Slashdot Mirror
Star Trek Premiere Gets Standing Ovation, Surprise Showing In Austin
MrKaos writes "Proving that science fiction can still be great entertainment, J.J. Abrams appears to have impressed Star Trek fans at the official world premiere of Star Trek, who gave the film a five-minute standing ovation at the Sydney Opera House in Australia today. Meanwhile, mere hours beforehand, flummoxed fans at the Alamo Drafthouse theater in Austin, TX, deceived into thinking they were seeing a special, extended version of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, were pleasantly surprised when a disguised Leonard Nimoy greeted them and announced they would be seeing the new film in its entirety. ILM's influence on the film is reported as visually stunning, and lucky Australian fans are scheduled to see the movie first, as it opens a day before the American release."
The audience consisted of trekkies, but I'm wondering; does that make the 5min. standing ovation more, or less impressive?
Just curious, is Christopher Pike the captain of the enterprise? I saw some guy introduce himself as Kirk in the trailer. However since this is supposed to be predating the early series, Kirk wouldn't be captain yet. Pike would. Or is this yet another one of the billion plot holes?
Remember, this was a screening attended by trekkies and Harry Knowles-type movie dorks. These aren't people that know what a good movie is.
Hell, the trailers for the new Trek movie seem to indicate that Abrams took inspiration from - God help us - the Star Wars prequels.
It'll suck. Like almost all science-fiction movies from the past 15 or 20 years. And I'm a sci-fi fan.
It was a screening to people who would actually take time out of their lives to go see a remastered version of Wrath of Khan. Which isn't anything against those folk, that was a good movie. But in terms of objective "this was a good movie on it's own merits" reviews, do you honestly expect to see any?
This was a binary choice: either they all loved it because it was the next Star Trek movie. Meaning it didn't stink as bad as Nemesis. Or they burnt down the theater because it was the next Star Trek movie and it stunk as bad as Nemesis.
Quote from one of the reviewers:
This 11th film is easily the best looking, most expensive, best produced iteration in the franchise. This film is going to be absolutely massive. It's epic in scale, and it's easy to see where the $150 million went.
Is anyone else actually excited by this kind of thing? Who here can say they enjoyed Reloaded or Revolutions more than The Matrix? I was really hoping for reviews to tell me how compelling the acting and story were, but it really seems to be all about the expense. Am I missing something?
It must of been planned. What better way to ensure you have a group of hard core Trek fans there than by say 'it's an extended Wrath of Khan'. The burn up must of been staged and Abrams was testing the film on the hardcore fans to gauge the reaction. Got to give it to him on knowing his market.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
While I agree with the analysis of Star Trek v. Star Wars, I'd argue BSG touches a lot of 'true sci-fi' topics, particularly the lines between machine and sentience, and the dangers associated with creating more and more intelligent machines.
Also I'd say its more than just a space opera because it explores the practical implications of multi-world society, and seems much more realistic than Star Wars in terms of social commentary and realism... although I realize that doesn't necessarily push it more into sci-fi rather than just being generally more substantial.