Star Trek: Obama V Sisko - ORATE OFF!

desperaterobots

... the final ...



... these are the ...



... of the special effect...



Your sexy hosts?



Wait, no! These guys:



Also this mutant freak:



Let's talk about Star Trek, especially the new film, the old films, the best and worst captains, etc!

SabreMau

Do they have a target release year for the inevitable sequel movie yet?

desperaterobots

I'd like to mention that I saw this for a second time last night and enjoyed it a lot more than the first time. I felt a little overwhelmed first time around as I tried to catch all the eye candy. Second time I noticed a bunch more stuff too, like the scarring/deformation on Nero. The plot hung together better than I remembered first time around too. It all makes a surprising amount of sense.

Although, there's no way Vulcan could appear that huge in the sky of that ice planet. It was bigger than Earth's moon!

Six

desperaterobots wrote: »

I'd like to mention that I saw this for a second time last night and enjoyed it a lot more than the first time. I felt a little overwhelmed first time around as I tried to catch all the eye candy. Second time I noticed a bunch more stuff too, like the scarring/deformation on Nero. The plot hung together better than I remembered first time around too. It all makes a surprising amount of sense.

Although, there's no way Vulcan could appear that huge in the sky of that ice planet. It was bigger than Earth's moon!

Star Trek XI has a lot in common with Joe Versus the Volcano.

SAW776

You know, having seen this in a Digital Theatre.. I was blown away. The last few movies I've seen have seemed like almost a waste, since they'd have looked better on my HDTV. Finally, with these digital projections, there's a reason to go back to the movies.

I just hope Terminator: Salvation has digital screenings where I'm at, because I'd hate to have to pass that up.

necroSYS

Regarding the subtitle, the way black holes actually work wouldn't make for a decent plot device.

desperaterobots

It was commentary on the nerd rage in the last thread. I liked that they just went with black hole/supernova, shit that people have heard about, rather than trying to make up some psuedo-scientific explanation to pacify the frothing nosebleeds who would otherwise complain about it.

Also, Spock is awesome.

electricitylikesme

desperaterobots wrote: »

It was commentary on the nerd rage in the last thread. I liked that they just went with black hole/supernova, shit that people have heard about, rather than trying to make up some psuedo-scientific explanation to pacify the frothing nosebleeds who would otherwise complain about it.

Also, Spock is awesome.

You are everything wrong with sci-fi.

I hate so much, the things you choose to be.

rufo

desperaterobots wrote: »

It was commentary on the nerd rage in the last thread. I liked that they just went with black hole/supernova, shit that people have heard about, rather than trying to make up some psuedo-scientific explanation to pacify the frothing nosebleeds who would otherwise complain about it.

Also, Spock is awesome.

Just for the 39 pages of nerd-rage that will soon be directed your way:

You are my new favorite person.

It should be about 12-15 minutes until I select a new favorite person, so enjoy it while it lasts.

Tamin

I seem to recall 'black hole as impromptu wormhole/time-travel/gate...thing' used in other things. Space Quest 3, for example. Does it work better there simply because we didn't know as much about said objects in 1989? Or did we? I confess I haven't been following black hole developments.

As a direct result, I didn't care very much. At times during the movie, I felt like it was verging on parody, but managed to stay just on the homage side.

Big Dookie

SAW776 wrote: »

You know, having seen this in a Digital Theatre.. I was blown away. The last few movies I've seen have seemed like almost a waste, since they'd have looked better on my HDTV. Finally, with these digital projections, there's a reason to go back to the movies.

I just hope Terminator: Salvation has digital screenings where I'm at, because I'd hate to have to pass that up.

Just don't sit near the front in the digital screenings, it WILL make you sick.

Richy

Actually, one of the things I really liked about this movie was the lack of meaningless pseudo-scientific technobabble. A supernova gaining energy and threatening the galaxy may be scientific nonsense, but it's understandable scientific nonsense. A multispectral transwarp shockwave with a trail of high-cochrane subphysical skanian particles can also threaten the galaxy, but it's meaningless nonsense that no one understands or cares about.

As for the bad black hole physics, Star Trek: The Motion Picture had the Voyager probe falling through a black hole, emerging on the other side of the universe, and making its way back to earth in a few centuries while learning everything about everything in the process. There was a TOS episode where the Enterprise flew too close to a black hole and ended up in the past, too. And hell, this is Star Trek; people fall through time at the drop of a hat.

Quid

Richy wrote: »

Actually, one of the things I really liked about this movie was the lack of meaningless pseudo-scientific technobabble. A supernova gaining energy and threatening the galaxy may be scientific nonsense, but it's understandable scientific nonsense. A multispectral transwarp shockwave with a trail of high-cochrane subphysical skanian particles can also threaten the galaxy

Hi5

I'm actually looking forward to seeing this now.

Malkor

I'm glad I can post this on the first page so people who really like the Star Trek series and are totally into it can see it.

I liked Voyager. I watched it every week as a kid.

Quid

I liked it too Malkor!

