The Gallifreyan Embassy
Home of the Doctor Who podcast DOCTOR WHO: PODSHOCK
Advertising | Donate | Feedback | New Website | Podshock | Shop | Forum | Media Gallery | Web Resources | Polls
 Gallifreyan Embassy 3.0  
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: Face the Raven? (5=Fantastic)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock Live Show 'Face the Raven' Review Scheduled
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: Sleep No More? (5=Fantastic)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock Live Show 2015 Mid-Series Review Scheduled
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: The Zygon Inversion? (5=Fantastic)
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: The Zygon Invasion? (5=Fantastic)
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: The Woman Who Lived? (5=Fantastic)
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: The Girl Who Died? (5=Fantastic)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock 330 - The Magician's Apprentice and Witch's Familiar Reviewed
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: Before the Flood? (5=Fantastic)

  •  Topics  
    Doctor Who News (188/0)
    DW: Podshock (201/0)
    DW Reviews (33/0)
    Torchwood (15/0)
    Sarah Jane Adven... (13/0)
    General News (29/0)
    Embassy News (19/0)
    Editorials (5/0)
    Alien Tech (2/0)

     Extra! Extra!  

    Become a Podshock Supporting Subscriber

    Corgi Collector's Box
    Corgi Collector's Box
    Browse Album

     User Functions  


    Lost your password?

     Support Podshock  

    This site and our podcast are free to use and listen to respectively. Though there are costs involved in maintaining and producing both. If you like, please make a donation to help offset these costs and to help ensure that we can continue to bring you both. Thank you so much.

    You can make a one time donation of any amount you like using the above "Donate" button. If you rather make an annual recurring donation of $25 (that is less than 50 cents a week), use the "Subscribe" button below.

    There are no upcoming events


     Ads by Google  

     Older Stories  
    Wednesday 06-May
  • In Russell/Moffat We Trust Shirts and More (1)

  • Tuesday 05-May
  • Join Us for Our Second Second Life Meet Up (3)

  • Friday 01-May
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 147 (0)

  • Wednesday 29-Apr
  • Sonic Newsdriver for the Week of the 27th of April 2009 (0)

  • Saturday 25-Apr
  • Who Party 14 Toronto Doctor Who Convention (0)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 146 (1)

  • Thursday 23-Apr
  • Sonic Newsdriver and Hoo on Who for the Week of the 20 April 2009 (0)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 145 (4)

  • Wednesday 15-Apr
  • Three New Producers Announced (0)

  • Saturday 11-Apr
  • Planet Of The Dead Canadian air date confirmed (0)

  • Tuesday 07-Apr
  • Doctor Who: Podshock Recognized as Best Podcast (1)
  • Sonic Newsdriver for the Week of the 5th of April 2009 (0)

  • Wednesday 01-Apr
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 144 (5)

  • Friday 20-Mar
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 143 (3)
  • Hitchhiker's Guide to British Sci-Fi - Episode 3 (1)

  •  Notice  

    Doctor Who and the TARDIS are owned and trademarked by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The Gallifreyan Embassy and the Doctor Who: Podshock podcast are not connected to the BBC in any way. No infringement is intended.


     Home »  Other Science Fiction/Fantasy »  Star Trek (2009) [SPOILERS]
    Prev Topic Next Next Topic Printable Version
    Star Trek (2009) [SPOILERS] Views: 3044
     Friday, May 08 2009 @ 12:01 AM EDT
    WARNING: This thread assumes you've seen Star Trek (2009). If you haven't, do not proceed.




    As a loyal Star Trek fan, that totally rocked my world. The "Curse of the Odd Numbers" is well and truly defeated. I can't imagine a better relaunch, really. I didn't expect to care so much for the characters, nor to both laugh and tear up so much.

    And I really didn't think I'd get so many little references that confirmed bits of the canon that I'd thought Abrams would've been happy to have ignored completely. The Kobayashi Maru sequence was exactly what one would've hoped for based on The Wrath of Kahn. The offhand reference to Cardassians and Admiral Archer was just enough of a nod to Deep Space Nine and Enterprise. Never in a million years would I have thought either would've been in this film. Spock's Ambassadorial status and his refusal to accord Romulans an olive branch was a perfect reference to both ST VI and TNG.

