps of Trekkies (die hard or otherwise) - those who like the reinvigorated iteration of the franchise and those who dislike it for its inconsistencies with the established canon. But little do they think about the greatness of a new Trek that can stand on its own without relying on irrelevant homages dotted all over the place while at the same time preserve the core values which made people love Star Trek in the first place. Is it too much to ask for the best of both worlds?
The thing is, some people hated Nemesis and Enterprise and they hate the new films. I don't get it, because it's like you say; they're getting what they asked for.
Technically, there are at least three camps, because there are those of us who like it all. Me, I'm an uber Trekkie. I have every series, every movie and even some fan films. I never saw the problem that a lot of people have with Nemesis and Enterprise, I love them both. Nemesis was a lot of fun and a great ending to the TNG films. Enterprise was a great prequel series, I hate that it only did four seasons. (I was watching Broken Bow this morning) Aside from the shows, I also read the books and comics, I play the games, and I, of course, model Star Trek ships. While I don't love what JJ has done, I do enjoy the first film. Granted, it's different, but I like it. I haven't seen the new one yet, it doesn't get released until Friday over here, but I'll see it at some point. I may go to the theater, I may wait for the Blu-Ray, it depends on my finances over the next few months.