StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Bounty wrote:... I could have sworn I had a spoiler warning before the UGO link. Did Bean have to edit that in or was there something else wrong?

Siobhan Synnot, for the [url=http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment/Film-review-Star-Trek-4012A41.5204557.jp]Scotsman.com[/url] wrote:It helps that the new Kirk-Spock dynamic isn't yet one of warm friendship. Instead, Spock's logic and Kirk's rebelliousness clash, and it is Spock who captains the Enterprise. "Out of the chair," the Vulcan wearily instructs James T Cuckoo. The story may be the least interesting aspect but New Star Trek, like Old Trek, invests in creating engaging relationships and rivalries that are more engaging than many recent films firmly placed on this planet.

Conor Nolan, for the [url=http://www.people.co.uk/showbiz/atthemovies/tm_headline=star-trek&method=full&objectid=21309629&siteid=93463-name_page.html]People.co,uk[/url] wrote:I couldn't wait to write this week's column and let everyone know how good the new Star Trek movie is.

This reboot of the franchise that began life as a TV show in 1966, the year I was born, is nothing short of spectacular. The hairs on my neck were on end in the first 10 minutes, before the title credits had even come up. The film really is that good.

Starting with the immortal line Space The Final Frontier - used in many of the 10 previous Star Trek films - director JJ Abrams tells us the origins of James T Kirk, Mr Spock and the rest of the USS Enterprise crew with real style, flair and vision.

Drew McWeeny, for the [url=http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/2009-4-25-the-motion-captured-review-star-trek]Motion/Captured[/url] wrote:Here, finally, the property is being given all the support any fan could ever ask, and it seems like the hardcores have decided that they won't support it because it's not the "Trek" they know and love.

But... it is. And it's new. And somehow, that combination of earnest homage and carefully-constructed reboot turns out to be the exact right way to not just bring "Star Trek" back to life, but to also extend that life to an audience that's never been truly interested before. It's neither fully sequel nor completely reboot, and so Abrams and his creative team have done something I've never really seen someone try before, and certainly something that no one's ever accomplished with this enormous confidence and skill. It's just plain fun, it's crafted with a genuine affection for the iconography of prior "Trek" but not with the sort of slavish devotion that crippled Singer's "Superman Returns," and I think it gives Paramount permission to go anywhere they want when they bring this cast back for the now-inevitable sequel.

SF Movie Page wrote: The truth is that we found ourselves missing the old cast, but most audiences won’t care: Star Trek works fine when taken on its own terms as a modern special effects-driven action flick. It is also hardly the train smash some fans feared it would be. (It’s better than any of the Star Wars prequels for starters. Shorter too.) Newbies to Trek should check it out and long-time fans should also lend their support. After all, the financial success of this Trek will determine the very future of the franchise and the universe will seem a much colder place without any Trek at all, even if it is somewhat “off” Trek . . .

Daily Telegraph (AU) wrote:Audiences who are anticipating a thrill-ride from re-imagined Star Trek blockbuster film from director JJ Abrams won't be disappointed.

And the good news is you don't have to own a plastic pair of pointy ears to enjoy it.

Aeolus wrote:I just saw the new trek at a sneak preview and I really really enjoyed it. I have always been a huge fan of WOK but in my opinion the new one is better. I can't state enough how much i liked it.

JLTucker wrote:

Aeolus wrote:I just saw the new trek at a sneak preview and I really really enjoyed it. I have always been a huge fan of WOK but in my opinion the new one is better. I can't state enough how much i liked it.

This can't be possible. Remember, we are all not lucky enough to go to an advanced screening according to Alyeska.

I am tired of the rave reviews, to be honest. Hopefully next week we will see the film torn to shreds. When I read reviews on films, I look at the bad ones and make a judgment call.

judging from the trailers and what we're shown of the villain it generally seems a lot like Nemesis.

Big Orange wrote:I do get the nagging feeling that this movie will be this year's Speed Racer in terms of box office performance, even if it is not terrible per se, it is going against Wolverine: Origin, and judging from the trailers and what we're shown of the villain it generally seems a lot like Nemesis.

Jon wrote:Without spoiling too much Nero's reasoning for his actions are much better defined and 'justified' than Shinzon's stupid ass plan- the only real similarity between them is being bald.

Jon wrote:Without spoiling too much Nero's reasoning for his actions are much better defined and 'justified' than Shinzon's stupid ass plan- the only real similarity between them is being bald.

Bounty wrote:

judging from the trailers and what we're shown of the villain it generally seems a lot like Nemesis.

Except anyone who's seen it says it isn't?