Star Trek review (no spoilers)

For the discussion of Movies, Television, Comics, and other existential distractions.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby Ezra Lb. » Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:11 pm

Whewee..for a minute there I thought Shatner was going to sing!

John I will do it at my first opportunity. Did anybody see a film called BOTTLE SHOCK? The new Jim Kirk is in it.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
John E Williams
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:34 am

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby John E Williams » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:21 pm

Oh and as long as I have you here, Ez... me and Keith C. were talking about a DC Pavilion meetup some time.

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby Ezra Lb. » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:00 pm

John, sounds good! I'm super busy at work until after Thanksgiving but after that...
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
markabaddon
Posts: 1790
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby markabaddon » Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:36 pm

Ezra, I have seen Bottle Shock and enjoyed it, although Chris Pine is a character light years different than Kirk in it. Fun film for any wine lover
Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristrocratic forms. No gov't in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the aristocracy develops, gov't tends more and mroe to act exclusively in the interests of the ruling class

User avatar
remarck
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: Arlington, VA
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby remarck » Mon Nov 30, 2009 9:57 pm

uhhhhHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAA. Grorp!

Who's taking my name in vein? John? May a thousand Vlasic pickles splatter you with their sperm, and the groud open up and sprout razorgrass between your toes.

It is after Thanksgiving, and I have An Opinion About Star Trek, having just seen it on glistening blu-ray. My opinion may contain spoilers, and should only be scanned by computers which have seen Star Trek.

Also, Mark, you have written a great review, and Steve Evil, you have written a great and resounding opinion. But think...what movie involving a heroic protagonist does not follow the plot of video game? Or, perhaps, reverse that: aren't video games modeled on the hero's journey? I think so, therefore I am right. (Man, I'm sounding a lot like Rob lately, except I'm not capitalizing every other word for EMPHASIS).

Keith Cramer’s non-spoiler Movie Review #1

My review is: Meh.

The End.

(NB, which may contain spoilers!: I note, for the first time, how, in my recollection, many previous ST movies contain grand assemblies for both the prosecution of the hero at some point, and acceptance/adulation for the hero at the end. As do several of the Star Wars movies. Syfy aficionados must really like them, perhaps signifying their fears that they are not accepted by society at large, and their need to feel accepted by society at large. This is interesting because blockbuster movies since Star Wars have been primarily Syfy-Adventure or Syfy-Horror movies.)

(Aarg: I also note that there were violations of the Law of Coincidence, stipulated by Harlan and Adam-Troy Castro on this very site a while back. How many? To give a number would be to spoil it for you, but I'll list a few...Kirk happens to be saved from one monster by another bigger monster, and then gets saved from the bigger monster by another person, who happens to be Spock. There were no genuine moments where I felt chance would go against the protagonists, or where I felt the hero was in any danger whatsoever. )

(Aarg2: Really? Building a Star Ship on an Iowa farm? Really?)

(Aarg3&4: They have HoverCycles but they still grow vegetables on Iowa farms? Hydroponics aficianados will cry. There’s still gas for that Corvette? )

(Aarg5: Black Holes can destroy a planet and a spaceship, but they can also transport ships to other times in the past – not the future, but the past. The same past. Is there a switch in the Black Hole that allows this change of function? Is there a dial that allows you to set future or past, and is there a code you can type in the year you want to arrive? Can I get a Black Hole for Christmas?)

(Aarg6: Red Matter? This alone shows that the entire franchise is a huge fantasy, and is no more related to science fiction than it is to modern literature.)

I think the performances were well done: the actors did a fine job. The screenwriters should be ashamed. I'm not saying I could have done better, but...well, there are other people who could have done better.

User avatar
remarck
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: Arlington, VA
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby remarck » Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:00 pm

JohnE and Ezra,

Let's do it.

I'm open from now until the 10th. Then from the 14th through Christmas, if I don't go on a long vacation. So maybe not.

User avatar
Duane
Posts: 1579
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby Duane » Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:18 am

A cent or two addressing Keith's excellent arguments:

...Kirk happens to be saved from one monster by another bigger monster, and then gets saved from the bigger monster by another person, who happens to be Spock...


No argument from me about that at all, and I'll go one step further: It appeared "Delta Pavonis" or where ever it was Kirk got dumped was lightyears from...somewhere. Yet Spock could see...something...

(Aarg2: Really? Building a Star Ship on an Iowa farm? Really?)


(Aarg3&4: They have HoverCycles but they still grow vegetables on Iowa farms? Hydroponics aficianados will cry. There’s still gas for that Corvette? )


Well, yeah. After all, in the future we'll make amazing leaps in physics, be able to play games with gravity and so forth, making Earth's ferocious gravity well a point of mootness. And being a wasteful species with core constituents who INSIST that large government projects be located in their districts to keep a little of that old time religion flowing into the economy, what's the harm in keeping voters happy?

And speaking of voters, short sighted politicians, then as now, love to keep that outmoded core constituency happy in order to stay elected. And in 200 years, it'll be the John Deere folks and the Free Soilers. Think about it: Hydroponic farms put farmers and laborers out of work, require a much higher education to run, and cause a cascade of related industries (tractor manufacturers, fertilizers, phosphate miners, etc) to go belly-up.

As for gas in the Corvette? Don't be silly; it's ethanol.

And to really blow your mind, consider this: why were there farm roads in the first place? Couldn't John Deere make a tractor that floats?

:D ((AND SINCE WHEN ARE THERE CHASMS IN IOWA!?!?!?!?) :D

(Aarg5: Black Holes can destroy a planet and a spaceship, but they can also transport ships to other times in the past – not the future, but the past. The same past. Is there a switch in the Black Hole that allows this change of function? Is there a dial that allows you to set future or past, and is there a code you can type in the year you want to arrive? Can I get a Black Hole for Christmas?)


