Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 96 Posts

·
Registered
2017 Camaro ZL1; 2011 CTS-V sedan; 2004 Lightning
Joined
·
12,007 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Saw it yesterday in IMAX. To those who are afraid that Abrams will abandon Trek canon or try so hard to appeal to young viewers that he creates Star Trek 90210: he does neither.

To those who are hoping that this movie will rescue/reenergize the franchise: :thumbsup: good chance of that.
 

·
Registered
2015 BMUU 335i MSport, 2006 STS-V--2005 CTS-V ( traded in)
Joined
·
25,514 Posts
To those who are afraid that Abrams will abandon Trek canon or try so hard to appeal to young viewers that he creates Star Trek 90210: he does neither.
I disagree, about violating cannon. It's no 90210 though. :)

To those who are hoping that this movie will rescue/reenergize the franchise: :thumbsup: good chance of that.
It may draw a whole new fan base. But I won't be following J.J.'s / Paramount's new vision.
 

·
Registered
1995 FTS
Joined
·
4,577 Posts
I saw it on friday night at an imax and I gotta admit from beginning to end it was non stop action. Great movie and exceeded my expectations big time. I can't wait to go see it again with my dad this week. The guy who played Spock was great and the kid who played Kirk I really liked. Aren't they turning this into a new series of movies?
 

·
Registered
2003 Cadillac Seville STS 73k Miles, '90 Chevy 1500 Reg Cab
Joined
·
725 Posts
Never saw any of the previous versions(more of a Star Wars guy) but saw the new Star Trek yesterday afternoon and thought it was awesome. Stunning visual scenes, great action sequences, great plot, again I'm not a Trekkie and was looking at it from more of a new series standpoint and not comparing it to past movies, but I loved it.
 

·
Registered
2017 Camaro ZL1; 2011 CTS-V sedan; 2004 Lightning
Joined
·
12,007 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I disagree, about violating cannon.
How so? The stroke of genius was to insert a quantum event at the beginning which puts the entire movie and all future events into an alternate reality. Now Abrams can do almost anything he wishes without violating canon; the old well-known events and timeline are nicely preserved somewhere else. I like it!

In other news, Trekkers are pissed that the movie is poplular: click
 

·
Registered
See my sig...
Joined
·
8,096 Posts
So then, in an effort to decide whether or not to boycott it or not (saying a lot for me, as I've sat through ST:V many times...) -- and to minimize spoilers:





























Is the destruction of a certain founding planet of the Federation somehow part of an alternate reality, then? If not, and canon was changed that much, I'm done w/it. I have a big enough problem w/losing the 24th Century...so it won't be a big loss....
 

·
Registered
'03 STS (RIP), '89 Eldorado, '13 Malibu, '89 Grand Wagoneer
Joined
·
2,191 Posts
...To those who are afraid that Abrams will abandon Trek canon or try so hard to appeal to young viewers that he creates Star Trek 90210: he does neither.

To those who are hoping that this movie will rescue/reenergize the franchise: :thumbsup: good chance of that.
I disagree, about violating cannon. It's no 90210 though. :)

It may draw a whole new fan base. But I won't be following J.J.'s / Paramount's new vision.
How so? The stroke of genius was to insert a quantum event at the beginning which puts the entire movie and all future events into an alternate reality. Now Abrams can do almost anything he wishes without violating canon; the old well-known events and timeline are nicely preserved somewhere else. I like it!

In other news, Trekkers are pissed that the movie is poplular: click

The wife and I caught a matinee yesterday and I can definitely say that as a standalone "Trek" movie - it was nothing less than spectacular. While I won't go as far as to say it was great as "The Wrath of Khan" or "The Undiscovered Country," I will say that as an overall package it's easily one of the best "Trek" films ever made. Even Becky liked the movie and she's never been a Star Trek fan in the slightest... Although I suspect part of it could have been the ample on-screen "boy-candy," as she so eloquently put it.

As far as it violating Trek-cannon, that's a double-edged sword - it doesn't and blatantly does at the same time.

What you may call a "stroke of genius," I see as nothing more than Abrams cheating his way into building the story line that he wanted - lazily doing so with a convenient, yet dreadfully tired plot mechanism. The bottom line is that he shouldn't have toyed whatsoever with the established plot/timeline, period. He could have still made the movie just as terrific without royally mucking up the works to the extent he did... Instead he chose to make things needlessly messy, leaving too many loose-ends and unanswered questions... As such, I can completely understand why diehard Trekkies are miffed by this movie - however, I believe much it stems from a far more selfish, vain reason.

