Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Star Trek (new movie)

Star Trek (new movie)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
question
20 Posts 12 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • J Joe Woodbury

    Thumbs up from me. (The die-hard Trekkies crack me up with their complaints about inconsistencies. Do these people even listen to themselves? The inconsistencies between individual episodes let alone between series and movies are so legion, why start complaining now?)

    Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

    S Offline
    S Offline
    Steve McLenithan
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    I love Star Fleet's new dress code (mini skirts).

    // Steve McLenithan

    L realJSOPR 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • J Joe Woodbury

      Thumbs up from me. (The die-hard Trekkies crack me up with their complaints about inconsistencies. Do these people even listen to themselves? The inconsistencies between individual episodes let alone between series and movies are so legion, why start complaining now?)

      Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Mycroft Holmes
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      What got me was that a minute globule of red stuff does a planet and a cubic meter doesn't instantly do a starship! Good film though, I enjoyed it

      Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J Joe Woodbury

        Thumbs up from me. (The die-hard Trekkies crack me up with their complaints about inconsistencies. Do these people even listen to themselves? The inconsistencies between individual episodes let alone between series and movies are so legion, why start complaining now?)

        Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

        D Offline
        D Offline
        Dalek Dave
        wrote on last edited by
        #4

        I have yet to see it, (Hopefully Wednesday Evening), but those of my acquaintance who have say it is Excellent. BUT NO SPOILERS PLEASE! :)

        ------------------------------------ "Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food and tyrannize their teachers. I despair for the future." Socrates 400BC

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • J Joe Woodbury

          Thumbs up from me. (The die-hard Trekkies crack me up with their complaints about inconsistencies. Do these people even listen to themselves? The inconsistencies between individual episodes let alone between series and movies are so legion, why start complaining now?)

          Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Member 4593559
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          I thought it was a cracking good film too :) love the fact that the new actors have done a really good job of maintaining the characters. Bones is especially excellent. Being a Trekkie/trekker/trek-fan/whatever did not stop me enjoying this film. there may be inconsistencies, but there are also enough nods to the existing canon of star trek to not lose the whole concept. Classic example, the gung ho parachute guy... you just know whats going to happen to him ;)

          D R 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • M Member 4593559

            I thought it was a cracking good film too :) love the fact that the new actors have done a really good job of maintaining the characters. Bones is especially excellent. Being a Trekkie/trekker/trek-fan/whatever did not stop me enjoying this film. there may be inconsistencies, but there are also enough nods to the existing canon of star trek to not lose the whole concept. Classic example, the gung ho parachute guy... you just know whats going to happen to him ;)

            D Offline
            D Offline
            Dalek Dave
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            Member 4593559 wrote:

            Classic example, the gung ho parachute guy... you just know whats going to happen to him

            Am I right in thinking he was wearing a Red Shirt?

            ------------------------------------ "Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food and tyrannize their teachers. I despair for the future." Socrates 400BC

            M 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • D Dalek Dave

              Member 4593559 wrote:

              Classic example, the gung ho parachute guy... you just know whats going to happen to him

              Am I right in thinking he was wearing a Red Shirt?

              ------------------------------------ "Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food and tyrannize their teachers. I despair for the future." Socrates 400BC

              M Offline
              M Offline
              Member 4593559
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              Well, he had a red parachute outfit if I remember rightly :D

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • S Steve McLenithan

                I love Star Fleet's new dress code (mini skirts).

                // Steve McLenithan

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #8

                Have you got the legs for them? :rolleyes:

                Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • J Joe Woodbury

                  Thumbs up from me. (The die-hard Trekkies crack me up with their complaints about inconsistencies. Do these people even listen to themselves? The inconsistencies between individual episodes let alone between series and movies are so legion, why start complaining now?)

                  Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

                  S Offline
                  S Offline
                  Simon P Stevens
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  Seeing to tomorrow at the IMAX. Looking forward to that.

                  Simon

                  M 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Simon P Stevens

                    Seeing to tomorrow at the IMAX. Looking forward to that.

                    Simon

                    M Offline
                    M Offline
                    Mycroft Holmes
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #10

                    IMAX - impressive, so you like the big screen huh. I think it would be a little too imersive.

