<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: STAR TREK Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/</link>
	<description>Daily coverage of what is truly interesting in the film world</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 02:12:20 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dean</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127952</link>
		<dc:creator>Dean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 15:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127952</guid>
		<description>The story is good. but making twenty year old novices into  first officers is unbelievable.  This story sets up the crew into power way to early. in the franchise. 

Costumes are lackluster. dull and  duller. They look like walmart wear.  Spock Prime is the only character with interesting futuristic clothing.
 
The Makeup is horrible or  these actors are butt ugly. The make-up shows discolored skin, blotches and blemishes and the standard bruise  over the right eyebrow of lead character James Kirk.  Audiences watch film to see beautiful faces.   Vllian Eric Bana as Nero looked better than the Trek crew in close-up. The Punk heavy metal makeup for the futuristic villian Romulons was unimaginative.We have seen it before.  Their costumes were boring hackneyed cliches also.
One bright spot visually was Rachel  Nivchols as Gaila in green body paint. She  was interesting and gorgeous.

Casting is seriously flawed also. 
Zachary Quinto as Spock is unappealing uninteresting, unlikeable. and basically unspock like.  His Young Spock is a boring  petulant little man.  Zoe Zaldana as Uraha sulks her way through the role.  Their romance is as  palpable as a limp noodle. Chris Pine as Kirk would be tolerable if we did not have to see the pores and flaws in his skin.  His acting is infantile and brought nothing new to the screen, or the role. He has the look and style of a dumb football player.  
Some casting choices were successful
Simon Pegg as engineer Scott , Karl Urban as Bones,  Bruce Greenwood as Cpt Pike and Winona Ryder as Spock's mother  each brought personality and life to their characters.  
JJ Abrams  used  CGI effectively but missed the boat on character presentation.  His lack of trekkie love shows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The story is good. but making twenty year old novices into  first officers is unbelievable.  This story sets up the crew into power way to early. in the franchise. </p>
<p>Costumes are lackluster. dull and  duller. They look like walmart wear.  Spock Prime is the only character with interesting futuristic clothing.</p>
<p>The Makeup is horrible or  these actors are butt ugly. The make-up shows discolored skin, blotches and blemishes and the standard bruise  over the right eyebrow of lead character James Kirk.  Audiences watch film to see beautiful faces.   Vllian Eric Bana as Nero looked better than the Trek crew in close-up. The Punk heavy metal makeup for the futuristic villian Romulons was unimaginative.We have seen it before.  Their costumes were boring hackneyed cliches also.<br />
One bright spot visually was Rachel  Nivchols as Gaila in green body paint. She  was interesting and gorgeous.</p>
<p>Casting is seriously flawed also.<br />
Zachary Quinto as Spock is unappealing uninteresting, unlikeable. and basically unspock like.  His Young Spock is a boring  petulant little man.  Zoe Zaldana as Uraha sulks her way through the role.  Their romance is as  palpable as a limp noodle. Chris Pine as Kirk would be tolerable if we did not have to see the pores and flaws in his skin.  His acting is infantile and brought nothing new to the screen, or the role. He has the look and style of a dumb football player.<br />
Some casting choices were successful<br />
Simon Pegg as engineer Scott , Karl Urban as Bones,  Bruce Greenwood as Cpt Pike and Winona Ryder as Spock&#8217;s mother  each brought personality and life to their characters.<br />
