Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Alexandra DuPont
Boldly Appraises
Abrams’ STAR TREK!!

EH? by chuffsterUK	May 8th, 2009 03:37:33 AM
Is this a double post??
2nd by chuffsterUK	May 8th, 2009 03:37:52 AM
:)
what heppened? by Iron-kong	May 8th, 2009 03:37:55 AM

3rd by chuffsterUK	May 8th, 2009 03:38:08 AM
Etc etc
meant happened- the talkback sort of rebooted by Iron-kong	May 8th, 2009 03:38:27 AM

ok by chuffsterUK	May 8th, 2009 03:38:46 AM
4th then!
I need attention by AlexandraDupontsBellyButton	May 8th, 2009 03:39:02 AM
Who will tend to me?
Light Glare & Shakey Cam = Shit. by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 03:39:31 AM
PLEASE STOP THESE ABRAMS.
anyone else notice that the one guy that died... by Iron-kong	May 8th, 2009 03:42:59 AM
on the skydiving scene was wearing red? An homage to all the red shirt deaths?
Check out the new 4 min Terminator Salvation trailer by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 03:43:37 AM
It's going to fucking TERMINATE Star Trek.
7th by DarthSaul666	May 8th, 2009 03:45:10 AM

Imax? by blakindigo	May 8th, 2009 03:47:50 AM
Did you have any issues on the Imax screen? Was it overwhelming? Did you have any problems directing your focus? I'll see it again this weekend, but I'm not sure about Imax (it's a cost and seat availability issue).
i love this frakken movie by deanbarry	May 8th, 2009 03:51:08 AM
it gave me a warm glow in my tummy, like The DarK Knight and Spider-Man 2 did. Sigh. happy thoughts....
Seen it twice for free. Wouldn't pay to see it though. by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 03:52:40 AM

What a load of crap! by CeejayNightwing	May 8th, 2009 03:55:38 AM
Nearly 40 years of Trek wiped out because writers no longer can step up to the challenge of progressing the standards set by their predecessors. So like some grade school plot we simply go back in time and cause another reality where we can do it all over agin and make everything happen the way we want to contrive by coincidence and fate and everyone is instantly happy with a easily made,sugar coated nostalgia trip instead of challenging science fiction. Truly Star Trek is dead, and this summerflick nostalgic formula will soon wear thin after a few movies and the actors growing tired of wearing someone elses boots no matter how much they pay 'em!
Alexandra, your reviews are getting worse (if that's possible) by jedimast3r	May 8th, 2009 03:58:21 AM
Past couple reviews you haven't really offered any unique criticisms or even creative lingual stylings which usually set your writing apart from the other reviewers (if you can call them that) on this site. Methinks your passion for your articles is dwindling, but who knows, who cares. This site is about the talkbacks, really. After years of coming here I finally realize that. Can we just get dedicated talkbacks instead of 1000 reviews from you guys which say nothing worth reading 1000 times?
Decent. Not NEARLY as good as all this hype by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 04:00:15 AM
I absolutely LOVED Chris Pine. Finally a fucking young actor who isnt a pussy, who has charisma and masculinity to burn. The guy works, and I hope he doesnt pidgeonhole himself. In fact the whole cast is great. But how can anyone ignore the ridiculous plot holes. So I guess SPock just miscalculated when that supernova was going to destroy Romulan? I mean seriously what the fuck, the impetus of all of this is that Spock just somehow missed the boat on a fairly simple calculation? And I swear Kurtzman and Orci just fucking hate the character of Spock because they didnt write him into this film. Whatever Quinto was, it wasnt Spock. And no it wasnt younger more naive Spock either. There is a difference between being emotional and being WAY MORE emotional than any other character in the film. Seriously this SPock was character from Guiding Light melodramatic. I could go on and on but whats the point, most of you people liked WOlverine.
Oh yeah, about Terminator... by jedimast3r	May 8th, 2009 04:00:55 AM
...SG nipples can you stop trying to usurp people's love for Star Trek? I'll be amazed if Terminator makes more than 75 mil at the BO. The TV show pwns any of the movies (yes, even T2) and noone could even support that.
ONCE AGAIN - Horrible movie!! by Professor_Monster	May 8th, 2009 04:04:17 AM
Seeing how my bash against AICN's newest flavor of the month has been mysteriously erased (taking lessons from JJ's sloppy storytelling no doubt) I will post a few shots as to why this film is bad. 1. Lens Flare and Shaky Cam - NO BULLSHIT - there was a Lens Flare that lasted through 6 different shots. SIX cuts and the image was divided in the middle by a band of flexing light. Also - JJ really needs to buy a steady-cam, there is not one clear fight scene throughout the entire film. 2. Nimoy can't do the Spoke lines like he used to - not only that, he spouts off every "famous" Spock line there is -"I have been and always shall be --" and the rest. If you are going to erase Star Trek - then fucking erase it and don't ride the coat tails of something you feel needs to be rebooted - Superman Returns pulled the same shit. 3. The score - IT SUCKED. Non thrilling and totally empty. 4. People will NOT listen to the Beastie Boys in 200 years. I'll post more tomorrow - I'm pooped.
The script was INARGUABLY awful by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 04:11:35 AM
And yeah there were things about this that worked. And I could see things working so much for some that they can get over the script. But don't defend the script, it was utter shit. If you are going to defend the film, and you have plenty of ammunition, DON'T even attempt to defend the script.
Script was shit. by V'Shael	May 8th, 2009 04:18:07 AM
But you'll be pretty much flamed by the hypernova of the fanboys rage, if you try to point that out. Personally, I thought it was worse than even Trek 5. The really sad part? After not bothering to watch the last 2 Trek movies, and thinking i'd finally put all things Trek behind me, this one actually got me psyched to see the movie. Stupid "hope". Never have hope. Cause fate just uses it to kick you in the happysack.
Kate Beaton's Trek Cartoon... by Daytripper69	May 8th, 2009 04:20:28 AM
... put a big, dopey grin on my face. Thanks for the link, Alexandra.
Beastie Boys will be around... by Joely_Boy	May 8th, 2009 04:28:09 AM
...til the end of time! They may be heads in jars a thousand years from now, but hey, at least we'll get another album from 'em!
So its ok the script sucked? by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 04:29:42 AM
Bullshit. And what made this great wasnt how the characters were written, its how they were acted. Kirk, for instance is given some absolutely fucking awful lines, but Pine sells it or makes it easy to ignore. Same goes for Karl Urban, who is a performance of amazing mannerisms in between horrible in jokey lines. He's fantastic, the script is piss poor. Quinto isnt so lucky. Spock in this film isnt Spock, period. Its not even that hes emotional hes so much MORE emotional than EVERYONE ELSE. Hes an outright fuckin drama queen. We do agree that all summer films are B-Movies, but they dont have to be.
You almost wrote a review! by The Dark Shite	May 8th, 2009 04:41:25 AM
Almost. "Abrams' occasionally self-conscious, ctrl-alt-del-meets-Joseph Campbell story structure didn't lessen my enjoyment." "That said: It did lessen my enjoyment a little." Which is it? If it lessened your enjoyment "a little", then your enjoyment was lessened, surely? And why does EVERY writer on this site use the word "An" instead of "A". As in "an precise set of coordinates". A precise set. A. Not "An". An comes before a vowel. Like "An elephant" or "An unsettling upsurge in illiteracy among Americans."
NEEDS GIANT ROBOTS by Sal_Bando	May 8th, 2009 06:06:43 AM
-not- Sounds like a good, fun movie. I'm happy to check it out. Let the Harold and co. JJ-fapathon-continue....
Nonce nts.. by The Dark Shite	May 8th, 2009 06:10:46 AM
Don't be a silly boy now. The "bastardization" you refer to is like me spelling that word with an S while you spell it with a Z. That's fine. The stuff I mentioned is applicable in all types of English & can only be right or wrong. You're confusing difference in spellings with intelligence. I'm pissed off because her last review (wolverine) had her using a fancy word & linking us to the definition on wikipedia, because we mere mortals obviously can't understand her mighty highness.That was fucking patronising & too many people on this site have high opinions of themselves. They really DO use the word "an" a lot too, in places where it doesn't belong, ALL THE TIME. The irony being, that in normal conversations they would say "A", but deliberately change it to "An" here, because they think it's correct & makes them look smart. It's a basic thing you learn in high school for crying out loud! It annoys the fuck out of me. Also, it's impossible for something to not lessen your enjoyment (as in "at all") & lessen it a little. That's like a fat chick turning up at weight watchers & saying "I didn't eat any pies. I only ate two."
For 25 years Nero might have been... by JThomasC	May 8th, 2009 06:47:37 AM
off repairing the damage to his ship caused by a big honking starship that crashed into it which took part of his right ear and scarred up his head. I dunno, suspending disbelief.
ass-forged. ha. by iwasredempted	May 8th, 2009 06:49:40 AM
i rather enjoy alexandra's reviews and i agree, bring the hemingway back to star trek. who doesn't want to be a magnificent bastard like hemingway or quietly envy someone like him. personally i prefer f scott fitzgerald but damn if i could live like hemingway did.
It's not hard to top any of the previous TREK movies. by Bob Cryptonight	May 8th, 2009 07:33:21 AM
They were all pretty bad. Even KHAN. They were mostly t.v. episodes filled with in-jokes for the fans. Not to mention that they cranked them out WAY WAY past the prime of the actors. But as long as RICK BERMAN is not involved, I'll give it a shot.
The script was fine. by rev_skarekroe	May 8th, 2009 07:41:17 AM
Some of you just decided way in advance that it sucked because you don't like what the writers did in the past. The only thing that struck me as Transformers-esque in anyway was Scotty's little sidekick. As for the rest of the film, I thought it was great. Not perfect. Lens flare was really irritating. Something about Nero didn't quite click with me, but I'm not sure I can explain exactly what. I thought Karl Urban was kind of hammy. And the physics and science frequently failed. But overall, it was a thumbs up. Looking forward to the continuation of the series.
IndustryKiller by whitty	May 8th, 2009 07:43:45 AM
This Spock is the Spock of "The Cage," who was very emotional. This isn't the same guy we get to know later in his life, when he's playing the "cold Vulcan" role. This is a Spcok who IS emotional--a Spock who would smile with glee at the sight of singing flowers, or yell "The women!!" after a transport gone awry, or look gravely concerned while asking Number One to go down to Talos IV "to be certain." This is not a Spock who would later lie about not recognizing "one of your Earth emotions," who would show an almost psychotic, self-delusionary need to deny what he was. This Spock is how he SHOULD be at this point in the timeline.
And with that last post... by whitty	May 8th, 2009 07:48:25 AM
...I completely revealed my inner geekery.
and yeah......with the reviews on here, T4 by southafricanguy	May 8th, 2009 07:54:13 AM
sounds quite dissapointing. Makes me dread McG's hair brained schemes for future sequals...
"What is this...the 80's?" by Nasty In The Pasty	May 8th, 2009 08:18:54 AM
Any soundtrack that's less than 60 minutes these days is a fucking rip-off.
Enjoyable read by Arteska	May 8th, 2009 08:31:49 AM
Nice review and I agree on casting - it's really amazing how great everyone was at channeling and not mimicking but still giving their own performance. The nitpicks are coming from reliable and predictable points of view (hate the screenwriters, ergo they are incapable of entertaining me ever, etc. etc. etc.).
Didn't Ms Dupont retire from this site at one point? by Orcus	May 8th, 2009 08:44:27 AM

