| Author | ||
CrazySugarFreakBoy! Member Since: Sun Jan 04, 2004 Posts: 1,235 |
Subject: It's not easy being green: Showing love for the most underrated character in the new Star Trek flick ... Posted Thu May 21, 2009 at 03:40:55 am EDT (Viewed 667 times) | |
|
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 4.0; on Windows Vista
... Because goddammit, Gaila of Orion is so cool, in such subtle ways, that I suspect even the writers who created her don't see how much win is hidden under her (admittedly already revealing) green-skinned surface.  So, while her species was never named onscreen, we know from production materials for the film that Gaila is an Orion, and as a female member of that species, there's a strong temptation to say that we all know what THAT means. And to be fair, given Uhura's comments about how often her roommate tended to bring guys back to their place for sex, there seems to be at least some amount of truth to the stereotypes. Given the speculation, on the part of one of the movie's screenwriters, that Gaila could be an ESCAPED Orion slave girl, there's some question as to how much of the continuity about Orion slave girls, specifically as established by the Star Trek: Enterprise episode "Bound," is still canon in the new movie (especially since the new movie gave a nod to Star Trek: Enterprise by having Scotty get in trouble for losing track of Admiral Archer's pet beagle in a transporter experiment). Now, my LJ friend seriousfic and I have already debated the merits of the original series portrayals, in which Orion slave girls were rather obviously intended to be exactly as they were described, versus the Star Trek: Enterprise retcon, in which Orion "slave girls" were actually themselves the enslavers, and secretly in charge of the Orion Syndicate. seriousfic's position is that anything which negates the canonicity of Star Trek: Enterprise is an automatic good. This is an argument that's very tempting to endorse, but I still prefer for Orion slave girls to be the true, hidden masters of their society, simply because it allows the new movie's continuity the potential to revel in all the Barsoom tropes traditionally ascribed to Orion slave girls, without relying on what essentially amounts to a Gorean scenario for straight male fanservice. Either way, though, whether Gaila really was a slave, or she merely called herself a slave while actually wielding significant societal power, the fact remains that she was brought up in a culture with rigidly defined gender roles that reduced all women to the sum total of their sex. After all, whether Orion women were made commodities because of their sex, or they were instead able to exert the influence of de facto rulers because of their sex, they were still defined exclusively by their sex. Think about the implications of such an upbringing, as you additionally consider the fact that Gaila is the ONLY female Orion we've EVER seen wearing a Starfleet uniform, with a cadet rank or otherwise. As sexist as modern human society is, think about what it would be like, to be a woman who was raised in a society where ALL women were deemed "slaves," and basically expected to live their lives between their legs. Think about how BADASS you'd have to be, to get past that deeply ingrained cultural conditioning enough to APPLY to Starfleet Academy, much less get ACCEPTED. I've seen a lot of fans slag off on Gaila, because of her one onscreen scene with Kirk, but the simple fact that she's THERE AT ALL shows how smart and strong she is, and the assumptions I've seen posted online, by both male and female fans, that she's either dumb or weak, just because she actively engages in casual sex? SHAME ON YOU, FANDOM. So, let's look at what we know about Gaila, beyond just her libido, and let's use that to infer some semi-defensible fanon about her background. We know she's Uhura's roommate at Starfleet Academy, and since we've seen that Starfleet tends to group similar personnel together, this could imply that Gaila is literally a Aesthetically, I find this uniform alternative appealing, because operations division red makes for a more striking contrast to Gaila's green skin, and highlights her red hair in a more complimentary fashion, than either sciences division blue or command division gold. In terms of her character, though, I don't exactly see her as a techie, and besides, she needs a rate that's specialized enough to set her apart from both Scotty and Uhura's functions on the ship. Which is where Gaila's background as an Orion slave girl comes into play, because when your society trains you in the ways of "pleasing men," so well that the women of your species gain an epic reputation for your skill at doing so, regardless of the race of the men in question, this almost necessarily connotes some affinity for reading both personality and cultural cues. If we hadn't already settled on operations as Gaila's division, I'd strongly consider issuing her a blue uniform and assigning her a proto-Troi role as ship's counselor (in spite of the problematic likelihood that she'd see no ethical issues in sleeping with her patients, thanks to the same lingering Orion cultural mores that have led her to be more sexually active than even enlightened humans of the future consider to be "normal"). As alternatives, then, I'd suggest that Gaila could serve as a sociologist, or perhaps even an anthropologist (or, more accurately, a "xenologist") for Starfleet. Such specialties are closely related enough to communications that Gaila and Uhura could be study-buddies, which would give them an additional reason to be roommates (in spite of their very different lifestyles), and the fact that both sociology and The best part is that, if it's done right, Gaila can be a clever, curious, compelling character AND a super-sexed vehicle for fanservice. She's the gal who beams down to the planet's surface with the rest of the landing party, showing her ass in her long-sleeved one-piece high-hemline red mini-dress with the open neckline, and if any of the native lifeforms approach her with offers of "close encounters" (as long as they're cute enough to meet her standards) ... well, she's certainly not going to pass up any opportunities to boldly go where no green-skinned woman has gone before. Of course, once she's back on board ship, her unique insights on what those aliens are actually like, when they let their guard down, will show what a mistake it is for anyone to underestimate how perceptive she is. It wouldn't make her any more of a "slut" or a "whore" than Kirk was on the original series, when any number of that show's plots, and that Enterprise crew's plans, hinged on Kirk's ability to conquer the opposition with his penis. Oh, and as for the Kobayashi Maru simulation? My fanon is that, as soon as Gaila received that e-mail from Kirk, she KNEW it contained a virus, that would install a cheat code to allow him to beat the scenario (as if someone living 250 years in the future wouldn't have the equivalent of McAfee or Norton automatically running on their inboxes), but she deliberately let him get away with it anyway. Given the stereotypes regarding female Orions, she knew that everyone at Starfleet Academy would just assume that she was too much of a ditz to scan for Trojans, and she also knew that the boldness of Kirk's cheat code would mean that, even though he'd get away with it in the sim, he'd still have to explain himself to Starfleet Academy. Gaila was pissed at Kirk for playing her, but still slightly charmed by how cocky he was, so whether he was punished or rewarded for his actions later, she'd be able to help make that happen, by letting his virus infect the computers running the sim. You can ask her about it yourself, since she was assigned to the Enterprise, and still pulls casual hook-ups with Kirk on the DL every now and again, although she did give him hell, the first time they got back together, after his final time taking the Kobayashi Maru. What she won't tell anyone is that she became a fan of the Beastie Boys after she and Kirk had sex to their songs enough times. She was impressed that an Iowa farmboy would have an ear for such Classical Terran music, and the first time they fucked, "Intergalactic" was playing in the background.  GODDAMMIT WHY IS THIS THE ONLY PICTURE I CAN FIND OF THIS CHARACTER ONLINE | ||
