Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mr Nobody wrote:


I want to know what starfleet makes their ships out of because they were flying them with all the grace of a tractor and somehow did not shatter into a million pieces.

Emergency power to the structural integrity field!

Well, I mostly liked it. It's not a GREAT movie, and still feels more like generic scifi-action movie than Star Trek (but same is true for most Trek movies so...) but it was more 'Trek' than two previous reboot movies.

First movie was fun, but it was mostly fan service and had gigantic plot holes. Into Darkness, what they SHOULD have done there was to estabilish the new 'Trek' continuum but instead they delved even further into fan service and legacy characters, combined with hated clichees from earlier Treks (evil Federation admiral, Enterprise fighting against super huge black ship and so on) and even more gigantonormous plot holes than the first.

In 'Beyond', plot holes were less obvious, there was little legacy burden and they introduced a major original character (well, not that 'original' but at least new). Failures are now only mostly on movie level rather than in concept level so that's a step up. 'Beyond' would have needed about two weeks of more writing to come up with bit better, more memorable dialogue and more original action sequences, and 5 to 10 minutes more runtime to estabilish characters and explain some plot points better. As it was, it felt that movie was overburdened with characters and there wasn't enough to do for many of them.

This is a generic problem for nearly all Trek movies: character cast is based on TV series which has enormously more runtime to estabilish characters and get viewers attached to them and familiarize us with their little quirks which then can be replayed in a movie. When you cram all that cast to two hours of runtime, it is just not enough to give all characters meaningful role (in Beyond, Sulu for example was mostly just sitting around, looking cool).

However, in new Trek movies it is worse because the character cast, whichs size is defined by cast in TOS, is shown ONLY in the movies. Since the characters themselves are quite different from TOS originals, they are effectively new and would need much more time to estabilish themselves than the movies can give us. New Uhura, for example, is mostly defined by her relationship to Spock. Chekov was mostly comic relief. Kirk and Spock are best estabilished characters, but even there, Kirk does way too much brooding because the movies assume a background which hasn't been actually shown to viewers to justify it.

Oh btw: Use of contemporary pop music in Star Trek trailers: a major faux pas.

Backfire wrote:
Oh btw: Use of contemporary pop music in Star Trek trailers: a major faux pas.

It wasn't contemporary pop music though. As they mention in the film; it's classical music.

Can someone explain some things I might have missed?
Were the bad guys humanoid robots? Not the main villains but his mooks?
Or were they the natives Krullba mentioned in his last log?
Were they flying mining craft in space?
Did the mining craft have warp drives or did they fly through realspace to the Yorktown ball?

 =Angel= wrote:
Can someone explain some things I might have missed?
Were the bad guys humanoid robots? Not the main villains but his mooks?
Or were they the natives Krullba mentioned in his last log?
Were they flying mining craft in space?
Did the mining craft have warp drives or did they fly through realspace to the Yorktown ball?

I think the mooks were the robots Krall mentioned in the video towards the end of the film.
I think the craft were part of the leftover technology that was also mentioned.
No, I seem to recall that when the Enterprise travels to the nebula it does so via realspace, so Krall's fleet presumably does so via realspace as well.

 =Angel= wrote:
Can someone explain some things I might have missed?
Were the bad guys humanoid robots? Not the main villains but his mooks?
Or were they the natives Krullba mentioned in his last log?
Were they flying mining craft in space?
Did the mining craft have warp drives or did they fly through realspace to the Yorktown ball?

I was wondering that as well. The mooks seemed likely to be robots, but then there were the three non-robot mooks who ambushed Montgomery Scotty, so I'm a bit confused on that.

Was okay. I do like rebooted star trek more than most of other reboots though might tell more about state old star trek had been left to...

But christ the way they took out that swarm. Had hard time to not roll my eyes over that.

tneva82 wrote:
Was okay. I do like rebooted star trek more than most of other reboots though might tell more about state old star trek had been left to...

But christ the way they took out that swarm. Had hard time to not roll my eyes over that.

My eyes rolled so hard that they came back the other way and realised that the only mistake was...

 Graphite wrote:

 =Angel= wrote:
Can someone explain some things I might have missed?
Were the bad guys humanoid robots? Not the main villains but his mooks?
Or were they the natives Krullba mentioned in his last log?
Were they flying mining craft in space?
Did the mining craft have warp drives or did they fly through realspace to the Yorktown ball?