Red Matter from Alias...Slusho Reference by kenjinattix	May 8th, 2009 08:51:34 AM
Anyone heard them mention JJ Abrams Red Apple Cigarettes-like product Slusho in the bar scene in Trek. Slusho was just on the last episode of Fringe and I had a feeling it would be in here somewhere. When Uhura is ordering drinks the bartender mentions Slusho. ALSO...more obvious was the Red Matter which to me looks EXACTLY like that Rembaldi creation Sydney Bristow was trying to steal in the first season of Alias...I'm I the only one who saw this???
Alexandra DuPont go the fuck away. by JarJar25	May 8th, 2009 08:52:41 AM
Your reviews are shit! Wolverine was good! Superman Returns was good too! This fanboys worship you like a goddess, but not me. You act like only you can write about these film and no else can. You only come here, because no else will hire you and to make yourself superior to everyone else here!
Nero is one badass mutha. (Sarcasm.) by kabong	May 8th, 2009 08:57:51 AM
Calling them Starfleet guys by their first names. Yeah, that's badass for a twelve-year-old. Hence, the problem of the movie.
Dumb place to put a spoiler warning... by DC Films	May 8th, 2009 09:08:12 AM
...After you tell us that 'by the end of the movie the time-travel problem doesn't get fixed...' Might be obvious when you think about that, considering it then nature of the reboot, but i'd still prefer to have not been told. Guess i just have to be sure not to read your reviews anymore!
Spoilers 25 years. by the_beard_of_Chuck_Norris	May 8th, 2009 09:13:47 AM
"2. Also, as Herc asked: Where the hell did Nero go for a quarter-century?" Spock (Nimoy) answers this. Why anyone would even ask this question is beyond me. The answer --- Nero knew Spock was coming through the Blackhole. But what was an instant to Spock was 25 years to Nero. Nero was waiting there in space for Spock to arrive. Nero never left that spot for 25 years.
I loved it - BUT... by Mr Gorilla	May 8th, 2009 09:16:20 AM
This is as good a Trek relaunch as we could possibly have hoped for. But I do think it was all a bit unrelentingly LOUD. The filmmakers blow you away with the opening sequence, but then don't trust you enough to take their foot off the gas - at ANY point in the film. There's loads of good action - but no action is quite as brilliant as the set-pieces in Mission Impossible 3 - I'm particularly thinking of the Vatican break-in and the bridge scene. All that being said, this is a wonderful film and the guys and gals behind it really should be applauded.
Beard of chuck. by V'Shael	May 8th, 2009 09:18:11 AM
That's kind of the point. He sat in the one spot, never moving for 25 years? And no one found him? Even though they were responsible for the destruction of the Kelvin? They never left the scene of the crime? No one ever came across them? Bullshit says I. Crap writing, that they hope no one thinks about.
I totally agree with Alexandra by oisin5199	May 8th, 2009 09:25:06 AM
as usual. Her reviews have been consistently right on. All the things she loved and all her quibbles I share and for the same reasons. Marry me, Alexandra! Oh, wait. I'm already married. Ok, be my third in a sexy triad!
I totally agree with ScriptGirl_Nipples by WriteFromLeft	May 8th, 2009 09:33:42 AM
I won't see a film that looks like Michael J. Fox was the DP. There's this thing called a tripod.
I like Star Trek and I don't like "Star Trek". [SPOILERS] by LordVonPS3	May 8th, 2009 09:52:56 AM
The 2009 movie has too much wrong with it to ignore. [SPOILERS] It started in typical Trek fashion and I thought the first ten minutes were great. I don't think we needed the scene with Kirk as a child. That should have been cut completely. The scene at the end where the Enterprise is holding its position against the gravitational pull of a giant black hole by using warp power was also fundamentally flawed. How did they escape? Eject the warp core into the black hole and detonate it like a bomb. Surely if the Enterprise needs warp power to hold its position against a black hole, the act of ejecting the warp core would see the Enterprise "fall into" the black hole with "even light cannot escape" immediacy. Who could believe a cracked & damaged Enterprise wouldn't be ripped apart by a black hole? Even "Space: Above and Beyond" got that one right. How about the "illogical" manner in which James T Kirk becomes Captain of the Enterprise? Kirk can get beaten up (several times), humiliated (several times), rejected (by women, Spock & even Star Fleet)... Yet he is "given" the Captaincy. What the fuck? Did Kirk show some incredible stroke of genius? An amazing display of courage? A natural authoritative air and style of leadership? Fuck that... Kirk earned his Captaincy by simply making it through the movie without dying, then logically convincing Spock that he was too emotive to remain as acting Captain. If Spock were so emotionally wound up by a baiting Kirk, surely the last thing he would do is give Kirk the Captain's chair. Particularly when Kirk had earlier been relieved from his position as 1st officer by Spock for being too emotionally invested (the way his dad died)! I'd like to say you couldn't make this stuff up, but unfortunately someone did. This movie should be gutted, panned and slated in every journal and mag. How dare these idiots say it is good? Star Trek has never been about assembling crews except in every drawn out season pilot that "knowing fans" only watch when they're having a marathon sit-and-watch session. Star Trek is supposed to be about exploring, meeting new races, technology, negotiating & fixing interstellar problems, fighting and blowing stuff up. I couldn't care less if the new Kirk is a dick head or a diplomat like Picard, but the dialogue sucked, the script sucked and the (mostly) immature characters sucked. Yet again the doctor was the best character. ST:TNG was a success in part thanks to the mostly mature characters in the show and DS9 showed that cadets can't run a star ship. The new Enterprise is destined to crash and burn, but not before making a lot of cash. Well done Paramount.
Great by unclebusu	May 8th, 2009 10:06:39 AM
great thoughts. I appreciate good dialogue about this movie rather than random fan boy attacks. Just enjoy yourselves fools. http://drivein77.typepad.com/d rivein77/
Shakey-Cam issue by Mr Gorilla	May 8th, 2009 10:08:56 AM
Yes, it really IS an issue. These shakey-cam films - Bourne, Quantum of Solace, Trek - look fantastic on the small screen. But on the big screen they are JUST TERRIBLE! These directors should be forced to edit in front of a giant movie screen, rather than a small Avid monitor. Then they would mend their ways.
JarJar25 by Friendo	May 8th, 2009 10:24:07 AM
hahahhahahahaha . . . you're a cute little sad fucker aren't you . . . hahahahahahahahah
Clarification please - does this site like this movie by Miyamoto_Musashi	May 8th, 2009 10:38:58 AM
Frankly I am still waiting for Yoko's review
Oh and Fuck you Paramount by Miyamoto_Musashi	May 8th, 2009 10:40:52 AM
29th of fucking May, is that allowed in theGeneva convention
They killed Wash in Serenity?!?!?! by D.Vader	May 8th, 2009 10:46:11 AM
NOOOOOOOOOO! I'm still in the middle of watching the series!
Vulcan and Amanda? by OptimusValdez	May 8th, 2009 10:56:44 AM
Question for all of you. How do we reconcile the death of Spock’s mother Amanda in the context of “Journey to Babel” and ST IV? Also, the destruction of the Vulcan planet to “Amok TIme,” ST IV, etc?
It's all gone, OptimusValdez. by kabong	May 8th, 2009 11:07:30 AM
Only the world of JarJar Abrams exists.
I love DuPont by DennisMM	May 8th, 2009 11:09:46 AM
I hate the rigid structure of her reviews, but I love the research she brings to them and the light humor she employs. And she (he?) is downright charming, charm being an uncommon trait in this site's writers.
Great review, Ms. DuPont by bravogolfhotel	May 8th, 2009 11:28:50 AM
You got to the heart of why this movie works so well: its infectious passion.
Jeez. Is there anybody left by StarWarsRedux	May 8th, 2009 11:45:35 AM
who HASN'T sucked this movie's dick yet? Christ. I would've expected at least one reviewer on this site who would've at least given it a slightly less hyperbolic level of praise.
29th of May.. by The Dark Shite	May 8th, 2009 11:58:20 AM
Racists! Racists I say!!! Damn you. 29th of fucking May?
This is unexpected! by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 12:00:31 PM
I said it before that i might revise my negative and extremely skeptical idea of Jay Jay's Star Trek after iread alex Dupond and Vern's reviews, as for me they sound like the smarters reviewers at AICN. And now Alex Dupond shows a gushing positive review of it (though it's the one with the most negative points as well). Well, normally this would make me revise a bit my skepticism and pessimist on this movie. But.... well, i have to say, of all of her reviews, this is the weakest i ever sen from her. and the most appologetic as well. It's as if she is making sorry for her review. I never seen her do this before. Her review is, for the lack of a better word, well, it feels like scripted. i don't know, man, i don't have a good feeling about this. for the first time ever, i feel that Alex Dupond wrote a phoney review. It just doesn't add up. I'm feeling terribly disapointed. About what, i really can't tell.
bravogolfhotel by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 12:01:26 PM
It's "Mrs DuPont". Aparently, she is a married woman.
Voyager by blhotz	May 8th, 2009 12:01:57 PM
Pwned. Only second to TNG. Hated Deep Space Nine but to each their own. Otherwise nice review, DuPont!!
J.J. Abrams raped my childhood! by yeah i'm a jerk!	May 8th, 2009 12:02:03 PM
seriously, this movie has none of the sense of wonder and fun of the original Star Trek. I can only think that Gene Roddenberry would appalled at what has been done to his creation.
LordVonPS3 by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 12:03:16 PM
Your review is the only pne that actually makes sense and does seem to match up with everything that has been shown in all the trailers and the hubris filled bullshit from Jay Jay and his ass-slaves BOB "mexiCAN'T" Orci and Alex Klutzman.
Pay Attention by MoPo	May 8th, 2009 12:07:42 PM
Optimus, in case you weren't paying attention for the 2nd half of the movie, this movie establishes an alternate timeline. The events of the original series and STIV still happen in the "prime" timeline, but obviosuly won't in JJ's new timeline.
"I'm feeling terribly disapointed." by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 12:22:15 PM
"About what, i really can't tell." That's because you wanted her to hate it. That way, you can feel better about your hatred of Abrams and then feel justified in hating on this film even though you haven't even seen it yet. Pathetic.
The details by Embeedeuce	May 8th, 2009 12:37:03 PM
The negative parts of this film, that are getting glossed over in reviews, are the ones I fear most. (And I admit I haven't seen the film yet, but have read every review and spoiler). If Kirk just gets into the captain's chair, calling "dibs" or whatev, and never climbs the officer ladder, that's huge! I would love him being Acting Captain in this one, then getting rewarded w/ Lieutenant rank or something. Then there's a whole story to explore in the sequel about how he becomes Captain. Resurrect the Gary Mitchell story line. Anything. Pine still has plenty of years to embody Starfleet's youngest captain. In one of the trailers, and I'm guessing it's an audio edit, Pike says "I'm leaving you in command," and Kirk says, "You got it." Really?
Forget everything you know.. by The Dark Shite	May 8th, 2009 12:58:21 PM
That's the tagline. Sums it up. It's essentially saying "We know you think Star Trek is shit, but try this one." That's bullshit. It's condescending to the fans. It's basically saying newcomers are more important than the people who really care about it, because we can make more money that way. I'm not saying the movie's shit. I hope it's great! I really wanna see it. But as a fan, that tagline pisses me off.
It's hit the torrents already. by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 01:23:24 PM

Any clues as to where? by The Dark Shite	May 8th, 2009 01:24:09 PM

CeeJay Nightwing left a douchie post by Joker Gordon Levitt	May 8th, 2009 01:24:50 PM
I'm telling...
But I DO think Star Trek is shit-- by Pompoulus	May 8th, 2009 01:32:09 PM
And I DO want to try this one. So there you have it. Oh, and Alexandra Dupont is the best writer on this site, and anybody who thinks otherwise cannot or does not read.
epidem.ru by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 01:37:31 PM