    And yet, even as the film head-faked towards fans, it did the very wise thing of keeping Vulcan destroyed, and the alternate timeline firmly in place. In much the same way that Doctor Who had to get rid of Gallifrey to continue, and the DC Universe has to periodically clean house, something big like the destruction of Vulcan is exactly what you need to both free yourself from and yet confirm the existence of years of continuity.

    This movie is perfectly pitched between satisfying old fans and clearing the slate for new ones. It's really no wonder that its Rotten Tomatoes rating is approaching the levels of The Dark Knight.

    Star Trek is back, baby. I've got exactly the same kind of goosebumps I got form watching Series 1 of Doctor Who.

    "I think of myself as ambitious in casting terms, and I know that Bonnie [Langford] has the potential to make the part totally unirritating . . ." — JNT, 1986
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Friday, May 08 2009 @ 01:33 AM EDT
    i'd just like to say here that because of the new star trek movie i've been getting more and more into star trek.

    and i have to say, i'm having a great time becoming a trekkie.

    and whether the movie is good or not i'll still be a trekkie.

    "Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth."
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Tuesday, May 12 2009 @ 12:23 AM EDT
    The movie looks good but I won't be a Trekkie like it or not. I might see all the resulting movies if it is good but I won't be suckered into another franchise that gets so lame so fast. I just rewatched a few NEXT GENERATIONS and for the life of me I can't seem to understand why I gave it and DEEP SLEEP MINE so much of my time. Most NEXT GENERATIONS are snoozers, boring comedies, or overwrought political "dramas" really just talking, talking, talking in disguise. It really got terribly lame in season 4 and never recovered. And come to think of it season 1 and 2 weren't that great either. Season 3 at least got them off the ship a bit and lo and behold we actually had some action in one or two of them. And less holodeck crapola.

    DEEP SLEEP MINE: don't get me started on lame, self centered boring characters with no point of interest or relation to reality or real life; dull endless arcs about the Cardaassians and those other aliens with the ear rings (couldn't stand any of those episodes on NEXT GENERATION, they were almost as bad as the Klingon arcs! Phew what bores they all were); and endless episodes about time loops, time mess ups, time changes, etc etc etc. So totally dull.

    Then VOYAGER came about and the first few years were okay with a large share of action and also some lame episodes. Then the gimmick or rather gimmock came: 7 of 9 with her big breasts. And instead of Lame Data episodes, now we were saddled with lame 7 of 9 episodes. Kess wasn't a perfect character but she was more likable and interesting. Not that I wasn't willig to keep watching or give the show a chance. One episode, season four maybe? had the doctor wake up in the far future where Voyager was considered the villains; and of course when Q showed up, it sometimes made for a fun episode. But then Voyager became the "7 of 9 kicks ass" show every week in and out or the Time Change thing happened over and over again. They never used any of the others in any real lasting storyline that mattered, the same thing happened to most of NEXT GENERATION's cast. And when Troi had a good ep, Worf was missing. Oh and btw by the end of it, they were...lovers or something? WTF? Anyway I almost never watched VOYAGER after the lame season four or five. And each time I attempted to find out more about an ep, it was almost always something like "Voyager gets blown up and only _____ can change time back to make it like it was never blown up to begin with". What a dull show it became.

    The movies were much better than any of the TV shows but even they got lame. 4 was great. 3 kinda lame. 2 and even 1 were okay. I even liked ST5 and 6. But they decided to give Picard some angst and killed off his nephew and brother and sister in law. So he could have the burden of carrying on the family name. Lame. Kirk died. Then some other stuff happened. More Borg, more Klingon stuff. It all sagged.

    Then we got ENTERPRISE. It was no prize. The last few episodes seemed okay but thankfully I didn't waste more time beyond the first two episodes or so. The first hour was pretty good. The second was boring. THe rest were not to be tolerated. Same old same old political bullshit and boring aliens with wrinkles and, oh, space diseases. Why? Why? Why? The show couldn't get away with looking like it was past beyond NEXT GEN time and having to really act like it was before the original show.

