Star-Trek

[jksmith269]

That's what was said in the movie.

No they could already "beam" people to locations close buy, scotty enhanced that techno mumbo jumbo to where someone could be "beamed" much farther distances even "to a ship at warp speed" he said it'd "be like hitting a bullet with an even smaller bullet while riding a horse" that's how they beamed from the planet they were on to the ship...

 

[theogt]

No they could already "beam" people to locations close buy, scotty enhanced that techno mumbo jumbo to where someone could be "beamed" much farther distances even "to a ship at warp speed" he said it'd "be like hitting a bullet with an even smaller bullet while riding a horse" that's how they beamed from the planet they were on to the ship...

It's before that. Spock asks him something like "you're the scotty that invented such and such?" when they first meet. Spock then gives him the formula to allow you to beam while in warp speed.

 

[PullMyFinger]

I think Gene Roddenberry would be happy with this. Leonard Nimoy seems to think Gene would be proud of this movie. There is a quote of Roddenberry saying that he wishes sometime in the future someone fresh would take hold of Star Trek and redefine it and move it even further than he did. I think JJ Abrams has done this. Gene would be proud.



I think it was more exciting than the trailer. The trailer gave everyone a taste of the movie but didn't give too much away. I didn't want it to end when the movie was winding down, so yeah, I'd say it's worth going to see.

Its about time JJ Abrams did something good, he directed one of the worst movies ever.......Cloverfield.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Its about time JJ Abrams did something good, he directed one of the worst movies ever.......Cloverfield.

 

[Aikmaniac]

Good movie. I think it fits right in line with the other Star Trek movies.

I just thought the guy who played Bones went a little over the top trying to emulate the original character.

Awesome effects.

 

[jksmith269]

It's before that. Spock asks him something like "you're the scotty that invented such and such?" when they first meet. Spock then gives him the formula to allow you to beam while in warp speed.

yeah, they were talking about beaming long distances, scotty said to the effect star fleet said it (beaming) could only be done localy such as ship to planet or ship to close ship, but he beleived you could beam a living organism to any place reguarless of distance even onto a ship in warp, that's when the dog was brought up... Scotty did not nor was it implied that he invented "beaming"... he invented beaming to long distances, which btw was after the ST movies because in the original movies they could only beam from ship to ground or another ship close by...

 

[theogt]

yeah, they were talking about beaming long distances, scotty said to the effect star fleet said it (beaming) could only be done localy such as ship to planet or ship to close ship, but he beleived you could beam a living organism to any place reguarless of distance even onto a ship in warp, that's when the dog was brought up... Scotty did not nor was it implied that he invented "beaming"... he invented beaming to long distances, which btw was after the ST movies because in the original movies they could only beam from ship to ground or another ship close by...

No, they said in the movie that he invented something. This was before the discussion of beaming long distances.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

No, they said in the movie that he invented something. This was before the discussion of beaming long distances.

The new film states that Scotty "invented" the theory of transwarp beaming. In essence, he developed the field equations that would make possible long-distance beaming.

 

[PullMyFinger]

I wrote this review about it on a website, it pretty sums up that movie.


Cloverfield

The movie abused the camcorder first person view. It was great for a while but shaky cam was pretty annoying. The movie used some guy's stupid going away party as a plot device so that when the monsters came, they'd all be together. The monster's origin wasn't even hinted at, leaving their existence and origin left COMPLETELY open for interpretation. I'm all for making the viewer think, but that was just lazy writing.The end, aka "Thanks for your money", tried to use "the camcorder as the storyteller" but completely failed. Massive disappointment.

I am still throwing up from this. . .I don't not even know what to call it. . . .Sucky? No it was worse then that. I didn't have any regrets in my life until I saw this movie. It has made me so frustrated I do not even know how to explain. The whole thing could have been great-besides the fact that there was no script and no image. Everything was just a blurry image of stupid screams. I kept praying that the monster would eat the camera guy to end my misery.

It was torture! Watching this movie was t-o-r-t-u-r-e! There is no reason to go and see this movie. Unless of course you are looking for a bad time, big headache, and somehow to waste your money. This could have been a good movie.. But it wasn't. The trailer was more interesting than the movie. The movie can be summed up in one word: Worthless. Can they even call this a movie? From what I've seen the producers have no right in calling this a movie. How did they manage to put this on the big screen?

This movie tries to hard to be cool... The 9-11 flashbacks were a little has been. The whole first half hour dragged on for so long, you were probably woken up by the first bang. And after that, you were just trying to prevent yourself from going into epileptic fits. This movie is so shaky, boring, dragtastic.

I pray to god that this style of film making dies with this film. I did not pay $9 to watch a guy run around with a handheld video camera. If Blair Witch Project meets Godzilla meets Starship Troopers meets You Tube is your thing, then this movie is for you.

Please ... save yourself the 70 minutes.

 

[theogt]

The new film states that Scotty "invented" the theory of transwarp beaming. In essence, he developed the field equations that would make possible long-distance beaming.

There you go. I didn't catch it word for word. Clearly, he has the experience to be put in charge once on the Enterprise. Thus, no plot hole.

 

[burmafrd]

What was really AU was making the whole crew the same age.

 

[Kevinicus]

I wrote this review about it on a website, it pretty sums up that movie.


Cloverfield

The movie abused the camcorder first person view. It was great for a while but shaky cam was pretty annoying. The movie used some guy's stupid going away party as a plot device so that when the monsters came, they'd all be together. The monster's origin wasn't even hinted at, leaving their existence and origin left COMPLETELY open for interpretation. I'm all for making the viewer think, but that was just lazy writing.The end, aka "Thanks for your money", tried to use "the camcorder as the storyteller" but completely failed. Massive disappointment.

I am still throwing up from this. . .I don't not even know what to call it. . . .Sucky? No it was worse then that. I didn't have any regrets in my life until I saw this movie. It has made me so frustrated I do not even know how to explain. The whole thing could have been great-besides the fact that there was no script and no image. Everything was just a blurry image of stupid screams. I kept praying that the monster would eat the camera guy to end my misery.

It was torture! Watching this movie was t-o-r-t-u-r-e! There is no reason to go and see this movie. Unless of course you are looking for a bad time, big headache, and somehow to waste your money. This could have been a good movie.. But it wasn't. The trailer was more interesting than the movie. The movie can be summed up in one word: Worthless. Can they even call this a movie? From what I've seen the producers have no right in calling this a movie. How did they manage to put this on the big screen?

This movie tries to hard to be cool... The 9-11 flashbacks were a little has been. The whole first half hour dragged on for so long, you were probably woken up by the first bang. And after that, you were just trying to prevent yourself from going into epileptic fits. This movie is so shaky, boring, dragtastic.

I pray to god that this style of film making dies with this film. I did not pay $9 to watch a guy run around with a handheld video camera. If Blair Witch Project meets Godzilla meets Starship Troopers meets You Tube is your thing, then this movie is for you.

Please ... save yourself the 70 minutes.

There's nothing wrong with Cloverfield if you have 90 minutes to kill and want to watch something different from the norm. Some people are bothered by the shaky cam, others have no problem with it. You're wrong about them not hinting at the monster's origins though. It's not specific, but it is hinted at.

But it seems your main gripe is that it is with a handheld camera. I'm not sure what the hell you expected going in, but anyone who had seen anything about the movie before hand should have known what it was and that there would be lots of shaking. Running with camera = shaking! It seems you are being overly hard on the movie simply because you couldn't handle the fast moving imagery and it caused you some sort of motion sickness.

If you want a movie that is truly torture, watch Pi by Aronofsky.

 

[DallasEast]

You never know how much other people's opinions differ from your own until read about them on the internet. I loved Cloverfield.

Finally, a (giant) monster movie unique to the U.S. market. No touchy-feely, "The monster is my friend, let's all go bowling together!" nonsense.

J.J. Abrams made a film which dealt with a what if. How would an ordinary citizen(s) life be affected by an attacking giant monster? He didn't make a movie from the perspective of what an Army general or an angry president or the media or some scientists or a top secret counterattack agency.

He asked, "What would you do?"

Now, how do you capture that singular viewpoint on film? From the general's warroom? From the halls of the White House? From the middle of an Associated Press newsroom? From some laboratory safely tucked away at Norad? From Area 51? How?

From the lens of a handheld camcorder carried by ordinary people who found themselves right smack dab in the thick of it.

Cloverfield isn't for everyone. If Godzilla or King Kong struck without warning, there will always be some nerdy scientist or bleached blonde who will save the day. And the number of deaths and destruction of city property will be minimal.

Who's the good little monster???? Nice monster. You're so cute. Don't eat me Mr. Monster. You're such a good boy... girl... it... Here! Have a Scooby snack!