|
Alchenar posted:The problem is that the film is edited to make it internally inconsistent. You want to tell me you can do magic? Fine, I believe you. But when you wave the wand and say the magic words and different things happen each time then I'm going to suspect that something is wrong. In the first film it takes a couple of minutes to get from Earth to Vulcan. But if you asked me how long it takes them to get back from Vulcan to Earth I'd say 'several hours' based on all the things that happen in between. Similarly in the first half of the film I thought the trip to Kronos took 'a period of time' that could've been anything up to several days but later it clearly takes seconds. Ships travel at the speed of plot. That's fine. But when the speed of plot constantly changes then it looks like bad pacing and editing.
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
Cingulate posted:I'm not saying that's a bad write-up, but ... Haha, very true. I guess it boils down to how seriously you take your magic McGuffin. I think a good example of this is the Sam Raimi Spiderman films. Reading the comics as a kid, I bought into the story that a bite from a radioactive spider could absolutely alter physiology to the point that a teenager could overnight have a rockin' bod, climb walls, and swing from an unlimited amount of webbing connected to an unlimited amount of buildings throughout the city, however in the movie the physics were wrong. I guess the mind tells us that if we are accepting that something unreal is happening, then every other aspect of the world around it should still function as we would expect. Another example of this, and more on topic, is in Wrath of Khan. The first time I saw it, I could absolutely take their word for it that somewhere in the universe, there was a bug that could be inserted into one's brain and through this you could manipulate their every move, including having them lie to their friends in order to suit your commands. However, I was bothered and completely taken out of the movie from the get-go when Khan recognises Chekov, even stating "I never forget a face", when he hadn't even been on the show during Space Seed. Internal consistency in-universe is most key, once the initial rules have been set.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:10
|
|
|
Mourning Due posted:
They do explain it. Chekov left a floater and Khan walked in.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:Yeah, it kind of bugged me that they were all "the Vengeance can't catch up to us at warp!" Yes it can, idiots, it just goes faster warp.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I remember the way to Kronos being quite short, actually. Isn't most of the talking happening before they leave dock? What happens between Sulu going to warp for the first time, and them dropping out of warp? The Enterprise never went to Kronos. The encounter with the Vengeance happens just outside or just inside the neutral zone. I'm not sure they ever really established how long it took Kirk to get to Kronos or they were vague enough that its uncertain. (I've only seen it once so far.) Either way, if we're going to take Enterprise as canon (which it apparently is), Kronos is about 4 days away from Earth at warp 4-5ish.  On an unrelated note, QMX-a model company that creates Trek replicas-was asked to create many of the props for the film including the models in Marcus's office. They posted a gallery of the ships. It's pretty interesting. I noticed the NX-01 but not the ring ship.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
Mourning Due posted:I guess it boils down to how seriously you take your magic McGuffin. I think a good example of this is the Sam Raimi Spiderman films. Reading the comics as a kid, I bought into the story that a bite from a radioactive spider could absolutely alter physiology to the point that a teenager could overnight have a rockin' bod, climb walls, and swing from an unlimited amount of webbing connected to an unlimited amount of buildings throughout the city, however in the movie the physics were wrong. I guess the mind tells us that if we are accepting that something unreal is happening, then every other aspect of the world around it should still function as we would expect. Should I see a doctor over this? Mourning Due posted:Another example of this, and more on topic, is in Wrath of Khan. The first time I saw it, I could absolutely take their word for it that somewhere in the universe, there was a bug that could be inserted into one's brain and through this you could manipulate their every move, including having them lie to their friends in order to suit your commands. Strange Matter posted:Yeah and honestly the scene where the Vengeance attacks the Enterprise in warp was genuinely terrifying because I'd never seen anything like that in Star Trek before. So really I'm willing to accept the stretching of canon laws if it leads to that. what is happening to me Cingulate fucked around with this message at 14:43 on May 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Phasers shouldn't work at warp though, assuming they're particle beams! Photon torpedos could create their own warp bubble, but a beam can't! EDIT: 
Strange Matter fucked around with this message at 15:07 on May 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 15:05
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:Obviously they were at close enough range that their warp bubbles fused and could therefore freely exchange fire with conventional weapons. This is what I assumed. But I could also speculate that part of a phaser's firing mechanism actually extrudes a warped-space containment corridor in which the beam or bolt travels. While the phaser blast itself couldn't sustain this field, the field would still exist for a second or two after being fired. The decay of this field would be why phasers have a maximum range (otherwise you should be able to just take pot shots at other planets with your phasers). I actually really like how fast warp feels in these new films. Yeah it a big difference from before, but the new jumping to warp effect combined with the fact that it seems to take only a few minutes to get to Kronos (new phonetic spelling!) or Vulcan makes warp drive seem magical and futuristic again. Just like communicators being able to make interstellar phone calls now, they have taken something that trekkies took for granted and accepted as a mundane part of the setting and make it fantastical again.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:
Phasers used to work at warp, back in TOS. If subspace radio is a thing, then why not a FTL beam weapon?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:Yeah, it kind of bugged me that they were all "the Vengeance can't catch up to us at warp!" Yes it can, idiots, it just goes faster warp. "If he tries to get away with warp drive, hah! He's really in for a shock."  