JJ Abrams  used  CGI effectively but missed the boat on character presentation.  His lack of trekkie love shows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bobo</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127553</link>
		<dc:creator>bobo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 04:42:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127553</guid>
		<description>classic movie making</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>classic movie making</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kt D</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127124</link>
		<dc:creator>Kt D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 19:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127124</guid>
		<description>I commend you on this review.  You do not necessarily bash/dislike the movie in any obvious sense, but you do recognize the film is not perfect.  Recognizing it for what it is--largely, an attempt to create a summer blockbuster hit while also attracting the unfailing attendance of a niche TV show's committed fan base.  Still, many critics and fans have praised the movie over and over again.
There is an interesting summary video on the movie and its different reviews at newsy.com.  Take a look:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/beam_me_up_box_office/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I commend you on this review.  You do not necessarily bash/dislike the movie in any obvious sense, but you do recognize the film is not perfect.  Recognizing it for what it is&#8211;largely, an attempt to create a summer blockbuster hit while also attracting the unfailing attendance of a niche TV show&#8217;s committed fan base.  Still, many critics and fans have praised the movie over and over again.<br />
There is an interesting summary video on the movie and its different reviews at newsy.com.  Take a look:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.newsy.com/videos/beam_me_up_box_office/" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsy.com/videos/beam_me_up_box_office/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spock</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127108</link>
		<dc:creator>Spock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 09:22:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127108</guid>
		<description>Abrams has really laid an egg with his version of Star trek. Has this man ever seen Star Trek? He has destroyed the Trek time line. In pursuit. of his own blinded vision. Vulcan left destroyed....in the past?
Bad Romulans again! Like the show lost....so is this. What would have been a great movie. Wasn't because he failed to repair the time line.
 Hey Abrams like Cloverfield....this sucks too.
    spock out</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Abrams has really laid an egg with his version of Star trek. Has this man ever seen Star Trek? He has destroyed the Trek time line. In pursuit. of his own blinded vision. Vulcan left destroyed&#8230;.in the past?<br />
Bad Romulans again! Like the show lost&#8230;.so is this. What would have been a great movie. Wasn&#8217;t because he failed to repair the time line.<br />
 Hey Abrams like Cloverfield&#8230;.this sucks too.<br />
    spock out</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Skitzocrayon</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127057</link>
		<dc:creator>Skitzocrayon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 12:53:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127057</guid>
		<description>Come on people....somebody got pissed off everytime a new series related to Star Trek was released. Next Generations was not instantly accepted by o.g. fans. It took a while. Deep Space 9 and Voyager were spit on...but they lasted for a few years. Enterprise was considered superior and closer to the o.g. series but was the shortest of all series.

