 


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Star Trek Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review</link>
	<description>The Official Home of Correct Movie Opinions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:54:32 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: shotta</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-206508</link>
		<dc:creator>shotta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:20:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-206508</guid>
		<description>Hi just saw something in the movie that&#039;s stuck in the back of my mind and wonder if anyone else have seen this, kirks mother i think is also sporks mother !!!! tell me if i am wrong...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi just saw something in the movie that&#8217;s stuck in the back of my mind and wonder if anyone else have seen this, kirks mother i think is also sporks mother !!!! tell me if i am wrong&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max D. Parrilla</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-205207</link>
		<dc:creator>Max D. Parrilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-205207</guid>
		<description>i had seen the star trek movie and was pleasantly surprised on how well the movie was. the movie had inside jokes to those who have seen the movies original series. the green woman, dr. mcCoys famous line, and so fort. 

i am just wondering how they will further explain the series of this movie to re-align with the original series story line or if this movie series will make its own story arc.

any solution or outcome and i will be in line waiting to see it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i had seen the star trek movie and was pleasantly surprised on how well the movie was. the movie had inside jokes to those who have seen the movies original series. the green woman, dr. mcCoys famous line, and so fort. </p>
<p>i am just wondering how they will further explain the series of this movie to re-align with the original series story line or if this movie series will make its own story arc.</p>
<p>any solution or outcome and i will be in line waiting to see it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-203185</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 02:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-203185</guid>
		<description>Dude! Star trek the movie was amazing; I knew it was going to be awesome! I have to share this with everyone... I just got the Star Trek ring tone on my phone by Texting TREKKIE to 30303 and received the Star Trek: Next Generation Theme

I have to tell you guys this ring tone is awesome! Who’s seen the movie did you enjoy it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dude! Star trek the movie was amazing; I knew it was going to be awesome! I have to share this with everyone&#8230; I just got the Star Trek ring tone on my phone by Texting TREKKIE to 30303 and received the Star Trek: Next Generation Theme</p>
<p>I have to tell you guys this ring tone is awesome! Who’s seen the movie did you enjoy it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-203056</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 19:33:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-203056</guid>
		<description>Check out...

http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/trek-writer

... if you want some details from the screenwriters themselves why the storyline regarding Nero was cut back. For me, their reasoning makes complete sense.

They compromised Nero for the overall flow of the movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Check out&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/trek-writer" rel="nofollow">http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/trek-writer</a></p>
<p>&#8230; if you want some details from the screenwriters themselves why the storyline regarding Nero was cut back. For me, their reasoning makes complete sense.</p>
<p>They compromised Nero for the overall flow of the movie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trent</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200781</link>
		<dc:creator>Trent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 05:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200781</guid>
		<description>Great Review John.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Review John.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: g8tor</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200708</link>
		<dc:creator>g8tor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 20:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200708</guid>
		<description>practice what you preach, see rule #2.
&quot;2) Disagree and debate, but no insulting other commenters or the author&quot;
i&#039;ve had posts deleted and i didn&#039;t even call anyone names.
i can&#039;t believe i&#039;m going to watch star trek before i see wolverine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>practice what you preach, see rule #2.<br />
&#8220;2) Disagree and debate, but no insulting other commenters or the author&#8221;<br />
i&#8217;ve had posts deleted and i didn&#8217;t even call anyone names.<br />
i can&#8217;t believe i&#8217;m going to watch star trek before i see wolverine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trekki</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200697</link>
		<dc:creator>Trekki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 19:40:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200697</guid>
		<description>Space Wars, because this is not Star Trek, was a good &quot;Die Hard&quot; in space. It was a good movie, but short of having a ship named Enterprise, it has very little to do with Star Trek. I cant understand why some Idiot &quot;Artsy&quot; director needs to re-envision something that has been so written about by it&#039;s creator. If you are doing to kill off main characters and destroy planets that exist in EVERY SINGLE movie and TV show, then dont call it Star Trek, because it is not. If you are going to do an Alternate Reality movie, then fix it at the end like EVERY Star Trek has ALWAYS done. Paramount promised when they started this project that it would be a Star Trek, but instead gave some moron the keys and he just decided to make it some Die Hard, Star Wars, Star Trek hybrid. While you are killing main Star Trek characters, kill off Spock or Kirk and have a real Alternate Reality movie. If you are going to go to the extreme of putting down your vision and rewrite something that was good already, then don’t call it Star Trek. That way, you wont have to pay all the licensing fees and copyright fees that go along with it. Now, you have to pay all the extra fees and all you did was use a few names and a ship, and are stuck paying millions to use a name that you ruined. Good luck fixing it for the next movie douche, I hope it fails as miserably as you pathetic attempt to be Gene Roddenberry. You suck!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Space Wars, because this is not Star Trek, was a good &#8220;Die Hard&#8221; in space. It was a good movie, but short of having a ship named Enterprise, it has very little to do with Star Trek. I cant understand why some Idiot &#8220;Artsy&#8221; director needs to re-envision something that has been so written about by it&#8217;s creator. If you are doing to kill off main characters and destroy planets that exist in EVERY SINGLE movie and TV show, then dont call it Star Trek, because it is not. If you are going to do an Alternate Reality movie, then fix it at the end like EVERY Star Trek has ALWAYS done. Paramount promised when they started this project that it would be a Star Trek, but instead gave some moron the keys and he just decided to make it some Die Hard, Star Wars, Star Trek hybrid. While you are killing main Star Trek characters, kill off Spock or Kirk and have a real Alternate Reality movie. If you are going to go to the extreme of putting down your vision and rewrite something that was good already, then don’t call it Star Trek. That way, you wont have to pay all the licensing fees and copyright fees that go along with it. Now, you have to pay all the extra fees and all you did was use a few names and a ship, and are stuck paying millions to use a name that you ruined. Good luck fixing it for the next movie douche, I hope it fails as miserably as you pathetic attempt to be Gene Roddenberry. You suck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vid</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200518</link>
		<dc:creator>Vid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 03:42:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200518</guid>
		<description>Star Trek works as a light action movie but as a sci-fi movie it lack any intellectual depth that the TV shows or movies had (as cheesy and dated as they are now).  For that reason it doesn&#039;t deserve a 9 out of 10.  And 8 maybe but a 7 would be more appropriate.