I was wondering that as well. The mooks seemed likely to be robots, but then there were the three non-robot mooks who ambushed Montgomery Scotty, so I'm a bit confused on that.

Spoiler:

And didn't Krall / Idris Elba mention that only 3 of the crew had survived on his last video log, and hence were would get some use of the life extension tech? I assumed that this meant himself, the guy who gets into a fistfight with black and white girl, and the woman who gets crushed by the enterprise saucer flipping over like the galaxy's biggest pancake (Watch her distress call to the Starbase, her face does roughly the same flickery thing as when Krall drains someones life). So who were these other three jokers?

I think THOSE non robots weren't Krull's minions. They were either natives or other ship's crew that Krull had absconded with to fuel his +10 gauntlets of life draining.
It's all so vague and unclear- more so than TFA IMO.

However, the boarding of the Enterprise played out pretty much like I'd expect a 40k v Trek to look like.

 angelofvengeance wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Hate the idea of reboot.

Star Trek put the show's mission statement into the opening credits "To boldly go where no one has gone before".

You cannot boldly go where no one has gone before if you're retelling stories from 50 years ago!

Glad to see them exploring new avenues with ST Discovery.

The problem is that it was 50yrs ago, where just about all the props were made of foam and ships were made from wood attached to string. And teleporting was light shone at some tinsel.

Not all of the younger generation would fully appreciate it when compared to what they can do with imagery now.

@Graphite: They were quite far away from Federation space in DS9. That and they never applied the strap line to the show. They just had a few pretty shots of a comet etc.

I see that sentiment a lot, but it doesn't really work. I and most of my pals growing up were all huge sci-fi nerds and we hugely appreciated TOS & original trilogy Star Wars despite them being decades old and sometimes looking really dated to our eyes, because they were great stories filled with great characters and more often than not some genuine meaning.

Well, it doesn't work assuming the target audience of your sci-fi product is sci-fi fans, which it evidently is not for nuTrek. That's not to say sci-fi fans can't enjoy it, or that there aren't Prime Trek fans who enjoy nuTrek, but they're not who the film is made for, it's made for Summer Blockbuster audiences who'd be equally at home watching any big, flashy, action-driven film, and yeah sure that audience isn't one that will tolerate dated visuals.

So it's not that they had no choice but to make a flashy, modern, action-driven version of Trek, it's that they decided doing so would make them more money. Huzzah for capitalism, I guess.

 Goliath wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Oh btw: Use of contemporary pop music in Star Trek trailers: a major faux pas.

It wasn't contemporary pop music though. As they mention in the film; it's classical music.

Even if we accept that, third trailer had Rihanna...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

But christ the way they took out that swarm. Had hard time to not roll my eyes over that.

Well, there is actual history of using music as a 'noise' to jam frequencies so it's not that far out.
But yeah that was some convoluted logic to get an excuse to play Beastie Boys. Also I don't kinda get what does it help to jam VHF frequencies if they can just communicate through other frequencies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 =Angel= wrote:

I think THOSE non robots weren't Krull's minions. They were either natives or other ship's crew that Krull had absconded with to fuel his +10 gauntlets of life draining.
It's all so vague and unclear- more so than TFA IMO.

However, the boarding of the Enterprise played out pretty much like I'd expect a 40k v Trek to look like.

Yes Jaylah said they were 'leftovers', just like her.

I was disappointed that Kirk didn't give order 'Repel boarders'.

 Yodhrin wrote:
it's made for Summer Blockbuster audiences who'd be equally at home watching any big, flashy, action-driven film, and yeah sure that audience isn't one that will tolerate dated visuals

Exactly corrrect. Right after the Paramount logo, we see the Alibaba and Huahua logos, then Bad Robot. This film was created to capitalize on Hollywood quality effects to drive foreign box office returns (domestic returns cannot support these effects budgets). This is the Michael Bay's Transformers version of Star Trek. Plot, characterization, and dialogue are secondary at best and it shows.

left half way through the movie... first time in my life I have done so, I think it perhaps has something to do with the fact I have been binging all the original TV series, I went in expecting trek, came out having watched more light shows and shallow story.

since I get cinema for free (thanks GF!) I may give it another go, cant judge it until I finish it.