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
No guys, my biggest beef is you shouldn't be warping 5 feet next to a space dock!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
My issue with Kirk's death was that I knew he would be alive ten minutes later. It was a well done scene and all, but I found myself not caring.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
Interestingly enough, people I know who aren't as into Trek as I am didn't notice the regenerative blood thing and only expected Kirk to live because it's scifi.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
It was, like a lot of the JJ Abrams stuff, more slick and kinetic (and yes, dumbed down) than a lot of what I think of as classic Trek, but as with Star Trek 09, I didn't mind it. On some level, I'm just thrilled for mainstream audiences to be excited about sci-fi again, and I'm legitimately excited to see what he does with Star Wars. Seems like a perfect fit. One change I would've liked would have resolved the "Where are all the starships?" issue. While Marcus is attacking, they could have the Enterprise contact some Federation ships in the system and at least summon them to the scene. Around the time the Vengeance's weapons come back online and Khan takes it over, the reinforcements show up and Khan blows them away. Then again, they explain why no other ships show up well enough with the whole "jammed communications" throwaway line, and I suppose the blasting of the Enterprise while it was in warp fulfilled the space destruction quota well enough. The person I saw it with thinks asking Old Spock for advice was a bit of a cheat, and I agree. I guess I assumed he had removed himself from events so as not to alter the timeline further and was off living as a hermit somewhere, not within easy reach of a video phone. Still, explaining that (or worse, killing him off while you still have Nimoy as a resource) would've taken as much screentime as just putting him in. Nimoy has waffled a lot about whether he is "retired" from acting (see his stint on Fringe as Bell), so I can see why the writers struggled with what to do with the character. Still, I hope if more movies get made, they can tread some new territory. I think they've earned it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
That Rough Beast posted:
Again though this completely ignores that any other Federation ships would be on the side of Marcus. He's the "good" guy as far as they're concerned.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Again though this completely ignores that any other Federation ships would be on the side of Marcus. He's the "good" guy as far as they're concerned. Also They mention before hand that most ships are off in other areas. Also the captains and first officers were killed
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Also Nero destroyed a large portion of the fleet in the last movie. Why do you think there were only a dozen or so captains at that table? They imply that all of the ship captains that are nearby will be in that room. There are maybe a dozen, meaning there aren't that many ships in the local fleet. Then a bunch of them get killed or injured. This is not a plot hole, this just isn't "Sacrifice of Angels" era starfleet. There just aren't that many ships. edit: VV: there's no real evidence of this. In almost every instance where earth comes under attack, the attacker is met with overwhelming force. Unfortunately for starfleet, it's usually the borg or Nero's ship (which apparently is augmented with borg technology) Snak fucked around with this message at 20:58 on May 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
The Federation seems to be pretty lax in its defense of Earth in the future.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
So did anyone else put together the Khan Blood, Carol Marcus Genesis creation thing? I expect that to be where she is able to make Genesis from. Also how does Pike die when the pilot for the original has them dragging Pike off to some forbidden planet?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
Anything goes in an alternate universe.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
Awfull Ioci posted:So did anyone else put together the Khan Blood, Carol Marcus Genesis creation thing? I expect that to be where she is able to make Genesis from. Also how does Pike die when the pilot for the original has them dragging Pike off to some forbidden planet? I didn't but that's a pretty neat idea. Would make sense to do something with it rather than forget it in the next movie. What're you on about Pike being dragged off to some forbidden planet??