Characters were the best part of this movie.  Well acted and memorable particular Bones.  I hope they tone down Chekov&#039;s accent and don&#039;t have Sulu doing unnecessary acrobatics that have nothing to do with his fencing training.  Uhura unfortunately has little to do but be the love interest.  Does nobody know how to write a relevant female role that isn&#039;t tied to a man?  Nero was a generic villain.

The plot has some pretty obvious contrivances.  How random was it for Kirk to not only land on the same planet but also run into &quot;you know who&quot; who just happens to have the means to defeat Nero.

Also the transporter technology was used way too often and in the most overly powerful ways that it makes it hard to wonder what it can&#039;t do.  Another lazy crutch to move the plot forward.

Nero is about to kill Kirk but ooh some distraction occurs.  The next Romulan is about to kill him but decides to brag instead.  How cliche, lazy and predictable was that?

There was some bad science in here but that was something I could ignore somewhat.

Watchmen may have been confusing but there was an intellectual depth to it.  Something which there is none of in Star Trek but that&#039;s ok but hopefully the sequel will be somewhat thought provoking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Star Trek works as a light action movie but as a sci-fi movie it lack any intellectual depth that the TV shows or movies had (as cheesy and dated as they are now).  For that reason it doesn&#8217;t deserve a 9 out of 10.  And 8 maybe but a 7 would be more appropriate.</p>
<p>Characters were the best part of this movie.  Well acted and memorable particular Bones.  I hope they tone down Chekov&#8217;s accent and don&#8217;t have Sulu doing unnecessary acrobatics that have nothing to do with his fencing training.  Uhura unfortunately has little to do but be the love interest.  Does nobody know how to write a relevant female role that isn&#8217;t tied to a man?  Nero was a generic villain.</p>
<p>The plot has some pretty obvious contrivances.  How random was it for Kirk to not only land on the same planet but also run into &#8220;you know who&#8221; who just happens to have the means to defeat Nero.</p>
<p>Also the transporter technology was used way too often and in the most overly powerful ways that it makes it hard to wonder what it can&#8217;t do.  Another lazy crutch to move the plot forward.</p>
<p>Nero is about to kill Kirk but ooh some distraction occurs.  The next Romulan is about to kill him but decides to brag instead.  How cliche, lazy and predictable was that?</p>
<p>There was some bad science in here but that was something I could ignore somewhat.</p>
<p>Watchmen may have been confusing but there was an intellectual depth to it.  Something which there is none of in Star Trek but that&#8217;s ok but hopefully the sequel will be somewhat thought provoking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jfstepro</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200431</link>
		<dc:creator>jfstepro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 18:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200431</guid>
		<description>Just to follow up on a previous statement that Watchmen was better. The cruel nature and naked dude of the Watchmen kept the masses from relating to it. Yea it was an awesome movie, I loved the fight scenes, it&#039;s production was a perfect, but better? It&#039;s totally aimed a different direction. The aim of the new Star Trek movie was to bring in new fans and it did. With Watchman being a one shot deal there is no hope for the future. Thats something I get from Star Trek.

Talking about Trek I was a little concerned that so many critical comments from hardcore fans might keep someone from going to see it. It didn&#039;t. The numbers are in and the movie is doing well.
 
