Thursday, May 7, 2009

Star Trek Officially in Theatres

It is now 7:00PM on the east coast of the United States so Star Trek has officially premiered in theatres. So what did you think?


  1. Different but Fun, Entertaining, Great Special effects and sound, score was not that good but the cast was great. Star Trek is Finally Back.

  2. i just saw it. CGI was awesome, the cast was great, cant wait to see it again. People I was with don't like Star Trek, yet they loved it as well.

  3. True Star Trek fans will be disappointed and left with a feeling of "what the hell just happened???" These guys can't seriously be thinking about leaving the hallowed Star Trek universe torn, tattered and RAPED the way this film left it. Someone must surely have a grand scheme for fixing everything this movie destroyed. If not, it truly is adios amigos to the franchise that changed television and science fiction forever. Is this the best that Hollywood and Paramount can come up with??? If so, can the end of cinema as a whole be far behind? Keep the modern morality and behavior in this century and don't force it on Star Trek. This may truly be the end of a forty three year legend for the sake of advancing the careers of many who wouldn't have made it without their part in the death of Star Trek. It is a sad, sad day in the universe.

  4. The movie was great, the way that they explained what happen was perfect, simple, and to the point. It was a perfect setting for setting up a alternate timeline. It sets up to create a new approach for the voyages of the u.s.s. enterprise. Some things have been changed, but in change new ideas can be brought to life and they left in tact room for some of the orignal storys to be retold i.e., trouble with tribbles and space seed or new insight with mirror universe. Great movie with a lot of sequel potentional.

  5. I feel I'm forced to agree with Tamalus. While I enjoyed the action and the sets and all the cool stuff Gene Roddenberry wished he could have done. I'm just not comfortable with the alternate timeline explanation. I understand it works on most levels (still doesn't explain Spock's relationship with Uhura) but it just isn't right. JJ Abrahms has successfully taken all of Star Trek over the last 40 years and thrown it into one of those singularities created by this red matter stuff. I was hoping for some wrap up at the end with the destruction of Nero's ship but nothing happened. Now someone needs to follow them back and repair the damage they've done. The alternate timeline was really just a cop-out. Keep the people and the cool shiny new toys but fix the time line that's all I ask.

  6. I am so excited to see this tonight. Going to see it here in NYC. The cast looks amazing and though I'm not a big Trek fan, I am sure I can catch on quick with this one. I also saw this amazing interview online where the guys really just seem to get along so well, plus they look really hot, lol. Enjoy the Trek eye candy!

    Also check out this gallery too of the entire cast, past and present and more!! So good….

  7. Alternate Reality? If you go that
    way with a story or movie, then
    anything can be made up without
    any regard to historical events.
    For instance, all the past
    happenings on Vulcan did not occur.
    One could argue that James Kirk
    changed history by going back in
    time on several occasions. Yes, but
    never at the expense of Star Trek
    history. It was germane to the
    encapsulated plot that was relevant
    to the immediate story. Destroying
    Vulcan was a horrendous mistake.
    They might as well have destroyed
    Earth and ended the movie there.
    Star Trek is finished as far as
    I'm concerned unless they can
    find a way to resurrect Vulcan, which of course is the intellectual
    center of the Federation. Also,
    the Spock/Uhura relationship does
    not work at all.

  8. Very good, but not great. Had a few contrivances. Didn't want a prequel, but since they did it I'm glad they were bold about it. That's what the Enterprise TV show should have made clearer: Time is altered and our heroes experience fear of certain death.


  10. Ithat movie was amazing! People who don't understand Star Trek will get what's going on. The fights were awesome, the dialouge was like an old Star Trek movie, Great Movie. Can't wait for the sequel.

  11. Really, what a disaster. The alternate time line destroys everything we know and love in the Star Trek world. I've been waiting for all the hype to die down and for true life long Star Trek fans to speak up. What a mess!!!!

  12. So apparently the film makers are obsessed with the idea that they needed a new time line so that there is a risk of death to all the characters. What a cop out! Sounds like an excuse for lazy writers to me. We see phenomenal and suspenseful films all the time where we know in advance that certain characters don't die. And who ever really expected any of the main Star Trek characters to die anyway? Not many. Of course they had to bring Spock back after Wrath of Khan. That's because people love the franchise. If you need to kill off main characters, make a horror film. If you want a new universe, write a new sci-fi story and create your own characters. Sorry, just too disgusted for words. When Zefram Cochrane cranked up Magic Carpet Ride during blast off in First Contact I had tears in my eyes. I have tears again, but this time because of the destruction of Star Trek.

    My wife's grandfather survived the Philippine death march. That story will still be captivating knowing that he survived. History is still captivating even though we of course know the outcome.

  13. I agree. The movie was indeed great and all but left me feeling empty and very uncomfortable with this alternate timeline. As the end credits rolled, I ended up with a huge "WHAT? THAT'S IT?" It's like someone took an eraser and erased the whole board. It did not feel right. It would have been better if they sent the young crew into the future and saved Romulus from destruction.