Mr. Nice Gaius by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 01:49:19 PM
I don't want nothing in particular from, any reviewer other then an honest opinion that's neither scripted nor an obvious exercise in sell out. And so far, i haven«'t seen a single example of that in all of the AICN personel. that this would also come from Mrs Dupond s a bit depressing.
One thing's for sure about Vulcans by GeorgieBoy	May 8th, 2009 01:51:23 PM
They sure do have BIG honkers!
My post was suposed to be far more extensive... by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 01:52:53 PM
... then what was posted above. Some malfunction i guess. i don't want to bother myself writing it all that again, so fuck it. I'll only add that i'm going to watch this movie tonight, and if it's better then i fear it is, i'll say it. I would rather be wrong about the movie and have it turn out to be good afterall. I can't get enough of good movies. Also, i'll post my opinion of it in the talkback exclusively and only dedicated to Jay Jay's Star Trek.
And yes, Mrs DuPont is an excelent writer... by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 01:55:22 PM
... i have disagreed with her before, i have sene her over-praise rather dumb movies before, but it's obvious she is a smart and well read reviewer. Which makes a rather pleasant contrast to the Joe Six Pack-wannabe attitude form most of the AICN staff. With the exception of Mr Beaks, who tries to pass as the intellectual of the group and always fails miserably at that.
ridiculous embrace of coincidence? by jofex	May 8th, 2009 02:08:42 PM
It only feels like coincidence because we know what comes after, that these guys have a whole "history" ahead of them. If we didn't know anything, these would just be new characters we're meeting, who become important as the story progresses.
AsimovLives is so desperate to hate this movie. by rev_skarekroe	May 8th, 2009 02:14:49 PM
It's comical. Really, I recommend you don't see it AsimovLives. You've already decided that you don't want to like it. Just save yourself some money.
thanks mrs dupont by Six Demon Bag	May 8th, 2009 02:18:39 PM
see you in 2 weeks for your T4 review...hint hint
I wasnt going to read another Trek review!!! by DOGSOUP	May 8th, 2009 02:19:58 PM
But goddamn it I have to read everything ADP writes. She nails films in a way few can and will. In conclusion she should tell Andre Dellamorte that Portland misses him. It's Keeping it Weird without him but a visit would be nice.
AsimovLives by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 02:20:25 PM
That's all anyone wants from a reviewer = an honest opinion. What you have accused Dupont of doing is exactly the opposite. And what proof do you have of this?! None. You tend to project an AWFUL LOT onto the various writers/editors of AICN. And a lot of it is really bizarre and unfounded (i.e. the Jay Jay cocksuck conspiracy, etc.). I'm heartened to read that you're actually going to SEE the movie and then offer your then INFORMED opinion on its merits or lack thereof. It certainly makes more sense than the accusations and pre-hate you've been throwing around. Enjoy the show.
rev_skarekroe by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 02:40:30 PM
I understand why you say that. And i gues sif i was soembody else, i could come to a similiar conclusion. i guess i just can't explain clearly why i feel so skeptical about Jay Jay's Star Trek. Everything that the people praise about this movie are the same things that i have hated in other movies from both Jay Jay and his buddies BOB Oric and Klutzman's movies they all have been involved in teh past. The things this movie is being praise are the same things that fills me with utter dread. I'm sorry if i don't go dancing to the hype's beat. I don't. i hate hype. I even hated the hype about The Dark Knight, and i loved that movie and had great expectations before i saw it. And every, every, review posted by the AICN crew reks of sell out. Doesn't matter if the movie is good or not, maybe the movie is as good as they say, still their gushing is sell out. Maybe i'm the kind of person to whom the glass is always half-empty. But i also remmeber that what is happening with Jay Jay's Star Trek reminds me of what happened with Transformers, and how everybody was so happy with it, and even the mainstream critics as well. And that puts the weelie jeebies on me and curls my shoes. For me, all signs point to a not very good movie at all. i'm going to see it tonight, so the want will not take much longer to know for sure.
Mr. Nice Gaius by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 02:43:28 PM
In blunt words, yes, i do accuse Mrs DuPont on selling out to Jay Jay as the other people of AICN crew. I still think she is one of the brightest people who reviews in here, i still like and admire her, but the sell out, yeah, that happened to her as well. For a real opinion i do trust almsot completly, there's only Vern left now. But i'll see this movie before Vern will post his review, so even that is a moot point by now.
A message from Vader to Kirk by codymr	May 8th, 2009 02:43:36 PM
TAKE THAT BITCHES! http://tinyurl.com/qjy4om
rev_skarekroe by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 02:50:43 PM
I'd liek to tell you this little story of mine: friends of mine convinced me to watch Perfume: Story Of A Murderer. And when i say convionced, i went dradding my feets, because everybody wanted to watch me, and i was thinking "gosh, not another one of those arty prestigious european boring movies". Five minutes into the movie, i was absolutly loving every living frame of it. I consider it now one of my fave movies. I love that movie, i love it as i love the blood that runs in my own veins. So, the point is, like everybody else, i can change my mind about a movie. Sometiems movies get advertized the wrong way. Master And Commander had terrible advertizement, and that movie kicked my ass, i loved every frigging milisecond of it. The thing is, i just love good movies. If a movie that seems to be bad turns out to be really good, i think i stand to win. Becasue i'm a movie geek, and that's what is all about, getting good movies to enjoy. We all know god movies are too scarce for us to have the luxury to dismiss them for no reasons. But i'm going to tell you, if this movie is bad, by Bale, i'm not going to mince words! It will be ugly! There will be blood!
AsimovLives by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 02:52:35 PM
So, what you're really saying is that if a contributor to AICN has written a positive review of STAR TREK (a movie written and directed by people that you admittedly hate), then they have "sold out". No ifs, ands, or buts. Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds?! What pretzel-styled logic are you basing this on?! And if you're so hot for Vern's review, why don't you go and check out his own website? Because, now that Moriarty is gone, AICN doesn't seem to run Vern's stuff anymore.
AsimovLives by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 02:57:21 PM
Fuck me, my post was terrible! Look at all that fucking typos! I'm going to correct it. I'd like to tell you this little story: friends of mine convinced me to watch Perfume: Story Of A Murderer. And when i say convinced, i mean i went dragging my feets, because everybody wanted to watch it and i was not going to stay behind alone. My idea was "gosh, not another one of those arty prestigious european boring movies". Five minutes into the movie, i was absolutly loving every living frame of it. I consider it now one of my fave movies. I love that as i love the blood that runs in my veins. Like everybody else, sometimes i change my mind about a movie. Sometimes movies get advertized the wrong way. Master And Commander had terrible advertizement, and that movie kicked my ass. The thing is, i just love a good movie. If a movie that seems to be bad turns out to be really good, i stand to win. Becasue i'm a movie geek, and that's what is all about, getting good movies to enjoy. We all know good movies are too scarce for us to have the luxury to dismiss outright. But i tell you this, if this movie really is bad, by Bale, i'm not going to mince words! It will be ugly! There will be blood!
rev_skarekroe by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 02:57:41 PM
Fuck me, my post was terrible! Look at all that fucking typos! I'm going to correct it. I'd like to tell you this little story: friends of mine convinced me to watch Perfume: Story Of A Murderer. And when i say convinced, i mean i went dragging my feets, because everybody wanted to watch it and i was not going to stay behind alone. My idea was "gosh, not another one of those arty prestigious european boring movies". Five minutes into the movie, i was absolutly loving every living frame of it. I consider it now one of my fave movies. I love that as i love the blood that runs in my veins. Like everybody else, sometimes i change my mind about a movie. Sometimes movies get advertized the wrong way. Master And Commander had terrible advertizement, and that movie kicked my ass. The thing is, i just love a good movie. If a movie that seems to be bad turns out to be really good, i stand to win. Becasue i'm a movie geek, and that's what is all about, getting good movies to enjoy. We all know good movies are too scarce for us to have the luxury to dismiss outright. But i tell you this, if this movie really is bad, by Bale, i'm not going to mince words! It will be ugly! There will be blood!
Mr. Nice Gaius by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:06:22 PM
I didn't made myself understood well. No, what i'm saying is, all reviews look scripted, they all look agreed upon before. None of them look genuine. They are all praising proses with deliberate intentions. and they are all alike, every frigging one. All they differ is the skills of the writer. But the text, it all reads the same. there's no individuality to the opinions, only to the writing skills. And that's very fucking telling. And when it's only the negative reviews who do actually seem to came from the heart and mind and are not following a script agreed on a meeting, then you bet i smell a rotten something fishy going on. As for liking stuff from filmmakers i don't like, it has happeend to me before, as has happeend to everybody here, i'm sure. I used to hate Adrian Lynn, i fucking hated Fatal Attraction, but i loved Jacob's Ladder. I used to think that Curtis Hanson was a miserable uninteresting hack from which nothing much great would ever come up, and i loved LA Confidential. So, again, all that stuff about being predisposed to hate is just nonsense. I don't operate that way. But i can also see the writing in the wall, i can see the very fucking obvious, and i'm very much immune to over-hype.
AsimovLives by DOGSOUP	May 8th, 2009 03:06:34 PM
Tom Tykwer is a Man-God. And I hate to tell you guys but ANYONE who ISN'T a hermit living off the land and contributing to our capitalist system in ANY way is a sell-out. We're all whores so let's just enjoy the frequent orgasms that come with the territory. "I've got some Advice for you, little buddy Before you point the finger You should know that I'm the man,And if I'm the man, Then you're the man, and He's the man as well so you can Point that fuckin' finger up your ass"
You don't 'trust' opinions, buddy. by Pompoulus	May 8th, 2009 03:08:47 PM
Opinions are only ever to be 'trusted' in that they can be trusted to accurately convey a person's subjective view. Because they're opinions. You know. Opinions.
sequel should have Gary Mitchell from classic pilot by Drath	May 8th, 2009 03:20:55 PM
He develops super powers and becomes a villain Tetsuo style. That'd be cool to see. Save Khan for the third movie. No Klingons until the fourth!
asimov.. by Six Demon Bag	May 8th, 2009 03:21:35 PM
so anyone on this site who gives a positive review "sells out" .. bullshit. there has been many times where harry and mori and ms dupont have ripped a new one into a film that did not meet their expectations. i especially like those rants (mostly yours dupont). gonna let you in a little secret asimovlives, its okay to like things with theyre actually..you know good? join the rest of us itll be okay. you've yet to see the film and youre calling it shit? sad fact, as ive stated before, the haters after they've actually seen the film, will still publicly hate on it but buy it quickly when it comes home. jackass. enjoy the show.
another thing asimov... by Six Demon Bag	May 8th, 2009 03:24:05 PM
you complained that reviews look scripted. its called coherency. otherwise it would look like a fucking TB rant. im sure any reviewer has some kinda notes before sitting at the laptop..this GOLD doesnt just flow from the fingertips (ms dupont excluded) its gotta be drafted.
Mr. Nice Gaius by LordVonPS3	May 8th, 2009 03:28:57 PM