I felt one of the glaring problems with the film was that they left Jaylah's plot hanging at the end of the movie. She introduced herself by telling Scotty how her family had been killed by Manos (Manus? I cannot find its name anywhere) when they tried to escape, setting up a story arc for her to avenge her family. When she infiltrates Krall's compound, she fights an alien that claims that she will die like her family, heavily implying that this is Manos. Instead of tying up this loose story thread, she flees from the battle with Kirk and that is the last we see of Manos. We do not know if Manos joined the fleet and died from the power of rock, was on of the ships that crashed into Enterprise, or if they are still on Altamid waiting for everyone to come home. That detail has been bothering me more than it should.

My grandmother still has not stopped complaining about how Spock's ears are not pointy enough, but at least it distracts her from trying to garden in the middle of a heatwave.

 the Signless wrote:
I felt one of the glaring problems with the film was that they left Jaylah's plot hanging at the end of the movie. She introduced herself by telling Scotty how her family had been killed by Manos (Manus? I cannot find its name anywhere) when they tried to escape, setting up a story arc for her to avenge her family. When she infiltrates Krall's compound, she fights an alien that claims that she will die like her family, heavily implying that this is Manos. Instead of tying up this loose story thread, she flees from the battle with Kirk and that is the last we see of Manos. We do not know if Manos joined the fleet and died from the power of rock, was on of the ships that crashed into Enterprise, or if they are still on Altamid waiting for everyone to come home. That detail has been bothering me more than it should.

Yeah I noticed it too. They were setting her up for personal revenge which never happened. On the other hand, most obvious route (she kills Manas (Manos?)) in hand-to-hand combat would have been so paint-by-numbers that I'm not too bothered that it wasn't resolved that way.
Also I thought it was strange she didn't seem to have any desire to contact her own people. Maybe she has been away so long she wouldn't feel home there anymore or something. I assume they are setting her up joining Enterprise's crew, it is obvious that such a visually striking character has plenty of appeal. Especially with Chekov gone...

She could easily fill Chekov's role. She's a wizkid with enough to martial training to sit comfortably at the defense/security station.

I suppose we could trade one accent gimmick for another. Beyond was very keen to portray lots of aliens among the crew, even more than I remembered from the previous two films, so she'd fit in on that score. Gosh some of those aliens, especially facehugger head and flayed bat face, were downright gross. Anyhow, Sofia Boutella was suitably charming. I wonder how long she would have to be at the Academy before becoming a bridge officer. As of Beyond, the Enterprise is in Year 3 of 5.

 Manchu wrote:
I suppose we could trade one accent gimmick for another. Beyond was very keen to portray lots of aliens among the crew, even more than I remembered from the previous two films, so she'd fit in on that score. Gosh some of those aliens, especially facehugger head and flayed bat face, were downright gross. Anyhow, Sofia Boutella was suitably charming. I wonder how long she would have to be at the Academy before becoming a bridge officer. As of Beyond, the Enterprise is in Year 3 of 5.

Considering JJTrek Starfleet are evidently willing to make a newly-graduated Cadet the captain of their brand-spanky-new flagship, they'll probably give her a quick long-distance interview by viewscreen and make her the Conn officer

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I suppose we could trade one accent gimmick for another. Beyond was very keen to portray lots of aliens among the crew, even more than I remembered from the previous two films, so she'd fit in on that score. Gosh some of those aliens, especially facehugger head and flayed bat face, were downright gross. Anyhow, Sofia Boutella was suitably charming. I wonder how long she would have to be at the Academy before becoming a bridge officer. As of Beyond, the Enterprise is in Year 3 of 5.

Considering JJTrek Starfleet are evidently willing to make a newly-graduated Cadet the captain of their brand-spanky-new flagship, they'll probably give her a quick long-distance interview by viewscreen and make her the Conn officer

This irked me at first too, but it actually makes more sense when you sit back and think about it. In the conflict with Nero, Starfleet lost a literal fleetsworth of ships and officers when the fleet was stretched thin enough in the first place it had to drag cadets out of the academy to fill the stations.