Manga Shoggoth (unlikley to see the film, alas) |
Subject: It's not a bad picture, but they really should have gone for dark green lips. Pink just looks silly. [Re: CrazySugarFreakBoy!] Posted Thu May 21, 2009 at 03:04:59 pm EDT (Viewed 3 times) | |
|
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 on Windows 95
| ||
Visionary  Moderator Member Since: Sat Jan 03, 2004 Posts: 2,131 |
Subject: I agree... the pink lips and red hair make the whole look scream "body paint". [Re: Manga Shoggoth] Posted Thu May 21, 2009 at 07:52:44 pm EDT (Viewed 600 times) | |
|
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
| ||
|
HH |
Subject: So I finally saw the Star Trek film... [Re: CrazySugarFreakBoy!] Posted Sat May 23, 2009 at 06:30:06 am EDT (Viewed 10 times) | |
|
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows 2000
| ||
|
Visionary Moderator Member Since: Sat Jan 03, 2004 Posts: 2,131 |
Subject: I just saw it myself... [Re: HH] Posted Sun May 24, 2009 at 01:16:39 am EDT (Viewed 599 times) | |
|
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
It didn't do much for me. It was obviously well made, and showed the benefits of a budget higher than any Trek movie has ever seen before, but overall it was bright, shiny, loud, energetic and... just kind of there. The villain was a muddled, uninteresting antagonist. I too had trouble following his reasoning, and found him lacking in all menace. And you're right... the interior of his ship was just plain goofy, the ridiculousness of it overwhelmingly shown when, during the climax, he gets an announcement and has to leap to another platform in order to do anything about it. Really, the whole movie had a bunch of those kinds of moments... ones that were (sorry) "highly illogical". Is it really Star Fleet regulations to launch insubordinate crewmembers onto nearby planets? Why on earth (or not) do people carry around unfolding melee weapons hundreds of years from now? Wouldn't a gun be far more practical? (For that matter, since when is "fencing" at all the same as using a katana?) When a giant ship starts drilling to the Earth's core, there's not a single ship that can shoot the cord like Spock did, or even try? And that goes for Vulcan too? (What kind of culture would send a captain into space with the codes to shut down all of your defenses?) And Kirk happening to be rescued by elder Spock (from a beast that was chasing him for no discernible reason, what with much bigger prey already dead and waiting to be eaten) beats any of the goofy coincidences that sunk "Spider-man 3". In other words, it was pretty aggressively dumb, without much in the way of plot or really any big sci-fi ideas. The "Transformers"-esque shaky cam action scenes really annoyed me too. All that said, I'd rate it a "B" or a "B-"... Most of these annoyances were countered by some really nice touches. And certainly, it's far superior than many of the other Trek movie offerings. Quote:
Quote: Despite my misgivings I went to see the film last night, based on good reviews from people whose opinions I value and an assurance that there were good in-story reasons for the changes in Trek history. I took with me my fifteen year old daughter and eleven year old son, neither of whom is familiar with Star Trek and especially not with the original characters. We saw the film in a Victorian village cinema with stained glass and plaster architraves and a big Hammond organ (for the silent movies) – and they stopped the performance half way through for an intermission to sell ice-creams!Quote: The good things about the film:Quote: 1. The characters were well defined and well introduced. Kirk was especially well depicted in his initial bar scene when he faces odds of four to one and offers his attackers the chance to get a couple more people. This was important from the point of view of my children who needed to be grounded in the protagonists and to pull for them and who had no previous affection for Kirk to carry them on. I was keen that the essence of the original cast interpretations should be preserved and I felt that for the main part it was.Quote: 2. The initial sequence with Kirk’s birth and the sacrifice of Kirk senior made for a gripping start as well as doing the necessary “setting up the villain†stuff. The choice of going to a full orchestral score and taking away the din of battle until we heard the baby’s cry was a bold one that worked. The only improvements I’d have appreciated would have been a “Captain’s Log†instant summary for reasons of both nostalgia and orientation and less use of headache-inducing out-of-focus hand-held cameras.Quote: 3. The cast interacted well and played off each other. This has always been a strength of the series and it was a strength here. I could have spent many more happy minutes watching all the crew getting to know each other.Quote: 4. Leonard Nimoy has long turned his acting limitations to strengths in his defining role as Spock. Here he brought a huge gravitas to his appearances and managed to command the screen whenever he appeared. His response to young Kirk was particularly well done. Nobody positions their fingers for a mind-meld exactly like Nimoy can.Quote: 5. The away mission to the mining drill was a particularly well-choreographed piece of work. It managed to establish Sulu as a heroic character, it allowed for a strongly defined combat in unusual conditions, and it looked stunning. Shame the mission failed to stop the actual plot, but what the heck. The downside was that the closing action also included Romulan-wrestling over more high drops and by the time that happened we’d already seen it done better in this sequence.Quote: 6. Most of the characters had story arcs and there was a good progression towards the status quo ante of the classic series. All of the regular crew got to contribute something towards the final victory.Quote: 7. I’d be happy to see more of Gaila of Orion. That body paint job was poor though. Red lips and green skin? Why?Quote: The bad things about the film:Quote: 1. I wasn’t impressed with the key set designs. Star Trek has managed to establish a number of visual themes for its various alien cultures and for Starfleet (two designs in the case of Starfleet from original Trek and Next Generation). These visuals have done much to convey the cultures and backstory of the various races and have become a helpful wallpaper for the series. Here the Enterprise bridge, which should be the most iconic and potent of sets was reduced to merely a room with some control panels in it, the engine room was a comedy tube maze, and the villain’s ship was a series of improbably high un-guard-railed dramatic drops with low level lighting. The visual effects were great. The scenery around which they took place let them down.Quote: 2. I wasn’t impresses with the music – until the end, when the final credits occurred to a fine orchestral version of the original theme tune. That music got a cheer from the audience. During the rest of the film the score was at best unobtrusive and at worst a pseudo-John Williams attempt at replacing themes which have become classic for