The only thing we can hope for here is an honest review. If we get one - fine. Just accept that everyone can have their own opinion on a movie. For me, it isn't a bad movie, it's just not a Star Trek movie - and that's what I was expecting, so I didn't like it. It is also not as good as everyone seems to be making out. 5 / 5? No way... More like 3.5 / 5. Star Trek (TOS/ TNG / DS9 / VOY / ENT) fans who are just looking for some more of the same will watch this and keep looking.
Pompoulus by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:28:59 PM
Of course opinions can be trusted. Intelligent, well formed opinions. I trust those all the time.
DouchePot: Shut. The. Fuck. Up! by KosherWookie	May 8th, 2009 03:30:29 PM
Why do you keep returning, like that little piece of turd that refuses to flush? Wassamatter, your slacker co-workers at Burger King refuse to listen to you whine on and on about movies? For a woman who is allegedly incredibly well-read and well-spoken, does the meaning of the word "RESIGN" somehow slip your mind? Now stay gone... or come back only after you apologize for the bitchy 'greener pastures' tone of your exit... Oh, and don't forget to refill the napkin dispensers at the end of the shift.
DOGSOUP by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:31:39 PM
Even in your mysantropic view of things, even if we are all sell outs, it's still in good manners to not have that writen all over your forehead and be very fucking obvious about it. And yeah, the guy who directed and co-composed Perfume is just brillant. The anti-Uwe Boll.
Well, Asimov, hope you like it. by rev_skarekroe	May 8th, 2009 03:34:00 PM
But even if you don't I hope you don't continue to believe that there's some kind of conspiracy by AICN reviewers to give the film more praise than it's worth.
Six Demon Bag by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:35:47 PM
I already explained my point too ofter and well enough for your post to have any validity in your erroneous presuming about me. I'd like to ask you to re-read my posts, if you will, they point to something completly different to what you are presuming. Please don't make me repeat myself. Thank you very much.
rev_skarekroe by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:36:47 PM
Conspiracy? There's nothing sinister going on, just a complete sell out from the crew of AICN. It's not dangerous, it's just sad.
And here we go... by Sidius	May 8th, 2009 03:38:04 PM
Like clockwork the "fans" start turning on it because it got great reviews. Just like they did for Dark Knight and for Iron Man. I'm so sur-fucking-prised. You guys are so fucking predictable and pathetic! OMG shaky-cam, lens-flares, Beastie Boys, insert cliched childhood-raping statement here! "I haven't seen it yet but the 93% good ratings tells me I'm gonna probably hate it because it's officially popular to like it and now I just want to act like a little bitch because internet anonymity allows me to." WAAAAH! Bring back the Rocketeer!! (which just might be the worst "good" film example ever given on this site by any poster not named Harry - the Rocketeer was total trash) You're all a bunch of bitches. The film's the most fun I've had in the theater (opening frame to end credits) in years and yes I also accept that it's far from perfect. Guess what? Very few, if any, films are. It's not like it's a totally loud piece of bombastic nonsense like Transformers was. It tries extremely hard to entertain and it succeeds 90% of the time. I wish I could say that about 90% of movies made today. I could only imagine the backlash a film like Star Wars would get today.
LordVonPS3 by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 03:39:32 PM
I can totally respect the fact that you didn't like it. You saw the film and gave your opinion. That makes sense. The difference here is that AsimovLives HASN'T seen the film. Even more, he's been piling the hate upon it simply because he doesn't like the folks involved with the its production. Now, here's the kicker. AsimovLives thinks that the AICN staff has "sold out" because they've enjoyed the movie and written positive reviews. (Keep in mind that I have not seen one person call it a "perfect" movie.) What's even more bizarre is that he thinks the reviews are "scripted" and disingenuous. How anyone could read Merrick's review and not find it "genuine"...well, it truly boggles the mind. Do you see my overall point and the bizarre disconnect being advocated by AsimovLives?
I guess i will have to repeat myself by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:42:19 PM
For the last time, get this: it's not the positive opinions of this movie that is the real problem. The real problem is that ALL reviews read the same. Different writing styles, they all still read the same. And it's not the kind of same as in everybody saying that The Dark Knight is an excelent movie, but in that EVERY BLOOD AICN REVIEWS is just the same review all over again. Hell, even The Dark knigth got less positive reviews, even The Dark Knight got more mixed receptions, even The Dark Knight got more flaws pointed out.
There's a flip side to this coin too by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:45:28 PM
The people who have decided to love this movie are loving it no matter what, regardless. See? This cut both ways. So, i rather not get too confortable with this stupid notuion of "haters hate this just because" bullshit. It cuts both ways, brothers.
In fac,t if anything... by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:48:54 PM
... there has been far demostrations of pure love for this movie before it was even released and from people who had not yet seen it, then the so-called "hate". So, please, let's not go this tired way. Of cours,e if i end up hating this movie, and i'll say it here, nobody will believe that will be a genuine opinion of mine because, like, i "wanted to hate it!!". Bullshit.
It's good, but not as good as it's hyped. by Azlam Orlandu	May 8th, 2009 03:49:14 PM
I just can't accept Pine as Kirk. I don't dislike him, in fact he's quite entertaining in the film, but he needed to interject just a tad more Shatner for my taste. I know there's a fear of him going overboard and perhaps this is my problem because of my love for Shat, but it was an issue for me.
See, that's what I'm talking about. by rev_skarekroe	May 8th, 2009 03:58:24 PM
Nobody's selling out. They just all LIKE THE MOVIE. Sheesh.
And i kinda liked Cloverfield by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:58:32 PM
That's kinda Jay Jay's movie too, isn't it? At least that's how he sold it, as his creation or whatever. So there.
Memo From Harry to all AICN staff writers by Glory_Fades_ImMaxFischer	May 8th, 2009 03:58:56 PM
"Ok team..we have alot riding on this..after that wolverine embarrassment I mainly caused, well me and Moriarty, we really have to pull together tight for JJ here. He gave us toys, and models, and set visits and pictures and let me rub his feet for him a couple times and the studio is paying us ALOT OF MONEY to place those ads on the site. So here's the deal..EVERY story must mention JJ abrams awesomeness, at least 4 times. ABSOLUTELY NO LESS THAN 2. Also I want every review to be plastered with posters and shots from the film..I'm talking chocolate covered pussy juice here people.. ALSO..NO NEGATIVE WORDS WHATSOEVER..just say something like 'but the negatives pale in comparison'..or some stupid shit like that. Everyone got that? Good..I don't want to fuck this up like I did Star Wars..Thanks Team..Harry"
"not as good as it's hyped" by AsimovLives	May 8th, 2009 03:59:57 PM
No shit!! You don't need to watch it to know that! I mean, according to hype around here, it would look this movie would be like 100th better then The Dark Knigth. Yeah, right!!
Glory_Fades_ImMaxFischer by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 04:03:48 PM
FYI - Moriarty doesn't work here anymore.
AsimovLives by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 04:07:33 PM
Wow. Intentionally stubborn till the very end, eh? And it's interesting to note how you use THE DARK KNIGHT as your gold standard for everything. Granted, it's a killer movie. But that film could not have been more hyped nor receive more unanimous acclaim. Even still, it's NOT flawless nor above criticism. But then again, you are in love with Chris Nolan. So there you go.
I agree with you AsimovLives by DOGSOUP	May 8th, 2009 04:08:40 PM
Overkill Kills Anything. This is why radio sucks ass, the same 12 songs over and over. I don't care how good the song is if I hear twice an hour by the fifth hour I want to kill everyone involved with it. I understand that. As for this movie I have no opinion. I haven't seen it yet and until I do I have no real right to an opinion. So I guess all of these reviews that have the exact same beats to them are more entitled to exist then anything I can say about it. In conclusion I did see The Battle for Terra in 3D and I was the only one in the theater. Nobody gives a shit about the plight of the floating sperm people.
AT LEAST I can see why people liked this by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 04:09:58 PM
It's a very likeable film and its so refreshing to see such spirited performances from most of the cast. People who seemed to do their research and homage without commenting on the absurdity of it all. If there was a casting option Abrhams and his casting director would certainly win it. It's just that GOD DAMNED SCRIPT. I'm sorry but I cannot ignore plot holes, many plot hoels in fact, so large that it literally takes zero thought to unravel the entire story. It robs the film of any organic sense and becomes an excuse to get these, admittedly wonderful characters together. Which you know, is ALOT more than we get from most summer fare. But it's not deserving of such effusive praise. But still, Chris Pine, awesome. Im happy this guy is on the scene because there is literally no one carrying that loveable scoundrel card around these days.
Dupont by Jawa 007	May 8th, 2009 04:10:37 PM
is the best reviewer on this site. Vern's great too, but for different reasons.
And I think you've got the hype-thing backwards. by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 04:11:00 PM
There were a TON of people ready, willing and able to sandbag this movie at their first opportunity. Well, judging by the reactions of critics and Talkbackers...it's taken people by surprise. You know what other movie did that? TRANSFORMERS!
IndustryKiller! by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 8th, 2009 04:14:27 PM
Interesting points. If you've read Devin Faraci's review at CHUD (fuck CHUD!), he basically says the same thing about the script. It's an abomination. Yet, Abrams was able to make it work somehow. If that's truly the case, then it's a worthwhile to note his ability to make lemonade out of shite.
You kids are so cute by Scorpio	May 8th, 2009 04:14:47 PM
with all your hate over this film. No, really, it's cute. And it must be a tough job to have to stake out your position on this, of all things, simply because the majority of viewers loved this film. It's cute.
I'll Second That by DOGSOUP	May 8th, 2009 04:16:56 PM
FUCK CHUD! They tried to have user comments for a while and couldn't handle it. PUSSIES!
Asimovlives, I can tell you this by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 04:18:36 PM
And hopefully you can read this and get some entertainment out of the film if you know what you are up against. What people are saying about the cast is true. They are just uniformly good, and moreover, in the scripts ONE triumph, the film lets them be a complete ensemble, everyone getting their moment. It juggles hte characters very very well and this is mostly where all the praise is coming from. Abrhams also colors a very interesting palette, it's a beautiful film and never anything less than completely engrossing to look at and organic. With that said if you arent a fan of Kurtzman and Orci, and what reason minded individual could possibly be, the script is CLASSIC them. It's full of plot holes, more than any recent summer movie I've seen in a long time (like fucking seriously NOTHING about the plot holds up) the dialogue can be painful, PAINFUL, at times (most of the actors are playing it so straight and real or are so in tune with the characters that they gloss over it nicely though), and the themes are so heavy handed that even the most simplistic filmgoer will have no trouble seeing them. Also Kurtzman and Orci hate Spock, or they think he's a boring killjoy because not only is Spock outright emotional, he shows emotion in EVERY SINGLE SCENE. This is not a guy who would ever become Nimoy's Spock, he's a downright rage-a-holic who is constantly battling to keep himself in check. Also Abrhams can't direct action. the camera moves constantly especially in melee combat scenes and makes it Batman Begins incomprehensible.
Terrible by tallsy	May 8th, 2009 04:29:43 PM
This movie didn't condescend to me about "big ideas." I feel cheated. I needed moral posturing. Oh, yes, I also believe there's a conspiracy because the reviews do not match my preconceived beliefs.
