Cool News
Quint has a post-TREK release chat with JJ Abrams!!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. If you’ve been following closely I’m sure you’ve noticed that I was quite taken with JJ Abrams’ STAR TREK. I’ve been seeing a bit of a backlash in the talkbacks (strangely enough I’ve never run into it in the flesh), but for all its faults I felt that Abrams’ resurrection of the Trek iconography was a stellar success.
There’s certainly room for improvement in further sequels, but the key elements are now in place. The cast works and works well together and I love the visual style Abrams employs. Yes, that means I love the lens flares. I had that on the list of questions, actually, a breakdown of how he uses different lens flares almost as visual keys into certain characters and situations, but the chat was short.
And no, I wasn’t late with this. I was locked in to interview Abrams during the press rush in the weeks leading up to the picture’s release and I figured I just feel through the cracks when the flick came out and no Abrams interview had surfaced. But apparently, not. Late last week I heard I’d have some time with the man. I actually think this kind of thing should be more commonplace, actually. The movie’s out and that gives us more freedom to discuss specifics without spoiling.
I’m not ashamed to say I’m a fan of his work. I am addicted to LOST and have stuck with it through the good times and the bad. I thought his work on M:I3 was really damn impressive for a first time feature director and he took it to the next level in TREK. He also has his mitts on something very close to my heart, Stephen King’s DARK TOWER series… so he better be at the top of his game when he gets to that!
Anyway, here’s the chat. Hope you enjoy!
JJ Abrams: Hey man.
Quint: How’s it going?
JJ Abrams: Great, how are you?
Quint: I’m doing very well. Thanks so much for taking the time for talking to me. It’s not very common to do these things after the movie has been out, so I think it’s kind of neat to look back on the movie and talk openly about it.
JJ Abrams: I’m thrilled to do it.
Quint: So the first thing I want to bring up: Did you see The Onion video made about STAR TREK?
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
JJ Abrams: That was so funny.
Quint: It’s kind of like the Shatner “Get a Life” thing from SNL a while back.
JJ Abrams: They do amazing stuff. Did you ever see the ones they did on the new Macbook with the turn wheel?
Quint: Yep and the “Sony Cocksucking Piece of Shit That Doesn’t Do The Goddamn Thing It’s Supposed to.”
JJ Abrams: Those were so funny. My God.
Quint: I don’t know how the hell you did it, but you kind of hit that middle ground perfectly where you were able to reach fans and non-fans alike.
JJ Abrams: Well, thank you.
Quint: It’s not even an opinion at this point. Look at the success of the film so far, both critically and monetarily. I think it’s pretty clear that you guys have hit that sweet spot, which, I still don’t know how you guys were able to do that.
Click here to read along with the next bit in amazing Sound-O-Text!
JJ Abrams: I think that part of it was that Alex (Kurtzman) and Bob (Orci) and Damon (Lindelof) are so well versed in TREK and yet they’ve got a great perspective on how TREK is perceived outside of that fanbase. And then you’ve got myself and Bryan Burk even more so, who were less familiar and so we had to this sort of range of experience with STAR TREK and a range of knowledge of it. And so you had the inside out and the outside in working together to make the movie and it really was the litmus test for us, which was “What is the story and the narrative of the story that we would all appreciate?” Once we got to that, we felt like we might be on to something.
Quint: Well, you seem to inject a lot of the adventure of a STAR WARS into the STAR TREK universe and you are also able to figure out the one way to reboot it where you kind of take away any arguments you have about bastardizing or going off canon. You were able to find a way to give yourself freedom to have fun with the movie and not be so tied.
Click here to read along with the next bit in amazing Sound-O-Text!
JJ Abrams: I think that the convention of breaking away from the timeline, which just obviously gave us the freedom to tell a story that wasn’t constrained by canon, but at the same time… and the weird part is that we also had to embrace it, because that’s what we were inspired by and we had to honor it and make sure that we weren’t insulting, as much as we could, the fans of TREK.
And we knew no matter what we did, that there would be some percentage of STAR TREK fans that would hate it. We just knew that there was no way to make everyone happy and yet it was important that we try and so that was the approach. The other weird balancing act is that it was simultaneously its own thing, but it was also adhering to what has come before. It was a vision of the future that needs to work in a way that was relevant for today, but also was a vision of the future from fifty years ago, so there was a lot of bouncing back and forth. There was a brand new cast and yet it also had a character played by one of the original actors, so it was a strange backwards/forwards original piece that was also trying to adhere to what came before, so there was always this bizarre dance going on between trying to make something that was just purely its own piece and also something that was honoring and… what’s another word for it? Just being true to what had come before and that was, I guess, the biggest challenge of the movie.
Quint: Well, yeah, because you can’t have Kirk not being Kirk. You can’t have Spock not being Spock, but what I think is what’s interesting about the way you guys approached it was that you were able to see… It’s not like the STAR WARS prequels where everything has to so rigidly fall into place, so by the end you feel like you already know what’s going to happen. I also have to say that I really like that you got rid of the time travel device, the red matter, at the end of the movie, because I think one of the big worries about the time travel aspect is that once you do it, it’s a way to write yourself out of corners. I kind of like that you guys took that away from yourselves at the end, so everything matters. It’s not like you got to go back and save Vulcan. Do you know what I mean?
JJ Abrams: Yeah, I think it was important that as much as we could, that the story… within the context of what we were doing, that it not feel like we were either trying to wrap things up too sweetly and too perfectly and we also wanted to, in a way, close the door that we opened, so that at the end of the film it felt like we had sort of gotten back on track and now the adventures that these characters are going on will be their own. This was really the bridge between what you knew or what you thought you knew of how their lives were and given the convention of the alternate universe, that reset becomes sort of pure at the end.
Quint: Yeah, where it doesn’t feel like us as an audience are waiting for the cop-out to happen.
JJ Abrams: That was definitely the goal.
Quint: Was there a particular moment were you knew that this was going to work? Like when you got all of your cast together? Saw a specific scene? Was there a specific moment where you were like “This is going to work out.” A “Wipe the sweat off of your brow” type moment.
JJ Abrams: I think it’s when I read your review.
Quint: (laughs) Okay.
JJ Abrams: The truth is the whole process was such a big pill to swallow that, in a way, the only way to approach it was sort of looking at every decision and doing the best we could to try and answer or decide and make the choice in that moment. So whether it was what the approach should be… doing STAR TREK and all, going back to Kirk and Spock, figuring out what the story would be like, what the premise would be, whether it was lines of dialogue or casting… whether it was production design, costume, props, wardrobe, obviously the casting was a massively important process, whether it was shooting with a camera how to stage a scene, choreography, production of the visual effects, whether it was editorial…
Literally, like with any movie, you just have countless decisions and I think that rather there being one moment where I would be like “Aha, it’s going to work” or not, and I really don’t remember having that moment, but I do remember having a bunch of smaller epiphanies where I felt like “Thank God that didn’t suck.”
I remember we started working with Zachary [Quinto] first and he was terrific and it was clear that he was going to be incredibly affecting and effecting in the role and he was very, very talented and working really hard and we had about a week working with him and I thought “Holy shit, Chris better be good.” I knew he was great in the audition and he’s awesome, but it was a different thing, like “Wait a minute, Zachary is really good. Chris better be great!” Then Chris started working and he was awesome and I thought “Zach better up his game” and it was this fun thing were they were all so good that it was like watching great tennis players where you think “Oh my God, that was such an amazing serve, there’s no way that can be returned” and then you see an amazing return and you think “Oh my God, that’s impossible.”
That really, for me, was the key, which was “Are the characters working?” and “Are the actors doing their job?” and I’ve never been more grateful for a cast of actors than this cast. They not only had the burden of having to make a space adventure feel real and emotional and funny and scary and legitimate, but they had to do it in the shadow of these incredible actors playing iconic roles that were shoes that intellectually I realize how daunting it must have been, more in retrospect than anything do I sort of feel what that challenge was for them and I think that all of them did it not with fear or hesitation or self doubt, but they did it with fun exuberance.
They did it with this kind of excitement and that was a really wonderful thing to see. They were embracing these roles in the only way you can do it and that to me, every day on the set and seeing how wonderful the cast was and what a wonderful job they were doing, that was the thing for me that felt like “It’s going to work,” because I was never worried that the story wasn’t good. I think they wrote a great script. I was never worried about the visual effects or that the action sequences weren’t going to be good, because I knew we were working with amazing stunt people, I knew that ILM is the best in the business, so my insanely long answer is really just to say that the actors were the keys for me even remotely feeling like we had a shot, that what they were doing was so good.
Quint: I think one of my favorite moments was seeing Chris Pine actually kind of throw on a little of the Shatner bravado during the Kobayashi Maru…
JJ Abrams: Yeah.
Quint: Where you have that kind of moment to acknowledge that aspect of Kirk as a character and it makes complete sense that that’s how he would approach that scene. He would kind of play up the theatricality of it. You pepper enough in there for the fans and then you have Leonard Nimoy… not only is he Ambassador Spock in the movie, he’s kind of Ambassador Leonard in real life, bridging the old and the new.
Click here to read along with the next bit in amazing Sound-O-Text!
JJ Abrams: That was the key. If Leonard would have said “No,” we would have been completely screwed if he didn’t want to do the movie. We knew there was a shot that he would and he was interested in the story and then we also knew that he had said “No” for decades, so we were nervous.
But there was only one moment in the movie where I actually asked Chris to do a little bit of the Kirk we know and it was literally just one, silly little thing, but it’s this moment later in the movie where Spock is telling Kirk the statistics of how unlikely it is for their plan to succeed and it’s the first time in the movie that Spock calls Kirk Jim. Young Spock calls him Jim.
And then the response that Kirk has is he says “Spock, it’ll work.” And I actually asked him to give that reading of just “Spock” a little bit of the Kirk we know, because it was the first time that it felt like… “Jim” and the first time that Jim said “Spock” in that way, it just felt familiar and it’s a subtle little thing, but again Chris did a great job.
Quint: I think also, just as a testament to the cast that you were able to draw, we haven’t really touched on Karl Urban or Simon Pegg and those guys bring so much to the movie, but as a testament to everybody, at the end of the movie all I wanted to do was see the next adventure of that crew. It seems like they are finally in the places they need to be and all is right in the world and they are about to go on their real adventures. So is that something that you purposefully set up, so you have…
JJ Abrams: The idea was that there were all of these disparate pieces and in a way, they are all sort of orphans and then by the end of the movie, they all click into place, they have all sort of come together as a family.
When Karl Urban came in, quite frankly I felt that it would be unlikely that that guy from BOURNE or the hunk from LORD OF THE RINGS was going to be Bones. I knew he was from New Zealand. I just didn’t see the connection, even though I liked his work very much, but I thought “Well, he doesn’t seem right for this, but I’m a fan.” He came in and blew my mind so fast. It was one of those great things where it’s a great lesson to not be so closed minded, but God he was amazing. He just channeled DeForest Kelley, it was eerie.
Quint: Right, well they are shooing us off here, but again I really appreciate you taking the time to talk to me and as a life long DARK TOWER fan, I think you have quite a road ahead of you. As difficult as STAR TREK was to adapt, I think you are going to be looking at an even harder world to create.
JJ Abrams: Yeah, we’ll see what happens with that, but I’m really grateful for all of the stuff that you do and all you do on Ain’t It Cool. I’m obviously such a fan of the site, so I really appreciate all of your work and talking to you has been fun.
I had hoped to grill him a bit on Dark Tower, but the publicist cut in saying time was up without a warning, so that is not to be. Not that Abrams gives up details of any sort this far out on anything, but still the effort was intended.
I hope you guys enjoyed the chat!
-Quint
quint@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter
src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js">![]()
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
And we knew no matter what we did, that there would be some percentage of STAR TREK fans that would hate it. We just knew that there was no way to make everyone happy and yet it was important that we try and so that was the approach. The other weird balancing act is that it was simultaneously its own thing, but it was also adhering to what has come before. It was a vision of the future that needs to work in a way that was relevant for today, but also was a vision of the future from fifty years ago, so there was a lot of bouncing back and forth. There was a brand new cast and yet it also had a character played by one of the original actors, so it was a strange backwards/forwards original piece that was also trying to adhere to what came before, so there was always this bizarre dance going on between trying to make something that was just purely its own piece and also something that was honoring and… what’s another word for it? Just being true to what had come before and that was, I guess, the biggest challenge of the movie.
Literally, like with any movie, you just have countless decisions and I think that rather there being one moment where I would be like “Aha, it’s going to work” or not, and I really don’t remember having that moment, but I do remember having a bunch of smaller epiphanies where I felt like “Thank God that didn’t suck.”
I remember we started working with Zachary [Quinto] first and he was terrific and it was clear that he was going to be incredibly affecting and effecting in the role and he was very, very talented and working really hard and we had about a week working with him and I thought “Holy shit, Chris better be good.” I knew he was great in the audition and he’s awesome, but it was a different thing, like “Wait a minute, Zachary is really good. Chris better be great!” Then Chris started working and he was awesome and I thought “Zach better up his game” and it was this fun thing were they were all so good that it was like watching great tennis players where you think “Oh my God, that was such an amazing serve, there’s no way that can be returned” and then you see an amazing return and you think “Oh my God, that’s impossible.”
That really, for me, was the key, which was “Are the characters working?” and “Are the actors doing their job?” and I’ve never been more grateful for a cast of actors than this cast. They not only had the burden of having to make a space adventure feel real and emotional and funny and scary and legitimate, but they had to do it in the shadow of these incredible actors playing iconic roles that were shoes that intellectually I realize how daunting it must have been, more in retrospect than anything do I sort of feel what that challenge was for them and I think that all of them did it not with fear or hesitation or self doubt, but they did it with fun exuberance.
They did it with this kind of excitement and that was a really wonderful thing to see. They were embracing these roles in the only way you can do it and that to me, every day on the set and seeing how wonderful the cast was and what a wonderful job they were doing, that was the thing for me that felt like “It’s going to work,” because I was never worried that the story wasn’t good. I think they wrote a great script. I was never worried about the visual effects or that the action sequences weren’t going to be good, because I knew we were working with amazing stunt people, I knew that ILM is the best in the business, so my insanely long answer is really just to say that the actors were the keys for me even remotely feeling like we had a shot, that what they were doing was so good.
But there was only one moment in the movie where I actually asked Chris to do a little bit of the Kirk we know and it was literally just one, silly little thing, but it’s this moment later in the movie where Spock is telling Kirk the statistics of how unlikely it is for their plan to succeed and it’s the first time in the movie that Spock calls Kirk Jim. Young Spock calls him Jim.
And then the response that Kirk has is he says “Spock, it’ll work.” And I actually asked him to give that reading of just “Spock” a little bit of the Kirk we know, because it was the first time that it felt like… “Jim” and the first time that Jim said “Spock” in that way, it just felt familiar and it’s a subtle little thing, but again Chris did a great job.
When Karl Urban came in, quite frankly I felt that it would be unlikely that that guy from BOURNE or the hunk from LORD OF THE RINGS was going to be Bones. I knew he was from New Zealand. I just didn’t see the connection, even though I liked his work very much, but I thought “Well, he doesn’t seem right for this, but I’m a fan.” He came in and blew my mind so fast. It was one of those great things where it’s a great lesson to not be so closed minded, but God he was amazing. He just channeled DeForest Kelley, it was eerie.
I had hoped to grill him a bit on Dark Tower, but the publicist cut in saying time was up without a warning, so that is not to be. Not that Abrams gives up details of any sort this far out on anything, but still the effort was intended.
I hope you guys enjoyed the chat!
-Quint
quint@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter
src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js">
-
+ Expand All
-
I get it. But if I read one more article about Star Trek on this site, I'm going to puke my balls through my mouth.
-
i'm with you, quint. loved the movie. can't wait for more.
-
...for the new Star Trek. What I could have done with the look, the story, and the dialogue of this film? I wish JJ well, but he did not deliver here. His work with the actors, was fine work, but the movie itself was lacking in all arenas...bought critics and the rave reviews therein, notwithstanding.Lastly, for a movie that reportedly costs 130 to 150 million dollars, the film looked like 60 million on screen, or less???
-
I am not an Abrams fanboy. I ABSOLUTELY hate everything else Orci and Kurtzman have written...and STAR TREK has been a part of my life since I was a kid(although I do not consider myself a Trekkie or Trekker/dont speak Klingon/dont own a starfleet uniform). And I thought the new movie was really,really good. Good enoughto see again and good enough to buy the DVD. Its certainly the most entertaining Trek anything since First Contact. I went into this movie expecting and almost wanting to hate it and it won me over. I'm quite excited about the prospect of Abrams and company doing more with the Trek universe(fuck The Dark Tower).
-
I posted that like 3 times in the other talkback, for 2 reasons: 1) it's funny, 2) it points out how LUDICROUS the complaints that the hardcore Trekkies have about the new film.face it, it's a fun, exciting, engaging movie. everyone loved it but you grumbling doofuses! you can hate it, that's your right...but it isn't going to be based on any logical or cohesive argument. you just were ready to hate anything that came out of this tube. and that's fine, I respect that. (I swear to god, I really do...if someone tried to remake Lawrence of Arabia, I'd be similarly up in arms) but just fucking OWN UP tp it.or else, as Shatner pointed out, get a life, will you people?
-
On tv when I was 12. Been a fan ever since, although I've hated all the Berman movies. Other than the engine room (for the love of GOD, PLEASE put a real engine room in the next movie, NOT A DAMN BREWERY) I thought this movie hit ALL the marks. Successful artistically and commercially. Go figure the odds on that. God Bless you, J.J. You brought Trek back from the grave. No mean trick, that.
-
This guy rocks!
-
The thing I like best about this move is how it embraces the characters we know and love with a fresh new spin. The Trek universe we all knew and loved was played out-First Contact was the last Trek movie to make any money..Insurrection and Nemesis put the nail in the Next Generation film franchise. DS9 was considered a failure because it never reached the heights of TNG,and Voyager and Enterprise were even bigger failures. It was long past time for someone new to come along and inject some new life into the Trek universe.
-
this goes to show you that either Abrams is a really smart guy, and knows the rare (and modern) version of the verb form of "effect" and is using it in a very interesting way...or he's just like the rest of you dorks, and he doesn't know the difference.personally, I think it's 50/50...but I did love the movie...
-
jj knocked it out of the park. MM you;re nutjob.
-
This interview reads disgracefully. Do you guys have any respect for the language? Maybe enrol in an ESL course at your local language school.
-
Was that little guy with Scotty. Just didn't seem necessary at all. Just a nit to pick, I guess. Otherwise, I enjoyed it.
-
what is the point of interviewing when there is no objectivity?
why is this even posted?
-
You're looking for objectivity at AICN? You must be new here.
-
Shame you didn’t ask him if he was embarrassed to work from such a terribly plotted script. The actors brought their top game and the writers delivered the shoddiest limp-plotted garbage I’ve watched in a cinema for an age. A string of ludicrous coincidences so far-fetched that they treat you like a moron (and drive you out of the story).
-
J.J.: I am a big fan of site and enjoy reading about how great I am and how great everything i touch is! What the fuck was he gonna say! I would hope he is a fan as this site is dedicated to all that is J.J and whoever else lets Harry and Co. get a sneak on set and exclusives and whatnot... Yawn. Quit coming here the last few weeks. Check back maybe once a week and find myself reminded why i left. and Im not alone.
-
with that one for sure. What drew him to the material? The fact that there were alternate realities in the story?
-
May 21, 2009 1:48:26 AM CDT
wow. the love/hate ratio on this talkback is favoring the love
by mr. smith
glad to see it.
cue Azimov's confrontational diatribe in 3,2,... -
and he took up about 20 seconds of the film, so even if he wasn't working for you, let's calm down a little, yeah?comic relief is a staple of big movies, and if that guy was the biggest complaint about this film, then you need to relax a little. everyone in the theater when I saw it, they chuckled at him. as did I. as did every other human that isn't a huge asshole...sorry, that was rude. but I meant it...you assholes.
-
May 21, 2009 1:55:22 AM CDT
the Kurtzman and Orci praise was bullshit and he knows it
by industrykiller!
Because EVERYTHING that was wrong with this movie was those fucking guys. That story was garbage, total and utter garbage, and by the grace of God, Abrams directing, and an excellent cast they somehow pulled a fun movie together. But seriously I don't think there will be a more plot hole ridden story in a movie all summer long and I would be so happy for those unparalleled to not write then next film.
-
I liked Star Trek but MI3 was a train wreck of an abomination.
-
And please keep in mind Im acknowledging there was plenty about this film to like. The craftsmenship with everything but the writing was impeccable, but the writing......ohhhh the writing. You've got to acknowledge how terrible and plot hole ridden that story was. Like not just a few plot holes, but possibly in the double digits. Even if it didn't bother you or you could ignore it, you CANNOT justify it.
-
That is what the new Star Trek should have felt like, but wasn't.
-
...a simple drone, one with no independent self aware thought of your own.
-
Jar Jar, Bay, and their faggot ass writers need to stop HACK'N up HollywoodStar Trek sucked and Jar Jar took on to many of Bay's trademark style ...including the awful: Actors are uniformly shot in tight, emphatic close ups, framed under the hairline and above the chin. ( Film making tips for writing Armageddon no doubt ) Not to mention the hacks that wrote it. I have never seen so many people complain about plot holes in my entire life... and look how they get rewarded for it. Nothing but praise on how they managed to combine Star Trek Paul Blart and Fast and Furious.
-
I did not grow up anything close to being a Trekkie, casual or otherwise, nor do I consider myself one now.
-
It's time for new Trek on tv.
-
as the first one. And that's how I find most Abrams productions. Average. I don't understand the hype for his work. Fringe has become interesting, but it started bland and as long as you don't expect too much it's fun.
Maybe that should be Abrams slogan, like the New Zealand poster in Flight of the Conchords: Don't expect too much, and you won't be disappointed.
And also, bring your mum. -
Watched Wrath of Khan the other night and just watching the scene where Kirk and Bones talk about getting older and how it's shot in full body to frame Kirks quarters and how that really gives you a sense of place and atmosphere. I didn't think it was a big deal with all the closeups, but something JJ should be mindful of.
-
Ok, First I think all modern Trek films owe a debt of gratitude to a screenwriter named Nicholas Myers, Who was also a novelist and wrote alot of great Sherlock Holmes stories set between the original stories, as well as great, yet unproduced adaptations of classic novels like Don Quixote and Conan Doyle's War of the Roses-era epic "The White Company". He also wrote Time After Time-the H.G. Wells vs. Jack Ripper novel/film. They turned to him to rewrite Wrath of Khan after the first Star Trek film sunk and all the sequel scripts were mediocre- he turned in his draft of Khan in only 12 days- being a fan of C.S. Forester's legendary Hornblower series, set in the British Navy during the Napoleonic Wars, he incorporated some of the maritime feel of those works into the Trek world- and they also echoed the diverse web of character relationships between shipmates as found in Forester's work. So Khan was a success because it was grounded in a vivid, literary reality that seems like a perfect fit with the material- you can even find an old interview with Shatner on youtube while they are filming the first pilot episodes of Trek where he compares the feel of the show to the Napoleonic Age of Sail.
Now when I first heard of this reboot I was pretty excited by the concept- because it meant that in our popular culture, we were moving passed the idea that Shatner is Kirk and Nimoy is Spock, etc... we were moving into the territory the patrons of the Globe theatre were in during the early 17th Century when Richard Burbage, the first actor to ever portray Hamlet, got too old or died off...when the notion was born that this CHARACTER is a worthy enough construction as to be endlessly adaptable and revived and reinterpreted by any number of later actors. Maybe all these watered down Trek spin offs that have come down to us in later years have all failed because they missed the point- not to continue the story down the timeline- but to focus on more stories involving the original characters-because THEY represent an important aspect of the total concept.
Anyway, we finally come to this movie. Which is odd first in that it is a film based on what was primarily a TV series, and directed by a guy who is primarily a TV producer. The worst part of this film is the direction of the quieter dialogue moments, when the tricks of television direction run amok and the camera shakes and cranes unnecessarily and every light source in the frame is flaring and candling in and out of focus, overwhelming the content of the scene. I read this type of thing as a lack of confidence on the part of the director.
The story itself- while hailed as bold reinvention- does not seem to me that revolutionary a concept- take any one of the hundreds of Trek stories where someone goes back in time and alters the future, and then someone else goes back after them and attempts to correct the alteration and instead of telling it from the point of view of the do-gooding time traveler out to set things right- tell it from the point of view of the people in the "wrong" timeline that have lived out their entire lives never suspecting they were really an "accident" and you have the spirit of this film.
The weakest parts, sad to say, involved Nimoy as a time-hopping older Spock. Playing the Deus Ex Machina/ Obi-Wan Kenobi role in so many places in the film as to shatter credibility. Nimoy plays each scene with a wink and a nod in scenes I believe were scripted just so militant fanboys would see Nimoy anoint the film with his approval. The movie really didn't need that- I wish the filmmakers had the courage to do without it- it would've made for a nearly perfect film. A much better solution would've been to somehow show this time-altering threat/event taking place in such a way that the audience understood that the future of these characters was once again uncertain- but the characters themselves remained unaware that any changes were taking place.
The Younger Spock character however is well-done. You really feel early on that he is a stranger of two worlds due to his mixed human/alien heritage. Events transpire in the film to make the Vulcans a rare, enlightened, ethereal, strange race akin to the Elves of middle earth in the Lord of the Rings films. An interesting turn, I'd like to see where it goes.
Eric Bana is adequate as the villain, Captain Nero. A Romulan Miner from the future with a Khan-like obsession for capturing and destroying his most hated enemy-the time traveling Older Spock. While i'm grateful his motivation wasn't belabored to death- I think it was too lightly touched on to make him compelling to me. In terms of production design I think Nero's ship is sloppily designed as a mass of spikes and tenacles floating through space. Between this and the aforementioned direction, alot of the space battles seemed abstract and confused to me.
Also you get kind of a Muppet Babies-vibe from the idea that this intergalactic UN peacekeeping armada is handing over the keys of quadrillion-dollar starships to green three year cadets- seems kind of farfetched.
On the positive side, Simon Pegg is really great as Scotty- I really dug it. Anton Yelchin does a great job too as Chekov. John Cho is OK as Sulu but they could've given him more to do-also, no one could've quite matched that strange theatrical timbre in George Takei's voice- so the character seems half-realized here. Ben Cross from the Dark Shadows remake even gets some work here as Spock's dad.
All said, It was a good film, worth the time -
loved every minute of it-- long time TOS fan.
-
MM sorry dude but you're fucked in the head if you like MI3 but hated Star Trek. The ending to MI3 was utterly ridiculous. JJ does have a tendency to have weak third acts. I'll even admit Star Trek's third act was a little weak but NOT NEARLY has bad as the abomination of MI3...cmon Cruise's civilian doc girlfriend shoots and kills 2 highly trained agents in a firefight? really? At least in star trek it's sci fi and you can get away with more but MI3 was awful.
-
and they use a different composer for the movie than they did for the tv show. Star Trek should be a case study used in all music courses. Yeah, I'm looking at you Giacchino. You're a fine composer, but know your (and your orchestration team's) limitations. Just because what you do sounds good in computer games and tv, doesn't mean you should do the same thing for a major Hollywood motion picture. Compare Michael Giacchino, Brian Tyler and even John Ottman to guys like Alexandre Desplat and Joby Talbot and you can hear what I mean. The themes may be there, the storytelling may be there, but the recording quality and overall cinematicness/emotion/grandness of the orchestrations are lacking for Giacchino and co. Just sayin.
-
I'm usually the jerk that is ruining films by pointing out plot holes, and logical missteps, but for this film I only had one (why Nero didn't warn his people of the sun problem, which is supposedly explained away in the missing scenes) tell me some specific problems you had, and if I have an answer for them, you'll have it. if not, we'll toss it around and discuss it/them. and if I think you're full of it and I refuse to acknowledge your point, in favor of my own yelling and craziness, well then I'll join the church of Scientology...
-
He's got all the film-making skills of a Peter Berg or a McG. All (bad) style and no substance. You really think an epic tale like The Dark Tower is going to benefit a shaky-cam, bad editing approach. A story like that needs someone who understands scope composition and scene structure. Abrams needs to go back to TV where his work doesn't hurt peoples heads.
-
go watch TERMINATOR SALVATION to experience BAD writing. WOLVERINE had BAD writing. STAR TREK was exactly what it needed to be, to kick the franchise off again. It gets harder to a degree from here on out.
-
Why does Star Fleet just ignore the Romulan ship for 20 years despite the fact that it destroyed most of the fleetWhy does Spock (literally) throw Kirk off the ship. Why not hold him in the brig...(I actually know this one, it's because the writers couldn't make a shopping list without plotholes and comedy side-kicks)Why is the romulan ship full of exposed water? Isn't this still dangerous in the future.Why does Kirk act like a total twat during the Kobyashi Maru test. Surely he makes it obvious that he's cheated.The ice planet-Spock in a cave-Scotty stuff...WTF!If all it takes to destroy the Romulan threat is a couple of starfleet cadets beaming aboard with phasers, why the hell did no one think of that sooner.How does Kirk manage to leap from a really high ledge and land on his chest without shattering every bloody rib in his body?
-
24/7 365 days a year
-
as much as I loved the new Star Trek, the only thing that bothered me slightly in the theater while watching it was the music.it wasn't horrible, but it seemed very over the top and un-subtle, compared to how smooth the rest of the movie reimagined the idea of Star Trek.again, not bad, but just...I don't know...clunky.what do you think?
-
Thats a shocking excuse and you know it. Kurtman and Orci write for the lowest common denominator audience in an attempt to please as much popcorn munching zombies as possible. This isn't what Star Trek needed (or any other film for that matter)to kick start the franchise. It needed a well written screenplay full of fun and intelligence. With the power these guys wield, surely they should be trying to make audiences smarter, not maintain their dumbness.
-
It's because we're used to movie scores being produced by film composers, while Giacchino and his orchestrators seem to be TV composers put onto film projects. TV and film are two different (albiet similar) types of media and should be treated (ie. composed for) as such.
-
The new music was horrible and stopped me from giving the film an A. Not sure why it was decided to keep the main theme until the end but that decision was most definitely off the mark.
-
I agree the music was awful. When the logo came up and the music begins to soar. That should have been a spine-tingling moment. Instead, it was flat and embarasingly lifeless. It sums up the whole film for me though. A load of TV guys transposing wholesale their TV shtick to the big screen and making fools of themselves for not undertsanding the vast differences between the two.
-
No Mr Abrams, they really didn't. They just didn't. This new Trek was moronic.
-
"Why does Star Fleet just ignore the Romulan ship for 20 years despite the fact that it destroyed most of the fleet"
from what I understand, the ship was involved in the huge battle, then disappeared (imprisoned by Klingons) for 25 years. there's references to the fact that it disappeared and was never heard from again in the movie.
"Why does Spock (literally) throw Kirk off the ship. Why not hold him in the brig...(I actually know this one, it's because the writers couldn't make a shopping list without plotholes and comedy side-kicks)"
first off, you failed to use "literally" properly. second, questioning his motivation in expelling Kirk is one thing, but he was certainly within his right, logically and technically, to do so. Kirk would find a way out of any brig, and he believed (at that point) that Kirk was a danger to the mission. so he got him as far away as he could.
"Why is the romulan ship full of exposed water? Isn't this still dangerous in the future."
also, time travel doesn't really exist, nor does wrp drive and "beaming"....come on man...
"Why does Kirk act like a total twat during the Kobyashi Maru test. Surely he makes it obvious that he's cheated."
it's a test with no real solution. either he thinks he's come up with a legitimate solution ( reprogramming) or he simply knows that it's going to come to light that he's cheated. either way, not outside of the realm of possibility that he'd be a little callous.
"The ice planet-Spock in a cave-Scotty stuff...WTF!"yeah, OK. what I assumed was that the future Spock knew what would happen (maybe not "knew", but had a good idea) and so made sure that when Kirk would be deposited there, he'd meet the right people, in the right context, that the timeline would be restored...which is to say: maybe in the original timeline, Scotty was in a different scenario, and met Kirk in a different way. but in this one, he;s marooned, and Spock knows it, and he makes sure that Kirk meets him, and in a certain way, so that he'll end up on the Enterprise.
"If all it takes to destroy the Romulan threat is a couple of starfleet cadets beaming aboard with phasers, why the hell did no one think of that sooner."
because no one even knew about the ship until the Enterprise engaged it.
"How does Kirk manage to leap from a really high ledge and land on his chest without shattering every bloody rib in his body?"it's a movie. -
Didn't Abrams do "Joy Ride" before? I'm too lazy to look it up, but that was a friggin great movie, and totally underrated.
And Harry, please stop defending the Star Trek script. Nobody's trying to shit on your love for the film. It is very entertaining. But it is also very, very hollow and has less to say than any previous Star Trek movie, including 5 and 9. -
Well he did and the movie was good.
-
Those are nitpicks
-Space is a big place the Romulans can hide. DONE
-Spock REALLY didn't like Kirk at this point, and he was fighting security guards during a crisis situation - why keep a disgruntled and violent prisoner on board if there was a Federation outpost nearby to drop him at?
-Water on the Romulan ship? that has nothing to do with the plot at all and I'm ignoring it.
- Kirk acting the way he does was funny, entertaining and worked for his character - also has NOTHING TO DO WITH PLOT OR HOLES
- Ice planet cave stuff could be considered a huge coincidence BUT with all the talk of Destiny and fate I decided to believe it happened for a reason (only thing you mention that COULD be considered a plot hole.
- Beaming aboard the ship didn't stop the Romulan threat - igniting the red matter did. And they didn't do it from the start because NO ONE KNEW IT WAS THERE until old spock told them
- KIRK and his leaping abilities have nothing to do with plot and I also will ignore it. -
You didn't like the movie , well so what. Don't call people who liked it stupid and moronic. Don't say the JJ and crew wrote for the lowest common denomenator cause people liked it. I hate it when @ssholes on this site with their noses turned up refer to the majority as brain dead and stupid cause they liked a film and didn't see the what they say. Keep on picking away, Trek is a hit.
-
... some of you need to watch the movie again and pay attention to it before typing.
I am in now way a trek fan or a sci-fi buff but this film just worked and I really enjoyed it.
Bring on the next installment.
-
I didn't say people who liked it were moronic. I said the script was moronic. Which it really is.
-
LOVED it. Carnally. I think Abrams really, really nailed it, and I hope to god he makes 15 more trek movies. No lie.
But, I'm perfectly willing to admit that Abrams and the cast kicked ass DESPITE, not because of, the story. Several talkbackers here have a very valid point: Some of the plot holes and missteps in the script are really, really bad. So bad, there's just no excuse for that kind of lazy writing. Fortunately, the performance of the cast and Abram's brilliant directing outshine the glaring plotholes, and Star Trek is still a fun, fun movie. But, when one thinks about how good it *could* have been with a better story, one can't help but sigh at the missed opportunity.
But I do hope the success of the first installment paves the way for many more to come, providing an opportunity for Abrams to tap better writers, and deliver Trek movies that just blow us away. -
It was fun, and joyous, and made you smile at goofy operatic space shit, and the characters were the characters in their dynamic. I hate remakes but Abrams not only nailed this, he made it feel genuinely watchable. I mean sure, all that time travel stuff has more holes than Sasha Grey in a non Soderbergh movie, but who gives a fuck. It's fun and you can take your girlfriend to it and she likes it. Moreover, he made Spock genuinely badass and in the most impossible thing ever Chris Pine took one of the most iconic caricatures of the 20th century and made it work. Like if I had a twelve year old boy I'd take him to Star Trek first and foremost this summer. Oh and despite the fact I think Tom Cruise is batshit insane, MI3 worked. Abrams knows his stuff. Though I wish he'd tell Lindelof to stop making a goddamn tv show about gun cocking, not having time to discuss things, and men with the gravitas of Captain Morgan ads who are supposedly immortals who can get stabbed to death. That Lost shit is just fucking godawful now.
-
Make the Enterprise a bigger character. Give it something to do in battle other than support a small fast starfighter. Let us see that thing be a ship in the manner that any classic naval story has the characters relate to its ship. I feel the Enterprise was the one character that didn't get its due.
-
That answer doesn't hold water.
-
The last four trek films has had roughly the same scenario in it's finale. I guess I can let this one slide since it didn't involve Picard and crew, but I want them to move away from showdowns on the enemie's vessel and a quick beamout/rescue/etc. Also, if there was no Doomsday Machine in the next few flicks, that would be ok with me. Sick of that shit too. I liked Trek, but yes, there was some really stupid shit in there and most of it was during the Hoth segment.
-
Why didn't you ask about the gaping plot holes? It's not good enough to say "well that's in the comic/deleted scenes", a film should make sense on it's own. Those are the sorts of questions a post release interview should be asking, not just blowing smoke up everyone's ass, that's what the junkets are for.
-
May 21, 2009 4:06:33 AM CDT
J.J: I love Giacchino BUT PLEASE get a mind blowing theme
by silentbobafett2
in the next film! Jerry Goldsmiths all time great, Trek theme/fanfare was sorely missed! Please, please, please use it OR come up with something else - it was the only complaint I have with the whole film! And I like Giacchino's music, I have purchased the soundtrack, but I miss true theme that a film like Star Trek needs!
-
oh forgot it, ur not going to pimp wolvi right!;)
-
Only with glasses. Just thought I'd point that out. Just waiting for his head to pop off and for the lady in the radiator to sing her song.
-
I thought you idiots would stop saying 'raped my childhood' when South Park did a spoof of it... but no. And HOW can Jay Jay rape a childhood? Unless you're only just hitting your teen years, he's only been populist for ten years. And even then you'd have to be watching his stuff as a KID - and thus not getting the point of Alias.
-
It's what a blockbuster should be. Great characters, a zingy script, a great adventure. Well done JJ. I liked MI:3 but you've easily surpassed yourself with Star Trek. It succeeds on every level that the Star Wars prequels failed. In some ways Abrams has done the hard bit. He was just as successful as Nolan was in recreating the origins of the characters in a authentic and engaging manner. Now he has the freedom to take the characters and the story where he wants to, just like Nolan did with the Dark Knight When you consider the utter crap that's being churned out by Hollywood most of the time, like Terminator Salvation and Wolverine, then films like Star Trek can't get enough praise. Quint that was a nice piece however may I suggest that the faults with the prequels go way beyond the fact that one knew how the story ended.
-
Enjoy your vapid entertainment, your TV cinematography, your 'exciting' editing and your 'screenplay writing for dummies' scripts. Someone wake me up when Avatar comes out.
-
Giacchino is the right choice but the score was nowhere near up to scratch
-
I've just listened to Star Trek, MI:3 and The Incredibles again. Incredibles is the closest he's gotten to a motion picture sound, and that was primarily concert stage band music (ie. more big-band jazz-based brass, less traditional orchestral).
Hopefully next time, and there will be one I'm sure, he'll go the route of Ottman's Superman Returns score. That would at least show he's growing as an artist. -
http://tinyurl.com/r42w7g - shameless, but meh!
-
May 21, 2009 5:04:29 AM CDT
Kirk was pretty serious in the first few eps of TOS
by most excellent ninja
I hope they bring that real regal/leadership quality in the next one. They're on the right track.
-
Everyone else played the character, Simon Pegg played Simon Pegg, just with a Scottish accent, and he's not funny working with someone else's material.
-
Urban killed it.
-
Way better than any of the Next Gen stuff. Too bad Berman wouldn't let Ronald Moore have more input but that's another story. Lens flares, yeah they bothered me and the family but did the Enterprise design (inside and out) strike you as wrong?
-
thats how i read it .... make it so
-
talkbackers
-
It seems Abrams spent the interview sucking off Quinto and Pine and Quint spent the interview sucking off Abrams. Did Abrams ask for a reach around, Quint?
You couldn't ask some hard questions like why are Kurtzman and Orci unable to write a script without dozens of huge plotholes? Or why Giacchino's score was so devoid of any personality or appropriateness to Trek? Or why cadets who haven't even graduated can skip ahead of all the trained, experienced officers to the top jobs on a starship? Etc, etc.
Or would that jeopardise the chance at a set visit when the inevitable sequel is being shat out? -
He's the one who really got the character right. I enjoyed all the cast members, but Urban deserves to be singled out as the best.
-
but it wasn't JJ's fault. Get some fucking writers next time. Luckily you have the cast.
-
What the fuck does JJ stand for anyways? Jizz Juggler? Just Jews? Jungle Jim?
-
total gross. I hope it keeps this up.
-
All those trek fans dissing this film, listen up. You had your chance, and YOU ALL BLEW IT. We got served up the soap opera shit that was DS9, followed by the cack that was Voyager, and then the turd that was Enterprise. Any self respecting trekkie, knows trek died after TNG ended. As soon as Roddenberry died, the vultures moved in, and tore Trek to shreds. I still shudder to think how Nemesis got made. Tom Hardy running around in a posh school boys accent, trying to be Picard, as well. Along comes this breathtakign piece of cinema, called Star Trek, a film that works on so many different levels, critically applauded, raking in the money, and you cunts have got to complain. There is no pleasing some people. You'd slate Lennon singing Strawberry Fields. Now Fuck Off.
-
from Firefly (as well as chase cam, etc.) Whedon said in the DVD extras that he wanted the show to resemble 70's TV. BSG reboot gets a pass since Zoic Studios worked on both. The ship Serenity appears briefly in the miniseries.
-
just baffle me. Yeah, it had flaws. But a good cast (only the most cynical couldn't enjoy Pine's performance as Kirk on some level, plus Quinto performed very admirably with an arguably even more defined character, and Urban was excellent) and a jolt of new energy pulled it off in the end. Perhaps you'd prefer to continue with films the caliber of "Nemesis" (ugh...the series borrowing from itself, and doing so badly, and worst of all, BORINGLY), or else none at all?