    TO be honest, I was never a big original show fan but I do like many of the episodes and give you that once you start watching any ep, it's hard to quit watching that one particular ep. Something about McCoy, Spock, and the original Kirk that did it. The rest of the cast was okay but underused except for maybe Scotty. The music was good, the sets very cheap, and the stories over rated but overall, very entertaining and sometimes thought provoking. Can't say the same for the spin offs. ALthough I really really like Pat Steward (name spelled wrong by me?) He'd make a great GREAT Doctor on Doctor Who.

    The new movie: Anyway the promos look great, the fans that have seen it love it, the non fans that have seen it have loved it.

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Tuesday, May 12 2009 @ 05:51 AM EDT
    Just read on Dvice:-
    The new Star Trek: 'Bad Astronomy' writer assesses its accuracy


    'Our favorite accuracy: a short sequence where a crew person is blown away from a starship, into the complete and utter silence of space'

    Made this comment myself on our CIA: Cultdom in Audio podcast (episode 98 - on iTunes OR TalkShoe)

    Noticed it straight away - even though it was just for a couple of second - excellent!

    Cheers, Dave (daveac)

    daveac on, TalkShoe, iTunes, LiveVideo, uStream, GE, Sci-Fi, DWO, DS & WTA, Dave C on WLP, cooperda on AVF, dac100 on YouTube & PB, dac on Tiscali
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Tuesday, May 12 2009 @ 08:22 AM EDT
    I saw the film last weekend but am a little confused by it-

    is this this supposed to be Jim kirks Schooldays?

    the stuff in the academy was cool but the whole aberrant time lines basically makes all the following films and the classic series moot. the enterprise is given directly to kirk so the events in 'the cage' never take place- Pike never acts as captain although its a nice touch he ends up in a wheelchair.

    As Vulcan is destroyed the Spock from the future should have been replaced by an alternative version of Spock - or possibly no Spock at all because he grew old and died on Genesis in star trek 2

    How does this film tie into establish ST cannon?

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Wednesday, May 13 2009 @ 12:41 AM EDT
    Apparently it doens't tie in at all as time has changed. And Jim Kirk was born in spaceship and not in Iowa?

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Wednesday, May 13 2009 @ 12:23 PM EDT
    For the most part I enjoyed the movie a lot. I saw it twice this past weekend. If I had to sum it up as quickly as possible, I would say that it felt like a tv series pilot with the promise of bigger threats to come.

    My biggest problem with the movie was that I felt the villain was weak. Captain Nero wasn't very menacing to me, even though he was able to accomplish so much, which was frustrating to me that a character such as his was able to destroy Vulcan so easily.

    However, I do understand that as a relaunch this was meant to establish characters and not focus on the villain so its more forgivable. And although it didn't feel like anthropologists in space anymore, they make it clear that they will go back those roots at the end of the film. Overall, the pros outweigh the cons.

    "Hero! I should have been a God!"
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 01:25 AM EDT

    Awful. Awful. Awful. It's not quite an inept movie or script but it comes close. How this movie can get such good reviews proves to me the decline of our culture if not our society. I'll ignore, for the moment, all the continuity errors that went on in the movie and focus on what it was for what it was.

    The effects are flawless although in my copy, a producer's copy, there are these lights that seem to grace the screen. Was that in the movie? Telling us this is a glaring future? More like a glaring error. The cinematrophy is horrid with shakey hand held camera movements that graced the equally awful BATTLESTAR GALACTICA remake show. The action sequences or rather the war sequences were somewhat exciting but would have been more so if I didn't have to squint as what was happening especially when Sulu and Kirk attack the device. Sulu has to use a sword instead of a phaser? And what happened to stun setting if he did? It seemed it was a kill mission.

    Which brings me prematurely, to the theme of the movie. Revenge. Okay, so the bright big future is based on revenge. Okay. Thanks for that. The original TREK might have had some of that but really. The emotionality and I"m using the term sarcastically comes from both male heroes losing their parents...and then wanting revenge.