That this review was so long and detailed (in the sexuality department/ presentation thereof mostly) makes me wonder if you like the movie more then you care to say. 

My feelings were mixed after watching this movie. The cast looked like they belonged on a MTV show. The special effects and sets looked like they were mashed together from several genre films spanning several decades. Some of the plot devices (holes rather) were used in a questionable manner. In the end i found those things minor to how much i enjoyed the film. The movie isnt meant to stay hardcore to the o.g. Star Trek. Its a rebirth made in a way that the modern audience. Most of the former Star Trek movies kept the plots simple, leaving the deeper stories for television. JJ Abrams did an alright job (great compared to his other shiet). I do agree that some of the angles used for bridge scenes were "frustrating" and i would have liked some wider angle shots and more of the interior.

all in all....i enjoyed the movie. it wasnt the greatest tasting pie i ever ate, but i liked how it went down the gillet. it was nice to see familiar characters, that nostalgic thang. I also liked that they created a way to reharsh the o.g. Star Trek but allow the o.g. canon to stay true. Star Trek 2.0, the alternate reality.....and practice commonly used in japanese manga and anime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come on people&#8230;.somebody got pissed off everytime a new series related to Star Trek was released. Next Generations was not instantly accepted by o.g. fans. It took a while. Deep Space 9 and Voyager were spit on&#8230;but they lasted for a few years. Enterprise was considered superior and closer to the o.g. series but was the shortest of all series.</p>
<p>That this review was so long and detailed (in the sexuality department/ presentation thereof mostly) makes me wonder if you like the movie more then you care to say. </p>
<p>My feelings were mixed after watching this movie. The cast looked like they belonged on a MTV show. The special effects and sets looked like they were mashed together from several genre films spanning several decades. Some of the plot devices (holes rather) were used in a questionable manner. In the end i found those things minor to how much i enjoyed the film. The movie isnt meant to stay hardcore to the o.g. Star Trek. Its a rebirth made in a way that the modern audience. Most of the former Star Trek movies kept the plots simple, leaving the deeper stories for television. JJ Abrams did an alright job (great compared to his other shiet). I do agree that some of the angles used for bridge scenes were &#8220;frustrating&#8221; and i would have liked some wider angle shots and more of the interior.</p>
<p>all in all&#8230;.i enjoyed the movie. it wasnt the greatest tasting pie i ever ate, but i liked how it went down the gillet. it was nice to see familiar characters, that nostalgic thang. I also liked that they created a way to reharsh the o.g. Star Trek but allow the o.g. canon to stay true. Star Trek 2.0, the alternate reality&#8230;..and practice commonly used in japanese manga and anime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sara</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127046</link>
		<dc:creator>Sara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 00:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127046</guid>
		<description>whoa there damian, kinda sketchy to use someone's review to plug your own lame blog, no?  

it's also pretty hypocritical to insinuate karina's writing is condescending given your tone and name calling.  

i won't speak on behalf "all worthy writers" such as you, but on behalf of the some of the readers...we're here on spout for the content and not the spelling.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>whoa there damian, kinda sketchy to use someone&#8217;s review to plug your own lame blog, no?  </p>
<p>it&#8217;s also pretty hypocritical to insinuate karina&#8217;s writing is condescending given your tone and name calling.  </p>
<p>i won&#8217;t speak on behalf &#8220;all worthy writers&#8221; such as you, but on behalf of the some of the readers&#8230;we&#8217;re here on spout for the content and not the spelling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joele</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127038</link>
		<dc:creator>Joele</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 20:06:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127038</guid>
		<description>I'm not sure that was a full-fledged review - it hit on certain points the reviewer latched onto and ignored many others about the film. The qualification that she's not a fan and so doesn't give a shit about Star Trek doesn't mean you can't write a review that serves its audience's interests.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure that was a full-fledged review - it hit on certain points the reviewer latched onto and ignored many others about the film. The qualification that she&#8217;s not a fan and so doesn&#8217;t give a shit about Star Trek doesn&#8217;t mean you can&#8217;t write a review that serves its audience&#8217;s interests.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joie</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127031</link>
		<dc:creator>Joie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 17:42:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127031</guid>
		<description>I'm utterly impressed by your ability to whip together Felicity (one of Abrams' best, along with Alias), Armageddon, and undertones of Stephanie Zacharek's salacious adoration of Hollywood hunks under the same review.  Hooray for post-feminist film criticism, whatever that means.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m utterly impressed by your ability to whip together Felicity (one of Abrams&#8217; best, along with Alias), Armageddon, and undertones of Stephanie Zacharek&#8217;s salacious adoration of Hollywood hunks under the same review.  Hooray for post-feminist film criticism, whatever that means.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Damian</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127026</link>
		<dc:creator>Damian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 13:36:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127026</guid>
		<description>I am the chief editor of ViciousWriters.com. The following is a letter that I've written to the editors of this half-cranked magazine, conveniently entitled SpoutBlog.com:

Who in hell taught Karina Longworth to write? Are you serious in presenting this half-wit as your representative? This is the first time I have been to your site, and you can guarantee that I will not return. In fact, don't even reply to this email. Instead, simply burn little miss Longworth upon the stakes of spelling errors, grammatical insults and Emo-driven innocuous revilements. What's more, her writing is condescending toward anyone that happens to know anything about the written word. It's disgusting. Should I blame her inept editorial staff, perhaps?

Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with her content. In fact, I would agree with her half-thought drivel, given that she could possibly form two sentences within the same paragraph without the use of "LOL". But, her writing is nothing short of insulting to the reader. It thoroughly disgusts me that this wench of the written word is allowed to continue her tirade against the English language, while other MORE QUALIFIED WRITERS are waiting patiently in the wings with absolutely NO recognition. Speaking for every worthy writer out there, Karina Longworth and this entire established online magazine disgusts me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am the chief editor of ViciousWriters.com. The following is a letter that I&#8217;ve written to the editors of this half-cranked magazine, conveniently entitled SpoutBlog.com:</p>
<p>Who in hell taught Karina Longworth to write? Are you serious in presenting this half-wit as your representative? This is the first time I have been to your site, and you can guarantee that I will not return. In fact, don&#8217;t even reply to this email. Instead, simply burn little miss Longworth upon the stakes of spelling errors, grammatical insults and Emo-driven innocuous revilements. What&#8217;s more, her writing is condescending toward anyone that happens to know anything about the written word. It&#8217;s disgusting. Should I blame her inept editorial staff, perhaps?</p>
<p>Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with her content. In fact, I would agree with her half-thought drivel, given that she could possibly form two sentences within the same paragraph without the use of &#8220;LOL&#8221;. But, her writing is nothing short of insulting to the reader. It thoroughly disgusts me that this wench of the written word is allowed to continue her tirade against the English language, while other MORE QUALIFIED WRITERS are waiting patiently in the wings with absolutely NO recognition. Speaking for every worthy writer out there, Karina Longworth and this entire established online magazine disgusts me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kurt2009</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127024</link>
		<dc:creator>Kurt2009</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 12:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127024</guid>
		<description>Why can't you just  relax and enjoy an entertaining movie without resorting to boring politically correct double-speak.  Who cares if the feminists don't like it-heck, that would only make me want to see it EVEN MORE!   Star Trek  may have some philosophical undertones but it was NEVER totally about social issues.  Action, suspense, and comedy were always a part of what made Star Trek enjoyable.   This franchise is for anyone who has ever looked up at the stars and said "what if"-  NOT about a bunch of elitist, "intellectual" bores discussing social engineering.    Now go out and see it again- you know you want to!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why can&#8217;t you just  relax and enjoy an entertaining movie without resorting to boring politically correct double-speak.  Who cares if the feminists don&#8217;t like it-heck, that would only make me want to see it EVEN MORE!   Star Trek  may have some philosophical undertones but it was NEVER totally about social issues.  Action, suspense, and comedy were always a part of what made Star Trek enjoyable.   This franchise is for anyone who has ever looked up at the stars and said &#8220;what if&#8221;-  NOT about a bunch of elitist, &#8220;intellectual&#8221; bores discussing social engineering.    Now go out and see it again- you know you want to!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kirk</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127018</link>
		<dc:creator>Kirk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 08:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127018</guid>
		<description>Message to JR : Please feel free to reference the alternative universe in which the equation U/Lsr = actually get a life.

Message to Karina : What on earth were you expecting? The film pretty much ticked every box you could have expected short of inventing time travel and getting the original cast sucked forward from the year 1965. I enjoyed it anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Message to JR : Please feel free to reference the alternative universe in which the equation U/Lsr = actually get a life.</p>
<p>Message to Karina : What on earth were you expecting? The film pretty much ticked every box you could have expected short of inventing time travel and getting the original cast sucked forward from the year 1965. I enjoyed it anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-127012</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 01:46:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-127012</guid>
		<description>Thank you JR.  You hit the nail on the head.  It may have a lot of snazy effects and big explosions, but it is NOT true to trek.  I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when they where brainstorming ideas for this movie.  I bet it was "How can we get the 15 year olds into see this movie" and less "How can we make a movie that works in every ones interest".  J.J. Abrams is to Star Trek as Joel Schumacher is to Batman.  Perhaps there was intention to stay true to the fans but marketing and demographics changed that.  I went today to see this movie expecting to see a full house,  it was almost empty.  The people who did come to the movie are all fans.  So shouldn't it make the most sense to at least HONOUR you audience?   I don't want some massive flow chart to see where things fit in the time line(lets face it, DC comics is the best example of what NOT to do to a series) and thats what's happening.  Stay true to the original ideas or at least make an attempt to return some order to the series we all grew up with and loved.  