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
Probably referring to this.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
Well, presumably Carol came up with Genesis independent of Khan's super-blood in the alpha timeline, so I doubt there's any kind of relationship there.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
Pope Mobile posted:The Federation seems to be pretty lax in its defense of Earth in the future. I assume it's because there are supposed to be how many hundred worlds in the Federation? Not every member has its own fleet and would rely on Starfleet to cover them, no?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
Pope Mobile posted:My issue with Kirk's death was that I knew he would be alive ten minutes later. It was a well done scene and all, but I found myself not caring. Actually I had heard there was some sort of controversial ending and watching the movie I thought they just might kill Kirk for real. I was obviously delusional but thought it would be great. I especially didn't like his character in the first movie and was glad to see there was finally some sort of consequence to acting like a rebellious teenager when you're commanding the flagship if the fleet. I would have enjoyed the next film without him, Spock as captain and Sulu working toward his destiny to helm the Excelsior. But alas, they brought him back.  Question: When Sulutook over as captain and made his announcement to Khan, did he say he would shoot the torpedos in TWO minutes? Wasn't sure if I heard that right. Couldn't be. Great_Gerbil posted:
Yeah I kind of sighed when they panned across the Ares V. Styles Bitchley fucked around with this message at 23:07 on May 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:Barely invented the wheel. I liked the way the super-holy sacred scroll was casually discarded as they were sketching out the Enterprise with a stick. Nice compact storytelling.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Yeah, Nthing the criticism of the Nimoy Hotline here. I honestly don't get why they felt that was necessary, I would have vastly preferred if they found out about Khan the same way they did in the original episode, re: someone looks him up in the ships historical archives and puts the pieces together just a little too late. The scene in the movie is, in my opinion, the low point.
|
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Is there a Trekkies.txt? Because people on Metafilter and i09 are SO ANGRY that this movie isn't 100% airtight and logically consistent. Kirk was a horny hothead, Spock was logical, Bones was a doctor and not a mechanical engineer. There were Tribbles. It was an enjoyable movie for both me, who had seen WoK and Old Trek, and my sister, who hasn't but enjoyed the slashy bits. Very few people care if the warp core is properly calibrated. Geek movies get subjected to this stupid level of scrutiny where they don't just need to make internal sense but they also need to confirm to 50 years of often contradictory continuity or they're the WORST THING EVER. And this goes double for people nitpicking Iron Man 3.
|
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
Having been a trek fan practically since birth (my mom is a superfan) I've seen all the shows, the movies, a ton of the books, etc. I thought STID was great. There are some flaws but I think my opinion can mostly be summed up as: what it did right makes it one of the best trek movies ever made. What it did wrong still puts it miles ahead of other trek movies. I thought someone a few pages ago put it best when they said that these are the same characters, same motivations, but because of the timeline split the situations are just different, and so some of the reversals are really well handled in that light. Edit: all the nitpicky points that have been batted back and forth are no better or worse than stuff in old trek. Honestly, how dumb was it to have McCoy carrying a backup of Spock's mind in his head in ST3 vs Khan's magical blood in STID? Error 404 fucked around with this message at 00:00 on May 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Edit: all the nitpicky points that have been batted back and forth are no better or worse than stuff in old trek. Honestly, how dumb was it to have McCoy carrying a backup of Spock's mind in his head in ST3 vs Khan's magical blood in STID? The difference is one deus ex machina was written after a character died in one movie so they could produce a new movie. khan's blood and kirk's "death" was a dumb gimmick that fooled nobody but the stupidest people and could have been left out of the movie entirely. Also opens the path to questions about why the gently caress isn't everyone on earth immortal now since they've found a cure for death.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Star Trek 3 is a criticized film as well, so what's your (Error 404's) point? In fact, it seems to be viewed on an overall similar level to this one.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
I wonder why people fixate on dying as if dying in itself is something that make for good plot. Kirk experienced character development because of his dying experience. That in itself is far more important than permanent death (which would be stupid because Star Trek without Kirk is not going to fly even if a smaller portion of the "hardcore" want it badly)
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
ChronoReverse posted:I wonder why people fixate on dying as if dying in itself is something that make for good plot. The complaint is that any emotional resonance is lost because of the too-obvious telegraphing, which is the exact opposite of the movie it references, which had strong emotional power. The only real way for that to hit anywhere near emotionally is to actually go through with it, which there was approximately 0% chance for that movie to do.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
My point is that all film is (and should be) criticised, but the specific crap being picked on in this thread takes on more of a tone of "this trek is not my trek so it's the worst thing ever" when in reality, this was a perfectly fine film, and an excellent entry into the Star Trek film series. poo poo, nobody seems to have issues with Scotty's annoying sidekick having literally no reason to exist in the narrative of ST09 and this film, but they want to hammer repeatedly on Spock said Kirk's line!!! The audience knows kirk will live! This film is trash! in WoK the audience also has plenty of information that characters do not. And in WoK, the plot was arguably worse, the action was good for its time, and of course the noted dramatic stylings of "well respected acting talent" Will Shatner (tm). I just think folks are either looking at the old stuff with rose tinted glasses, or not giving the new stuff credit for (if not being better) not being worse than the old stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