Richy

I hope a supernova gains energy and destroys you, Malkor.

Malkor

It will most likely transport me to the delta quadrant.

matt has a problem

I would like to see the OP's proof that black holes don't work like that.

desperaterobots

electricitylikesme wrote: »

desperaterobots wrote: »

It was commentary on the nerd rage in the last thread. I liked that they just went with black hole/supernova, shit that people have heard about, rather than trying to make up some psuedo-scientific explanation to pacify the frothing nosebleeds who would otherwise complain about it.

Also, Spock is awesome.

You are everything wrong with sci-fi.

I hate so much, the things you choose to be.

I don't think Star Trek 11 was aiming to be science fiction. If anything it was attempting to shrug that label the fuck off.

Well, really, it's the same reason I enjoyed, nay, loved Battlestar Galactica (the finale never happened and there's another thread for those who believe it did). It didn't bother explaining to me how cylons worked, how downloading worked, how FTL worked, how any of the pointless tech bullshit worked. It may frustrate the teeth-grinding, eyeglass-dropping, sex-withouting pedants, but it's so utterly unimportant to the story that it just doesn't matter. What if they'd called it an Inverted Quantum Singularity? Would the tech-dipshits quit whining? Probably not. Would 95% of the audience they seek to attract immediately switch off? Yes.

I mean, really, the very worst example of this non-tech writing in the film was naming

the deadly planet destroying goo 'Red Matter'.

They didn't bother explaining how it worked, or what it was, they didn't even bother giving it any kind of techwankery name. Thank. Christ. It is what it is, a plot device, with sexy consequences.

matthasaproblem wrote: »

I would like to see the OP's proof that black holes don't work like that.

I've read a brief history of time, how dare you call my credentials into question!

Nakatomi2010

There are many theories that revolve around black holes potentially being used to travel through time, what we know about them is very little, but ultimately every time a black hole is used in sci-fi lore it does something strange with time, in Stargate they used a black hole to slow down the replicators to a crawl in the hopes they could kill them, but discovered that they evolved quite rapidly and escaped.

Andromeda says that a black hole can properly preserve something in a stasis like state until rescued several years later...

Mind you, both of these examples represent ways of using the black hole to go forward in time, there are other things which represent them as ways of travelling vast distances in a short period of time, such as Event Horizon, if I recall correctly...

Not many that say you can use em' to go backwards in time...

Unless that anomoly in the remake of Planet of the Apes was a black hole... Though I still think that one went forwards, not backwards....

To the post above me

Red Matter was explained in the comics Star Trek: Countdown, for the hardcore fans these 4 comic books were released to explain Nero's anger, motivations, the reason the Narada was so powerful, and how Red Matter comes into play

And die hard fans will eat that up...

For me I went through other logic to get what I got...

How did the Narada tear through the ship?

Comic book: Borg enhancements
Movie: It's from the future using futuristic weapons, tech from 150 years ago can't cope with that...

And so on and so froth

Basically the comic books were released to satisfy those who'd see the plot holes to explain away some of the tech being used...

Sadly however, I think reading paper is an archaic art which many people are losing interest in...

Robos A Go Go

My roommate thinks blackholes are magical doorways to parallel universes or some shit, so I could stand to learn more about black holes too in order to make him feel stupid.

Al_wat

Well the time lords invented black holes, but they are all (ok mostly) dead so we aren't getting any answers.

desperaterobots

They're black because they're so heavy that light cant escape them.

Here's an article: What would it look like to fall into a black hole?

anastazius

For anyone worried on the writers approach to the sequel:

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci explained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

MTV movies interview

Al_wat

anastazius wrote: »

For anyone worried on the writers approach to the sequel:

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci explained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

MTV movies interview

awesome.

RocketSauce

Red matter was actually William Shatner's blood. Just a drop of it was so awesome it created a rip in the space/time continuum.

It was the filmmaker's attempt to include him in the movie.

Robos A Go Go

Al_wat wrote: »

anastazius wrote: »

For anyone worried on the writers approach to the sequel:

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci explained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

MTV movies interview

awesome.

I'd still like Nimoy to have a cameo or two, simply because I like him so much.

Nothing integral to the plot, of course.

Grislo

Al_wat wrote: »

anastazius wrote: »

For anyone worried on the writers approach to the sequel:

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci explained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

MTV movies interview

awesome.

They said the 'T' word, though. Doesn't that mean that hordes of enraged [strike]trekkies[/strike] trekkers will flay them and, presumably, eat their skin?

Which, in turn, will lead to news segments mentioning

alternate universes

, which will lead to roving (probably not very fast roving, but roving all the same) gangs of [strike]trekkies[/strike] trekkers out for blood.

It'll be a whole vicious cycle of rampaging socially awkward people. And skin eating.

necroSYS

anastazius wrote: »

For anyone worried on the writers approach to the sequel:

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci explained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

MTV movies interview

Translation:

Look, you pocket-protecting adenoids, the whole reason we used the plot devices we did was to achieve a clean reboot of the universe so we can fuck around all we want on a blank slate. Why the christing fuck would we cock that up by continuing with those same plot devices in the next movie?

