J.J. Abrams' Star Trek


Recommended Posts

Well just saw this movie, I watched everything from ST before and was a bit skeptical but man it was a fantastic movie! It felt fresh and new but I still had this good old StarTrek feeling while watching it. The crew was amazing too, especially Kirk, Scotty... ah what am I saying everyone of them was great!

Like some said before, the whole timeline thing is a bit overused but it was the best way to gain freedom for future plots. However I must say when Vulcan was destroyed I was a bit..... ummm O_O....

Anyways a short word to the ship design, was great too, Neros ship kinda reminded me of the Scimitar but hey it was Romulan too. The Enterprise was the best designed Constitution-class i've seen to date, it just looked "sleek"

Anyways can't wait for the sequel^^

Maybe its just me but i miss the old crew of Piccard, Riker, Data, etc from the older Star Trek movies. I don't think anyone will ever be able to replace that crew. This new take on Star Trek really doesn't appeal to me. Neverless my girlfriend convinced me to go see it tonight and it wasn't all bad.. action packed at least.

That is not the old crew...

This movie portrays the original star trek crew which was kirk spock ect...

I loved Simon pegg as Scotty lol

Maybe its just me but i miss the old crew of Piccard, Riker, Data, etc from the older Star Trek movies. I don't think anyone will ever be able to replace that crew. This new take on Star Trek really doesn't appeal to me. Neverless my girlfriend convinced me to go see it tonight and it wasn't all bad.. action packed at least.

I think you need to learn 2 Star Trek.

saw it at the weekend and loved it!.. also the fact it was fast paced and just moved forward.. nothing like the last few films that seem to be lots of talking bit of action and more talking/babel...(nemesis anyone or inseraction) so hit the mark for me.

the timeline change i can't really see is really that big.. so i hope they really dont just scrap everything and start over.. that would be disrepectful to a franchise that as lasted so long.

standout characters was Bones.. thought Karl urbun did a top job. and Zachary was just spock.

Hammond, let it go. I'm disappointed that a self proclaimed Trekkie can't empathise with why many others are a bit miffed by the film.

The only think Trek about the movie were the bits JJ stole from other Treks. The general dumbing down, while letting in more popcorn heads may be good for revenue, it hardly furthers Roddenbury's vison (which you admit). Its hard for me to understand how you take that in such good humor. Like many in a string of movies and TV lately, they spent the money for the names and little else.

Saw it yesterday at the imax in London. Totally awesome film. I've been a trekkie for many years, right back to the original series and I loved this film. All this crap about it dumbing down. Of course it has to. If it contained anything like previous films my girlfriend would have been bored silly. But she loved it as much as I did.

I'm glad some of the trekkie nerds hate it, and the masses are loving it. For too long, I think the stigma attached to Star Trek, because of its fanbase, has held it back.

That being said, a friend of mine, who is one of the biggest star trek geeks I've ever met, loved the movie and the freedom this will afford the franchise. warwagon, I've not seen the film, but from what he told me,

there is something in the number of 10,000 Vulcans remaining after the destruction of their homeworld.

Edited by VIVIsectVI
Question

So in this new universe there should be no romulains right? They are now extinct?

No. The Romulans aren't extinct in either timeline. Their planet was simply destroyed by their star going supernova (in the future timeline). Of course, that doesn't mean every single Romulan died.

I liked the fact that they cut back on the whole shields thing...I am sick and tired of them calling out "Shields are at 30%, blah blah".

No, no. They did refer to shields. I just didn't see any shield impacts in the ship-to-ship battle scenes. It felt as if they were fighting with no shields. All you saw was explosions.

I actually believe it was the Vulcan's who are now Extinct

No. Vulcans aren't extinct. Remember, Spock said something about 10,000 Vulcans remaining and being a member of an endangered species.

I'm glad some of the trekkie nerds hate it, and the masses are loving it. For too long, I think the stigma attached to Star Trek, because of its fanbase, has held it back.

