New Star Trek Movie, your thoughts.

[heganboy]

What I did enjoy about the film was, that the director has hit the reboot button. That means all the pointless information and trivia the Trekkies have learnt over the years is now void

Ziggy,
you're mistaken here- the whole movie is set deep into all the star trek lore, there's nothing in there that isn't consistent with all the trekkies wealth of "knowledge".

strangely enough the wife loved it and she's never seen a star trek movie or even an episode...

[ziggysego]

What I did enjoy about the film was, that the director has hit the reboot button. That means all the pointless information and trivia the Trekkies have learnt over the years is now void

Ziggy,
you're mistaken here- the whole movie is set deep into all the star trek lore, there's nothing in there that isn't consistent with all the trekkies wealth of "knowledge".

strangely enough the wife loved it and she's never seen a star trek movie or even an episode...

You're mistaken heganboy I'm afraid. One example is that the Vulcan race has been virtually wiped out now. That wasn't the case in the original history.

[Trevor Hill]

Ziggy your original post on this thread was to describe the movie as "cheesey". Can you explain, especially now that you seem to be a Trekkie and know a bit about Vulcan history. I am not a fan of Star Trek, certainly not the original, but I really enjoyed this movie and in no way would call it cheesey.

[heganboy]

You're mistaken heganboy I'm afraid. One example is that the Vulcan race has been virtually wiped out now. That wasn't the case in the original history.

ah ziggy we'll not fall out over it, but from the most referenced piece i have ever seen in wikipedia:

Orci said creating a clean reboot would have been disrespectful,[68] and getting Leonard Nimoy in the film was very important. "Having him sitting around a camp fire sharing his memories was never gonna cut it" though, and time travel was going to be included in the film from the beginning.[69] Kurtzman added the time travel creates jeopardy, unlike other prequels where viewers "know how they all died".[70] The writers acknowledged time travel had been overused in the other series, but it served a good purpose in creating a new set of adventures for the original characters before they could completely do away with it in other films.[71] Abrams selected the Romulans as the villains because they had been featured less than the Klingons in the show, and thought it was "fun" to have them meet Kirk before he does in the show.[72] Orci and Kurtzman noted it would feel backwards to demonize the Klingons again after they had become heroes in later Star Trek series, and the Romulan presence continues Spock's story from his last chronological appearance in "Unification", an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation set in 2368.[71] The episode of the original continuity in which Kirk becomes the first human to ever see a Romulan, "Balance of Terror", served as one of the influences for the film.[57] Orci said it was difficult giving a good explanation for the time travel without being gimmicky, like having Nero specifically seeking to assassinate Kirk.[73]
Orci noted while the time travel story allowed them to alter some backstory elements such as Kirk's first encounter with the Romulans, they could not use it as a crutch to change everything and they tried to approach the film as a prequel as much as possible. Kirk's service on the Farragut, a major backstory point to the original episode "Obsession", was left out because it was deemed irrelevant to the story of Kirk meeting Spock, although Orci felt nothing in his script precluded it from the new film's backstory.[69] There was a scene involving Kirk meeting Carol Marcus, who becomes the mother of his son in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, as a child, but it was dropped because the film needed more time to introduce the core characters.[47][74] Figuring out ways to get the crew together required some contrivances, which Orci and Kurtzman wanted to explain from old Spock as a way of the timeline mending itself, highlighting the theme of destiny. The line was very difficult to write and was ultimately cut out.[71][75]
The filmmakers sought inspiration from novels such as Prime Directive, Spock's World, and Best Destiny to fill in gaps unexplained by canon; Best Destiny particularly explores Kirk's childhood and names his parents.[57][69][76] One idea that was justified through information from the novels was having the Enterprise built on Earth, which was inspired by a piece of fan art of the Enterprise being built in a ship yard. Orci had sent the fan art to Abrams to show how realistic the film could be.[77] Orci explained parts of the ship would have to be constructed on Earth because of the artificial gravity employed on the ship and its requirement for sustaining warp speed, and therefore the calibration of the ship's machinery would be best done in the exact gravity well which is to be simulated.[78] They felt free to have the ship built in Iowa because canon is ambiguous as to whether it was built in San Francisco, but this is a result of the time travel rather than something intended to overlap with the original timeline.[70] Abrams noted the continuity of the original show itself was inconsistent at times.[7]
Orci and Kurtzman said they wanted the general audience to like the film as much as the fans, by stripping away "Treknobabble", making it action-packed and giving it the simple title of Star Trek (to indicate to newcomers they would not need to watch any of the other films).[79] Abrams saw humor and sex appeal as two integral and popular elements of the show that needed to be maintained.[63] Orci stated being realistic and being serious were not the same thing.[77] Abrams, Burk, Lindelof, Orci and Kurtzman were fans of The Wrath of Khan, and also cited The Next Generation episode "Yesterday's Enterprise" as an influence.[57] Abrams's wife Katie was regularly consulted on the script, as were Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof's wives, to make the female characters as strong as possible.[68] Katie Abrams's approval of the strong female characters was partly why Abrams signed on to direct.[80]
Orci and Kurtzman read graduate school dissertations on the series for inspiration;[56] they noted comparisons of Kirk, Spock and McCoy to Shakespearian archetypes, and Kirk and Spock's friendship echoing that of John Lennon and Paul McCartney.[57] They also noted that, in the creation of this film, they were influenced by Star Wars, particularly in terms of pacing. "I want to feel the space, I want to feel speed and I want to feel all the things that can become a little bit lost when Star Trek becomes very stately" said Orci.[67] Star Wars permeated in the way they wrote the action sequences,[70] while Burk noted Kirk and Spock's initially cold relationship mirrors how "Han Solo wasn't friends with anyone when they started on their journey."[81] Spock and Uhura were put in an actual relationship as a nod to early episodes highlighting her interest in him.[75] Orci wanted to introduce strong Starfleet captains, concurring with an interviewer that most captains in other films were "patsies" included to make Kirk look greater by comparison.[68]
The USS Kelvin, the ship Kirk's father serves on, is named after J. J. Abrams' grandfather, as well as the temperature scale Kelvin, itself named after physicist and engineer Lord Kelvin (William Thomson). The Kelvin's captain, Richard Robau (Faran Tahir), is named after Orci's Cuban uncle: Orci theorized the fictional character was born in Cuba and grew up in the Middle East.[77] Another reference to Abrams' previous works is Slusho, which Uhura orders at the bar at which she meets Kirk. Abrams created the fictitious drink for Alias and it reappeared in viral marketing for Cloverfield. Its owners, Tagruato, is also from Cloverfield and appears on a building in San Francisco.[38] The red matter in the film is in the shape of a red ball, an Abrams motif dating back to the pilot of Alias.[82]