a reason. I don’t have a problem in principle with adding new signature music. This wasn’t it.Quote: 3. I didn’t buy the time-travel plot-retcon explanation. How could Nero coming back in time change the relative ages of the cast, the styles of technology, or any of the other non-Kirk related trivia detail? Either it’s an in-canon story or it’s a “reimaginationâ€Â. This movie tried to be both and fell between two stools. And if I understand this right, original Star Trek, Next Gen, DS9 and Voyager are now out of canon but Star Trek: Enterprise is still in there? Really? Those are the bits you’d choose to keep?Quote: 4. From a plot point of view the villain appears to have achieved an almost complete victory, beyond anything achieved by Khan or any other of the far more distinctive villains in Trek’s history. Nero has wiped out the future and everything we’ve ever seen done in it. That’s a big win. His motives remain confusing though. Why is Spock to blame for a supernova destroying Romulus? Isn’t that like blaming the fire brigade for your home catching fire? How does destroying the Federation in the past save Romulus from getting nova-d? Am I missing something here?Quote: 5. The sudden bursts of slapstick didn’t really sit well with the rest of the storyline. Kirk running around with giant hands while a planet is dying is like Jar Jar Binks clowning across a battlefield while people die all around him. Scotty in a water tube is a waste of screen time where we could have had a well-written Scotty’s-first-comments-on-seeing-Enterprise-engine-room.Quote: 6. The climax of the film wasn’t particularly well cut. The timing and emphases seemed wrong. Kirk’s usual big confrontation with the villain was reduced to Kirk getting briefly beaten up by the baddie then left to be beaten up by a sub-baddie. Spock saved the day from a distance by causing a fender-bender and being beamed to safety while the villain growled ferociously from a video screen. A little more thought and build up could have made the end action so much more potent. Kirk still on board and wrestling with the baddie – and giving him his surrender option face to face – while the ship disintegrates around them would have been one improvement. He could even have torn his shirt. Uhura being aboard the baddie’s ship too would have given Spock more of an ethical dilemma and brought his emotions vs logic theme to a pointed climax.Quote: The verdict:Quote: Not bad. Could have been much worse. With a little more thought and care, and particularly with tighter editing and more disciplined use of available time it could have been better. My children were happy enough with it, though, and they’re the demographic that the new franchise needs to hook. And I enjoyed it. I even enjoyed the ice-cream break.Quote: A more general comment on all Trek movies occurred to me though. A fundamental part of the original series and the Next Generation was “boldly going†– exploration, discovery, first contact, the frontier feel. Nearly all the Trek films have actually been Star Wars, a military struggle against a superior enemy that threatens home. That’s quite a disconnect from the main thrust of the series’ conception and leads to a particular kind of story and a particular kind of cast interaction. I can see why the money people might want the films to be all about the big explosions and the overwhelming archvillain but I think that formula has become very stale by now. Maybe it’s time trek returned to its roots and did some actual Trekking? |
Posted Sun May 24, 2009 at 06:24:06 am EDT (Viewed 6 times)
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows 2000
Quote:
It didn't do much for me. It was obviously well made, and showed the benefits of a budget higher than any Trek movie has ever seen before, but overall it was bright, shiny, loud, energetic and... just kind of there.
The problem was that many of the things which were once distinctive about Trek have been copied and even improved by lots of other movies. The big fight on the gantry has become quite hackneyed (the last good one I saw was in Serenity). Two starships shooting lights at each other or even crashing into each other has become de rigeur. To make those things work now requires some serious choreography and some great plotting, not just an FX budget. The final Khan fight in Trek II works after all this time because it does that. No one will remember the finale in this latest movie.
Quote:
The villain was a muddled, uninteresting antagonist. I too had trouble following his reasoning, and found him lacking in all menace. And you're right... the interior of his ship was just plain goofy, the ridiculousness of it overwhelmingly shown when, during the climax, he gets an announcement and has to leap to another platform in order to do anything about it.I liked the idea that a mining ship from the future was advanced enough to do all that damage. The concept should have allowed for some great interior visuals, but even the external design didn't make sense. Why build a mining ship to look like Cthulhu?
Quote:
Really, the whole movie had a bunch of those kinds of moments... ones that were (sorry) "highly illogical". Is it really Star Fleet regulations to launch insubordinate crewmembers onto nearby planets? Why on earth (or not) do people carry around unfolding melee weapons hundreds of years from now? Wouldn't a gun be far more practical? (For that matter, since when is "fencing" at all the same as using a katana?) When a giant ship starts drilling to the Earth's core, there's not a single ship that can shoot the cord like Spock did, or even try? And that goes for Vulcan too? (What kind of culture would send a captain into space with the codes to shut down all of your defenses?) And Kirk happening to be rescued by elder Spock (from a beast that was chasing him for no discernible reason, what with much bigger prey already dead and waiting to be eaten) beats any of the goofy coincidences that sunk "Spider-man 3".Sulu's always been a blade enthusiast; hence his choice for a personal sidearm. All defending ships were kept at bay by the weapons capable of disabling a starship; only an advanced future-ship could avoid them. Pike had the defence codes because he wasn't due to go into space but was instead teaching at Academy until the crisis required him to set forth. Clearly future Spock was influencing the reactions of present Spock. No-prize please?
Quote:
In other words, it was pretty aggressively dumb, without much in the way of plot or really any big sci-fi ideas. The "Transformers"-esque shaky cam action scenes really annoyed me too.That's a technique that will cause many current movies to be criticised in years tio come.
Quote:
All that said, I'd rate it a "B" or a "B-"... Most of these annoyances were countered by some really nice touches. And certainly, it's far superior than many of the other Trek movie offerings.I've enjoyed quite a few of the other Trek movies. This ranks somewhere around the middle.
Moderator
Member Since: Sat Jan 03, 2004
Posts: 2,131
Posted Sun May 24, 2009 at 09:28:47 am EDT (Viewed 598 times)
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
Quote:
The problem was that many of the things which were once distinctive about Trek have been copied and even improved by lots of other movies. The big fight on the gantry has become quite hackneyed (the last good one I saw was in Serenity).True... and even in Serenity, the absurdity of it was mocked with a bit of self-aware dialog. On a tangent, the Operative's sword in Serenity didn't bother me all that much, because it was clearly unusual even there... making it a character quirk. "The guy killed me with a sword, Mal..." Nobody else pulled out a collapsible ax to fight him.