-
If you think Star Trek was great writing, you really have lost all credibility. That had more plot holes than a Uwe Bowl movie.
-
First off, we didn't 'blow it.' If you didn't like DS9, or the rest, take it up with Berman and co.
And as bad as Nemesis was (shudders), it was better than this Ritalin-induced piece of crap. -
"..for the new Star Trek. What I could have done with the look, the story, and the dialogue of this film? I wish JJ well, but he did not deliver here. His work with the actors, was fine work, but the movie itself was lacking in all arenas...bought critics and the rave reviews therein, notwithstanding."
Does that last sentence even make sense?
We get it, you didn't like it... but you are in the minority... for the love of God, move on to something else. -
Chris Pine does a spot on Shat imitation at the end. It is brief ... but it is definitely full on Shatner.
-
and elevated the movie in ways that we don't see often anymore.
-
"But if I read one more article about Star Trek on this site, I'm going to puke my balls through my mouth." You could, you know, NOT read the articles.. there are these little headlines on the main page... when the word "Trek" appears, why not, you know, skip over that story? God, you people....
-
I'll keep saying it until it happens. Then I will expect a collective thank you from all.
-
Denial is a powerful thing.
-
Wasn't Kirk-like at all. He basically acted like an arrogant prick throughout the movie. The only time he seemed like Kirk was in the final scene, after he'd been made captain & walked onto the bridge.
I loved the movie by the way,but I don't share the love for the way Kirk was played.
-
Is it really possible to have exciting adventures in such a utopian future? I mean, the space operas I really love - Star Wars, Starship Troopers, Firefly/Serenity, the new Battlestar Galactica TV show -are either set in a utopia that turns out to be downright sinister, or they are in worlds where any democracy is hard-won. Just a thought.
-
has credibility equivalent to Blutarsky's grade point average: "ZERO POINT ZERO"
-
will you corrupt asshats quit pushing this movie? it was decent. it had no plot. OMG they recast Star Trek. quit blowing your loads over that simple fact. regardless of how much it is or is not star trek (like 10% star trek but who the fuck actually cares really? 20 years after TNG and 3 crappy series?) regardless of how "star trek" it is the flick simply had no plot it was just dogpaddling in place for 2 hours followed by "TADA! We didn't suck!" WE GET IT ASSHOLES it was better than Van Helsing. It didn't suck balls. Grats? Now quit pushing it regardless of how many burritos Abrams is buying for your fat ass.
-
I've been watching Star Trek since the age of 9, and I grew up on TOS, own it all on DVD, watch it all the time, and this new movie was damned GOOD. if you don't agree then you need to get over yourself and learn to have fun at the movies again and stop putting an old Tv show up on a pedestal. Because the old Tv show wasn't good either. It was FUN, it was silly, and it never took itself all that seriously either.
-
"It’s not like the STAR WARS prequels where everything has to so rigidly fall into place, so by the end you feel like you already know what’s going to happen."
Puh-lese! Quint and his middle-aged OT fanboy cohorts were the ones who complained anytime some moment in the prequels didn't EXACTLY justify every throwaway line from the OT. And to complain that the prequels failed because they felt predictible in order to service Abrams is the height of fanboy revisionism. -
whining like the loose pussy he is
-
Fans and non-fans loved this first new Star Trek movie. When the second comes out people will love that too, but some will start griping, starting with bitching about Khan not being in it, or they got the wrong actor for Khan, or that there's too much or too little Khan. Anyway, mixed reviews but generally positive. Then the third will come out and some will allready be chomping at the bit to declare that JJ is beating a dead horse, and make it stop, etc. Regardless of how awesome the third one is, the anti-fanboy/anti-hype moaning will get louder and louder. Then the studios will cut the budget in half for #4 and get a new director, and while many fans will still like #4, the general moan of the fanboy chorus will be negative, citing various stupid reasons for why #4 is pure garbage. Some idiot will say it's the inverse trek curse manifesting in the alternate timeline, making all even numbered Trek sequels suck. #5 will be made and people will say meh, at least it didn't suck like the last one (even though they were both pretty good). This is fanboyism. It has litle to do with the actual movie sequels and much more to do with eager fanboys chomping at the bit the be the first to say something sucks right when most people are still saying it's awesome.
-
You people do realize these are movies, right? Not bullies who pantsed you in front of that girl you beat off to, right? Relax. You gotta learn to enjoy movies. There are no perfect movies. I don't get why it's so hard to just have fun and kick back and enjoy the good AND the bad...
-
Fire!! Pew! Pew! Beeow!!
-
Yeah.. at the end when he says: "Bones! ... Buckle up."
-
splat!
-
Why does Kirk act like a total twat during the Kobyashi Maru test. Surely he makes it obvious that he's cheated.The way I see it is that this was 'rebel' kirk.. You see, he didn't have a proper upbringing which gave him some bad traits.He still has certain innate abilities as Kirk but is a punk nonetheless.. Remember that this is an alternate timeline. In the 'original' timeline I believe Kirk had beat the Kobayashi test in a more subtle manner in keeping with a more upstanding Kirk.. Spock Prime, realizing that he has totally fucked up the timeline, does what he can to salvage the situation by giving ole baby Kirky a swift kick in the pants so-to-speak..And in the end we have a once derailed Kirk (and Spock for that matter) back on track and ready to tackle a universe without most of the Vulcans.
-
Nothing against the movie, but please when you get valuable time with these guys, could you for us, ask some tough questions, it came across like a headjob.
Talk about the challenges of a future movie, what didn't work, test the guy out a bit, challenge him, seems like a smart guy.
-
Is it really possible to have exciting adventures in such a utopian future?Yes it is. This is what Star Trek is all about. Humanity has come to terms with itself and has progressed, evolved even, past petty disputes and is now out exploring space.. It is the conflict that arises as a result of the exploration that creates the exciting adventure.
-
A match made in heaven. I don't see how people can bitch about this site giving too much space to the new Star Trek movie - precisely the exact type of flick for which AICN was created! Geez, the first decent (90-odd% positive on RT) ST flick in ages - I think this site should be putting as much related material as possible on here. And to those complaining about the JJ-Lovefest: I kind of like that this site wears its collective heart on its sleeve. What's wrong with being polite and letting an artist know you appreciate his work? This ain't Time.com; unbiased reporting isn't a prerequisite, nor should it be...
-
Yeah, really. It's like throwing red, bloody meat to a pig that's been on a two week fast.He should be careful though; he may being walking a fine line should he choose to go full-on Assimov in here...
-
Fourth post from the top. It's all fluff and no substance. The writing had so many plot holes. Didn't Abrams read this script before shooting? This was only ST in name only. Personally, I feel he took the easy way out. He had to use established characters instead of creating new ones. Pretty lazy stuff.
-
i thought the movie was a fine reboot, really the best they could hope for. sure, i had moments where i rolled my eyes and laughed, but it's a MOVIE, and i enjoyed myself watching it. one thing i have to say is, i LOVED the ships. the romulan ship was organic and appropriately "alien", and spock's ship was also very cool (tip o' the had to to ILM, i'm sure). zack quinto is a worth successor for spock, and he rules. that is all.
-
And what about those Klingon cruisers!
-
Exactly how does someone who had to watch a movie a day to "fill in gaps in my movie knowledge" qualify to determine that a movie like Star Trek has "all its faults"? An amateur is an amateur. Get out of the job if you can't do it, otherwise don't talk about shit you don't know about.
-
The accumulated filth of all their sfx and plotholes will foam up about their waists and all the fanboys and critics will look up and shout "Star Trek was GREAT!"......and I'll look down, and whisper, "No".
-
I feel gay looking at his pic though.
-
Watching the movie, I remember thinking that same thing: that moment reminded me of the infamous Shatner "Spahhhck"s we have seen over the years. It's neat to know that was intended from JJ.
-
Thank you for not fucking it up! For that, I'll always be grateful. Taking the wife & son to see it this weekend at the Bengies Drive In Dusk-Till-Dawn memorial Day thingamabob. If you're not too busy I'll save you a seat and some popcorn.
-
i enjoyed it so much i may go again
-
Pew!!! Pew pew pew beeow!!!!
-
You might be gay.
-
Turn to point... oh-five; we'll cover for you.Beeow! Pew! Pew!
-
"at the end of the movie all I wanted to do was see the next adventure of that crew..."
I felt the exact same way - I cannot wait for the next Star Trek! Thank you JJ!!! -
Or the only really noticeable ones. It isn't that Orci and Kurtzman completely blew it - it was just savvy enough to let JJ, the actors and the effects carry the film. For the sequel, however, that won't cut it. The engine room is more of a quibble, but not just a fanboy one. Too many perplexed stares: Why does the Enterprise engine room look like a brewery? Why does it look so radically different from the rest of the ship? Surely it wouldn't have cost that much more for a more plausible redress or a new set.
-
Firstly, hire a composer who can produce a memorable score, secondly, recast scotty, as one talkbacker mentioned, he was the weakest character, pegg playing pegg instead of pegg playing scotty, he's funny in his own material but not funny in someone elses, and besides, since when was scotty meant to be a joke, hes a serious minded brilliant engineer, not some daft bufoon, thirdly, make sure your final screenplay contains little to no plot holes and contrivances and fourthly and lastly a better villian next time please, eric bana had zero presence in this.
-
Let me begin by saying that I liked the new Star Trek. I even saw it twice; I took my mom and dad on Mothers Day after seeing the 7 pm showings that prior Thursday. I actually liked it more the second time because I could watch it with a less critical eye than I did when it was unrolling before me the first time. That said, even after the second time, which I enjoyed a lot more, I was still left with the impression that something was missing. Once I thought about it, it occurred to me that it was missing that certain "Roddenberry" element. It really was more Star Wars than Star Trek and in most ways that worked out well, but ultimately Star Trek differed from Star Wars in that it was supposed to be OUR future, not a fantasy epic in another galaxy. This movie is OUR future and it is grounded in the Star Trek "universe," but it was missing that optimistic, exploratory, cooperative angle that Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek had. And yes, sure, there were brief allusions to those principles (what Pike says to Kirk about the Federation and Starfleet for example) but really this was a flat out revenge, action-driven origin story. It captured the characteristics of our main cast (Kirk, Spock, et al) but it did not capture that overall sense of Roddenberry's vision of the future, at least for me. I do think, however, that this first movie will be better served in the long run if the next Star Trek movie DOES service that vision because then you can say that the first movie was just setup and we needed it to get to this space where we can fully embrace the vision of this world. IF that's the case, then this movie will still be good and will likely seem better, but if the next movie is going to be just a flat-out special effects spectacular then I think it will miss what Star Trek is and why it is different from Star Wars.
-
AsimovLives (he wants you to know HE KNOWS HIS MOVIES) Media Messiah (the irony of that name never ends)..bringing sexy back (a one gag drop kick caps lock fetus scraping) Son of Ebert (training wheels)
-
Great movie and outstanding cast. They should get Lindelof to do a Trek TV series with these guys after Lost is over.
-
Mediocre movie.
-
... "well versed in TREK", how is it they didn't even get the Stadates right?? let alone WHY doesn't it matter to Nimoy-Spock or anyone else that the past has been altered? there have been countless episodes (and STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT) that were ALL ABOUT correctin the timeline! and now everyone simply ACCEPTS it? accepts that Vulcan has been destroyed, Spock's mother killed, Kirk's father killed?? WHY??? old Spock MUST know about the slingshot effect time-travel (after all, he also knows the formula for transwarp beaming from the top of his head), so why don't they "go back... repair whatever damage's been done"?? in my humble opinion, those guys know SHIT about TREK if they make mistakes like that.
-
Longtime ST fan, especially TOS. Have to admit that during the movie, it felt fun despite the plot holes and the terrible score. Hearing our beloved characters say some of their catchphrases helped. Seeing the real Mr Spock (Nimoy aka Spock Prime) also helped during the movie....so I liked it while I watched it, despite the Star Wars feel.
After walking out and thinking about it, I decided I didn't like the movie. Forget about the plot holes and the new direction...the biggest issue with me is how JJ and the writers changed Spock Prime's character. The Spock we know would do whatever it takes to to fix the timeline and this is a basic premise starting with TOS and continuing with all of the Trek spinoffs. Instead Spock Prime is like "oh well, Vulcan blew up, guess we'll start a colony even though it is not supposed to happen". And then with this stupid JJ interview, fanboy Quint lets him off the hook for this.
I understand why they wanted to change the timeline so they didn't get into the future history trap and have every ST fanboy saying "this isn't how it happened", but introducing an original TOS character and then changing this character's moral compass? It is bad writing and it is insulting to the character. It would be like Bruce Wayne not being driven to clean up crime because of the murder of his parents. It is like Peter Parker not hearing Uncle Ben's "with great powers comes great responsibility" and his regret over not preventing his death.
Sorry, JJ, (and not that you care) but you lost me with what you did to Spock Prime.
-
Hugh Jackman is too young and too pretty boy to play Roland. We need someone who can carry a 6-7 movie series (There's no way the Gunslinger is a 2 hour movie without some serious fluffing & filler) who isnt going to be filming other 'blockbuster' films in between. Dark Tower needs to be handled like Harry Potter with all the films shot as back-to-back as possible.
-
Nitpicking are little mistakes that no one notices and faults are huge mistakes that everyone notices.
I do nitpick, I confess. But this film had major Faults, which you hear about from many reputable sources including the film's so-called fans.
It is like when Revenge of the Sith came out and there were reports of people crying during the screening, ostensibly because the film moved them so much. That film is a logical and storytelling trainwreck, filled with Special Effects and bad editing, storylines that go nowhere, bad performaces, bad writing bad directing, bad editing and anything positive were constant allusions designed to evoke a nostalgic response. And yet, it was a huge hit and seemingly critic-proof.
It doesn't make it a good film, nor does it make Star Trek a good film. The fans are just happy that Star Trek is back, or that it is now much more dumbed-down to suit mass-market summer-film expectations.
F*ck that.
Even it's staunches supporters realize the film has faults, but no one wants to piss of JJ by actually calling him on it. -
EXACTLY!
-
EXACTLY!
-
...It's a new day for Trekdom. The movie was great. If you didn't like it, go see Terminator Salvation to find out how bad a movie can actually be.
-
... to acknowledge HOW MANY TREK FANS out here have a HUGE problem with those MAJOR FAULTS. Quint, if you've never run into any critical TREK fans in the flesh, that's probably either because you don't get out much or just coincidence. BUT WE ARE THERE! AND WE HAVE A POINT! actually, we have several very valid points. so would you please not IGNORE this?
-
Please don't. Because I will go on and on about it--and I am sure everyone is as tired of it as I am.
But--in short, brand names piss on the Utopian Quality of Roddenberry's vision of the future. There is no money in the 23rd century. It has been said time and time again, so corporations make no sense, especially in light of the Post Atomic Horror that is the backstory of Star Trek--they even have the aftermath in First Contact and Enterprise (which, supposedly is still the past of this Star Trek Universe).
The filming in the Budweiser Brewery was just silly and a way to spend the money on badly edited effects rather than patch up the script of actually build sets of modular, compartmentalized rooms that would actually make sense in a Starship and could easily be redressed to be different rooms in the ship.
Either that or the Enterprise is secretly the Visitor's ship from "V"... -
Sorry--typo.
-
crappy movie...wait until its on tv and tune in 10 minutes before its over... thats all you need to see and you will not be confused.
-
Have you seen it a second time yet? I found myself liking it a whole lot more on second viewing.. Friend of mine just told me that his kid wants to see the original series because of the movie.. it at least does that for TOS.
-
I'm at the point in my life where I just can't be so anal over these things any more. I was ready to bash this movie, but I really liked it, despite its flaws. There were so many times where my rational brain said 'that's not right!', but I have more important things to occupy my brain. Now let's just take the goodness from this one, get some GOOD writers for ST2 and move along.
-
Glad that your friend's kid likes it and wants to see TOS episodes and I'm glad that you enjoyed it more the second time.
Frankly, I'm not interested in seeing it a second time in the theaters based upon how I feel about the item in my posting. If I do see it again, I'll wait for the DVD.
Cheers! -
What brands were in Star Trek? I totally missed them and I hate that shit.
-
Orci and Kurtzman found one idea of String Theory that allows for multiple realities and jumping from one to the other (or creating new realities) by time travel--and they built their whole approach to the reboot based on that. Which is fine, since it justifies their whole approach without having to have predestination paradoxes or what-have-you...but the problem is that version of String Theory is basically outmoded and is no longer supported by people who follow it--but it supports their idea on how to reboot Star Trek, so lets go with it.
So, they use that--but they don't bother to find other Astrophysical concepts that could say, provide the devastating destruction of Romulus and Remus and threaten the Galaxy (A supernova? WHA???), or think even the slightest about what a Black Hole really is versus a Wormhole versus the various ideas of what a singularity is? What about the crappy energy wave the Enterprise "surfs" at the end--when (and admittedly Star Trek has made this mistake many times in the past because it looks cool) when a powerful wave like that wouldn't even happen in the vacuum of space? Wouldn't the implosion of that much Red Matter (of which we have been shown that a single drop will destroy a planet) suck the entire quadrant of space, or at least our solar system into it's own singularity?
But, hey who cares, right?
It's not like Star Trek ever inspired people to actually, you know, look into real science or become scientists or astronauts--It is just a dumb, Sci-Fi actioner that uses the laziest storytelling devices and explosions to lull it's audience into a stupor of drooling conformity with the Oh-So-Pretty colors and simple story of Heroes and Villians.
Oh wait--that is supposed to be what Star Wars is.
Well, I guess that is what Star Trek is now--as these films take one more step towards being homogenous and interchangeable.
And why do Vuclan children know what a WHORE is? -
Nokia, Budweiser, BMW...
-
"he Spock we know would do whatever it takes to to fix the timeline"
Alright, apparently you and brightgeist didn't get it...this isn't the same timeline! That's the whole point of the supernova/black hole. No past has been altered, they are on a new timeline. I didn't think it could be anymore obvious.
And for the whiners about plot holes, this is fucking STAR TREK! Every single episode and movie is riddled with plot holes. It's the key ingredient to science FICTION. -
I swear, I cannot type.
-
In the words of Shatner, "Get a life".
It's funny how some people compare this to TOS like it's a holy grail or something. -
You captured it perfectly. Fuck the whiners
-
relative to what they actually have swallowed and even "enjoyed" in the Trek name over time.
-
his presence in this film felt like a nod to the original crew rather than a neccesity to the plot. his presence here felt tacked on to add nostalgia value to the fans. and as one talkbacker mentioned, his character is not the old spock we all know and love, he has transformed to suit the needs of the script, nimoy in this film was not nimoy in films 1 to 6, there is no way he would allow the timeline to remain as it is and just accept that vulcan has been destroyed etc. he'd find a way to resolve all the chaos caused, thats how the film should have ended, not old spock just accepting it all. picture back to the future 2, martys dad is dead, his mom is a glorified whore and biff runs everything, does marty and the doc just accept this, no they god damned fix it all. spock would have done the same, especially considering his mum and home planet were destroyed. heck even id try to fix it, and im not even educated in science.
-
you are reading my mind. every word you say I just wanted to say :-)
-
May 21, 2009 12:22:44 PM CDT
I have a suggestion for Abrams before he does the next film...
by bones
...Go onto a Submarine and an Aircraft Carrier.
No, seriously.
Go, poke around the interiors of those ships to understand what the interior spaces of the Enterprise should be like. Then think about what Roddenberry and his guys did with the original show.
They took the idea of compartmentalization, of having small rooms that are separate from each other and have pressure doors (that is what the sliding doors are supposed to be) that keep every compartment separate in case of decompression, fire, infection--whatever...Then they simplified everything into clean, aesthetically walls and forms. It might be seen today as being simple or even cheap, but it was a stylistic choice that made the future seem different than the present.
The future should look different than the present.
Matt Jefferies, who designed the look of Star Trek, theorized quite correctly, that the vacuum of space is a difficult place to work--and that the engines of the ship would be so powerful, perhaps giving off so much radiation, that there is an amazing amount of automation and telepresence to how the mechanics of the Enterprise operates. The main Engineering section was designed as more of an observation room, with a massive board that controls the various valves and kill switches that control the flow of energy to and from the ship--the main generators are separate from the room (you can see them in the distance) and the only part of the engine that is actually in the room is the Dilythium Crystal hatch because that requires a human interface.
If JJ was to go to a Nuclear Power Plant or the engine rooms of a Submarine or Aircraft Carrier, he would see, even with the pipes and controls, that it is basically "hands-off". In Star Trek, the places where an engineer could interact with actual mechanisms were called Jefferies tubes and were basically access ways and crawlspaces. The juxtaposition of these cramped mechanized areas and the wide, clean spaces where people usually worked was a hallmark of every Star Trek show and part of the Star Trek "look".
It sure as shit wasn't a brewery with random terminals placed willy-nilly. -
That would be called "Fandom".
One day you might have something that you care about, be it religion, politics, sports or even a silly TV show/Movie series that means a lot to you. -
trust me, I have a life. I'm not typing this from my mom's basement. I have my own 4-room place, my own company, I have a fiancee, and STILL I'm a TREK fan who actually CARES about details and continuity and consistency.
-
"I'm at the point in my life where I just can't be so anal over these things any more"... yes, many people these days are at that point in their lives... that point is called "dumbed down" and "brainwashed"
-
This film only compounds the problems of the Star Trek films.
Star Trek at it's best are great television episodes that challenge, inspire and entertain. -
A shout out to Zoe Saldana? The guys get all the credit here, but she managed to create a role that was strong, smart, sexy, funny and feminine without it feeling like a token thing or hackneyed girl power rah-rah bullshit. JJ and Quint spend a ton of time talking about the cast and how inportant they were, but where's Saldana's deserved kudos?
-
The cliche of the Trek fan in his parents' basement hasn't been true for two decades--except for the rare exception that seemingly proves the rule.
I mean, the idea of massively overweight Geeks with long stringy hair, a housefull of iconic collectables, whe breathe heavily and obsess over minutia as they sit in their wheelchairs railing against people who are attacking their beloved franchises--and who can only state their cases through their blogs or websites...that doesn't sound like anyone other than a Star Trek geek, does it?
;) -
She is great. Except that Uhura's role, although expanded, is for the most part reduced to either corroborating Kirk's theories or being Spock's girlfriend.
Maybe she will get to go on an away mission and kick some ass. -
Engineering was just fine as a set- a welcome departure from what's come before and an interesting aesthetic choice. Engineering is very utilitarian befitting the work that goes on there. Now Scotty can actually simulate some actual engineering getting his head and neck in the grease. It was an aesthetic choice to portray engineering as grungy. How the fucking hell are faux -paneling, neon lights, or a big plastic tube from the previous films more realistic or futuristic? They aren't douch-fucks. I can believe actual life saving, ship moving WORK goes on in an industrialised location moreso than big long warp core tube with people standing around it getting concerned.
Let's also NOW make the mistake of branding anyone opposed to this film a "Star Trek" fan. I'm 35 and have loved Trek all of my life, since the early 70's. Before some of these clowns were even born. I loved this film, so no it isn't Star Trek fans that despise this film, it's assholes. Banal, insipid, uninspired assholes. But then again, they sort of bitch about everything in every talkback don't they? As a matetr of fact, if these emo fucktards AREN'T bitching, they aren't happy. -
NOT make the mistake....regarding Star Trek "fans".
-
You're absolutely correct. She wasn't given a lot to do, I just think she deserves credit for what she managed to squeeze out of what she had to work to with.
-
even if I ignored all the scientific dumbness and all the TREK inconsistencies and all the characters that act indifferently to the altered timeline... I would still think it's dumb TREK, because there is NOT ONE moment in the entire movie that makes me THINK. there's not a single situation or predicament where I think "what would I do? what would be the RIGHT thing to do? what would be the MORAL thing to do?". there's no internal conflict to the characters. they never have to think about what might be the best thing to do, because the story doesn't even put them in situations that would require such thoughts. the only conflict is whether to follow Nero's ship to Earth or to regroup with Starfleet. and that EXTREMELY INTELLECTUAL "conflict" is solved be a fistfight and by throwing Kirk off the ship. but, you know, it would even be okay that there are no intellectually challanging situations in the story, if AT LEAST there was some sort of MSTERY. BUT THERE'S NOT EVEN THAT!
-
Why didn't he feel like a single scene in the movie had to make sense? These are the questions I'd like answered. I don't give a shit about Star Trek or "canon" but I want my money back for having to sit through such a lazy, poorly thought out and terribly executed movie. And how the hell can anyone say the cast was great when nobody had anything to do? If somebody had told me about the scene where Scotty gets carried off through a series of water-filled tubes before I bought my ticket I would have known it was a insulting sub-Transformers-level piece of dreck. What in the hell is wrong with reviews these days? There were numerous scenes in this movie, any one of which somebody could have recounted to me and made me realize it was utter garbage, but I didn't see them mentioned anywhere. Bones is right on about the set design. It was lazy. Everything about this movie was lazy. Just awful. It managed to look like it had a smaller budget than the TV shows. There were, what, 4 sets on the Enterprise and one of those was a concrete warehouse full of pipes? Fuck anybody who liked it. There have been a lot of bad movies that have gotten good reviews lately but this POS takes the fucking cake.
-
he funny thing is I don't hate JJ Abrams. I like most of his television work (Except Fringe. Passing Pseudo-Science and bullshit off as viable science in a modern day setting bugs the crap out of me). In fact, I have met him before--and his kids--and he seems like a genuinely nice guy, as well as being a real Star Wars geek. I just don't think that his mantra of making Trek into Wars does either series a service.
Look, I realize that I am in an extreme minority when it comes to liking or disliking the film--but at least I have my reasons. People who say that they like something but who cannot give a reason as to why they like it are something of a puzzle to me. Besides--anyone who reads this--I am not attacking you for liking the film. I am genuinely interested in finding out why you liked it and then crossing swords and having us go back and forth with our likes and dislikes. This way, people who read these talkbacks can see the whole picture.
And if I get heated, just shows my passion, I guess... -
Amen about Saldana. I hope she inspires a whole generation of women to be strong, smart, competent, and wear miniskirts.
-
If Star Trek serves as your moral compass and "enlightens" you, your parents failed you. Plain and simple.
Sure Star Trek couched ambiguous moral and ethical talk-points underneath the action, when you were FIVE. But Trek as an allegory for social commentary is bullshit. Or, perhaps your heads are too far up your asses to even remotely percieve the commentary inherent in this film- a film that with broadstrokes JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL SERIES, covered such I don't know, relevant and important concepts such as HEROISM, Gallantry, bravery, courage, duty, honor, kinship, friendship, destiny, interference, the futility of revenge, self-acceptance, not living in the past or in shadows, and finally selflessness, but then again, what would this Generation EMO crowd know about any of THAT shit?? -
...stop watching. You hateful TREKKIES (mostly older 30+ yr old guys with no wives...or careers) sure do spend a lot of time flooding the boards with your HATE. Interestingly, most of the TREK haters are also the same guys who flood EVERY thread with their HATE. I don't like Picasso or Dali, but I don't spit on their works. Holy cow, ranters! Can't you figure out that this world is bigger than your mother's basement and your 10-hour-a-day computer usage?
-
believe me, nothing makes me HAPPIER than a GREAT MOVIE that I can enjoy on a purely entertaining and/or intellectual level. I would have LOVED to love the new STAR TREK movie. and I am generally very accepting towards dumb, entertaining movies such as ARMAGEDDON or VAN HELSING. but there hasn't been an intellectual tv show called ARMEGADDON with several equally great spin-off series that set a STANDARD for things that call themselves ARMAGEDDON. the same goes for VAN HELSING. I don't care if those movies are silly (and, by the way, there's definitely a lot more accurate science in ARMAGEDDON than in the new STAR TREK movie). but I DO care about STAR TREK. you know, I really don't care if other people like the movie. what SUCKS is that I have been a TREK fan for at least 20 years, and I wanted to stay a TREK fan for the rest of my life, because those were always great stories to me. sure, I can still love what came before the new movie. but I can't love this new TREK anymore. and that's what I hate.
-
Wow, that does kind of shit on the original premise. totalyl didn't even think about it. Were they new logos or post-apocalypty looking at least?
-
is a comment made at trekmovie:
ety3: My only real concern with the film comes near the end when Kirk offers an olive branch, and Spock — almost jokingly — questions it. Not to get all high-minded and what-not, but isn’t Spock’s reaction antithetical to the peaceful exploration mindset that Starfleet is supposed to imbue in its members? If Spock had been flat-out angry about the olive branch, that would, at least, have made some sense, character wise. But to play it off as a joke?
BobOrci: I can understand that. Entertainment value weighs heavily there! -
May 21, 2009 1:02:32 PM CDT
I also think that people's viewpoint on this film will change...
by bones
I also think that people's viewpoint on this film will change...
Look at how overwhelmingly positive everyone was when Transformers came out...until they started to think about it. Then the whole house of cards begins to collapse under it's lack of thought or logic...and pissing robots...and horrible robot designs...and horribly staged and shot robot fights...and the fact that Megan Fox is actually given work in anything other than a Vivid Video title...
The new Star Trek works if you don't think about it, if you have nothing invested in it, if you have no opinion or love for it's subject matter, if you don't have higher standards for Star Trek than other films or franchises.
It also seems to work for people so desperate for anything new with the name Star Trek on it, who are excited to have new Star Trek glasses to collect. But on the whole, I think that it will fade from people's minds just as easy as it was for them to watch--because there isn't really much there.
Maybe Quint will talk to JJ again--and this time ask him some tougher questions--about people's dissenting opinions, the role of Nostalgia in modern cinema or why he made the choices he did in making the film. Or try to actually ask if the film was compromised by it's lack of re-writing due to the writers strike.
Lot's of things I'd like to know... -
I think they're just defending it against some perceived threat of "dorks who live in their mother's basement." You can see it in everything people say about the film. "Sure, it had its problems, but it was fun! Aren't you capable of enjoying it for what it is?" Basically, you can now pretend to be cooler than people you perceive as being all too similar to yourself (virgins who live in their mother's basement) by liking the new Star Trek movie, so people like the new Star Trek movie. I doubt there's anything more to it. Another fad driven by people's desire to not be perceived as falling into the wrong group ("Trekkies who are frothing mad about the new movie") carefully engineered by the movie studios.
-
If people like this movie. There are so many problems with it (storywise) it isn't even funny. But, I guess this movie was made for the lowest common denominator who walks around day after day in an Obama-loving haze. What lemmings we have become.
-
I didn't like Transformers when it first came out. However, I now think that it wasn't so bad. In act, it was enjoyable for what it was...even if it didn't fulfill the unreachable expectations of fat, jobless, 30+ yr old fanboys. Face it: TREK was a film that was genuinely enjoyed by a lot of moviegoers and professional critics (a VAST majority). I can't wait for the sequel! By that time, I think that you haters will be as relevant as those people who hated BATMAN BEGINS. I think that this is the best outcome of the new STAR TREK film: The old Trekkies are so irrelevant now.
-
my parents did just fine, rest assured of that. but what they taught me is, first and most importantly, to THINK FOR MYSELF. you're probably one of those people who believe everything exactly as their parents do, be it religion or politics or whatever. I tend to find materials (books, documentaries, movies, tv shows) that I find interesting and whose contents I find morally and intellectually stimulating. and YES, STAR TREK used to be one of those materials.
-
true. every word.
-
do you have anything productive to contribute?
-
then you are a bad person. That is all.
-
The vitriol some of you guys are spewing makes it hurt to be a trekkie. If you hate it, you hate it. Fine. But don't act like the rest of us MUST feel that way. I thoroughly enjoyed it, even if I did wince every time they said the stardates wrong. Saying that 40 years of established Trek themes weren't properly crammed into 2 hours is unfair, anyway. Those themes were well established when they made Star Trek V, you know.
-
I certainly don't hope you die ;-) and that's a VERY interesting point you make! that may very well be the psychological / sociological reasons behind what we're seeing right now.
-
by critics and moviegoers. Seriously. Who cares. It's about the final product. A product that has been around for some time. It has certain qualities that have made it what it is and should always be over time. This movie failed in that. It had a terrible plot hole script. Characters that strayed away from the qualities that made the characters in the first place. Too much special effects and not enough focus on character development. It's easy to channel a character that you saw onscreen. Actually being the character is something else.Also, Batman Begins is better than the Dark Knight. I might be in the minority but damn proud of it.
-
Do you realize that you TALK TOO MUCH? Get a REAL job, you useless would-be movie critic. You flood the TBs with your excessive criticism of this film. We know you didn't like it. You said so 200+ times already.
-
Your lack of understanding is really rather funny. One day, when you have a job, mortgage payments, a spouse (of either sex since this would be the future), children, pets, and a real life in balance with your entertainment interests (like the rest of us)--it will be interesting to see what your take on all of this is.
Great way to perpetuate stereotypes though, Nimrod.
Now it is time for your bottle and nap--don't forget to go change your diapers before you go out, get drunk and perpetuate your mindless date-rape youth culture.
Tool. -
from beginning to end? This applies to all genres. When movies had some fantastic tight scripts. I might have enjoyed this movie if the script had made sense. Doesn't the director read it before shooting?
-
I don't think you MUST feel the same way I do. but please, PLEASE tell my WHY it doesn't bother you that no-one in the story cares about the altered timeline. I can accept every opinion as long as someone EXPLAINES it to me in sensible words. but if you just say that you liked the movie DESPITE the fact that all the main characters are acting the way NO character in a STAR TREK story EVER acted, only because the writers needed them to be indifferent to the altered timeline in order to create the reboot, then I really do not accept your opinion.
-
You're so funny...because you are stupid. I don't have to defend my JOB, my WIFE and my LIFE to some fool who floods the TBs at AINT IT COOL NEWS with his excessive hate for this film. We know that you fools hated this film. We heard you the first couple of hundred times. Now excuse me as I get back to work...and provide for my wife. I suppose that you will continue to flood the boards with your excessive hatred...which only a small handful of your fellow HATE MONGERS even care to read. It is time to move out of your mother's basement, old man.
-
Actually if you read the talkback (this one or 41001.. either one) you would know that on second viewing I liked the movie a whole lot more.. So I take that as a no then?
-
I totally agree with you.
And Batman Begins was in my opinion a much better film than The Dark Knight--much more in line with it's comic book roots, and had one of the most interesting and believable Fantasy Cities ever put to film, that combined elements from many sources like Tim Burton's films but in a much more realistic manner.
The Dark Knight was an overlong mess that easily should have been expanded and split into two films. The Joker should have been dealt with while Dent semi-recovered and then the last shot would have been the Bar scene with Dent calling himself Two-Face, setting the stage for a whole film of Two-Face versus Batman.
Spiderman 3 had the same problem, where by trying to squeeze too much into one film, it didn't service either villain.
And I'll leave my opinion of Heath Ledger's Joker to another talkback--as people's different opinions of what The Joker's character is varies wildly.
I will say that if Ledger hadn't died, the film wouldn't have done nearly the same amount of business--and the I still hold that the best Batman film of all time is still Mask of the Phantasm, which in one film managed to accomplish the telling of Batman's origin in a more successful way than both of Nolan's Batman films. -
May 21, 2009 1:46:19 PM CDT
This sites cock sucking love for Abrams is ridiculous!
by scriptgirl_nipples
The amount of cock sucking AICN does for Abrams is insane! - Even licking the cum off your chin, to love the fucking overuse of lens glare - For Fucks Sake!
JJ's Star Trek, was a fucking shit-fest!
-
"PLEASE tell my WHY it doesn't bother you that no-one in the story cares about the altered timeline."again from trekmovie:boborci: ..going back in time is the equivalent of stepping into a parallel universe, according to current speculations based on Quantum Mechanics.
Starfleet and Spock, basing their decisions on this theory, would see that their is NO SUCH THING as “rectifying” the situation in a MULTIVERSE. -
Look Chris--
All I did was give you back what you were handing out. If you had bothered to read it, you would realize that I have all of those things too (well, no kids yet).
Relax.
Time to get back to work.
Rant at you all later. -
I want fries with that order, please. Love how people claim to have a wife, kids, and family on this site when they get their feathers ruffled. Also, love the basement line. Gee, that never gets old.
-
I liked it alot but... I had a hard time not thinking about it as..."Ultimate Star Trek" An excuse any excuse to change it up and tell the stories again.
-
Good post.
-
May 21, 2009 1:50:52 PM CDT
Even the torrent version of Star Trek, ain't doing that good.
by scriptgirl_nipples
MUST prove, how shit this film actually is.
It's not setting the box office alight, and even the pirates ain't fucking bothering! -
right! imagine (all you who like the new STAR TREK), if you can, being a JAMES BOND fan. then (in an alternate universe) CASINO ROYALE is released, and not only are the new Bond gadgets unbelievably scientifically stupid (invisible car that can also phase-shift to drive through walls unnoticed, transform into an aircraft carrier and weighs only 3 pounds), and not only does the bad guy threaten the WHOLE WORLD with a little box of off-the-shelf fireworks, BUT James Bond also doesn't give a damn about the fact that the baddie threatens to blow up England and kill Bond's mother, but instead Bond just seduces women and drinks Vodka Martinis (with everyone in the theater cheering when he says "shaken, not stirred"), because that's obviously what James Bond DOES, those things DEFINE Bond's character, RIGHT? it's not that he fights to save world or anything. no, the important thing about his character is that he drinks his Vodka Martini shaken. BUT the movie has great effects and a lot of fun and action. I'd like to know how Bond-fans would have reacted to such a film.
-
Are you jealous, old man? If you get out of the TBs, you might actually meet a girl...or guy...or whatever rocks your world. Seriously, coffee break is over. I'll check back at lunch. ;-P
-
Okay, one last post before I get back to work...
Do you mean "Ultimate Star Trek" as in the marvel comic books or "Ultimate" as in last?
Because this might very well be my last Star Trek film... -
and tonight will make five. Let's see how "Germinator: Constitpation" does this weekend.
-
okay, at least here's someone who's discussing reasonably. but, then please do explain to me why, if there "IS NO SUCH THING", Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer have all risked their lives in several episodes and movies to rectify the situation, and they also SUCCEDED! so, obviously, it is ESTABLISHED TREK SCIENCE that the situation CAN be rectified.
-
Ultimate as in Marvel. Basically somebody went..oh oh oh oh I know how we could have told that better and then comes up with a way to do it.
-
May 21, 2009 1:55:55 PM CDT
and on and on and on and on and on and on...
by glory_fades_immaxfischer
Aint it Never Ending Star Trek News
-
May 21, 2009 1:59:41 PM CDT
"JJ Why are you so awesome?" - Thats the interview
by glory_fades_immaxfischer
-
Cause i seem to be the only one to notice that little alien with scotty was one of those attacking aliens in Nemesis - the mad max ones in that pointless car chase scene. fuck i hate that film
-
"it is ESTABLISHED TREK SCIENCE that the situation CAN be rectified"I agree that it plays games with how time is handled in canon.I would say simply that if for every action that resulted in a bad outcome one could just go back in time and fix it, having a stable universe in which to work with would become less plausible. Plus you get into paradoxes.By marooning Spock in the altered/parallel timeline and keeping Vulcan's destruction it shows that any of our characters are vulnerable and it allows for a concrete universe split in which to build on.
-
the film is fucking great. the score is the best since Horner (goldsmith is in a class all his own) and who gives a fuck if they didn't fix the timeline in the end. THIS IS HOW IT IS fucking deal with it... it's fantastic. TREK IS BACK!!! you bitches seem to forget that.
-
This is what I took away from the story; the only person who knew the timeline was altered was Spock and the Romulans. To everyone else, nothing was ever changed, except realizing that they were in an alternate timeline some 30-odd years after the fact. If I were them, I wouldn’t see the point of changing what is already an established reality for me, and the rest of the universe, especially not knowing if the other one is any better. How would they change it, anyway? Nothing in their arsenal is comparable to Nero’s ship. What would they do, go back in time and get destroyed with the Kelvin? They can’t go to the future, because it would be the future of the alternate timeline, so events wouldn’t unfold the same way anyway.
As much of a science geek that I am, this is science FICTION. This has to be a parallel universe/reality (or whatever you want to call it), because otherwise neither Spock, nor the Romulans for that matter, would know it was any different than what they came from. Like in First Contact where they surmised they weren’t affected by the new timeline they saw because they were caught in the Borg’s temporal wake. That’s pseudo-science if ever I did see, and I loved that one, too. You’re asking for trouble when you do a time-travel story no matter what. But as a storytelling device, I thought it worked. And as far as characters went, we are seeing them at the beginning of their adventures together, not when they’ve already been together for a while. Maybe the second movie will flesh them out more, who knows? But the galaxy is fundamentally different for them now, what with one of the founding members of the Federation near extinction, who knows how they’ll react to things?
As a franchise, Star Trek’s always been full of plot holes and contradicting canon. I suggest you check out this video on youtube. It had me laughing so hard I cried, because it’s totally true. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1chtJQFQNs
-
It would have been much hotter to watch you guys jacking each other off instead of just reading the transcript.
-
.... a single person who didn't like trek. EVERYWHERE everyone loved it. even all over the internet. But come to aintitcool and there is this band of cocksuckers who pull apart every single fucking thing about this film. it's a champion filmi purposfully stayed away from this thread... why did i come onto it eventually? why?? none of you truely hated the film, admit it.
-
Where are the plotholes? What makes you think the script is so bad? It was excellent and I would like to debate the "holes" that keep getting mentioned but not having any valid point behind them.