    The movie is also terribly flawed because it presents a likable cast saying and doing things that the Trek crew might say once in awhile but which have become iconic sayings...but which destroy the film for me. McCoy rails against Spock, Spock puts McCoy in his place, Kirk makes quips, Checkov can't get his V's correct, Scotty (in the worst performance ever) says his catch phrases, and all of them are playing chacaritures of much loved characters who once seemed so real and so human. The quips and lines designed to give us "moments" for trailers or for laughs, aren't funny, add nothing to the movie and take away from it. There is NO humor in this movie. It's not funny. The future Spock even says stuff that makes me cringe, "I am and always have been your friend" indeed. Doesn't anyone in this movie talk like a real person instead of trying to make us go "AWW, he said that when he died..." and other stuff.

    Gosh, the monsters are good looking in this. Aliens are thrown in to make us say, ahh, it's alliance so when the Starfleeters kick Romulan butt it looks like the UN defeated the bad guys. Ahh, yes, the bad guys, Romulans. Oh, I thought they were out of an old Kojak Episode. WTF? Romulans are so emotion filled? Hate filled that they make really stupid mistakes like they do. They let Spock live more than once, let Kirk go when they've had him in their clutches, literally, keep Pike alive (and just where did he get that gun he used to shoot from his torture bed? Did he get it from Kirk? I couldn't tell the "action" of war was so fast). Romulans also leave Kirk on the floor when he should have been killed. One even lets Kirk get his gun. In the opening I truly didn't know these were Romulans.

    And I thought in the end climax, Kirk and Spock were on their own? How did Spock suddenly communicate to get himself beamed off? Earlier in the movie, younger Spock marooned Kirk on a frozen planet? Why? And it just happened to be the same planet that older Spock is on AND Scotty! WTF?

    Left aside that time travel rarely makes sense in TREK, something like a black hole forming around a starship and threatening to suck it in should be a hugely dramatic, scary thing but here it's just an excuse for Scotty to say funny things and everyone to shake a bit...nothing dramatic about it even comes close to being on screen. There should have been some tension and something to show it more. Here it's depicted as just another routine escape. WOW.

    and the problem with Trek has always been that everything was treated as just another thing. McCoy has an amazing medical thing, just part of this world. Scotty has crystals, okay, that's part of the future world. Worlds and black holes and aliens should make us go WOW in a good way and make us excited and filled with that tingly good feeling of awe and suspense and a bit of danger feelings and amazement--just like in GOOD DW. This TREk had none of that and did nothing for me at all.

    Now: Spock and Uhura. There's so many things wrong with that I don't know where to start so maybe I won't. Awful and awfully played. I really thought the guy playing Spock looked alot like him but I really thought he was a good actor. He shows emotion in almost every scene. He has this wry smile and emotion behind his every moment. Not good. He is no Nimoy and truthfully only a few people can play Vulcans and this guy is not one of them. Nimoy is. Phew. Maybe his lack of logic and his continual show of emotion is why the "Kirk makes Spock get really emotional and break down" scene falls totally flat or maybe it's the poor dialog and acting and script. If I had to say something good about the cast I'd say the Sulu actor was pretty good.

    I'd say TREK is alive but it's dead to me. I hated this movie from start to finish and I really wanted to like it. What a mess.

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 01:29 AM EDT
    Ahh yes, as Columbo might say, One more thing, mame: Trek is no journey. It's supposed to be a five year mission yet it seems in all the shows it goes to and from Earth except maybe in the original show. AND in the original show in THE WAY TO EDEN they establish that everyone is living domes and not out in the grassy fields and that Earth and most other planets are dealing with polluted atmospheres. In almost all TREK, Original Show we NEVER see the outside of Earth and never see forests, trees, etc. Then suddenly in the movies and the defacto shows, NEXT GENE, VOYAGER, etc, Earth is a mix of great outdoor cities and mountains and preserves. Are you on a mission? Or do you shuttle back and forth to Earth? ANd if every place you go has an ambassador or a research guy are you really exploring a strange new world?