Let me just say... by Sithtastic	May 8th, 2009 04:30:11 PM
Nice review Alexdra, all very logical and flowing. I think though that a common thread I'm seeing is criticism of "Nero as plot device" and thus far--changes and all--it's the only thing that gives me pause before seeing this. Other than that, I'm in.
It's true Nice Gaius by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 04:31:20 PM
The film is undeniably likeable without necessarily being good. And I think that has a lot to do with Abrams decisions. And you know what I think we should cut Abrams even more slack because the great tragedy here is the film shot during the writers strike when NOTHING about the script that wasnt improved by the actors could be changed. I would kill to know what this movie would have been if Abrams gave it a script polish.
No, the movie wasn't good. It's cute that so many by Snake Foreskin	May 8th, 2009 04:41:10 PM
on here feel the need to fawn all over it. Have you no frame of reference? Of course you do. Multiple seasons of the TV show and 6 movies. How can you say this Trek movie was fantastic? It rates somewhere between ST 3 and ST5. JJ Abrams' Star Trek was a sloppy, disjointed, largely soulless romp in space. The mere fact that you are defending it so forcefully and arrogantly bespeaks either a lack of taste and judgment or pure stubborness on your part. The story was confusing and purposely upsetting at times. It's Abrams way of letting us know who's in charge. We get it, JJ. You da man now. So destroy Vulcan and 6 billions Vulcans along with it. Pull an Alderaan. People will just have to choke on it. The cinematography was poor, sir. What's "cute" is that some of you dolts are professing it to be brilliant. Really? All those faked lens flares with lights in almost every scene was brilliant? No, it was sophomoric. The scenes were dull. Almost every one. The set design, the costumes, the makeup... little of it managed to inspire awe or feelings of glee. And the audience reacted accordingly. Not one person clapped during or at the end of the movie. And I went to the very first showing yesterday: 7 PM, IMAX. True Trekkie time, right? The music was one-note, unlike Goldsmith and Horner's far superior scores. While it boasted its epic-ness, it lacked any subtlety or finesse - something both Horner and Goldsmith achieved beautifully. It made Alexander Courage's theme sound positively brilliant by comparison. The acting was a poor substitute for the brilliantly portrayed characters of the original cast. The chemistry was simply missing, once again, from a new Star Trek cast. No subsequent cast has been equal to the original cast, and frankly it seems doubtful this group of actors will be either. Urban's McCoy wasn't spot-on as some have claimed. He wasn't nearly intense and crotchety enough. Sylar, I mean Spock, was but a poor imitation of Nimoy's legendary rendition. Chris Pine as Kirk was grating for most of the movie. He was unlikable and hard to watch due to his horrible skin and JJ Abrams' penchant for close-ups. Really, HD IMAX is not a good thing for that Pine kid. It just shows he HAS no "good side". Eric Bana was wasted. His character was a mess and didn't even rate proper exposition. Where the hell was he for 25 years? He was an afterthought, like much of Abrams' production. Scotty, anyone? No, there are myriad reasons for Trek fans to be disappointed by Abrams' foray into Trekdom. Much like Singer's puzzling take on Superman. Well, with any luck Abrams won't decide to make a sequel. Or if he does, let's just hope he doesn't decide to reveal that James T. Kirk is really a Klingon. Or gay. Or worse, a gay Klingon.
I was waiting for Spock to slice into Kirk's skull... by Snake Foreskin	May 8th, 2009 04:45:55 PM
or throw him across the bridge with a wave of his hand. He was absolutely no different in this movie than when he is playing Sylar. Okay, except his eyebrows are more controlled. Freaking caterpillars, those.
I thought Pine's huge facial mole was going to be by Snake Foreskin	May 8th, 2009 04:47:34 PM
a singularity that swallowed up Nero's ship. Really. I thought that was Abrams' plan all along. Get Kirk onboard the enemy vessel and then let the mole devour the whole damn thing.
Smells like Paramount has a flop. by kabong	May 8th, 2009 04:48:33 PM
$ 7 million for Thursday night. They won't get 80 mill for the whole weekend. She's going down, Jim. Engage.
For a movie with an almost $200 million production budget by Snake Foreskin	May 8th, 2009 04:53:27 PM
it sure as hell didn't show up onscreen. Yet another reason the original films are far superior. They worked off meager budgets and achieved a far greater level of emotional impact. More bang for your buck, if you will. Star Trek movies haven't earned much bank as of late. Apparently Paramount and Abrams' answer was to just throw money at the franchise. Well, much like the Obama administration and Congress need to learn, there's more to problem solving than spending huge piles of money. Quantity does not necessarily equal quality. I will say one thing: This Star Trek movie gives me a better appreciation for the original movies. Especially Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
Seriously? Only $7 million? My theater was damn full by Snake Foreskin	May 8th, 2009 04:55:25 PM
And these were $13.50 IMAX tickets. And 3 or more showings on multiple screens. How is it possible to only get $7 million? That just can't be right.
Im surprised to see the reactions so decidedly mixed by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 05:00:57 PM
I thought it would have been a slam dunk in favor of this film. It's by no means great due to Kurtzman & Orci but its better than a lot of what we get. Which I don't mean as a defense as much as a point of fact, because if WOlverine, which was, and Im not being hyperbolic here, nigh UNWATCHABLE, and that still managed to attract people, I thought this would for sure. I mean this is a website where people routinely defend crap like Transformers. Hmmmm.
by Bladernner79	May 8th, 2009 05:03:26 PM
whats movie do you fucking loser's like? must be terrible to have a life like that. im sure most of you faggot's think serenity is a good movie and joss whedon is god.
Bitch, moan, whine, blah blah blah by seagrass	May 8th, 2009 05:20:04 PM
God, I hate fanboys. Get out of the theater and go back to your momma's tit. It's a solid, solid flick.
$7 million for Thursday by kabong	May 8th, 2009 05:22:44 PM
http://tinyurl.com/d2qboj
This Movie Is Horrible!!! Serenity Is A Much Better Film by Media Messiah	May 8th, 2009 05:27:52 PM
There is nothing charming about this movie, nothing at all. The film is slow moving...and there is nothing weighty about it, no substance??? They turn a planet into a black hole with 6 billon people on it, and you feel nothing emotionally? However, when Princess Leia's planet was blown up in Star Wars, you felt a sense of awe and sadness...and we didn't even know Princess Leia yet as a character? When Star Wars first debuted, we were just getting acquainted with Leia, but we felt her horror, and her people scream out in pain and in voice through the force, however---we have known Spock, and his parents for years, the lore is substantial--and we have come to know and love the Vulcan people, and when Vulcan is destroyed, you are made to feel nothing? Let's look at a similar event in another movie to better examine my point, and that film would be Superman. When Kal-El (Superman) lost his planet in the opening scene of the original Superman, you felt it. You felt the horror and the pain of the dying Krytonian race, and the violent separation of a family. Somehow Richard Donner, within the first 10 minutes of the movie, was able to establish great empathy for these people...and George Lucas delivered similar results in the original Star Wars from early on in the epic, perhaps 45 minutes into the film...but here, in the new Star Trek, you felt much of nothing, there was no real sense of empathy...and this is just one of the problems for this movie. I think of Firefly, a show that was only on the air for about 11 episodes, and a additional two having gone unaired, episodes which later, fortunately for the fans of the show, appeared on the subsequent DVD Box Set release--and when I ponder that show, I think how rich its lore is, a lore that was mined for story gold in the film version of Firefly, which was dubbed Serenity. Serenity towers over the new Trek film with a smart economcally driven and emotional script which is about something of major import. It is about one's freedom of will, freedom of mind, and freedom of spirit, and the willingness to live and or die for it, to protect and guarantee its continuance. Serenty had a voice, a well informed opinion, a mission statement that said to its audience, "Stand for something, or fall for nothing"...at least, with regard to the latter, nothing that you can use, at the hands of others, who would scheme to control you for their own devices. This new Trek, unlike Serenity, has no voice, we were just delivered an uninteresting stock villain with a ridiculous motive for mass holocaust...and a small crew willing to follow a mad, and maddening fool? Serenity, however gave us a smart villain and an equally smart hero, and when the two square off in battle, their tactical brilliance as displayed on screen, serves to "wow" the audience, but in the neo Star Trek...Kirk does not prove himself as a tactical genius, nor does his enemy? Kirk stumbles into a position of prominence thanks to his cheating, but not as a smart cheat, just as an average cheat, one who got caught. Nothing special is shown that informs you, save for character references, that this guy should be in command of anything short of a donut, and certainly not a star ship, and yet, he is instantly thrust into the role of first officer aboard the Enterprise by Captain Christopher Pike? Sure young Kirk warned of an attack in advance, but that would not logically (ironic isn't it?) net you the position of first officer aboard a vessel during a battle engagement, at least, not in the fashion i was presented? Story wise, that was a cheat, like much of this movie (more irony, speaking of cheating...and lack of logic)? Why didn't the Federation, young Kirk, and or Spock of the future...and Spock of the past, and crew...just time travel to the past and undo Nero's attacks? Why didn't they travel to Nero's future to kill or arrest him and his crew before they could wreak havoc and destroy Vulcan? And why didn't they simply go to the future and save Romulas before its destruction, or prevent future Spock from creating the black hole device, in the first place...all in order to protect and fix the time-line? Time travel is the norm in the original Star Trek TV series as well as subsequent Star Trek series...and in several Trek movies...thusly, it makes no sense that time travel was not used to affect repairs to the original time-line??? This fact fully negates the logic of the entire storyline of the film, and exposes it as nothing but bad writing, from beginning to end. There are so many holes in this film, and its plotline, that even swiss cheese would be proud! So how is it that Joss Whedon's Serenity, knew how to touch its audience emotionally, and effectively, and JJ Abram's missed the boat entirely here with the new Star Trek? Well, for starters, JJ Abrams doesn't like Star Trek, a fact that he has openly admitted to the press...and it shows dramatically. This guy is well out of his element here as he lacks understanding of story within this genre. And the writers of the new Trek clearly don't understand science fiction as well, save for serving us cliched scenes from much, much better films...and tv shows in the genre. If they had been well versed in science fiction and fantasy, they would not have made so many mistakes in dealing with the time travel issues, and that goes directly to their collective incompetence. In regard to tone, the film feels like a mesh-mash of Star Trek: Insurrection, Star Trek: Nemesis, and to a lesser degree, Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan. It also feels very long, and often stalls with long boring stetches that fail to effectively advance the film. You want to root for these characters, but there is little to root for as you sense that this film is from a connect the dots script...and written by the numbers. It's all formula, no heart, all forced heroism, but nothing that feels authentic? Don't believe the phony reviews that are praising this film, as they are false. I would be interested in seeing what the Saturday box office numbers are for the new Trek, as I suspect that they will not improve on the Friday numbers of the movie...and should that occur, that will inform us that word of mouth has hit this film in form of a brewing backlash, as Saturday box office numbers should always inprove on Friday opening numbers. That said, I also suspect that this film will tank in its 2nd and 3rd weekend, as fans fail to come back for repeat viewings of the film...and fail to recommend it to their acquaintences, loved ones, and strangers, alike. This film will make money, yes, but it does not deserve to live long...or prosper--and hopefully it won't, or we will receive more of the same--brainless simpleton trash.
