|
Given he's talking about how he's returned, I wouldn't be surprised if the movie is structured with dramatic pathos-filled flashbacks telling the origin story of Cumberbatch in parallel to the movie. That'd be a way to get around needing to have a whole backstory first.ComposerGuy posted:Except that: In JJVerse, the Enterprise was built on Earth (in Iowa, no less), meaning at some point that sucker had to lift off and deal with the strain of exiting Earth's gravity and atmosphere. I'll grant you it isn't quite the same a deep-sea diving, but still. I dunno, if I were building her I'd build her on Earth and have tugs lift her and her supports into space, not just blast off. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Dec 6, 2012 |
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 16:58 |
|
|
Joe Don Baker posted:I'm glad everyone is able to figure all that stuff out based on a 60 second teaser trailer with bits and pieces cut together to create some sort of mystery. Have you met Trek fans? Endless speculation and fanwanking is how we entertain ourselves. Don't take that away from us.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:This actually brings me to a small complaint about something I didn't like about the first movie: the depiction of earth. You got facist looking speeder-bike cops, huge canyons in Illinois from strip-mining, and apparently corporations such as Nokia and Anheiser Busch still flourish after poverty and want have been eliminated. I miss communist-Utopia Star Trek When they were doing the Mattes of San Francisco for the first Trek movie, they were instructed by Roddenberry to make the whole area greener and leafier and less built up than 20th century San Fran. I think I'd prefer to live in that Trek than towering grey lifeless megacity Trek.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 19:00
|
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:Haven't they gone underwater in Star Trek before? Wasn't there some Voyager episode with a water world or whatever? Oh, and what about that episode of of Enterprise where they find the Xindi thing underwater? In Voyager, the Delta Flyer shuttle went underwater, but it was specifically designed in its first episode to fly in high-pressure environments. I can't remember if the shuttlepod in the Enterprise episode went underwater, but the ship certainly didn't.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Wasn't the point of everyone's favourite Trek movie Wrath of Khan was that the studio thought The Motion Picture was too 'deep' and 'sciency', so they made the sequel into more of an action adventure? No, they just thought it was slow and dull. You can have deep and sciency and still have entertaining plots and decent pacing and lack of creepy Gene Rodenberry bald chicks.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
Madurai posted:Also: not only has the Golden Gate Bridge survived, but the Transamerica pyramid, too. Those are fine. The London Eye on the poster? Yeeeeeeeah doubt it. DFu4ever posted:Counterpoint, DS9. They trekked through the grey morality of war or something! Trek's about exploration, both physical and metaphorical, and DS9 did to a fair bit of both.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 02:37
|
|
|
Maybe, but there were so many near misses by things that are definitely still out there that he really should warn them, because really the odds of them making it through, say, V'Ger or Whale Probe are practically nil. They just got incredibly lucky the first time around.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 09:45
|
|
|
Yonic Symbolism posted:It was somewhat slowly paced, a lot of things happened offscreen (battles mainly consisted of people at terminals narrating what was going on), serviceable visuals, Well, LOST exceeded it in every one of these factors...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 10:06
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:A long time ago I thought it would have been sort of interesting in JJTrek or Enterprise to show off a temporal artifact division, so to speak, where there were people in charge of collecting and cataloging chronological displacement events and items that didn't make sense to belong. Well, DS9 did show us the existence of the Department of Temporal Investigations; some more stuff involving them would have been awesome. ("James T. Kirk. Seventeen separate temporal violations. The biggest file on record. The man was a menace.") MikeJF fucked around with this message at 11:13 on Dec 7, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 11:10
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:I don't understand how we're supposed to believe for a second that Cumberbatch is some sort of genetic superman when his head is shaped like a giant tater See thread title.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 15:24
|
|
|
The thing that defines Star Trek is not the slow paced plots, offscreen action style and mediocre special effects. It can be Star Trek with all those changed. The thing that defines Star Trek is the optimistic future where we're exploring the universe out of the sheer joy of it, and along with it, our own issues in metaphor as well as philosophical and moral conundrums. Admittedly, it usually wasn't always done very well or with great depth or skill, but just the act of trying meant that occasionally it was amazing, and I do think that you could wrap that concept into a modern-style television series with all the pacing, plotting and visuals a modern audience expects.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:That's not what any of the movies are about, though. The movies tend center around singular threats, either against galactic peace as a whole or against individuals or specific factions. Oh, yes. Star Trek as I described it is something that lends itself naturally to a series, not a movie. The movies, all the movies, have just been... bonuses. Peeks of action fun. Which is fine and enjoyable, and I enjoyed JJTrek enormously, but it's the serieses that are the core of Trek.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:Is it me or does the starship crashing into the bay look a hell of a lot like the Enterprise as it looked in the Original Series (rectangular nacelles instead of the curved roundish ones) The nacelles were round in the original series. You mean in the original movies?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2012 06:14