Richy

Grislo wrote: »

They said the 'T' word, though. Doesn't that mean that hordes of enraged [strike]trekkies[/strike] trekkers will flay them and, presumably, eat their skin?

Which, in turn, will lead to news segments mentioning

alternate universes

, which will lead to roving (probably not very fast roving, but roving all the same) gangs of [strike]trekkies[/strike] trekkers out for blood.

It'll be a whole vicious cycle of rampaging socially awkward people. And skin eating.

Don't worry Grislo. Most Trekkies do not rove, as it implies leaving their parents' basement. For those few that do, you can escape them by yelling "STANDBY FOR TRANSPORT!", at which point their freeze in place to allow a better transporter lock and wait to be energized.

XiaNaphryz

The last thread got particularly off-kilter at the end. Wonder if it will continue here...

Al_wat

Robos A Go Go wrote: »

Al_wat wrote: »

anastazius wrote: »

For anyone worried on the writers approach to the sequel:

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci explained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

MTV movies interview

awesome.

I'd still like Nimoy to have a cameo or two, simply because I like him so much.

Nothing integral to the plot, of course.

I feel the same way, but thats my inner nerd coming out.

Quid

So does the reboot make room for scrapping that prime directive crap or was that before Kirk's time?

mcdermott

desperaterobots wrote: »

I mean, really, the very worst example of this non-tech writing in the film was naming

the deadly planet destroying goo 'Red Matter'.

They didn't bother explaining how it worked, or what it was, they didn't even bother giving it any kind of techwankery name. Thank. Christ. It is what it is, a plot device, with sexy consequences.

Welcome to the reason I loved this movie. I was Star Trek for people who get laid every now and then. 10/10, would watch again, waiting for sequel.

EDIT: Pretty sure the Prime Directive was before Kirk's time, but who cares anyway...Kirk regularly wiped his ass with it, it's part of what made Kirk...Kirk.

Al_wat

Quid wrote: »

So does the reboot make room for scrapping that prime directive crap or was that before Kirk's time?

The movie never commented on it. I guess they could go either way. I have a feeling if they did incorporate it they would still make it awesome though.

Nakatomi2010

Prime Directive is kind of important, but mostly for a TV show story line, I doubt they'll bring it up in the movies... I mean, what are they going to do in the movie? Have them happen upon a planet of primitives, a crew member trapped, and have them debate over the moral of interferring with a pre-warp culture? Pfft, yeah, like I wanna watch two-hours of that....

Heartlash

desperaterobots wrote: »

I mean, really, the very worst example of this non-tech writing in the film was naming

the deadly planet destroying goo 'Red Matter'.

That seemed to be a pretty clear homage to the silliness/typical basic nature of the techy stuff in the original series.

desperaterobots

Heartlash wrote: »

desperaterobots wrote: »

I mean, really, the very worst example of this non-tech writing in the film was naming

the deadly planet destroying goo 'Red Matter'.

That seemed to be a pretty clear homage to the silliness/typical basic nature of the techy stuff in the original series.

Whatever the reason, it worked. No technobabble, no fucking around, get on with the explosions.

8-)

Bionic Monkey

desperaterobots wrote: »

It was commentary on the nerd rage in the last thread. I liked that they just went with black hole/supernova, shit that people have heard about, rather than trying to make up some psuedo-scientific explanation to pacify the frothing nosebleeds who would otherwise complain about it.

Also, Spock is awesome.

Honestly though, if they'd just made it the Romulan's home sun that was going supernova, Spock dropped the red matter in time, but fucked up the equation, and the black hole destroyed Romulas too, we wouldn't have the giant gaping plot hole, and Nero would have a legitimate reason to be pissed off at Spock.

King Riptor

desperaterobots wrote: »

Heartlash wrote: »

desperaterobots wrote: »

I mean, really, the very worst example of this non-tech writing in the film was naming

the deadly planet destroying goo 'Red Matter'.

That seemed to be a pretty clear homage to the silliness/typical basic nature of the techy stuff in the original series.

Whatever the reason, it worked. No technobabble, no fucking around, get on with the explosions.

8-)

So pretty much status Quo. I really don't get why that plot device was so unbelievable considering there's at least 900 god like races out there that can do the same thing.

necroSYS

Bionic Monkey wrote: »

desperaterobots wrote: »

It was commentary on the nerd rage in the last thread. I liked that they just went with black hole/supernova, shit that people have heard about, rather than trying to make up some psuedo-scientific explanation to pacify the frothing nosebleeds who would otherwise complain about it.

Also, Spock is awesome.

Honestly though, if they'd just made it the Romulan's home sun that was going supernova, Spock dropped the red matter in time, but fucked up the equation, and the black hole destroyed Romulas too, we wouldn't have the giant gaping plot hole, and Nero would have a legitimate reason to be pissed off at Spock.

But without the benefit of hearing a million voices crying out in wordless, nasal rage.