So can anyone explain how Old Spock miscalculated... by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 05:32:14 PM
the whole supernova thing? First of all it's a supernova, it takes like, literally a billion years of slow build up to occur. You think that problem would have been taken care of on Romulus as soon as limitless space travel was discovered. But I digress. What I gathered was that Spock is put in charge of launching the red matter to build a black hole that would suck in the supernova from inside out, thus saving Romulus. As Spock is explaining this it is showing him with the Romulans getting on the ship and going off to do just that, then the next thing you know Romulus is destroyed by the fucking supernova Spock just took off presumably to take care of immediately. How the hell did the Supernova hit Romulus before Spock got to it with the red matter? Did he like take a fucking detour to Starbucks? This is the event the ENTIRE FILM hinges around so ignoring it as a plot hole is totally impossible.
You guys are right about Karl Urban by jawsfan	May 8th, 2009 05:34:41 PM
His take on Bones is perfect!! The bit at the beginning where the Kelvin crew is wheeling out Papa Kirk's pregnant wife just as she is giving birth to J.T., all while Daddy is on a suicide mission... lots of lovey-dovey "I love you"s being exchanged.... Can't SOMEONE in Hollywood find a way to AVOID this oft-used cliche???
Oh yah, the Firefly/Whedon/Serenity thing... by Scorpio	May 8th, 2009 05:41:06 PM
That's cute too. It was so good the first time, it was definitely worth re-posting. Fortunately, the haters have their Transformers and Terminator sequels to look forward to. I bet those stories will be excellent. Sadly, though, the Browncoats have nothing to which to look forward. Their only hope is to smash their heads repeatedly into a wall and induce amnesia so they can re-live those glorious 13 episodes again and again!
IndustryKiller! by genrefanboy	May 8th, 2009 05:54:44 PM
Yeah I can explain it!! The screenplay is shockingly poor and logic gaps like this are why it makes no sense. You know Spock Prime must really be an OAP by now as he not only botched that up but would not use his time travel forumla from ST4 to save his home planet & Mother yet he was fine with saving Earth & the Whales. Makes perfect sense I suppose to the level of audience this film is aimed at.....
Media Messiah by genrefanboy	May 8th, 2009 05:58:31 PM
Much of what you say is right on the money. But Paramount have done such a strong job on the marketing & bribery for phony reviews they will get a reasonable opening then watch it hopefully drop off very quickly next week and do a Watchmen. I'm shellshocked at how poor this movie is and even now how many people are saying it's great. Perhaps IQ's dropped overnight or something!!!
Abrams is a douche. But Khan of Borg for a sequel. by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 06:00:41 PM
Carry on the Enterprise story of then they found the Borg on Earth from First Contact. Since then, the Borg have been on route to Earth. They discover Khan on the Botany Bay. When assimilated, Khan & his group add their genetically modified superhuman substance to the Borg. Have this new Borg, wipe out the Federation and assimilate Earth. Leaving the Enterprise as flagship of a rag-tag fleet.
GenreFanboy: Thank You. Most People Are Sheep by Media Messiah	May 8th, 2009 06:07:53 PM
They eagerly buy into fads...and fail to think for themselves. I have loved my share of Trek through the years, and blasted it when it was bad...and this is a time to blast it, as this is not a good movie. Seriously, I want my money back...and the 2 hours of my life which I lost while watching it.
Media Messiah by genrefanboy	May 8th, 2009 06:14:12 PM
I hear you man but they have our money already. Least I could do is return the favour and let people on here & many other sites know that its a bogus con of a movie!! Even Berman would never have stooped this low (and I hated a lot of what he did but he still knew what not to mess with). Do you think the mainstream audiences outside of the internet crowd are dumb enough to embrace this movie?? (I hope not otherwise they will spoon feed us more of this trash!!).
Media Mess by Spamgelus	May 8th, 2009 06:37:22 PM
So, if I liked this movie, I'm a sheep? Or is it that if I have a different opinion than you I'm a sheep?
Media Messiah is a FUCKING PLANT! by Sidius	May 8th, 2009 06:41:03 PM
NM
Wow are you all a whiney lot. by JediWuddayaknow	May 8th, 2009 06:47:04 PM
So much venomous hate toward a MOVIE? Je-sus. Someone here mentioned that the Talkbacks are what this site is about, and it's really a shame that that's true. It's a bunch of overblown ego's by everyone who thinks they're an expert shouting their opinions as if they're god and shooting down and then insulting incessantly anyone who dare oppose them. The internet is full of ass holes, but this seems to breed the largest amount of them. Nothing worse than a filmmaker who could never make it pushing his or her insecurities on the more talented. The movie is fun, at the least, but most of you people going off so angrily and violently really just come off as totally pathetic and unable to enjoy anything. Seriously, people here have the nerve to critique a review? Jesus, pot calling the kettle black. And any time the reviewer has a positive opinion of a movie they must be "sucking (insert name here)'s cock"? Christ, grow up you self absorbed know-it-all assholes.
Serenity by Spamgelus	May 8th, 2009 06:48:25 PM
...and why are people STILL whining about Serenity? Look, I think Firefly was probably the best show to ever hit television. Ever. I think Whedon's got more talent in his fingernails than most writer/directors have in their entire bodies. But let's face it, the movie was about half as exciting as the best episode, and it treated half of the core characters like glorified extras. And why even compare it to Trek? Because it's SPACE? WOW! YOU MADE THE CONNECTION! You are my new hero, you leaf on the wind, you.
JediWuddayaknow... by Spamgelus	May 8th, 2009 06:50:40 PM
I think I love you. I mean, internet...al...ly...
Spamgelus by JediWuddayaknow	May 8th, 2009 06:50:48 PM
I would only compare it to Serenity in the space battles. The effects were reminiscent.
Look! by doubleARon	May 8th, 2009 06:51:19 PM
Haters on AICN! SHOCKING! My wife and I were extremely entertained. Script was bad? Dialogue is always subjective and might have an issue here and there, the story was pretty simple, but given the task at hand the script was a minor miracle, imo. I really want more of these movies with this cast and new timeline immediately. I did read the coincidence as a sort of fate, or at least the theory of time that says that events tend to settle back into their grooves when they've been disrupted (rather than cause giant change.) The writers had Spock call it out on purpose when he asked "How did you find me?" They wanted the audience to think about it. Just sayin'
Loved nearly everything about this movie... by Hugh G Rekshun	May 8th, 2009 06:58:49 PM
...except 2 things: 1) The music was FUCKING HORRIBLE! 2) Some of the scenes and dialogue seemed just a bit too contemporary.
No one mentions how horrid Nimoy's voice over was.... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	May 8th, 2009 07:05:55 PM
...during the time travel explanation scene. It sounded like a fucking temp track. Why was he so jolly sounding? And agreed. Serenity is a far better film.
Mr. Nice Gaius -- glad to see you still pop up to suck cock... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	May 8th, 2009 07:08:25 PM
...now and then. You are AICN'S JackNance. A spineless cheerleader.
No, the script is not "subjectively" bad by IndustryKiller!	May 8th, 2009 07:12:30 PM
It's fucking OBJECTIVELY terrible. I just explained in my last post how the plot makes ZERO sense. It's an inarguable plot hole that renders the entire plot bullshit. Want another one? Nero supposedly waited outside the black hole for Spock to come through for 25 years. Now this is the same black hole that Nero just tore a federation ship apart outside of. So you are telling me that a ship that just destroyed, unprovoked, a federation ship sat outside of a spontaneous black hole, a universal phenomenon if there ever was one, for 25 YEARS and the federation NEVER did anything about it? They never, in 25 years, investigated a foreign marauding ship??? NOTHING about the plot makes any sense. I repeat, this is a fact, not conjecture. If you can ignore it fine, but dont pretend it isnt there.
DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD by genrefanboy	May 8th, 2009 07:15:07 PM
Because Nimoy is getting old and his voice is breaking up. Plus he wears a hearing aid nowadays. Check out the Bluray of him on the new ST1-6 set where he talks with Shatner, Stewart, Frakes & Godlberg about the ST movies. It was filmed last year but Nimoy looks like he is getting really old & frail.
Contemporary? by JediWuddayaknow	May 8th, 2009 07:18:09 PM
Wasn't that kind of the problem with Star Trek? That it wasn't contemporary enough? The trekkies seem to love that elevated style of speech they always used like theater people love shakespeare, regardless of the fact that most people don't relate well to it. It sounds pretentious. There are few Star Trek movies I've enjoyed, the most being First Contact, followed by Wrath of Khan, which was just under the too cheesy bar for me until the famous Shatner yelling scene. Everything else has been goofy, boring, or just plain horrible (Star Trek V) in my opinion. My biggest gripe with this movie was that the little sidekick really didn't add much to the proceedings and that lens flare thing. Once or twice is fine, but it seemed like the special effect dept just figured out how to do it and wanted it in every shot. To make someone like me, who is in no way a Star Trek fan enjoy a Star Trek movie is something. I think making things more contemporary and relatable than the nigh perfect society where the only time we see a character drunk it has hilarious results (Cochrane?) helps the movie. It's eliciting the response I really was hoping it would. It's pissing off the uber nerds that EVERYONE else seems to be liking it, so they can sit on their pedestals and look down on them saying "Well, it's dumbed down for the mouth breathers!" so they can pretend they're somehow enlightened. I love that there are so many people who are upset about this movie, and I hope it continues to do well and your little worlds are just ruined by a Star Trek even non-geeks can appreciate.
Abrams Star Trek is more fun in the Russian CamRip by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 07:43:52 PM
Also it would be funny if they made Chekov speak english in the leaked cam-rip.
LordVonPS3 - Couldn't agree more. by KnowItAllFromCali	May 8th, 2009 07:47:09 PM
The plot holes are hard to ignore and how Kirk made captain was just plain jarring (and nuts!). However, have to point out that STII - the fan favorite and the only Trek movie I REALLY liked - did have a pretty jarring plot hole of its own. Are you telling me that the captain and chief science officer of a Star Fleet science vessel could beam down to the wrong planet because they didn't know that another one in the system had exploded!? Seriously!!!?
overrated : the black holes are literally in the script by lastchimp	May 8th, 2009 07:47:30 PM
(spoiler) ok: watchable, enjoyable character, humor but damn... the story is incredibly bad (almost worst than my english) a simple miner become totally berserk and want to destroy 2 planets because... because ONE man, spock, tried to save his planet but failed Super grudge man... the guy who will destroy a world if a guy from it is not good enough at helping him even for me, a french (so born ungrateful and arrogant) this Nero is simply the worst person in the universe or the dumbest "arrrg! Spock failed to save my planet and all the people i love died... aaarg! if only we can go back in time or something like that" wait... nero he's now in the past, he's got "red matter" he can save his own planet or make his people evacuate long before the disaster happen but no it make more sense for him to... destroy the core worlds of the federation because a former member of it will not be able to save his planet 150 year later (suck on that grand Moff Tarkin) sure after that, the coincidence "kirk meet old spock and they meet scotty" is easy to swallow ^^
The plot of Abrams Star Trek is a total mess & clunky. by scriptgirl_nipples	May 8th, 2009 07:54:35 PM

Ms. DuPont by amadeus781	May 8th, 2009 08:19:11 PM
Another great review. Love you and love your work!
lastchimp...yeah, man... by StarWarsRedux	May 8th, 2009 08:19:24 PM
Why would Nero want revenge for something that hasn't even happened yet? He's just travelled through time! He can try preventing it from ever happening in the first place! Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, this movie's plot has more holes in it than a cheese grater from Switzerland. And yet the accolades just keep on comin'...
MrGeyser enjoyed da movie! by Sal_Bando	May 8th, 2009 08:43:49 PM
Wondering where your partner in Grime, The PaZoozoo hath hidden hisself. He must on his way to the Svedish Meatballs(TM) convention or something-- Not much of a TrekaZoid here myself, but sure I'll check this out. Even w/ the gaping plotholes Akiva here keeps yappin' about. Gimme a break. It's a fuckin' Sci-Fi flick, it's GONNA have huge holes in it ala Megan Fox in 7 years, okay-? comes w/ the territory.
Messiah and genrefanboy Get a room! Some thought on the movie.. by TallScott	May 8th, 2009 09:02:00 PM
Geeze you two act like gay lovers who just walked out of a bad production of Cats! Ok that was my snark of the day. Sorry guys could not resist. Anyway I said id respond to your post so I will. You love serenity. Hey so did I. I still harbor a big time grudge against Fox for canceling firefly. But lets face facts the movie was the TV show with a larger special effects budget. Not saying it was a bad movie. But it catered to only the ones who watched the show as well. Really didnt let anyone who was not a fan in. And also killing off Book and Wash put a big time sour taste in my mouth. It really didnt lend the chance for a sequel. The new Star Trek movie was MUCH better then Serenity. It lets new fans in and gives old fans much meat to chew on. It accomplishes what it sets out to do and is an entertaining 2 hour film that lays the foundation to a whole new Trek universe without some of the barnacles that have attached itself to the Enterprise's hull. They kinda painted themselves in a corner with the whole peace all over the universe and seen everything done everything thing. If anything utopia is boring. This one brings back the stakes are high and the universe is a very scary place vibe. And I liked that it was kinda goofy. One thing that will kill a Trek dead in the water is when it loses it seance of humor and takes itself too seriously. I hope this new universe never gets bogged down in being a killjoy. Im sorry you guys didnt like it. Im getting the idea that some people hate that the new Star Trek is universally appealing. That something thats just theirs and special to few will be now loved by the unwashed masses. Saw the same type of thing when Lord of the Rings came out. Id think any Star Trek fan would be stoked that the movie did so well with critics and young audiences and brought in millions of new fans. I didnt mind that it was a young cast hey at least they wont be looking like a bunch of old guys by the time the sixth movie comes out like in ST6. ( before you flame I LOVED VI but comon..the wrinkles were there ) Well there you go Im sorry that you and some of the other didnt like the movie even if you didnt it would be a shame to call yourself a trek fan and not be happy about the glowing reviews new fans. If thats the case just stop now..and never say your a fan of Star Trek agian. Just think Lucas loves you and stick with Star Wars. Oh and Messiah I saw how you were waxing poetic over a New hope..You are in total denial if you overlook the flaws in that movie.
All the haters by shran	May 8th, 2009 09:24:13 PM
sure do exert a lot of energy trying to take the legs out from under this movie. To what end? Your opinions don't make a difference to the movie-going public. And you won't change the minds of those of us who liked it. Are you all plants from compeing studios?
Your inarticulate passion has inspired me, chimpy by Rocco Curioso	May 8th, 2009 09:32:34 PM
Saw this movie last night in IMAX Digital. Decent FX, some interesting character interpretation(particularly the guy who played McCoy), enough humor in the right places... but fuckit if the plot wasn't as substantial as cotton candy. It's one thing to take liberties with established Star Trek canon; people were expecting as much (as a non-Trekkie, I could've cared less). It's another thing to have the machinations of the entire plot dumped in your lap during a brief bit of exposition from elderly Spock. Not only is it lazy screenwriting, it's an insult to the audience. Added to which, the entire tone of the movie was borderline silly. One got the sense that nothing of importance was at stake.
@ KnowItAllFromCali by LordVonPS3	May 8th, 2009 09:37:32 PM
That one from ST2 I could make up an excuse for? For example: Ceti Alpha 6's original orbit could have been known and expected to be out of sensor range - perhaps on the other side of the Sun from Ceti Alpha 5 as the Reliant entered the system. Khan said that Ceti Alpha 5 was knocked into a similar orbit as Ceti Alpha 6 when Ceti Alpha 6 exploded, so it stands to reason that the ships computer could have interpreted the planet to be Ceti Alpha 6 given that ecologically the planet was now barren (as Ceti Alpha 6 would have been). If the computer says it is Ceti Alpha 6 and it looks like Ceti Alpha 6, maybe it is Ceti Alpha 6? Then again... Anyway, I am not here to quibble over ST2 plot holes. Wrath of Khan was (and still is) a great movie. Star Trek (2009) is not - in my opinion. On the topic of plot holes... The way I see it is you are on the other side of the street with an empty mini gun. I am unarmed, but clearly about to be entertained. Choose an option... 1. Point the gun at me & hope I'm too scared to notice it's empty. 2. Point at a nearby ammo belt & expect me to see reason. 3. Make an effort to grab the ammo belt, load up and start shooting. Show me the pain! --------------- If you chose Options 2 or 3, you won this time. If you chose Option 1, you probably liked Star Trek (2009).
Bad Plot is the least of our problems. by eyeofoden	May 8th, 2009 09:46:36 PM
Someone should get some of this "red matter", go back in time before good old JJ had time to create such a Swiss cheese, homage to Star wars botch of a script, smack him in the face and wright a good one. First off, the opening scene was pretty cool I do have to admit, but the odds of the time rip appearing at the same point in time when the kelvin was orbiting a sun (what sun was that by the way?) and after destroying (oh yeah that,s right the Romulan ship didn't destroy the kelvin did it, it wasted all of those other more advanced ships 25 some odd years in the future pretty nonchalantly but it couldn't even destroy the wee old little ship kelvin) and then wait there for over twenty years or so doing what? twiddling there thumbs? come on. I don,t mind the enterprise being constructed on earth, but if your going to have it in a "ship fleet yard" at least have some other ships being built along with it, have you ever seen a naval dry dock JJ? and in Iowa? come on. okay, how come the Romulan drilling ship and Spock,s little hot rod could go through the rift in space (without any of the energy from the sun going supernova getting through by the way) and come out at some other time, but when Vulcan is pulled into it, it,s destroyed and not just delivered to another time? Speaking of time (and the lack of understanding on JJ,s part) the whole mind meld sequence where Spock explains his plight DO,S NOT MAKE SENSE AT ALL. Romulus being destroyed and Spock not being able to get there in time, Spock dropping the "red matter" anyway just for the Hell of it and Nero being around there just at the right time to get pulled in as well. Vulcan dos not have any moons and there are not any other planets that close by to view the demise there of, come on really? What was with Ohura being somewhat of a whore and all? and the thing with her and Spock? you,v got to be kidding me. Does anyone else feel that the humor was a little too Michael bayish? Kirk with blown up swollen hands? Montgomery acting like a git and not the awesome raunchy Scot engineer that we all know and love. Coy witty comedy in a good action film such as Iron Man works, slap shtick in an action film never can and never will. Okay, what,s the point in having all of this money to put into a movie and spending a great deal of it filming in a beer brewery? I mean I,m all for the whole "nuts and bolts look" but we never even get to see the hallway of warp cores. it just looks like they took a couple of props and set them up around distillers and drainage caps, come on guys really? The ship being pulled apart by the rift, need I say more? Why let someone who dos not even like Star Trek make a Star trek film? I think they did it for spite to degrade the trek universe, I mean JJ did say that he likes Star wars far more after all. maybe it,s his way of getting the ultimate stab in on us Trek fans for liking a better medium. I mean it,s not all gloom and doom and there are some pretty cool moments, but the inconsistencies in the script and the teenager/young adult centered viewing basis are more then enough to make most of your Star trek fans pretty outraged. We all know who they should have gotten to write the scrip and direct this film, Ronald D Moor can I say Battle Star Galactica anyone? Gene would have never let this abomination get past a rough draft, truly a sad day for the federation :(
by TallScott	May 8th, 2009 10:03:58 PM