[theskull1]

Nothing beats chewin the fat's version 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLxLmFhROqY

[ziggysego]

You're mistaken heganboy I'm afraid. One example is that the Vulcan race has been virtually wiped out now. That wasn't the case in the original history.

ah ziggy we'll not fall out over it, but from the most referenced piece i have ever seen in wikipedia:

Orci said creating a clean reboot would have been disrespectful,[68] and getting Leonard Nimoy in the film was very important. "Having him sitting around a camp fire sharing his memories was never gonna cut it" though, and time travel was going to be included in the film from the beginning.[69] Kurtzman added the time travel creates jeopardy, unlike other prequels where viewers "know how they all died".[70] The writers acknowledged time travel had been overused in the other series, but it served a good purpose in creating a new set of adventures for the original characters before they could completely do away with it in other films.[71] Abrams selected the Romulans as the villains because they had been featured less than the Klingons in the show, and thought it was "fun" to have them meet Kirk before he does in the show.[72] Orci and Kurtzman noted it would feel backwards to demonize the Klingons again after they had become heroes in later Star Trek series, and the Romulan presence continues Spock's story from his last chronological appearance in "Unification", an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation set in 2368.[71] The episode of the original continuity in which Kirk becomes the first human to ever see a Romulan, "Balance of Terror", served as one of the influences for the film.[57] Orci said it was difficult giving a good explanation for the time travel without being gimmicky, like having Nero specifically seeking to assassinate Kirk.[73]
Orci noted while the time travel story allowed them to alter some backstory elements such as Kirk's first encounter with the Romulans, they could not use it as a crutch to change everything and they tried to approach the film as a prequel as much as possible. Kirk's service on the Farragut, a major backstory point to the original episode "Obsession", was left out because it was deemed irrelevant to the story of Kirk meeting Spock, although Orci felt nothing in his script precluded it from the new film's backstory.[69] There was a scene involving Kirk meeting Carol Marcus, who becomes the mother of his son in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, as a child, but it was dropped because the film needed more time to introduce the core characters.[47][74] Figuring out ways to get the crew together required some contrivances, which Orci and Kurtzman wanted to explain from old Spock as a way of the timeline mending itself, highlighting the theme of destiny. The line was very difficult to write and was ultimately cut out.[71][75]
The filmmakers sought inspiration from novels such as Prime Directive, Spock's World, and Best Destiny to fill in gaps unexplained by canon; Best Destiny particularly explores Kirk's childhood and names his parents.[57][69][76] One idea that was justified through information from the novels was having the Enterprise built on Earth, which was inspired by a piece of fan art of the Enterprise being built in a ship yard. Orci had sent the fan art to Abrams to show how realistic the film could be.[77] Orci explained parts of the ship would have to be constructed on Earth because of the artificial gravity employed on the ship and its requirement for sustaining warp speed, and therefore the calibration of the ship's machinery would be best done in the exact gravity well which is to be simulated.[78] They felt free to have the ship built in Iowa because canon is ambiguous as to whether it was built in San Francisco, but this is a result of the time travel rather than something intended to overlap with the original timeline.[70] Abrams noted the continuity of the original show itself was inconsistent at times.[7]
Orci and Kurtzman said they wanted the general audience to like the film as much as the fans, by stripping away "Treknobabble", making it action-packed and giving it the simple title of Star Trek (to indicate to newcomers they would not need to watch any of the other films).[79] Abrams saw humor and sex appeal as two integral and popular elements of the show that needed to be maintained.[63] Orci stated being realistic and being serious were not the same thing.[77] Abrams, Burk, Lindelof, Orci and Kurtzman were fans of The Wrath of Khan, and also cited The Next Generation episode "Yesterday's Enterprise" as an influence.[57] Abrams's wife Katie was regularly consulted on the script, as were Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof's wives, to make the female characters as strong as possible.[68] Katie Abrams's approval of the strong female characters was partly why Abrams signed on to direct.[80]
Orci and Kurtzman read graduate school dissertations on the series for inspiration;[56] they noted comparisons of Kirk, Spock and McCoy to Shakespearian archetypes, and Kirk and Spock's friendship echoing that of John Lennon and Paul McCartney.[57] They also noted that, in the creation of this film, they were influenced by Star Wars, particularly in terms of pacing. "I want to feel the space, I want to feel speed and I want to feel all the things that can become a little bit lost when Star Trek becomes very stately" said Orci.[67] Star Wars permeated in the way they wrote the action sequences,[70] while Burk noted Kirk and Spock's initially cold relationship mirrors how "Han Solo wasn't friends with anyone when they started on their journey."[81] Spock and Uhura were put in an actual relationship as a nod to early episodes highlighting her interest in him.[75] Orci wanted to introduce strong Starfleet captains, concurring with an interviewer that most captains in other films were "patsies" included to make Kirk look greater by comparison.[68]
The USS Kelvin, the ship Kirk's father serves on, is named after J. J. Abrams' grandfather, as well as the temperature scale Kelvin, itself named after physicist and engineer Lord Kelvin (William Thomson). The Kelvin's captain, Richard Robau (Faran Tahir), is named after Orci's Cuban uncle: Orci theorized the fictional character was born in Cuba and grew up in the Middle East.[77] Another reference to Abrams' previous works is Slusho, which Uhura orders at the bar at which she meets Kirk. Abrams created the fictitious drink for Alias and it reappeared in viral marketing for Cloverfield. Its owners, Tagruato, is also from Cloverfield and appears on a building in San Francisco.[38] The red matter in the film is in the shape of a red ball, an Abrams motif dating back to the pilot of Alias.[82]