Remember that JJ Trek starts before the Federation-Klingon War, at a point when Starfleet's role as a military force to defend the Federation is very limited (that role wouldn't expand until after the war). Pike said it himself. Starfleet is a "humanitarian armada", not a battle fleet. In that kind of organization, it makes a fair bit more sense to fast track officers to command, especially if one of them comes out of a crisis a big damn hero and you're really short on officers, let alone capable ones. EDIT: Not to mention that this is in the period before first contact with Borg, when Star Fleet's overriding philosophy was that of a peaceful force of exploration and diplomacy. Even when arming ships to the teeth, the Federation didn't build an actual warship until after Wolf 359 when it designed and constructed the U.S.S Defiant (and the later Akira, Prometheus, and Sovereign class ships).

I just saw the movie this afternoon, and I loved it! The new Trek will never beat the classic Trek series (any of them) or movies, but it's still good and worth seeing.


My favorite thing from the movie had to be Yorktown; I would totally live there if it was a real place!

Yorktown was bitchin'

Arclight Theaters in Manhattan Beach have the costumes for Jayjah and Scotty on display...
if you are in L.A., fancy a trip to the beach, and a cool down at the theatre after, go check them out...
the costumes look really cool, and the movie snack bar serves beer and wine

cheers
jah

Is bevvy in cinemas not a common thing in the US?

 Yodhrin wrote:
Is bevvy in cinemas not a common thing in the US?

If by bevvy you mean alcoholic drinks such as wine, beer, and cocktails, not normally.

There are a few places that do, but that isn't the norm. AMC, IMAX, and other theaters generally do not serve.

There was an awesome theater near my house in Houston that had tables and served food and wine and stuff, and if you hit a button, a chick would come to your table with more stuff.

That was pretty cool.

 kronk wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Is bevvy in cinemas not a common thing in the US?

If by bevvy you mean alcoholic drinks such as wine, beer, and cocktails, not normally.

There are a few places that do, but that isn't the norm. AMC, IMAX, and other theaters generally do not serve.

There was an awesome theater near my house in Houston that had tables and served food and wine and stuff, and if you hit a button, a chick would come to your table with more stuff.

That was pretty cool.

Man, that's mad, even the chain cinemas in my city sell booze to adults at films rated 15 or higher. There's one local venue that's the only place I'll willingly go out to watch a film that has small screens(~20 people) with giant plush chairs and craft beer table service.

I don't think I could tolerate watching films with other people at all if not for alcohol

You could always sneak in a flask of something stronger or a few bottles of these to mix in your slushie.

I think it is becoming more common now though - the AMC's in my area serve alcohol.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
She could easily fill Chekov's role. She's a wizkid with enough to martial training to sit comfortably at the defense/security station.

Yeah and they need to fill the alien warrior quota and Klingons are probably out of question at this point.

Plus, staff-fighting warrior-scavenger-mechanic-chicks are all the rage in SciFi-franchises just now.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Is bevvy in cinemas not a common thing in the US?

If by bevvy you mean alcoholic drinks such as wine, beer, and cocktails, not normally.

There are a few places that do, but that isn't the norm. AMC, IMAX, and other theaters generally do not serve.

There was an awesome theater near my house in Houston that had tables and served food and wine and stuff, and if you hit a button, a chick would come to your table with more stuff.

That was pretty cool.

Man, that's mad, even the chain cinemas in my city sell booze to adults at films rated 15 or higher. There's one local venue that's the only place I'll willingly go out to watch a film that has small screens(~20 people) with giant plush chairs and craft beer table service.

I don't think I could tolerate watching films with other people at all if not for alcohol

it is becoming more common for small theatres with second-run films to serve dinner and drinks, as well, which makes more a much nicer evening out...
sadly, the big theatres are slower on the up-take, but times are changing...

when i moved to Amsterdam in '98, i was blown away by bottles of Grolsch being standard fare at the movies...
it was nice to see that people could be trusted to act like adults, a sentiment that is all too rare in the States...

cheers
jah

 Alpharius wrote:
I think it is becoming more common now though - the AMC's in my area serve alcohol.

There are at least two theaters within five miles of my house that serve adult beverages. One is the Alamo Drafthouse, which is my preferred theater, and it has a full waitstaff to serve you food and beverages at your seat. The other is a Cobb Theater (which is literally right around the corner from me), which has a bar in the lobby that allows you to take your drinks into the theater and a kitchen where you can order and then carry your meal in.