Here&#039;s my positives. 
Chris Pines was perfect. He did what no one else could and made it look easy. He made the masses care about Kirk. He made himself an instant star. Karl Urban was perfect. Bruce Greenwood was the leader and teacher we all wish we had. The cast was great. We cared about them.
The action was exciting and the humor was just right. The scenes with McCoy chasing Kirk giving him shots was fun. 
The opening back story was emotional and as Kirk made each new relationship it was satisfying. 
I especially liked the lonely motorcycle scene. Out on the country road looking at the ship construction. It captured someone on the outside of looking in. Wanting to be a part of something bigger. 
The movie brought Star Trek back to the masses and gives it a future.

Here&#039;s my negatives.
The engine room. A location shoot in a factory? Must have been a cost savings idea. If the cost savings got the movie out then ok but if it was some idiots idea of good enough then not acceptable.
Kirk as a kid saying his name seemed staged. Should have practiced how to make it seem more natural. 
I think everyone would have loved a scene of them launching the ship from the ground. 
Since we are sort of in an alternate time line with Vulcun being blown up etc. etc. why didn&#039;t they put Shatner in some place. I heard JJ. had written a small hologram scene for Shatner. I would have liked a brief cameo at the end. He could have walked up to old Spock and said, Did it work? Spock replies, yes.
Kirk smiles and says, see I told you it would work! Then they walk off together.
The ship is ok but nacelles too close together makes ship long and narrow. Wanted to see more ships. How about the Archer Enterprize as a museum?
That would have been cool. 

Very happy Star Trek was relaunched successfully. Now I have more movies to look forward too!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just to follow up on a previous statement that Watchmen was better. The cruel nature and naked dude of the Watchmen kept the masses from relating to it. Yea it was an awesome movie, I loved the fight scenes, it&#8217;s production was a perfect, but better? It&#8217;s totally aimed a different direction. The aim of the new Star Trek movie was to bring in new fans and it did. With Watchman being a one shot deal there is no hope for the future. Thats something I get from Star Trek.</p>
<p>Talking about Trek I was a little concerned that so many critical comments from hardcore fans might keep someone from going to see it. It didn&#8217;t. The numbers are in and the movie is doing well.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s my positives.<br />
Chris Pines was perfect. He did what no one else could and made it look easy. He made the masses care about Kirk. He made himself an instant star. Karl Urban was perfect. Bruce Greenwood was the leader and teacher we all wish we had. The cast was great. We cared about them.<br />
The action was exciting and the humor was just right. The scenes with McCoy chasing Kirk giving him shots was fun.<br />
The opening back story was emotional and as Kirk made each new relationship it was satisfying.<br />
I especially liked the lonely motorcycle scene. Out on the country road looking at the ship construction. It captured someone on the outside of looking in. Wanting to be a part of something bigger.<br />
The movie brought Star Trek back to the masses and gives it a future.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s my negatives.<br />
The engine room. A location shoot in a factory? Must have been a cost savings idea. If the cost savings got the movie out then ok but if it was some idiots idea of good enough then not acceptable.<br />
Kirk as a kid saying his name seemed staged. Should have practiced how to make it seem more natural.<br />
I think everyone would have loved a scene of them launching the ship from the ground.<br />
Since we are sort of in an alternate time line with Vulcun being blown up etc. etc. why didn&#8217;t they put Shatner in some place. I heard JJ. had written a small hologram scene for Shatner. I would have liked a brief cameo at the end. He could have walked up to old Spock and said, Did it work? Spock replies, yes.<br />
Kirk smiles and says, see I told you it would work! Then they walk off together.<br />
The ship is ok but nacelles too close together makes ship long and narrow. Wanted to see more ships. How about the Archer Enterprize as a museum?<br />
That would have been cool. </p>
<p>Very happy Star Trek was relaunched successfully. Now I have more movies to look forward too!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike calhoun</title>
		<link>http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200139</link>
		<dc:creator>mike calhoun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 20:16:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themovieblog.com/2009/05/star-trek-review#comment-200139</guid>
		<description>Write Comment here.  Before you do, review these rules:
1) Stay on topic
2) Disagree and debate, but no insulting other commenters or the author
3) off topic messages for the author should be emailed directly, not left as a comment.
i just have to say that im a SERIOUS star trek fan and i thought this movie was sub-par...The WATHMEN was a FAAAAR superior movie.
the story line was NOTHING that hasn&#039;t already been done.Spock was given dumb lines that felt out of place and contrived (Ahura and he should have gotten a room--what the hell???). Dr. mcCoy was 
awful- talk about trying to hard!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Write Comment here.  Before you do, review these rules:<br />
1) Stay on topic<br />
2) Disagree and debate, but no insulting other commenters or the author<br />
3) off topic messages for the author should be emailed directly, not left as a comment.<br />
i just have to say that im a SERIOUS star trek fan and i thought this movie was sub-par&#8230;The WATHMEN was a FAAAAR superior movie.<br />
the story line was NOTHING that hasn&#8217;t already been done.Spock was given dumb lines that felt out of place and contrived (Ahura and he should have gotten a room&#8211;what the hell???). Dr. mcCoy was<br />
awful- talk about trying to hard!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
