Author Topic: Star trek the movie  (Read 27515 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Star trek the movie
Great movie! My favorite character was the young spock. After that, young chekov and young scottie (sean of the dead). They did a really great job with making a younger version of the old cast of star trek. Not to mention the continual big role cameo of leonard nemoy.

The movie had many moments of horrendous techno babble. Black holes for time travel and a super nova that threatens the galaxy....uuugghh :ick:

Even though the movie was great. I felt sort of empty afterwards because what happened in this movie completely made all of the other trek series and movies not happen except for enterprise. Then i realized that this star trek movie is just an alternate reality star trek movie, then i was ok again.

I could definitely see the star wars like stuff that the people making the movie tossed in. Especially the way the ships went to warp, that was really cool.

As far as anything else goes, the ship battles were really cool, but there wasn't much dignifying ship to ship combat at all. At the beginning of the movie with a federation ship with kirks father serving on, that one bit the dust, but it was entirely cool. The last and pretty much only other ship battle with the romulans from the future was sort of crappy. There was never any full out combat between the enterprise and the romulans. The romulan ship got stuck in a black hole, and the enterprise went to pummel it with all of it's phasers and torpedos. There never was a full on glorious battle of the romulans versus the enterprise. Like i said, it was either the romulans shooting first and the enterprise not attacking, or the romulans are sitting ducks with the enterprise blasting it away.

One last nitpick of this movie was shields. The enterprise had it's shields working through the whole movie. Yet enemy fire always impacted the hull. It was like this for every ship. The movie would have done itself a favor had it never even mentioned any form of energy shielding throughout the whole movie since you never got to see any of it in use.

Aside from the nitpicks. Great movie, great cast, great way to reboot the star trek franchise within an alternate trek reality.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Star trek the movie
Quote
One last nitpick of this movie was shields. The enterprise had it's shields working through the whole movie. Yet enemy fire always impacted the hull. It was like this for every ship. The movie would have done itself a favor had it never even mentioned any form of energy shielding throughout the whole movie since you never got to see any of it in use.

Exactly like Star Wars.  It's one of my biggest pet peeves of the movies.

 

Offline Turambar

  • Determined to inflict his entire social circle on us
  • 210
  • You can't spell Manslaughter without laughter
Re: Star trek the movie
If the Enterprise had a full-on battle with the Narada, it would have been blown to tiny pieces.
10:55:48   TurambarBlade: i've been selecting my generals based on how much i like their hats
10:55:55   HerraTohtori: me too!
10:56:01   HerraTohtori: :D

 

Offline Knight Templar

  • Stealth
  • 212
  • I'm a magic man, I've got magic hands.
Re: Star trek the movie
Quote
One last nitpick of this movie was shields. The enterprise had it's shields working through the whole movie. Yet enemy fire always impacted the hull. It was like this for every ship. The movie would have done itself a favor had it never even mentioned any form of energy shielding throughout the whole movie since you never got to see any of it in use.

Exactly like Star Wars.  It's one of my biggest pet peeves of the movies.

zomg not teh shieldz! bcuz todays shield technology completely blocks all incoming 24th century weaponry, amirite?
Copyright ©1976, 2003, KT Enterprises. All rights reserved

"I don't want to get laid right now. I want to get drunk."- Mars

Too Long, Didn't Read

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: Star trek the movie
At least in star wars with shields, you can see them working at times. Such as when that empirial star destroyer is in the asteroid field searching for the millenium falcon. You can see some asteroids impacting on the star destroyers shields. Basically it just looked like an asteroid getting destroyed by nothing.

If the Enterprise had a full-on battle with the Narada, it would have been blown to tiny pieces.
This is star trek were talking about. Couldn't they do the normal thing and like scan the narada and pour over the data looking for a weakness and exploit it. That way it'd be like normal trek with a huge ass space battle with the little federation getting ripped up to ****, but still wins because they exploited the "weakness". Would've been much cooler.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Fury

  • The Curmudgeon
  • 213
Re: Star trek the movie
That way it'd be like normal trek
This movie was miles better than "normal trek".

  

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: Star trek the movie
This aspect of normal trek would have made an official battle between the narada and the enterprise great. Unfortunately the movie didn't have that many starship battles.

There was one major opportunity the enterprise had to scan the narada and that was when it first encountered it. Both ships were just sitting there while the drill was getting disabled. Just scan the ship and chekov would be like, captain, i see a weakness in the other ship's design. Non vaguely explain where it is and make a battle possible later on in the movie.

It wouldn't even have to be a destructive weakness. Just like a design flaw of the narada where a portion of the vessel has it's power grid exposed or something. In trek a whole bunch of times you do have smaller federation ships take on much bigger targets.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Kosh

  • A year behind what's funny
  • 210
Re: Star trek the movie
Quote
One last nitpick of this movie was shields. The enterprise had it's shields working through the whole movie. Yet enemy fire always impacted the hull. It was like this for every ship. The movie would have done itself a favor had it never even mentioned any form of energy shielding throughout the whole movie since you never got to see any of it in use.

Exactly like Star Wars.  It's one of my biggest pet peeves of the movies.


Because the enemy weapons were more than a century ahead and many times more powerful, it could overwhelm the shields in just a couple of shots.
"The reason for this is that the original Fortran got so convoluted and extensive (10's of millions of lines of code) that no-one can actually figure out how it works, there's a massive project going on to decode the original Fortran and write a more modern system, but until then, the UK communication network is actually relying heavily on 35 year old Fortran that nobody understands." - Flipside

Brain I/O error
Replace and press any key

 

Offline Turambar

  • Determined to inflict his entire social circle on us
  • 210
  • You can't spell Manslaughter without laughter
Re: Star trek the movie
they were based on advanced Romulan technology made from converted borg nanites.

nasty stuff.
10:55:48   TurambarBlade: i've been selecting my generals based on how much i like their hats
10:55:55   HerraTohtori: me too!
10:56:01   HerraTohtori: :D

 

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: Star trek the movie
Even the 1701-E would have had a nasty time taking it on.

As I said in the thread in Diaspora, I thoroughly enjoyed it, I'd feel like a hypocrite complaining about Star Trek mucking around with Time-Lines, that's like complaining about Angst in BSG ;)

It had what a movie needed, and asked only for a suspension of belief, and I considered it a worthwhile trade.

 

Offline Pred the Penguin

  • 210
  • muahahaha...
    • EaWPR
Re: Star trek the movie
Battles were graphically splendid, but barely got any more tactical than "fire all weapons" o_O

 

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: Star trek the movie
Best way to fight a battle in my opinion ;)

 

Offline Turambar

  • Determined to inflict his entire social circle on us
  • 210
  • You can't spell Manslaughter without laughter
Re: Star trek the movie
USS Enterprise

beam-free-all [check]
10:55:48   TurambarBlade: i've been selecting my generals based on how much i like their hats
10:55:55   HerraTohtori: me too!
10:56:01   HerraTohtori: :D

 

Offline Dilmah G

  • Failed juggling
  • 211
  • Do try it.
Re: Star trek the movie
USS Enterprise

beam-free-all [check]
Hit play. Rinse repeat.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: Star trek the movie
Battles were graphically splendid, but barely got any more tactical than "fire all weapons" o_O

Close range, one on one combat between starships isn't going to be terribly tactical. They're effectively at knife-fighting range, their tracking systems probably find any efforts to evasively manuvering at that distance to be giggleworthy.

One thing they got right I think with the Kelvin though is the sheer difficulty of destroying a starship. It doesn't sink, and it doesn't burn, which is how you destroy ships. Stuff like Star Wars, B5, and earlier Treks liked to make stuff explode flashily. That's not how it's going to end. You'll see something more like Starlancer and what happened to the Kelvin. It would be very difficult to stop a well-compartmented ship.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Dilmah G

  • Failed juggling
  • 211
  • Do try it.
Re: Star trek the movie
Yeah, but the Kelvin looked like it's hull was getting absolutely raped in some of those shots, I was surprised the hull didn't break apart in the first thirty seconds of the intro the way the explosions were going at it.

 

Offline MR_T3D

  • 29
  • Personal Text
Re: Star trek the movie
This aspect of normal trek would have made an official battle between the narada and the enterprise great. Unfortunately the movie didn't have that many starship battles.

There was one major opportunity the enterprise had to scan the narada and that was when it first encountered it. Both ships were just sitting there while the drill was getting disabled. Just scan the ship and chekov would be like, captain, i see a weakness in the other ship's design. Non vaguely explain where it is and make a battle possible later on in the movie.

It wouldn't even have to be a destructive weakness. Just like a design flaw of the narada where a portion of the vessel has it's power grid exposed or something. In trek a whole bunch of times you do have smaller federation ships take on much bigger targets.
"small thermal exhust port right below the main port" comes to mind.
damn i'm glad i'm not a superweapon designer...yet :nervous:
pity is is lacking in awsome space battles dept.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Star trek the movie
One thing they got right I think with the Kelvin though is the sheer difficulty of destroying a starship. It doesn't sink, and it doesn't burn, which is how you destroy ships. Stuff like Star Wars, B5, and earlier Treks liked to make stuff explode flashily. That's not how it's going to end. You'll see something more like Starlancer and what happened to the Kelvin. It would be very difficult to stop a well-compartmented ship.

Well with Trek they have the excuse that once you take out the warp containment you're going to have a pretty big bang.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Mikes

  • 29
Re: Star trek the movie
One thing they got right I think with the Kelvin though is the sheer difficulty of destroying a starship. It doesn't sink, and it doesn't burn, which is how you destroy ships. Stuff like Star Wars, B5, and earlier Treks liked to make stuff explode flashily. That's not how it's going to end. You'll see something more like Starlancer and what happened to the Kelvin. It would be very difficult to stop a well-compartmented ship.

I'm kinda rusty on "Trek Tech" ... but i would believe the end of a Star-Ship would entirely depend on the underlaying technology...

... anything working with anti-matter and containtment fields... for that matter... ;) ...  at least would have the potential to end rather spectacular i believe LOL.

 

Offline Pred the Penguin

  • 210
  • muahahaha...
    • EaWPR
Re: Star trek the movie
A slow death definitely looks better than the flashy kind. :drevil: