Star Trek: the new movie.

[evcake]

Well... What are you waiting for? Anyway I figure I can turn this back to the topic, I liked Sarek, the dialog was authentic, and they did him right. But wierd thing I didn't like the actor, he didn't have the gravitas. I'm still trying to come up with a way to articulate my feelings on this. But all I can come up with is a lack of charisma. And I'm trying to wrap my head around the fact that Vulcan teachers would allow students to fight IN school. Now if they were walking home or something I'd get it. Still, I liked the events. That speech on Vulcan emotions was AWSOME! I only wish it had been Mark Lenard saying it.

Sigh...you said it, girl. Ben Cross did fine, but after the stately, beautiful Sarek we knew...

[WarpGirl]

I have to admit Sarek just standing there watching Spock beat the stuffing out of Kirk for insulting his mama, was better than I thought it would be. I could imagine "Real" Sarek doing that too. Not to mention Spock was kind of HOT! And I don't usually got for his type.

[CX]

To answer your question from the other thread, when the sparkling starts, that means the transporter has already started dematerializing whoever it's locked onto. Which is part of why a certain death scene makes no sense.

[WarpGirl]

So I was right it makes no sense that Checkov lost the lock. Thank you.

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

If only...

Star Trek 2009 trailer - The Original Series version

[Alelou]

So I was right it makes no sense that Checkov lost the lock. Thank you.

Maybe not (I didn't entirely get that either, especially the amount of time that transporter appears to provide for Long Agonized Looks), but there was something about everybody having to stay relatively the same in regard to each other? Kirk and Sulu would have been falling at the same rate earlier, so maybe the fact that she was falling while the others weren't made the lock fail. They did rather clunkily have Scotty crowing about transporting two people back simultaneously from different locations for the first time later... The only good excuse for that line was somebody realizing Amanda shouldn't have died in the earlier scene if they could do that.

I didn't like the transporter effect, period. I thought it looked faker than the one on TOS. It looked weirdly hand-drawn or something.

[CX]

I thought it looked kind of like a bug swarm, actually.

[Linda]

Hey anyone hear when the DVD is coming out? I want to check out all these things people have been saying about scenes in the movie and I don't want to have pay for it more than once. I.E., I don't want to sit through it in the theater again and again just to check things out.

[Alelou]

It's still in theaters, so who knows. I bet it will be out in time for Christmas, though.

[justTripn]

I was talking to a Star Trek fan I met at the Texas Star Party about the Vegas Con (she had a great time) but she heard a new theory about Scotty's annoying sidekick:

BTW, my friend had an interesting insight about the little creature hanging out with Scotty. I thought it was just a nod to the Star Wars crowd, but she saw it as a literal reference to the gremlins in the engine Scotty was always complaining about.

[Alelou]

[Aquarius]

That's funny!

[WarpGirl]

Hearing that makes it make sense to me. I didn't mind the little guy but I didn't get it either.

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

Not that I should really care since I've sworn myself off the Trek reboot franchise, but for those interested:

Star Trek Sequel May Contain Pointed Modern Commentary

I have an ill foreboding feel about this. Contrary to many Trekkies I've never really liked it when they do "in your face" commentaries on Trek. It tends to be devisive to the fans. Also, as the writer of the article says:

Problem there is that as soon as they start tackling ‘real issues’, those things can seem a lot more important than just telling a proper story. Fall into that trap, and suddently Trek is exactly where Abrams said it wouldn’t be: pretentious.

[Aikiweezie]

Groan. As long as they stick with "universal" moral type quandries I'm fine with that, but as the writer of the article stated, if they make it too "current" it risks becoming dated.