That of course being that Abrams had the sheer nerve to actually create a Star Trek film that wasn't made for the pure viewing-pleasure of Star Trek fans...

How dare he try to make a genuinely good movie with (eek!) mass-market appeal and even worse - one that's also (gasp!) applauded by critics and worse still - actually be (holyshit!) successful in doing so!

The audacity!!! :thehand: He should be ashamed of himself...
 

·
Registered
Past: 95 Fleetwood, 91 Brougham. Now: 92 Lexus SC300
Joined
·
5,418 Posts
^ I think Vulcan being destroyed is part of this "new" reality, think of this new movie as a branch off of the trek timeline/cannon that has nothing to do with the rest of the cannon.

The thing that pissed me off more than them messing up the cannon was how Kirk was promoted from cadet to captain. Like anybody would give some 25 year old hooligan with three years of training at the academey the keys to a starship. This was a guy who three years ago had a criminal record for assault, public intoxication, and other petty crimes.
 

·
Registered
See my sig...
Joined
·
8,096 Posts
Well, then as long as they bring it back in Star Trek: Version 2: Number 2 -- "The Wrath of the Trekkie"...I'm "OK" with it, maybe...
 

·
Cadillac Technician
none
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
I'm going right now, I don't want to read all the comments, I already know too much.

Looking forward to this since I saw the trailer several months ago!
Got my fandango on baby!
 

·
Registered
2015 BMUU 335i MSport, 2006 STS-V--2005 CTS-V ( traded in)
Joined
·
25,514 Posts
How so? The stroke of genius was to insert a quantum event at the beginning which puts the entire movie and all future events into an alternate reality. Now Abrams can do almost anything he wishes without violating canon; the old well-known events and timeline are nicely preserved somewhere else. I like it!
WARNING IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE DO NOT READ THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS

1st. - Gene Roddenberry had a written/unwritten rule that if ever the timeline had been changed, it was put back to the right way so as not to allow the correct timeline and future events to be altered. This has been violated several times by the producers of the star trek series since Gene's death because, I guess, they lack crative originality and cannot write their sci-fi without doing it.

2nd - The insignia worn on their uniforms, all their uniforms in the new movie including the star fleet cadets, carried the "arrowhead" insignia of the NCC-1701 Enterprise crew. That insignia was the insigna of ONLY the crew of the TOS Enterprise not all of Star Fleet. It was not adopted as the symbol of all of Star Fleet until many years later after TOS crew distiquished themselves with their adventures.

Even with the Romulan drilling ship coming back and destroying the USS Kelvin and Kirk's father as acting captain, Capt Robau and whatever other crew members that didn't escape, they did nothing else to change the future except sit around and wait for Ambassador Spock for the next 25 years. Yet it's written by the current writers / director to have changed "everything" once they came back, which in itself makes no sense since the only things that would have changed would be that directly affected by those killed with the Kelvin incident, such as Kirk growing up without his father.

3rd - Pon farr suddenly thrown out so Spock and Uhura can be with each other in this film ?



ANY SPOILERS ARE NOW DONE

It was my hope they could make a good movie without making the "little" mistakes they seem to keep doing since any post Roddenberry creative control, but they keep doing it. Since it appears this is going to continue to happen since Voyager was released, I have no interest in following with it.

It's not that the movie didn't have good action, good special effects and a job well done by the actors in their roles, all of that was present. But if they are going to no longer follow Gene's vision of what Star Trek is / was and simply change things as it fits their scripts, then it's no longer Star Trek, but just another nicely done Sci-Fi story.
 

·
See you in the funny papers
04 CTS-V, 05 STS, 07 SRX- All sold :(
Joined
·
26,239 Posts
I thought it was fun. The canon breaking didn't bother me at all for two reasons: I'm more of a Next Gen fan than TOS, so I'm not against seeing a more "modern" take on the characters, and the fact that they give a perfectly logical reason why the events in this one diverge from the canon.