Hey! I'm a Trekkie and I loved it. I'm so glad that it's becoming more mainstream. It makes Star Trek feel "cooler".

No. The Romulans aren't extinct in either timeline. Their planet was simply destroyed by their star going supernova. Of course, that doesn't mean every single Romulan died.

No, no. They did refer to shields. I just didn't see any shield impacts in the ship-to-ship battle scenes. It felt as if they were fighting with no shields. All you saw was explosions.

No. Vulcans aren't extinct. Remember, Spock said something about 10,000 Vulcans remaining and being a member of an endangered species.

Hey! I'm a Trekkie and I loved it. I'm so glad that it's becoming more mainstream. It makes Star Trek feel "cooler".

Oh, I know, I said some. I'm a closet trekkie nerd, and have been for years. Now I can be open about it. =P

Oh, I know, I said some. I'm a closet trekkie nerd, and have been for years. Now I can be open about it. =P

I know. :)

I do agree with you. This movie has made Star Trek more mainstream. And that's exactly what it needs. I'm sure a lot of non-Trekkies went out to see this film. Heck, I went with two of my non-Trekkie friends and they enjoyed it just as much as I did. In fact, it made them more interested in Star Trek.

right well In my head I was thinking Endangered, I dunno why I said extinct, heh I was just reading that other guys post

Gotcha!

Anyway, did you guys notice the new warp effect? I liked it a lot. It really gives you a sense of speed eh?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • >defenders of AI-generated artworks often claim that AI is just a tool It is not. It is the inhuman artist replacement. The human writing the prompt is the employer/manager requesting the work product of the artist -- a supervisory/descriptive job that doesn't carry with it any rights to the copyright of that work product at all. And since AI is not human itself, it can't gain copyright for anything it is asked to regurgitate or hallucinate, so it can't transfer that copyright to the employer/manager/human who asked for the output. This was all legally reaffirmed last year. So, no, while there are AI tools, AI slopware generation is NOT a "tool" in the legal definition of that word.
    • As long as i get to play GTA 6 before it ends 😂😂
    • Google is opening the world's first AI museum in Los Angeles by Ivan Jenic Image via: Google Ever since AI image generators went mainstream, the debate over whether AI-generated art is real art hasn't let up. Those who don’t consider AI to be art say that if a machine does the creating and anyone can prompt it, there’s no skill involved, and therefore no art is produced. The counter-argument is equally persistent, as defenders of AI-generated artworks often claim that AI is just a tool, and that every major technological breakthrough, like the camera or the computer, was met with the same skepticism before eventually being accepted as a legitimate creative medium. Google’s position in this debate is clear. Which is no surprise, as the company is investing billions in AI infrastructure. And now, in efforts to encourage people to use its AI even more, Google is opening Dataland on June 20, which it's calling the world's first AI arts museum. Located inside The Grand LA, a Frank Gehry-designed building in Los Angeles, the museum spans 25,000 square feet. The museum is built around a collaboration with media artist Refik Anadol, who has worked with Google since 2016. The inaugural exhibition is called Machine Dreams: Rainforest, and is powered by an AI model trained on “an extensive dataset of the natural world.” It generates 1.2 billion pixels of visuals in real time and reacts to visitors dynamically. The space also generates soundscapes, real-time emotion sensing, and algorithmically produced scents. Image via: Refik Anadol Studio / Google Google says that the museum is powered by its Gemini models, which run on Google Cloud. So, everything is generated inside one of Google’s AI data centers and is streamed to the museum. Alongside the museum opening, Google Arts & Culture is funding an AI Artist Residency, giving four artists $25,000 grants each, along with mentorship from Refik Anadol Studio and access to Google's machine learning tools. Their work will be shown at Dataland and on the Google Arts & Culture website later this year. Google’s AI museum will undoubtedly initiate a fired-up debate on social media, and we can’t wait to see the first reactions. Via: Smithsonian Magazine
    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      571
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      178
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!