Kind of surprised there's no thread yet, but okay, I guess I can be the one to make it.

So I just saw the movie, and thought it was quite good. Very entertaining.

Some slight nitpicks - too many lens flares and camera-tilted-on-an-angle shots (what is this, Battlefield Earth?), and there were a few bits that didn't really feel like Star Trek at all (I don't remember there ever being what looks like a chemical plant on the Enterprise).

Other than that, I'd say it's pretty much all good. Lots of action, a solid story, cool sfx, it doesn't have any overly long or boring parts (I'm looking at you, every other Trek film ever), and of course Simon Pegg is in it which automatically makes it awesome.

IT HAS SIMON PEG?
IM SEEING THIS SATURDAY!

I just watched the first star trek movie last night, and there was a lot of lens flare in it too

Well I got back from it at the IMAX. Personally (and I'm a big Star Trek fan) I loved it.

I'm sure people will have nitpicks and complaints - but I thought it was damn enjoyable.

SIMON PEGG?

I'M IN!

And lol@Onion video

there was a thread about it 2 weeks ago

Just got back from seeing it. I thought it was pretty cool. I have to agree with the op regarding the lens-flares. Seemed like they overused it bigtime.
But for the most part, it was a very solid Trek film. Plenty of awesome effects. Some good laughs.

I never watched the series, but I enjoy this movie deeply. Personally, I think the movie has some good pacing. There was always something exciting going on. I never felt like the movie dragged on too much. The shaky camera was used a bit too much though. I guess Abram's Cloverfield days haven't worn off completely. Karl Urban's role as a doctor was rather unique though. In the movies I seen, he usually played some action-type guy. Lastly, I like most of the wide angle shots; they were nice eye candy.



I like how two elements that made me dislike the series are removed: turn-based battles and technobabble. I know turn-based battles are suppose to be more realistic, but they're not exactly fun to watch. Techbabble? The video below explains it.

That video is annoying. I wish the narrator would shut up.

To me, this is the definition of terrible pacing...

It was probably my favorite Trek movie tied with First Contact. I'd probably rank my favorites:

Star Trek / First Contact
Wrath of Khan
The Voyage Home / Undiscovered Country

Talk about loving to hear yourself speak.... God damn.

just got back from seeing it. thought it was

I thought it was good over all. But several of the jokes/one liners were very clumsily set up (most notably the "I've got your gun" line). Every time I got pulled into the story-line, Chris Pine would say some dumbass statement that pulled me out of it.

I enjoyed it a lot. Very good special FX. Casting was exceptionally well done overall, with the exception of Bana (who's character wasn't anything special). I thought that the movie actually could've been longer. By the time you get to that last action sequence, I thought that it was going to be a lot longer (a good longer though). Uhura's character was kind of unnecessary (I understand you can't leave her out, but she almost could've been).

But overall I enjoyed it very much. It was quite the treat to look at visually. I look forward to what they do with the series. I think they've got a pretty good formula.

I did like all the nods kind of to the original trilogy, or at least nods to the campiness

Bana isnt that great of an actor in the first place. i thought the movie was a good length. it just seemed short, but it was about 2 and a half hours long.

It was only just over two hours. Would have been nicer if it was two and a half.

I'm such a huge trek nerd -- the onion video linked was stuff that (while exaggerated) actually touched on my actual concerns. Though I suppose my real concern is only that the broader appeal and whatnot is at the expense of what I think makes Star Trek stand out among most other sci-fi works, which includes the cornball and optimism and such.

Also, I find it amusing that James Rolfe (better known as the Angry Video Game Nerd) picked some technobabble that was actually used in those scenes to highlight making fun of it in its own way.

Until I see the movie myself, I'll have to remain wary with my hopes.

Munich

If any of us get laid tonight, it's because of Eric Bana in Munich.

You don't watch much sci-fi do you?

speak for yourself Vin.

Or read much sci-fi. Star Trek is the reason why most people hate what is otherwise a very rich genre.

the hulk and the other boleyn girl. he wasnt even that good in troy... and it was TROY!

Would have been much better without Old Spock and the time travel/alternate reality cop-out.

We know it's a reboot. We expect major changes. You don't need an excuse.

Old Spock I could glance over. It was nice to see Leonard again. But the time travel...yeah that made me grimace. I still enjoyed it a lot though.

I liked basically everything about it. Thought it was awesome. The only thing I didn't buy was how abrupt the whole accusing Kirk/you're all promoted part was. IMO they could have skipped Kirk and Spock's childhood to have more time for the academy.