-
first off, what DOES J.J. stand for? ( J.Jonah? like spiderman?) and secondly-you sir, are a cool motherfucker.I LOVE LOST-even if you don't do much with it, I liked cloverfield, I LOVED Star Trek, and you know..MI3 was okay.
So, take that! -
that was already beaten beyond recognition. JJ Penis Nose brought in a thoroughbred - a little wet around the nose to be sure, but it's a winner. On to the next race. Engage!
-
At the time Spock threw Kirk off, Kirk was still an unauthorized, unranked stowaway on the Enterprise. He was making trouble. Spock possibly knew there was a Federation base on the planet, but either way, he was competely within his rights to kick Kirk off.
-
it was fun - forgettable fun. now it is over - let's all just move on.
-
What the fuck did you losers want anyway???? What in the world would have made you happy and content. NOTHING except to exhume the original actors from the crypt and resume their 60 year old dance. NOTHING else would ease your jangled nerves, so all your criticism is worth shit.
-
The new Star Trek movie is a series of recycled scenes from Trek’s tv series and movies, committee-picked as being the most marketable moments for “fans,” packaged around state of the art special effects and the pleasurable nostalgia of seeing the reds, golds and blues back on the screen.
There is no semblance of a lucid plot. This is a movie written by people who think creativity is the ability to imitate what has come before without processing it in any way, shape or form to impart even a hint of originality of content, or respect of purpose. Orci and Kurtzman are good at what they do…but what they do is not good.
Even my non-discriminating wife (who praises ‘Independence Day’ to God Most High—shudder)—and who left the theatre saying she liked it, came back with a series of questions once the dazzle faded. And it fades fast with this movie. I wanted to like it on several levels. I couldn’t. The director kept shining lights in my eyes, wouldn’t let me see what was onscreen during action sequences, and paced the movie so that there was no time to digest anything presented. I suspect this last was extremely intentional, otherwise we would have quickly realized how little we were getting in terms of an actual cinematic meal.
It’s Star Trek. I like Star Trek a whole lot. “Art thee Wulcan, or art thee human?” has resonance for me. I do not expect Shakespeare from Star Trek. But I do hope for a little cohesiveness out of a movie within the confines of its own conventions. As pointed out by a lot of folks, you shouldn’t have to buy collateral-marketing (the comic book) in order to get the full sense of what a movie’s supposed to impart. If it ain’t on the screen, it ain’t on the screen. But there’s this “extra commentary—deleted scenes—dvd mentality” that says people won’t care in the theatres so long as they know it’ll be explained later.
The movie made no sense. The internal logic made no sense. There are no canyons in Iowa. If the canyon was meant to be man-made, slow down enough so we know that.
Here then, from what I can piece together of the whiz-bang viewing, is the creative process of Star Trek 2009:
Big battle. Kirk’s father all heroically dead and everything, sets up big shoes for son to fill. Goth Romulan wants to kill Spock but finds out he’s been thrown back in time after blasting the crap out of Starfleet ship with super Mining Vessel Digger Missile Bomb thingies. It’s a mining ship, but it’s a Romulan mining ship, so they don’t play. Let’s see, I’m thrown back in time, I’ve just seen my planet destroyed by a natural phenomenon, what do I do? I kill a Starfleet captain. Because I’m all badass-torn up inside. Kirk grows up unloved. We know this because he’s a badass kid blasting down a dirt road in a hotrod (product placement here) about to plunge off a cliff in Iowa (check Wikipidia if get chance: cliffs/gorges/canyons in Iowa?). No motivation to scene whatsoever but will be visually cool.
Everybody liked Spock-relearning scene in Voyage Home. Reuse. Make him kid though. Bridge it to lots of ‘Officer & A Gentleman”, “Top Gun” stuff, get Kirk in Starfleet. Hey, instead of coming up with plausible reason why Spock never took Kobayashi Maru test, say he created the test. Yeah. Spock uptight upperclassman instructor—but he gets the hot hot love from Uhura on the DL—WHO THE HELL SAW THAT COMING, HIGH FREAKING FIVES, WRITERS RULE! (note: make sure to bold caps), because, remember, in a couple episodes Uhura kinda teased Spock about his pitiful lack of romanticism, so here, in alternate reality, BOOM, getting it on at Starfleet. Subtle nod to fans. Yeah. Make note to self: ten thousand dollar bonus to me.
Kobi Bryant Maru: Kirk ate an apple in Wrath of Khan all cool, bum-rushing the no-win scenario and laying the Kirk wisdom on the masses; let’s get this young dude to eat an apple and be all I’m-the-shit arrogant while only taking one of Starfleet’s most important tests—hell, the thing had to count for at least a quarter of his grade—because, y’know, everybody loves the Wrath of Khan. (ironic note to self: have villain shout Spock’s name like Khan later on.) (also, redo bug/Chekov ear scene—way cool.) (also, kill Spock’s mother in way that makes no sense but, again, is visually cool; Uhura can be all “I will sympathy-do you in this turbo lift.”) (also, make fun of Chekov’s accent—people loved that “nuclear wessel” scene in Wrath of Khan.) (Hey, can we splice scenes from Wrath of Khan in to save on budget? No? Ok.)
What else do we need to show? Ok, Pike in wheelchair; Spock with the “I have been and always shall be your friend” line—that was cool, fit it in somewhere; all tag lines mandatory—hey, have we made sure that there are only cadets available to run Starfleet’s flagship yet again? Cool! Kill the red shirt but make him a doof anyway. Oh, hot green chick, definitely. We need lush, I’m talking boobs, not some waif; Kirk doesn’t do waifs. Need hot green chick. Everybody knows Kirk does green women. Note to self: cast black chick as Uhura, otherwise people might not know who black chick is supposed to be. Whoever’s available between Soft Sheen commercials.
Where were we? Dilapidated Spock. Most excellent marketing tool. Have him Obi-Wan young Kirk on Tattoine—no, Hoth—dammit, no, Ok, come up with something. Delta Vega. Coooool. Spock can see Vulcan blowed up from there. How? He’s on the planet, it’s a clear sky. Got CGI budget and Nimoy budget, need cool scene of monster chase and scene of Spock trying to justify movie. Ice planet. Makes sense as counter point to Vulcan, y’know, Dune, Arrakis, Desert Planet… Hoth. Delta Vega. I think that was a name on one of the episodes. Check with geeks to be sure.
Getting brain tired. Need pointless fight and explosions. Kirk and Spock bonding. Have him call him Jim for no reason. At end, Kirk gets ship. Roll credits.
The End…
Of Star Trek.
Brother, unless we get some writers who aren’t easily amazed at shiny things, the future looks bleak in what’s sure to be sequel-land. I went into this movie wanting it to live up to its potential the whole time. This should have been a tight character piece minus any fake-menace villain or with a real villain. Instead we got Romulans from the Mike Tyson colony trying to be Khan and his people. I waited for Eric Bana to slip and call his second in command “Joachim”—maybe even do the “for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee.”
There were enjoyable bits. But when Kirk’s father’s scenes have more heft than the rest of the entire movie—including the utter destruction of Vulvan, which came off as “eh”—a potentially memorable movie becomes an utterly forgettable one. Honestly, I’m having trouble remembering bits now a few days after the fact. The Enterprise was butt ugly inside and out. The original pants fit better than the new ones. Zoe Saldana is not fit for Nichelle Nichols’ red panties to peek under her miniskirt. The plot holes were not just ridiculous but insulting (we can energize on Kirk and Sulu hurtling to their doom, but Spock’s mother falls and can’t get up so we lose her? Scotty’s able to beam them from a planet to a ship at high warp light years away? Wouldn’t Nero’s resources have been better served trying to prevent his planet from getting sucked up again? Or did I miss that explanation in all the witty banter of Starfleet’s finest? The whole angry “Joe the Romulan” thing just wasn’t working.)
Every Star Trek movie has its share of utterly ridiculous stuff. I’m not one of those “canon” folks. I can enjoy a fluff movie like anybody else, as long as the fluff respects me in the morning. Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman didn’t respect me in the morning. They woke up loudly and kept pestering me to tell them they were great. Then they left without even offering to buy my hungry ass breakfast. You can’t riff together a movie from a bunch of other movies and tell me ta-daa! That, sirs, is not magic. You can’t arbitrarily and persistently contradict yourself just to shoehorn the kind of quick, gimme-scenes a real writer would have to actually, y’know, write themselves out of. This movie could have left the black hole/time travel gimmick at the door and started with Spock alone somewhere reading “A Tale of Two Cities”: the voiceover would have given Trekkies goosebumps and laid the groundwork for non-trekkies that a good meal was about to be served. “They were the best of times, they were the worst of times…” Spock sitting beside Kirk’s grave where Picard left him…
Fade in…
Alas… and sigh.
But, I guess, there are always possibilities.
-
its gonna be tough to get a good cast to commit to 7 epic movies, but i'm saying viggo mortensen for roland
-
Was it Khan? No. Was it a good start? Yes.
-
IT'S A MINE close enough to where they're building the enterprise to be convenient. Made perfect sense to me.
-
"WHEN HE GETS UP HERE, THAT FUCKING PRICK. IF ANYONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING OUT FOR MY GOOD NAME IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN HIM."
-
1) its the original crew, concept & universe
2) the cast is great and worthy - you can actually accept these new guys in these classic roles
3) The score is phenominally good
4) The visual effects are absolutely top notch (not one fake giveaway)
5) the ship is sexy and sleek and finally realized in it's original form
6) serious drama and intrigue - vulcan gets fucking destroyed for crying out loud! (BALLS)add to that it was romulans that did it - This is star trek at it's finest!
7) The kobieoshi maru - kirk didn't just reprograme the simulation, he challenged the reality of the programers - thinking outside the box, that is star ship captain material!!
8) Nimoy came out of retirement to give it his stamp of approval
9) a red shirt gets killed. Fucking halarious!
10) Spock and Uhura - I don't know whats going on there but i am hanging to see that plot line get developed further! the potential is incredible
11) the transporter effect is terrific - actually looks like some seriously powered technology, not just a cheap effect.
12) the old uniforms!! even pike at the end is wearing a uniform from the motion picture!
13) It's not a mere remake, it's still in line with the complete star trek universe
14) Spock is young and struggling with his human emotions and his vulcan logic. he is a stubborn prick and even lashes out at kirk. Not even the old films could have that because Spock had grown beyond it by the end of the original series run.
15) the phasers switching between stun and kill... now THAT was cool!
16) starfleet officers running and shooting in a romulan ship and it's not boring! (nemesis, im looking at you)
17) fuck... i just loved everything. and i'll debate any bullshit excuse you have for not liking this film. cause your a dick licker -
..THAT MAKES ANY SENSE IS THE SHORT SKIRTS AND ZOE SALDANA'S PRETTY ASSHOLE. OTHER THAN THAT IT'S COMPLETE ASS."
-
its fucking NOT. I said this in another talkback - there is nothing in this film that hasn't been done already in previous trek films or tv. it's been going for 40 fucking years, give it a fucking break - you guys would burn the planet if you were at a safe distance and had a button that could do it.
-
JJ: HAVE YOU SEEN THE FILM YET?
QUINT: WHAT FILM?
JJ: COOL. WATCH THE TEETH -
YOU'R A GROT. FUCK OFF.
-
YOUR LIST IS AN EPIC FAIL. PLEASE PROCEED TO THE NEAREST BATH HOUSE AND TAKE YOUR MEDICINE YOU PONCE.
-
You know it to be true
-
May 21, 2009 3:24:18 PM CDT
TITBAG: I ENJOYED STAR TREK MORE THAN MY BOYFRIEND ALLOWED
by joshuavance1701
-
May 21, 2009 3:25:31 PM CDT
TITBAG: MY BASEMENT LOOKS LIKE ENGINEERING, ONLY THERE'S SPEW EV
by joshuavance1701
-
I'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO HERE. STOP NOW AND I'LL SHOW YOU SOME FUCKING MERCY.
-
...THE TIME TRAVEL DRIVEL OR THE SHAMPOO COMMERCIAL ACTING FROM THAT NANCY-BOY WHO PLAYED KIRK.
-
PONCHUACHANCE: ANY PLANS FOR THE WEEKEND? BESIDES THE USUAL CUMBUCKET ROUTINE YOU DO EVERY FRIDAY NIGHT?
-
I'll probably go see Star Trek again since it was such a horible film, whilst everyone else is bitching about how bad Terminator sucks hopeing and praying for Transformers or G.I (snicker) Joe to save their summer, I'll do my part again to contribute to the box ofice of the BEST FUCKING MOVIE OF '09.
-
That was epic and true in every last respect. JJ, et al. haven't "reset" the Star Trek universe, they just borrowed the bits that were obvious and jumbled them up for shits and giggles. If I hear one more time that this "new" Trek universe is now free of all the "baggage" and continuity that went before, heads will start to roll. THAT SO-CALLED BAGGAGE IS WHAT TREK IS ALL ABOUT!! JJ have created nothing more than a machine to recycle and REMAKE all of the Trek that went before. We won't get anything new in a sequel to Dawson's Trek. We'll get a retread of "Khan" or "Best of Both Worlds" or any number of easily recognizable Trek tales that went before. And of fucking course, JJ is attached to "The Dark Tower." It's got the same plot as every other JJ project that he's ever been attached to - time-travel/alternate reality games. The man doesn't know how to put together a piece of filmed entertainment WITHOUT these tired crutches.
-
EVERYONE PAY ATTENTION TO ME!
-
The man is putting together filmed entertainment? In actuality, so is Stephen Sommers, Michael Bay, Uwe Bowell, and you know what? They are living their dreams, what the fuck are all the bitches on this website doing exactly? Oh that's right, a "critic", is a failure at whatever they are critiquing.
Bob Orci must laugh his fucking ass off at you clowns everytime he gets on here and hears you cunts cry, all the while, cashing his FAT FUCKING paycheck and residual. Moan away Merril, Moan away. -
what some of you morons consider a 'good' film. Shit like Saw (utter crap). The ponderous case of Benjamin Butane? What? What do you Trek defecation ranters think is good? This is going to be....fascinating.
-
This movie blows Donkey Balls!! It had no heart. Just a pile of Special Effects, which in all honesty were cool. Abrams could not do ANY better than a damn Romulan Mining Ship?? Come on dude, did he bang out this script while he was on the shitter. But Hey, His movie is gonna make $200 million plus, so who cares what I say.
-
AICN seems to have morphed into a JJ Abrams fansite. It's become incrementally more inane to the point where the blind fan worship this man receives rivals anything a cult like Heaven's Gate could come up with...
-
May 21, 2009 4:17:42 PM CDT
BTW, Terminator had no plot and barely any characters
by fa_tass_dinomolester
and was still more watchable than JJ Abrams Star Wars remake.
-
than anything in the entirety of the new SW...
-
J.J. DOING DARK TOWER. FUCKING FORGOT ABOUT THAT. KILL ME NOW.
-
There is only one that should play Roland in the Dark Tower and that is Hugh Laurie...search your feelings you know it is true.
-
...AND HAD TO CLOSE DOWN TWO WEEKS IN ORDER TO CLEAN THE CUM OFF THE RESPECTIVE REVIEWERS' MONITORS. YOU FUCKING PRICKS.
THAT'S ALL I READ FOR FUCKING WEEKS ON END WAS HOW AWESOME THIS FILM WAS. THE JIZZ WAS FLYING EVERYWHERE.
THE STEAMING PILE OF DANK MAGGOTY EXCREMENT THAT I VIEWED IN THE MOVIE THEATRE IS A TESTAMENT TO JUST HOW FAR UP JJ'S ASSHOLE YOU REVIEWERS ARE LIVING. MY GOD. AT THIS POINT THAT FUCKER BETTER BE CHARGING YOU RENT. -
My Compliments Titbag
-
...IS THE COCKSUCKING THAT'S GOING ON WITH THE NEW STALLONE FLICK.
OMFG
STALLONE SENDS HARRY OR WHOMEVER SOME JPGS THAT PEOPLE FUCKING MAGAZINE RAN THE PREVIOUS WEEK AND THE AICN TEAM IS ALREADY HAILING THE NEW STALLONE FLICK AS A FUCKING MASTERPIECE.
NO.
FUCKING.
SHAME. -
May 21, 2009 5:15:25 PM CDT
STEPHEN KING: "SAW THE NEW TREK. JJ, YOU'RE FIRED FROM DRKTOWER
by titbag
-
you think so? those aliens in NEMESIS seemed taller. also, NEMESIS was a good TREK movie. at least, unlike the new one, it dealt with VERY interesting philosophical questions that are EXTREMELY important in our world today. in essence, the movie asks "what makes a person 'good' or 'bad'? what defines who we are?". obviously, the answer is that it's NOT in the genes, because Shinzon (Picard's clone) became a "bad" person, whereas Picard became a "good" one. that seems obvious, but unfortunately most people don't seem to really understand the meaning or the consequences of that concept. essentially it means that there are no "good" or "bad" people and that ONLY our environment shapes our behavior. and when you continue along that line of thought, it means that so-called "terrorists" or "criminals" have been conditioned by their environments, their upbringing, their religions, and so on. even more importantly, it means that humans are NOT inherently greedy or power-hungry or lazy or anything else, and therefore that we could live in a money-free society, distributing the resources of the earth EQUALLY to all human beings, working just as much as is necessary to keep that system working, without any greed or power-struggles or any other aberrant behavior.
-
How the hell did I miss that? I will say that I'm certainly not opposed to it. Dark Tower, more than anything else, is the character study of a hero (Roland), and Abrams--at least more than other directors--knows how to focus on the characters. I just really hope that they find a decent actor for Roland. Clint Eastwood 40 years ago would have been perfect for the role. The only other actor I have in mind is Viggo Mortensen, and that's only because Aragorn is pretty similar to Roland in certain aspects. I can't wait to see his work in The Road.
-
two things: first, no-one is talking about changing every "bad" thing that happens by traveling back in time! there's a big difference between traveling back in time to rectify changes in the timeline, and going back in time to change things that happened the "natural" way! in STAR TREK, it has always been about keeping the timeline on its natural course. when something bad happens without any timeline-meddling, they don't go back in time and change it, because it's the natural way. but when someone has already altered time (like the Borg in FIRST CONTACT), then they go back and rectify that. and that's what they should have WANTED to do in the new movie, too. I mean, WHY don't the want to do it? there's no logical or human explanation for why they don't want to rectify the timeline, except that the writers of the story just decided that the characters simply wouldn't. and that's weak. because a writer should ALWAYS make it his or her priority to think "what would my character do next?", instead of just trying to reach a pre-set GOAL with the story, ignoring the characters and their "natural" behavior completely. and second: Spock wasn't "marooned" there at all, because he should (according to all we know) be able to come up with at least 2 ways to go back in time. there's the slingshot effect that THIS SPOCK has personally performed/witnessed at least FOUR TIMES. or, there's the Guardian of Forever. so, there's just no way around it: the writers simply did not allow Spock to do what Spock would/should/must do in the given situation. and that is BAD, BAD writing.
-
you see the HOLES now?
-
"THIS IS HOW IT IS"... I see... you're probably the type of guy who accepts EVERY story he's told with the excuse "this is how it is", no matter how stupid or unlikely. like, the bible, for example. or terrorists blew up the WTC and the the USA went to Iraq to kill Saddam, because it's all the same anyway. great!
-
that's crap what you're saying. you wanna know what would have made me happy and content? easy: a BELIEVABLE explanation for why no-one in the story wants to change back the timeline, like, say, the old Spock simply ISN'T in the story, so no-one KNOWS about the change, and everything's peachy! it's not ME who needed to have Nimoy in the movie! that was Abrams & Co. I would have been perfectly happy with an all-new cast playing the well-known characters, but the STORY has to make sense! if they just left Nimoy-Spock out, there would have been MUCH, MUCH LESS of a problem. okay, there would still be no great philosophical topics in the story, but I would have been able to love the movie as a TREK-action adventure that at least FITS in the TREK universe and doesn't piss on everything we know about established characters and their behavior in a given situation.
-
May 21, 2009 5:46:21 PM CDT
BendersShinyAss, you were right about one thing:
by fa_tass_dinomolester
"you guys would burn the planet if you were at a safe distance and had a button that could do it." Damn straight! Goodbye, dumb shit primate pricks! Goodbye!! Our species is a hemorrhoid on the ass of the universe.
-
I dont get it? He wrote First Contact, which I feel is the 2nd best movie in the series and wrote some of the BEST epi's on TNG (Brothers, Matter of Time & Unification) Im just curious as to why so many people hate on him? Thanks......
-
Star Trek is not a good, great,fun or entertaining movie.
Star Trek is just not as horrible as the rest of the shit that has come out yet. So please refrain from saying other wise. Here is a list of acceptable adjectives for describing the new Star Trek movie: arid, bromidic, characterless, cloying, colorless, commonplace, drab, drudging, dull, flat, humdrum, insipid, interminable, irksome, lifeless, monotonous, mundane, platitudinous, plebeian, prosaic, repetitious, routine, spiritless, stale, stereotyped, stodgy, stuffy, stupid, tame, tedious, tiresome, tiring, trite, unexciting, uninteresting, unvaried, vapid,and wearisome. -
wow, man... that's nice writing. best STAR TREK review I've read so far. could you please write the NEXT TREK movie? first scene: the last scene from Abrams' movie, then someone (Picard? Spock? anyone still alive in the late 25th century) wakes up in their bed and goes "thank goodness, it was just a dream!" that would be the ONLY CONCEIVABLE way that I could ever accept Abrams' STAR TREK as part of the "real" STAR TREK universe. thanks for your post, Bubba... really enjoyed reading it
-
For anyone who thinks there's too many lens flares in Star Trek, I suggest you watch one of the best-looking films ever made: Close Encounters of the Third Kind. They're about on par with each other, and Close Encounters was shot by Vilmos Zsigmond, a.k.a. The Master. Get real!
-
my favorite movies: 1. THE CROW 2. THE MATRIX 3. THE MATRIX RELOADED 4. THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS. THE CROW is simply a movie that touches me every time I watch it, I couldn't tell you exactly why. and THE MATRIX TRILOGY is great science fiction, SMART science fiction (which, of course, most people didn't GET beyond the first part).
-
Saying Trek was "what it needed to be." Is not a tangible way of stating things. I may even agree with you, but probably not int he capacity you meant it. I agree Trek was "what it needed to be" But it was nothing more than that. It was a great set-up for some great actors, but its not going down in the pantheon of genre films. Moreover I know a few Trek fans who abhor the lack of any sort of procedure,a nd no I don't mean the boring kind, just hte few things that establish that this is as much a naval vessel as it is a silly sci fi starship. The kind of procedure that gives the film and it's world meat, that its a functioning organic thing even before the story we are seeing began. Moreover the story was crap, that's just an objective fact.
-
Saying Trek was "what it needed to be." Is not a tangible way of stating things. I may even agree with you, but probably not int he capacity you meant it. I agree Trek was "what it needed to be" But it was nothing more than that. It was a great set-up for some great actors, but its not going down in the pantheon of genre films. Moreover I know a few Trek fans who abhor the lack of any sort of procedure,a nd no I don't mean the boring kind, just hte few things that establish that this is as much a naval vessel as it is a silly sci fi starship. The kind of procedure that gives the film and it's world meat, that its a functioning organic thing even before the story we are seeing began. Moreover the story was crap, that's just an objective fact.
-
okay... THE DARK TOWER is my FAVORITE BOOK (series) EVER. but, you know, as much as I think JJ's STAR TREK sucks, I still think JJ Abrams is a very good director. the problems in STAR TREK are ALL about the story. sure, I don't know how a director can not have enough influence on the story of the movie he's directing to avoid such stupidity as in STAR TREK. but I don't know, maybe for some reason he wasn't in the position to say "hey, does this really make sense? couldn't you guys write something more intelligent, and by the way, why don't they try to rectify the timeline?" maybe he just didn't really care. all I think I see in STAR TREK is that the story sucks and the director rocks. I mean, I LOVE LOST, M:I:III is pretty good, I like FRINGE a lot, and STAR TREK is (as far as I can judge) very well directed. so, as long as Orci and the other guy don't write the script for THE DARK TOWER, there's still hope. even if they do, I don't think King would allow them to fuck it up. at least that's what I WANT to believe. they just CAN'T fuck up THE DARK TOWER. they mussn't. please. PLEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAASE!!!
-
i wouldnt say it was "good" but it was definitely not as shitty as JJ's
-
Sorry but its true.
His ideas for Superman alone should have had him banned from hollywood.Armageddon,Alias, Lost, Star Trek....all shit. What do people see in this guy?? -
at least NEMESIS had ambition to SAY something. JJ's "TREK" doesn't even try to speak, it just phasers and punches and screams.
-
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Jar Jar Abrams... I know I'll never get that one out of my head again, LOL :-D
-
First of all Devin from C.H.U.D. already posted a great list of five continuity errors so you can go read those but i won't repost them here. I'll just talk about the ones in the film. First and foremost is SPock somehow miscalculating when the supernova was going to hit Vulcan. It's a fucking supernova, they take millions of years to occur. You would pretty much know when that was gonna happen. How the fuck did SPock simply not know when the thing was gonna hit Vulcan?How come the only survivors of the planet Vulcan were on some random mining vessel when the Vulcans have LOOOONG had limitless space travel? Was it some sort of Vulcan religious holiday when that supernova hit and everyone just flatly refused to leave? Give me a fucking break Then there is the concept of Red Matter. It's not a plot hole so much as a ridiculous macguffiny thing that is given absolutely zero explanation. It's just a lazy lazy lazy plot device from the same douche bags who brought you the "Rabbits Foot" in MI3. why do black holes suddenly allow people to time travel? Does that mean Vulcan just time traveled somewhere else? How come when Nero time travels he magically comes out at the exact time, in the exact place, that the ONE GUY who could possibly defeat him in the future is about to be born? That's an awfully fateful occurence. You would almost say the force willed it. If Nero was just flying around space doing nothing for 25 years how did he just HAPPEN to be waiting for Spock when he came out of that black hole at a totally undetermined time? Once again fateful. Unless he had been waiting for a while by the black hole for Spock to come out, but then wouldn't the federation have noticed and been like "Hey that's that ship that destroyed one of ours totally unprovoked, let's go do something about that."? After all I assume they would be monitoring the place where a black hole just spontenously appeared and then a massive murdering ship came out How the hell does a random Romulan mining vessel have enough firepower and military skills to take out the entire Starfleet federation? It's like an oil rig taking out the U.S. Military.
Convenient that on the entire surface of this ice planet Kirk stumbles into the cave where SPock happens to be. There's that fate again
Ditto for the remote station Montgoemery Scott happens to be stayingWhy would Nero maroon SPock on a planet he knows nothing about? You'd think a guy THAT desperate for revenge would say "I want you right here next to me so I can see your face while I destroy your planet....then I'll kill you."
I know I've thought of/heard more, but this will do for now and it gets m point across. I expect a lot of apologizing and very little actual explaining. -
To Fortune Fools queries. I think most of them are sound. SOme things can be ignored I agree. But you TOTALLY and ridiculously apologized for hte SPock cave stuff. First of all Spock was shot to that planet by Nero, not on his own volition. Moreover he wouldnt have the slightest idea Kirk would ever be there since none of the event int his film even have a reasonable facsimile in Old SPock's timeline. There is just no excuse for any of that. Like I said man none of this is a total dealbreaker in my enjoyment of the film, I did enjoy it, but Im realisitc about how good an actual film it was. A better tact than apologizing for plot holes would be to talk about how great the cast was and how immersive the visuals could be.
-
Star Trek on no 1 spot again!!
Star Trek has now more visitors in 2 weeks as Wolverine in 3 weeks.
Why? because of good word of mouth!! The movie was great and as a Star Trek fan I enjoyed every minute of it!!You haters have to much bandwidth on this site. You are a minority!! PLOT HOLES? Who give a shit!! Shut up and crawl back in your holes with your Star Trek TOS VHS tapes. -
Roland Deschain - Hugh Laurie
Eddie Dean - Edward Norton
Susannah Dean - Alfre Woodard (Lily from Star Trek First Contact) if she isn't too old now
Jake Chambers - Not sure
Oy - CGI
Father Callahan - James Cromwell
-
Thanks lostbat, thats the only evidence I need that you're a complete douche bag.
-
my favorite movies: 1. THE CROW 2. THE MATRIX 3. THE MATRIX RELOADED 4. THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS. THE CROW is simply a movie that touches me every time I watch it, """I couldn't tell you exactly why. and THE MATRIX TRILOGY is great science fiction, SMART science fiction (which, of course, most people didn't GET beyond the first part)."""""" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
JERK OF THE DAY!!! -
He's deluded himself into thinking nobody likes the movie when it has fantastic reviews and made a shit ton of cash. But everybody hates it. Right. You're a fucking idiot and your name is awfully stupid. Cheers, fuckface. Also, good to see Quint throwing in his random editorializing bashing the prequels in every single interview he ever does. Guy can't help but mention it, can he? Fucker has a psychotic compulsion.
-
Get a life or get laid!! You need that!!
-
Hugh Laurie isnt a bad choice for Roland. Lately I've been re-watching Dexter and thinking James Remar would be good for old long, tall, and ugly.
-
you are quite easily entertained, aren't you?
-
Does anybody know how much longer Lost is going to last?
-
and since you don't give a shit about plotholes, please humor me and tell me what exactly makes a movie GOOD in your eyes?
-
"...AND THOSE TREK BOBBLEHEADS ARE MORE FUN THAN THAT FUCKING ABORTION OF A MOVIE. WE REINACTED THE ENTIRE FILM, BUT IN OURS IT'S NOT A SUPERNOVA BUT A GIANT SPACE COCK THAT'S HUNTING A SHAMPOO COMERCIAL ACTOR KNOWN AS KIRK.
OF COURSE, WE FIRED THAT PRICK SPOCKBOBBLEHEAD HALF-WAY INTO THE FIRST SCENE. FUCKER.
COMERCIAL ACTOR KNOWN AS KIRK.
ANYWAY, TRY THEM OUT!" -
I apologize for my reaction..but if you state that the Matrix 2 and 3 are outstanding movies and good science fiction and that most of us didn't get that......then U make me laugh..
-
you're right about a lot of things, but on some accounts I actually have to defend JJ's STAR TREK. 1. the supernova destroyed Romulus, not Vulcan. but you're right about the rest of the supernova stuff. 2. Spock (Quinto) knew that there was a Federation station a few miles from the spot where he dropped Kirk.
-
I know the plot relied too heavily on coincidence, but I don't care because it was entertaining and the characters were well written. Most Trek plots are nonsense, as is the science. Why this movie gets picked on for science and plot holes I'll never know.
-
"but Im realisitc about how good an actual film it was."...
No, you're realistic about how much you enjoyed the film. You don't expect me to substitute your judgment for mine, do you? Plot holes, sure! Still enjoyed the hell out of it, and if you didn't, it doesn't make it a mediocre or poor film. Personal taste. Pick another movie to nitpick please... -
I don't have a recipe for that...
A good movie is a movie that gives me value for my money. It has to touch me and keep me entertained...... -
plot holes you could fly the entire Federation fleet through. BTW, I notice Abrams and Friends don't seem to realize the difference the Federation and Starfleet, and think they're interchangeable. That's like confusing the United States with the US Navy (and/or NASA). Figures.
-
I agree with all of those reasons! Awesome!
-
right. I don't care about money, but I too want to be touched and entertained by a movie. but in order to be entertained, and even more so in order to be touched by a movie, I need to be able to suspend my disbelief. and JJ's STAR TREK didn't allow me to do that for more than a few minutes at a time, before another hole or science stupidity or STAR TREK incontinuity pulled me back out of the movie. maybe you're the lucky one here, because you don't think about what you see. ignorance is bliss, I guess. and still, I'm happy not to be ignorant. it may ruin a few movies for me, but at least I know my brain is still working.
-
as these Star Trek TB's...what a whining bunch of humorless fucking loser haters and flat out drooling retards (Titbag, your posts scream only PLEASE IGNORE ME)..which of course we do
-
YOU COULDN'T EVEN IGNORE ME IN YOUR LAME FUCKING PATHETIC EXUSE FOR A SMACKDOWN YOU WORTHLESS CUNT.
I'D LEAVE NOW BEFORE YOU HURT YOURSELF. -
...ABOUT GOD KNOWS WHAT AS USUAL.
-
remake this scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avTfiRccYIA
-
May 21, 2009 8:13:10 PM CDT
Why did I get banned for a SG reference, and not TITBAG?
by doctorzoidberg
-
Probably THE stupidest person here at AICN, and that's saying something.
-
MORONS UNITED! SOME FUNNY SHIT! IT'S LIKE SEEING OZZY FIGHTING w/ GENE SIMMONS OVER WHO SNORTED MORE BLOW OFF THE BACK OF MORE HOOKERS. WOWEE LOOKEEEEEEEEEEEE
-
fucksake. really??
-
FUCK ALL HATERS. FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
Oh, and HUGH JACKMAN IS ROLAND!!!!! -
Every time I mention Vulcan in the plot hole post just pretend it says Romulus. Good catch brightgeist,
-
Enjoyment is far more subjective. Quality can be measured at least as far as technical points are concerned. And I think any good writer would tell you the Star Trek script, in many places, is damn near incompetent. Your enjoyment of something does not make it good.
-
I was simply pointing people toward other sources of writing mistakes. His list, like him or not, does in FACT point out many inarguable continuity errors.
-
Last thing the Dark Tower needs is Hugh Jackoff Van Helsing as Rollen.
-
This crappy talkback needs an edit button...damn you to hell Harry Knowles!
-
..OR SIT THROUGH TERMINATOR SALVATION 100X BEFORE VIEWING THE HOPELESS ROTTING GAY ASS-RAPED CORPSE THAT IS THE NEW TREK.
-
..FINGERNAILS SCRAPING ON A CHALKBOARD. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. HAS THERE EVER BEEN A WORSE AFFECTED ACCENT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA? NO, THERE FUCKWELL HASN'T.
I KEPT HOPING AGAINST HOPE THAT SOMEONE WOULD TAKE A MAKITA DRILL TO MY TEMPLE DURING HIS SCENES IN ORDER TO PUT ME OUT OF MY MISERY. BUT, ALAS, IT NEVER HAPPENED.
AT LEAST HIS SCENES WERE MERCIFULLY SHORT. -
...I ACTUALLY LAUGHED OUT LOUD IN THE THEATER.
BLACK HOLE, INDEED. FUCK YOU. -
eddie dean:colin farrell, susannah: zoe saldana, the man in black:stuart townsend, he already hates viggo for replacing him in LOTR
-
REDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTERREDMATTER
NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES I SAY IT, IT STILL DOESN'T GET ANY LESS RIDICULOUS AND OUTRIGHT INSULTINGLY LAZY. -
i guess im in the minority here but i loved the movie. the plot holes dont bother me for some reason. i didnt watch the film just to pick it apart and look for errors. david lynch doesnt explain and spoon feed the audience every background detail in his films either and i love his work. im laughing at all the j.j. hate. i would never waste so much time picking apart a film and director i hated like you guys do. i didnt go into this movie to scrutinize every detail, i just wanted to see the trek universe on the big screen and i was really entertained. trek has always had plot holes. this movie was pure trek and im sorry if you guys dont see that.
-
Okay fine, you're getting a sequel. Now get some real fucking writers and make Kirk's character actually worth a damn, not just captain Cheaty Mc'Hang from stuff who gets everything handed to him by the script. I'm actually attentive in theater, even when the film being projected has explosions; I'm sorry most of your fans aren't.
Also, If I knew they were going to take the guts of a series I loved since a kid and stuffed it into a bone-headed Michael Bay suck'fest, I wouldn't have put my money down. Seriously JJ, I'd love to have that $35.00 back. You can ask IMAX to share in the cost for suckering me into a fake IMAX experience if you like.
-
...because shit actually happened and they didn't just stand around having tea and talking about space math. I knew the movie would piss of a lot of people though, but The Onion was right on the money.
-
You want bad story? Go watch ONE fucking episode of DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise.
And OT (Original Trek) apologists need to shut their mouths about this subject...it's not like any of the Treks before had blow-your-mind stories, save Khan (which, in essence was a revenge tale, but at least it was a revenge tale with balls). MP was about a fucking satellite, Voyage was about humpback fucking whales....jesus, I'll stop there.
Get over it and stop the damn nitpicking, the new Trek was amazing and the story was epic. -
May 21, 2009 11:22:39 PM CDT
"stand around having tea and talking about space math"
by industrykiller!
I want to preface this by saying I am not, nor have I ever been, a Trekkie. But I really feel for those who are because it looks like JJ has handed their franchise to the douche bags on a silver platter. I cannot believe how fucking callous and stupid some people are. I get it, you didn't like Star Trek, it was over your head and the pacing wasn't to your liking. Well guess what, you've got a lot of fucking alternatives. Why does everything have to be for you? Why do you covet something and want to change it when its meant so much to so many other people? It's the same thing with people who liked Wolverine. You want something watered down and homogenized for the masses? I'm sure that version is out there somewhere so go find it. Seriously go watch a Michael bay film you fucking imbecile and leave those of us who are actual fans of quality with our art. And first and foremost, get the fuck off this site, as YOU are the problem with the cinema of today. These people are fucking disgusting.
-
Seriously is this the best the apologists have? THIS fucking cretin?
-
May 21, 2009 11:32:03 PM CDT
killer, we may not agree on the movie but i like your moxie
by mr. smith
but the the slapfighting beatdown fanboy fascism is pretty disheartening. ah, well. htat's why i don't speak up much.
-
if you wish. damn lack of edit mode.
-
how did you get past the inarguable plotholes of matter transportation and faster-than-light travel?
just kidding. yer okay kid. -
really, really Jewish.
-
That's kinda how it felt, with all the good looking perfect people, Spock as a pimp, but I liked it overall and the characters should get better. As far as The Dark Tower goes, Steve Buscemi would've been a perfect Eddie Dean when he was younger.
-
Ok, plenty of stuff to nitpick on.. But a most interesting, enjoyable, well-made film.. in my oponion. Thanx JJ & Quint.. keep up the cool !
-
i've got to give you respect. your objective is admirable. yes, sometimes the folks in the moviemaking biz do sometimes read this. and a difference can be made. you actually provide arguments to make your case, unlike, say, the tourette's-addled rantings of a toerag who just want to take a piss on someone for enjoying a movie. there ARE other options out there, for all of us. so you have my apology for the devlin crack. reasonable people can agree to disagree and sometimes meet in the middle. as for the movie, my criteria for an enjoyable time at a star trek movie is no doubt more lax than yours or some others on this site. take for example, wolverine. to me, the movie looks like ass. i'll see it eventually, i'm sure. but i won't begrudge the 18 year old with a wolvie hairdo who's completely ecstatic about the film. to each his own. so keep fighting the good fight, there'll be something in the goodie bag of upcoming movies for you, i'm sure. cheers.
-
It was a great time and the actors did a fine job. Abrams can keep his other shit house shitty shit, but he did good with this one. Nice overall development and the story was pretty good. The space scenes were kick ass too. Alot of people complained about Eric Bana's character but I thought it played out well and he was far more ruthless than people are saying. If you haven't....go see it.
-
One of the great joys of watching science fantasy like Trek is starting with the *axiom* that there are no continuity errors. What the characters say is correct and what their engineers do is the most rational course of action under the circumstances. So any time you *think* you see a continuity error, you treat it as a challenge to your imagination to explain it away with the minimum required additions to known physics and lore.
-
Side by side comparison of Jar Jar's Star Trek and Star Wars.
http://tinyurl.com/p26p 7f
Collage Humor video -
Side by side comparison of Jar Jar's Star Trek and Star Wars.
http://tinyurl.com/p26p 7f
Collage Humor video -
Star Trek is extending it's release 120 screens, no doubt to accomodate the sell out showings. I said EXTENDING as in adding showings. Hows about dem apples? You cock sucking uninspired pedestriant minded fuck-faces. Eat on that with your Watchmen and Wolverine AND Abominator assholes.
-
193 screen count increase.
Now you may kindly burn and rot in hell. -
is spot on! They didn't reboot Star Trek, they simply remade Trek with a Star Wars template. Star Trek is suppose to be challenging to the imagination and the intelligence. This was simply a popcorn flick. Americans love popcorn flicks so it's no surprise that its doing well in the summer. The rest of the world aint blown away! Making Star Trek into something it was never meant to be just to make more money is called selling out your integrity. JJ regressed the entire ideal and concept of Trek to a teen popcorn flick and Fans are ok with that? I guess most ST fans simply never really grasped what was unique and challenging about Gene Rodenberry's creation to make it what it was in the first place. It certainly wasn't about turning every character into a caricature or making the one Alien on the ship even more human than the rest of the cast! Spock is supposed to wear his humanity as an embarrassment, in this film he wears it on his sleeve! Why? becasue Kirks dad died fighting a ship from the future? What kind of ridiculous time story makes one ship being destroyed a ripple that changes the entire universe to that extent? Contrived Bollocks for people who want a quick laugh and a coke, not challenging sci-fi in one iota!
-
"I want to preface..." Righteous rant! Absolutely agree.
-
Did you fucking people ever even WATCH Star Trek? It might help you know having an informed opinion about a subject before shit oozes from your mouth.
Star Trek is above and beyond an adventure flick and action spectacle? Um. Fuck you turd heads.