Quote:
Two starships shooting lights at each other or even crashing into each other has become de rigeur. To make those things work now requires some serious choreography and some great plotting, not just an FX budget. The final Khan fight in Trek II works after all this time because it does that. No one will remember the finale in this latest movie.I agree. The one thing I always felt was missing from the Khan fight was a final shot where Khan sees the Enterprise make it to warp just before Genesis explodes. I like to see a villain know they've been beaten.
Quote:
I liked the idea that a mining ship from the future was advanced enough to do all that damage. The concept should have allowed for some great interior visuals, but even the external design didn't make sense. Why build a mining ship to look like Cthulhu?Given the special effects budget that they had, I was surprised that a bunch of platforms was all they could come up with. They're in an environment where any gravity is artificial... play around with that, especially if you're going to use a huge interior space.
The idea of the mining ship being able to do that much damage I do like, I admit, but it gives the impression that the bad guy was just some blue-collar Romulan, which doesn't add much to his menace factor. (Yes, I know one could argue that he would need some serious scientific know-how to do his job, but still... it's not the kind of position that one looks to in order to find the most cunning threat to the federation.
Quote:
Sulu's always been a blade enthusiast; hence his choice for a personal sidearm. Convenient that he ran into a Romulan axe enthusiast... and that neither of them had bothered to bring a pistol. For that matter, why the hell would you need axe-armed guards (or any guards, really) on a tether shooting a giant laser? And why couldn't the Enterprise just shoot the tether, since Spock did later? Plus, I know they wanted to kill a red shirt on the away mission for custom's sake, but it was an especially stupid way to go... I'm not sure why they gave the mentally challenged crewmember the explosives.
The whole set up doesn't make a lot of sense, but you let it go because it is a pretty cool action sequence.
Quote:
All defending ships were kept at bay by the weapons capable of disabling a starship; only an advanced future-ship could avoid them.I'll buy that for why nobody else could simply shoot the tether. Some indication that they were trying would have been appreciated, though.
In hindsight, they did establish that communications were impossible once the drill started drilling, so I guess that's a reason why no-one else on the entire Earth showed up to try to stop it.
Quote:
Pike had the defence codes because he wasn't due to go into space but was instead teaching at Academy until the crisis required him to set forth.Well, the real question is why anyone would have the keys to shut down an entire planet's defenses, especially someone off-planet. But then they were pretty lax on any kind of regulations through-out the movie. Apparently if you were the last one to be seen with a captain before he died, you're allowed to simply say "He made me captain before he left" and that's that... no recording in the logs, or anything. And nobody is an acting captain, or simply in command while the captain is away... it's always "you're the captain now."
I did like how Kirk was made First Officer of the Federation's Flagship after being in space for all of 15 minutes. Says a lot about the qualifications of everyone else aboard that ship.
Quote:
Clearly future Spock was influencing the reactions of present Spock. No-prize please?Your No-prize is in the mail. Display it with pride.
Quote:
I've enjoyed quite a few of the other Trek movies. This ranks somewhere around the middle.I liked "The Wrath of Khan", the whale one was cute and fun, although I don't know how well it holds up (having not seen it in years), the last full movie with the original cast, and "First Contact" with the Borg. Most of the rest of them were pretty bad, as I recall.
Moderator
Member Since: Sat Jan 03, 2004
Posts: 2,131
Posted Sun May 24, 2009 at 10:26:19 am EDT (Viewed 564 times)
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
Quote:
| This Star Trek movie had some serious strikes against it before it began. It came after a long gap when the Trek franchise had lain dormant and forgotten, at least to the general public for whom TV and movies are their only exposure. It featured recast versions of the best known characters, an ensemble of actors that defined the original roles perhaps more than any other movie series cast. It included a reboot of continuity that negated every favourite story that a trivia-driven fandom treasured. |
Honestly, I think one of the reasons that fans have been more accepting of this than one might think is that early on the studio gave the impression that the old timeline was done and buried, never to be visited again, and that they were going with a total remake. That makes the links to the original Trek that are in this one seem like something of a reprieve.
Quote:
Despite my misgivings I went to see the film last night, based on good reviews from people whose opinions I value and an assurance that there were good in-story reasons for the changes in Trek history. I took with me my fifteen year old daughter and eleven year old son, neither of whom is familiar with Star Trek and especially not with the original characters. We saw the film in a Victorian village cinema with stained glass and plaster architraves and a big Hammond organ (for the silent movies) – and they stopped the performance half way through for an intermission to sell ice-creams!Really? Where did they cut in the ice-cream intermission?
Quote:
The good things about the film:Quote:
1. The characters were well defined and well introduced. Kirk was especially well depicted in his initial bar scene when he faces odds of four to one and offers his attackers the chance to get a couple more people. This was important from the point of view of my children who needed to be grounded in the protagonists and to pull for them and who had no previous affection for Kirk to carry them on. I was keen that the essence of the original cast interpretations should be preserved and I felt that for the main part it was.I wasn't sure I was going to like this portrayal of Kirk from the trailers and such... The actor didn't seem to have the charisma to pull off the cockiness without being just an ass. Seeing the whole movie, however, he didn't bother me at all... although the script sometimes did. (The over-the-top stolen car bit from the beginning, for example).
Quote:
2. The initial sequence with Kirk’s birth and the sacrifice of Kirk senior made for a gripping start as well as doing the necessary “setting up the villain†stuff. The choice of going to a full orchestral score and taking away the din of battle until we heard the baby’s cry was a bold one that worked. The only improvements I’d have appreciated would have been a “Captain’s Log†instant summary for reasons of both nostalgia and orientation and less use of headache-inducing out-of-focus hand-held cameras.Hate, hate, hate, hate shaky-cam action. There are a few... very few... directors who can use it successfully. This wasn't one of them.
Quote:
3. The cast interacted well and played off each other. This has always been a strength of the series and it was a strength here. I could have spent many more happy minutes watching all the crew getting to know each other.They did a pretty good job. I remember watching the "Generations" movie and being amazed at how much more energized the opening sequence with the original crewmembers was compared to the Next Gen parts... they had really honed down their interactions and characters to such a natural (though broad) degree.