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 05:58 AM EDT
    I put up a review last week after I saw the movie on my blog. Check it out. What really is frustrating is that the movie seems to have gotten universal praise. I've come out against how lame the plot is and people keep telling me that I'm a trekkie and being picky--as though my actually wanting a good story behind a sci-fi flick to be some crazy thing. Personally, with ticket prices being so high, yeah, I'd like the story to actually make sense. You can boil the plot down to a few sentences and, when you do that, you have to shake your head and go: What?! It's just lame. And I guess it's just "fate" and "good luck" that Kirk happened to land on the ice planet, and happened to be saved by someone important, and then they just happened to meet someone who could help them beam across the universe and get them back into the thick of things. That's called lazy writing in my book.

    But because the movie has good special effects and everyone was dying to see the reboot do well it's all forgiven. I'm very happy that Star Trek is back, but can we please have a better bad guy next time with a plot that doesn't make you want to roll your eyes?

      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 04:50 PM EDT
    Wow, I'm glad I'm not the only one. In fact, some Trekers or whatever Trek fans are called, are saying, "I just like all that stuff," and using their fan status as a reason to like he movie. When I point out flaws, it is because I"m a geek (I am) and becauseI want a better ...what? Story? Yeah I do. For me, the movie really stunk hands down. I'd give it at best a one and a half out of ten stars. Mohan I agree with you 100 percent.

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 04:51 PM EDT
    oh and the thing that really pissed me off: they had to kill off Archer' dog from ENTERPRISE? What is it with TREK movies where they have to kill of an important person or two every movie!??!!!

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 05:18 PM EDT

    @Chase Seriously dude enough with the double posts. There is an edit button for a reason.

    I'm a Time Traveler, I point and laugh at archaeologist.
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 08:05 PM EDT
    You're right. I forgot. Did I just do it again?

      Profile    PM    Email   
     Friday, May 15 2009 @ 09:05 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  Chase] DEEP SLEEP MINE: don't get me started on lame, self centered boring characters with no point of interest or relation to reality or real life; dull endless arcs about the Cardaassians and those other aliens with the ear rings (couldn't stand any of those episodes on NEXT GENERATION, they were almost as bad as the Klingon arcs! Phew what bores they all were); and endless episodes about time loops, time mess ups, time changes, etc etc etc. So totally dull.
    Oh, this isn't going to go well for either of us. The "Klingon arcs" — or more correctly, the "Klingon arc" — is actually the one spine that runs through the entirety of Star Trek prior to the 2009 movie. It's the one narrative that withstood even Enterprise. You can literally take every Klingon appearance and put it somewhere on a series of events that start in Enterprise, goes to TOS, ST VI, TNG, and eventually ends with Worf assuming the leadership of the Council at the end of DS9. To turn your nose up at it is to reveal your lack of genuine interest in Star Trek. I can see how you'd have problems with ST if you don't buy into the Klingons. It's much harder to like ST if you hate the Klingons than to like DW but hate the Daleks. The Klingon-Federation conflict, and specifically Worf's family's place in it, is absolutely fundamental to the ST universe. So you're not a ST fan. That's cool. It's a free country. But then you go on to say this:
    [Quote The effects are flawless although in my copy, a producer's copy, there are these lights that seem to grace the screen. Was that in the movie?
    And with that one sentence you lost your right to critique this film. Seriously. None of this First Amendment crap for you, sir.
    [Quote The cinematrophy is horrid with shakey hand held camera movements that graced the equally awful BATTLESTAR GALACTICA remake show.
    You're having us on, aren't you?
    [Quote The action sequences or rather the war sequences were somewhat exciting but would have been more so if I didn't have to squint as what was happening especially when Sulu and Kirk attack the device.
    Here's a thought: see the thing in a theatre — preferably an IMAX one — and then give your opinion on the visual design of the production might, y'know, matter.

    "I think of myself as ambitious in casting terms, and I know that Bonnie [Langford] has the potential to make the part totally unirritating . . ." — JNT, 1986
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 

    Topic Legend:
    Normal Topic Normal Topic
    Locked Topic Locked Topic
    Sticky Topic Sticky Topic
    New Post New Post
    Sticky Topic W/ New Post Sticky Topic W/ New Post
    Locked Topic W/ New Post Locked Topic W/ New Post
    Subscribe to this topic Subscribe to this topic
    You may not post messages
    Full HTML is allowed
    Words are censored