thank for your "chimp : human" translation Rocco ;) by lastchimp	May 8th, 2009 10:11:04 PM
in fact... the plot could be better by being dumber without changing anything. only the explanation from old spock to the young kirk. If Nero is simply a "very bad guy" (old school megalomaniac, emperor Ming's style) who go back in time to erase the federation from the begining. and he is followed by an old spock trying to stop him. Than the story make more sense... (only stealing from terminator 1) i'm not a trek fan and it's still an enjoyable movie but JJ look like someone who trying to be "smart" but alway fail if you use the routine "the bad guy by circumstance and not really by choice and natural evilness" than you have to make the circumstances a bit... well logical, time travel or not
It's Star Trek for Joe Sixpack by MCVamp	May 9th, 2009 12:12:53 AM
Entertaining fluff. The trilogy will make millions. But then...where do you go from there? In one fell swoop "Star Trek" becomes nothing more than popcorn summer blockbuster. It's nothing more than a better-executed "Lost in Space" remake. This is a remake, no matter how it tries to tie into "actual" Trek continuity by (SPOILER) stranding Old Spock in the altered past (although of all the possible fates for Spock, why not this one?) Gene Rodenberry's STAR TREK is now officially dead. Which might be fine, because so few people knew how to effectively work within that continuity. However, what we have here isn't a STAR TREK revival. It's a temporary solution to a dying franchise that will sputter again when they run out of sequels. What would be next, a rebooted TNG in the same continuity with "Old Data" coming back in time to make sure Jean-Luc Picard joins Starfleet instead of staying in the wine business? I liked it, it was a fun movie, but it was not thought-provoking, which was the original intent of the concept. If the sequel is just another slam-bang FX extravaganza, STAR TREK will fizzle out much like the Matrix did. But other than that good movie (where did Giachinno lift that main theme from though? I KNOW I've heard something like it before and all that guy does is re-work other people's stuff into catchy themes.)
Re: characters... by MCVamp	May 9th, 2009 12:20:39 AM
Pine as Kirk was good, the voice lacked a commanding tone. Ditto Quinto. Pegg was near-perfect, a little clowny. Sulu and Chekov could use some work. Zoe Saldana's Uhura was propped up with little to do except make witty remarks and fawn over Spock--the romance was a bit too contrived (shades of BSG in my book.) Pike was good, Nero was...well, whatever. Nimoy didn't even seem like he was playing Spock, it felt like Leonard Nimoy playing Leonard Nimoy doing Spock dialogue. Karl Urban...for half of his screen time he was awesome. The other half you could feel his forced lines and phony accent in the back of your neck. Not that anyone cares what I think...
"It's Star Trek for Joe Sixpack" by JediWuddayaknow	May 9th, 2009 12:24:44 AM
As opposed to what? Star Trek for Dilbert Paste-eater and his perpetual virginity living in his mom's basement?
JediWuddyaknow... by MCVamp	May 9th, 2009 12:32:54 AM
Actually, yeah.
nonce nts by The Dark Shite	May 9th, 2009 01:06:04 AM
I did "pick something with better teeth", as you put it. For example, I've been calling you nonce nts the whole time. Look up British slang-Nonce in the thesaurus. It isn't nice. & don't call me son, unless you like the taste of boot.
The Dark Shite by JediWuddayaknow	May 9th, 2009 01:28:49 AM
Did you REALLY just threaten someone over the INTERNET?
Maybe. by The Dark Shite	May 9th, 2009 01:37:13 AM
I'd literally just woken up with the hangover from hell. Oh well.
I'm A Plant For Who??? by Media Messiah	May 9th, 2009 01:49:58 AM
The truth, that's what? This movie is trash!!!
THE SCORE SUCKED BALLS! by Pixelsmack	May 9th, 2009 03:31:16 AM
Phasers sounded weak too but JJ forgot one of the cast members with that uninspired completely forgetful score. How dare you say it's even close to what Goldsmith and Horner did! Theirs were epic, this was DULL CRAP!
Snake Foreskin and Industrykiller by AsimovLives	May 9th, 2009 03:40:20 AM
I'm affraid you two guys are very very correct about this movie. I have sen it already, and one of the best ways to describe this is to paraquote the ol' Bard: "Much fury signifying nothing".
Ironic that Ebert posted one of the few negative reviews of this by Iblis_mage	May 9th, 2009 04:22:04 AM
For me, Trek passed the tipping point irrevocably into hell back in 1998 when Siskel (then alive) and Ebert reviewed Insurrection. The film actually compelled Ebert to use the words "metagenic radiation" in the course of the discussion, and I've been indifferent to any/all new Trek product (use of the term as intentional as possible) ever since.
Saw it with my 11 and 9 year old boys.. by oldenslow	May 9th, 2009 07:04:53 AM
..they totally geeked out. They weren't worried about all the things we worry about, since they knew nothing of what had come before. They enjoyed the film, just like we did when we first saw Star Wars. As the Penny Arcade guys say: "It's not for you" When we got home, "Generations" was on one of the pay channels. They thought it totally sucked. Tonight we'll watch "Wrath of Khan" on the projector.
yeah that's pretty much the way I saw it too by Maniaq	May 9th, 2009 08:49:51 AM
except the only time(s) I "got a lump in my throat" was when you heard NOTHING in outer space
the star wars analogy is a real stretch by Eyegore	May 9th, 2009 09:33:38 AM
after reading two paragraphs making really wink generalization on how this is just like, or modeled after star wars, I can't take anymore. REVIEW FAIL! I saw the movie. It was great. It wasn't like star wars. Get over it alexandra. You probably think terminator is about star wars too?
It's not for me? by GeorgieBoy	May 9th, 2009 09:38:01 AM
WTF? Who is it for then? People who don't give a crap about Star Trek? Why would they go see it anyway? I think Edward James Olmos created a dangerous precedent when he told fans of the original BSG not to watch the new show. Now you've got people making movies of long running series flipping the bird off to those that kept that series alive long enough to make the new movie/show in the first place! I dunno about you, but I'm getting tired of these Hollywood hacks recycling legendary ideas just to fill their already huge coffers. Damn greedy bastards. Stop stealing the work of others (Roddenberry) for your own ends!!
Patrick Stewart in a leather or leather-esque coat by Jesiah	May 9th, 2009 10:58:26 AM
Never seen insurrection before, but seeing that picture makes me want to give it a shot. And we'll see if this beats wolverine.
DICKBLOOD - How does if feel having my balls... by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2009 12:17:56 PM
...in your mouth? Feels good, don't it? Glad to see that you're still a completely off-base and clueless asshole.
Sal_Bando by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2009 12:20:19 PM
What's up you crazy bastard! Actually, I'm probably going to catch the flick tonight. I was just hashing out the nonsensical theories of AsimovLives (Memories-Of-Murder).
from Variety: by Hercules	May 9th, 2009 01:33:31 PM
Paramount's reboot of the sci-fi classic franchise "Star Trek" had no problem playing beyond its core Trekkie crowd Friday as the pic raked in an estimated $31 million giving the Melrose lot its second highest opening day ever at the box office for a live-action film. tinyurl.com/pozphj
@LordVon by KnowItAllFromCali	May 9th, 2009 01:38:34 PM
Ha ha, dude - I said I agreed with you! However, you're really stretching yourself to fill in STII's plot hole. Are you telling me that Star Fleet computers are that imprecise? The writers could have easily come up with something to explain it, but they didn't - and that's their job. I still love Wrath of Khan. I didn't love Abram's Star Trek, but I was entertained. I actually thought it was brilliant until about half way through and the story started to fall apart. I was really disappointed at how Kirk took command - it made no sense at all!! I actually think you were being a bit generous with your score - I'd give it 3 out of 5 stars - maybe.
Joe Average (the plumber?) Vs. Trekkie Fanboy by KnowItAllFromCali	May 9th, 2009 01:56:08 PM
It's really a silly argument, but then that's what these forums are for. I think the line is a lot fuzzier than some people make it out to be. The way it is being presented by some is that we have to make a choice between satisfying the two groups. I happen to disagree. I'm a pretty big Trek fan and am almost ashamed to say I could spew more than my fair share of obscure Trek trivia. However, I'm not all that concerned with continuity (between the new Trek and old). Star Trek stories have had serious contradictions from the beginning. I like the fact that they are spawning an entirely new Trek universe that leaves it open to interpretation. What I don't like is stories that make no sense. It IS POSSIBLE to make a movie that is just as spectacular and entertaining to the average person, yet weaves a tale that is not so easily broken down by anyone that isn't willing to shut his/her brain off.
kabong by whitty	May 9th, 2009 02:03:08 PM
Flop? The film's doing great in theaters--what are you talking about?
Fun time at the old Bijou. by Sal_Bando	May 9th, 2009 03:48:22 PM
They did a good job w/ Trek. Yes see it. Fuck the haters. I'm more of a Big Robots (hitting Each Other) type fan, and prefer SW to Trek, but c'mon-this is a good movie. You'll prefer seeing it in the theatre too. Iggy all the time travel contrivances and just have fun. Wasn't Spock's little Gyroscope ship cool?
$31 mill? That's all? by StarWarsRedux	May 9th, 2009 04:02:17 PM
Seriously? You're getting excited over that?
Annoying Coincidence, huh? by bitnik1	May 9th, 2009 06:15:46 PM
I was thinking how the Kirk landing near Spock's man-cave and then happening upon Scotty was a little much, but then... How about a rebel blockade runner with a princess onboard smuggling stolen Deathstar plans just happening to come under Star Destroyer attack and having to jettison 2 droids to a planet that just happens to be the boyhood home of the empire's second in command, and who just happens to be her (unknown to them both) dad, AND just happens to be home to her (unknown) brother - AND AND said brother just happens to buy those droids with his stepdad - one of which he has to talk his dad into buying after the first one turns out to have a bad motivator????
Um, bitnik... by KnowItAllFromCali	May 9th, 2009 07:16:44 PM
There's really no logic to your assessment. Putting the words "happen to" in front of something does not automatically mean it's a coincidence. The reason the situation with Kirk and Spock and Scotty is different is that these are three characters that we know met under one set of circumstances and in this alternate timeline, they "just happen" to meet again under a different set of circumstances in a vast universe. It's more than just a little improbable. But yes, Star Wars has its share of ridiculous coincidences - Darth Vader built C3PO as a child!? Really!?
@ KnowItAllFromCali by LordVonPS3	May 9th, 2009 08:34:55 PM
Ha ha. Well, my Ceti Alpha 5 / 6 example was just an example. When you ask whether I think the computers are "that imprecise"? I think you should remember that the computer data used during "Wrath of Khan" is based on ST:TOS recordings / data (it's not ST:TNG)! From a planetary physics perspective, I wouldn't expect the computer data to be that much better than some souped up version of Stellarium or Starry Night Pro. i.e. Map the planets, their sizes, their orbit's, the sun's brightness, the solar system's position and movement vectors in the galaxy it is in, etc. When flying into the solar system, the Reliant's computer would have loaded up TOS data and overlaid that against its sensor logs. The Reliant would have detected Ceti Alpha 5 in Ceti Alpha 6's place and thus mislabeled the planet Ceti Alpha 6. If Ceti Alpha 5 was originally in an orbit where it would have been out of sensor range, then everything works out quite nicely... Do also remember - no ship from Star fleet visited that system for a decade or two. The Reliant's computer only had old data to go on. So, are you buying it? Ha ha.
@ KnowItAllFromCali by LordVonPS3	May 9th, 2009 08:44:03 PM
3/5 is a fair score and you're right - I was actually feeling generous! I'm thinking maybe a second showing on the small screen may prove a little better. Kudos to everyone who pointed out more JJ-shake-o-vision (again)!
I'm SURPRISED at how many pirated leaks are around. by scriptgirl_nipples	May 9th, 2009 10:53:55 PM
Cam versions appeared within a day. TS versions 2 days.
well noncents... by lastchimp	May 10th, 2009 04:52:51 AM
"if you are a humain being that is capable of empathy" I dont think the movie make you feel good... several billion people die in the middle of the story but somehow it's a happy ending because 1 guy become the capitain. at the end no one give a shit about vulcan even old spock : the important thing is that young him and kirk become buddy.
Um, cali... by bitnik1	May 10th, 2009 09:04:23 AM
No logic you say? Throw me a bone, here...the only difference between the ice planet hooha in the current movie and EP4's beginning is that we are talking alternate reality in the former. The situations are very similar otherwise - 3 characters (actually 4 if you count Threepio and Artoo) in a ship under duress converging in space and story line by accident (and jettisoned spacepod) who have a huge tangled backstory together. And from Webster's - coincidence = "the occurrence of events or circumstances that happen at the same time by accident but seem to have some connection ; also : any of these occurrences" I was tired and just using "happen to" as a rhetorical device. :>
Star Trek geting smoked by Wolverine by tailhook	May 10th, 2009 02:00:56 PM
Anybody see the box office? Ouch. Another AICN baby gets clocked by Fox.
So So by 2LeggedFreak	May 10th, 2009 02:04:23 PM
Just watched it and was entertained for a couple of hours (slightly bored around the exposition segment.) Thought the villain, as in a couple of previous ST films was a little ho hum and, if even if you didn't care about continuity with original ST there didn't seem a lot of logic in Old Spock looking to ensure Kirk got the captains chair as that was how things "should be" when there was already a Vulcan sized hole in the space time continuum - hated how this was just a special effect with no impact - billions of Vulcans have died. Kirk got his cataincy by default- one minute he's a dick head cadet , the next he's Catain--- very very lazy/ Only redeeming factor was the performances.
NB by 2LeggedFreak	May 10th, 2009 03:28:20 PM
I am not sure what is worse, the Generations story that saw mega hero Kirk simply fall off a bridge and die or the Star Trek story that shows a doddery incompetent Spock who mis-times a Super Nova then goes back in time and delivers a world destroying weapon to a nutty Rumulan and then sits by in a cave waiting for ? Where are the time police when you need them.
NB2 by 2LeggedFreak	May 10th, 2009 03:58:33 PM
Also gotta love the flippant murder of Nero at the end when he was already beaten - condoned and encouraged by Spock - that didn't feel very Trekky !
Nero's death by Maniaq	May 10th, 2009 08:15:03 PM
yeah - they could have added a whole second dimension to him if he'd accepted Kirk's offer of assistance instead of "fuck you I'll take death" but.. as somebody pointed out, he's more of a plot device than a villain... STILL LOVED IT THO!
@ Bitnik by KnowItAllFromCali	May 11th, 2009 12:15:46 AM
I suppose you could argue that the prequels destroyed the continuity in the original Star Wars movies, but that is not the fault of the original movies. Since we were exposed to them out of sequence, it is the prequels that are to blame. But here's a bone - what the heck. :)
Hmm, bad word choice... by KnowItAllFromCali	May 11th, 2009 12:18:59 AM
What I meant was that if the prequels did not exist, the events you described from Episode IV would not seem like such a huge coincidence.
@LordVon by KnowItAllFromCali	May 11th, 2009 12:30:39 AM
Ha ha! No, and I don't think you are buying it, either (but it was a nice effort). Let's just say the hole in WOK is big enough to fly a shuttlecraft through while the hole in JJ's Trek is big enough for an entire starship! And I agree - what's with the use of shaky-cam these days!? It plagued the latest Bond movie, as well!
So what ever happened to Kirk's brother... by Droogie Alex	May 11th, 2009 02:45:30 AM
...Sam, and nephew, for that matter. Never born, huh?
Fuck you Trekkie Haters, I liked it. by ragermac	May 11th, 2009 08:02:40 AM
I have seen all of the Star Trek TV shows and Movies and I really enjoyed JJ's remake. It had its holes, but I always remind myself and you should too.... It's a fucking movie!!!! I liked the cast and I even liked the Uhura+Spock connection. Sure it had some slapstick but thats good, it was not overdone. Nero needed to be more evil IMO and I did not like the alderaan style destruction of Vulcan. But it was very entertaining, the special effects were good and I look forward to a sequel. And by the way, you fucking trek bitches will complain NO MATTER WHAT. Unless Gene Roddenberry's ashes get sucked into a wormhole and he returns from the dead to take back the series you stupid ass OVERLY CRITICAL nerds will complain NO MATTER WHO DIRECTS the Franchise. STFU. At least it is not a bad that that shit movie Serenity or the abomination that was the Star Wars Prequels.
too much coincidence? by whoisthismuaddib	May 11th, 2009 08:57:03 AM
it wasn't coincidence, it was fate!

Talkbacks

Alexandra DuPont
Boldly Appraises
Abrams’ STAR TREK!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks

Talkbacks

Alexandra DuPont Boldly Appraises Abrams’ STAR TREK!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks

Alexandra DuPont
Boldly Appraises
Abrams’ STAR TREK!!