Science, Pseudoscience, Intergalactic Handwaving... I minored in physics in college, but that was the late '80's/early '90's. I'm a smart guy and I read Scientific American, but... well... I'll just defer to a higher authority (spoilers included, so click with caution) and bow out gracefully while I can.

(Aarg6: Red Matter? This alone shows that the entire franchise is a huge fantasy, and is no more related to science fiction than it is to modern literature.)


See above. By the by, the author of the blog link found problems that didn't even occur to me. But in the end, he loved the movie, as did I.

User avatar
remarck
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: Arlington, VA
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby remarck » Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:37 am

Duane wrote:

((AND SINCE WHEN ARE THERE CHASMS IN IOWA!?!?!?!?)

----------------------------------

This occurred in 2007, when the script, heading to LA from NY, broke free of its anti-rationality moorings in the hold of a 747 and fell through the belly of the plane and into a large stretch of worm farms in Iowa.

User avatar
David Loftus
Posts: 3182
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby David Loftus » Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:40 am

remarck wrote:Duane wrote:

((AND SINCE WHEN ARE THERE CHASMS IN IOWA!?!?!?!?)

----------------------------------

This occurred in 2007, when the script, heading to LA from NY, broke free of its anti-rationality moorings in the hold of a 747 and fell through the belly of the plane and into a large stretch of worm farms in Iowa.



Nah, couldn't be. A script that bloated with bloopers would have sunk the continent, not just cracked it.

I'm just funning, guys. I got kick out of the movie while watching it . . . and promptly forgot it. Loved the acting' even if it wasn't great, it was fun. And weirdly on-target.
War is, at first, the hope that one will be better off; next, the expectation that the other fellow will be worse off; then, the satisfaction that he isn't any better off; and, finally, the surprise at everyone's being worse off. - Karl Kraus

User avatar
remarck
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: Arlington, VA
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby remarck » Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:51 am

I'm just a bit upset because I thought I was going to be getting a meal for dinner, and instead just got served a big dessert. I love dessert.

Funniest part of the movie to me is one I predicted to my friend. The 3 members of the away team (Kirk, Sulu, and Mr. Red Suit) are heading to a drop zone. I turned to my friend and said, "The guy in red is going to die immediately." I looked back and the screen, and watched it play out for 30 seconds. Red Suit was gone. My friend and I hi-fived and roared. He wasn't a Trek fan, so he just thought me calling it was a riot.

I can get a metaphor out of even this bit of cake: The overly cautious Mr. Sulu is skilled and dependable. The utterly reckless Red Suit is instant fodder. James T. Kirk is a mix of both, and gets the job done. Metaphor of life.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby Moderator » Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:43 am

The lesson, of course, is "don't wear red to a party". (The Brits learned that the hard way around, oh, 1780.)
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
markabaddon
Posts: 1790
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby markabaddon » Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:08 pm

Keith, first thank you for your kind words on the review. The really large plot holes both you and Dunae pointed out are absolutely valid and make absolutely no sense when you think about it. However, I think this was still a fun movie. Seeing Kirk sit in the Captain's chair, watching Bones, these were cinematic moments that got me to scream "Hell yeah"

I agree with you, the film is more dessert than a meal, in that there ain't much to think about and it does not have much depth, but I did enjoy the hell out of it
Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristrocratic forms. No gov't in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the aristocracy develops, gov't tends more and mroe to act exclusively in the interests of the ruling class

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby Lori Koonce » Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:34 pm

Duane

If you know something about particle physics, red matter is theoretically possible.

The basic building block of the atom is a particle called the quark. Amongst other things quarks come in colors. When a physicist talks of color, he's not talking about what you see, but the frequency of the forces keeping the quark from flying apart.

Now with that said, it should be possible to take red quarks, turn them into red atoms and then get red matter from those. Goddess only knows what the matter would look like, but we should be able to do it at some future point in time.

Prehaps this was on the mind of the script writer. It would have been nice for him to get this information out in a creative way. But he didn't and hence your frustration.

For all if any of the above is interesting here is the materaial I got my information from http://eands.caltech.edu/articles/LXVII3/quark.html

User avatar
John E Williams
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:34 am

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby John E Williams » Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:29 pm

Keith,

I dunno who this "remarck" character is but I assure you I take no one's name in vain! Except the Lord's.

My office is right near the Verizon Center/Chinatown mishmash, and probably the best way for me to do anything is straightaway out of work. Hopefully that is convenient for you and the Lb. Lad. If not, I am flexible.

Everyone here is invited as well, should any of you pass through the nation's capital any time soon.

User avatar
Duane
Posts: 1579
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Star Trek review (no spoilers)

Postby Duane » Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:47 pm

Actually, I'm not all that frustrated about the whole "red matter" angle; quantum physics, dark matter, pretty much anything's possible in the Star Trek universe if you wave your hands vigorously enough, and with this nifty atom smasher the ESA has now, who knows what we'll discover about the building blocks of our universe?

The only REAL quibble I had with it is the fact that a black hole tiny enough to be created on a space ship yet large enough to swallow up a planet will be (a) extremely unstable, with a life measured in a few billionths of a second before it fizzes apart, and (b) provided the Romulan with the axe to grind could preserve the black hole long enough to get it to the center of the planet, its event horizon (the barrier through which nothing, even light, can't escape) is far smaller than the radius of a proton, so it would likely oscillate through the planet and not really do too much (until it exploded). But then again, it's RED MATTER. Jazz hands!!


Return to “Pop Culture”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests