Star Trek 2009 – “The Best Star Trek Ever???”

Best ‘Star Trek’ ever? 05:49 PM PT, Mar 11 2009 I ran into Zachary Quinto up in San Francisco at WonderCon and he was all smiles. “I just saw the movie for the first time last night,” said the “Heroes” actor who wears the pointy ears of Mr. Spock in the new “Star Trek” film. “It’s pretty amazing. You have to see it…” I want to. After interviewing “Trek” director JJ Abrams and seeing several extended chunks of the movie over at the Paramount lot, I’ve ramped up my expectations pretty high. I fully expect this to join “Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan” as the very best of the “Trek” films. It may even surpass “Khan.” Why? I love the humor and the action I’ve seen and I think Abrams has the right attitude going in. And I think the “Trek” films, as a whole, are a pretty flawed bunch. I’m ready for a “Trek” film that is engaging, energized and stylish. I think this might be it. I’m not the only eager Enterprise watcher: The new trailer for the movie was downloaded 1.8 million times in its first 24 hours as an iTunes offering and 5 million times since it hit the merchant site on March 6. That’s quite a bit of pent-up interest. Check out the action in this thing: Here’s a random prediction: “Trek” will finish as the fourth-highest grossing film of the 2009, behind the new “Harry Potter” film, Pixar’s “Up” and the “Night at the Museum” sequel. — Geoff Boucher www.blacktree.tv

Related Post

25 thoughts on “Star Trek 2009 – “The Best Star Trek Ever???”

  • @StoneKnivesBearskins Thanks you. That is the kind of intelligent reply I respect. As I have said many times, it’s OK to like bad movies just as long as you know they are bad. To say something is “good” or “great” or “FANTASTIC” without logical points to back it up is just plain childish. I do feel though that a true fan would want to preserve Roddenberry’s vision of Star Trek, and would condemn this movie.

  • It is good that the director of this film gave the familiar characters of Star Trek a refreshing new dimension. They were becoming pretty stale from the previous movies. Kirk is a womanizer and a troublemaker, Spock is more tormented by his guilt, McCoy is VERY short tempered, and so forth. Best Star Trek movie. I would put it up there with Star Treks 2 and 4.

  • Here is an idea for the next film. A deadly form of tribbls that can live in space and move at warp speed attacks federation planets. Mean while Uhura and Spock are having martial problems. Uhura gets bit by a tribble and starts to mutate and the only cure is whale barf from the blue whale. It turns out whales are tribbles natural predators and are released in the galaxy saving the day. Your right it’s too good.

  • Here is an idea for ST2 film. A deadly form of tribbls that can live in space and move at warp speed attacks federation planets. Mean while Uhura and Spock are having martial problems. Uhura gets bit by a tribble and starts to mutate and the only cure is whale barf from the blue whale. It turns out whales are tribbles natural predators and are released in the galaxy saving the day. Your right it’s too good.

  • @Lurvy1963 So… if someone came into your home Insulted your husband until your husband lost his temper, than that same person took over your house and afterwards the Police gave him a mettle for doing it, that would be refreshing? STXI was impossible junk with unbelievable out comes. It teaches kids that if you want to get ahead in the world all you have to do is be selfish, lucky and have no respect for authority.

  • @Trekfreek REALLY??? That’s the morrow of this Star Trek story? Be selfish, lucky and have no respect for authority? YIKES!!! Let’s bring some serious education for our kids to follow so that they don’t grow up to be like Captain James Jerk (oops sorry, Kirk). Just having a little fun with it my friend. Nothing personal.

  • @Lurvy1963 Yes it is the moral of the new movie Star Trek (XI). Real Star Trek teaches kids how to show respect when disagreeing. No need to apologies, the new Kirk is Captain JERK.

  • I will admit to finding this movie very entertaining and the performances fairly good, Star Trek (2009) has very little to do with Gene Roddenberry’s sci-fi vision. It’s a film about special effects, action and violence, and not about ideas, philosophy and the morality. While this film has the veneer of the the Star Trek legacy, it’s lacks much of the original show’s depth and heart. When all is said and done, what have we really learned about ourselves from this film?

  • @05mjdubb What made it “awesome”? Please stick to the movie. If you can’t say why it was “awesome” without using words like “Fuck”, “awards”, “Box office Hit”, and “because” Then I will consider no longer posting.

  • @rktsncalnc That two people, with different beliefs and different views and problem solving ideals, can still take a moral road, a way to bridge that awful social gap between each other for the greater good. That there is something that binds individuals in the face of absolution, that hope isn’t just a waking dream but a dimension made reality by the collective will of people faced with hard decision in the face of morality versus end result.

  • @Trekfreek If faced with directives are unsound, it is the duty of a lesser rank to remind the officer in question the focus of the problem. Wether the officer is a prideful prick or not, you need to show some courage to voice your opinions, elsewhere, we’re not talking about a Free Frederation, but rather, a Militaristic order without encouragement for freedom of speech (which isn’t what the Federation is about).

  • @Sethir Let me finish your speech with a quote from the real Kirk (You)”dimension made reality by the collective will of people faced with hard decision in the face of morality versus end result” (Kirk) “To Dream the highest REALITY!” See? It fits perfectly! One nonsensical speech for another, you really can’t tell them apart.

  • @Sethir {BUZZZ} WRONG! Star Fleet may be part of the federation but it is military (Militaristic). You can be court-martialed, replaced, reassigned, ordered, relieved of duty, dishonorably discharged, and even confined to the brig; and you have no choice in the matter. The chain of command must be maintained: this was in all the Star Trek shows and the first 10 movies. Even Chief O’Brian had no choice but to obey orders from Ensign Nog (Rom’s Kid).

  • @Trekfreek Except that you can’t, and you’re just being posh about it. In retrospect, Kirk’s quote speaks about a vision, and envisioning a best scenario. Being short or long term isn’t the issue, it’s the message behind it. You understand it, but feel it is not necessary to take it seriously through this youtube conversation, as bashing other’s posts and debating the sentences rather than the message floats your boat better at this instant.

  • @Sethir LOL ROTFLMAO!!!!! Kirk’s quote was gibberish to confuse and short out the android Norman. There was no Deep Meaning to it. You are the kind of person who will stare at a pack of gum for 20 hours then proclaim that the ingredients is a deep philosophical statement. I only bash people who try to find things that are not there. It’s a waste of life to speak in riddles with no reason but to sound precocious, and to justify belittling people who are wiser than you and/or disagree with you.

  • @Sethir Okay, so where was the “moral road” when, towards the end of the film, they killed Nero? How does killing a man – one who is your enemy, nonetheless – figure into the Federation’s ethos? Would it have not been much more noble and moral to beam Nero and his crew aboard the Enterprise, throw them in the brig and let this man who was hellbent on revenge suffer a lifetime of being saved by his enemies? How does allowing Nero to die serve Starfleet’s “greater good” beyond revenge?

  • @rktsncalnc. Great point; I would like to add that it was Spock who wanted to finish the job in the movie, which is totally out of character for Spock. In the series Spock tried to talk Kirk out of chasing down the Gorn and it was Spock who refused to take the lives of the giant Neanderthal men who killed 2 of his men. The real Spock never seeks revenge.

  • @Trekfreek The scene early on in the film where Spock is mocked by Vulcan “bullies” rings false, as well. Here is a race of aliens who suppress their emotions, yet a trio of youths badger young Spock w/ illogical and emotional pettiness? Also, the Nero storyline: He comes through the black hole in time and waits 25+ years for Spock to arrive? How did he know Spock would be coming through the black hole? Wouldn’t Nero’s time had been better spent flying to Romulus to warn of the future supernova?

  • @rktsncalnc “How did he know Spock would be coming through the black hole?” Also, if they both came through about the same time, how could he know when Spock is going to come out of the black hole? As fair as he knew Spock could have come out 20 years before him or even 200 years before, or even 500 years into the future. After all Nero is no scientist. There is so many painfully obvious things wrong with the movie; it’s a wonder why people like it at all.

  • @Trekfreek Nero blames Spock for the destruction of his planet and the death of his wife. Okay. So why not fly on over to “present day” Romulus and warn them of this impending doom? He had 25 or so years to do so. “In so many centuries, our sun will supernova. Let’s get some scientists on that. Pronto!”

    Also, after Nero destroys Vulcan, his next target is …Earth? Why??? What did the Federation do to him?

  • @rktsncalnc Another great point. Ambassador Spock was an outcast of the Federation for living on Romulus. Also if he had gone to Romulus (who hate the federation) The Romulans of that time would have given him both Spock’s heads on a silver platter.
    Star Trek (XI) is way too easy to pick apart; the1970’s Godzilla movies are harder to ridicule.

  • @Sethir In other words “Can’t we all just …Get along” Get real that is not even good enough for Care Bears.

Comments are closed.