Obsession , A Private little war, The Enteprise Incident, The Omega Glory, Operation:Annihilate, Assignment: Earth, The Savage Curtain, Where no man has gone before, The Galileo Seven, Mirror Mirror, A piece of the action, The Devil in the dark, The Doomsday Machine, The ultimate computer, holy shit you people clearly don't know your Star Trek, or maybe as i said vaginas are sandy because we don't have to put up with anymore of that Picard, Janeway Papsmear shit. God bless. -
I'm not going to apologize for Trek. Or for Wolverine. Or for any other movie you have mentioned. I just want to point out that you have this habit of getting on a high horse about populist film being pablum and yet I recall you being a HUGE TDK apologist when I made some of the exact same points you're making about Trek. Call the kettle black much? Your anti-populist tirades are ridiculous. Go throw on some skinny jeans, a sweater-vest, and listen to Iron & Wine or watch some Jim Jarmusch "quality" independent cinema. Or whatever it is you think you have to do to prove how much "smarter" you are than the average movie viewer. Even if you ARE (and I don't doubt it, you actually sometimes make cogent points), the fact that you're so desperate to point it out is pretty f'n sad.
-
I'm sorry you feel that quality science fiction has to be macho sexist claptrap.
-
No really I do. To a degree you have me pegged. Hell, you might have me all pegged. That doesn't mean I'm wrong. Movies are important to me. Vitally important. I honestly don't know what I, personally, would do without them. And I want them to be the best they can be. And I'm not really ranting against anything that has always been. I mean yeah bad movies have always been, but you just cannot look at films of the 80's and say genre filmmaking was the exclusive domain of the sub-jock asshole. In other words I'm not taking arms against the color blue or wood or something. And I'm not going to shut my brain off during an action film because it carries the monkier "action" before it does film. I just fucking won't. The two DO NOT have to be mutually exclusive. And once upon a time there were directors who would meet with me on my level on that and beyond. Or for God sakes would at least TRY. These guys today commit the worst cardinal sin of filmmaking. They don't care. Well if you don't care then fuck you. You can not read a Kurtzman and Orci script and say they care, I mean really really care. Seriously man read the Transformers script. These guys are cynical assholes, maybe not in their day to day lives, but when they take up the pen watch out. To me that's just disgusting. To leech unflinchingly off something that means so much to so many people. To sell everything that could be out for a quick buck. With that said I will also never separate the sick symbiotic relationship between studio and audience. What exactly IS that relationship nowadays? "Hey peeps here's a deal, you shut off your brain during our shitty films and we'll keep making them incrementally shittier until you literally have no idea what your brain is attempting to comprehend?" At what point is it up to the audience to say no more?? I can't say for sure but I'm pretty sure we've reached it. When people who are posting on a movie forum on a movie website about movies and they lack the fundamental ability to quantify ANY sort of quality that could produce SOME sort of tangible argument I'm going to hold them accountable.I thought my Dark Knight points were well supported, and I still say MOST of our difference of opinion comes down to Goyers overrated mess Batman Begins being our launching pad....but I digress.
-
Must take lessons from the Larry King school of interviewing.
But anyway, Abrams Trek is better than most Trek flicks. I just don't understand all of the love for Pine. He was adequate and that's about it. -
it is the best of TREK movies, it is the worst of TREK movies. I think we have now established that some people love the movie despite its gigantic shortcomings, while other people hate the movie despite its gigantic entertainment value. in the end, all of this tells us a lot about the movie, but it tells us MUCH MORE about the people in the audience. sure, you can call us (the ones who don't like the movie) "anal" or whatever you want. but the fact is, we are not the ones who simply accept (or even enjoy) it when filmmakers treat us like morons. we actually want a movie to make sense (within the confines of its film-universe). if you liked JJ's STAR TREK it doesn't mean that you're a bad person or a stupid person, but it does say alot about you. you're probably not someone who cares a lot about scientific truth in your life. you probably don't read much, and you probably watch a lot of television. you're probably not very critical about the kind of society we live in. most likely, you simply want to enjoy your life, without any ambition to improve the world around you. sure, you're in the majority these days. but that really, REALLY doesn't mean you're right.
-
Scientific truth? From a Star Trek film? From entertainment medium in general? Star Trek represented a pursuit of scientific truth WHEN exactly during the last 40 years? I'd say the notion Star Trek somehow represents a legitimate sincere pursuit of scientific "truth" pretty much sums it up. Star Trek as originally envisioned conceptually represented wagon train to the stars- and the new film captured the spirit and creed of that concept MAGNIFICENTLY. You guys down the script and pseudo-intellectual scientific inconsistencies, and completely miss the forest for the trees with your incessant whining about something Trek never even represented. There was more emotional resonance and celebrating of the God damn human condition in all it's idealistic nobility than 8 out of 10 movies you people can even NAME, I guaranfuckingtee that.
It's no different than the Prequel trilogy shit, just because you have projected your own self-deluded notions on what constitutes Trek onto this new film in NO way shape or form reflects on what Star Trek embodies or represents. If you want a two hour presentation on "the pursuit of scientific truth" go watch your God damn reel to reel 9th grade science film strip. There's not a fucking thing in this film that departs from the previous film or series extrapolation on current scientific dogma, not a fucking thing. Maybe quantum theory is simply too adult and high brow a concept for some of you to fathom so naturally there are "glaring plot holes." The only glaring holes I see is in some of your parabolic short-sighted half-ass reasoning. If you want a treatise on science go watch fucking NOVA or read some Stephen Hawking. -
I did not in any way connect "scientific truth" with the STAR TREK movie. maybe you should read my post once more (with brain switched ON), and then have another go on a response. everyone deserves a second chance ;-)
-
it isn't that I didn't read your post right, you simply didn't articulate it right. But now since I've corrected you , you may infact remedy your glaring hyperbole hole.
-
Good catch...that video nails the bitch.
We now return you to the TalkBack already in progress:
"Slurp! Slurp! Mmm...Jar Jar Abrams cock tastes SO-O-O-O good!" -
since you have apparently heard the "wagon train to the stars" thing somewhere, and now claim that the new film captured the spirit and creed of that concept magnificently... please explain to me what that concept means to you. because to me, it means primarily the "exploration of unknown places and societies". or, as someone once said it "to explore strange, new worlds. to seek out new life and new civilizations". now, you HAVE TO mean something else when you speak of "wagon train to the stars", because I did not see ANY exploring of strange new worlds, new life or new civilizations in the new STAR TREK movie. or did I miss something? all I remember are fistfights, phaser shootouts, starship battles and funny or intense character scenes. where, exactly, was the exploring? in your eyes, is Kirk being chased by creatures on a planet very close to Vulcan "exploring strange new worlds and new life"? if I'm not mistaken, that Delta Vega was the ONLY planet, except for Earth, Vulcan and Romulus, in the entire movie. but if those two "monsters" on that ice planet satisfied your desire for exploration of new life on strange new worlds in a STAR TREK movie, then I thank you for proving my point.
-
you go on and on about how STAR TREK has never been about scientific truth, when all I said was that people who like this movie probably don't care a lot about scientific truth in their lives. that statement may be too complicated for you to understand, but it really doesn't mean that STAR TREK has always represented scientific truth in the past. if you're unable to process such complex thoughts in your mind, then I thank you again for proving my point.
-
I know you are just bullshitting me now right? Because fist-fights, phaser battles, starship battles, and funny intense character scenes are brand new concepts for Trek right? I mean, it isn't like every FUCKING EPISODE MADE didn't feature those premises? God almighty are you THAT desperate to cling to a reason to hate a movie?
Exploration and strange new worlds? A. It's a prequel that fucking sets everything up so that the crew can INFACT explore new worlds. B. The film in broad strokes as so many other Trek films did touch upon an extrapolated scientific concept- in this case quantum parallel universes and a multi-verse. That's not your cup of tea? Didn't agree with the presentation of said concept? Fine, but you only make yourself look like an uninformed moron posting blanket statements, entirely erroneous blanket statements at that.
If it's endless discussion of anomolies and rerouting conduits you want, dude you have HOW MANY hours of Voyager to sift through? -
I actually prefer the STAR WARS prequels to the original trilogy, because the prequels had a lot more interesting philosophical and socialogical concepts.
-
How's this for a blanket statement- for those who enjoyed this film to not care alot about scientific "truths." I'm a statician with a Psych degree from the University of Louisville. What do you got exactly? A couple University of Pheonix online courses? Fucking putz. God it kills me how kids watch just enough discovery channel to get themselves in trouble.
-
YOU SAID that the new movie captured the "wagon train to the stars" concept magnificently. I only asked you WHERE you think it did that.
-
the entire two hour running time you know? Wagon Train to the stars being high adventure and a film that starts off with a bang and doesnt let up I'd categorically define as wagon train to the stars. Do you need everything spelled out for you or what? There is something to be said for extrapolating you know.
-
My handle is my AIM ID, open for all the world to see, I love talking film so, go for it.
-
I'm sure you are aware that Psychology is not at all accepted to be "natural science", right? so you having a Psych degree doesn't really mean anything. as you can probably read from my less-than-perfect English, I'm not from the USA but from Austria (that's not Australia, but a little country in Europe), so my academic degree is a little difficult to translate directly to your language or academic system. but I finished a school for electrical engineering with an "engineer" degree, and then a MutliMedia university/college with a "graduate engineer" degree. I'd say that's more "natural science" than a Psych degree, wouldn't you? also, I'm not a kid, I'm 33 years old, so I'd be curious who's the "little man" here.
-
okay, if that's your definition for "wagon train to the stars", that's your problem. but I think most people would define it more in the direction of exploration. I mean, you do know where the term "wagon train" originally came from, right? it wasn't "high adventure and a bang", but it was the exploration of unknown territories. so your definition may be lacking.
-
that's supposed to be "MultiMedia"
-
never used it, if you have a Skype handle we can talk :-)
-
There are hours upon hours of drivel such as Voyager for you to sift through. If you simply enjoy playing devils advocate for the sake of debate I don't have the time or desire for that, that's an endless slippery slope of back and forth panderings.
I'm also sure you would agree Behavioral sciences employ the scientific method just as much as natural science, probably moreso given the dogmatic rigidity held simply to maintain university grants.
My definition of wagon train to the stars works just fine for me in the context of which it was originally intended, since exploration of wild untamed lands was often you know, adventurous.
Don't be concerned, you are still permitted to have fun despite having a mundane career, don't let anyoen tell you otherwise. You are projecting far too much and embodying far too much cognitive dissonance regarding this film. It manifests quite clearly. You are allowed to enjoy the film, no one will think differently of you I assure you. -
Watch "Where no man has gone before, The Tholian Web, The Enterprise Incident, Errand of Mercy, Devil in the Dark, This side of Paradise, and the Ultimate computer", then watch the new Trek film, THEN we will talk. If you can watch those episodes and find a discrepancy with the new film in content, characterisation, humor, intrigue, dynamics, and character interactions, then I admit to being mistaken and wrong. You and others downing this film wouldn't be uninformed, you would be intellectually disingenuous.
-
1. natural science and "dogmatic" don't really fit together, wouldn't you say? natural science is about discovering better models of describing the world, and in the process dropping older and less accurate models. but, yes, to a degree I agree that behavioral sciences do employ the scientific method, so I am generally inclined to respect your opinions ;-) 2. I really do not think that my job is more mundane than that of a statician. I work as a camera man, editor and visual effects guy in a small team of filmmakers here in Austria. for example, yesterday, today and tomorrow we are producing the official video for Austria's biggest oldtimer race. yesterday, I had the chance to shoot some footage from the co-pilot seat of a 1958 Mercedes Benz 300 SL-S during the 5 laps of the race, going at speeds of over 100 mph through the inner city of Salzburg. what exciting activities did your job as a statician allow you lately? 3. I really don't care what ANYONE thinks about me, especially in regard to what movies I like. I LOVE silly fare like ARMAGEDDON, VAN HELSING and TRANSFORMERS, and I say so without any shame. but I simply can't enjoy the new STAR TREK because it insults my intelligence and my being a TREK fan. 4. yes, of course there are TOS episodes that are no more intellectual than the new movie. honestly, TOS is my least favorite TREK show. in my eyes, STAR TREK improved greatly after TOS, beginning with TNG, which really perfected the concept of intellectual, critical, philosophical, sociological topics in the TREK stories. and JJ's TREK is definitely a fall-back to the most brainless, adventure-oriented TOS episodes. it may well be that STAR TREK began as mostly brainless adventure, but it EVOLVED over the years and became SO MUCH MORE, and THAT'S what made me a TREK fan. as a kid, TOS was fun to watch. but as I grew and learned, so did STAR TREK (TNG, DS9, VOY). and now TREK has became what it may have been in the beginning, but that's not enough for me anymore! I neither can nor wish to develop backwards in my life. and this isn't even so much about any scientific knowledge, than rather about what I expect from entertainment. I don't want to be insulted by writers. and when writers expect me to simply ACCEPT that a character that has been establishes for DECADES (Spock) now suddenly doesn't care if the timeline has been altered (to the extreme WORSE), then I feel insulted.
-
I watched my new blu-ray version of "where no man has gone before" last week, and I agree with you that it's not really any more intellectual than the new movie. also, it's not exactly believable scientifically, with the galactic edge and all that. and you know, if the new movie had simply claimed to be a PURE REMAKE of TOS, I could totally accept it as that. but it's NOT a remake. it is, actually, a sequel to NEMESIS (though it's not easy to see that). Nero and Nimoy-Spock come from a time AFTER the events in NEMESIS, so that's the actual time reference for the movie (in my opinion). and it DEFINITELY wants to be canon. but it fails miserably at that.
-
you and whose army you worthless sack of moronic slime with your little fat fingers tapping away holding the caps lock, spitting over yourself..i'd lay you flat in a millisecond you micropenis flathead.
now get back to making those posts longer so i can scroll past your worthless blitherings. -
These guys that bitch about how they want their money back are gonna want their money back for the sequel when they go see it.
-
that depends... I will read every spoiler I can get about the sequel (which I usually never do) and then MAYBE, just maybe decide to go see it, but only IF they address the problem of correcting the timeline. if they ignore that, I will ignore the movie.
-
YOU'VE AMPLY DEMONSTRATED IN YOUR LAST SLEW OF POSTS THAT YOU ARE NOT ONLY A COMPLETE FUCKING PIMPLE ON JJ'S ASS, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND STAR TREK ABOUT AS MUCH AS HE DID.
NOW RUN ALONG. QUANTIZE HAS SAVED YOU A SPOT ON THE KIDDIE POOL YOU FUCKING CHILD. -
IK wrote..."Enjoyment is far more subjective. Quality can be measured at least as far as technical points are concerned. And I think any good writer would tell you the Star Trek script, in many places, is damn near incompetent. Your enjoyment of something does not make it good."
Look, it's obviously incredibly well-liked by most.. if you didn't, fine.. but that doesn't make it a bad or poor film. You are in the minority. Plain and simple. For the large majority of filmgoers it is a good film, regardless what your plot problems with the film are... if you didn't like it, why on earth are you on a message board talkback for it many days after its release? You aren't changing anyone's mind. Why waste your time???? -
Seriously. If you can't enjoy this film, then simple run and go fuck yourselves. Or walk. It really doesn't matter as long as you are fucking yourselves with your stuffy, over-thought, tired opinions of what this film should have been. Trek is here, and if the new format means we lose all of the dipshits that made the last round so intolerable, then so be it. Live long and Fuck off.
-
"I think we have now established that some people love the movie despite its gigantic shortcomings, while other people hate the movie despite its gigantic entertainment value". Like it. I can't deny the film isn't perfect (Nero badly underused, big plot holes) but fuck me if I didn't come out of this film with a big smile on my face having been thoroughly entertained by a great summer popcorn movie that had equal amounts of action, wit, heart, good characters and was FUN. No Trek movie in nearly the last 20 fucking years managed that (Undiscovered Country was the last great Trek. First Contact is merely good, not great). This wasn't what I was expecting, but I liked what I got, and I say give us more. Tighten up the plot holes next time, though guys....
-
okay, TREK belongs to you brainwashed morons now! have fun with it! nevermind that it's just another meaningless sci-fi-movie now. I guess that's what you wanted all along.
-
"they don't go back in time and change it, because it's the natural way"Don't you remember what happened in Trek IV.. they totally changed a bunch of stuff.. In the natural timeline there were no whales..
-
yes, when I got out of the film I had a big smile on my face, too. that lasted about 3 minutes. then I started actually THINKING about the movie. and it fell apart.
-
nah, now you're confusing things. in TREK IV they didn't go back in time and change the PAST (at least not noticably). they went back in time, got those whales, and brought them to the PRESENT. that doesn't create an alternate timeline.
-
of course, technically, it DOES create an alternate timeline where there are a couple less whales in the past. but I guess that was a small enough change, compared to saving Earth.
-
Fuck, this is the problem with sci fi. Particularly any sci fi that involves time travel. None of it (and I mean NONE) stands up to any serious scrutiny whatsoever from a narrative perspective. Back To The Future, Trek 4, First Contact, Terminators 1 & 2 (anything after that doesn't exist for me) - none of it holds any logical water. Time travel is inherently shaky as a plot device. The fact that you came out with a smile initially should tell you something - that you enjoyed the movie. I came out of Crystal Skull in a state of gibbering hysteria at the shiteness of it - thats a bad movie. The new Trek was fun, accessible and enjoyable. Which it hasn't been since Next Gen ended on tv in 94. Everything since then has been portentous, pompous, mostly unintelligible shite (Voyager being the absolute fucking nadir).
-
"if you liked JJ's STAR TREK it doesn't mean that you're a bad person or a stupid person, but it does say alot about you. you're probably not someone who cares a lot about scientific truth in your life. you probably don't read much, and you probably watch a lot of television. you're probably not very critical about the kind of society we live in."Dude. Its just one movie. Your deductions about the audience have no scientific basis beyond your own hypothesis. There will be more. Some will be good. Some will be bad. Its not like Trek is the only scifi out there.. I suggest you take this long weekend to read "Coyote" by Allen Steele. Great scifi read. You will thank me for it.
-
you don't understand my actual problem with the movie. I have no problem with time travel stories, in fact I generally LOVE them. I'm not saying and have never said that there's any problem with the time travel in the new TREK movie. once again, to clarify: the thing I really find terrible about the new STAR TREK is the fact that THE CHARACTERS DON'T CARE ABOUT THE HORRIBLY ALTERED TIMELINE! got it? TREK characters have ALWAYS cared about that. they ALWAYS risked their lives in order to rectify the timeline, from CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER to YESTERDAY'S ENTERPRISE to STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT. whenever the past was altered (and someone happened to be more or less aware of the change), they made it their TOP PRIORITY to change it back! but here they simply don't, although they're SUPPOSED to be the SAME characters. why?
-
...that its only Spock Prime who has time travelled and knows how his PARTICULAR future turned out. The new Kirk & crew don't KNOW the future. For them it isn't set, so they can't do anything to put it right, nor would they know what "right" is. As for Spock - well, what can he do about it? Not much as far as I can see. And the nature of Trek itself does allow for the original timeline to still exist, no matter how people might bitch about it being a plot conceit too far. There's the mirror universe, for one, and wasn't there a TNG episode where Worf hopped between hundreds of alternate timelines? Chill, man. Shatner & Stewart Trek is still out there.
-
I'm not saying that my deductions about the audience have a "scientific basis" as such. it's just my observation and my own deduction that in many cases, people who don't care about logical details in movies also tend to not care about most other things in life beyond their own well-being and their personal entertainment. if you can report a statistically significant number of contrary observations, please let me know. oh, and I checked out COYOTE on Amazon, and from some of the reviews, I don't think it's for me. it seems very much rooted in traditional political concepts, and I'm not interested in that topic. today's politics is an irrelevant, outdated system that we should get away from, and I see it as a waste of time to read books that treat our existing political systems as relevant. thanks anyway.
-
May 22, 2009 9:27:49 AM CDT
brightgeist - from some of the reviews, I don't think it's for m
by son_of_ebert
I should think by now you would understand the fallacy in relying on someone else's review. Your loss.
-
you have some good points there. however, take for example the great TNG episode YESTERDAY'S ENTERPRISE. in it, only Guinan has a feeling that something is "wrong" with the timeline. she doesn't even know exactly what, but still they take it seriously and correct it. so, if Spock Prime knows about the change, wouldn't he EASILY be able to convince the Enterprise crew to do something about it? especially with Kirk's father killed by the change, and Spock's whole planet destroyed and his mother killed by the change, he should have enough convincing arguments to make them slingshot back in time, throw some antimatter into the black hole just as Nero emerges, and then slingshot back to the future. I mean, they all KNOW how it happened, after all. they KNOW Nero came from the future and they KNOW that all the bad things were direct results of that. so they SHOULD be pretty motivated to restore Vulcan, Amanda Grayson and Daddy Kirk. shouldn't they? for your other argument about the multiverse nature of the STAR TREK universe. okay, if that's so, then WHY did they EVER bother to correct the timeline before?? I'm not saying that there aren't multiple universes in STAR TREK. all I'm saying is that the characters ALWAYS wanted to "correct" their own timeline before, but now they suddenly don't, without ANY given reason. please tell me you're beginning to understand the problem.
-
try reading Allen Steele's house testimony (don't forget to remove the spaces):http://www.allensteele.com/testimony.htm
-
you must have misunderstood. I'm not relying on their reviews. the reviews simply contain some content descriptions that make me think that I will not be interested.
-
Based on what? I'm done playing 'play science' with you.*washes hands*
-
okay, I read part of the testimony and feel totally confirmed in my opinion that this author has nothing to say that would interest me. he writes "the United States has become the wealthiest and most powerful nation on Earth", and "Our global communications network are now linked by geosynchronous satellites; without them, many personal, business, and financial transactions could not occur with the instantaneous speed to which we've become accustomed", and "Overseas military actions are now largely guided by satellite; officers in the field can now access real-time images which allow them to see the exact positions of opposition forces and react accordingly", and "All of these things are the result of space technology". someone who speaks about military actions and financial transactions with such obvious pride is of no interest to me. but I'm a bit proud of myself, I must say, because my initial deduction from the Amazon reviews was spot on.
-
...and yes, you've got a point. To which the answer really only can be - they didn't fix it because then we wouldn't have a shiny new Enterprise crew and un-set timeline to play with. But that's fine with me - its only a sci fi franchise and its a tricksy conceit which allows them to retool the franchise without completely rebooting (which would rightly have caused uproar). You could rationalise the multiverse thing by saying, well until that TNG episode ('Parallels', I just googled it) no one actually knew that there was a genuine multiverse - just a mirror, so they had to correct the timelines in case they blinked out of existence. You could theorise that Spock Prime in fact knows that although a time change has taken place, it doesn't mean "his" reality no longer exists. He has simply traversed one timeline into another. Added to which, he's too fucking old and can't be arsed.
-
in the sense that you personally observed that a majority of the people who don't give a damn about logical or scientific errors in movies, are in real life extremely dedicated to making the world a better blace, getting away from the monetary/political system, and so on. if you have observed something like that, let me know. beecause I have observed the exact opposite.
-
you wrote "if you liked JJ's STAR TREK it doesn't mean that you're a bad person or a stupid person, but it does say alot about you. you're probably not someone who cares a lot about scientific truth in your life. you probably don't read much, and you probably watch a lot of television. you're probably not very critical about the kind of society we live in. most likely, you simply want to enjoy your life, without any ambition to improve the world around you. sure, you're in the majority these days. but that really, REALLY doesn't mean you're right."
That's the single most condescending thing I've ever read.
I liked the movie, and what that says about me is that I enjoyed watching the movie. Period.
Fuck you. -
sure, whatever you say ;-)
-
you're absolutely right, the only answer can be that they simply made the characters indifferent because otherwise there would be no reboot. and anyone who thinks THAT'S a good motive for writing characters' behaviors, really has a poor sense of good writing. you also have an interesting point about the multiverse knowledge of the characters, but it doesn't work that way either, because in STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT they were all about "repairing whatever damage they've done", weren't they? if they believed in the multiverse theory, they would have simply accepted that the Borg have assimilated the entire Earth, but they didn't, did they? why?
-
Austria, right? The guy with ONE Myspace friend and three twitter posts? How long have you been using the net, 12 minutes? Seriously, if you didnt like the movie, great.. but why would you come back time and again to post on a message board article that is positive about the film? Why? What does that say about you? Clearly you have "no ambiition to improve the world around you." as you wrote to those of us who liked the film. Go do something useful.
-
you wrote "sure, whatever you say.."
Thanks for agreeing with me. I knew you'd come around. -
when I say you can overanalyse. Ultimately any plot involving time travel will fall apart if you examine it. Why does Marty McFly remember a timeline in which his Dad was a wet gimp, when he's changed it at the source? Why does John Connor not disappear at the end of T2? None of it holds any water. At a certain point you have to say, ok, this can be rationalised in a way that means we have a story, but we acknowledge this can be easily deconstructed. What matters is whether it works for the film and for my money, it did for the new movie, while acknowledging that as with ALL time travel stories, it doesn't really make sense.
-
let me think... my dorm room in 1995... so, no, not 12 minutes but almost 14 years :-) maybe the reason I have only one myspace friend and three twitter posts is that I usually do more useful things than use those websites. for example, I have created the Austrian chapter site of the ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT last week (www.zeitgeist-movement.at). there's just a preliminary site online so far, but I'm currently waiting for approval for the official ZEITGEIST webiste templates from www.thezeitgeistmovement.com, so that I can build the final site. also, I am very active in the Zeitgeist Community (on the web as well as in real life). I would say that counts as ambition to improve the world around me, wouldn't you? how about you? what's your handle on the ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT website? don't tell me you're not part of the movement yet, because that would be really irresponsible of you.
-
May 22, 2009 10:10:20 AM CDT
Can we stop the "Trek" shit now, or hasn't the check cleared?
by conspiracy
I DL'd Trek..it was ok, fluff and popcorn, and definitely NOT "Trek", but it was good enough I went and paid to see it at the theater.Still...as good as the effects, pacing and overall look of the thing was...the script was complete amateur hour; tv quality at best. Not an ounce of real weight or thought too it...even Nimoy's lines were flat, and when a Master Fucking Thespian like Nimoy can't bring a line to life...that is pretty fucking bad.This movie wasn't the second fucking coming, it was not high art, it was not even good Sci-Fi...it was just kinda entertaining.So enough of this JJ knobing...it is getting really fucking obvious.
-
I can live with that as a final statement! if the JJ lovers can leave it at that too, then we can put this TB to rest and continue with our lives ;-)
-
"I went and paid to see it at the theater." Hahaha!!! That's awesome. You've been shitting on the movie and being a dick to Orci for months now, predicting Trek would tank like Superman Returns, and then you admit you kinda liked it and paid to see it. You sir are an idiot. But at least you're an idiot who embarrasses himself publicly so we can all laugh at you. I am a 20 year Trek fan, and I had faith in this project. My faith was rewarded. I love the movie, it was much more "Star Trek" to me than most of the Berman-era crap, and it is wiping up the decks with all the competition. Long live STAR TREK!!!
-
movies...entertainment..drama
what titbag does understand..anything to do with poo poo and wee wee and screaming like the little bitch baby he is...
big range there you felch bag
-
When did it become the norm to have zero to no expectations from art/entertainment/culture/life? If Rosario Dawson walks up to me and says she's going to do me to within an inch of my life, I expect to write out my will and get my affairs in order. If everybody involved in a major movie orgasms about how much work they put into making it right, I expect to at least get a chubbie. That's all I was looking for from Star Trek 2009: a chubbie, not a Viagra "call your doctor for erections lasting longer than 4 days" chubbie, but one good enough to make a man proud to wear soft, cotton drawers. I feel like Spock did a mind-meld on my troubled brain and quietly told me, "Forget," because I'm literally having trouble remembering chunks of this movie. I know I saw stuff, but I'm damned if I can get the memory to jog. I've been reading about Abrams and crew explaining this or that to people basically asking a huge WTF. Dig me now: if you've got to pretend you read a bunch of science books on string theory and then pretend that it informed your script and then pretend that telling people that your confused POS is actually sound once you tell us that it's sound--mind, all after I've plunked down enough stimulus package money to put the cute teen at the snack counter through college--college writing 101 clearly states that if the writer has to tell the reader what he meant, he should have meant what he wrote. Caps here for purely promotional purposes: JJ, I WOULD LOVE TO WRITE THE NEXT STAR TREK MOVIE. I WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPORTANT CHARACTER DIE BECAUSE SHE WASN'T WEARING HER MEDI-ALERT BRACELET. LET'S DO LUNCH. Bubba Foom knows his Star Trek. Bubba Foom liked the tribble in Scotty's cage as a throwaway Easter egg. Bubba Foom even enjoys speaking of himself in the third person as befits the name Bubba Foom, and Bubba Foom even did a spec script for the Next Generation featuring the entire planet Vulcan in major-league danger (Bubba Foom is not litigious), so let me do the next movie. I'm ready to get my nuts stomped by fans for nuanced, aesthetic reasons, not because I wrote a scene like Scotty's Wonka Ride without remembering to hit the delete button. This movie was 80 percent what you ate before you flossed, 10 percent that cool minty floss feeling, and 10 percent knowing that flossing is supposed to be beneficial. I base that on scientific theory, for those who might not get it on first reading.
-
I agree that a lot of the whiners will come back for a second helping, but I truthfully would like JJ Abrams to do the right thing and give me my money back. I feel like I got suckered into this one and I will not be back for part 2.
When the project was announced I outright groaned at the prospect of Captain Lost doing Trek justice and I wasn't really exciting about seeing them reboot the franchise. Those fans of the series, those who want to honor it would serve it best by moving on and penning something new. I'll give you Serenity for instance, or Battle Star Galatica. With this latest attempt at a reboot I'm now more then convinced - Trek, real Star Trek is gone. If you'll permit the analogy: It's Jon Paul Valley in Batman's cloths. It's Magog to Superman. Hollywood should have dusted off that old drawing board and moved on.
I wasn't going to budge..Then came this media blitz, Harry, The Major critics minus Ebert *He's still the best barometer*, the word of mouth from people who I now suspect also loved Tokyo drift, and JJ preaching the gospel of solid writing. My skepticism thawed. Maybe they were right? Maybe I should stow it and give it a chance. Twenty minutes in and I knew I was duped. Son of a bitch! JJ's just put me behind the wheel of a lemon, despite my best judgment.
So now he's making a ton of money and accepting that as a vote of confidence. I however would like to recast my vote as "NO" by asking for my money back.
-
you should get a refund..you're an idiot and the good work was wasted on you. your judgement is fucked.
-
You're right, I should get a refund.
"The good work was wasted on you" AHAHAHAHAHA. Hey, if you like eating shit that's your thing. Who am I to tell you to stop?
-
Didn't Ebert give it 2.5 stars? I mean, its not like he hated it, right?
I never said the movie was great, I said I enjoyed it and obviously many others did as well.. if you didn't, move on to Transformers or Potter or whatever's "next"...
And Brightgeist, you said I was doing nothing to "improve" the world, I said nothing about you.. although I think the reason you have only one MySpace friend is because.. well, you only have one MySpace friend :) (bit too old for that anyway, no?)
Your Zeitgeist website (and the main site) is very impressive and worth exploring.. but the fact that it is so full of worthy ideas and concepts brings me back to my original point. Why the hell are you here talking about a movie you didn't like then? Your website is where you should be focusing your attention, not at this movie PR site.. -
Nichelle Nichols nailed the character of Uhura in "The Man Trap"--one brief corridor scene and you knew the "Hailing Frequencies Open" girl was not to be messed with. Those of you who know what I'm referring to, cool. A crying shame they never let her character be a character after that (with rare exceptions), but that's why Uhura gets the respectful nod in fandom. She was fine as hell but she had balls. The new actress, Ms.Saldana, was nice eye candy for a few seconds but fell into the generic black chick hole where actresses with super-permed hair wait for their next supporting role on the pretty-white-kids-with-problems shows. I say this because people might start talking about her "breakthrough role" ala what's her name's from Independence Day (if a black woman in a blockbuster movie doesn't become a crack prostitute, it's considered a breakthrough role--Hollywood, I will burn you down). Personally, give me the green chick any day! That full body shot of her was the best part of the movie.
Since the writers of this movie do nothing but rehash, the next movie will suck just as much as this one. And not like fellatio, which was handed down by God, but like a parasite. It was cotton candy: dissolved as soon as it hit the tongue. And they didn't even use real sugar. Dudes used Splenda!
There were good elements to the movie. People rag so high on it because the filmmakers and the marketing machine promised us hot porn action (Rosario Dawson, please contact me; I'm married but, dammit, some things trump marriage) but delivered Monica Lewinsky instead. -
May 22, 2009 12:06:25 PM CDT
No Money, Brand Names or Rock and Roll in the Future?
by cymbalta4thedevil
You people who claim to be hardcore Trek fans are surprisingly IGNORANT of how the Federation actually operates. It's partly a TRADE Federation. The citizens of the member planets (including Starfleet employees) work for CREDITS which they can use to purchase whatever they want. How do we KNOW this? Three words. Deep. Space. Nine. We see Starfleet employees drinking and gambling in a Ferengi bar, eating in a Klingon restaurant and buying clothes from a Cardassian tailor. When they go to pay, do they say "Sorry, I'm from the Federation, we don't have any money?" You guys are MORONS. Eliminating Want and Deprivation is not the same as eliminating Trade and Compensation. Are you telling me Ben Sisko's father slaves over a hot stove all day, cooking family recipes with non-replicated natural ingredients and then just GIVES THE FOOD AWAY? It doesn't work that way. They haven't spelled out in great detail exactly HOW it works, but it doesn't work the way you "No Money" Utopians think it does. The DS9 writers made that very clear and impossible to argue. And as for brand names in a post apocalyptic economy: Why Not? We're supposed to believe Picard's family has made wine for centuries and Scotty can still get a good bottle of Scotch, but Jack Daniels and Budweiser have ceased to exist? And if Nokia isn't making communicators in the 23rd century: who is? That was just funny. If you want to say they're military issue, then how do civilians communicate? Some COMPANY is making those devices. And for everyone groaning about the Beastie Boys: you accept that Picard loves classical, Riker loves Jazz and Data can sing Irving Berlin to Worf's chagrin, but Kirk, the most rock'n'roll of Captains, can't blast a little "Sabotage" when he steals a car? We know Rock'n'Roll survives your little "WW3" excuse for everything. How do we know? Two words. Zefram. Cochran. They love him enough to name a school after him and build statues in his likeness, but they aren't studying his fondness for Roy Orbison? If they had played "Pretty Woman" while Kirk was watching Uhura cross the bar that would have made the scene even better. And completely CANONICAL. Flame away but you all know I'm right.
-
You hate this movie. You hate the director of this movie. You hate people who like this movie. We heard you the first thousand times! Give it a break, bro! Has anyone told you that you TALK TOO MUCH? You are sounding like a repetitious NAG. Maybe you should call yourself TitNAG? MOST people liked this movie. You are just the oddball.
-
May 22, 2009 12:20:15 PM CDT
If TITBAG, SONofEBERT, ASIMOV, etc... had their ways...
by ccchhhrrriiisssm
...this would have been what the new STAR TREK film looked like: http://www.tinyurl.com/badtrek Yep...that is a Trekkie's STAR TREK, all right!
-
If you fucks really like this piece of shit then you are fucking retarded. JJ looks like a little fag-jew
-
It is a Trekkie nag's WET DREAM for a STAR TREK film!
-
That's a matter of opinion. I didn't think the holes were any bigger than any other sci-fi movie, especially any given Star Trek movie. You do realize that if we encountered alien life, it wouldn't look like anything human, right? You do realize that warp speed would be impossible for humans to survive? So I'm tired of hearing "a black hole can't do that". Who gives a shit? The characters worked, the story was entertaining. Fuck me, that's the point, isn't it? If I nitpicked every plot hole, I'd never be able to watch classic sci-fi like Alien again.
-
...but, like I said in another Trek TB, I liked the movie for it's pacing, character development and huge entertainment value, but I don't think that it was a Star Trek movie in the traditional sense (read:intellectual).I didn't hate the movie by any stretch, but I did think that there was much to improve upon. I can't wait to see the next one, because I'm sure that which was off-putting (for me) will be tightened up (shakey cam, lens flares, plot holes).JJ has a lot of work to do if he's doing the next one too. What will it be called? I wonder.BTW-Those touting their career credentials to justify being a douchebag are still just a douchebag (esp. Psych. OMFG. Sure you've been educated more about astrophysics and quantum theory than an engineer. Douche.).OK, one more thing: It's clear (to me, at least) that some people are trying to explain themselves as to why they did/didn't like parts of the movie to have enlightened conversation and healthy debate, while others seem to feel some sort of triumph in dismissing those who disagree with them (I know: Welcome to AICN, but let me assure you that I've been coming here since '98 and it wasn't always this way. There was a time when people respectfully disagreed with each other, instead of bashing.), and I think it's sickening. People are allowed to respectfully disagree with other's opinions, so quit getting your panties bunched if it's not the same opinion as your own. Those who've been respectful and willing to discuss (as passionately as it can get sometimes) their opinions are always going to be the TBers whose posts I read. All others are refuse to me.rant fini
-
I seriously doubt john logan was thinking the same thing when he wrote nemesis. nor do i think stewart beard was cotemplating all that bullshit you just said when he was preparing to direct. infact, the only person actually putting any effort into that film was jerry goldsmith. and even he saw the bullshit that it fucking killed the poor bastard. Nemesis is more worthy of trek hatred. and it is not in any way a better film thah the new trek. put your cock away and stop trying to impress me. it's just to fucking small. and ugly.
-
...and I'm only posting because it's a quiet day at work, The Man has already left early, I've got work on a personal manuscript I'm neglecting to do, and Big Trouble in Little China was a fun-ass movie that was dumb as hell but didn't pretend to have Chinese history and mythology underpinning it.
What was wrong with Trek '09 is not that it had plotholes. The problem was that there were fundamentally too many, which came off as "the writers and director don't care", which comes off as moviegoers don't care so long as we give 'em 'splosions, cleavage, humor and ironic references. Key being the "don't care" component. The writers knew their script was trite; they didn't care, movie was going to be made anyway. The director knew he was chewing horse when he wanted steak, but he didn't care. Not caring about what you put out and what you consume is not cool.
Outside line is ringing now. Obviously somebody thinks I'm going to do some work. Fools. -
"There were times when people respectfully disagreed with each other...." I remember those days! I wish that we could return! The hate-ranters on here have ruined this website. The TBs used to be fun places to learn new info...and discuss films in a great fanboy manner. Now, the TBs are overrun with the same small group of HATE ranters who try to outdo one another in the pushing of their HATE envelope. There is no tolerance amongst these guys for an "opinion." They just try to come up with "clever" (*cough) ways to RIDICULE those who disagree with thier limited viewpoint. I miss the good ol' days, bro! Back in 1998...when we were trying to figure out the plot of EPISODE 1. It all changed when some idiot made the claim that George Lucas "raped his childhood." The ridiculous "rape" rants have only gotten worse.
-
for shame on you. shame. shame. I am literally gob smacked at your reasoning. go sit in the corner and think about what you have done. you are a sad sad talkbacker this day. just change your talkback name now. you'll be missed.
-
do you have anything productive to contribute?
-
Yes. Do you contribute anything except NAGGING about every movie or opinion that you hate? I didn't think so.
-
Anyway, I will admit that you are much more congenial than the other guys who flood the TBs with their hate rants. I don't mean to criticize you unfairly. You do say some intelligent things. I just miss the days when a small handful of ranters didn't control the direction of every TB.
-
YEAAHHH!!!!! must meet the high standards of shithead #377474!!
-
I WASN'T EXPECTING THIS NEW TREK TO BE THE NEW WRATH OF KAHN.
WHAT I WAS EXPECTING IS SOMETHING THAT HAD AT LEAST HALF THE SUBSTANCE OF A WIGGLES EPISODE.
YOU PATHETIC TOOLS. THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT LIKE THIS FILM ARE THE AGE GROUP THAT'S SLIGHTLY TOO OLD FOR MILEY CYRUS.
WE AREN'T HATERS. WE'RE PEOPLE THAT WERE EXPECTING A MODICUM OF COMMON FUCKING SENSE FROM THIS PIECE OF DONKEY SHIT.
BUT PLEASE. DON'T LET ME GET IN THE WAY OF YOUR FUCKING CIRCLE JERK YOU HOMOS. IS THERE ANYTHING I CAN GET YOU? SOME MORE 2-PLY TISSUE? SOME MOTION LOTION? -
"respectfully disagreeing" with each other is not a virtue. there is ALWAYS, on every subject matter, ONE TRUTH, and ONLY ONE TRUTH. and I think it's very healthy when people discuss a topic until they reach that truth.
-
"..FOR AGREEING TO DO A VOICEOVER FOR THIS TRAINWRECK OF A FILM"
-
DAMN RIGHT DUDE
-
"BEGGING FOR MY FORGIVENESS. I ALMOST CONSIDERED GRANTING HIM A PARDON. UNTIL I SAW HIM IN THAT OTHER GODAWFUL JJ SHOW FRINGE. FUCK NIMOY, THAT PRICK."
-
The plot holes, or devices that irk me the most are the ones that corrupt the believability or integrity of the Characters.
In the opening scene the Kelvin rams Nero's ship. The computer is still functioning enough to calculate its trajectory and the controls are functioning enough to steer the ship, but it can't go on Autopilot? Did George honestly need to be there? There's a transporter! Seriously, there are easier ways to be an absentee dad. So Kirk, me lad, you're the offspring of canon fodder. Also, for a group of baddies who just speared the Kelvin's captain, they sure are spontaneously benevolent by letting those escape pods float off. I guess mining ship torpedoes get recalled when their mother ship gets scratched. My question though, didn’t any of the survivors talk when they were rescued? "So, what destroyed the kelvin?".."I dunno, lightening storm or something.." .."Oh.. Okay. No investigation necessary." Fuck is new Starfleet worthless.
