Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Undiscovered Country was OK. Most of the original cast films were OK *EXCEPT* for V. (Everybody knows that)

First Contact was good on paper but sucked onscreen. ("So you guys are on some sort of Star Trek", ugh)

Nemesis had potential but they really-REALLY screwed it up. The one b4 nemesis was bloody terrible too.

Taksraven

LOL, Nemesis, should have called "Data the Suicidal Andriod" or "trying way to hard to recreate ST II."

Posted
First Contact was good on paper but sucked onscreen. ("So you guys are on some sort of Star Trek", ugh)

:rolleyes:

I actually had the opposite reaction for First Contact.

I remember reading a plot synopsis for the film prior to its actual release and not liking what I read.

But the delivery on film was actually much better.

Sure, there's a handful of cheesy or overly dramatic one-liners. But the solid character portrayals are what still stick with me to this day. Picard going Captain Ahab on the Borg. Alfre Woodard's character being the perfect foil and "voice of reason" for Picard.

And of course, Zephram Cochrane being totally different from the LEGEND that Starfleet and the Federation made him out to be. Loved that line where he says that he made the warp engine, not for altruistic reasons, but for money............and women. Made him a lot more relateable and interesting.

Posted
what about generations?

Generations had some good moments. Especially Data with "Oh poo!". The bit where Picard went into the Nexus was absolutely terrible though.

Taksraven

Posted

poo poo poo Hey thats really cool never seen that before. Mods, how does that work? fart.

Posted
I dunno, I've seen some interesting audience reactions in Australia over the years.

* Groans, shocked laughter and a single solitary cry of "MUMMY" when Neve Campbell started kissing Denise Richards in Wild Things.

* Laughter, cheering AND screaming during Starship Troopers. There was also some horror at what Dizzy's breasts looked like.....

* A guy leaving the theatre in disgust and slamming the door behind him due to the violence in Hana Bi.

* Real shock and disgust when John Travolta blows the guys head off in Pulp Fiction.

* Audiences breaking into loud cheers when Jack Nicholson stuffs up at the end of A Few Good Men....

I dunno, maybe these reactions are just universal.

I think that Trek will have a hard sell but I think that the trailer stuffs up with the daggy logo at the end with the transporter sound effect and silly music. The rest of the trailer is great.

Which part of Australia specifically were you in to see this trailer, BTW? (Suburb that is)

Taksraven

which part of Australia specifically were you in to see this trailer,BTW?(suburb that is) Brisbane ,sunnybank

Posted
Critics always get things wrong. I remember years ago when they were all raving about Life is Beautiful and when I saw it I thought it was a HUGE pile of shite.

Taksraven

Critics are just supplying opinions and observations about a given film. Good critics can convey their opinions in such a way that one can understand where they are coming from, what their priorities and tastes are like, so that if someone with very different tastes reads the review, they can get an idea of how the critic arrived at their conclusions and decide for themselves whether or it it sounds like they would share those feelings. Even then, there's a bit of hit or miss. It's never an exact science.

As for good or bad Trek movies, I'm kinda odd about it. I liked the Motion Picture well enough. Kahn was fantastic, and to me The Search For Spock is a good continuation of those events. IV was campy, but fun enough. Not one of my favourites, but I don't completely dislike it either. V I hated, but it's been so long since I've seen it that I can't recall just how awful it really was. Undiscovered Country I really liked, not as much as II, but more than most of the others. Of course, I haven't seen VI since the 90s, so I might not like it as much if I see it again.

I really don't like any of the Next Gen movies. Generations was like a long, decent episode of ST:TNG, but I'm just not a huge fan of TNG, so decent is still pretty mediocre. First Contact had some really good points, and some really bad points. Overall I dislike it. The borg were one of the most interesting parts about TNG and they really removed a lot of what I liked about them and reduced them to just another bad guy. Not to mention again and again they show weapons like machine guns working fine against the borg, but Starfleet never seems to run with that idea. The movie after that was like a mediocre and not very memorable TNG episode. I didn't bother with Nemesis.

Posted (edited)

I'm an oddball when it comes to Trek movies too.

The Motion Picture I kind of like, eventhough it is soooooooo slooooooooooooow paced and the story is so so. But I'm a sucker for exterior space shots and this movie gave us a wonderful 6 minutes tour of the Enterprise (not a Connie-Refit fan) with the beautiful score from Jerry Goldsmith.