I also thought it was funny how much command of the Enterprise got passed around.

Awesome movie. Saw it in IMAX yesterday after my Torts final. Only downside was that I had a terrible headache from all the shaky cam and was unable to work for the rest of the evening.

I'm surprised no one has talked about the alternate reality.

No more Vulcan = severely different Trek future. This means the battle of kirk and spock in front of T'Pol, the famous (duh duh DUH DUH DUH DUH BUM BUM BUM BUM BUM...BUM BUM BUM BUM BUM .... think the cable guy movie battle at medieval times) isn't going to happen because it was ON Vulcan. It also means lots of other stuff isn't going to happen.

Some people might say "Oh, it's a fresh new start for the Trek Franchise, all the future stuff (AKA, all trek series except enterprise) won't hold down the creativity of the writing anymore. I'm a tad upset that everything trekkies have come to know and love is slightly changed and/or jeapordized in an unforseen way.

Also, Kirk a fully promoted full time captain after only enlisting in 3 years? Seems a bit sketchy.

I said 'stand out' -- whether you agree that it's also good is none of my concern, but also not what I meant. I meant that, unlike most sci-fi, which is often DARK and GRITTY and HUMANITY SUCKS BIG ONES, Star Trek (for the most part) doesn't do those things.

i think it's a massive exaggeration that to say most sci fi is about a dystopian future, and a massive exaggeration to claim star trek stands out because it isn't.

Is it?

Metropolis
Social dystopian between classes.

Star Wars
Fighting against the dominant Empire, this arguably introduced 'gritty' into the genre (well).

Firefly
A space western with an oppressive government and a gritty outlaw life.

Starship Troopers
Military life taken to some dark extremes.

The Time Machine
Again, the dystopian class conflict is taken to an extreme with humanity evolved into two -- the equivalents of the upper and lower classes.

1984
Look, it's Big Brother!

Blade Runner
We got a whole subgenre here -- cyberpunk.

Not to mention other subgenres like ones dealing with the apocalypse, and mixed with other genres like horror, superhero (mixed with alternate history like Watchmen), it's not an exaggeration to say that most science fiction deals with the darker side of humanity. This isn't to say that these works aren't good -- quite the opposite. But it is to say that a culturally-significant sci-fi work usually doesn't depict humanity (nevermind its future) as improving socially.

Geb, you're going to have a hard time arguing the Star Wars one. It may be set as a battle against an evil government, but in the end the evil loses, which is hardly characteristic of a dystopian work. (Or a work that looks harshly on human nature.)



On the contrary, the notion that humanity is continually improving and things will keep getting better is very much a trope of scifi (and cultural thinking in general) up until about the 70's. TOS is just a product of its time in that regard, and TNG is a holdover from TOs's vision of the future. DS9 darkened that vision of the future quite a bit; Voyager less so, but are you really going to hold Voyager up as the best example of what makes Star Trek good?

The series does very badly need rebooting. It's weighed down to heavily by decades of low budget writing which is just ludicrous to try to continue to rationalize.

So much of the franchise is just terrible; if they want to do anything with it, they can't be trying to hold continuity with the campy out-dated ideas of the last 40 years of the series' TV-writers. Star Track it self isn't exactly the greatest premise ever, but I think that this movie has proved that it still has potential, and there's still plenty of decent stuff to salvage.

Did you just legitimately try to use the term "Star Track"? Any opinion you had was completely invalidated by that nonsense.

LOL STAR TRACK..oh its like when they call it Star Trex...brilliant

DS9 put some realism into Star Trek. One of the things that I really couldn't swallow about Star Trek was utopian Earth. DS9 showed that humans are still flawed. We can make questionably moral decisions. We still abandon values in a time of crisis. Civil disobedience is still a problem.. People are still corrupt. I didn't get that AT ALL in TOS & TNG. Voyager was..well the nerd's show. They concentrated on technobabble. Enterprise was just full of bad stories but I liked the premise of humanity taking it's first steps into intragalactic travel.

Oh, I don't disagree at all: DS9 is probably my favorite series, for exactly that reason.

Having seen the movie now, I don't get what everybody else is liking about it. I actually don't have any problems with it from a Trek perspective, but as a movie it's just really bad. They preserved a lot of what made TOS good (mostly the characters), but then they replaced the corny optimism with all the tropes of bad stupid action movies. It's not an improvement. (Then again, I have most action movies I see, so I guess I shouldn't really be surprised...)

Really? For me this is right up there with Wraith of Khan and Undiscovered Country. So many of the Star Trek movies are just complete crap.