Kirk cheats his way through the Kobioshi Maru, not with tact but as bugs bunny getting away with something mischievous. This makes Kirk look incredibly stupid as well as Spock and Starfleet Officer #whatever for asking "How did he beat your test?" Really? In an advanced computer age? Its pretty God damned obvious.
The Vulcan's can't destroy the Death Star's squid penis? Man, the Vulcans kind of deserve extinction. Something was bound to get'em. Also, did Pike really need to take the chance and send sky divers down to destroy the drill? Why do something right when you can do it XTREME!!! No one thought "lock on target, photon torpedoes." God damn is Pike a shitty captain. He deserved to get tortured.
Speaking of the giant squid penis; apparently people in San Francisco haven’t the ability to look up. There must also be absolutely zero planetary protection. What does this say about Starfleet?
Nero farts around space for 25, or 27 years..whatever it was. I know JJ cut a scene where Nero was imprisoned by the Klingons during that time. So what happened to Nero's amazing ship during that time? Did the Klingons just impound it and not think twice? The questions lead me to believe the Klingon's are incredibly dim witted.
Then there's the planet Hoth scene. Jesus christ! So what I can deduct from this? -that Spock Prime is either senile, or lazy. Was he just going to sit around the cave waiting for someone to stumble in? Also, He had the formula for transporting Kirk and Scotty across the gulf of space but he didn't think to maybe use that technology to help the Romulans? Spock Prime, who are you really?
The entire film leads me to believe Kirk is little more then a vandal. A womanizing, bar-fighting cheat, who has no respect for authority, or the chain of command. So what does this incredibly worthless Starfleet do? It gives him a Starship! So Kids, that's how you do it. Kirk can be Captain and George W Bush can be a president.
Alright, I need to get back to work as well.
-
May 22, 2009 1:38:03 PM CDT
JJ, you should do the next X-Men movie...
by h_woodexecmakingstupiddecisions
Or Terminator movie...pllllllllllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
-
well it's not necessarily correct what you say about intelligent alien life. in fact, when you consider how evolution by natural selection works, it is quite likely that intelligent, space-traveling beings on other planets would have developed to look quite similar to humans (or to what humans will look like when they begin to really travel through deep space)
-
well said. although I actually have to DEFEND the movie on one count (even if it hurts me)... Kirk's dad stayed on the Kelvin for exactly one purpose: to destroy the torpedoes fired on the escape pods. it can be seen in the scene (if you know where to look) that he phasers the torpedoes while he flies on his collision course. I think that dissolves most of your critique about that scene. still, the rest of what you say is quite true.
-
"AND PROUDLY HAIL IT AS A MASTERPIECE AFTER THIS NEW ABORTION. GRADING ON A CURVE IS FUN! RIGHT MAJEL? OH, SORRY. MAJEL IS STILL RECOVERING FROM THE BEAT DOWN I GAVE HER FOR DOING THE COMPUTER VOICE."
-
...JERRY GOLDSMITH'S ROTTING ASSHOLE, YOU'D JUST ABOUT HAVE SOMETHING THAT EQUATES TO THIS NEW FILM SCORE. DREADFUL. POSITIVELY DREADFUL.
-
Ok, I think I remember that. I don't know if I remember him doing much more then sitting in the captain's chair talking to his wife in labor though. Also the ship rammed into Nero's but we've already established that his ship is pretty impervious to damage. So why did Nero spare those survivors? All we would have needed is a short cut back to Nero commanding his vessel to not to follow them. Since obviously they wouldn't have been a threat to him. ...but then later he seems to go out of his way to slaughter everything he sees.
-
you didn't quite get it. yes, on DS9, the Starfleet personnel has to pay for clothes or food with credits, but that's because they are dealing with NON-FEDERATION businesses! Garak, the tailor, is Cardassian (hardly a Federation member) and Quark, the barkeep, is Ferengi (not exactly Federation either). the way I have always understood it, a planet has to achieve a certain degree of technological AND social sophistication before it can join the Federation, and I am sure it is an integral part of that requirement that the planet has reached a Resource Based Economy (no money, all the planet's resources are distributed according to the people's needs, and so on). so, that means that Federation member worlds don't use money. and certainly there's no money in use on Earth! that is definitely said several times in the shows. and yes, Sisko's dad does work in his restaurant and then GIVES AWAY the food for free. because that's his way to contribute to society! if you find that concept so hard to believe, you should definitely look into The Venus Project (www.thevenusproject.com)
-
I agree, it should have been explained. my explanation would be that the Kelvin did quite some damage to Nero's ship, and they had their hands full restoring life support or something... still, it's strange... I mean, where did those escape pods go? were they picked up by a Starfleet ship? if so, why didn't that ship go on to destroy Nero's ship? okay, maybe Nero's ship was repaired by then... but if so, then why didn't Nero pick off the escape pods? well, another one on the long list of points that don't make sense
-
Seriously. They spend so much time trying to rubbish the Movie they are clearly obsessed and have nothing better to do.
They also prove the Onion Stereotype is 100% accurate. -
at least in this TB, I'd say there are at least as many people who didn't like the movie as there are others
-
Just wondering because it answers another question I have... When is Harry going to stop sucking Star Treks dick and move on to something else?
-
Yes, and the bulk of the STAR TREK haters are confined to this TB (amongst other TBs) to repeat their HATE over and over and over and over again... They sound like broken records. We heard them the first 1000 times...but they continue. I'm glad that STAR TREK is moving ahead without them.
-
Told me he has a very small inverted penis, He's pre-op. I tried getting more out of her while I was banging her tired cunt but fucking an armless, legless torso and spinning her around my fat cock is grueling work. Here's a hint kids - Titbag works for a rival studio hah hah hah hah. Hey Titbag, your film Shitinator sucks J.J.s circumsized nose. You tired queerbait.
-
What's the problem?
-
Don't quit your day-job man, film is definitely not for you.
-
Three or four fags have multiple handles and they are in awe over the fact they are failure to launch in life. Either that, or they are waiting for their other teste to drop.
-
I find it incredibly odd how you would defend Trek and bash Terminator in the same breath. The same reasons you use to support Trek are easily, and appropriately, applicable to Terminator.
-
Yes, they sure are a vocal bunch. Titbag's one of the funniest haterz around. Hopefully we can all unite and bash Bayformers with the same zeal and volume.
-
A. Trek was fun. Terminator wasn't. B. It's clear everyone involved with Trek honored and genuinely cared for the source material, McG shit all over the legacy of Cameron. Star Trek focused on the core integral characters, re-introducing them, Terminator meandered with completely arbitrary and redundant new characters. The film is a big shitfest Deux-ex Machina that ends essentially as it begins without advancing the Terminator mythos in any way, shape or form. Star Trek at least took chances and didn't recitify everything done by the end of the film. Vulcan is gone. Spock Prime is isolated in another universe. Amanda is dead. They at least had the sack to attempt some-thing groundbreaking. Terminator was filler-material.
-
I'M GLAD YOU ENJOYED MY MUM. THAT'LL BE $5 YOU CHEAP FUCKING PRICK.
-
...AND THEY CAN'T PULL ONE SKANKY THIEF HAS-BEEN ACTRESS OUT OF THIN AIR? OMFG.
THE LEAST THAT PRICK ABRAMS COULD HAVE DONE WAS GET THAT FLEA RIDDEN CUNT TO SHOW HER AGING, SAGGING TITS. FFS. -
You mean she's gonna pay ME for the honor right? Sorry dude but she wasn't worth it. Oh and , I'm your dad Titbag. Sorry to have bailed on you like that but, at least I mailed you everyday. I dodged child support though so tell her to stop fucking sending me nude pictures. It's distasteful.
-
Well, Terminator is not supposed to be fun. It's supposed to be grimy and dark, and in this case was barely so. The one commonality between ST and TS is eye candy spectacle. On that score, they both delivered.
I agree that TS had a pretty fucking poor cast. Totally weak. It was left up to Bale, Worthington and Yelchin to carry the movie, and the rest were either poorly directed (look who the director is after all) or didn't care enough. Well, Moon Bloodgood looked like she gave 100%.
JJ is simply the better director, ST was far better edited, and he had more talent to work with. Still, TS wasn't as bad as the critics are making it out to be - we'll just agree to disagree. -
suuuure, all the "haters" of the new TREK in the WHOLE WIDE WORLD are ALL in this TB, and everybody else LOVES the movie. that is VERY realistic. but if it makes you happy to think so... makes sense, actually, that you have a strong ability to kid yourself... after all, one needs that same ability to believe JJ's STAR TREK movie is good :-D
-
Christ almighty for people bitching about plot-holes you fuckers sure don't spend any time trying to you know, reason it out prior.
Kirk and Sulu were falling from fucking SPACE, Chekov had time to get a transporter lock on them before they impacted the ground. Chekov knew they were falling. Amanda and the Vulcans were stationary, he had a lock on them, the ground gave way beneath Amanda and it fucked his lock on up. The distance she fell to her death was less than the distance Kirk and Sulu fell through the atmosphere. He couldn't maintain a lock on the Vulcans and Spock in addition to re-locking the Transporter on Amanda. You stupid tired sack of shit. -
LOL, that's funny, cause my day-job IS film! :-D you probably won't believe it, but I work as an editor, camera man and compositing "artist" (although I don't claim to make "art" as such)... mostly commercials, music videos, corporate image films and stuff like that... check out our showreel at www.wuger.com
-
It's simple envy then. You make commercials and J.J. makes multi-million dollar films. That's fair enough. I guess the old axiom is true, critics are failures at whatever they are critiquing. I grant you that then.
-
who are you talking to about the transporter? I never complained about that... one of the few things that actually made sense... I especially liked how they threw in a line for Chekov right before he beamed Kirk and Sulu out, something like "compensating for gravitational pull"... otherwise I would have complained that Kirk and Sulu should have impacted the transporter pad with the same kinetic energy that they were falling with
-
YOU DOUCHEBAGS WHO THINK THAT THERE'S ONLY A HANDFUL OF HATERS NEED TO LEARN HOW TO FUCKING READ. AND COUNT.
HERE'S A BREAKDOWN YOU HOPELESS TARDS:
NEARLY HALF THE POSTS ARE 1ST TIME REPLIES FROM ENLIGHTENED MEN STATING THAT THEY HATED THIS DINGLEBERRY OF A MOVIE.
THE BULK OF THE REMAINING POSTS ARE MADE BY THE SAME 5 OR 6 COMPLETELY CLUELESS JJ ASSRIMMERS WHO KEEP INSISTING THAT THEY LOVED THIS FILM AND THAT IT WAS 'REALLY NEAT'.
-
yeah, that's a total BULLSHIT argument, because then I would have to hate EVERY movie, wouldn't I? no, I only hate crappy movies. hey, and maybe I as a "filmmaker" in the broader sense even have a little more capacity to actually RECOGNIZE a crappy movie than you do? hmmmmmmm
-
....THE 3 OR 4 OF YOU THAT KEEP REPEATING HOW THE 'ONION' GOT IT RIGHT. FFS. STOP SUCKLING YOUR MOMMY'S TEETS AND PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU ARE WATCHING NEXT TIME.
-
Was for ass-douche Titbag.
Hey Titbag, yes people hate this movie. Enough for 193 additional screens to be added to the count. In it's third week of release screenings are being added for DEMAND, suck on that shit you festering turd boy. -
Right, your company makes music videos, commercials, and corporate image films. Which is basically what new Trek is. It's a commercial, wrapped in a music video. It's rock'n'roll baby. It don't need to make sense to sell. Ah, so You are an editor, Camera Man and compositing artist.plus you're are a pshyc major.. which sounds suspiciously like a producer to me. Well, given the volume of responses I'd say the economic situation is effecting you too. Are you New York or LA based?
-
You DO infact have a hate fetish for every movie. Though I bet you liked Event Horizon and The Core didn't you? Or I bet Blade Runner is your ideal vision of the future. It's "realistic" hah hah hah. I bet you have Star Wars technical manuals and Andrew Proberts E-mail address don't you? Why don't you admit you are pissy we avoided the bullet of a two hour yawn fest Captain Archer movie. Or even worse Janeway. Audiences just love being treated to philosophical musings on warp conduits and subspace anomolies. You know, extended close-ups of peoples faces talking the most banal uninspired throw-away shit a failed science teacher can envision. Man, and here I thought "I" was a Star Trek geek, you fuckers LIVE the stereotype. Maybe now that Trek is popular you may actually live a bit and experience that lovely creature woman?
-
I didn't say that all of hte TREK haters in the world are frequenting this exact forum. I will say, however, that the bulk of the people in this forum are TREK-hating radicals who really need to get a life. There is a small handful of TBers who are flooding this (and other) TBs with their HATE-induced rants. Not only do they flood their board with their hatred for this movie...but they point their outlandish hatred toward anyone who disagrees with their opinion (which just happens to be a minority of film goers). Some of them spend hundreds of posts...effectively repeated the same hate over and over again. Can't they just say that they didn't like the movie...why...and just leave it at that?
-
...and I'm pleased to see that JJ Abrams understood that. Some filmmakers would have foolishly tried to proceed without him.Without Nimoy, the alternate timeline story would have not worked at all IMHO.
-
I work for the government as a statician, and sell original paintings. Though I make more money selling my paintings.
-
You sure do spend a lot of time bickering on Aintitcool's tbs. Now I can admit that film work has dried up a bit and because of the lull here I sit, talking shit with you, but don't play the "I'm a film maker" card. Do you know how many film students troll this board? Pah-leeeze.
-
...are just angry that the public liked this movie...and find their opinions so irrelevant. It must suck to realize that their opinions are ignored by so many...and the TREK train has passed them by. Since this film will pass $200 Million by next weekend, who cares what these ranters think? We have moved on without them.
-
What hate-filled Trekkies really wanted from a new TREK film. LOL! ;-P
-
Good for you. I personally thought it sucked, I gave my reasons why and now I want my money back :)
-
I never had any desire to work in major motion pictures, because A) that would have meant that I would have to leave my home, which I don't want to, because living here really ROCKS, and B) during my career so far I have gotten some glimpses of big movie production and frankly I wouldn't want to work on big movies even if I got the chance to go to Hollywood... it's simply too much pressure, too much money involved... I have my own company here, I work about 4 hours per day, can easily make a comfortable living with that, and I will never get a heart attack from stress :-) so no, I don't consider myself a failure. if you define "success" as making big hollywood pictures, you're brainwashed. I define "success" as living a happy, stress-free life.
-
Trek is adding screenings for it's third week of release. Wolverine is dropping 900 screenings. Star Trek will endure through the summer.
-
You mark my words.
-
Everybody will like!
-
You claim to be a Star Trek fan, yet seem perfectly content for it to maintain it's previous steadily declining niche market. You should be jumping for joy at this new film. Star Trek will transcend generations now and will endure and continue. Do you WANT Trek to be relegated to the national archives as a sad byproduct of the 20th century? Would that maintain your sense of personal entitlement and ownership of a failed franchise? I've got news for you man, Star Trek was DEAD before this film was released. Rick Berman killed it. Mediocrity killed it. Formulaic safety nets killed it. Star Trek is something it hasn't been in a LONG time, culturally RELEVANT, and you being a Star Trek fan bitch about it? Shame on you man, shame on you.
-
"trek is adding screenings for it's third week of release".. And people love eating at chillies. I personally don't understand it but what can you do?
-
WHAT CAN I SAY? THERE'S A LOT OF TEENAGE GIRLS AND BUDDING PONCEY FAGS WHO WANT TO SEE KIRK'S PACKAGE.
IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE YOU -
FXD.
-
you are clearly confused, man. I'm not the Psych major, that's joshuavance1701. and I'm not in the USA, I'm in Austria. also, I'm not a film student. as I wrote somewhere above, I graduated from a college/university (majored in video and film production) with a MultiMedia engineer's degree, and I've had my own company since 2003 now. get your facts straight. by the way, we shouldn't be arguing, because we both don't like the movie ;-)
-
As what? Seriously, this is Magog replacing Superman. This new Trek is Fast and Furious in Star Trek cloths. I agree with a previous poster, did you douchebags have to have this too?!.
Sorry Folks, Star Trek is dead. New Trek isn't Star Trek.
-
Didn't you guys listen to Spock Prime? Long live New Trek.
-
I was addressing Joshuavance, not you.
-
...IN THE SAME BREATH AS THIS NEW FLY COCK OF A MOVIE IS SACRILEGE AND ONLY GOES TO SHOW THAT NOT ONLY DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND STAR TREK, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND SCI-FI AT ALL. YOU'RE BANNED, PIG FUCKER.
-
You people are just fucking anti-populist proceeding from the fallacious belief something popular must be inferior. You liked Star Trek better when it was just you that liked it evidently. We understand. You know, something "sacred" you could hold close to your heart. Something to distinguish yourselves in your own pretentious elitist minds from everyone else. You fuckers wouldn't know art if it slapped you in the face with it's dick.
I've got news for you imbeciles, Star Trek , is a PRODUCT. A FRANCHISE. A MEAL TICKET. It isn't a philosophy or way of life. It is an entertainment medium. Gene Roddenberry would laugh his asses off at you people. -
you are making a VERY serious miscalculation of my character here. just because I consider myself to be a STAR TREK fan, that doesn't mean that I have any interest in preserving the INSTITUTION (franchise) STAR TREK as such. sure, I'm happy if STAR TREK continues to give me more great stories. but if the survival of STAR TREK means that it has to be DUMBED DOWN like this, then I'd rather let it die in peace.
-
there's one a couple of spaces above me. take your meds for fucksake.
-
http://tinyurl.com/penjgn"Star Trek is very philosophical. What better way, then, to learn philosophy, than to watch Star Trek, read philosophy, and hash it all out in class? That's the plan. This course is basically an introduction to certain topics in metaphysics and epistemology philosophy, centered around major philosophical questions that come up again and again in Star Trek. In conjunction with watching Star Trek, we will read excerpts from the writings of great philosophers, extract key concepts and arguments and then analyze those arguments. The questions that we will wrestle with include:
I. Is time travel possible? Could we go back and kill our grandmothers? What is the nature of time?
II. Could reality be radically different from what "we" (I?) think? Could we be brains in vats?
III. What is the relation between a person's mind and his functioning brain--are they separate substances or identical? Can persons survive death? Can computers think? Is Data a person?
IV. What is a person? When do we have one person, and when do we have two (think of the episodes where people "split" or are "fused")?
V. Do people have free will, or are they determined by the laws of nature to do exactly what they wind up doing, while believing they have free will? Or both? What is free will? "Pretty narrow for an artist joshuavance1701..as an aside, feel like sharing any links to your work? -
again, you're wrong. I would have LOVED SO MUCH for this new TREK to be both good AND popular! when I heard (before I'd seen it) that it resonates well with "regular" audiences AND trekkies, I was totally looking forward to finally being able to talk with more people about this beloved franchise of mine. but, alas, turns out THEY like it now because it's been tailored for the stupid masses.
-
It's a lot more than a few. I bet at the end of the day it doesn't make as much money as the first Transformers, and prevailing opinion on that piece of shit is that it is just that, a piece of shit.
-
oh, and HOW GREAT that YOU know (and tell us) what STAR TREK really is! thank you so much! it's not like I've been a TREK fan for 20 years and MAYBE I know for myself what STAR TREK is, for me. no, I surely need an idiot like you to tell me it's a franchise, a product. I got news for you: perhaps STAR TREK always used to be a VERY CLEVER combination of both entertainment AND philosophy. perhaps that's why it appealed to different kinds of people, those who like an adventurous sci-fi series and those who like some intellectually touched entertainment. and, only perhaps, you have always been a member of the former group, which is why you STILL like the new TREK. but (and please try to understand this now, even with your not-so-intellectual mind) the new TREK isn't that clever combination anymore. is has now been reduced to adventures in space with starships and fistfights. sure, for people like you, nothing has changed, because you never even saw the more intellectual aspects to begin with. but for us, who liked to be entertained AND inspired to think by STAR TREK... for us, everything has changed.
-
Your logic is very flawed. Star Trek was never expected to make as much $ as Transformers. Transformers was a behemoth from the word go, whereas Trek films have traditionally been B movies that made modest money, or even flopped in a few cases. The fact that Trek has perfomed at this level is an amazing turnaround that is stunning and very satisfying to old fans like me. And critically speaking, you are way off on the public's perception of these movies. Transformers was aimed at children and currently has a score of 57% on rottentomatoes.com. Star Trek is holding steady at 95%! It has a better script, period. And a better director and cast. It is exceeding all box office expectations. The sequel in 2011 is likely to be huge. Deal with it. You obviously know very little of which you speak.
-
since when is box office success any measure for quality?
-
IN AN AGE WHEN HANNAH MONTANA FILM MAKES $100BILLION ON OPENING DAY, I'D SAY THE 'PUBLIC PERCEPTION' AMOUNTS TO JACK.FUCKING.SHIT.
GOD. WHAT A FUCKING TWAT YOU ARE. -
since when is box office success any measure for quality?
-
okay, you say STAR TREK has a better script than TRANSFORMERS. please tell me the GLARING PLOT HOLES and inconsistencies with long-established character personalities in the TRANSFORMERS script.
-
On most of your points about Trek v. Transformers, except for the script which is about equal, and I wasnt trying to tie them together in any way other than to say how much money a film makes at the box office is totally fucking meaningless to it's quality. Yet people still bring up box office dollars over and over and over and I've had enough of it.
-
...WHEN SOME TOOL CLAIMS TO LIKE THE NEW TREK, THEN REFER TO THEMSELVES AS AN 'OLD FAN'.
OBVIOUSLY WAY TOO MUCH VICODIN AFTER THAT MASSIVE HEAD INJURY INVOLVING AN OUT OF CONTROL DILDO. -
so someone made a star trek movie that people can enjoy. jesus fucking christ go masturbate to pikachu drawings or something.
-
So, here is something that someone will have to explain to me: Why is it that when someone expresses that they didn't like the film, then explains WHY they didn't like the film they are a HATER--when the most common comeback to that disappointment is "You guys suck! Quit Whining! Get out of your parent's Basement! We hate you!"
I mean, who is the hater here?
I try very hard not to make any personal attacks toward anyone (except when I responded back in kind to Chris--but then that was provoked), but to explain my disappointment as clearly as I can.
The venomouse attacks are mostly directed from the Mob to the people who are daring to stand out against something they didn't like.
The OMFG YOU ARE SO STUPID defense is not a defense at all, and it isn't much of an argument either (didn't Monty Python teach us this?).
I think, in the end what we are seeing is a clear division in what we all think of as Star Trek--and that is fine. I do wish that if they are going to have two universes to play in that they would create new content in both universes, but that will probably not happen.
Oh well. There will be many more bad movies coming out this and other summers to argue about, hopefully we can do it in a way that is not a personal attack.
Now, back to more DS9! -
back to more DS9... those were the days of GREAT STAR TREK :-)
-
I have four of the seven seasons and am watching them in order, with the fifth on the way.
Outside of the original series, it is my absolute favorite Star Trek... -
it's true, I only "hate" the movie, I don't hate the people who like it. but they certainly seem to hate us. what did we do?? it's not our fault that the movie sucks. we're just saying it how it is.
-
I had fun w/ it. I've been a lifelong casual fan of Trek-it's pretty good, but I see it for what it is. You ask me to watch it or Twilight Zone or Mash or say Charlie Chan movies, I'll take those over it any day of the week. Ditto watching da Sawks or da Cubs play. But if you wanna know-did I like what they did w/ this new reboot of Trek? why yes. It's pretty good. There' nothing wrong w/ it, really. Someone call the WAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMbulance here. morons.
-
You must learn to get over yourself. Your fucking opinions are just that-your own fucking opinions. Because you pontificate about a given movie, pro or con it's no matter-doesn't mean fuck-all to Anyone save yourself. You like hearing yourself bloviate. That's great. So do I. So does everyone else here. But for chrissakes your pomposity here REALLY gets outta hand. I eagerly await your spooging over the next installment of the Hulk.
-
Thanks for your post above, ccchhhrrriiisssm. brightgeist, you just lost a fan. One truth? Black or white? C'mon! Seriously? You were joking, right? The only truth is that there are many sides to every story, good or bad, better or worse. Maybe the truth that I missed is that douche-baggery runs deeper than I thought.Yeah, I do miss the days before everyone thought that they're tough (tell me where you're at and I'll come and punch you in the face) and people could agree to disagree instead of resorting to name-calling (fuck all you haterz in the ass). I guess it's easier to do when you know that their won't be any reprecussions.That said, I'll fight anyone who disagrees, and then call you and your mother (what the heck, your whole family, too) every name in the book and then you'll all see that I am the king of the world, and everyone else is a total fucking loser.Mike Judge, how could you make such a shitty movie that is so right on the money (Idiocracy). You deserve a kick in the crotch (Owww, my balls!).Remember kids, we all know when you're being a douchebag, so re-read that post before you hit enter.rant deux fini
-
cool :-) I have every episode of all 6 TREK series on DVD, and DS9 is my absolute favorite of them all.
-
I don't hate you for hating Star Trek. I'm just grateful you're here to tell me "how it is" otherwise I wouldn't have a clue if the movie I watched was good or not.Also, if you read your own 6:17 post back to yourself out loud it may give you an insight as to why other posters might "hate" you.
-
my statement about "one truth" may require some explanation. of course, I don't mean there's on simply black-or-white truth about questions like "is the new STAR TREK good or bad". I mean, there IS one true answer to that question, but it's definitely neither "black" nor "white", if you know what I mean. the answer to the question may be very complex, but there's still ONE TRUE answer. I think it's just out of laziness or fear of conflict that people say "let's agree to disagree". there is a definitive answer to EVERY question. sometimes the answer is very easy to find (does 1 + 1 = 2?). sometimes it takes some work to arrive at an answer (how good or bad is the new STAR TREK movie?). and in some cases, it's almost certainly impossible to ever KNOW the answer (does god exist?). and still, we know that there IS an answer. god either exists or he doesn't. THIS is an example where there's in fact a black-or-white answer. regarding STAR TREK, there isn't. but there's an answer nonetheless. and I think we've made at least SOME progress towards that answer in this TB.
-
I'm not telling anyone "how it is". all I'm saying is how I FELT ABOUT THE MOVIE.
-
as a big fan I had reservations. Yes, it had pacing and energy and fine SFX, particularly the ending shots of Enterprise and the "Jupiter" shot. But it also had a thin story, particularly Nero and his motivations. The Vulcans came off as helpless and bullying, with little of the regal authority and ethics of previous Trek. Spock gives in to Kirk's bullying much too easily. Kirk's space rebel provides key battle information, but he shows no tactical brilliance to explain his meteoric rise. SPOILER And the perfunctory offer of mercy to Nero is dismissed with mocking indifference to Kirk and Spock's essential human compassion. Yeah, I know they're both younger here. Can't say that much about the actors because it'll take some time to digest the performances. How do they stack up considering they are playing younger, less experienced people. Plus the script had few long exchanges. Despite the talk of changes what works best is Classic Trek; the talks on the bridge; thrilling rescues; the nomenclature of Trek - warp drive, Starfleet Academy, the Enterprise herself. What worked less for me was the added gore, sexless sex. Some of this reminded me of "Corbomite Maneuver" -- the ship under attack. Which is good. Where did 150 million dollars go? It had to be special effects -- they were dazzling and brief -- because this Big E had fewer standing sets than the 1960's TV show. They did the minimum bridge, corridor and transporter room, but sickbay could have been ER with set dressing, and that engineering set (a brewery) could have only fit into that hull via Irwin Allen 4D physics (love Irwin Allen stuff by the way). The "Starfleet Outpost" Spock and Kirk entered had tile flooring and they came through a crash door like your local high school, complete with plastic bullhorn mounted in the corner. Look, even in Trek III, a low budget Trek, the space bar looked distinctly Trek, down to the glasses. It's the same in the Star Wars universe, everything is designed. At this price, Trek should be no different. The costumes worked well, though the originals seemed to fit better. The pullover idea is a good one, though. Miss great individual Trekkian costumes like the duty jackets in STII, or the Vulcan costumes in the original movies. Look, I'm a biiiiiig fan. At least I can say the movie kept my attention. That's rare these days. As an action movie I'd rate it pretty high. As Trek, well, it could have had much more heart. Enjoy your weekend.
-
May 22, 2009 6:59:22 PM CDT
I'm sorry, let me burn some insense and we can hold hands
by industrykiller!
Give me a break. This isn't Meet the Press, there aren't laws of candor and why should there be? One thing and one thing only matters, the ability to back up your point with details, if you can't do that I could care less to hear about your griping about being insulted. Some people SHOULD be insulted. This is a country full of people who have become far too comfortable with being intellectually bankrupt philistines. I'm insulted by the constant and vacuous praise for awful genre films that purposefully butcher the spirit of their original idea for the sake of NOTHING but a cheap buck. That's more insulting to me than anything anyone can say and if you praise it then you're part of the problem.
-
This fucker likes Deep shits nine and has the audacity to try to lecture someone on what constitutes quality science-fiction? Dude go back to your fucking new age Bajoran spiritual enlightenment that festering piece of shit series sucked just as bad as Voyager and Enterprise, it only gets a free ride from certain Trek fans under 21 years of age because of massive space battles, everything else is entirely disposeable fluff, who are the cunts jumping on Star Wars' bandwagon now?
-
Hannah Montana fucking bombed at the box office dude, 100 million first day my white rosey ass.
As far as box office being relevant, well shitheads if a movie is THAT fucking bad it usually dissapears rather quickly , you know, sort of like WATCHMEN. There's plenty of uninspired Indy films that are "high-quality" being produced for film-whores such as yourselves. -
Thanks for your points. It seems that those of us who had a problem with the movie all noticed the same things. You would think that if they were going to make a Star Trek movie, then they might use some of the talented people who worked on the previous shows, like the amazing Mike and Denise Okuda, who not only designed the graphic design for Star Trek for the last 23 years, but also would be great resources when it comes to continuity--like Star Trek Chronology and Encyclopedia.
Now, that doesn't mean that you have to be slavish to the old Universe, but they would be able to help with things that wouldn't be affected by the time travel or finding the proper Trek terminology for Galaxy-threatening disasters. They even know real scientists who could corroborate or dismiss the writers' ideas.
Well, if they wanted it to make sense. -
The new film is a departure from the shit we've been spoon fed under the banner of Trek under Bermans watch for the last 23 years. FUCK Berman era Trek. It sucked horribly. You guys have become so accustomed to mediocrity passing itself off as quality science fiction you are defending and longing for the shittiest period in Trek history bar none. Good fucking riddance. Star Trek is about Captain Kirk and Spock and the starship Enterprise not the convoluted hackneyed shit that raped the name Trek Berman produced. Fuck Benjamin Sisko. Fuck, Kathryn Janeway, Fuck Jonathan Archer. hell, fuck even Picard and his PC dispassionate starship Ramada Inn.
-
..OF RATIONALIZATIONS ABOUT HOW THE MOVIE ISN'T 'THAT BAD' ARE EVEN MORE FUCKING MORONIC AND MIND-NUMBING THAN THE 'I LOVED THIS MOVIE' POSTS. BECAUSE THE PEOPLE POSTING THAT DRIVEL ARE NOTHING MORE THAN SPINELESS COWARDS.
IT SUCKED, ASSHOLE FENCE-SITTERS. THE SOONER YOU ACCEPT THAT, THE QUICKER YOU CAN GET BACK TO SOMETHING THAT REMOTELY RESEMBLES REALITY. -
..OF ENTERPRISE WAS BETTER THAN 99% OF THIS NEW FILTH. AND THAT, DEAR NONCES, IS TRULY SAYING SOMETHING.
-
WEE WEE POO POO SHIT FUCK CUNT I HATE THIS MOVIE, MUMMY HELP ME, I AM RIGHT, WEE WEE POO POO
you're a fucking loser and every single person with an ounce of taste knows you're a piece of shit.
suck on your hate. explode you shit stain. -
why am I not surprised that you don't like WATCHMEN, the most important movie of our time? well, I guess all the philosophical, intellectual themes must have been pretty hard to digest for an infantile person like you.
-
..I TOOK IT HOME, DOUSED IT WITH LIGHTER FLUID, AND BURNED IT ALIVE AS YELCHIN'S HORRIBLE FUCKING RUSSIAN ACCENT WARBLED OUT OF THE THING:
ENSIGN CHEKOV, PAVEL ANDREIEVICH, SIR"
FUNNY THING IS, THE THING DID A BETTER JOB OF ACTING THAN THAT SUPER TWINK ANTON DID.
NEXT UP: I SMEAR SHIT ON THE SPOCK BOBBLEHEAD AND RUN IT OVER WITH MY LAWNMOWER. -
..AND UTTERED THE FIRST BIT OF THAT 'ORRIBLE DOCTOR ZHIVAGO AFFECTED ACCENT, I SWEAR TO FUCKING GOD I THOUGHT THE OTHER ACTORS WERE GOING TO START CRACKING UP. TRUE STORY.
-
Not only do I like Deep Space Nine, I love it.
Because it has great characters, social commentary, a sweeping story arc and works as a great counterpoint to TOS and Next Gen.
The great thing about DS9 is that they are stuck on the space station and have to live with the consequences of their actions wheras the Enterprise can go to some planet, Kirk can break the Prime Directive every week and tell planets what they are doing wrong and then move on without thinking about it.
That was the great thing about DS9's Mirror Universe episodes, because they showed the consequences of Kirk's interferance and how that played out for the humans in that universe.
Actually, if you think about Wrath of Khan, it is very similar--the whole plot is dependant on Kirk's cavalier attitude and how it comes back to bite him in the ass. Kirk maroons Khan and never thinks about him again, whereas Khan spends every day of his exile thinking about what he will do to Kirk when he finds him.
They tried to find that level of depth in the new film with Nero's obsession with Spock--but because they don't take the time to develop the backstory, it rings shallow and false.You could have replaced the destruction of Romulus with Nero being obsessed with Spock not wanting to date Nero and never calling him back and it would be pretty much the same level of exposition that they gave him.
Sure gives that whole "SPOOOOCCKKK!!!" that Nero screams a whole different spin, doesn't it? -
LOL, and I totally agree
-
DS9 FUCKING RULED.
I DIDN'T THINK IT POSSIBLE TO FIND ANYONE AS UTTERLY CLUELESS AND PEDESTRIAN AS CCCOOOCKKANNDDBALLLS, BUT THERE YOU STAND. KING OF THE MORONS. -
"Watchmen the most important film of our time?"
And with that statement, ALL invariably comes to be revealed. You have effectively negated and rendered null and void, any thing you have said, and anything you can POSSIBLY say. I won't even hazard a response to such a statement so callously concieved. It's fairly clear now what the mindset is of a select few, but I digress. Well kids, it's off to see Trek again, see you bitches for the sequel. -
IT'S OFF TO SEE TREK AGAIN, AND THEN YOUR DUMPSTER DATE AFTER?
IT'S FRIDAY NIGHT ALREADY? DAMN! -
Yeah Joshua, that might take some *GASP* thought and reasoning!!!!! I wouldn't want you to strain yourself coming up with a well detailed argument, better sit this one out too.
-
I'LL BE TAKING ALL OF THE BURGER KING TREK BOBBLEHEADS AND MELTING THEM TOGETHER TO FORM A GIANT COCK IN THE SHAPE OF JJ'S HEAD.
OFFERS FOR THIS MASTERWORK OF FINE ART WILL BE ACCEPTED STARTING IMMEDIATELY.
-
You are damn skippy, Deep shits nine most certainly works as an effective counter-point to original TRUE Star Trek. It perfectly demonstrates as a counter-point good Trek, versus Shit Trek. You guys have been out to sea or playing in Bermans sandbox FAR too long. You have lost all perspective. Maybe you just like homogenized bland neutral by the book paint by numbers Star Trek - interchangeable Captain Shum on the starship shucks or space station shits.
I like it when Star Trek is focused and true to itself. Star Trek, is about a Captain named Kirk, on a starship called Enterprise, conducting a five year mission of exploration. Simple, concise, to the point.
You guys seriously need to stop posting Gay Kirk-Spock videos on Youtube, it's distasteful and insulting. -
Dammit man is your Mom still living in that dumpster? I told that bitch to get a job and an apartment. Evidently turning tricks didn't pan out. Ah well, once a whore, always a whore. Wouldn't you say ShitBag?
-
...WAS THAT THOSE PRICK AICN STAFF REVIEWERS WHO WENT ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND FUCKING ON ABOUT HOW GLORIOUS THIS NEW TREK WAS NEVER MENTIONED ANYTHING ABOUT:
1. WORST PLOT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA
2. APPALLINGLY BAD SCIENCE
3. UTTERLY IMPLAUSIBLE CHARACTER MOTIVATIONS.
4. WORST PLOT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA
5. WORST PLOT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA
6. WORST PLOT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA
7. WORST PLOT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA
8. WORST PLOT IN THE HISTORY OF CINEMA.
9. APPALLINGLY BAD SCIENCE
10. HORRIBLE RUSSIAN ACCENT.
-
I am usually QUITE an optimist, and also quite self-confident. but I just thought about EXPLAINING to you the importance of WATCHMEN, and... well... for the first time in years I knew I wasn't up to a task. it would be like trying to get a totally ignorant talkbacker to understand the meaning of a movie that actually says a lot of important things about today's society. no, wait, that wasn't an abstract enough analogy. let me rephrase. explaining to you, josh, the importance of the movie WATCHMEN, would be about as difficult than teaching a piece of dogshit to fetch a stick. you, too, have quite a bit of human DNA inside you, but that obviously doesn't mean that you're capable of human tricks, such as using your brain.
-
so you're a fan of the original STAR TREK series, and you also like the new STAR TREK movie, right? and you think there's continuity between the two, don't you? then why is it that in BALANCE OF TERROR everyone on the bridge is shocked when they see that Romulans have pointy ears like Spock, but in the new movie, no-one even reacts AT ALL when Spock mentions the common ancestry of Vulcans and Romulans?
-
Star Trek is far more than rehashing the same characters over and over. Do you know who decided that was true?
Oh yeah, Gene F*cking Roddenberry--and the millions of fans who followed him in 1987 with The Next Generation and beyond.
Star Trek is the idea of a future where The Federation exists, where Earth is at peace and is now focusing it's energies to explore and learn from the universe, where people are allowed to let their greatest talents blossom and inspire their future--and where adventure is not only on the Starship Enterprise, but around every corner on every planet.
I am really sorry for you if you can only see one (Statistically) small part of the entire Star Trek universe as the real Star Trek--now made even smaller by this new half-assed adaptation.
Because, that is all this film and it's sequels will ever be, adaptations of adventures that may be "dated" by when they were made, but who's influence is felt in not only every other Star Trek show and film ever made--but every science fiction show and film made in the last 40 years.
Keep your idea of Star Trek small if you want. Bend over and take what the new films gives you, if you so desire. I choose to embrace Star Trek from the period of it's greatest success, when there were hundreds of hours of great stories rather than two hourse of mediocrity.
But, that's just my opinion, right? -
...IS REALLY JUST ANGRY THAT 'GLEE' WILL ONLY BE SHOWN ONCE BEFORE IT VANISHES INTO OBLIVION, THAT FUCKING PILLOW BITER.
-
that's also my opinion :-)
-
... who thought the entire rest of humankind in THE MATRIX universe existed on the Nebuchadnezzar. and when we saw Zion in RELOADED, it was too much for them.
-
"WATCHMEN, the most important movie of our time?"
You've got to be kidding me. -
"WATCHMEN, the most important movie of our time?"
You've got to be kidding me. It's not even the most important graphic novel... damn good one tho. -
It helps to pay attention to the fucking movie if you are trying to convey a thought. Nero corrupted the timeline by appearing when and where he shouldn't have been, in the 23rd century. By appearing, the timeline ruptured and an alternate reality was created. The telemetry of the Kelvin and the survivors not only clued Starfleet in on Romulans, it introduced advanced 24th century technology. This coupled with George Kirk dying results in the Enterprise being launched far later, and far more advanced than it originally was. George Kirk contributed to Constitution class vessel design and without his presence the configuration of the ship was changed.
No one reacts to the common ancestry of Vulcans and Romulans in the film because there is no surprise element. Ayel appeared to the crew of the Kelvin thereby altering when Starfleet get's it's first glimpse of what exactly a Romulan looks like. Think man, think. -
Induced prematurely Winona Kirks labor, resulting in Kirk being born on the shuttle, not on Earth, where he would have been had the Kelvin went along on it's merry way and not encountered the Narada.
Enterprise was built in Iowa rather than San Francisco to commemorate and honor the sacrifice of the Kelvin, of which George Kirk was from Iowa.
You got no plot holes you God damn whores. You've got nothing. -
Anyone else notice his names is basically Romulan Ale?
Ha. Another "great" joke from Orci and Kurtzman... -
is that the best you got? Come on fuckers time to put up or shut up, STUMP ME. Where are these plot holes you hack face fucks?
-
For the last time, the problem isn't plot holes that have to be retroactively patched because they didn't think of it the first time around--it sin't so much the PLOT (what there is) as it is the WAY they made the film that I have the biggest problem with.
The Script, the Production Design, The Direction, The Cinematography, The Special Effects, The Editing, The Music--these were where it fell down for me.
Which is pretty much the whole movie.
I didn't mind Vulcan's destruction, George Kirk naming James or Sarek telling Spock that he loved Spock's mom...Those were the few highlights for me that felt fresh in a sea of regurgitated plot points and dialogue. Well, quotations rather than dialogue--but you know what I mean.
The film actively rides the Nostalgia wave, but there really isn't much more to it than that.
Again, that's my opinon... -
How about Nero sitting on his ass for 25 years waiting for his sexual obsession Spock rather than trying to kill young Spock or take over the sector with his advanced technology? That is kind of a massive one.