TWOK is a classic for me too and The Search for Spock is just a solid OK. The actor switch for Saavik didn't go well with me and I've never really been interested in the whole Vulkan mysticism thing. Number IV is not one of my favourites. It's one thing to have a bit of comedy in your show but it's another to make comedy of your show. Movie V - horrible. Shatner stick to stop motion acting. The last one with the original crew was good, although I never want to see "No Smoking" signs in a Trek movie ever again.

The majority of TNG movies are bad. Generations wasn't good IMO. It was forcefully put under this necessity to bridge TOS with TNG and we ended up with the very bad Nexus plot.

Next up First Contact. At first one of my favourites, but a giant plot-hole because of time travel again (after "All Good Things" one would have thought the staff had learned their lesson)

and an anti-climatic ending makes this movie not so good.

Insurrection one of the best TNG movies. It carries the spirit of TNG and Roddenberry, has the moral/ethical message and a decent amount of action. The Joystick scene is the only negative.

Nemesis should have been a grand story, so much potential was wasted and therefor fail in my book. The space action scenes in the movie where OK though.

Edited by lechuck
Posted

I only like II and VI and a bit of III for it's continuation of II. Most of the Genesis planet stuff stunk though. Hated the change in actress for Saavik.

Posted

I didn't like the actress change either, but Kirstie Allie (sp?) grates my nerves just watching and or listening to her talk. Good riddance...

Posted

Hahaha that's such a strange place to be screening it. The Sydney Opera house is not at all suitable to be showing movies man. Plus $100 bucks for sub-par experience? Lol.

Posted (edited)
Hahaha that's such a strange place to be screening it. The Sydney Opera house is not at all suitable to be showing movies man. Plus $100 bucks for sub-par experience? Lol.

My thoughts exactly, its not a bloody cinema. Would be better to show it at the Open Air Cinema at Mrs Macquarie's Chair* at sunset.

Taksraven

*To a non-Sydney person that must sound like a strange venue. Here it is....

image_4.jpg

large-film-st-george-open-air.jpg
Edited by taksraven
Posted

Wow, that's pretty cool.

A good venue with the right crowd can make or break a movie going experience. I saw crystal skull at the castro theater in SF with the organ playing John Williams music and giveaways; the whole crowd was really into it and that energy sustained us through the movie. So even though the movie was crap everyone had a good time.

Posted

Even the most cynical of those reviews is still somewhat positive, which is pretty impressive. Sounds like this is a must see.

Vostok 7

Posted
Early reviews are pouring in.....I will see this movie at least twice.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/04/07/early-...rams-star-trek/

Thanks for that. Its a great collection of reviews/summaries.

I like how with a lot of them you can tell pretty quickly if they are fans of the old Trek or newly introduced fans. (The guy who compared it to Khan was a dead giveaway, and as much as I like Star Trek II, I would NEVER bother to compare this new film to it)

I hope its as good as they generally claim it is.

Taksraven

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

Those "1/50" Hot Wheels ships have hit the stores. I found the Enterprise-A and USS Reliant at Target tonight. They're running about $12.99. Overall they are very nice pieces, just a few issues. The Reliant is almost perfect, being that the main fuselage is mostly diecast and just the nacelles and the upper deflector structure are plastic (some sort of hard PVC kind of material). Unfortunately, on the Enterprise-A, only the "engineering" section is diecast, the rest is that odd hard PVC (I say hard PVC because it holds shape OK and is stiff but is bendy at the same time). Unfortunately, on the Enterprise, this leads to a rather large amount of gashapon disease meaning just about every surface attached to the engineering section juts or bends off at some different angle. Pretty disappointing for a $13 "diecast" ship. Would have been nice if they used ABS at the very least instead of some kind of crappy PVC material. Also, the example I have of the Enterprise-A (and all the other ones I saw at the store) is only marked "NCC-1701" and not "NCC-1701-A" meaning it's the Refit ship, which is fine and dandy except that everywhere on the box says it's the Enterprise-A. Otherwise, they are pretty cool. The stands are nice and the ships mount to the stand on a simple ball joint allowing them to be posed.

EDIT: Then again, the website linked below shows that Wave 1 is the Refit Enterprise in the pictures, but the box and the main part of the website list it as an Enterprise A. Lovely.

Unfortunately, the much cheaper (and also much smaller) Johnny Lightning ships are probably better since they are made of different materials and don't seem to have gashapon disease problems. I hate gashapon disease with a passion, due to my perfectionist nature, and to find it on a $13 "collectors piece" that says "die cast" all over the box is extremely disappointing.