Quote:
4. Leonard Nimoy has long turned his acting limitations to strengths in his defining role as Spock. Here he brought a huge gravitas to his appearances and managed to command the screen whenever he appeared. His response to young Kirk was particularly well done. Nobody positions their fingers for a mind-meld exactly like Nimoy can.I will say that, for being such a key player in the story, the young Spock didn't work all that well for me. I just didn't care for him as a character... but that may be that I'm most familiar with Nimoy's older Spock from the movies, and he always had a droll sense of humor underlying his delivery and lines.
Quote:
5. The away mission to the mining drill was a particularly well-choreographed piece of work. It managed to establish Sulu as a heroic character, it allowed for a strongly defined combat in unusual conditions, and it looked stunning. Shame the mission failed to stop the actual plot, but what the heck. The downside was that the closing action also included Romulan-wrestling over more high drops and by the time that happened we’d already seen it done better in this sequence.True... any you know my objections to this bit from the other thread.
Quote:
6. Most of the characters had story arcs and there was a good progression towards the status quo ante of the classic series. All of the regular crew got to contribute something towards the final victory.I suppose McCoy's only contribution, getting Kirk aboard the Enterprise in the first place, was fairly major even if he really had nothing to do for the rest of the film.
I was surprised to see that they made Chekov into a kind of proto-Westley Crusher. Kind of blurred the line between his role in things and Scotty's though. Of course, I was never too clear on what Chekov's role was supposed to be anyway.
Quote:
7. I’d be happy to see more of Gaila of Orion. That body paint job was poor though. Red lips and green skin? Why?Yeah, it really was. I'm sure the make-up artist had fun though.
Quote:
The bad things about the film:Quote:
1. I wasn’t impressed with the key set designs. Star Trek has managed to establish a number of visual themes for its various alien cultures and for Starfleet (two designs in the case of Starfleet from original Trek and Next Generation). These visuals have done much to convey the cultures and backstory of the various races and have become a helpful wallpaper for the series. Here the Enterprise bridge, which should be the most iconic and potent of sets was reduced to merely a room with some control panels in it, the engine room was a comedy tube maze, and the villain’s ship was a series of improbably high un-guard-railed dramatic drops with low level lighting. The visual effects were great. The scenery around which they took place let them down.Yes... the overall design order seemed to be "Enterprise bright white, enemy dark and spikey". I will say that I appreciated the fact that the Federation didn't worry as much about their electricity bills in this time period. For some reason, once they started doing the Next Generation movies, all the lights on the Enterprise were put onto dimmer switches and set to permanent twilight. Barry White may have been constantly playing in the background.
Quote:
2. I wasn’t impresses with the music – until the end, when the final credits occurred to a fine orchestral version of the original theme tune. That music got a cheer from the audience. During the rest of the film the score was at best unobtrusive and at worst a pseudo-John Williams attempt at replacing themes which have become classic for a reason. I don’t have a problem in principle with adding new signature music. This wasn’t it.The music didn't bother me, but it was notably less than iconic. It actually reminded me of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" sequels, in that the first movie was one of the few of the last decade or two to really establish some memorable orchestral themes, and then the sequels seemed to go out of their way to avoid using them. In that case, it was due to a different composer taking over... I guess everyone wants to do their own stamp on things.
Quote:
3. I didn’t buy the time-travel plot-retcon explanation. How could Nero coming back in time change the relative ages of the cast, the styles of technology, or any of the other non-Kirk related trivia detail? Either it’s an in-canon story or it’s a “reimaginationâ€Â. This movie tried to be both and fell between two stools. And if I understand this right, original Star Trek, Next Gen, DS9 and Voyager are now out of canon but Star Trek: Enterprise is still in there? Really? Those are the bits you’d choose to keep?I feel bad for Scotty. It would suck if you were the one to make a revolutionary breakthrough in something, and then instead of actually discovering it yourself some old guy comes back in time and tells you what it is. Sure, you still get credit, but you didn't actually *do* it. He'll likely develop a drinking problem due to secretly feeling like a fraud.
Quote:
4. From a plot point of view the villain appears to have achieved an almost complete victory, beyond anything achieved by Khan or any other of the far more distinctive villains in Trek’s history. Nero has wiped out the future and everything we’ve ever seen done in it. That’s a big win. His motives remain confusing though. Why is Spock to blame for a supernova destroying Romulus? Isn’t that like blaming the fire brigade for your home catching fire? How does destroying the Federation in the past save Romulus from getting nova-d? Am I missing something here?While we're on the subject of the whole "stop the super-nova" plot, why do the vulcan's make a ship carrying a huge beach-ball's worth of "red matter" when only a tiny drop is enough to create a black hole? Why send only one man to complete a mission that important?
And for the villains side of things, why would you need to drill into a planet to place the red stuff at the center? Wouldn't a black hole right next to a planet be just as bad? Did Nero just like the aesthetics of a planet collapsing in upon itself, rather than sideways?
Quote:
5. The sudden bursts of slapstick didn’t really sit well with the rest of the storyline. Kirk running around with giant hands while a planet is dying is like Jar Jar Binks clowning across a battlefield while people die all around him. Scotty in a water tube is a waste of screen time where we could have had a well-written Scotty’s-first-comments-on-seeing-Enterprise-engine-room.I didn't mind the slapstick as much. Bones stabbing Kirk repeatedly was fun... and it was impending danger, rather than current danger, so tonally it didn't feel as out of place. The big hands were a bit broad, though.
Scotty being pulled towards the giant Cuisinart was very much a "Galaxy Quest" moment. Why was that even there?
Actually, the success of this movie makes me think of all sorts of possibilities for a "Galaxy Quest" sequel, especially one where the original crew find themselves replaced by younger actors.
Quote:
6. The climax of the film wasn’t particularly well cut. The timing and emphases seemed wrong. Kirk’s usual big confrontation with the villain was reduced to Kirk getting briefly beaten up by the baddie then left to be beaten up by a sub-baddie. Spock saved the day from a distance by causing a fender-bender and being beamed to safety while the villain growled ferociously from a video screen. A little more thought and build up could have made the end action so much more potent. Kirk still on board and wrestling with the baddie – and giving him his surrender option face to face – while the ship disintegrates around them would have been one improvement. He could even have torn his shirt. Uhura being aboard the baddie’s ship too would have given Spock more of an ethical dilemma and brought his emotions vs logic theme to a pointed climax.Good ideas.
I also found the whole "escape from the singularity" bit just made them look like idiots. Was there anyone in the theater who didn't know they were going to have to struggle to get away from the Black Hole? So why did they sit there jawboning with the villain instead of moving the ship away?