I liked most of the actors, with the exception of Anton Yelchin. Everyone seemed to be playing their character, but he just did a bad Walter Koenig impression for 2 hours. Karl Urban was a riot as Bones, and even managed to pull off the "Dammit man, I'm a doctor not a physicist!!" line without winking at the camera. The only part I thought was superfluous was the ice monster scene, which was a totally pointless sequence thrown in just to up the action quotient.

In my mind, Picard will always be THE captain of the Enterprise, but I'm still looking forward to seeing some adventures from this new crew.
 

·
Registered
1999 STS - diamond white
Joined
·
5,229 Posts
I learned something new in this thread. I have never seen the term "canon" used in this context. I have been out of the loop. click
The wife and I are closet trekkies, we'll probably use our free movie tickets to see it.
 

·
See you in the funny papers
04 CTS-V, 05 STS, 07 SRX- All sold :(
Joined
·
26,239 Posts
If you subscribe to the Quantum Mechanics (string theory) of time travel (which this film does), having Nero pass through the singularity into our timeline before Kirk was born created an alternate timeline that runs parallel to the one we already know. Canon changes can be traced to the "butterfly effect" caused by Nero's arrival (such as the planet being destroyed, Spock becoming captain, Kirk being a stowaway, etc), but that's the cool part: They're not really canon "changes", since these events do not cancel out what happens in the original timeline. This story happens parallel to what we already know.

The other changes like the arrowhead and the lack of Pon Farr can just be chalked up to 'reimagining'. If they weren't going to change some stuff, what's the point of rebooting the series? I know you're a purist, but things like the origin of the arrowhead are minutiae that have no effect on the quality of the story (and only the diehards will notice). Batman Begins and Dark Knight are chock full of canon contradictions, but they're the best reviewed and highest grossing Batman movies ever.

At some point, especially with a series that's 40 years old, it becomes impossible to tell a new story inside the tiny box of canon that already exists. The singularity and multiple timelines was a solid plot device to allow us to see some new adventures from the TOS crew. Since this theory has already been explored and explained in Star Trek canon, it brilliantly allowed the setup to be canon, while the actual events afterward create a new, alternate canon.
 

·
See you in the funny papers
04 CTS-V, 05 STS, 07 SRX- All sold :(
Joined
·
26,239 Posts
The term "canon" is used to describe what "really happened in the end" (even though it's fiction, so none of it "really" happened :lol:.....). It's easy to understand the term when you take time travel out of the equation, as it's pretty simple. For example: Luke is Darth Vader's son, right? If a Star Wars prequel were made that showed Obi-Wan Kenobi being Luke's father, people would have freaked out and said "That contradicts canon!". Make sense now?

It becomes complicated with time travel. Star Trek assumes that infinite versions of reality exist, but we only see one of them. Any episode of Trek that deals with time travel creates all kinds of alternate versions of events, timelines and realities, but only one version of the events is the one that our view of time moves forward from (since we can't simultaneously perceive multiple realities). The end result after all the meddling and the version of reality that the movies continue on from is canon, as in "this is the version of events that officially happened".

Example: Star Trek IV. An alien ship arrives at Earth and begins destroying it. The Enterprise goes back in time and does something that changes the timeline so that when the aliens arrive in the future, Earth doesn't get wrecked. Earth not getting wrecked is now considered canon, since future Star Trek movies have Earth intact since that's the reality we moved forward from. Keep in mind however, going back in time didn't stop the events from happening in the first timeline- they altered the events in OUR reality, but in the other reality, the Earth still got wrecked by the alien ship and time continued moving forward from then. We never saw it though, so it's not canon.

In the case of the Star Trek reboot, the writers are going at it a different way. Basically, they're saying "this is a different reality than the old show presented us with". Someone traveled back in time and changed something, which caused a new reality that goes off in a different direction than the one we watched in the old show. This new one isn't trying to fit into the established series of events or say that these events are taking the place of the old ones- this is an alternate reality where things went differently than what you saw before.

Now that I'm done typing all that, I'm going to go shoot myself in the face for being the biggest nerd ever.
 

·
Watching the Watchers
Joined
·
5,959 Posts
I like it. Yes it diverged greatly from what is considered "canon", but the reality is we either had that or nothing. I dont think the plot will hold up to multiple viewings as there seems to be some holes in it but all in all, pretty good.
 
1 - 20 of 96 Posts
Top