How about transporting to a GODDAMN STARSHIP MOVING AT WARP SPEED from a stationary point using a low-powered Transporter? How does that one throw you?
How about an ungradutated Cadet being made Captain because there are seemingly no serving officers on the USS Budweiser?
I await your answer. -
So there aren't glaring "plot holes" now all of a sudden, so all along you are just pissed it's a Kirk-centric film and not one of the other series of characters and just your own arbitrary designations and preferences. Well you're right, it's your opinion and that's about it.
I tell you fuckers what, I guara-ndamn-tee you my left ass cheek has forgotten more about Star Trek than any of you fucks have or ever will know. So where are these fuckers like Ben Stein or Bright national socialism or whatever the hell he calls himself? Where is ShitBag and that idiot Asimov, come on you fuckers bring that shit. Come on give me a plot hole so I can inform you. Stop talking the shit and bring it, so I can embarass your asses into seeing Wolverine again. -
Bring it.
-
As it is the fact that I (once again so you can catch up) didn't like the filmmaking.
Now, some of the other guys aren't as worried about that as the SUPER MASSIVE PLOT HOLES (Ha! I made a Muse reference) and I won't deny that there are plot holes.
It just isn't my primary concern. -
If that's the best you got then your ass is handed to you pal.
The Kelvin rammed the Narada causing massive damage and adequate distraction for the shuttles to escape. During repairs the Klingons intercepted and imprisoned Nero and his crew for TADA 25 years until Nero escapes and decimates a Klingon fleet before returning to greet Elder Spock as he arrives from the future. Didn't you notice his mauled ear. That bitch Titbag must have nibbled a bit since he is a common prison fuck.
Elder Spock introduced, TADA future technology to young Montgomery Spock. Say, how LONG exactly was Montgomery Scott flying around the 24th century in a SHUTTLE Captain Picard "loaned" him? Long enough to perhaps develop a formula FINALLY for transwarp beaming? It doesn't explicitly state, nor does it need to, when exactly in the future Scotty develops the technology. OR gives it to Spock.
You've got to be shitting me right? Kirk saves the entire Enterprise crew from being decimated by the Narada, Captain Pike, selflessly dives for Sulu, beats Spocks computer simulation for the Kobayashi Maru (remember ass fucks the hearing was interrupted with the emergency, no decision or verdict had been reached) and was promoted First Officer by Pike. it was hardly a cadet Kirk to Captain scenario I dont know what film you fucks watched. Besides, It is a precedent some graduates are Lieutenants, Saavik, Kirk, etc. So just because it doesnt state a rank for Kirk, doesn't mean he was a fucking Ensign like Chekov.
Like I said, you got no fucking plot holes. -
It is an Alternate Universe Kirk-Centric Film That I Don't Care About.
Well, really it focuses on the Two Spocks...but who cares anymore?
I really think you are hilarious. -
Wesley Crusher was given a position DRIVING the fucking Enterprise and he wasn't even IN Starfleet. I don't want to hear a fucking thing about Kirks ascension.
-
May 22, 2009 9:47:03 PM CDT
Trek was enjoyable, but doesn't stand up to scrutiny
by dark knight lite
The more I think about the whole "Planet Coincidence" sequence, the more it aggravates me. The level of AICN fellatio for this film is sickening, and is provoking a backlash. We are guaranteed a sequel, so lay off the relentless shilling. Dark Knight Out.
-
...would have been a good explanation, had they bothered to include it in the f*cking movie...but they didn't. And if they had been in prison for 25 years, why didn't the Klingons tear the Narada apart for parts?
Spock introduced a Transwarp Equation, not new technology. Doesn't change the fact that it would require a Transporter of IMMENSE POWER to transport over long distances and at Warpspeed--by which time, The Enterprise would have been at the Laurentine system or wherever. BUT, through the power of IGNORING WHAT ISN'T CONVENIENT TO THE SCRIPT (similar to the quick montage of walking to the Icebase which would have taken hours or a day) Scotty was able to do what no ship in the history of Star Trek could ever do, when even the ships in the 24th Century could only ever beam from the upper atmosphere.
As to Kirk--she should have still only been a Lieutenant or Commander at the end of the film--Or they should have just had Pike say that Kirk would be the ship's next commander and ended 2 years later with Kirk assuming command.
What is one final time-jump between friends?
But, the didn't...and the holes still exist. -
May 22, 2009 9:53:05 PM CDT
Can't We All Just Get Along like the Great Bird wants Us to?
by cymbalta4thedevil
joshuavance is right about the plotholes. You guys keep complaining that we aren't adressing your problems with the story, but your problems mainly indicate that YOU WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION. No matter how many times we correct you on these things, you keep on calling US the idiots. For example, the most obvious "coincidence" in the movie is the bringing together of Kirk, Spock Prime and Scotty on the ice planet. But this was not some "random planet" where they all happened to bump in to each other. They all have specific reasons for being there which are explained in the scripted dialogue. Scotty has been given a shitty posting. Spock was left there to view Vulcan's destruction. And Kirk was dropped on the nearest planet with a Federation base and told he will be rescued if he stays in the pod. Spock leaving him there rather than putting him in the brig is NOT bad writing. It is further evidence that Spock is emotionally unstable and not up to captaining the ship.The fact that their reasons do not "coincide" with each other makes their meeting coincidental, but would you rather they DIDN'T meet? How would you bring them together? The audiences clearly enjoy the monster sequence, Spock's rescue of Kirk, their mind meld and conversation which, again, EXPLAINS HALF OF THE SUPPOSED PLOT HOLES YOU KEEP REGURGITATING IN THESE TALKBACKS, and their meeting with Scotty. If you don't buy into it, so be it.And last but not least, Anton Yelchin, who is of Russian descent, has said in interviews, that he considered doing a more realistic accent, but felt the more comedic approach would pay bettter tribute to Walter Koenig and the campy fun of the original series. So please STFU about Chekov's accent.
-
mere convenience to your weak argument, not script. Some of you fucks clearly just like debating for the sake of debating, I have zero desire or intention to try to convince anyone that didn't like this movie to infact like it. A veritable slippery slope ensues. We can write a treatise indefinitely on the merits of plot, pacing, LIGHTING, dialogue, consistency, adherence to Trek canon, film proficiency ad nauseum. The bottom fucking line is, when you cut through all the bullshit, those with such a grudge against this film were predisposed to, and are simply pissed the film isn't what THEY wanted it to be- and for that, you are nothing, nothing but incessent assholes and dickheads completely anhedonic and lacking in joy. Nimoy called it magnificently about you fucks. You cunts would be content with another Nemesis dooming Trek to another 5 or 10 year hiatus. Thank GOD almighty these types aren't involved in the creative process and are relegated to hackneyed arm-chair critics. May Kirks fat swollen bloated hands punch your sole nut forcing the other to drop.
-
about Deep Space Nine. I really enjoyed that series. Behr and Moore and the rest got out from under Roddenberry's meddling and Berman's distraction with Voyager and produced some really fun and thought provoking television. It's definitely the most subversive Trek we've ever seen.
-
But, you didn't answer my points.
But that is okay, I didn't expect you to.
Cymbalta--thanks for being civil, dude. I honestly am looking for discourse that doesn't devolve into name-calling, and you deliver. You'll notice that I don't question the destruction of Vulcan (although they did create a brand new planet to be conveniently next to Vulcan), how Spock and Scotty find each other, the Kobiashi Maru scene (which was better than originally scripted and shot, since Kirk didn't even reprogram the test--he got the Orion girl to do if for him)--my main beefs were with how the film was made.
Personally, would I have preferred the film to be about someone other than remaking Kirk and his era? Sure.
But, I began to accept the project for what it was as I found out more and more--but I can't get behind how they executed the Enterprise design or sets (or lack thereof...come on guys, you have to admit it looks crappy when they are off the clean bridge and hallway sets)--but I completely understand that it isn't an issue for most.
I am not attacking people for likeing the film, but I am defending my right to NOT like it--and I am keenly interested in what people actually like about it.
But, honestly, most people's answers about why they like it is summed up as Good Dumb Fun.
And I don't mean to be the voice of dissent--but I guess I require more from a Star Trek film. That's just me. -
In the final film, Kirk reprograms the test--but there is a cut scene where the whole reason he is making out with the Orion babe is so he can get her to help him reprogram the test.
It was a lot more fun to have him just be the big stud on campus--and I am glad they made the change.
See? I can find a few things to like...just not the whole film. -
Oh, and for the record, that corner animation is the most disturbing yet. The guy that creates those must be seriously warped.
-
Your crap works on the drugged out freaks of Hollyweird--hence, your career--but the rest of us have functioning brains.
-
Bitching about the plot holes in ST and how time travel was handled so poorly in ST. Oh fuck is the Dark Tower a jumbled mess of plots holes, abandoned plot threads, and multiverse illogic. I liked the Dark Tower but damn, some people are giving King a lot more leeway than this Trek film. I guess it is a lot easier to say that you wasted two hours on a movie than twenty five years waiting for King to finish his opus, only for meh?
and don't flame me back or I'll send the Crimson Santa after you, EEEEEEEEE! -
http://tinyurl.com/otb4g4
-
In the deleted scene Kirk creates the patch and Gailen simply agrees to open it in the 23rd century equivalent of E-mail and download it to the simulation. The work was still all Kirks reconfiguring the Kobiyashi Maru scenario. Sorry pal, no dice.
-
But some of its "flaws" are part of its charm. I like the use of realistic locations. I like the fact that Scotty's base looks exactly like a crappy base on a planet nobody cares about. Even in the 23rd Century a place like that might look like something out of Carpenter's THE THING and not like the Federation's version of a luxury hotel. I like the fact that they tried to make the inner workings of a ship look like the inner workings of a ship and not like every other room on the Enterprise. I liked the visual contrast. It shows that while decisions are being made on the bridge, the real work is being done by sweaty nervous people in an enviornment that is not designed for aesthetics. It's not what TREK fans are used to seeing, but it is what non TREK sci fi fans ARE used to getting from BSG, Firefly, Farscape, the Alien films etc. etc. I give Abrams a pass on that one, though he could have used something besides a brewery? I think the NEXT film will give us more of what Trek fans expect, with added energy from a younger cast and the success of the first film. Trek should always be FUN and never be DULL. It can be philosophical without being ponderous. It can be futuristic without resorting to technobabble. Abrams and his gang have given us that sort of thing on ALIAS and LOST and FRINGE. If they didn't entirely succeed to everyone's liking with this film, they certainly didn't fail as miserably as some of you keep insisting.The box office is proof that people are enjoying this movie and telling others to see it. And their reasons for enjoying it aren't any less intelligent than your reasons for not enjoying it.
-
And all of the sudden you aren't interested in convincing anyone about the film or debating it's merits. Give it a fuckin rest man. I mean Jesus the best you got is "The enterprise was built to commemorate hte Kelvin in Iowa." What thin blue fucking sky did you pull that one out of? Also if you really wanna apologize for some plot holes go up to my post that says "PLOT HOLES" in big bold letters. The ones Bones mentioned are nothing compared to those that I listed.
-
Enjoying the film does not make you unintelligent. I enjoyed hte film. It's got a great cast, some brilliant visuals, and breezy exciting directing. But when guys liek Joshua say "there are no plot holes" that makes him an idiot. If you can't be realistic, like you seem to be, then your reason for liking it are stupid.
-
Almost every work of art has flaws. To begin with, it's the aspiration of all great art to be entertaining as hell AND profound as hell, but this is a combination reserved for the likes of Shakespeare and Philip K. Dick and a few others. In most cases, one is going to be sacrificed for the other. And the same principle of tradeoff applies to more specific aspects of a work of art's purpose. In the case of Star Trek, sure, one can imagine a genius script that contained the classic Trek moral seriousness while simultaneously rebooting the franchise and establishing a new set of actors in the familiar roles. But given a choice between the two, it is clear what the priority of the filmmakers was -- and what it should have been. And it's not like every great episode of TOS had the moral depth of "The City on the Edge of Forever"; there were pure butt-kicking action in eps like "The Doomsday Machine." If you were let down that this movie lacked the gravitas of some of the best of TOS, is that the movie's problem--or your own?
Sometimes the "flaws" in a work of art are intentional on the part of the creators, because allowing them gives freedom for desired strengths. Most obviously, in a science fiction movie, precise scientific rigor is often an impediment to exciting storytelling. As a former physics major I'll be the first to testify that the "red matter" made no fucking sense at all, in terms of contemporary physics. It didn't bother me a bit. It served the purpose of the plot and it wasn't impossible (because the Standard Model of physics is almost certainly wrong in big, important ways), and that was sufficient.
Folks have pointed out that the music wasn't great, that the Scotty-in-the-water-tubes sequence was kind of ludicrous and that the design of the engine room problematical, that his sidekick really didn't work, and probably a couple of other flaws. I would agree with all of these. I still loved the movie, because they are small flaws that didn't come close to undermining my overall delight.
The intent of this movie was to cast new, talented actors in the iconic TOS roles and set the stage for a series of movies featuring them, while telling an exciting story and not negating the original canon. Period. They succeeded brilliantly. Quinto IS Spock, Pine IS Kirk, and above all Urban IS Bones. (That Pegg may not be Scotty may or may not be a misstep; we’ll see.)
So, for the most part, the haters get to keep their ball and go home and play by themselves. For some unknown reason they wanted a different movie, and for reasons that all too sadly clear, the real but minor flaws are going to stick in their throats like peanut-butter-coated action figures while all that was glorious about the movie is going to pass through their systems unobstructed like Gatorade on the eve of a colonoscopy. People use “pathetic” as a general pejorative but I really mean its original sense: I truly feel sorrow for the haters, whose brains are close to broken. What a sad life.
Oh, yeah: the haters are wrong about the “plot holes.” But those complaints are an after-the-fact rationalization to justify their dismissal of a movie everyone else seems to love.
-
It just occured to me it never ends prick and I don't have the luxury of time to indulge endlessly in responding to every single entirely forced perceptual fallacy someone pulls out of their ass, its a perpetual back and forth. I loved the film, some didn't, there's no point throwing bones to the wolves. Where some see plot holes others see inferences, where some see shoddy science others see science FICTION. It's no different than someone trying to convince me to like Terminator 4, it sucked in my mind. More or less it's all about a mickey mouse pissing contest on here, whereas some should be more concerned about impressing their girlfriends,or hand, rather than anonymous posters on an internet chat forum.
-
I scrolled up and read your plot holes post and most of them are the Exact Same Plot Holes that we keep explaining over and over and over again. Watch the film again when it comes out on DVD with the SUBTITLES on and you will see that the film's script ANSWERS all your QUESTIONS. The fact that some of you don't enjoy or approve of the answers you're given is a perfectly valid response. Pretending or Ignoring or Denying that the Answers are there in the first place is NOT. The main plot point that some of you seem completely oblivious to is: Nero doesn't want to KILL Spock. He wants Spock to LIVE with the knowledge that his planet was destroyed and there was nothing he could do to prevent it. And he doesn't go looking to kill Spock as a child or warn Romulus a hundred years in advance because, FOR THE HUNDREDTH FUCKING TIME YOU IDIOTS this is an alternate universe, not just an alternate timeline in Nero's. He can't go back to his universe and neither can Spock Prime. The Spock in this universe is not to blame for what happened, and in this universe Romulus may never be destroyed. He wants to torture Spock Prime the way he was tortured, and punish the entire Federation that isn't even the same Federation. He's a crazy angry vengeful Romulan. Of course his actions are illogical.
-
If I'm wrong about the plot holes then explain them. They weren't an after the fact realization, I saw them plain as day AS I was watching the film. Don't be a fucking punk and toss it off as an aside in closing. Methinks you know you've got absolutely nothing in terms of an argument. And if you think Quinto IS Spock then it's obvious you dont understand the source material. There is absolutely no way Quintos rage-a-holic sociopath drama queen SPock becomes Nimoys Zen master logic driven SPock. I mean he's already like fucking 3 when this film takes place. He's not just emotional, he's more emotional than anyone else on the ship. Does he suddenly find himself after meeting Kirk who magically turns his life around. *rolls eyes*
-
Why don't you go wrap your car around a tree and burn and rot in hell you fucking 15 year old piece of shit. You are a SAD COCKSUCKER to post OVER AND OVER AND OVER about you not liking a movie. Did your fucking worthless life depend THAT MUCH on this film for happiness? You tight penny pinching pussy are you crying about having lost 8 bucks? Mother Fucker I sat through Terminator I want my two hours back. You emotionally ill fucker everyone gets you dont like the movie take your sandy beach pussy and go watch Watchmen you obtuse piece of flotsam.
-
Thanks for the support! But, let's not pick too hard on Cymbalta, alright? He is one of the few guys who is presenting his support of the film in a way that isn't outright insulting.
I think we have pretty much hit the wall, where the only thing left is people saying "I like the film--screw you guys who don't" or "I hate the film--screw you guys who do".
Which is a real impasse.
I got into a discussion with someone on another board about FATE and DESTINY in Star Trek--and how so much of this film is about those two things. I took the approach that Fate doesn't really have a place in Star Trek, and this other person argued that it certainly did, as was seen in First Contact and DS9.
My rebuttal was that in First Contact, people from the future were pushing the events to fit the mold that was needed to form their future (and possibly they always did if it was a predestination paradox) and in DS9 it was actually the machinations of the Wormhole Aliens who live outside of Linear Time--it wasn't true fate. But in this film, Fate and Destiny (or self-correcting timeline) kind of serve the purpose of The Force in this film and seem to be pushing all of the original character together to combat the incursion of Nero--and it bothers me, as it implies a kind of intelligence or will moving everything toward a forseen goal...and that kind of goes against the Humanist Ideals of Star Trek.
I honestly hope that when they continue this series, they avoid previous storylines and let them unfold in a completely different way. -
A plot hole is something that can't be made sense of. A mere gap in a movie's narrative is not a plot hole if reasonably intelligent people can think of reasonable explanations to explain the apparent omission or oversight. Storytellers are not obliged to tell you everything.It goes without saying that it's especially not a plot hole if the storytellers have explained elsewhere exactly how the apparent gap is filled.
The "plot hole" debate here will go on endlessly because the haters are defining the term differently from everyone else. They are demanding that the narrative on screen cross every T and dot every I. That's the way children like their stories to be told, and it's actually often bad storytelling when adults are watching. -
Where are the fucking explainations. The ONE things I mentioned you responded to was barely even a plot hole so much as a gap int he logic in terms of character. And My gripe wasnt that Nero didnt kill Spock, its that he randomly and conveniently maroons him on a planet he apparently knows nothing about (given he didnt know there was a federation base nearby that would allow him to easily escape) instead of making him watch in a place he couldn't possibly escape from and foil Neros plans, like, maybe, Nero's ship. It's worse than a fucking Bond villain leaving to let a slow moving machine kill Bond unsupervised and it's just more lazy writing i.e. ALL the ridiculous coincidences I mentioned (and you chose not to acknowledge) and the vague red matter plot device.As for the alternate universe stuff I dont know who you are responding to because that wasnt one of my complaints, Im well aware that they are in an alternate timeline. If you think that's one of the thing I listed then you need to read a little more carefully, because it flat out isn't.
-
They know nothing of inference, extrapolation, correlation or creative bridging. They need everything spelled out for them laundry list style.
-
Most of these guys ideas of a "reasonable explanation" is an apology made up out of the ether. For instance Joshuas totally unsubstantiated reasoning that the Enterprise was built in Iowa as some kind of fucking tribute to George Kirk. You can't just make shit like that up. Just like you can't make up an origin for red matter, or why black holes allow you to time travel, or why of all the times and places Nero popped out it HAPPENED to be the place where Kirk was about to be born, or how Nero happened to be outside the black hole waiting at the random moment Spock came through, or how Kirk just coincidentally stumbles upon the cave Spock is in......jesus I could go on but Ive made my point. None of these things has ANY explaination that doesnt have to be completely invented from scratch by the viewer. Ergo it is a silly plot hole, or AT LEAST insanely lazy screenwriting.
-
Is that what you call inventing whole unexplained sections of a script. Man you should have worked for the Bush administration with spin like that.
-
I didn't make it up it came from the fucking writer of the movie Bob Orci over at Trekmovie that is responding to a Q and A you troubled fuck. The Riverside shipyard was to honor George Kirk who was FROM riverside Iowa. Now go burn and rot in hell.
-
It's like we're not even watching the same movie! You guys that don't like it think the people that do have their brains turned off, when it's abundantly clear that you guys are the ones who weren't paying attention. 2/3 of your problems are dealt with in dialogue during the Kirk /Spock mind meld. Did you go to the bathroom during that scene? Were you so pissed off at coincidences that you ignored the entire backstory? I'm tired of getting so worked up over this that I'm cursing in all caps over a Star Trek movie. Emfan and Bones are the only ones making sense at this point.
-
I don't give a fuck what he says in an interview, he could have made that shit up on the spot to apologize for his own pathetic screenwriting. I mean thats not even in any way inferred. They could have put a sign or something that said "George Kirk Memorial Station" or a simple line. If hes so sure of it why isnt it in the film?
-
You wrote: "Star Trek is dead. New Trek is not Star Trek." Here's a little Nietzsche for you: If Star Trek IS dead, then you are the killer. You and your obsessive, fanatical colleagues who use every opportunity to belittle any attempt to breathe life into the franchise. You have proven that Trekkies are irrelevant in this world of cinema -- and impossible to please. The good news? STAR TREK is not dead. It is alive and well...and earning new fans with every viewing of the new film. It is only "dead" in the eyes of impossible-to-please Trekkies.
-
You missed the Kelvin saltshaker Kirk played with. It wasn't a toy he pulled out of his pocket you know. Go see the movie again and this time actually watch it, to hell with the third bag of popcorn you don't need it.
-
You're just dodging my points because you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. I watch the SPock/Kirk scene and the answers to my question arent in there. They didn't answer a thing about red matter, time warping black holes, why a race of people with limitless space travel didn't evacuate their planet when the supernova that was already edging toward them became imminent, or how Spock could have so grossly miscalculated when the supernova was going to hit Romulus (in fact this is tossed of with the line "and then the unexpected happened" and is brushed aside completely). If its so obvious, fucking explain it with the information you claim was given in that scene. ANd don't just try to brush off the coincidences, they are every bit as egregious as any other lazy bullshit screenwriting device. Im taking you to task cymbalta, step up or keep your mouth shut.
-
Chance and Coincidence exist in the 21st Century in our universe. Would it be more realistic if they ceased to exist in the 23rd and 24th Centuries of a fictional one?Is there any explanation for red matter that would possibly satisfy you? It's a macguffin. And if a space anomaly that sends two different ships to an alternate universe twenty five years apart is too great a sci fi conceit for your mind to grasp, why are you watching Star Trek? Apparently it wasn't "dumbed down" enough for some of you?
-
when their complaints are well documented and well supported using specific points from the film. Trekkies rent relevant? WHat group of moviegoers is relevant. Discerning Audiences in general arent fucking relevant as the awful quality of anything is rewarded with gabs of money and only a total douche bag would celebrate that kind of idiocy.
-
"How come the only survivors of the planet Vulcan were on some random mining vessel when the Vulcans have LOOOONG had limitless space travel? Was it some sort of Vulcan religious holiday when that supernova hit and everyone just flatly refused to leave? Give me a fucking break"
Leaving aside the fact that you called the Romulans "Vulcans" three straight times ... this is typical of the level of "plot hole complaint" I'm seeing here. There is a level of simplistic stupidity (sorry, got to call a spade a spade) here that makes it real hard to not reply in ALL CAPS, but I will exercise restraint.
Who the hell says that Nero and his ship are the only survivors? Why would the presence of a hundred or a thousand other such ships, all captained by sane, non grudge-holding captains (some of whom may have even been caught in the black hole and gone back in time), affect the story in any way? Why would any competent storyteller bother mentioning the presence of all the non-pissed-off survivors? Why would Nero care about the other, unmentioned survivors?
Another poster began his "plot hole" list with the assertion that George Kirk died in vain because he could have put the ship on auto-pilot. A conclusion he apparently reached because we didn't get a specific scene or shot in which it was mentioned that the heavy damage to the ship included damage to the auto-pilot. Now, since it could be inferred incredibly easily that Kirk stayed on the ship to pilot it because the auto-pilot was indeed out, it actually would have been brutally obvious and bad filmmaking to slow down that action sequence with an "auto-pilot is out" segment when everyone can fucking figure that out.
As I said, these are not complaints about "plot holes" -- these are almost entirely complaints about simple, omitted, aspects of the story whose existence EVERYONE ELSE is correctly inferring and whose inclusion in the movie would have justifiably been assailed as dumbing down. -
The last line of my last post had nothing to do with the rest of it.
Alright, kids. I am off for the night. Please, play nice... -
It goes to show nothing the screenwriters could have come up with would have disappointed you. If chance after chance isnt enough of a lazy storytelling device for you. As for the 25 year gap, I fucking get it full well, what I dont get is how Nero, after having flown around the galaxy doing nothing for 25 years, just HAPPENED to be in front of that black hole the random moment SPock came through. It's not like he knew when it was gonna happen, you're telling me he just got lucky? But I guess thats more chance for you. And red matter is a macguffin? No shit. But it's as fucking lazy, mysterious, and completely unexplained as you could possibly have in a film, just a cheap deus ex machina to move the plot along.
-
of Romulus emvan. So fuck off on that point or try again. As for the George Kirk thing its not one of mine, and I dont agree with it. But thanks for leaving all my other major complaints completely unanswered
-
"how Spock could have so grossly miscalculated when the supernova was going to hit Romulus (in fact this is tossed of with the line "and then the unexpected happened" and is brushed aside completely)"
OK, the exact time that the supernova hits Romulus is going to be determined by an incredibly complicated computer model of the exploding star, right? And Spock is not infallible, right? And you know from chaos theory that extremely small errors in initial conditions can cause gross differences in the results, right?
And yet somehow you don't buy the fact that Spock's model of the supernova could have been incorrect? Or you would have preferred we stop the movie for Spock to explain that he had a computer model and that he must have made some error in the initial conditions that led to the supernova going off before he thought it would, when anyone with a functioning brain can work that out in thirty seconds?
Again, you are not complaining about "plot holes," you are complaining about efficient storytelling that doesn't stop to spell out every easily inferable detail. -
Emvan is exactly right above but in fact THE FILM CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE AUTOPILOT ISN'T WORKING. It shows the malfunction on George Kirk's workstation screen AND I think the computer announces it? This ignorance of what the film makes perfectly clear is why we are, to quote Kirk: "Laughing at the superior intellect."And Industry Killer, Nero isn't just pissed because Romulus was destroyed. He's pissed because his poor miner's family was still on the planet when it happened.Of course the Romulan higher ups probably escaped. This is the kind of social commentary /political allegory that Trek fans swoon over but are completely oblivious to in the movie. The poorer Romulans are basically hit by Hurricane Katrina.
-
They actually love the film, but are searching for others to explain to them why. Just drop it man they aren't worth the typing.
-
"Another poster began his "plot hole" list with the assertion that George Kirk died in vain because he could have put the ship on auto-pilot."
That was actually I who brought that up and I was in return, rightfully, corrected..George stayed behind to give the escape pod's cover fire. It still doesn't explain why the "narada" *or giant space squid* didn't continue firing on the escape pods after the kelvin dented it's hull, or why Star fleet didn't investigate the occurrence thoroughly since we're told no one but Kirk seemed to recognize the whole lightening in Space thing. This is called writing yourself into a corner and asking the audience's forgiveness and in return the special effects team will provide you with some more wizz bang pow. Unfortunately, if you were paying attention you'd catch the shitty sales pitch and be a bit insulted. -
The film can't and doesn't say anything about how many Romulan survivors there are, because the film has no omniscient narrator. The Federation can't know because it hasn't happened yet. Nero may have stated his ship was the only survivor (I saw the film twice and absolutely don't recall such an assertion), but that's meaningless; he would have deep motivation to believe he was alone. And the storyline, as I pointed out, doesn't in the least depend on his ship being the only survivor (as if there's a difference between the death of, say, 6,000,000 Romulans and 6,001,000); it just depends on his rage over the planet's destruction.
BTW, I found nearly all of your other "plot holes" equally as stupid (coincidences aren't "plot holes" either, they're coincidences, and I agree that the coincidences on the exile planet are a minor flaw) and feel no obligation to demolish them one-by-one. -
McCoy just happens to accidentally shoot himself full of a drug that makes him go crazy in "City on the Edge of Forever". He just happens to jump into the Guardian of Forever and change the future. Spock just happens to figure out a way to find him and stop him. Kirk just happens to fall in love with the woman who has to die. Boy, that Harlan Ellison is a shitty writer isn't he? Fuck him and his time travel bullshit. Alternate timeline my ass! ;^)
-
No, coincidences are a lazy writers excuse. Period!
-
I thought the whole point of crashing the Kelvin into the Narada was to prevent the Narada from firing on the escape pods. It doesn't not make sense to me that the collision could cause enough damage and chaos aboard the Narada to do so.
"why Star fleet didn't investigate the occurrence thoroughly since we're told no one but Kirk seemed to recognize the whole lightening in Space thing."
Who says they didn't investigate it thoroughly? There's probably an entire Warren Report-sized cache of documents. But who says the details would be common knowledge among everyone on board? We are given specific reasons as to why Kirk and Kirk alone has all the pieces of the puzzle. Pine in theory knows the "lightning storm in space" reference but he's apparently too busy running the ship to remember it; recall that he wrote his dissertation on the Kelvin years ago but Kirk read it very recently.
-
I'm not as well versed in old Trek as some of you, but I will say the comparison isn't applicable. TOS had very little money as well as very little production time. JJ had more then a healthy budget and enough time to make this thing air tight - what we got was something that could have been written by first year screen writing students.
-
A unbeatable Romulan ship shows up out of nowhere which then wipes out a Starship and you think everyone will just forget, including Pike who actually witnessed the fucking thing happen but it Takes young Kirk, who was too young to remember, to speak up. This makes Pike seem incredibly absent minded...but then he also didn't think to photon torpedo the space squid's penis, or call up the Vulcans and go "hey, ummm you guys might wanna wake up."
-
You know jack shit about writing if you think they are always the sign of laziness. Coincidences do happen in real life. Any human being could tell you a story about one that had a significant impact on their life. The skillful writer knows just how much coincidence a given story can stand (one rule of thumb is that you're allowed one major one per novel).
In this case, it's probably a coincidence that Scotty is on the planet near Vulcan, but maybe not; it is a punitive assignment but you might want to send the brilliant young engineer to an outpost near a scientific mecca. And it's probably a coincidence that Spock is near the Federation outpost, but maybe not: the outpost may well be in a spot that has the best or most frequent view of Vulcan, so that's where Nero would leave him, and/or Spock himself may have been headed for the outpost. It's definitely a coincidence that Kirk runs into Spock's cave, but, hey, shit happens. The whole sequence strikes me as unlikely but not to the degree that it's a deal-breaker; I can take it with a grain of salt.
-
". It doesn't not make sense to me that the collision could cause enough damage and chaos aboard the Narada to do so"..
So mining torpedos don't continue to chase their targets when their mother ship gets hit? Also, if a "photon torpedo" can't hurt the narada, how can a ship crashing into it do much more then blind it? But here's the bigger question, in Space, what dumb ass crew would allow a ship to ram you at impulse power? wouldn't, you know.. get out of the way?
I wouldn't have said anything if the Kelvin jumped at warp speed into the Narada. -
I find it amusing that these people would NEVER hold a show they claim to love written by an award winning science fiction writer to the same standards that they're holding a film they clearly don't love written by the guys who gave us TRANSFORMERS? No film is Perfect. I can shoot holes in CITIZEN KANE till the cows come home. Why does Bernstein tell the story of the first day at the newspaper when the Flashback shows HE WASN'T IN THE ROOM? How can he tell the reporter what Kane and Leland were talking about when he was walking in and out with the guys carrying the furniture? And that breakfast table montage showing years of Kane's marital troubles is really cool, but who the fuck's point of view is that from? Are we supposed to believe Charles Foster Kane came to work every day and told Jed Leland about what he and his wife argued about over their cornflakes? And if there was nobody in Kane's room when he died, how do we know his last word was "Rosebud"?!!!
-
Coincidences do happen in real life, but lightening doesn't strike four or five times in the same spot. Watching coincidences happen to Kirk is like playing a video game with god mode on.
-
Wow, time to dust off that citizen kane tb ;)
-
Pike did not witness or escape the Kelvin attack. He wrote his dissertation on it. For him to recognize what's happening before Kirk does, he has to pick up on *one specific detail* from that 20-year-old paper. That detail has been stressed for OUR benefit as viewers but was not necessarily more than one detail out of hundreds in his report. It's unlikely that he's re-read the paper since he wrote it (have you ever re-read any papers you've written for school?), whereas Kirk has probably read the paper over and over again, as the document of his father's heroism. It's set up beautifully. When I see the movie a third time I will watch what Pine is up to at the moment that Chekhov quotes the "lightning storm in space" description. I'll bet that he's reasonably distracted.
-
We'll get Spock's birth scene, Nero and his crew escaping from the Klingon Keystone Kops,the uncensored threeway with Carol Marcus and the Orion girl,a half hour of Kevin Smithesque scenes of Romulans bitching about 25 years of waiting for Godot, I mean, Spock. And the mind meld scene will be twice as long and include a power point presentation where Spock uses a laser pointer and gives a chemical analysis of the origins of red matter. The movie would be even more successful with an extra hour of exposition.
-
anyhow, I doubt any of the actors or imagery of the reboot will be iconic, will inspire the dedication of Trekkies/Trekkers whatever. It'll probably be a minor facet of the conventions, or a splinter group. The upcoming online game looks mostly like TNG.
-
for the long haul. They'll have to do TNG reboot within the timeline (though I suspect new Trek will be in the future of the original).
-
The new actors are ALREADY signed to do sequels. With a 2 to 3 year window between movies, we'll be seeing them for at least a DECADE. Get used to them. There will still be books, comics and games set in the original Universe. And I would be surprised if these actors do more than one convention a year each (if any). They're working movie stars. And they will be warmly embraced if they do go. They've rescued the Franchise.
-
Some are complaining that the Federation didn't "hunt down the Romulan ship" when it destroyed the Kelvin. You do know that at this point in time the Federation and the Romulans were in the middle of an intergalactic cold war right? Who's to say the Federation didn't think that the giant ship didn't scoot on back to Romulus? No one had any idea that it was displaced from an alternate reality. It would have been like barging into Soviet borders in the mid-60's looking for an advanced jet fighter. And space is huuuuuuge. Even if they knew it wasn't some top secret Romulan warship then they had to know they could have looked forever for it and not found it. Yes, somebody should have picked up on the "lightning storm" aspect but the "main fleet" was of in the "Lorintian(sp?)" system. After the initial reports, I'm sure all communication was stopped by the drill anyway.
My big plot hole was how well armed the "mining vessel" was. They must have some pesky pirates in space for a non military craft to be that well armed. 47 Klingon war birds? I hope the whole "imprisoned" by the Klingon thing gets cut before the dvd because that would truly be a plot hole for me. Why/How could the Klingon's hold a ship of that size for 25 years without raiding it and exploiting the technology? We'll see when it comes out. This is a FUN movie guys. Plot holes not withstanding. You only hurt yourselves when you don't allow yourself to have a good time. Wolverine was far more disappointing and Terminator Salvation was much less fun. Relax and enjoy guys. -
be in it as long as the original cast.
-
May 23, 2009 4:32:39 AM CDT
I enjoyed Star Trek but Leave the fucking Dark Tower alone...
by kendragon
Some books should never be filmed.
-
Or did you miss that about Nero? No flowery dialog.....That's because he was mining for 20 years; Hence, no time for Shakespeare. I had never seen a blue collar Romulan before. I thought chopper was pitch perfect.... Shit sakes!!! Star Trek by JAY JAY was awesome!!!! Fuck the haters who try to be smart about it......I grew up on TOS and it had fucking Space Hippies...... let me repeat, SPACE HIPPIES!?!
-
Seriously, the amount of mental gymnastics people are doing to gloss over the plot holes is laughable.
-
This ain't canon, JJ!!!
-
is exactly what the sequel needs to up the ante. I hope Bob is listening.
-
That would be one I would actually want to play.
-
How DID they know about Rosebud when no one was in the room?
-
to make this crappy one look good.
-
HERE'S A RUN DOWN OF THE LAST 50 POSTS WHERE SOME CLUELESS MORON PRATTLES ON AND ON ABOUT HOW THERE ARE NO PLOT HOLES. READY?
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH
I'MACOMPLETEFUCKINGMORON.
IT'S BEYOND CLEAR THAT THOSE OF YOU STILL DEFENDING THIS ABOMINATION SIMPLY HAVE A TOUCH OF THE DOWN. -
"AND APOLOGIZED THAT I WAS KIND OF A TWAT TO HIM ABOUT TREK VI. I TOLD HIM I'D JUST SEEN THE NEW JJ TREK AND DIDN'T KNOW WHAT SHIT REALLY WAS."
-
....1000 VIEWINGS OF THAT HORRIBLE DUNG HEAP LAST SEASON OF BSG, THAN AGAIN SIT THROUGH EVEN 10 SECONDS OF THE NEW TREK.
IF THAT'S NOT HATE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS.
MAAAAJJJJEEELLL! BRING ME MY FUCKING TEA YOU CUNT!!!" -
"IT'S CONFIRMED."
-
"Too late for that but at least I have Majel to kick around again!"
-
Just logical paradoxes.
-
"If you care to redeem yourself JJ, make it so!"
-
"I WASN'T AS ANGRY AS WHEN THE CREDITS STARTED TO ROLL ON THE NEW TREK. TRUE STORY."
-
"WE HATE THE NEW TREK SO MUCH, EVEN WE AREN'T GOING TO MAKE BOOTLEG COPIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
-
It's interesting how noone in here has been able to DISPUTE any of the ANSWERS to these alleged plot holes that joshuavance, emvan, myself and others have repeatedly pointed out are right there in the film. Are you actually READING any of our posts? Or do we have to call you SHITBAG and gae 683 to get your attention?Here's your homework for the weekend: Name TEN Favorite Star Trek Episodes of your choosing that: 1. Don't involve Time Travel or Alternate Universes. 2.Have no chance encounters or coincidences. 3. Have an antagonist who never makes any mistakes and whose motivations make perfect sense. 4. Don't involve malfunctions or anomalies that occur out of the blue. 5. And clearly explain the origins of all the science involved in enough detail that noone can be confused or feel the plot has holes. Post your responses here. Extra Credit for swearing and using ALL CAPS.
-
"And I can confirm that, yes, it is torture. Absolutely it is torture."
-
"I would terminate my teen self to prevent New Trek from happening."
-
I'm not trolling here. It was crap. One of the worst, most retarded, episodes of the old series ... badly acted, massively illogical, depending on the retarded idea of Alien Artifacts designed to send things back in time, even though sending things back in time just causes horrible trouble that has to be fixed by going back in time! And it's responsible for the worst in Sci Fi TV since, the Time Travel reset button (though Voyager, typically, made their TT episodes more watchable and fun than much previous to Voyager). Oh, and Edith Keillor was ugly.
-
Read up about "red mercury" and remember that the best Trek devices are scaled up versions of something odd about the real world.
-
My apologies if I'm wrong, but I recall pike saying he was a rescued crew member on the Kelvin. This is why he has some kind of relationship to the Kirk family..which fits him into the whole StarWars motif JJ and crew were going for. Am I wrong here? If so I'll step down on the issue.
You still didn't answer why the Narada allowed a massive ship to float into it, or why the Narada didn't continue firing on those escape pods other then the writers needed to get to the next scene quickly. This might not be a plot hole, but it's weak fucking writing.
To Davy: "You do know that at this point in time the Federation and the Romulans were in the middle of an intergalactic cold war right? "
This explains why they didn't chase the Narada past the neutral zone but it creates a hole in logic when no one recognizes the Narada when it pops back up. We're also given no sense that time has changed for the Narada crew or for Starfleet for that matter other then the wardrobe. Again, did none of the survivors really talk? A indestrutible enemy ship pops up and wipes out one of your ships within minutes and all we get is a nod to a paper writen at some time. Seriously? That's it? This makes Starfleet, Humans, Vulcans, Klingons and Romulans incredibly fucking dull. It's as if no one recognized that the Genesis torpedo could also be used as a weapon and that no one would want to get their hands on it. What this really is is a week setup to get Kirk in the game after he cheats. Coincidence? Maybe, but it makes his universe a pretty dim-witted one. Par for the course since no one seems to be able to protect itself. -
"It's interesting how noone in here has been able to DISPUTE any of the ANSWERS to these alleged plot holes that joshuavance, emvan, myself and others have repeatedly pointed out are right there in the film."
Hi there.
-
J.J. Abrams Please film staring with Roland's life in time order or at least start with Wizard and Glass which is by far the best and most accessible book.
-
So this is how they could have resolved my Narada opening scene question. George would deduct quickly, because he's a naval officer, that none of his weapons can do damage to the Narada. He knows this. He also knows that if the Kelvin is destroyed then the escape pods are sitting ducks. He should then come to the inspired decision, and suspicion that no matter how strong the Narada's hull is, it can't take an impact from a Starship at warp 1. Warp drives down, so fix it! It's our only chance.. The engineers go to work while George space-invader blasts mining torpedoes. Damn does this thing have an arsenal! They get Warp drive up in the nick of time *that's what they do - they're fucking good*, George orders them to transport off the ship onto an escape pod. The head engineer argues, he's figured out what George is attempting to do, he recognizes the courage of the act and refuses to let him do it alone but George demands it. He/She does so, George then over-rides the collision detection on the Kelvin and as the ship counts down to warp, he has his little conversation with his wife. What's warp drive to the Trek virgin? Well you're about to find out. 3,2,1.. BLAMMO! The Narada's hull opens up and it's given a pretty bloody nose. It's strong to be sure, but it's crippled and drifts uncontrolablly.. It's believable too, that a relatively untrained Romulan crew wouldn't suspect a tactic like this. They would however be able to look out the window and see a ship crawling towards it and report to their captain. At warp 1, you wouldn't have time to jump out of the way in time. This would be like a fire-ship in the Hornblower world. So we're told when Starfleet came back to retrieve whatever wreckage *it's not as if scientists couldn't deduct the happening took place* they found nothing. No trace of an indestructable ship, black box, nothing, just the reports of a handful of survivors.