Quote:
A more general comment on all Trek movies occurred to me though. A fundamental part of the original series and the Next Generation was “boldly going†– exploration, discovery, first contact, the frontier feel. Nearly all the Trek films have actually been Star Wars, a military struggle against a superior enemy that threatens home. That’s quite a disconnect from the main thrust of the series’ conception and leads to a particular kind of story and a particular kind of cast interaction. I can see why the money people might want the films to be all about the big explosions and the overwhelming archvillain but I think that formula has become very stale by now. Maybe it’s time trek returned to its roots and did some actual Trekking?I found it interesting that so much of the galaxy is already establsihed at this time point. They mention some kind of Cardassian drink in the bar. The Orion Slave Girl is in the academy. Romulus is established. I have no idea when these races were introduced in Trek history, but this show seems to want to jump ahead to the Next Generation's level of established interstellar relations rather than the idea that they don't really know what's out there.
Posted Sun May 24, 2009 at 05:28:41 pm EDT (Viewed 5 times)
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows 2000
Quote:
Quote:
| This Star Trek movie had some serious strikes against it before it began. It came after a long gap when the Trek franchise had lain dormant and forgotten, at least to the general public for whom TV and movies are their only exposure. It featured recast versions of the best known characters, an ensemble of actors that defined the original roles perhaps more than any other movie series cast. It included a reboot of continuity that negated every favourite story that a trivia-driven fandom treasured. |
Quote:
Honestly, I think one of the reasons that fans have been more accepting of this than one might think is that early on the studio gave the impression that the old timeline was done and buried, never to be visited again, and that they were going with a total remake. That makes the links to the original Trek that are in this one seem like something of a reprieve. That's how the UK government gets us to accept bad news. They leak that inflation's gooing to be 5%. Everybody screams. When it turns out to be only 4.6% everyone heaves a sigh of relief and relaxes.
Quote:
Quote:
Despite my misgivings I went to see the film last night, based on good reviews from people whose opinions I value and an assurance that there were good in-story reasons for the changes in Trek history. I took with me my fifteen year old daughter and eleven year old son, neither of whom is familiar with Star Trek and especially not with the original characters. We saw the film in a Victorian village cinema with stained glass and plaster architraves and a big Hammond organ (for the silent movies) – and they stopped the performance half way through for an intermission to sell ice-creams!Quote:
Really? Where did they cut in the ice-cream intermission?Just after the first encounter with Scotty.
What's really amazing is that everybody in the cinema seemed to know everybody else (except us) and all left their seats to chat with old acquaintances. There was also a bar open at the back.
Quote:
Quote:
The good things about the film:Quote:
Quote:
1. The characters were well defined and well introduced. Kirk was especially well depicted in his initial bar scene when he faces odds of four to one and offers his attackers the chance to get a couple more people. This was important from the point of view of my children who needed to be grounded in the protagonists and to pull for them and who had no previous affection for Kirk to carry them on. I was keen that the essence of the original cast interpretations should be preserved and I felt that for the main part it was.Quote:
I wasn't sure I was going to like this portrayal of Kirk from the trailers and such... The actor didn't seem to have the charisma to pull off the cockiness without being just an ass. Seeing the whole movie, however, he didn't bother me at all... although the script sometimes did. (The over-the-top stolen car bit from the beginning, for example). I could have done without that scene really, but I suppose they needed something to counter Spock's childhood bullies.
As a matter of interest, if one's father is Earth ambassador shouldn't he be resident on Earth?
Quote:
Quote:
2. The initial sequence with Kirk’s birth and the sacrifice of Kirk senior made for a gripping start as well as doing the necessary “setting up the villain†stuff. The choice of going to a full orchestral score and taking away the din of battle until we heard the baby’s cry was a bold one that worked. The only improvements I’d have appreciated would have been a “Captain’s Log†instant summary for reasons of both nostalgia and orientation and less use of headache-inducing out-of-focus hand-held cameras.Quote:
Hate, hate, hate, hate shaky-cam action. There are a few... very few... directors who can use it successfully. This wasn't one of them.Henceforth it shall be known as vomit-cam.
Quote:
Quote:
3. The cast interacted well and played off each other. This has always been a strength of the series and it was a strength here. I could have spent many more happy minutes watching all the crew getting to know each other.Quote:
They did a pretty good job. I remember watching the "Generations" movie and being amazed at how much more energized the opening sequence with the original crewmembers was compared to the Next Gen parts... they had really honed down their interactions and characters to such a natural (though broad) degree.Actually I thought the Next Gen crew achieved that level of interaction as well, but their characters not being as broad they didn't translate as well to the big screen.
Quote:
Quote:
4. Leonard Nimoy has long turned his acting limitations to strengths in his defining role as Spock. Here he brought a huge gravitas to his appearances and managed to command the screen whenever he appeared. His response to young Kirk was particularly well done. Nobody positions their fingers for a mind-meld exactly like Nimoy can.Quote:
I will say that, for being such a key player in the story, the young Spock didn't work all that well for me. I just didn't care for him as a character... but that may be that I'm most familiar with Nimoy's older Spock from the movies, and he always had a droll sense of humor underlying his delivery and lines.
He was always going to have an uphill struggle. I thought he did okay.
Quote:
Quote:
5. The away mission to the mining drill was a particularly well-choreographed piece of work. It managed to establish Sulu as a heroic character, it allowed for a strongly defined combat in unusual conditions, and it looked stunning. Shame the mission failed to stop the actual plot, but what the heck. The downside was that the closing action also included Romulan-wrestling over more high drops and by the time that happened we’d already seen it done better in this sequence.Quote:
True... any you know my objections to this bit from the other thread.I'm puzzled as to why only Kirk and Spock beamed over. Why not Kirk, Spock, and 200 marines? Even trainee marines?
And of course, my perennial problem with Star Trek crew transporting onto baddie spaceships: if you can send your captain why can't you send fifteen primed photon torpedoes?
Quote:
Quote:
6. Most of the characters had story arcs and there was a good progression towards the status quo ante of the classic series. All of the regular crew got to contribute something towards the final victory.Quote:
I suppose McCoy's only contribution, getting Kirk aboard the Enterprise in the first place, was fairly major even if he really had nothing to do for the rest of the film.True, McCoy wasn't that integral to the ending was he?