As for the actors, I think they all did a great job.  I'm impressed with Simon Peg and Karl Urban.  Both nailed there roles with precision.  Chris PIne however may not have been the best fit for Kirk, but in the end seemed to redeem him self with some classic Kirk-ish actions.  

Too much glaring lighting effects and way to much moving camera.  

Over all not a horrible film, but lacks in what it should have been heavy in, Trek accuracy.  The ship looked like someone  didn't even look at the Volumes of technical journals and countless hours of movies and TV footage.  I was hoping for CG like the remastered Original Series has.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you JR.  You hit the nail on the head.  It may have a lot of snazy effects and big explosions, but it is NOT true to trek.  I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when they where brainstorming ideas for this movie.  I bet it was &#8220;How can we get the 15 year olds into see this movie&#8221; and less &#8220;How can we make a movie that works in every ones interest&#8221;.  J.J. Abrams is to Star Trek as Joel Schumacher is to Batman.  Perhaps there was intention to stay true to the fans but marketing and demographics changed that.  I went today to see this movie expecting to see a full house,  it was almost empty.  The people who did come to the movie are all fans.  So shouldn&#8217;t it make the most sense to at least HONOUR you audience?   I don&#8217;t want some massive flow chart to see where things fit in the time line(lets face it, DC comics is the best example of what NOT to do to a series) and thats what&#8217;s happening.  Stay true to the original ideas or at least make an attempt to return some order to the series we all grew up with and loved.  </p>
<p>As for the actors, I think they all did a great job.  I&#8217;m impressed with Simon Peg and Karl Urban.  Both nailed there roles with precision.  Chris PIne however may not have been the best fit for Kirk, but in the end seemed to redeem him self with some classic Kirk-ish actions.  </p>
<p>Too much glaring lighting effects and way to much moving camera.  </p>
<p>Over all not a horrible film, but lacks in what it should have been heavy in, Trek accuracy.  The ship looked like someone  didn&#8217;t even look at the Volumes of technical journals and countless hours of movies and TV footage.  I was hoping for CG like the remastered Original Series has.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JR</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126998</link>
		<dc:creator>JR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 20:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126998</guid>
		<description>I agree with Ms. Long is pretty right about this movie.  The best review I have read so far abou this movie was by Scott Mendelson at Huffington Post.  www.huffintonpost.com/Scott-mendelson/ 
It  was short on talent long on formula.  It's the weaker formula for a star trek movie that shows out.  If you are a star trek fan as I will admit it was a dumb ass job to create what I call ST:UII = Star Trek: Univers Two and i think it pisses on everything else created by all the other francizes when JJ Abrams says they aren't relevent by not restoring or not even trying to restore the timeline in the end of the movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Ms. Long is pretty right about this movie.  The best review I have read so far abou this movie was by Scott Mendelson at Huffington Post.  <a href="http://www.huffintonpost.com/Scott-mendelson/" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffintonpost.com/Scott-mendelson/</a><br />
It  was short on talent long on formula.  It&#8217;s the weaker formula for a star trek movie that shows out.  If you are a star trek fan as I will admit it was a dumb ass job to create what I call ST:UII = Star Trek: Univers Two and i think it pisses on everything else created by all the other francizes when JJ Abrams says they aren&#8217;t relevent by not restoring or not even trying to restore the timeline in the end of the movie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pierre</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126976</link>
		<dc:creator>Pierre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 11:01:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126976</guid>
		<description>Yeah I think this film turned me gay for Chris Pine.