Oh, and of course, despite most web sites claiming they are 1/50, they are most definitely NOT (probably more like 1/500 or 1/5000 even, I can never remember Star Trek sizes). They are large, but not THAT large! The Reliant also doesn't appear to be in scale to the Enterprise-A, either, it's actually somewhat larger (I always thought the "saucer" of the Reliant was the same size as the saucer of the Enterprise-A, however on the toy it is larger).

http://www.hotwheelscollectors.com/showroo...tline/StarTrek/

Vostok 7

Edited by Vostok 7
Posted
Those "1/50" Hot Wheels ships have hit the stores. I found the Enterprise-A and USS Reliant at Target tonight. They're running about $12.99. Overall they are very nice pieces, just a few issues. The Reliant is almost perfect, being that the main fuselage is mostly diecast and just the nacelles and the upper deflector structure are plastic (some sort of hard PVC kind of material). Unfortunately, on the Enterprise-A, only the "engineering" section is diecast, the rest is that odd hard PVC (I say hard PVC because it holds shape OK and is stiff but is bendy at the same time). Unfortunately, on the Enterprise, this leads to a rather large amount of gashapon disease meaning just about every surface attached to the engineering section juts or bends off at some different angle. Pretty disappointing for a $13 "diecast" ship. Would have been nice if they used ABS at the very least instead of some kind of crappy PVC material. Also, the example I have of the Enterprise-A (and all the other ones I saw at the store) is only marked "NCC-1701" and not "NCC-1701-A" meaning it's the Refit ship, which is fine and dandy except that everywhere on the box says it's the Enterprise-A. Otherwise, they are pretty cool. The stands are nice and the ships mount to the stand on a simple ball joint allowing them to be posed.

EDIT: Then again, the website linked below shows that Wave 1 is the Refit Enterprise in the pictures, but the box and the main part of the website list it as an Enterprise A. Lovely.

Unfortunately, the much cheaper (and also much smaller) Johnny Lightning ships are probably better since they are made of different materials and don't seem to have gashapon disease problems. I hate gashapon disease with a passion, due to my perfectionist nature, and to find it on a $13 "collectors piece" that says "die cast" all over the box is extremely disappointing.

Oh, and of course, despite most web sites claiming they are 1/50, they are most definitely NOT (probably more like 1/500 or 1/5000 even, I can never remember Star Trek sizes). They are large, but not THAT large! The Reliant also doesn't appear to be in scale to the Enterprise-A, either, it's actually somewhat larger (I always thought the "saucer" of the Reliant was the same size as the saucer of the Enterprise-A, however on the toy it is larger).

http://www.hotwheelscollectors.com/showroo...tline/StarTrek/

Vostok 7

Are those the same things as the old Micro Machines Star Trek toys? You're description of which parts are plastic/die cast seems similar, IIRC.

Posted

I really think that the "set your phasers for snore" subheading for this thread is looking more and more irrelevant and hopefully inaccurate.

Taksraven

Posted
Are those the same things as the old Micro Machines Star Trek toys? You're description of which parts are plastic/die cast seems similar, IIRC.

The only micro machine ones I recall are very small and completely made of the crappy plastic as described above. Those hot wheels ones seem overpriced if they are as bad as is described. I am curious just how big roughly these new ones are? The scale doesn't help me much. Does anyone know the actual length of these. I'll be looking out for them in the stores. I wouldn't mind picking up the Reliant if they are not completely terrible.

I'm really looking to collect the larger Art Asylum ships. Enterprise-D should be out next month. I'm also looking forward to the "HD" classic Enterprise due out in Sept.

Posted
The only micro machine ones I recall are very small and completely made of the crappy plastic as described above. Those hot wheels ones seem overpriced if they are as bad as is described. I am curious just how big roughly these new ones are? The scale doesn't help me much. Does anyone know the actual length of these. I'll be looking out for them in the stores. I wouldn't mind picking up the Reliant if they are not completely terrible.

I'm really looking to collect the larger Art Asylum ships. Enterprise-D should be out next month. I'm also looking forward to the "HD" classic Enterprise due out in Sept.

Yeah, these are nothing like the old Micro Machines which were of course gashapon-tastic. The material is a little stiffer/harder than used on the micro machines. Also, the micro machines had no die cast. I don't really feel these Hot Wheels ones were a ripoff at all, it just would have been nice if they used a different material (such as ABS) for the plastic parts, especially since these are marketed towards collectors.

The Reliant is about 6 inches long and 3 1/4 inches wide. It's also pretty hefty since the whole main fuselage is diecast. The Refit Enterprise is about 6 3/4 inches long and just a hair over 3 inches wide. So they aren't small, especially not micro machine small.

Vostok 7

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...