Quote:
I was surprised to see that they made Chekov into a kind of proto-Westley Crusher. Kind of blurred the line between his role in things and Scotty's though. Of course, I was never too clear on what Chekov's role was supposed to be anyway.Wasn't he ship's navigator originally, and later became ship's security officer? I presume it was his former specialism that led him to make his navigational suggestions.
Quote:
Quote:
7. I’d be happy to see more of Gaila of Orion. That body paint job was poor though. Red lips and green skin? Why?Quote:
Yeah, it really was. I'm sure the make-up artist had fun though.I approved that they gave her retro-60's Orion underwear.
Quote:
Quote:
The bad things about the film:Quote:
Quote:
1. I wasn’t impressed with the key set designs. Star Trek has managed to establish a number of visual themes for its various alien cultures and for Starfleet (two designs in the case of Starfleet from original Trek and Next Generation). These visuals have done much to convey the cultures and backstory of the various races and have become a helpful wallpaper for the series. Here the Enterprise bridge, which should be the most iconic and potent of sets was reduced to merely a room with some control panels in it, the engine room was a comedy tube maze, and the villain’s ship was a series of improbably high un-guard-railed dramatic drops with low level lighting. The visual effects were great. The scenery around which they took place let them down.Quote:
Yes... the overall design order seemed to be "Enterprise bright white, enemy dark and spikey". I will say that I appreciated the fact that the Federation didn't worry as much about their electricity bills in this time period. For some reason, once they started doing the Next Generation movies, all the lights on the Enterprise were put onto dimmer switches and set to permanent twilight. Barry White may have been constantly playing in the background.Original Trek hit upon the absolutely perfect bridge design for a movie starship, with a focal central chair for your central actor that others could gather about, two role-defined officers in the foreground, and the technical people who gave information - Uhura and Spock - off to one side so we could all turn and look at them as they gave their info. And the main entrance is directly behind so that new arrivals are immediately in shot and interacting.
What annoyed me about this revamp is that nobody seemed to understand what the layout was for - not in Trek-tech but in visual design.
Quote:
Quote:
2. I wasn’t impresses with the music – until the end, when the final credits occurred to a fine orchestral version of the original theme tune. That music got a cheer from the audience. During the rest of the film the score was at best unobtrusive and at worst a pseudo-John Williams attempt at replacing themes which have become classic for a reason. I don’t have a problem in principle with adding new signature music. This wasn’t it.Quote:
The music didn't bother me, but it was notably less than iconic. It actually reminded me of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" sequels, in that the first movie was one of the few of the last decade or two to really establish some memorable orchestral themes, and then the sequels seemed to go out of their way to avoid using them. In that case, it was due to a different composer taking over... I guess everyone wants to do their own stamp on things.They needed the original music all the way through to sell it to the old timers. And they needed more "Captain's Log, Stardate..."
They did manage to revive some of the clasic sound effects though, including the communicator chirp and the transporter hum. I didn't spot the sliding door opening, the tricorder whine, or the phaser zap but that doesn't mean they weren't there.
Quote:
Quote:
3. I didn’t buy the time-travel plot-retcon explanation. How could Nero coming back in time change the relative ages of the cast, the styles of technology, or any of the other non-Kirk related trivia detail? Either it’s an in-canon story or it’s a “reimaginationâ€Â. This movie tried to be both and fell between two stools. And if I understand this right, original Star Trek, Next Gen, DS9 and Voyager are now out of canon but Star Trek: Enterprise is still in there? Really? Those are the bits you’d choose to keep?Quote:
I feel bad for Scotty. It would suck if you were the one to make a revolutionary breakthrough in something, and then instead of actually discovering it yourself some old guy comes back in time and tells you what it is. Sure, you still get credit, but you didn't actually *do* it. He'll likely develop a drinking problem due to secretly feeling like a fraud.Yes, I had a similar thought. Except for the alcoholism.
Quote:
Quote:
4. From a plot point of view the villain appears to have achieved an almost complete victory, beyond anything achieved by Khan or any other of the far more distinctive villains in Trek’s history. Nero has wiped out the future and everything we’ve ever seen done in it. That’s a big win. His motives remain confusing though. Why is Spock to blame for a supernova destroying Romulus? Isn’t that like blaming the fire brigade for your home catching fire? How does destroying the Federation in the past save Romulus from getting nova-d? Am I missing something here?Quote:
While we're on the subject of the whole "stop the super-nova" plot, why do the vulcan's make a ship carrying a huge beach-ball's worth of "red matter" when only a tiny drop is enough to create a black hole? Why send only one man to complete a mission that important? Indeed.
Quote:
And for the villains side of things, why would you need to drill into a planet to place the red stuff at the center? Wouldn't a black hole right next to a planet be just as bad? Did Nero just like the aesthetics of a planet collapsing in upon itself, rather than sideways?The red stuff only implodes under intense gravitational pressure. Honestly.
Quote:
Quote:
5. The sudden bursts of slapstick didn’t really sit well with the rest of the storyline. Kirk running around with giant hands while a planet is dying is like Jar Jar Binks clowning across a battlefield while people die all around him. Scotty in a water tube is a waste of screen time where we could have had a well-written Scotty’s-first-comments-on-seeing-Enterprise-engine-room.Quote:
I didn't mind the slapstick as much. Bones stabbing Kirk repeatedly was fun... and it was impending danger, rather than current danger, so tonally it didn't feel as out of place. The big hands were a bit broad, though.Quote:
Scotty being pulled towards the giant Cuisinart was very much a "Galaxy Quest" moment. Why was that even there?Quote:
Actually, the success of this movie makes me think of all sorts of possibilities for a "Galaxy Quest" sequel, especially one where the original crew find themselves replaced by younger actors.Now that I'd pay to see.
Quote:
Quote:
6. The climax of the film wasn’t particularly well cut. The timing and emphases seemed wrong. Kirk’s usual big confrontation with the villain was reduced to Kirk getting briefly beaten up by the baddie then left to be beaten up by a sub-baddie. Spock saved the day from a distance by causing a fender-bender and being beamed to safety while the villain growled ferociously from a video screen. A little more thought and build up could have made the end action so much more potent. Kirk still on board and wrestling with the baddie – and giving him his surrender option face to face – while the ship disintegrates around them would have been one improvement. He could even have torn his shirt. Uhura being aboard the baddie’s ship too would have given Spock more of an ethical dilemma and brought his emotions vs logic theme to a pointed climax.Quote:
Good ideas. Quote:
I also found the whole "escape from the singularity" bit just made them look like idiots. Was there anyone in the theater who didn't know they were going to have to struggle to get away from the Black Hole? So why did they sit there jawboning with the villain instead of moving the ship away?I thought the drama of that moment was wasted through poor setup. Had Kirk still been aboard the Romulan mining octopus there'd have been a reason for sticking around. Spock could have made one of his famous "needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many" choices and kept the ship there to save Kirk (and Uhura) and Scotty could have dome something really clever at the last moment while his engines couldn'ae stand it around him.