Darko posted:The complaint is that any emotional resonance is lost because of the too-obvious telegraphing, which is the exact opposite of the movie it references, which had strong emotional power. The only real way for that to hit anywhere near emotionally is to actually go through with it, which there was approximately 0% chance for that movie to do. And as mentioned in the spoilers, a near equivalent amount of emotion was realized through the character going through a realization of their death, even if they didn't stay dead forever.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
Darko posted:The complaint is that any emotional resonance is lost because of the too-obvious telegraphing, which is the exact opposite of the movie it references, which had strong emotional power. The only real way for that to hit anywhere near emotionally is to actually go through with it, which there was approximately 0% chance for that movie to do. It's not as telegraphed for regular non-edgy super genre-savvy folks. I can see it coming a mile away since they do the blood thing nearly at the beginning. And then hammered it in twice with tribbles. I groaned slightly during the movie but those with me were oblivious. But those I saw it with found the Kirk dying scene to be emotional despite all that. Sometimes we the hardcore project too much onto others.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:42
|
|
|
There are plenty of complaints in this very thread that analyze it as a film in itself and state why it does not work as well as it could. In fact, most of them seem to be rather even-handed, especially early on, ie., a) worked, but once b) was introduced, it kind of soured me on the experience overall. The comparisons to the old series are kind of inevitable because a huge portion of the movie relies almost entirely on referencing familiarity with the characters/series. For instance, the ZOOM IN CHARACTER REVEAL has no bearing outside of being a dramatic audience reveal, and the emotional explosion at the end by one of the characters is only earned if we take prior knowledge into account, since them being close for 10 minutes of movie time up until this point does not earn that reaction. Since you're forced to take the old series into account, you can't help but see what it referenced and how it succeeded or failed in doing so. The reception for this, at least in this thread, seems to be somewhere around the retrospect-reception (and not when first released) of First Contact, where it's kind of okay but doesn't make much sense and makes a lot of weird plot and character decisions. That still puts it in the upper-midrange of overall Star Trek films. As far as "Star Trek nerd" reactions, there is literally no reason to ever factor in what someone with a huge pre-existing bias (to the point of being unable to review something without that bias interfering in a huge way) has to say about a film unless you need to make money off of them in some way. Irrational fans are ignorable unless you're the studio. it's like going to theforce.net for opinions on Star Wars stuff - don't do it.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:My point is that all film is (and should be) criticised, but the specific crap being picked on in this thread takes on more of a tone of "this trek is not my trek so it's the worst thing ever" when in reality, this was a perfectly fine film, and an excellent entry into the Star Trek film series. I actually enjoyed the film but felt pretty much nothing during Kirk's death because I knew he was coming back to life. I put much of it on being too overt with the "magic blood" thing. Scotty's partner is great in that he is useless. They even mention this when Scotty is in the bar; "What do you even do? You just sit around!" He's basically an imaginary friend come to life. E: Another thing I really liked was how things were shown and not told (paging Plinkett) ala the Star Wars Prequels. One of the biggest is right in the beginning when we see Kirk violate the Prime Directive to rescue Spock. its all nice on rice fucked around with this message at 00:59 on May 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
One thing that bothered me in the 09 film, and reared it's ugly head here again: Cadet Kirk as Captain. It seemed ridiculous that a cadet (under disciplinary investigation!) would instantly rise to the rank of Captain, even if it was all a PR stunt. Sure, he helped save the Earth, but if the JJ-verse is anything like the original Trek universe, then someone is saving the Earth every couple of weeks... I understand that thematically they felt they had to end the film with "Captain" Kirk in the big chair, rather than Lieutenant Kirk or something similar, but like a lot of things in these two movies it starts to fall apart if you think about it too much. Then, in the new film, we have Kirk being removed as Captain of the Enterprise...and told he is going back to the academy! So are we supposed to believe he has still been a cadet all this time, even while Captain of the Enterprise? Then five minutes later he is Commander Kirk and back on active duty (and an Admiral turns into a Captain)...and five minutes after that he is Captain Kirk again! Sure, a few senior officers died in the attack on Starfleet headquarters, but there must be hundreds (thousands?) of experienced Commanders, Lieutenant Commanders, Lieutenants, etc. in the fleet who would be better suited for those positions. Heck, why is Spock not put in command?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
Error 404 posted:My point is that all film is (and should be) criticised, but the specific crap being picked on in this thread takes on more of a tone of "this trek is not my trek so it's the worst thing ever" when in reality, this was a perfectly fine film, and an excellent entry into the Star Trek film series. I could pick on general crap instead of specific crap if you like. The movie is general crap. There you go. I could go through old Trek movies and complain about stupid poo poo but they have so much to redeem them, I don't care. At least the writers made a genuine effort to create something intelligent and in the spirit of the series for most of the other movies, except maybe nemisis. The only thing that can possibly make anyone overlook all the crap in this movie is the action. That doesn't cut it for Star Trek. It's not supposed to be loving Transformers and it's a waste and a shame making it into that.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 01:08
|
|