Now none of this needs extensive screen time. In a movie that jumps around like a ADD riddled child, it takes only seconds to setup. It can simply be nested in the dialog later to give it credence and make Kirk look more versed in naval lore and tactics unlike the purely Logical Spock, or the younger crew members. Still, the question remains. Why wouldn't the Vulcan's investigate the Narada occurence? Why wouldn't this peek the interest of the Romulans? We simply get no hint of it so I, the Audiance, can only assume no one really cared which is a hard bone to swollow. This event should have impacted the time line more then simply making Kirk an orphan or putting Kirk and Spock at each other's throats but played right it can be rightfully overlooked. In it's current form, it can't be. It's a nagging question.
Also, I find it hard to believe that even after 25 years this event wouldn't become legend with older crew members. Even Pike. The Narada would be like Moby Dick. It's the monster in the deep that could jump out of nowhere and tear you asunder.
Like Khan, this film could have benefited from a little bit of Midshipman and Lieutenant Hornblower. Kirk could have been seen as reckless, he stumbles more, but he's also as an exemplary character who thinks on his feet and knows how to exploit an enemies weaknesses..Like in Khan. -
You're correct. Pike explained that he was a rescued crew member. He later wrote a dissertation on the subject. The Narada was firing on the escape pods, but the Kelvin, under control of George Kirk, used phasers to intercept the missiles.
-
So if that's true it makes Pike and incredibly forgetful person. You almost die in space by the might of a giant space squid crawling with Romulans, and nothing strikes you when the signs appear again? The man wrote a paper on it! God damn does new Pike suck.
-
Well, he was probably a new recruit on the ship...and had no idea what was going on. Younger Pike wasn't in the bridge...wasn't an officer...and wasn't in the "loop" about it. The only reason that Captain Pike seemed to not realize what was going on was because he had not intercepted the Klingon communication about a light storm.
-
First, I don't know this necgray person. From what I recall, he was a jerk who called Hercules the Wonderful out on what he considered bullshit and got banned. Necgrey (me) loves Hercules the Just and Wise and doesn't at all feel that some AICN administrators abuse their power because they are spineless shits who can't tolerate dissenting opinion. Now, I agree that a lot of mainstream garbage gets made because the average audience has a tendency to buy into it. Where I think we disagree most is who gets the blame and how much blame there is to give. And possibly what movies are at fault. For instance, I don't at all agree with your notion that Orci and Kurtzman are cynically cashing their checks thinking they "got one over" on the filmgoing audience. I'm pretty sure they think what they do is good. I liked Star Trek, but my biggest complaint was the unnecessary and over-the-top comic relief. When I saw it on screen I said to myself, "Ah, from the writers who brought you pissing Transformers..." But I don't think they did that to be dicks. I just think they're artless about their comic relief. You make it sound malicious, but I think you're way overreacting. Likewise with the moviegoing public. Do they too often seem to beg for dumbed-down, crass garbage? Yeah, it seems that way. But you make it sound like it's an effort. Like they purposely avoid critical thinking about their entertainment. But you and I and others like us have made an effort to BE critical thinkers about entertainment. It's something we're passionate about. If John Doe who works 8+ hours in a factory job doesn't give a shit about preserving the artistry of film, how can you get mad at him? His passion isn't your passion. What if he was a motorcycle enthusiast and you said "Harleys are awesome", and he got pissy because he thinks Harleys are populist pieces of shit? Would he be justified getting angry at you? No. He has a right to get angry, but it's not justified. That said, I know some of your wrath is directed at THESE people, this site, the fans who have said they liked the film. Fair enough. I see your points and don't disagree, but none of that stopped me from enjoying the film. Too many people are complaining about fealty to the source material of ST:TOS, and I think that's kind of silly. And although I thought the comic relief was unnecessary and artless, I didn't think it ruined the movie. I also thought there were some holes in character logic. But again, doesn't ruin the movie for me. It makes it 3 1/2 stars instead of 5. I should also apologize for the "skinny jeans/Iron & Wine" thing. Hipsters aren't all bad and Jim Jarmusch has made a film or two that I thought was worth some of the drawers-pissing indie-fanboy hype he gets. I just find it easy to get pissy about indie film. That was me doing the pot-kettle...
-
If we want to over-analyze the supposed plot holes in this movie, we might want to go back to every other TREK incarnation and do the same. STAR TREK is, after all, one giant plot hole. From the "late 20th century eugenics war" to the uncountable holes in the series, STAR TREK has just been soaking in the crossed fingers of hardcore Trekkies who are willing to look the other way. The writers are, after all, "Deuce ex Machina." I thought that this film had less plotholes than some of the other Trek films out there. The difference is that these supposed plot holes are mostly nitpicking while the plot holes of the other TREK incarnations are much more glaring yet ignored.
-
(type)
-
You can go to YouTube, type in STAR TREK PLOT HOLES or STAR TREK MISTAKES and find quite a few videos that show the extent of plot holes in the STAR TREK universe. It is, after all, only a work of fiction. It is just a movie...that many people thought was entertaining.
-
OFMG.
HERE'S A RUNDOWN OF ALL YOU NANCY-BOY FAGGOTS WHO KEEP INSISTING THERE WERE NO PLOT HOLES.
READY?
"I LIKED THE NEW TREK. IT WAS REALLY NEAT. I LIKED ALL THE FLYING SPACESHIPS. SO DID MY DADDY. CAN I HAVE SOME ICECREAM?" -
after 36 hours of non-stop work I'm actually thinking that I might like the new STAR TREK if the extended version or deleted scenes in the blu-ray give me explanations for some of the major inconsistencies. I should get some sleep... things will be back to normal in the morning, and I'll see clearly again how much the movie sucks
-
whoa, there's stuff in this blu-ray! LOL... man, I should really get some sleep :-D
-
None of them, so how the fuck can I re-dispute the undisputed? The ONLY thing that was tackled was whether or not Neros ship were the last ROmulans left alive, which old SPock says they are. So thats that. You guys didn't explain anything else. You say "Oh coincidences happen" thats a cheap bullshit apology. They don't happen THAT conveniently over and over and over again so specific exciting things can happen. You give carte blanche to any filmmaker to use some insane deus ex machina device to fix anything they are having trouble writing. It's like if at the end of Star Trek Nero is just about to kill Kirk when he trips and hits his head and dies. Do things like that happen? yes they do. Is that how youw rite films, no, because its fucking lazy lazy lazy. Just like insanely important event after insanely important event occuring for no other reason than the plot cant move forward unless it conveniently happens. Don't fucking sit there and ask me to answer to things you have not addressed.
-
Give me a break. Stop soft-peddling this crap. The plot holes are obvious, and they've been rehashed over and over here already. Nothing you've said has disputed anything, except your fanboy rhetoric.
-
JJ has created a Trek that appeals to the masses. Typically the masses get bored after three movies (many were bored by the first), and they aren't going to support a new TV show. The cost of doing a Trek movie is so high that it has to bring in the masses in addition to the fans, and it won't be able to continue to do so. Box office will drop for the next two movies, and that will be the end of Star Trek. Funny how so many credit JJ with saving the franchise when I'm pretty sure he's created something that will crush the franchise under its own weight.
-
YOU ARE VERY CLEVER AND WELL-SPOKEN! I AM GLAD THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING COGENT POINTS IN LOWERCASE HAVE GENIUSES LIKE YOU TO MAKE THEIR CAPSLOCKED HOMOPHOBIC POINTS FOR THEM! WELL DONE!
-
some folks seriously have no joy in life. killer, no one needs to be insulted, you certainly don't have the market cornered on intellectual superiority. if you did, you would have made your point and moved on. no none here has to justify liking a movie to any other self righteous snob who thinks they've cornered the market on quality criticism. bullshit. hey everybody, guess what i'm off to do? show some friends the new star trek movie! think i'm an idiot? i could give a shit. get a life. i'm out.
-
I'VE GONE BACK AND RE-READ EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR POSTS.
I'VE REGISTERED ON THIS FORUM PURELY TO INFORM YOU THAT YOU ARE A COMPLETE CUNT. -
YOU HAVE NOT USED THE WORD 'COGENT' PROPERLY.
FAIL.
THE REST OF YOUR POST IS ACCEPTABLE. BARELY. YOU MAY REMAIN. -
AFTER YOU SHOW YOUR FRIENDS YOUR NEW STAR TREK MOVIE, WILL YOU LUBE UP YOUR ASSHOLE BEFORE THEY RAPE YOU?
BECAUSE...UM....IF THEY HAVE EVEN A SMIDGEN OF TASTE THEY ARE GOING TO FUCK YOU BUT GOOD.
JUST SAYIN'. HAVE FUN. GIVE US A FULL REPORT. -
That doesn't make the movie good.
-
You might be a nice guy, you might have some good points, but I just want to say that calling a bunch of guys "Nancy Boy Faggots" on a JJ Abrams Star Trek TB that YOU YOURSELF are posting on could be considered a little 'the pot calling the kettle black.'
-
Which means shut your brain off. I can do that with some movies. I actually enjoyed movies like Crank because they know what they are. Big, loud, stupid. I assumed this new Star Trek would follow suit. It wasn't made for the fans, it was made to sell something that seemed distasteful to much of the moving going audience palatable.
Then came JJ and the critics. JJ kept talking about the importance of good story telling, and how much respect his writers had for the subject matter. What he was really saying is they had a basic understanding of the catch-phrases and a Wikipedia knowledge of the back story. Beyond that the writers didn't give a damn. They didn't stop to ask "Does this make my protagonist look stupid, or Lame, or a Jackass?" No, they just blazed through for the sake of finishing the music video. Who cares anyway? Modern day audiences don't pay attention. He start his selling campaign to get asses in seats and he did that well. However I felt duped. I will not go to StarTrek 12 the New Wrath of Khan, and further more I will never watch another movie Helmed, Produced, or catered by JJ Abrams. I won't watch another one of his bogus, half-assed shows either.
I'm done with JJ Abrams.
-
The cod philosophy always put me off, but this was great fun if a little silly (why not save his planet rather than hang around (or did he understand time/space thing-a-mi-bob?))
-
May 23, 2009 7:16:12 PM CDT
Well, no JJ, you should have minded the script. Of course, who
by empyreal0
...millions of dollars in returns. I'm not saying it was a BAD script; it was mostly good. Child Spock's introduction was awesome. BUT the few problems with it were very distracting. Bones' excuse to get Kirk on the ship and Spock's horrible decision to abandon the captain's seat and not pick a successor (leaving Kirk to call dibs) is absolutely plot leading character by the nose. That is bad (ie, lazy) writing. Oh, and the "red matter" thing was less McGuffin, more Deux ex Machina, and really felt like a lazy substitute for a bit of clever science fiction. Apart from that, the movie was great. 95% spot-on casting, a great visual sense, and an iron-clad alternate universe explanation to avoid being roped in by canon. The devil's in the details.
-
should have been "Of course, who am I to argue with (millions of dollars in returns)"
-
Apart from being done with Abrams, I totally agree.
-
"...THEN JUST BEFORE THE MOVIE STARTS, TAKE A LARGE HAMMER AND SMASH YOUR SKULL UNTIL IT'S COMPLETE MUSH. THEN YOU ARE READY FOR THIS EXPERIENCE."
-
"Like they purposely avoid critical thinking about their entertainment." No? Call me cynical, but I think you'd be surprised. Although I agree it's probably less common than specialized knowledge in other areas taking precedence, or pure apologetics (especially on a movie website), I have met plenty of people who tell me they hate movies that make them think and would rather turn their brain off when they plop their ass in their seat. It's depressing. That said, these problems didn't ruin the movie for me either, but I too (like IK) get irritated by the message that this kind of success sends - that as long as the movie makes a big return, there's nothing wrong with cutting corners or using lazy cop-outs. I think IK is so angry because he wants people to know that there are audience members who DO care about these things. His voice may be drowned out by big waves of money, but I tend to agree and I think we have every right to voice our complaints.
-
and a good time was had by all. thank god you finally noticed me, i was getting a little jealous. fucktard. much luv. now say something really cleaver in all caps, that'll show me!
-
killer is pointing his arguments at the wrong source. i didn't write the fucking movie, nor did anyone else here. make your point, have a spirited discussion, then get on with life. quit trying to convince someone that likeing star trek is indicative of some deep personality disorder. i didn't like watchmen. one of my best friends loved it. once we said our piece to each other, we had a pint and went on to the next subject. that's what real people do. honest to christ, what was the point of the "people have other options" speech if you are just going to beat someone over the head for liking a movie? fucksake. and the less said about that ranting piece of garbage toerag up there the better.
-
May 23, 2009 8:27:53 PM CDT
"arguments pointed at the wrong source"... well, yes. mostly.
by empyreal0
Technically, JJ did indicate in his interview that he reads the site. Not like I expect him to have the time or the slightest inclination to read every forum post or take any of it to heart because, as the subtext of your post indicates, opinions are like assholes. So you're mostly right; it's pretty much pointless to belabor the point. My argument is more along the lines that some of what IK is saying (and I believe the reason for all his anger) is based not merely on opinion. Yeah everyone knows art is (almost) purely aesthetic and unless you're a Randian, aesthetics is subjective. However, problems like inconsistent characterization are more than subjective. The degree to which it offends him is subjective. It really seems to piss him off. Me, I find it disappointing. But I think we can both agree it didn't kill the movie for either of us.
-
Just Say: I Didn't Like the Movie. Don't Blame your Dislike on Plot Holes that don't actually exist. Some of the alleged problems are arguable, but 2/3 of the ones you guys keep bringing up are just examples of you not paying attention. For example, empyreal0 just made reference to Spock leaving the captain's chair without naming a successor? He didn't have to. Pike made his first officer Spock acting captain when he went over to Nero's ship and he made Kirk Spock's second in command. It was a battlefield promotion. And I'm not picking on empyreal0 whose post is otherwise solid, just using him as an example. People keep bitching about Kirk getting the Enterprise when he's fresh out of the academy, but the film clearly states that Pike, who has been promoted to Admiral, exercises his perogative to hand the ship over to Kirk. And as near as I can tell, and feel free to prove me wrong, THE FILM NEVER SAYS WHAT KIRK'S RANK IS. He was obviously on a command track. If he wasn't on suspension for cheating on the Kobayashi Maru, he might have been assigned as first officer on one of the other ships. People are whining like he's an ensign lower on the totem pole than Chekov or something. Starfleet considers age, ability and experience when assigning rank. Pike says Kirk's entrance exams are off the charts, and he completes a four year program in three years. He voluntarily takes the "No-Win Scenario" three times (when as McCoy clearly states he's only required to take it once) because he's determined to find a way to beat it. Kirk clearly outranks everyone but Pike and Spock as soon as he walks onto the bridge. If he didn't, Sulu or Uhura would say something. This is clear as day, right there in the dialogue, and how many people have been completely and utterly WRONG for trying to make an issue out of it?I never said they're are NO plot holes in the movie. I just keep shaking my head and chuckling at how many things are not only implied or inferred, but CLEARY STATED IN DIALOGUE OR SEEN ONSCREEN that you guys somehow missed completely?
-
...Your post regarding SHITBAG and GAY 683 was NICE!!!
-
"I wasn't trying to tie them together in any way other than to say how much money a film makes at the box office is totally fucking meaningless to it's quality." What you said is that Trek wouldn't do as well as Transformers, which is an idiotic way to attempt to discredit the movie, since Trek has never before been regarded as a true, A-level, big budget franchise. Also, I notice you didn't comment on my pointing out Trek's wonderful reviews and 95% rating on rottentomatoes. Most people, including me, appear to love the movie. It's making audiences happy and winning new fans while all the other summer blockbusters so far are letting people down. Star Trek is back, bigger than ever before, and it deserves its moment in the sun. You're nothing but a hater, and not a very bright one at that.
-
As I stated in a previous post almost all your "plot holes" concerning Spock, Nero, Red Matter etc. are dealt with in Spock's mind meld /conversation with Kirk. They are not dealt with in enough detail to satisfy some of you. But they ARE dealt with. They are dealt with in greater detail in the prequel Graphic Novel, which is a fun read, but there is no way to know how much of that backstory was filmed for the movie. I would assume there were deleted scenes which will hopefully be included on the DVD. But short of making the film a half hour longer, I don't see how your questions could have been answered in the way you want them to be. Should they have frontloaded all the Nero/Spock Prime stuff, robbing the film of its powerful opening? Should they have brought the film to a dead stop so Spock could explain red matter to the audience? He doesn't need to explain it to Kirk. THAT'S WHAT THE MIND MELD IS FOR!And I went over to CHUD and read that Devin piece on continuity glitches that you thought was so insightful. ALL of his points can be refuted with one simple fact that cannot be repeated enough apparently: THIS IS NOT AN ALTERNATE TIMELINE. SPOCK AND NERO HAVE TRAVELLED INTO AN ALTERNATE REALITY. THEIR PRESCENCE DID NOT CREATE THE REALITY. IT WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE. THEY HAVE ALTERED THE NATURAL COURSE OF EVENTS IN THAT UNIVERSE BUT THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW WHAT TO CHANGE OR COURSE CORRECT, BECAUSE FOR THE UMPTEENTH FUCKING TIME YOU ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER DICKHEADS: IT WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THEIR UNIVERSE TO BEGIN WITH. PAY ATTENTION TO THE FUCKING FILM NEXT TIME!
-
Like the site, like the comments - glad to be a part of it
-
...TITBAG, and the other HATER went over to AssholeLives cave (didn't know caves had basements) for their weekly CIRCLEJERK, otherwise known as "Saturday Night" (cue the Bay City Rollers music). His mom will be serving grilled cheese sandwiches and he will be sharing his voluminous library on Auto-Fellatio with all.All of them stroking off to a picture of JJ Abrams sitting on a pile of money, then with their mouths AGAPE for the SNOWBALL BUKAKE finish!!!!Then next "Saturday" the cycle begins anew(cue the LION KING soundtrack "The Circle of Life".
-
I mean come on get their eye color right JJ!
-
"Greetings everyone. My name is Spock. Not your Spock. A different.. well nevermind that now. I need you to fly your ship around the sun several times so we can go back in time and erase the past 25 years of your history because it wasn't supposed to happen that way. Well, some of it wasn't. At least it didn't in my Universe. And my Universe has to be the correct one. You see there's an angry Romulan flying around with technology that's a hundred years more advanced than yours, but if we get there at exactly the right instant I can stop him with this red stuff. Then I can go back to my technobabbled future, and you guys can remake every episode of my old TV show on the big screen exactly the way they happened 40 years ago because if there's one thing this franchise needs, it's more of the same."
-
TITBAG, LOOK UP THE DEFINITION OF COGENT AND USE IT IN MY SENTENCE AND YOU WILL SEE THAT I DO, IN FACT, USE IT CORRECTLY. DUMBASS. Empyreal0, I'm not suggesting you don't have a right to get aggravated about mainstream film being dumbed down. What I object to is the blatant superiority complex demonstrated by those taking up the argument like IndustryKiller. Who makes a rational case for why the film doesn't hold up, but then goes on a personal insult tear. Is it necessary to be shitty about your argument? No, it's not. As for your cynicism about people not wanting to think, again I don't disagree necessarily. I also know people who *purposely* avoid critical thinking in film. But they are the vast minority. My father, for instance, doesn't think critically about films. Does he purposely do this? No, he doesn't. He's not avoiding critical thinking, he just DOESN'T critically think about film. And there's no reason for him to do so. It's not his passion. He doesn't care like I do. And you know what? He doesn't have to. Even MORE to the point, it's part of the risk WE take by getting passionate about mass produced commercial art. What it boils down to, for me, is I'm fine with guys like IK making intelligent points about a film when it's warranted. But when he cops an attitude and gets pissed off and rails against the dying of the fucking light, I consider that ridiculous and unwarranted.
-
why are random people who may have never seen ANY Star Trek before able to immediately grasp and enjoy the complex concepts involved (time travel, parallel universes,time space distortions etc. etc.) while you haters can't even get it through your thick heads that there's no way to course correct the story back to your precious canon minutia because it takes place in a different universe? Maybe you're the ones who've been dumbed down by memorizing the Star Trek Encyclopedia like it was the Torah and the Talmud?
-
on this we see eye to eye. way to be civil. kudos!
-
...with his tail between his legs, like that other complete moron who called himself "conspiracy," then good riddance. The world is too full of people who have that winning combo of ample hatred plus an intelligence deficiency. And I'm sure everyone has noticed how such individuals tend to be the loudest. Screw that. I'll never suffer such wastes lightly, nor should anyone. On the contrary, fools like that need to be slapped down as hard as possible. Come on back, conspiracy ... tell us again how Star Trek is going to be this year's Superman Returns, but you paid to see it and kind of liked it anyway. Please allow us to chuckle some more at your stupidity. And you, IndustryKiller ... the only thing you're capable of killing is your own credibility. Join a 6th grade debate squad and you might fare better there. Probably not, though.
-
I really don't get criticisms of this film's music - I thought it was absolutely breathtaking (if you'll excuse me for using such a gay term)
-
"...INSTEAD OF RAMMING MY SHIP INTO NERO'S, OR BLOWING UP MY SHIP BEFORE NERO CAN GET HIS MITS ON IT, I'M GOING TO LET THE RED MATTER FALL INTO HIS HANDS."
WHO GIVES A SHIT WHAT HE DOES WITH THE STUFF?
THERE WAS A TIME WHEN I WOULD HAVE GIVEN MY LIFE FOR FAR FUCKING LESS, BUT HEY...THIS IS JJ'S SCRIPT. HE'S GOT NO FUCKING WELL IDEA WHAT MOTIVATES OR DRIVES ME. ABOUT AS MUCH AS THAT BIG-NOSED PRICK UNDERSTANDS IS THAT I'VE GOT POINTY EARS AND AN ENORMOUS FUCKING COCK.
HELL, MAYBE THIS WAY I'LL EVEN MAKE IT INTO THE SEQUEL. I NEED CASH - ESPECIALLY WHEN MY HORRIBLE MINDFUCKING AWEFUL PHOTOGRAPHS HAVEN'T SOLD." -
May 24, 2009 8:40:53 AM CDT
THE NARADA CAUGHT SPOCK PRIME'S SHIP WITH A TRACTOR BEAM
by bringingsexyback
Ramming was not an option.
-
Blowing it up was not an option.
-
HE WAS THE MACGYVER OF HIS AGE. A LITTLE CHEWING GUM. A COMMUNICATOR. INSTANT BOMB.
FOR THE LOVE OF RODDENBERRY'S HAIRY BALLS, THERE'S THIS CONVENIENT SHIT ON BOARD CALLED RED FUCKING MATTER. THERE'S NO WAY THAT SPOCK - MUTHAFUCKING SPOCK - COULDN'T FINDA WAY TO DETONATE? WE'RE EXPECTED TO BELIEVE THAT?
OMFG.
A FAIL BEYOND FAIL.
THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. A TOTAL AND UTTER LACK OF UNDERSTANDING ON THE PART OF JJ & CO ABOUT WHO THESE FUCKING CHARACTERS ARE THAT THEY JUST SAVAGED. NONE. ZERO. JESUS. HOW MANY FUCKING TREK EPISODES ARE THERE WERE THEY EVEN JUST TAKE A STUPID PHASER AND PUT IT ON OVERLOAD? OMFG.
SERIOUSLY FFS. WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS NOTHING SHORT OF TOTAL GROSS INCOMPETENCE ON THE PART OF THESE FILM-MAKERS. A TOTAL CASCADE EFFECT STARTING WITH THE KELVIN SCENE. IT'S ALL SO FUCKING GOD-AWFUL THAT BY THE TIME THEY EVEN GET TO SPOCK'S CAPTURE IT'S SIMPLY "WOW. WE HAVE NO TWATING IDEA WHAT WE ARE FUCKING WRITING HERE, SO LET'S JUST GO WITH EAT. THE HANNAH MONTANA GENERATION WILL NEVER KNOW THE DIFFERENCE."
YIPPEE. -
IS THAT TERMINATOR SALVATION SIMPLY DISPENSES WITH THE NOTION OF A PLOT ALTOGETHER.
A WISE MOVE, ACTUALLY.
THE UTTER FUCKING AICN MORONS WHO HAVE PANNED TS WHILE PRAISING TREK ARE COMPLETELY CLUELESS CUNTS. BOTH MOVIES ARE TOTAL SHITE.
HAIRY'S REVIEWS ARE A PERFECT EXAMPLE: 800 PARAGRAPHS POINTING OUT THE FAILINGS OF MCG AND THE TS PLOT. THE TREK REVIEW? 800 PARAGRAPHS POINTING OUT HOW CUTE JJ IS AND THAT THE FILM IS REALLY 'NEAT' AND 'FUN' AND HOW HE WONDERS IF JJ IS CIRCUMSIZED.
-
They stretch the thinnest of excuses over the gaping plot holes and convince themselves that it really is the 'perfect' movie.
They should click their collective heels together and utter 'There's not place like home. There's no place like home. There's no place like home.' Maybe, just maybe, one day, if they believe in it strong enough, it'll come to pass.
Of course, by then, the 'paddy wagon' people will come with those wonderful white coats and cart them off to the padded rooms where no one gets hurt, and none of this will matter. -
You seem like a rational, civil person. Which plot holes are you referring to? Be Specific. When people like TITBAG say: Why didn't Spock do this, or why didn't Nero do that, that ISN'T a plot hole. That's you trying to rewrite the movie to please yourself. Why doesn't Nero kill Spock when he has a chance? Gee, why doesn't every movie villain kill the hero as soon as they capture them, instead of giving them an opportunity to be the hero? Why doesn't Spock Prime act like Clint Eastwood or some 80's action hero instead of acting like Spock? Because he's Spock. Dealing with a crew of Romulans armed to the teeth who are half as old as he is. Why doesn't he sacrifice himself like George Kirk does instead of living to counsel Kirk and his younger self in scenes that fill everyone in the audience that isn't drinking Haterade with warmth and joy? Gee that would be uplifting. How many times does Spock have to die in this franchise to make SHITRAG happy? I firmly believe that most of the people who are complaining about plot holes were so angered by the admittedly coincidental chance encounter of Spock and Kirk in the cave that they sat there grumbling to themselves and proceeded to IGNORE THE EXPOSITION AND BACKSTORY CONTAINED IN THE SCENE. Chance encounters and coincidences are not plot holes. They are real life occurrences. Every two car accident on the road today will be a chance encounter and a coincidence. If one of the two drivers had left ten minutes earlier or later it might have never happened. Could that scene (and many other scenes) have been handled better? Absolutely. Do the millions of people coming out of this film with smiles on their faces worry about such things? Absolutely Not.Noone is paying them to be a film critic or a frustrated screenwriter. And noone is paying any of you to do that either.
-
May 24, 2009 10:53:21 AM CDT
JJ, simply, you suck: My closing arguments to you cymbalta4thede
by dr_pepperspray
cymbalta4thedevil is standing on the battle ship in front of a mission accomplished sign. You damned fool! You haven't resolved any of the plot-hole issues, you just keep making excuses for them and most of your excuses are just as flimsy as the film's plot.
Yes, the Plot does lead the characters around by the nose. You've gotta be exceptionally blind not to see that. Kirk isn't on the command track organically, it's shoved in our faces by the plot to fulfill step 10 but it's not believable and why would I want to continue this story? I'll make the analogy again, it's like watching someone play a video game with God mode on. If that's your thing, whatever, but I wanted something better. I personally think you can tell a FUN story that doesn't insult your audience or ask them to check out. It's possible to tell a story where the weight of believability rests on the sci-fi elements and not on the characters. *By the way, my eyes are squarely on the TOS movies and not on the TNG's. I wasn't really a fan of any of those -- maybe generations -- especially when they felt it necessary to dumb down the stories to appeal to sucky'faced tweens.*
It's the Lost school of story telling. Shit happens, people do things and the writers simply employ "Just cause" They ask you to accept something one minute but it doesn't count the next. Hey, Look over here, but don't ask what that was about. You keep your mouth shut and keep moving.. but this kind of story telling isn't convincing except to you and obviously a million plus people who could care less. Which is fine, the topic of subjectivity has been discussed ad nauseum: Where I see a trash heap, you see a lovely picnic spot. That doesn't mean the place isn't covered with trash mind you, you're just more willing to over-look, and even make excuses for it so you can have your picnic. Fine. Enjoy.
Am I a "Hater"? I certainly didn't want to be. Initially I thought the idea was lame and a bad move, but as more reports came out and I heard more of the critics chime in I started to believe in it. I really did want this to work. Excuse me, I didn't see MI:3 or Cloverfield, so I didn't expect to walk into a Michael Bay film, or a rehashing of Star Wars. I thought I was coming to see Horatio Hornblower, or Master and Commander in space and what I got was Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. JJ's Star Trek proved just as shallow and false as the fake IMAX screen I got sucker into seeing it on.
..And with that I'm done with this conversation. I've wasted enough time on it. JJ, If you're reading - you've made me a hater and I won't give you anymore of my money. -
I've seen it three times and still want to see it again while it's on the big screen.Thanks for giving Star Trek its balls back.
-
....yes, and if TITBAG, IndustryKiller, DrPepperSpray, AssholeLives, jae683, et.al., would have been born with any BALLS, maybe they wouldn't HATE FOR HATES SAKE!!You IMBECILIC CUNTS!!!
-
Overloading one was not an option.
-
"OH. A SUPERNOVA. HMMM. LET ME SEE. I'VE GOT THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF SCIENTISTS AND SOME OF THE BEST PILOTS IN THE QUADRANT BUT I'M GOING TO SEND THAT SENILE OLD VULCAN SPOCK LONGPASTHISPRIME IN OUR *COUGH*FASTEST*COUGH* SHIP."
"I'M AS MORONIC AND RETARDED AS THIS SCRIPT I'M IN. BECAUSE OF
MY UTTER AND TOTAL FAIL MY PLANET IS DOOMED."
"WE ONCE RULED SPACE. NOW WE CAN'T EVEN STOP ONE OLD FART FROM MAKING A COMPLETE ASS OUT OF HIMSELF." -
"THOUGH I DO WONDER IF SALDANA HAS A NICE LITTLE TRIANGULAR BUSH. THAT WOULD BE NICE. I HATE CHICKS THAT SHAVE THEIR COOCHIE AS BALD AS A 9 YEAR OLD. FUCKING DISGUSTING."
-
To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld ( or is that Ronald DUMsfeld?): "You deal with the FILM you have, not the film you WISH you had." Every single "plot hole" you people have presented me with so far is answered by the film itself. You don't like the answers because you don't like the film. You have a right to your opinion. You also have a responsibility to have an INFORMED opinion. Half of you are making faulty observations based on a misreading of the material. The other half are making pointlessly convoluted technobabble script revision suggestions to a film that's already MADE and seems to be doing quite well without them, thank you very much. How is Kirk NOT on the command track? Does the film you claim to have watched say that? Or does it say exactly the opposite right from the jumpoff? He's the son of a Starfleet Hero, recruited by Pike, Captain of what will become the fleet's flagship, SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PURPOSE: To BE a Captain Someday. Pike sees Kirk as a diamond in the rough. A prodigy. A more cocky, less nerdy Wesley Crusher. And he's RIGHT. And the film spends the next hour and a half showing how right he is. You people who want a fictional construct set in the 23rd and 24th Centuries to function exactly like our military can "Horatio Hornblow" me. Starfleet doesn't work that way. Never has. Never will. Picard can make the teenage son of his ship's doctor an acting ensign on the bridge, but Admiral Pike can't hand his ship off to a man who's gone above and beyond the call of duty to earn it? HE SAVED THE PLANET EARTH! What kind of Jerk de Soleil gyrations do you killjoys have to put yourselves through mentally to deny what's RIGHT THERE ON THE FUCKING SCREEN?
-
Your argument is still thin. Loved the characters, acting, action, and JJ's overall direction. (Yeah, I liked the lens flare too... the movie had a bold, flashy style). And judging by its persistantly solid box office, it looks like the rest of the world agrees with me. A few plot holes, which every Star Trek movie has, do not ruin a great experience. You're just harping on what little there is to harp on. Why does it piss you guys off that so many people like this movie?
-
Is a fucking used condom. A paltry, smelly, trisby 21 chromosome lacking douche-fuck. There was more heart and humanity in the first 10 minutes of Star Trek than his entire pirated DVD collection of wank-fest Joe Bob Briggs Sci-Fi original movies. Fuck you dude, fuck you long, fuck you hard, and fuck you running. You are a boil, a festering tired little cunt that is pissed Terminator BOMBED. Go to hell, go directly to hell, do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars. (besides of which speaking of 200 bucks tell that shithole Mom of yours to stop leaving voice messages on my Answering machine , it was a one nighter what doesn't that bitch get??)
-
PONCE DE LEON
-
"Because I'm dead."
-
May 24, 2009 1:35:51 PM CDT
DESPITE ADVANCED TECH, ROMULUS DID NOT POSSESS RED MATTER
by bringingsexyback
which was the only solution to saving their planet. Other than relying on the Federation, they had no other option.
-
Did you see Shitbag on the Rotten.com jerking McGee wizz off? It was hilarious man Shitbag had fecal matter all around his mouth. I think he knocked his own teeth out too like Margot Kidder. He was going on and on about how Star Trek was the best movie of the summer and McGee felt betrayed, so he squeezed another 6 incher in Shitbags mouth.
-
when he was Brannon Braga - Hey Shitbag , I knew Brannon Braga, and you are no Brannon Braga.
-
I know Titbag can be inflammatory but I think we can resolve differences by reasoned discourse. Let's see if we can't alter the course of this talkback.
-
It wasn't a typical "supernova" that was threatening the quadrant despite Ben Spockobi's nomenclature. Alot of people are assuming it was Romulus' own star that went supernova but I say thee, nay. There was a supernova elsewhere and it began a fatal self-propogating chain reaction that not only destroyed Romulus, Remas, and their own star, but it threatened to engulf the entire galaxy, hence Ben Spockobi's proceeding rapidly on the work of neutralizing before other star systems suffered the same fate as Alderaan er, Romulus heh heh.
-
Tried that. Didn't work. Of course I can always slingshot around the Sun and try it AGAIN...
-
Which death from a ground level sucked worse, getting blown away on Romulus, or getting sucked into nothingness on Vulcan. Black holes....suck.
-
but we are far into the minority. too bad really.
-
his words will echo through the ages!!! all the non believers will be doomed to watch star trek OVER AND OVER in their own personal hell, the one that they wont even know they're in! not even red matter in a tube of vodka will save you.
-
To keep this interview at the top of the que now for what, 4 days?
-
Nice to see everyone kept their cool, didn't name-call or disintegrate into mindless back-and-forth insults.
Sigh.
But, then again if people actually kept their cool and had a reasoned discourse it wouldn't be an AICN Talkback, would it? -
http://easyurl.net/c99b2
Fascinating... -
May 24, 2009 3:28:17 PM CDT
Cymbalta, STILL the artful dodger. Alan Moore & Necgray
by industrykiller!
What do you mean it was "explained int he mind meld. NONE of that was explained in the part of the mind meld that that the audience was shown. You're completely full of shit. Unless you mean that it was explained in some offscreen part of the mind meld, in which case you're just another apologist. Probably a bit of both. And if you can't think of a way to give red matter more depth than random plot device #8 then it's your own screenwriting ignorance getting in the way. Because there are plenty of way to do it without going into a 5 minute exposition. What your implying is a total exaggeration of what is necessary. The fact of the matter is you STILL refuse to answer a single question with ANY degree of specificity and then you proclaim "NOPE NO PLOT HOLES HERE!" Denial ain't just a river in Egypt my friend. As for your aspersion that everyone loves the film, I don't fucking care what an apathetic public and a mainstream critics cabal that generally regards genre film making as the stuff of children only think. That's irrelevant here, what is relevant is whether you can defend the film on it's merits. And Nec_gray, you're less cynical than me maybe but the light isn't dying, it's dead. We have no great genre filmmakers left to rely on. Even Spielberg has began insulting his audience with utter garbage like Indy 4, which was probably the worst film of his career, and he said he did it "For the fans"> So that is what fan service is now, terrible filmmaking and writing. And people LOVE it. Look at the box office for SPider Man 3 and tell me thats not terrible for the film industry. Then we get Dark Knight and Iron Man, you think maybe its turning around, and then the abhorable Wolverine makes a killing. THis is bad for art, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.
-
Is anothers aura of mystery and allure. The term plot hole is very subjective entirely dependent on the perception of a viewer.
See kids, if you dot every I and cross every T, you run into basal exposition territory and grind the narrative to a halt.
Is it a plot hole when Old Ben Kenobi skirts and dances around the issue of his relationship and knowledge of Lukes Father assholes? You guys are simply arguing semantics and nothing more.
If Obi-Wan had sat down and had a 15 minute monologue explaining his discovery of Anakin, subsequent training, battle on a volcano for the benefit of the audience, GONE would be the mystery and allure that caused a generation to wonder how the fuck this old man knew Anakin and what that big fight was like. You guys are nothing more but murdering inference. Apologists my fucking ass, Star Trek has been universally praised by critics and is a RESOUNDING finanical success so FUCK. ALL. OF. YOU.
Sniff sniff. Watchmen BOMBED. sniff sniff. Wolverine BOMBED.
sniff sniff. Terminator is a flaccid BOMB.
You guys STINK of jaded cynicism. I fucking love it! Come on, give it to me, CRY some more about plot holes and dissapointment. PLEASE, I love laughing at you. Humor me, bitch and moan some more PLEASE. -
it seems to be directed just as poorly as Trek.
Horrible camera work and lighting.
Its strange because the Lost pilot was so good compared to these turds.
-
if you liked the movie then you did....if you disliked it then you did, the end. why is it soooo important for so many to make people see their opinion? will they die if nobody agrees with them?
-
And will almost certainly top $200M by Friday. This movie has legs!
-
...since you're so hung up on "plot holes," let me ask what you consider good Star Trek? Let's start there. And you say we're casting "aspersions" that audiences love the film? LOL. First of all, you don't know the meaning of that word. An aspersion is a derogatory remark. Are you a kid? If so, I feel bad about beating up on you for being so ignorant. Anyway, based on Trek's weekend haul (finishing ahead of Angels & Demons, now up to over $183 million) and its holding steady at an amazing 95% on rottentomatoes (A&D and Wolverine have both sunk into the dismal 30's), it is not an "aspersion" to say that most people love the movie, it is a fact. So give up, already. You're coming off as nothing so much as the nerd left out of a cool kids party, standing outside and shouting, 'I didn't wanna be invited anyway!' But at least you're not as pathetic as Conspiracy...
-
of posting TEN Favorite Star Trek Episodes that have NONE of the problems they ascribe to this movie? Noone's even attempted it. I pointed out how "City on the Edge of Forever", one of the most beloved episodes, is loaded with the same problems. Nothing. I respond point by point to Industry Killer's alleged plot holes, tear Devin from CHUD a new one, invite dae 683 to provide his list of plot holes? No response. Crickets chirping. Industry Killer: Here we go AGAIN. In the mind meld/cave discussion scene I saw,and unlike you, PAID ATTENTION TO, Spock explained: Who he was Who Nero was What happened to RomulusThe purpose of the Red Matter How Nero wound up in Kirk's universe Why Spock arrived 25 years later How he was captured by Nero How and why Nero stranded him on the ice planetWhat Nero was doing with the Red Matter and Why he was Doing It The Answers are There. You just don't like the answers. Denying that they're there makes you look even stupider than every thing else you post. There are elementary school kids who've never seen a Star Trek episode who have less problems following this plot than you do. Whatever you do, don't go on Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?
-
I'm.... from the new Star Trek film. A... little... film you. may. have. noticed, eating... up the box office AND spanking....spank-king competitors.
I.......... want to sincerely thank..... everyone for coming to see our film aaaaand hope..... you.... attend it several more times. WE plan... on... having many more adventures and. look. forward.... to entertaining audiences for years to come. -
Always has been. Always will be. It's not, as Harlan Ellison once said, Roddenberry's one and ONLY plot where the crew encounters God and God is ambivalent, malevolent or a child. It's not about seeing how many computers Kirk can talk to death.It's not 45 minutes of Berman /Braga technobabble about science that not only DOESN'T EXIST, but given the average IQ of the haters in this talkback breeding the next generation of humans, is probably NEVER GOING TO. Is it possible, as Dr Pepper Spray says, to "tell a story where the weight of believability rests on the sci fi elements and not on the characters"? Sure, if you care more about concepts than PEOPLE! If an explanation of Red Matter is more thrilling to you than a green skinned girl in a bra and panties. Science Fiction is not about Science. It's about how human beings are affected by science. How they respond to it. How it helps them grow or retards them. How it saves them or destroys them. It's just another way of looking at People. 2001 is not about the Aliens and their monoliths. It's about Dave Bowman and Frank Poole and their relationship with HAL. And how that relationship is fatally compromised.The ALIEN movies are not about the Aliens. They're about Ellen Ripley. Her victories and her losses. Her pain and sacrifice. The AVP movies suck because they have no heroes for us to follow. They've stopped being about people. And STAR TREK is about people. Their cocky drive to go where no one has gone before. (Or, in the case of the green girl, where several people have already been.) Their battles with logic and emotion. Their desire to make friends and the enemies that stand in their way. JJ's film is about PEOPLE. And that's why PEOPLE are responding to it, in ways this franchise has never seen before. You guys keep saying the fact that we like this movie says something about us. What does the fact that you dislike it so intensely say about you, and your ability to deal with: PEOPLE?
