Action ? Yes. Establishing the crew ? OK. After that, well . . .

Also, the Vulcan skyscrapers look like they could use a pressure-cleaning

The more I see Zoe Saldana as Uhura, the more I think she is absolutely scrumptious!

@ #56: a rascal…dropKirk…bawaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaahaha!

BTW –

I just scored passes to an advance screening this coming Monday!!!!

w000000000000000000t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>>>>>>>>>

56. HesDeadJim – April 23, 2009

@10 you know I have to say that while I’m sure even people who are as excited as this film as I am have their own personal doubts, there are trolls like you who take it to a new level

You and your beetle-browed friends are more than free to post your nitpicking here, from the comfort of your parent’s basement

And when the film comes out, feel free to light up all the trek BBSs about every single irrelevant mistake you’ve come across

But so help me God, if one of you disgusting obese fanboys disrupts by movie going experience, I will put the dropKirk on your fat ass so hard that you seriously better hope that your parents can afford to buy you a Rascal (although most of you are probably already in one)

Ahh..thats better

VIva La Trek!

“So is the motorcycles wheels independent from the body? Look at the picture, it’s blowing my mind! Did someone say it was a BMW?”

The wheels are attached, though unconventionally. This is a popular motif among industrial design students, referred to as the “hubless” look. Motor energy is (in theory) relayed by a smaller, offset mechanism. The original conceit was purely graphical, eliminating the clutter of hubs and spokes, freeing the elegance and strength of true circles. The form becomes sculptural, appearing to float. To my knowledge, such has never made it to the silver screen, before — despite many, many hopeful submissions by concept artists!

Yeah, ummm… No. Dead wrong. Its called a good story. Usually when you have a good story with good characters, you don’t give a rat’s ass what the stuff looks like. Its all background that serves as the setting. Yeah, the speed of the movie makes it hard to look at the little design details, but that’s not what our friend here is saying. What he’s saying is that you get sucked into the story so much that you don’t pay attention. And what problems are you referring to? If you are saying that all the problems with this movie involve your personal dislike of the production design, then no, those are not problems. They’re your problems. And my friend, the continuity, whether you choose to accept it or not, has already been explained away and according to those who have seen it, is explained perfectly within the movie. The movie is good. Get over it. Stop trying to convince people that this movie sucks and don’t say that’s not what you’re doing. If you didn’t have a purpose to your statement, then you would not have said it at all.

And just for you info:

-The movie currently has a 100% at rotten tomatoes
-All the fans who have seen the movie like it
-All who were suckered into seeing it and had no plans to loved it

Shall I continue?

Its a good movie. I haven’t seen it, but considering I have read about 43 reviews so far, all positive, then yes, I think its safe to say the movie is at least halfway decent.

Your arguable friend,
THE GOVERNATOR

codename: Gd846c3

(here ends tirade)

Right….the speed and story of the film will distract from the problems. That’s a given. Stories do that…and the speed of this one, in addition to the edits, camera work and flares help distract viewers from continuity issues. The still images and small clips we have already seen are better estimates about our individual reactions and the film’s design problems. Easier to judge without the rollercoaster effect.

I was born in 1984…5 years to late for TMP in theateres and 2 years too late for TWOK

I know that TMP wasn’t the greatest Star Trek film…I don’t hate it as much as most, but I do know that it was an incredibly hyped movie premiere, and I wish I could have been there…I started watching Trek with TNG, and worked my way backwards…the only films I saw in theatres were the dissapointing Generations and the snooze-fest/overbloated T.V. episode known as Insurrection…so in many ways, even though I have teeny-tiny insignificant worries about this film, this is Dec. 1979 for me.. I want to go all out and make this an event, and totally embarass my wife in the process!

And by the way, Anton Yelchin is a great actor…I am only more excited about seeing Urban as McCoy…last year I ananlyzed Yelchin’s film “Charlie Bartlett” for an English class, and he was just great…he’s funny, and he’s got the Chekhov spunk, so he’ll do just fine!

“Name…Chekhov, Pavel…

Rank…ADMIRAL!”

Not that we go back to the original time line, but these younger characters made so much sense that it fleshes out the TV show characters even more, regardless of the design differences.

I’m telling you all:

This movie is too engaging to let you worry about the surface details. Maybe walking home you may start to debate with other or yourself the differences pro and con, but while watching the film, you’re just too caught up in what Spock or Kirk or Uhura or Chekov will do next.