|
|
|
Monkeyseesaw posted:That's my favorite part of TOS, the hilarious horse-blinder aspect of its progressivism. I don't understand how the writers could have been so tuned into the racial and political prejudices of the time while still writing scenes like "a woman archaeologist??" *double-take, eyes pop out, slide whistle* Star Trek was sexist but still for the time amazingly sexually progressive. I mean, for all they played with the women as targets for kirk and emotional creatures they never did something like "a woman archaeologist??" *double-take, eyes pop out, slide whistle* or showed that women serving alongside men was anything out of the ordinary (well, mostly). Uhura being a proficient lieutenant and senior officer in the service who happened to be a woman was mindblowing to the 60's audience. Even if in the scripts she pretty much just opened hailing frequencies. And hell, in the original pilot, the first officer of the ship was strong, professional woman who took over command for a decent bit of the episode. The studio made them get rid of her for the series. Yeah, looking at it now there's lots of sexism all over the place, but it should be acknowledged that for the time it was still pretty drat good. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2012 04:38
|
|
|
Astroman posted:And perhaps he'll move from helm to botany, in an opposite move of the OT. That was never more than a hobby. He was head of astroscience at the start of TOS before he became chief helmsman. (I may have just gone and watched Where No Man Has Gone Before)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2012 06:35
|
|
|
TNG was just so... safe. Even at being progressive it was playing it safe at being progressive.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 06:04
|
|
|
In terms of progressiveness of Star Trek in TNG and after... well, you just have to look at the franchise's treatment of LGBT issues, for example. What treatment? Yeah. Playing it safe.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 06:27
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:This is probably the closest they got. And Jonathan Frakes wanted the character from the genderless race he kissed in that episode to be played by a man, but the higher powers refused and made it be a woman.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 10:09
|
|
|
Pastamania posted:But given ENTs complete and total lack of any sort of tact and subtlety, it's probably best that they didn't - they'd probably have an episode where Mayweather contracts space-aids in a Vulcan bathhouse or something. Oh gently caress me, I'd managed to block out the part where they tackled AIDS by giving T'Pol Vulcan brain-AIDS after she was mind-raped and then she got discriminated against by all the other Vulcans. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 14:46
|
|
|
That was Tucker. Please, like they'd give Mayweather a role.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 14:54
|
|
|
The big issue isn't that they'd be incapable of making a starship that can fly in an atmophere and go underwater, it's that they didn't. They very clearly made one that's meant to stay in space, which is obvious just looking at it, and no matter what century, when you do ridiculously stressful things with something that you're not meant to do, they tend to fall apart.Siroc posted:I got annoyed when the Enterprise-E reversed propulsion and pulled itself out of the Scimitar. In space, nothing would "hold" the Scimitar in place; the E-E would pull both ships in that direction. No, this one works. Inertia partially holds the Scimitar in place. They're not bound together tightly enough to overcome that entirely. Also the navigational deflector and the deflector shields are two different things entirely.  MikeJF fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Dec 11, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 02:37
|
|
|
Heavy pressure along the ship's designed lines of acceleration, sounds fine to me.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 03:34
|
|
|
Well, also, let's be honest, it's impossible to compare that to what should really happen because Black Holes Do Not Work Like That At All. That was less of a real black hole and more of a magical trek space distortion with high gravity.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 03:35
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:Fair enough, but however they work I think it's safe to say anything getting that close to the event horizon isn't getting away, rerouting the plasma manifold or not. That's what I mean, I don't think it even had a drat event horizon. It was just a two-dimensional black disc in space surrounded by lightning swirlies. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Dec 11, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 03:40
|
|
|
Apollodorus posted:At the risk of being a total sperg, I will point out that spaceships in Star Trek have, in fact, traveled around underwater: The whole point of them building the Delta Flyer in the first place was for it to go deep into a gas giant down into the high-pressure liquid levels. That's why it's as overly streamlined and single-hulled as it is, even more than other shuttles. As I said before; things do what they are built to do. Clearly the new movie should bring back the Aquashuttle. 