Thanks for destroying my sense of sexual security and giving me a future of awkward conversations with the parents, J.J.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah I think this film turned me gay for Chris Pine.</p>
<p>Thanks for destroying my sense of sexual security and giving me a future of awkward conversations with the parents, J.J.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Munch Head St. Wah</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126972</link>
		<dc:creator>Munch Head St. Wah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 08:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126972</guid>
		<description>in the defense f the pretty cast, remember, the original cast back from the sixties were good looking too. William Shatner from the mid 60s was a stud!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>in the defense f the pretty cast, remember, the original cast back from the sixties were good looking too. William Shatner from the mid 60s was a stud!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terrence Garrett</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126969</link>
		<dc:creator>Terrence Garrett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 07:40:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126969</guid>
		<description>I've read your take on the new Star Trek film and while you make some interesting (if not valid) points, I find your review inadequate. This film makes the choice not to directly hit the audience over the head with social commentary, but instead finds a way to tell a small compact story that happens to have same nice special effects. I say small because frankly not alot happens travel wise. The crew actually heads for one place, then goes to another, gets delayed, then finally arrives.

Outside the main characters the smaller one get their time to shine. I can see how you could compare that aspect to a Michael Bay assemble event film, but this characters are earnest with a sense of humor that comes out not as slap stick but as something that fleshes out their different aspects making them more than one dimensional Michael Bay puppets.

As far as the characters being exaggerated is a confident african-american woman who shows she has the intelligence to work amongst some of the more intelligent and well trained men in a galaxy who also happens to show emotional honesty in falling for an intelligent member of another race (er..species) instead of going for the caucasian cocky guy exaggerated? Or a character of another mixed race (er..species) being offended and defying those who would congratulate him for overcoming one side of his race because they find it inferior exaggerated?

Does the film have it's flaws sure. But the film doesn't depend on it's effects to make the story. It's not the best story ever written. It's not the most inventive. But it is (if you let yourself escape) a future earth where people are finally learning to be at peace with themselves but are just starting to learn to be at peace with the galaxy and maybe the future galaxy a good story.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve read your take on the new Star Trek film and while you make some interesting (if not valid) points, I find your review inadequate. This film makes the choice not to directly hit the audience over the head with social commentary, but instead finds a way to tell a small compact story that happens to have same nice special effects. I say small because frankly not alot happens travel wise. The crew actually heads for one place, then goes to another, gets delayed, then finally arrives.</p>
<p>Outside the main characters the smaller one get their time to shine. I can see how you could compare that aspect to a Michael Bay assemble event film, but this characters are earnest with a sense of humor that comes out not as slap stick but as something that fleshes out their different aspects making them more than one dimensional Michael Bay puppets.</p>
<p>As far as the characters being exaggerated is a confident african-american woman who shows she has the intelligence to work amongst some of the more intelligent and well trained men in a galaxy who also happens to show emotional honesty in falling for an intelligent member of another race (er..species) instead of going for the caucasian cocky guy exaggerated? Or a character of another mixed race (er..species) being offended and defying those who would congratulate him for overcoming one side of his race because they find it inferior exaggerated?</p>
<p>Does the film have it&#8217;s flaws sure. But the film doesn&#8217;t depend on it&#8217;s effects to make the story. It&#8217;s not the best story ever written. It&#8217;s not the most inventive. But it is (if you let yourself escape) a future earth where people are finally learning to be at peace with themselves but are just starting to learn to be at peace with the galaxy and maybe the future galaxy a good story.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karina Longworth</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126962</link>
		<dc:creator>Karina Longworth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 05:26:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126962</guid>
		<description>Yes, it is a crime that I worte anything at all about a popcorn summer blockbuster. All apologies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, it is a crime that I worte anything at all about a popcorn summer blockbuster. All apologies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sam</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126959</link>
		<dc:creator>sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 05:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126959</guid>
		<description>For godsake its a popcorn summer blockbuster, what did you expect. The fact that you worte that much about star trek shows you thought more about the movie than any other critic did. Feminist theory get a grip. Here is a tip for reviewing a blockbuster was it well cast, good use of cg/action, decent story. There it no need to write a bloody essay or what you think is one but fuck it keep tying you will get there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For godsake its a popcorn summer blockbuster, what did you expect. The fact that you worte that much about star trek shows you thought more about the movie than any other critic did. Feminist theory get a grip. Here is a tip for reviewing a blockbuster was it well cast, good use of cg/action, decent story. There it no need to write a bloody essay or what you think is one but fuck it keep tying you will get there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: daveed</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126943</link>
		<dc:creator>daveed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 21:03:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126943</guid>
		<description>I dunno. I'm trying to evaluate the boobage...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dunno. I&#8217;m trying to evaluate the boobage&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karina Longworth</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126926</link>
		<dc:creator>Karina Longworth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 14:17:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126926</guid>
		<description>I defy anyone to look at the lighting of the still above and then tell me that Chris Pine's ass is *not* a valid area of inquiry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I defy anyone to look at the lighting of the still above and then tell me that Chris Pine&#8217;s ass is *not* a valid area of inquiry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gil</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126923</link>
		<dc:creator>gil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 07:19:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126923</guid>
		<description>Nice review; I enjoyed the read.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice review; I enjoyed the read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Goss</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126920</link>
		<dc:creator>William Goss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 04:53:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126920</guid>
		<description>"Each time the pristine youthful beauty of his face is marred by a new fist-fight scar, Pine seems to take a step towards fuller immersion in the passionate but detached persona of the eventual Captain Kirk; as his cockiness makes him a target for one set of fists after another, his physical stamina becomes increasingly part of the point of his character; in film without any real sex and minimal romance, he gets closer to naked than anyone else."