Well not being the obvious Trekkie like yourself heganboy, I didn't invest a great deal of my time in researching an answer

[heganboy]

geeks-r-us

[All of a Sludden]

New trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ec_rPApKCA

New ship:

[Syferus]

The same man in charge of Star Wars and Star Trek is wrong on so many inconceivable levels. It's the sort of thing you could never in your wildest dreams imagine, like Mayo winning the All-Ireland or Mike Sheehy saying something nice.

I think the first Abrahams Star Trek movie would have made a good Star Wars movie. I hope the second film goes beyond the skin-deep lip service to the franchise of the first but I honestly have higher hopes for the new Star Wars film.

[stew]

The same man in charge of Star Wars and Star Trek is wrong on so many inconceivable levels. It's the sort of thing you could never in your wildest dreams imagine, like Mayo winning the All-Ireland or Mike Sheehy saying something nice.

I think the first Abrahams Star Trek movie would have made a good Star Wars movie. I hope the second film goes beyond the skin-deep lip service to the franchise of the first but I honestly have higher hopes for the new Star Wars film.

It's sci fi, I am sure the lad can separate the two franchises with no bother.

Bad comparison with Sheehy though, Sheehy is just an ignoramus, yer man is extremely talented and can bring people enjoyment through his movies, Mickey peddles negative shite to a few dozen.

[Syferus]

The same man in charge of Star Wars and Star Trek is wrong on so many inconceivable levels. It's the sort of thing you could never in your wildest dreams imagine, like Mayo winning the All-Ireland or Mike Sheehy saying something nice.

I think the first Abrahams Star Trek movie would have made a good Star Wars movie. I hope the second film goes beyond the skin-deep lip service to the franchise of the first but I honestly have higher hopes for the new Star Wars film.

It's sci fi, I am sure the lad can separate the two franchises with no bother.

Bad comparison with Sheehy though, Sheehy is just an ignoramus, yer man is extremely talented and can bring people enjoyment through his movies, Mickey peddles negative shite to a few dozen.

Y'see, I don't think he could do that even before he got his hands on Star Wars. Abrahams' style is action blockbuster, boom-fizzle-boom stuff, and he's at his best doing that type of film. Star Wars basically created the modern blockbuster so that's a natural home for him. Star Trek means something more thoughful to me. There's a clear (and very endearing) hokeyness to the franchise but what made it so vital was its willingness to tackle ideas other mainstream products wouldn't touch. It was about ideas and Abrahams made a film about explosions and one-liners.

If I had to chose a big name director for Star Trek it'd be someone like Christopher Nolan, a director who could integrate interesting ideas with action, without the stilted old-fashioned tone of the tv series.

[All of a Sludden]

Enjoyable, but not as good as the first one. 5/10