I'm not really curious about the types of the "reviewers" or anything, but I am curious about what IM elements people might see in the written reviews themselves. (Though, I mean, typing the reviewer is fine too. )
#1 This one is from here and it mainly rips at some of the technical aspects or logistics of the film.
#2 This excerpt came from here: http://aristophrenium.com/?p=95Originally Posted by "buckjones"Here ya go; hate me all you want; I don‘t care.
Why would they free fall from space to the end of the drill thingie platform to disable it. The fucking thing is right there in space, set the fucking charges on it in space and blow it to hell, after the steel support is blown up, the whole thing will fall to Vulcan and be destroyed. Who decided the jamming device is on the end of the drill device; wouldnt the jamming be coming from the main ship?
How long is this steel support the drill is hanging from, the ship is in space which means its around; oh I dont know two or three hundred miles above the surface of the planet, so this umbilical attached to the drill in the atmosphere is around three hundred miles long, bull shit!
Why not shoot it with a Phaser or Photon torpedo and destroy the fucking drill at the end of the three hundred mile support attached to the Romulan ship?
Oh YA; Spock had to do it near the end of the film; guess hes the only one with a brain.
Wouldnt falling a couple hundred miles from space into an atmosphere cause them to; oh I dont know, burn up; spontaneously combust? Would they survive the fall?
Why would there be any Romulans in the automated drill thingie, I dont get it, wouldnt this thing be completely remotely controlled?
And of course the new guy dies.
Why the fuck are we shooting the steel wall of the drill, there isnt any controls in the damn thing?
Ok; the Romulans launch a bomb with the Red Matter in it and it takes less than a half a second to travel from space to the same height of the drill? Again; bull shit.
Ok, why the fuck does Checkov have to run from the bridge to a transporter room to take control of the transporter, why the fuck wouldnt he just take control from a bridge station? Again; Bull shit!
Chekov had transporter lock on Spocks mom, why would he loose transporter lock just because she fell? Again; bull shit!
Who the fuck typed this piece of crap?
Nero is holding Captain Pike hostage strapped to a board in water, water boarding?
Nero wants to know the sub space frequencies for the border protection grid?
Pike must be very stupid, instead of lying and telling him that theyre changed every twenty-four hours, which they should be, he just endured the fucking torture?
If the typer had a brain, Pike should have told him, that he; captain Pike is a captive that the frequencies and encryption protocols and access passwords are changed to protect the Federation frontier.
Nero is stupid, Enterprise got away, they know it's an attack; they would contact Star Fleet and warn them,
This thing was created for a fucking retarded nine year old.
Spock quoting Sir Arthur Conan Doyle?
Warp factor three, in the original series Enterprise could travel at warp nine.
Enterprise is cursing along at .01 impulse and they launch a pod at a convenient planet to maroon Kirk; where did this planet come from?
Fucking stupid, who typed up this piece of crap?
I believe or predict that Star Trek 2009 will suffer the same fate as Superman Returns, it will make money, some will think it's the greatest film ever made, but it will not recoup its investment. It will fall short my several million dollars.
This one was interesting to me because I have been wondering about this (not regarding the movie, I mean about IM and the drawing of this sort of story skeleton, formula, theme or metaphor)... What IM does the metaphorical drawing of these two chains of events use (if any)? Is it Ni or Ne (or what)? Essentially (whether right or wrong) it's drawing out an underlying story in both the movie and the Iraq war and claiming it is the same story. The story has the same flow and properties, but it is an abstract tale that exists apart from the myriad events, details, and "players" you could fill it in with.Originally Posted by "Ryft"The movie did not mirror real historical events completely, of course, but it used them rather as a catalyst to explore important issues and themes of contemporary relevance. And that is something that Abrams and the writing team of Orci and Kurtzman finally injected back into the franchise with Star Trek (2009), as far as I understood the narrative. (It is perhaps somewhat ironic that once again it is the original crew at the helm.)
What tipped me off was the villain in this movie, a Romulan war criminal known as Nero. I appreciated the fact that Nero was originally a noble character (a back-story alluded to in the movie but fleshed out in the Countdown comic books); it helped make his character believable. What had set Nero on the course of becoming a war criminal was the catastrophic destruction of his homeworld, Romulus, which he blamed on the calculated impotence of the Federation to act, embodied in the Vulcan ambassador known as Spock. When Nero channelled his grief into bloodlust, he lost his noble character under the powerful influence of vengeance. He would avenge the death toll of his people on the planet Vulcan first, then on to Earth and other planets of the Federation, until he could finally rid the galaxy of the pestilence that caused such grief.
But what really drove the metaphor home for me was a particular scene aboard the Narada (the spaceship Nero commanded). He had captured Captain Christopher Pike and was interrogating him for the subspace frequencies for the Federation’s border protection grid. When he was not getting the information he wanted, he resorted to more extreme methods for extracting it. At this point something in my mind clicked, and the entire story shifted dramatically. (This is at least partly the reason I saw the movie three times.)
Suddenly I began looking at Nero as a metaphorical representation of the Bush administration; I saw the destruction of Romulus as the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings and the 9/11 terrorist attacks; I could see a real-world correlation to Nero’s grief-turned-vengeance toward those he felt responsible; I began to consider the relationship between first-Vulcan-then-Earth and first-Afghanistan-then-Iraq, how Vulcan was easy but Earth would be complicated in the same way that Afghanistan was easy but Iraq was complicated, that getting at Earth required interrogation for information the way getting at Iraq did; I noticed that in the Countdown books the Klingon homeworld was next, similarly to how Pakistan is next; I saw parallels in both spheres with respect to ridding the world of those thought responsible; I saw a powerful allegory in Nero being a formerly noble character whose vengeance caused him to lose his way and wander into war criminal territory, in a way representing America’s fall from grace; one could even argue that refining decalithium into ‘red matter’ typifies refining crude oil into petroleum; and, of course, it was impossible to miss Nero’s increasingly aggressive interrogation techniques as mirroring those advanced under the Bush administration (with the subtle image of water on the floor, sloshed at Nero’s feet as he paced around the platform to which Captain Pike was bound).
And true to the heart of Star Trek lore, the humanistic optimism of Gene Roddenberry rises up to offer an answer to this narrative of vengeance on two different levels. First, the black hole that eventually consumes Nero and his crew aboard the Narada might graphically represent a cautionary tale, that vengeance is a fire that can end up consuming the avenger. And second, the hopeful triumph of unity through diversity, that the heart and soul of a healthy and thriving world is found in the harmonious union of diverse ethnicities and cultures working together toward a common good through the collaborative value of our unique multi-national and multi-ethnic diversities. Roddenberry intended Star Trek to be a platform for confronting real-life issues under the guise of entertainment. As Michael Spindler noted, "Society as a whole may be unaware of the direction [we] are taking in the world—that is, until an artist holds a mirror to face of humanity, offering up a chance for self examination and reflection."