Quote:
Quote:
A more general comment on all Trek movies occurred to me though. A fundamental part of the original series and the Next Generation was “boldly going†– exploration, discovery, first contact, the frontier feel. Nearly all the Trek films have actually been Star Wars, a military struggle against a superior enemy that threatens home. That’s quite a disconnect from the main thrust of the series’ conception and leads to a particular kind of story and a particular kind of cast interaction. I can see why the money people might want the films to be all about the big explosions and the overwhelming archvillain but I think that formula has become very stale by now. Maybe it’s time trek returned to its roots and did some actual Trekking?Quote:
I found it interesting that so much of the galaxy is already establsihed at this time point. They mention some kind of Cardassian drink in the bar. The Orion Slave Girl is in the academy. Romulus is established. I have no idea when these races were introduced in Trek history, but this show seems to want to jump ahead to the Next Generation's level of established interstellar relations rather than the idea that they don't really know what's out there.As I recall Orions were already known in the original series. Romulans and Klingons were known of but seldom encountered before. Cardassians were never mentioned.
Posted Sun May 24, 2009 at 05:36:25 pm EDT (Viewed 5 times)
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows 2000
Quote:
Quote:
The problem was that many of the things which were once distinctive about Trek have been copied and even improved by lots of other movies. The big fight on the gantry has become quite hackneyed (the last good one I saw was in Serenity).Quote:
True... and even in Serenity, the absurdity of it was mocked with a bit of self-aware dialog. On a tangent, the Operative's sword in Serenity didn't bother me all that much, because it was clearly unusual even there... making it a character quirk. "The guy killed me with a sword, Mal..." Nobody else pulled out a collapsible ax to fight him. Also, the whole Firefly mythos is based on recombinant anachronisms, with Western, Oriental and SF tropes breeding together. So why not a bit of mediaeval longsword?
Quote:
Quote:
Two starships shooting lights at each other or even crashing into each other has become de rigeur. To make those things work now requires some serious choreography and some great plotting, not just an FX budget. The final Khan fight in Trek II works after all this time because it does that. No one will remember the finale in this latest movie.Quote:
I agree. The one thing I always felt was missing from the Khan fight was a final shot where Khan sees the Enterprise make it to warp just before Genesis explodes. I like to see a villain know they've been beaten.Noted.
Quote:
Quote:
I liked the idea that a mining ship from the future was advanced enough to do all that damage. The concept should have allowed for some great interior visuals, but even the external design didn't make sense. Why build a mining ship to look like Cthulhu?Quote:
Given the special effects budget that they had, I was surprised that a bunch of platforms was all they could come up with. They're in an environment where any gravity is artificial... play around with that, especially if you're going to use a huge interior space. I'm amazed they resisted the big conveyor belt crusher scene.
Quote:
The idea of the mining ship being able to do that much damage I do like, I admit, but it gives the impression that the bad guy was just some blue-collar Romulan, which doesn't add much to his menace factor. (Yes, I know one could argue that he would need some serious scientific know-how to do his job, but still... it's not the kind of position that one looks to in order to find the most cunning threat to the federation.Indeed. He'd have been so much more interesting as a kind of sinister teamster boss, actually.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Sulu's always been a blade enthusiast; hence his choice for a personal sidearm. Quote:
Convenient that he ran into a Romulan axe enthusiast... and that neither of them had bothered to bring a pistol. For that matter, why the hell would you need axe-armed guards (or any guards, really) on a tether shooting a giant laser? And why couldn't the Enterprise just shoot the tether, since Spock did later? Plus, I know they wanted to kill a red shirt on the away mission for custom's sake, but it was an especially stupid way to go... I'm not sure why they gave the mentally challenged crewmember the explosives.Why did only one crewmember carry any vital element of the mission?
Quote:
The whole set up doesn't make a lot of sense, but you let it go because it is a pretty cool action sequence. Quote:
Quote:
All defending ships were kept at bay by the weapons capable of disabling a starship; only an advanced future-ship could avoid them.Quote:
I'll buy that for why nobody else could simply shoot the tether. Some indication that they were trying would have been appreciated, though.Indeed. Why did nobody actually set a guard on Vulcan or Earth?
Quote:
In hindsight, they did establish that communications were impossible once the drill started drilling, so I guess that's a reason why no-one else on the entire Earth showed up to try to stop it. I think somebody might have noticed.
Quote:
Quote:
Pike had the defence codes because he wasn't due to go into space but was instead teaching at Academy until the crisis required him to set forth.Quote:
Well, the real question is why anyone would have the keys to shut down an entire planet's defenses, especially someone off-planet. But then they were pretty lax on any kind of regulations through-out the movie. Apparently if you were the last one to be seen with a captain before he died, you're allowed to simply say "He made me captain before he left" and that's that... no recording in the logs, or anything. And nobody is an acting captain, or simply in command while the captain is away... it's always "you're the captain now." I'm sure somebody referred to somebody as "acting Captain" - possibly Spock. But hey, field promotions are an old tradition.
Quote:
I did like how Kirk was made First Officer of the Federation's Flagship after being in space for all of 15 minutes. Says a lot about the qualifications of everyone else aboard that ship.I don't think the point was made adequately that these were all trainees apart from Pike. Pike was clearly the only teacher at Starfleet academy.
Quote:
Quote:
Clearly future Spock was influencing the reactions of present Spock. No-prize please?Quote:
Your No-prize is in the mail. Display it with pride.With no-pride.
Quote:
Quote:
I've enjoyed quite a few of the other Trek movies. This ranks somewhere around the middle.Quote:
I liked "The Wrath of Khan", the whale one was cute and fun, although I don't know how well it holds up (having not seen it in years), the last full movie with the original cast, and "First Contact" with the Borg. Most of the rest of them were pretty bad, as I recall. I quite like the third one too.