MikeJF fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Dec 12, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 06:06
|
|
|
Honestly, the bit that really bothers me is the brief glimpse we saw of the crash into the water that looked like it should have torn the ship to shreds. (But yeah, not that happy about the rest either. It's not the water that's the problem at all. It's the flying around flat like that in gravity, be it water or air. The ship doesn't have engines pointing down, after all)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
My mother just saw the trailer and said to me 'Ooo, that looks like fun! It's like Star Wars vs Star Trek!'
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 06:26
|
|
|
treeboy posted:man this thread knows how to ruin cool things with overindulgent fanboy pseudo logic in a franchise littered with technomagic. Stop bitching about our Star Trek fun, damnit!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 07:11
|
|
|
superh posted:http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Tomorrow_is_Yesterday_(episode) She was in very low orbit skimming in the upper atmosphere, actually. Pft, you think I didn't check that?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 15:46
|
|
|
Apollodorus posted:If you didn't like Insurrection, you really should watch the version with the full commentary by Frakes and Sirtis. It is hilarious, revealing, informative, and also really, really sweet because Frakes knows the name of almost every supporting actor in every scene, and has nothing but nice stuff to say about them and the crew. The Frakes and Sirtis commentary singlehandedly justified the movie. It's now a hilarious comedy duo piece. Also, the Ba'ku are just Swedish.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:So did I on the first couple of passes. I'm guessing it's motorized unicycle or motorcycle, or it's on a concealed track. Pretty sure that's the saucer off the six-footer model, so it's only a couple feet across. It'd be on a track.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 05:19
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:I liked the preview. That always made more sense to me. I think the writers in TNG were just sticking to it religiously without actually thinking through the morality issues it was meant to cover and what the intention of the directive was. I mean, in TOS they saved primitive people; The Enterprise was sent to deflect an asteroid from smacking into a planet of primitives. They just couldn't tell them about it. I always just figured that that kind of intervention just needed extra review and, like, Federation Council go-ahead as a matter of course.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 10:34
|
|
|
Need a new Trek series comprised entirely of the first 10 minutes of JJ films.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2012 10:23
|
|
|
Throb Robinson posted:Old TOS Spock always seemed bemused or genuinely not understanding emotion coming from humans. Really? In my view, TOS Spock used bemused superiority to cover up his own emotional reactions and understanding and kinda lord it over the humans. It leaked through a lot. Quinto potrays Spock as trying to do that but not being as good at it, which makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2012 14:31
|
|
|
Hasters posted:I think they were, ironically, trying to prevent confusion. I guarantee that to most people "Thursday at midnight" means late on Thursday night. It's not technically correct, but it's how most people think. When you specifically say 12:01 am on Thursday, though...
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 07:36
|
|
|
qbert posted:Question: The film stated the date as 22-something. Khan's been frozen for 300 years. That means he was created in the 1950's? Is that right? Roughly 300 years. Khan was frozen in 1996, after the Eugenics Wars where he personally was absolute ruler of something like a quarter of Earth in Asia from about 1992. We don't like to talk about it.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 09:17
|
|
|
I thought during seeing it that they'd finally built an engineering set, but apparently they just appropriated a real-world fusion research facility? At least they picked something more appropriate looking than a brewery this time.qbert posted:Yeah, not being a TOS fan, all that went completely over my head. I had forgotten how strictly the new movies adhered to TOS continuity up to the timeline split. You can spot a model of the Enterprise NX-01 in the Admiral's office. Everything pre-Kelvin is theoretically the same. that said, the 1996 date of the Eugenics wars is something that later shows have always kinda edged away from referencing too. It's just one of those things you stick your fingers in your ears and hum about MikeJF fucked around with this message at 09:28 on May 15, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 09:23
|
|
|
Context of conversations provides a spoiler in and of itself.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 15:22
|
|
|
Speaking of thawing out another one, the idea of that did rather make their desperation to take Khan alive at the end a bit forced. I think it would've been better if Spock had pulled back at the last moment without prompting from Uhura after taking Khan down and told him he was taking him in for trial. Have his morals from earlier in the film win out.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 16:58 |
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I just realized 72 virgins To be fair, the count of 72 other survivors besides Khan comes from Space Seed.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 03:54
|
|