Wow. So this is where Tweets about how much you enjoyed Chris Pine's ass will get us. :)

Well put, Ms. Longworth. Very well put.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Each time the pristine youthful beauty of his face is marred by a new fist-fight scar, Pine seems to take a step towards fuller immersion in the passionate but detached persona of the eventual Captain Kirk; as his cockiness makes him a target for one set of fists after another, his physical stamina becomes increasingly part of the point of his character; in film without any real sex and minimal romance, he gets closer to naked than anyone else.&#8221;</p>
<p>Wow. So this is where Tweets about how much you enjoyed Chris Pine&#8217;s ass will get us. <img src='http://blog.spout.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Well put, Ms. Longworth. Very well put.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NerdyShirts</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126906</link>
		<dc:creator>NerdyShirts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 22:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126906</guid>
		<description>Make that, "thewaitisover" :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Make that, &#8220;thewaitisover&#8221; <img src='http://blog.spout.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shadow And Act</title>
		<link>http://blog.spout.com/2009/05/06/star-trek-review/#comment-126901</link>
		<dc:creator>Shadow And Act</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 21:46:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spout.com/?p=14003#comment-126901</guid>
		<description>Eye candy and sugar-shot power of diversion aside, I'm hesitantly going into this one with quite low expectations, being a Trek fan, but not a Trek fanatic. 

I'm hoping that the the woman who Kirk and Spock are fighting over is Uhura.

This reminds me somewhat of "Cloverfield" actually (another JJ Abrams affiliation) - not necessarily in terms of story. A group of "20-something and absurdly attractive" types, working together to get through some challenge. Except, the monster movie's characters weren't as diverse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eye candy and sugar-shot power of diversion aside, I&#8217;m hesitantly going into this one with quite low expectations, being a Trek fan, but not a Trek fanatic. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m hoping that the the woman who Kirk and Spock are fighting over is Uhura.</p>
<p>This reminds me somewhat of &#8220;Cloverfield&#8221; actually (another JJ Abrams affiliation) - not necessarily in terms of story. A group of &#8220;20-something and absurdly attractive&#8221; types, working together to get through some challenge. Except, the monster movie&#8217;s characters weren&#8217;t as diverse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
