GamerTab
That was an excellent one.
Humaira Grant
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Francene Odetta
It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
joexboxer
Robert Walker Jr could not be brought on to reprise his role as Charlie Evans. Gary Lockwood was not brought back to reprise his role as Gary Mitchell. Why is that? They probably read the script. I realize I was thinking this was NOT going to be another Cawley production like New Voyages, and I was wrong. It used the same sets, and I guess that is all the sets they had. Cawley's sets and an Amiga Video Toaster right out of 1985 for those graphics. WOW. OMG. The story was so jilted. You get Captain Harriman, the captain who 'lost' Kirk, Charlie-X AND Gary Mitchell together in 1 film, and that was it? I mean seriously? And you people who give it high praise - did you actually watch THE WHOLE THING? I only give it a 1 because I cannot add a NEGATIVE. I apologize, I read reviews and I was expecting greatness. Instead I get something on par with made-for-science class drizzle that I watched thinking it was going to get better, and ended up feeling like I might get quizzed on it later. DRIZZLE.
Kevin Schuhmacher
Star Trek has been a part of so many peoples lives and has inspired so many people to go into many different occupations, from doctors to engineers, astronauts and many more. Some of the top minds in the world are Star Trek fans. I am proud of the people that took the time to do this project, thank you! The story on the filming conditions was terribly funny, well not to the cast and crew, the Enterprise bridge used for this film is located by a busy train track so every time a train would roll on by they would have to stop filming, plus I heard the humidity was horrendous. To all my fellow Star Trek fans this is a must see. Live Long & Prosper as they say on Vulcan! Kevin out.........^v^
a666333
It was interesting that they were able to pull so many of the old bit characters back into the story and in many cases with the original actors. The story was basically stitched together from loose ends lying around and the old alternate reality gambit.The dialogue is tongue-in-cheek much of the time and the directing dragged noticeably in a few places. The acting ranges from very good to forced and pain inducing.Despite the many flaws, it compares favourably with a lot of the stuff that has been put out by the full budget Paramount crew (which says something about the inconsistent efforts by Paramount). I am sure this crowd of amateurs had fun making it and it is clear they really want to make a good product that captures the feeling of the original series. All power to them. too bad that nothing that is done now can recover the lost opportunity when the original series was cancelled.
katyzone
Done lovingly and so wonderful to see a few of the old faces some of us knew so well. I actually liked the CGI used, it was crisp and clean and relied on the person watching it rather than making the person a subjective viewer, kinda put the viewer in league with the movie, it is up to the viewer to decide how much they will enjoy it.Heck, the graphics reminded me when computer games were about the puzzles, tactics and maneuvers inherent rather than the gee whiz blow you away factor with a hollow center in most I run across- simply human nature I guess- "a beautiful person need not be as deep as one plain"- not that I buy that, I don't, it's just, unfortunately it is just that way betimes. SPOILERIf you can get past the first scene, it gets better. "Charlie X" doesn't get his "acting shoes" quite laced till his next scene. To me, overall, I like this addition to the universe of Star Trek, heck, better than Nemesis IMHO anyway. The acting is good. Think BBC (Doctor Who, Blake's 7, "bad" effects and all are easy to ignore, but actually the effects in this are a tad better than the older BBC stuff, which I love BTW).I give it a 7/10, but I am biased!
