|
Post by Sailor on May 11, 2009 16:29:43 GMT -8
Mrs and I watched it yesterday (regular theater, not IMAX.) I do not think you will be disappointed. But I will caution you that if you are such a "Trekker (Trekkie?)" that you have memorized the "history of the future" as canon you should prepare yourself for some surprises.
The cast did a most credible job in making the characters their own, especially Zachary Quinto (Spock) and Karl Urban (McCoy). ENTERPRISE herself seemed aircraft carrier big and impressive from the outside though some of the interiors left me a bit disappointed. I will admit that I still prefer the version of the ENTERPRISE first seen in dock in the first movie. The forced perspective of the modelwork made her appear (in that scene) even larger than the CVN-65 ENTERPRISE, and the fine details of the model supported the illusion.
We went to this movie to be entertained. We were not disappointed. This is a very good action / adventure flick worth the price of admission.
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on May 12, 2009 10:36:09 GMT -8
I saw it also. It was the first ever Star Trek movie, or anything, that I sat down and watched so there was no constant comparrison to previous shows and movies for me.
All in all I thought it was a good flick with the cast doing a pretty good job of, like you said, making the parts their own and keeping from that sometimes cliche, hackneyed acting that comes when making remakes or the like.
The only actor I knew in the film oddly enough was Simon Pegg who played Scotty. I'm a fan of his comedic work and thought his take on Scotty was pretty good and definitley entertaining.
Anyway, just my two cents.
-Zach
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on May 27, 2009 17:17:21 GMT -8
We went to see it over the weekend.
I thought it was well done and did justice to the original.
Somewhere, Gene Roddenberry is smiling.
|
|
|
Post by ReformedLiberal on May 28, 2009 16:01:08 GMT -8
"impressive from the outside though some of the interiors left me a bit disappointed."
I found that a bit peculiar for a few seconds, but then decided that they were trying to give it an unrefined, prototype kind of look, that would by contrast make previous depictions of later versions look technologically advanced. Once that was resolved in my mind, I had no problem with it.
Much of the interior scenery in the TV shows and prior movie versions went out of their way to look futuristc to the point that it sometimes lost the "form follows function" rule and I had more of a problem with that, especially if it looked stucturally unsound or compromised for aesthetics.
|
|