                    Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • S Steve McLenithan

                      I love Star Fleet's new dress code (mini skirts).

                      // Steve McLenithan

                      realJSOPR Offline
                      realJSOPR Offline
                      realJSOP
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      It's the old dress code.

                      "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
                      -----
                      "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

                      Z 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • M Mycroft Holmes

                        IMAX - impressive, so you like the big screen huh. I think it would be a little too imersive.

                        Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Simon P Stevens
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #12

                        Mycroft Holmes wrote:

                        so you like the big screen huh.

                        Actually, this is the first time I'll have been to an IMAX. I have a friend who says it's fantastic, so I'm going with him. (Secretly my opinion is that it's resolution not size that matters. you just sit further away from a big screen. I generally prefer to sit in the front third of a cinema. The ideal sweet spot is at an exact distance so the screen almost fills your vision, but requires no neck tilt to view - It's like those video glasses. The actual screen size is just a few centimetres, but placed very close to your eyes to give an impression of a 52" screen a few metres away)

                        Simon

                        R 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M Member 4593559

                          I thought it was a cracking good film too :) love the fact that the new actors have done a really good job of maintaining the characters. Bones is especially excellent. Being a Trekkie/trekker/trek-fan/whatever did not stop me enjoying this film. there may be inconsistencies, but there are also enough nods to the existing canon of star trek to not lose the whole concept. Classic example, the gung ho parachute guy... you just know whats going to happen to him ;)

                          R Offline
                          R Offline
                          Ray Cassick
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #13

                          The one thing I cannot seem to get passed is the fact that they show the star ships being built on land. It was my understanding (still looking for the actual reference now) that they were built in space. Given the mass of them, knowing that the first ones were much smaller compared tot he later models, I still don't see how that could be the case. Also, figuring that the one in the Enterprise TV show, supposedly happening prior to this movie DID have it constructed in space, gives me a bit of the willies. But other than that, the movie rocked. They did a great job on the characters and provided some very cool back-story. I think they opened the door for some very cool sequels also.


                          LinkedIn[^] | Blog[^] | Twitter[^]

                          D M 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • R Ray Cassick

                            The one thing I cannot seem to get passed is the fact that they show the star ships being built on land. It was my understanding (still looking for the actual reference now) that they were built in space. Given the mass of them, knowing that the first ones were much smaller compared tot he later models, I still don't see how that could be the case. Also, figuring that the one in the Enterprise TV show, supposedly happening prior to this movie DID have it constructed in space, gives me a bit of the willies. But other than that, the movie rocked. They did a great job on the characters and provided some very cool back-story. I think they opened the door for some very cool sequels also.


                            LinkedIn[^] | Blog[^] | Twitter[^]

                            D Offline
                            D Offline
                            Dan Neely
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #14

                            You're making the assumption of assuming the scriptwriters have a fraction of a clue. :doh: They've done this sillyness repeadedly in the TV series' despite having the inability to enter atmosphere as a plot point in others. :rolleyes: http://flare.solareclipse.net/cgi2/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=002562;p=0[^]

                            It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains. -- Pride and Prejudice and Zombies

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • R Ray Cassick

                              The one thing I cannot seem to get passed is the fact that they show the star ships being built on land. It was my understanding (still looking for the actual reference now) that they were built in space. Given the mass of them, knowing that the first ones were much smaller compared tot he later models, I still don't see how that could be the case. Also, figuring that the one in the Enterprise TV show, supposedly happening prior to this movie DID have it constructed in space, gives me a bit of the willies. But other than that, the movie rocked. They did a great job on the characters and provided some very cool back-story. I think they opened the door for some very cool sequels also.


                              LinkedIn[^] | Blog[^] | Twitter[^]

                              M Offline
                              M Offline
                              Member 4593559
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #15

                              For this film, I think they have put it being built on the land just to make the scene look dramatic rather than thinking about the actual physics of it.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • S Simon P Stevens

                                Mycroft Holmes wrote:

                                so you like the big screen huh.

                                Actually, this is the first time I'll have been to an IMAX. I have a friend who says it's fantastic, so I'm going with him. (Secretly my opinion is that it's resolution not size that matters. you just sit further away from a big screen. I generally prefer to sit in the front third of a cinema. The ideal sweet spot is at an exact distance so the screen almost fills your vision, but requires no neck tilt to view - It's like those video glasses. The actual screen size is just a few centimetres, but placed very close to your eyes to give an impression of a 52" screen a few metres away)

                                Simon

                                R Offline
                                R Offline
                                Richard Jones
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #16

                                I've been to 2 IMAX movies, both 3D. It's :thumbsup: The screen is just so big, and the seating angles mean your view is unobstructed, and the sound is better than normal too. I wish the nearest one wasn't 3 hours away.

                                Cheetah. Ferret. Gonads. What more can I say? - Pete O'Hanlon

                                S 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • R Richard Jones

                                  I've been to 2 IMAX movies, both 3D. It's :thumbsup: The screen is just so big, and the seating angles mean your view is unobstructed, and the sound is better than normal too. I wish the nearest one wasn't 3 hours away.

                                  Cheetah. Ferret. Gonads. What more can I say? - Pete O'Hanlon

                                  S Offline
                                  S Offline
                                  Simon P Stevens
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #17

                                  (I'm kinda just mumbling to myself here so feel free to ignore me) For the sake of argument (and easier calculations), lets say the viewing angle of your eyes is 90 degrees (45 degrees from the centre line in each direction). A standard cinema screen is around 15 metres wide. So to fill your view you would have to be seated 7.5m from the screen. A standard IMAX screen is 22m wide. So you have to be seated 11m away for the screen to fill your vision. So what is the difference. I go to an IMAX and I sit 11m from the screen, I go to a regular one and I set 7.5m from the screen. In both cases, the screen fills my vision. Surely it's exactly the same? I really don't see how size matters in this case.

                                  Simon

                                  R 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • S Simon P Stevens

                                    (I'm kinda just mumbling to myself here so feel free to ignore me) For the sake of argument (and easier calculations), lets say the viewing angle of your eyes is 90 degrees (45 degrees from the centre line in each direction). A standard cinema screen is around 15 metres wide. So to fill your view you would have to be seated 7.5m from the screen. A standard IMAX screen is 22m wide. So you have to be seated 11m away for the screen to fill your vision. So what is the difference. I go to an IMAX and I sit 11m from the screen, I go to a regular one and I set 7.5m from the screen. In both cases, the screen fills my vision. Surely it's exactly the same? I really don't see how size matters in this case.

                                    Simon

                                    R Offline
                                    R Offline
                                    Richard Jones
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #18

                                    Don't IMAX films use higher resolution film? They really showcase the extra detail on a bigger screen. Also, most people aren't seated the optimum distance, most sit at the rear of the cinema.

                                    Cheetah. Ferret. Gonads. What more can I say? - Pete O'Hanlon

                                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R Richard Jones

                                      Don't IMAX films use higher resolution film? They really showcase the extra detail on a bigger screen. Also, most people aren't seated the optimum distance, most sit at the rear of the cinema.

                                      Cheetah. Ferret. Gonads. What more can I say? - Pete O'Hanlon

                                      S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Simon P Stevens
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #19

                                      Richard Jones wrote:

                                      Don't IMAX films use higher resolution film?

                                      I could be wrong but as far as I am aware, there is a high res 'imax format' film, but it is expensive so generally only used for specialized imax only films - often documentaries or educational films. Regular entertainment films are rarely shot on the imax format. (Like I say I could be totally wrong about that)

                                      Simon

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • realJSOPR realJSOP

                                        It's the old dress code.

                                        "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
                                        -----
                                        "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

                                        Z Offline
                                        Z Offline
                                        Zhat
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #20

                                        I thought the "old dress code" was a fig leaf??

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        Reply
                                        • Reply as topic
                                        Log in to reply
                                        • Oldest to Newest
                                        • Newest to Oldest
                                        • Most Votes


                                        • Login

                                        • Don't have an account? Register

                                        • Login or register to search.
                                        • First post
                                          Last post
                                        0
                                        • Categories
                                        • Recent
                                        • Tags
                                        • Popular
                                        • World
                                        • Users
                                        • Groups