-
I was seriously liking me some green breasticles. That Orion slut was smoking fine.
-
He's obviously his own worst enemy...a couple of drinks in him and he's the life of the party, shitting his pants and falling over the furniture..keep it goin douchebag.
-
It's that the people who claimed for over a week that we had no concrete responses to their complaints have elected him to be their spokesperson and slunk off to lick their wounds. I post carefully thought out reasoned responses to their diatribes and all I get back is some kid calling me a CUNT in all caps. Can I get an amen?
-
...your campaign has the momentum of a runaway freight train. Why are you so popular?
-
Well put. Thrilled to hear someone vocalizing that! I nominate u for president of Hollywood. Or at least head of the Sci fi division.
-
why Nero waited 25 years to attack Vulcan or Earth for that matter?What was Nero doing for 25 years between attacks on the first starship and attacking Vulcan? Why the Federation never once pursued Nero and his crew for the attack on the Krevin? Many people enjoyed the movie but came out asking more questions than going in. A friend of mine went back a second time only to see if he had missed anything due to the lousy plotting/writing.My opinion is that JJ and crew threw everything but the kitchen sink out to the audience just to keep them off balance. It worked. Many people are now beginning to question what the hell did they saw in the movie theatre.
-
They didn't need his presence onscreen at all. Talk about wasting a character. If they wanted a reboot then by all means reboot without using Nimoy. You didn't need him around at all.Of course the one thing they had to use was the proverbial time travel effect. With that sort of toy they could play the movie anyway they wanted. I might have respected them more if they hadn't gone this route. Just reboot and start fresh. No, the screenwriters and Abrams took the easy way out. Now, with time travel anything goes instead of laying a concrete base to go with.
-
was imprisoned on a Klingon ice planet? If so then how did he escape? How did he get captured?Please don't tell me that I have to wait for the dvd missing scenes or read a comic book. Face it.That was sloppy writing all the way around.
-
There must be something wrong with this script to have such a debate over it. I see questions and answers from both sides in a positive light. Still, to have such a debate really makes one question the final product including yours truly.
-
Sorry Joshua but I accidentally saved TITBAGs life the other day!I killed a SHIT EATING DOG!!!
-
AMEN
-
Fuck that and fuck people using it as an insult. I've read posts using it on AICN for the longest time and I see it here and you know what? It's used as a derogatory term and there's nothing in the definition that is inherently bad. So stop using it as such.
-
Not everyone who disliked the film wants to get into a yelling/name-calling match.
I still can't get a clear answer about the super-powered Transporter thing. They could have had a line of dialogue from Scotty saying that he had been bored and building an experimental Super-Transporter--but they didn't. Alos, just a single line of dialogue talking about the "phantom ship" attacking the borderes for 25 years would have taken the place of the whole Klingon Prison subplot that was cut out an not even glossed over. They could have even done it in voiceover.
My problems with the film are not the plot--it is how they executed the film. I understand that I am in a minority, but I know others who feel the same way--and their lack of enjoyment had more to do with BeerVats, Nokia phone/radios, Budweiser beer, Warehouse Cement, Giant Hands, Lens-Flare and JJ's direction rather than percieved holes in the plot.
I guess in the end people didn't notice those things when they got caught up in the action and the breakneck pace of the film--or they never cared to begin with. But for me, all of those things kept pulling me out of the film and kept making me think I was seeing a bad Sci-Fi network film that somehow cost $150 Million.
The film (to me) didn't look or feel like Star Trek--but I guess the majority rules. -
"why Nero waited 25 years to attack Vulcan or Earth for that matter? What was Nero doing for 25 years between attacks on the first starship and attacking Vulcan? Why the Federation never once pursued Nero and his crew for the attack on the Krevin?"
Most likely answer: He didn't have red matter to attack with. He had to wait 25 years for Spock. If he'd gone on the offensive without the red matter, maybe he would have become too conspicuous and the powers that be would have had time to marshal their forces against him. In that case, he would possibly get destroyed and would never get a chance to use the red matter against the Federation. So he tried to lay as low as he could before he had a chance to obtain his ultimate weapon bwahahahaha.
Maybe the Federation DID try to hunt him down but he evaded them by going deeper into space. Maybe he was attacked by all sorts of crazy shit that we just haven't heard about because it has little to do with the actual story.
Interestingly, maybe they WILL go into his captivity in the sequel (which was cut from the movie). Maybe the Klingons will have all sorts of crazy technology because they copied it from the Narada. They would be KICKASS Klingons. Why not???? -
I take it that you believe its possible to "beam" someone from orbit down to a planet. Why is it impossible to believe that Scotty is smarter than other engineers and was working (experimenting) on beaming people onto a spaceship in warp?If a transporter pad is needed to "beam" people to someplace, why isn't one needed to receive them at their destination?You can believe (accept) the former, but not the latter?
-
it is a matter of distance and energy. Beaming happens when a ship is focused on a stationary point. Then it takes a great deal of energy to project to that one point.
The Enterprise is moving away from the planet--AT WARP SPEED-- and they take a shuttle's power and try to beam to a ship that is moving faster than the speed of light.
Bullshit. -
Let's nitpick the greatest Star Trek movie of all....
Has anyone figured out how Khan could have know Chekov?
Why the nicey nicey Federation never checked on his progress?
Why a great captain like Kirk never raised the shields after it was obvious he should do so?
Why Khan said Kirk would be marooned alive for all eternity when it was obvious that the Federation would likely just go get him one day?
Why Kirk said Khan would have to "come down here" when Khan had no problems being up the Genesis device (so why would he have to go down there instead of just being him up)?
Why Scotty brought his dying nephew to the bridge instead of sickbay?
Why HE JUST HAPPENED to meet his ex lover and estranged son along with his archenemy in one plot and in one movie? -
thanks for the reply. Appreciate at least someone throwing out some answers without being a dick. Thanks.
-
None of the things you posted that were explained in the mind meld have anything to do with any of the plot holes I posted. None of them. If you are going to try again I must insist you BE SPECIFIC and answer only the questions I asked. Now I will say this, we agree on one thing. For the most part the characterization int eh film was very solid. I wasn't thrilled about emo Spock, I don't see him eevr becoming Nimoys Spock, but everything else about the characters I loved. It's what actually got me to enjoy the film despite its obvious logic fallacys
-
being=beaming (dumbass)
-
Had they gotten into the Shuttle (which could have been a super-powered Warp Shuttle because Scotty is Scotty), had Spock Prime pilot the shuttle at warp and then beamed them from the shuttle to the Enterprise, then it would have made some form of sense.
But they didn't.
Instead, after trekking for hours in the snow, walking into the 20th Century Grocery Store Backroom that was Scotty's base and using a low-powered shuttle Transporter (when Shuttles shouldn't even have transporters)they somehow make it onto the Enterprise, which has been at full warp THE ENTIRE TIME, and they aren't missing any pieces and somehow connect with a room (even if Scotty ends up in the Water filtration system).
Again, I say Bullshit. -
Kirk's archenemy is the Klingon people. Kirk is Khan's archenemy.
Kirk never thought about Khan after he left him on Ceti Alpha V. And that is the mistake that fuels the whole story.
Now, ret-conning has fixed most of the holes in Star Trek II the same way that Orci and Kurtzman are trying to do damage control with the new film. Chekhov was a person in the lower decks who had a run-in with Khan offscreen, and Khan also remembered him when he memorized the personel log and technical manuals of the Enterprise.
Kirk didn't have the sheilds up, because he was momentarily senile (his own words)--he recognized that something was wrong, but didn't recognize how wrong he was.
Scotty was emotionally upset and was searching for McCoy--okay that one is a stretch, it was in the film simply because it was a strong image.
Now back to the new film, it is interesting that everyone keeps saying to read Countdown to get Nero's backstory when Orci just admitted that it isn't canon and was written after the film was finished--it is the first bit of Ret-Conning to tie into the film, as there will no doubt be other debatable answers to tie up questions they didnt' bother to include in the film...
It is, after all, the Star Trek way. -
C'mon, it's not just Kirk who would know about Khan. OF COURSE he would tell the Federation. And Khan would be THEIR responsibility. I have some GOOD IDEAS about why they'd keep that classified, but why wasn't it EXPLAINED in the movie? And yeah, I guess Kirk just wasn't on his game, but what about my other points you didn't mention?
-
The entire plot of the new Trek unravels under them. The whole plot. But yeah Khan ain't perfect. The whole Chekov thing is completely absurd.
-
I often lurk around here and I often agree with your posts. But I disagree with your position on Star Trek. The plot isn't the movie's strength, but the dialogue and the acting and the special effects more than make up for it. IMO. A few unexplained plot points and coincidences just are not enough for me to get worked up when it comes to Star Trek 2009. I loved the film. I mean, I see crazy coincidences and unexplained occurences all the time in movies...even great ones that get great box office and reviews...but it's not worth getting worked up over...so why am I here on aintitcool? I dunno...just for shits and giggles I guess...
-
The Federation might not have realized how much of a threat Khan was--and never thought about it since he was marooned on a backwater planet--so backwater that they never bothered to update it's solar system models at the Federation's Central Stellar Cartography section.
I grant you, it is a lame excuse.
Khan claimed they would be marooned alive because he was insane and he was being theatrical while monologuing during the revenge he had plotted for years, Count of Monte Cristo-style.
Kirk thought that by pushing Khan's buttons that Khan would want to face him in person and have a hand-to-hand battle, just like the old series (after all, it was a ploy that had worked before)--but the BRILLIANCE of the movie is that they never meet in person, throughout the ENTIRE film.
Find another film where the Hero and the Villain never have one scene together? KICK ASS!!
Finally, Everything in the film from the plot, the characters and the dialogue are there to emphasize the theme of Star Trek II: Aging, Death and Rebirth--and the consequences of our actions.
Kirk cheats on the Kobiyashi Maru test so he can win at any cost, chooses Starfleet over Carol and David and then during his adventures he maroons Khan.
The consequences of those actions are that David uses Protomatter and gets Carol's project to work, their project brings them in contact with Khan and Khan gets to introduce Kirk to an actual no-win situation--the Death of Spock.
It all ties together because of a very strong theme, and everything in it is to reinforce it.
This works because Nicholas Meyer is a brilliant guy who has studied classic myth & literature and was at the top of his game at the time (compare Wrath of Khan to Undiscovered Country sometime to see the difference), whereas Orci and Kurtzman don't have a strong central theme other than Destiny and Making a New Family to Replace your Old one.
Also, since this is all happening in an alternate universe, there is no real threat since we already know how the other characters lived--and (at least for me) I never felt a connection to these new versions of the characters.
Again, that might just be me. -
I hated how his character was written in the new film. Again, my opinion onlu.
-
Wow I gotta say I thought Pine was hte highlight of the film. Maybe Kurtzman and Orci WROTE him a bit douchey in the beginning, but I think Pines performance really changes that. I thought Pine had the kinda of relaxed derring do that we never see in young actors nowadays, and was VERY respectful and evocative of Shatner's Kirk. Just a great, insta-movie star performance.
-
My closing thoughts on this entire discussion can basically be summarized thus- as we grow older and mature, become educated, experienced, live a bit, life bestows a sharp cynicism within us, we are quick to criticize, reluctant to smile. We rationalize, evaluate, systematically consider, reason, derive, hypothesize and conjecture. We think more, and feel less. We become adults.
I find it ironic and sort of bittersweet, that at my 4th viewing of this film, I remembered some of the cold brutal logic from this thread. Not only this thread, but from life in general. Then I looked over and saw this 12 maybe 13 year old kid. This kid got it. His eyes were fucking wide in awe the entire length of this movie. There was spectacle there on screen to that kid. Magic. Then I remembered back to A New Hope, Empire, Superman the movie, Superman II, Return of the Jedi, Star Trek the Motion Picture, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Conan The Barbarian, Close Encounters of the Third kind...this kid was me 25 years ago.
I looked at the screen and then I looked back at that kid, and with perfect clarity it hit me - Yeah, J.J. nailed it. He nailed it out of the park. There was myth-making and magic going on to that kid. The stuff of legend and immediately leaving the theater, hitting Toys R Us, scooping up the Trek figures, and creating his own adventures. Yeah, J.J. got it, and so did this kid. That kid has something we have all lost : The world to him is still something to believe in and aspire to, there are still unknowns completely existing beyond petty plot holes, structure, even reason. An imagination was engaged, and that....THAT, is the greatest gift of all. I smiled at that, because it was then I realised - how very small, small and insignificant a sophist mentality is. -
I think by the middle of the film, by the time they were on the Ice Planet, I was so annoyed with everything that it wouldn't have mattered if Pine had actually morphed into Shatner himself.
Kirk is written as an ego-centric douche and is constantly rewarded for it--from his cocky Batman -Begins Prison/Star Wars Cantina inspired fight at the shipyard bar to his cocky "I'll do it in Three" to his cocky beating of the Kobiyashi Maru he is constantly rewarded: First his barfight gives him Pike, his trip on the shuttle gives him Bones, and His Kobiyashi Maru gets him the chance to be on the Enterprise, albeit with McCoy's Big-Hands exfoliate. Even the scenes with Spock Prime are a constant ego trip for Kirk, (I mean a brilliant man from the future is going on and on about how great he is going to be)so by the time that he becomes the Captain at the end, all his smugness is completely reinforced.
A lot of the time these things happen not because Kirk is smarter than everyone else, but because he is supposed to be Captain Kirk someday--so of course things go his way.
The new Trek works a lot of the time based upon "The Idiot Principal". It is a cliche that many films have fallen into (such as Alien 3, for example) where the main character has a small piece of information or puts together a theory and everyone he gets in contact with won't believe him no matter how persuasive his argument is. In the new film, everyone in Starfleet is an idiot--except Kirk, and to a lesser degree Spock. "A Lightning Storm in space" appears near Vulcan, which only ever happened once before (the Kelvin attack) and none of the Federation Officers or Computers make the connection--not even Pike, who did his dissertation on the Kelvin. But Kirk, who (I guess) learned everything about his father's death somehow puts it all together and gets Pike to put up the shields (thanks to a little help from a badly written joke at Sulu's expense).
The Idiot Principal is still in effect when Nero attacks Vulcan as there are no Vulcan perimeter ships attacking Nero or the Drill, no ground based weaponry, and there is seemingly no one else on the starship who can be a part of Pike's plan to go down and disable the drill. Why didn't Kirk and Sulu have devices to help destroy the drill as well as Engineer Red Shirt? Why wasn't a "planet-wide emergency" sounded when the big bad Romulan ship came a-knocking on Vulcan's core?
Then this is where the convenient writing takes over from the Idiot Principal and hands it over to the Amazing Coincidence School of Sloppy Writing.
Kirk is the one who wants to chase after Nero--is a total ass about it and Spock kicks him off the ship--and this is where it strains my nerves--where he meets the exact two people who have the exact knowledge and technology that is needed to defeat the threat--but more importantly, to make him Captain of the Enterprise.
Spock Prime knows that NuSpock will be shaken by the destruction of Vulcan, so he has Kirk push NuSpock's buttons, believe himself unfit for command and become second fiddle to Kirk. This AGAIN, reinforces Kirk's superiority over everyone else. If not for Spock getting Uhura instead of Kirk, Kirk would be a total Ubermann in his own mind. It is very lucky that they now have an engineer who can now Transport two people from Saturn to Earth, using only a regular Transporter...very lucky indeed. And that Kirk can make Spiderman-like jumps inside the ridiculously designed Romulan mining ship/warship/giant onion.
Of course, Kirk (with a great help from the higher ranked, more experienced Spock(s)) saves planet Earth (the first in a series of such savings, if history is to repeat)so, they throw the chain of command to the wind and promote him directly to Captain, officially. Swell.
By then, I wasn't even noticing Pine. I just wanted it to be over.
-
I totally understand, and if I was 12 I might look past all the films "flaws".
In fact, when I was 11 Star Trek 3 came out and I loved it and looked past it's many flaws. It doesn't hold up as well to me anymore, but I love it the same.
I am glad people love this movie, even though I don't get it. I really am. But, it's just not for me. I have spent too many years analyzing and being hyperdetailed in my work to just sit back and enjoy something for surface enjoyment. I am old, I guess, inside and out.
Joshua, I respect your opinion even if I don't share it--and will talk to you later on a different subject--maybe even on the SAME side of an argument. -
The reason I don't respond in specific detail to what you people consider plot holes is because most of them can be answered with that old standby: "Because then there wouldn't be a movie." For example, you're actually angry that Spock didn't somehow prevent the destruction of Romulus and you wanna know why he miscalculated the trajectory of the supernova & didn't get there in time? BECAUSE THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE A MOVIE. Someone else was actually angry that Spock Prime didn't crash his ship into Nero's, or make his ship self destruct, or do all these other sacrificial things to keep Nero from getting his mitts on the Red Matter? BECAUSE THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE A MOVIE. Some other people are actually angry that the moviemakers made the brilliant choice of letting Nero be this powerful mysterious figure that comes out of nowhere with advanced technology from a parallel universe, alters history and then disappears for twenty five years, only to strike again when they least expect it.That's not a plot hole. It's an aesthetic decision that allows the characters to grow up onscreen while the audience is in suspense wondering when Nero will return. These people somehow think the film would be better if instead of Spock answering all those questions about Nero and his motives in the mind meld, that we were given scenes of Nero attacking other ships that have nothing to do with the plot or the characters in it? Or dialogue like "Oh yeah, that ship that attacked the Kelvin. We've been searching for that ship for 25 years so it could blow us away too." How would those scenes improve the movie? They would weaken Nero as a villain. We don't even see him attacking the other ships in the fleet that go to Vulcan. We just see all the debris from their destruction. Much more powerful that way. And those scenes would weaken Kirk as a hero, because his putting the pieces together is what causes Pike to promote him and earns his eventual respect from Spock. How can you guys not realize that? What movie are you watching?I'm tired of proving you people WRONG. It's beneath me. Nobody's saying the film is perfect. Every suggestion you consider an improvement would actually make things worse. I've never seen such cognitive dissonance about a movie. You guys don't have the first clue about story construction or directorial choices. The internet and sites like AICN have made you think you all have the chops to make a movie or criticize one. You DON'T. I shudder to think how bad this movie would have been if ANY of your suggestions had been in the final product. Do you secretly want Star Trek to die?
-
Nice attempt Bones...my thoughts on TWOK is that Khan was classified. The Federation didn't want anybody else to know they had a genetically superior tyrant hanging around in case some stupid noob had the bright idea of helping him escape.
But on the movie, where on DV is Nero going to maroon Spock Prime? Nero wants Spock to feel his pain, so he also likely wants him to live long enough to feel it. Therefore, he'll leave him by a federation outpost where he'll have a chance at life and of being rescued.
Now where will Spock maroon Kirk? Yes, next to a place where he'll have a chance at life...next to a federation outpost. Now, Kirk is supposed to stay in his pod (it is punishment after all), but maybe it's federation policy that the castaway be given at least a chance at reaching safety outside the pod in case of an emergency, and the pod does tell Kirk that the federation outpost is nearby.
And since Vulcan has no moon, maybe it's the only Class M planet either Spock or Nero could leave them on.
That's why they end up together on the same world in the same location.
This isn't much worse than Luke just happening to crash land near Yoda. Was he guided by the Force? Did Yoda do something to his ship? Maybe, but it doesn't explicity say anything about that in the movie.
Now Scotty, I grant you is a coincidence. But it's not much worse than Chekov just happening to find Khan and just happening to work for Carol Marcus who just happens to be the ex of Kirk who just happens to be on the only ship in the quadrant able to deal with the new threat.
Anyways, isn't this fun? -
I think Cymbalta is right about why the coincidences happen the way they do in the film--with the story they created, the only way they can move the plot along was for the coincidences to occur.
Whether that bothers you or not is matter of opinion and taste I guess--I like my Science Fiction to operate a little more on logic than coincidence I guess. It isn't so much a concern with Star Wars, since it is a fantasy and not a science fiction story.
Again, you do raise good points. If someone could give me a solid explanation for how much power it would take to transport two people from Saturn to Earth or from Delta Vega to a moving Starship at Warp Speed it would ease my mind about the story a bit more...and yes, this back and forth is a lot of fun for me! -
Apply your "idiot principle" to Raiders of the lost Ark. Or Jaws. Or Close Encounters of the Third Kind. It all applies. You are taking the wind from the sales of movies basically.
-
Indiana Jones in your "idiot test" and it works just the same. He was a smartass cocky protagonist that kept running into people that helped him along. Marcus got him the assignment, Marion got him the amulet, Sallah helped him get the ark. Geez man you have got to be kidding me.
-
What movie are you watching? Kirk gets the shit kicked out of him for that entire story. Figuratively and Literally. No Father. Distant Mother. (She's offworld when he steals the car.)Uhura hates him. Everyone in Starfleet insults him and refuses to take him seriously no matter how good he is. Pike dares him to be better and then treats him like a nuisance when he actually IS better. The two other outcasts, Spock Prime and Scotty, are the only ones rooting for him to succeed. He spends half the movie bloody bruised and battered. Self deprecating and never afraid to look scared shitless or foolhardy. And the audience loves every minute of it. He's like Indiana Jones with a spaceship.Kirk IS Smarter than everybody else in the movie, because he LISTENS to other people and INVOLVES them in his decision making. Just like Shatner used to do on the show. And he needs their help. He doesn't do it all himself. They save him as much as he saves them. He's an INCLUSIVE Captain. And if you don't think he's earned that ship and the respect of its crew by the end of that story, what else could he possibly do to deserve that center seat?
-
Old Ben gave him the assignment. The droids gave him the Death Star plans. Old Ben gave him his first force lessons. Han Solo saved him at the end. It's called the heroes journey man. Kirk was beginning becoming the great man we know him to be.
-
That's it exactly. Do these people not WANT him to be Captain Kirk at the end of the movie? What is the end result of their nitpicking? I don't get it. They've shot themselves in the foot so many times they're running out of toes.
-
He bangs his head in the same embarassing manner that Shatner had Doohan do it in ST5. That whole film is Abrams and Pine and the writers dismantling and deconstructing our expectations of Kirk so they can reassemble him for a new generation. They're "taking the piss" as the Brits would say. It's genius really.
-
Bones...I don't know where it was ever claimed that transporters require all that much power. I mean, I'm not a Trek tech geek by any stretch, and I do thank God for that in truth, but maybe it's more of an accuracy thing than a power thing. If it needs power, maybe they're patching a lot of it from the outpost into the shuttle craft. And as for getting them on board Enterprise, if it was anyone else trying to do it, I'd be WTF. But c'mon, it's Mr. Resident Genius of the Federation helping them out. It's frickin' Spock. Honestly, the transporter thing never bothered me. We've seen crazier stuff on Trek before. It's just that they usually spent more time technobabbling us to death with that shit to make it sound good.
And BTW, as for supernovas and blackholes and time travel.... C'mon now, it's no worse than exploding moons, exploding planets, god-like terraforming, katras, strange energy ribbons, and hell...the time travel we saw in Voyage Home or FC was worse than anything we saw here. Wayyy too easy in those movies. At least here it was a helluva big deal. -
Not AT it. Of course that transporter maneuver is far fetched, Bones. Ridiculously so. But Nimoy, Pegg and Pine are so deadpan that they SELL IT. And it references that scene in ST4 where Scotty gives the guy the formula for transparent aluminum and says "How do we know he didn't invent it?" This time Spock gives Scotty his OWN formula for Warp Speed Transport and Scotty DOESN'T Know that HE invented it. I was grinning from ear to ear at their audacity. So was everyone around me. That scene was supposed to be fun, and funny. I think they nailed it. And when Young Spock can't figure out how they did it, and Old Spock was the one who showed them how? The audience was roaring with laughter.
-
"...everything else about the characters I loved. It's what actually got me to enjoy the film despite its obvious logic fallacys (sic)." So you did enjoy it? Good for you, retard. It seems even the trolls who don't have two neurons to rub together are reluctantly admitting they liked it. God forbid a successful, crowd pleasing movie should come out and invalidate their whole sad reason for existence! The consensus is that Star Trek was very good. I'll bet the sequel will be even better, and I and many others now eagerly await it. You idiots who've never done anything in your wasted lives and live only to criticize those who have are left without a damn thing to say this time. Hilarious.
-
Luke didn't really crash into the planet so much as he had nowhere to land, but he knew generally where he was going. And yeah you can explain away some things with the Force, there is precedent for that. You can draw up whatever conclusions you want about Nero's motivations, but it's just very unlikely he would randomly maroon him on a planet. MAYBE after he got the pleasure of watching him as Vulcan imploded, but not before. Either way its lazy screenwriting. And no matter what flaws Wrath of Khan has it doesn't excuse the flaws in this. Wrath of Khan is also, as Bones said, just a film with a MUCH stronger thematic core and character dynamics, which makes it even easier to excuse things like Khan recognizing Chekov. All I ask is that people are realistic about this new Trek, just as we should be with Wrath of Khan. e seem to be more ont he same page than not Greenriver. After all I did ENJOY Star Trek, I just hope Abrams is MUCH more careful witht he actual story he tells next time around. In fact it would be wonderful if he would just write it himself rather than bringing Kurtzman and Orci back on, who have NEVER written a script that you could genuinely describe as good.
-
"Kurtzman and Orci back ... who have NEVER written a script that you could genuinely describe as good." Really? And yet, you just said you enjoyed it and loved the characters. Stop embarrassing yourself already, you poor village idiot.
-
So your argument boils down to "BECAUSE THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE A MOVIE." Perfect. That's been my point since the beginning that there is no rational justification. Odd, after finally coming clean, that then you go on a rant about how you're "proving" me wrong. Proving....I do not think this word means what you think it means. But I do expect more unsupported rants congratulating yourself about this "proof". Each one becoming more and more insane and becoming mroe and more hardened that every moment of the film is cinematic genius and meaningless personal audience reaction descriptions. I was happy I could aid you in getting to this unstable place my friend. Cheers.
-
I didnt say I loved the characterization, which would be their portrayal on a script level. WHat I loved was the acting performances. Karl Urban did beautifully with Bones, K & O writing some silly throwback line in every other second? That I didn't like so much. I'm sure you see the difference, or choose not to, whatever.
-
"a false or misleading charge meant to harm someone's reputation" I think that assuming everyone loves the film is false and/or misleading and was clearly assumed by you to damage my reputation. Now read pages 110 through 120 and do the exercise at the bottom of the page.
-
So you by your own admission you enjoyed the movie and loved the characters ... but neither had anything to do with the script? Hahaha! That's classic. Like I said, you'd be eliminated first round in a 6th grade debate tourney. Look, we can split triblle hairs all day long, but at the end of the stardate, you paid to see it and you admit you enjoyed it. So please for your own good cease your pathetic attempts to prove that it was still somehow beneath you. Make yourself useful for once, go see it again tomorrow.
-
... my "aspersion" (a gross misuse of the word on your part) is based on the movie's box office success and the 95% critical score on rottentomatoes. That's real evidence. What is your counter-argument that most people don't enjoy the movie based on? This should be good...
-
Did you see Transformers? I'm sure you did. Now I didn't like the film, but I did like SHia Labeouf in it. He had great energy and was a likable believable protagonist in an otherwise flaccid film I felt. now I read the script for that movie before it came out and anything that character had as far as depth or energy was COMPLETELY put there by Labeouf, because it wasn't ANYWHERE int he script. The character on the page was flat, lifeless, and cliche. You see Alan that's what actors get payed so much money for. They can fix things like a flat script. Another example is Johnny Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean who invented what we know as Jack Sparrow wholesale from his own imagination. It happens chief.
-
Otherwise I guess EVERYONE also loved Wolverine, Indiana Jones 4, and Spider Man 3. And critics have long been out of touch with mainstream genre film making. They cynically see films like this as somehow lesser than and deserving of praise if it even attempts to rise above mediocrity. Which Star Trek does in it's acting and directing. But not EVERYONE loves it. Today I was arguing in FAVOR of the film to a guy claiming it was worse than any Michael Bay film. Now THAT is a ridiculous statement. The majority of the people liked it sure, I'll grant you, but that's commonplace for any big budget Hollywood film in todays climate.
-
"Box Office doesn't mean anything Alan." You're the fool who brought box office up, saying you bet Trek wouldn't make as much as Transformers. That was a very weak attempt at criticism on your part. "I guess EVERYONE also loved Wolverine, Indiana Jones 4, and Spider Man 3." Wrong. None of those highly flawed movies enjoyed the great reviews Trek is getting. Again, I refer back to the 95% rating, which you seem dead set on ignoring. "The majority of the people liked it sure, I'll grant you..." Including you, moron, so shut up already.
-
And I think that film is a fucking horrible, silly, poseur of a fantasy masquerading as drama. Hell that script won the Academy Award. The zeitgeist often gets it wrong man. Saying "well people like it" is not a solid argument to stand on, argue the merits of the film(let me give you a hint, Directing and Acting). I've said since the beginning that I LIKED (didn't love) the film but the plot holes are unfortunate and keep it from rising above fun little distraction. I've explained what I'm talking about in detail without resorting to red herring arguments. For me it's all about the plot holes, dude. Take those away and I like the film a whole lot more, unfortunately there just aint any explaining them beyond Cymbaltas "BECAUSE WE WOULDN"T HAVE A MOVIE". I can only ignore that to an extent. If it's easier or less important to you then fine, more power, but don't pretend it isn't there.
-
"My name is Titbag."
-
if the new STAR TREK movie really were a GOOD STAR TREK MOVIE... and I'm a HUGE STAR TREK FAN (I have EVERY episode and movie ever made on DVD)... wouldn't it be logical to conclude that I should LIKE the damn movie? well, I DON'T LIKE IT... so, does that mean that I'm not REALLY a huge STAR TREK fan (even though I love EVERYTHING ELSE that's STAR TREK)? or does it perhaps mean that the new movie isn't REALLY a good STAR TREK movie?
-
Since my girlfriend is a internet-scrabble freak and is locked in some insane battle that's giving her that obsessed look in her eye, I felt like I had the go ahead to keep doing something that's equally as pointless. Sorry honey :) - Last time I promise.
So let's focus on the low hanging fruit here, which is the Planet Hoth scene *Delta Vega my ass - I sees wut you did thar JJ* This is a scene that makes no sense, really corrupts the character's integety and plants suspicion and rejection of the other concessions we're asked to make.
Kirk literally goes rogue on the Bridge of the Enterprise. He flat out disobeys a direct order from his Captain and attempts to get into a fist fight with him. We would obviously expect him to be up for court mashal for this action, and if it took place five hundred years earlier he would have been hanged. A captain's position is pretty cheap paper indeed if any 'ole asshole on the bridge can just challenge a Captain in front of the crew. It however looks good on screen, and it allows the writers to use the Vulcan neck pinch which they so desperately want to use. Now the logical choice would be to throw Kirk in the brig so he could be court marshaled on some future date but then the writers would have to cook up some exciting way of allowing Kirk to escape while also moving the plot along. So they keep it snappy and simply kick him off the ship. Now if your eyes are Sharp, you'd realize this makes Spock look a little emotionally compromised, a device we're asked to accept later but I'll get back to that.
Now is Spock trying to get Kirk killed? Since we're told later that there is a federation outpost on the planet, wouldn't the Enterprise just beam the Unconscious Kirk to the outpost in chains and warp out? This makes the most since, the Federation is comprised of reasonable, thoughtful people right? But this would make the plot drag, so to keep things moving they shove Kirk in an escape pod and jettison him towards the surface of a inhospitable world. This way he can find Old Spock, who also has no logical business being where he is and they can recycle a the monster model from Cloverfield. This little scene also looks great in a trailer by the way. I can't say this enough, Old Spock has no business being there. If Nero wanted Spock to see the destruction of Vulcan he could have made things a lot easier and kept Spock on the Narada where Nero could have actually seen Spock's reaction. But no, the plot has written itself in a corner and the only way to keep it moving is to put Spock-prime in that cave, not at the outpost which would make sense, but square in that cave where it makes absolutely no sense - He wouldn't have been able to see anything there! At least at the outpost he'd be able to watch it on the television. What? We're asked to accept Nokia but apparently Samsung didn't make it past the future gate *Weren't ponying up the cash* and in a universe were we're supposed to accept Warp drive, Transporters and Subspace communication is it a stretch to accept subspace news frequencies? Nope, Spock is only there to feed us exposition and give Kirk some destiny mumbo jumbo.
Given how much we're being asked to bend over backwards, everything that happens at the Federation outpost is cake. The only reason Scotty is here is to get Kirk off the Planet where he shouldn't be and so we can be introduced to Scotty which they needed to get around to. There's only one bit of nonsense I couldn't stomach, and the whole plot and the future of Kirk's career rests on it: That stupid Star Fleet regulation the writers pulled out of their ass. So now we're asked to accept this whole emotion compromise business. Not before, not when Spock ordered his first officer hastily shot out of canon onto an unfriendly ice-ball, but now. Why even bother? Why not make it regulation 3021: Any non-James T Kirk commanding officers must give over their rank and post to any Available James T Kirk's whenever he starts up on yo momma? It would have been just as convincing. It would have been equally convincing if Spock just hulked out for no reason and then stormed off to his room. Wouldn't this set precedence though? Kirk has staged a coup, challenged his commanding officer directly on the bridge not mere foot steps away from his chair and has won not by cunning, or ingenuity, or prowess, but because the plot cooked up a bogus and completely unbelievable device. Do I really have to put up with this shit?! So now that Kirk Mc'Hangfromstuff is captain, who's to stop Chekov, or Sulu or anyone else who disagrees with him to simply challenge him and see if he gets really fired up? Shhhh.. It's a mystery..
Robert Mckee would have been proud. The Plot churned along but like an engine put together with bubble gum and toothpicks it doesn't hold up to the most basic stress test. So sue me if I had bad engineering. -
Sorry, had to fix that. :)
-
YOU NEW TREK LOVERS ARE LIKE THOSE LITTLE DOGS YOU SEE IN OLD WESTERN MOVIES, RUNNING AROUND THE LEGS OF THE CATTLE IN THE HERD, YIPPING AND YELPING AND RUNNING IN CIRCLES.
-
"BOLL CALLED ME UP LAST NIGHT. HE SAID, 'GENE, WOW. JUST. WOW'. I MAKE MOVIES THAT ARE COMPLETE SHITE, BUT WOW. I'M HUMBLED AT THE TOTAL COCKROT THAT IS THE NEW TREK. CLEARLY, I HAVE MY WORK CUT OUT FOR ME NOW."
-
REFERENCE DONALD RUMSFELD IN A TALKBACK IS THE ULTIMATE IN TWATTERY. OMFG. SMALLBALLSACK4THEDEVIL, YOU ARE A BIGGER NONCE THAN EVEN JOSHUAADVANCINGONMYSPHINCTER. CONGRATULATIONS. WHAT'S NEXT, A DICK CHENEY REFERENCE YOU FUCKING TWIT?
-
Vulcan was just destroyed and the same fate awaits Earth in a matter of minutes. There was no time for niceties. Kirk had to go ballistic on the bridge to get his captain to face the reality that failure to confront Nero would mean Earth's demise. As first officer, it was his duty to speak out. Pwned!
-
He is simply following protocol. Beaming a mutineer to an outpost is prohibited because he/she can stir trouble in said outpost. Regulations state that the pod computer will alert the outpost and they will in turn call for Federation security personnel to retrieve the mutineer. Pwned!!
-
That regulation is in the handbook. Your problem is with Starfleet, not Roberto Orci. Spock Prime wisely instructed Kirk to do what was necessary to take command of the Enterprise and engage Nero - to save Earth. Time was of the essense, billions of lives in the balance, and thus unorthodox measures had to be taken. It was fortunate that Sarek was on the bridge. Clearly he realized Kirk's intent, and interceded to help him. Pwned!!!
-
It was the use of time travel. Pretty easy to use this plot device in any form the writer(s) darn well please. God forbid if the writers actually use an original plot.I have no problem with a reboot. Some of the cast did a great job. Some. I wish that the script would have been handled a little better. Too many darn plotholes. I appreciate that many of you are trying to answer those questions but it just ain't happening. I have asked questions and not one has been answered. I love movies but don't expect to walk out asking more questions than I did going in to it.
-
But You Guys CAN? See that's the problem. When I say I'm proving you WRONG, I'm not talking about your Opinion. You have a right to your opinion. But when the "evidence" you site from the film doesn't support your opinion, and in fact is demonstrably contrary to your opinion, your opinion carries less weight. You all think you're smarter than this movie and the people who made it. But your continued IGNORANCE (from the root word IGNORE) of what is actually presented to you by the film shows that you're NOT smarter than the film.Industry Killer: You have yet to respond to any of my explanations of why the film is structured and written the way it is. There are very good reasons why they don't give us more detailed scenes with Spock Prime and Nero. And the point of the BECAUSE THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE A MOVIE argument didn't sink in. This is the story they CHOSE to tell. You have every right to dislike that story. But when your suggestions to improve their story would actually make the story worse, or create another story entirely, you're no longer responding to their story. You're writing your own. If Spock had prevented the destruction of Romulus, this story wouldn't exist. When you start a post about plot holes asking why he didn't prevent it, it's hard to take anything else you say seriously.Dr. Pepper Spray: Bringing Sexy Back has already pointed out some of your errors, but I feel the need to chime in. Kirk is not just "any asshole on the bridge". He's Spock's second in command. This franchise has a long history of friendly disagreements and outright arguments amongst the chain of command. Plenty of "Permission to Speak Freely?" And the film reverses the traditional dichotomy. This time Spock is acting emotionally and Kirk is counselling logic. Spock realizes this later, and grows to respect Kirk. This film was very carefully thought out. The more you think about it, the more the structure reveals itself. You guys are having kneejerk emotional reactions that blind you to what's seen and heard onscreen.How do we know this? Because Doctor, you got so angry at the ice planet scenes, you don't even remember them correctly. Nero marooned Spock Prime on the planet's surface. He didn't beam him into a cave. The mind meld shows him, plain as day, watching Vulcan being destroyed.How many times do I have to say this? THE FILM ISN'T PERFECT. None of us are saying it is. But it's difficult to discuss the film, when people like me and joshuavance and bringingsexyback are referencing THE FILM ITSELF and people like Industry Killer and Dr. Pepper Spray are referring to some imaginary piece of fan fiction they've created in their own angry imaginations.
-
Dudes, give. me. a. fucking. break. I have to spell out everything to you and you keep spouting the same shit. Yes yes yes, the script told you this is true, or that is true no matter if it over-runs common sense or human nature. Accept this device here, but forget it come next scene. GIVE. ME. A. FUCKING. BREAK. Again, this is fucking LOST where really stupid shit happens and not a finger is lifted to explain why. No, just accept it. It's a mystery. Trust me, the script says so. What fucking studio is paying you two retards? Which one are you, Kurtzman or Orci? You dumb shits have your heads so far up each other's asses it's unreal!
"it's Starfleets problem" You know who decides what Starfleet does? Take a guess...THE WRITERS! Oh cybalta, all forms of regimented units allow for lower positions to "speak freely". If the commanding officer says "no" then that's it. They don't give mutaneers promotion. There's a reason why. I shouldn't have to fucking explain this to you. If the script says other-wise then the script is stupid. Get it? This film isn't carefully thought out, your just a couple of fucking mindless cheerleaders who wouldn't know a good story if it bit you on the face. Whatever bro, enjoy you picnic on the garbage mound - you paid for it. -
He's fighting the Security Guards. Spock nerve pinches him. Ice Planet Scenes. THEN: Kirk goads Spock into physically assaulting him. NOT the other way around. It's nice that some of you, like brightgeist, have seen every episode of Star Trek ever made.You know what would be even nicer?If you would watch this movie again. AND PAY ATTENTION THIS TIME. Then we'll Talk.
-
i still dont get the confusion of "why was spock left on that planet". he was left there so he could witness his planet be destroyed. nero wanted him to suffer just as he suffered seeing his planet destroyed. i'm not sure if its during the mindmeld or some other coversation but he pretty much says that word for word.
-
My questions would still not be answered. So far none of mine have been answered here or anywhere else. Seriously. Answer all my questions and I will be happy. Please.
-
What Film Did You See? Did Kirk and Scotty storm the bridge phasers drawn? Did they maroon Spock on the ice planet and sail the Bounty to Tahiti? Or did they piss him off so bad he relinquished command which made Kirk Captain? And then, upon reflection, he realized Kirk was right, came back to the bridge and helped Kirk execute his plans? From now on when you guys refer to this IMAGINARY FILM THAT DOESN'T EXIST instead of the one that the rest of us are trying to discuss, I'm going to paraphrase Scotty: "I like YOUR Film! It's EXCITING!"
-
JIM, I'M INTELLECTUALLY COMPROMISED
-
I'm tired of answering everyone else's. It's like arguing with a brick wall that's slowly caving in on itself because it has no support. And the wrong bricks.
-
First, what did Nero do for the 25 years between when he appeared and the appearance of Spock Prime?
-
You are mistaking the "Idiot Principal" for plot convenience.
There aren't any idiots in Raiders of the Lost Ark or Star Wars but there is a lot of convenience...because GUESS WHAT? THEY WERE MAKING FANTASY FILMS THAT WERE TRIBUTES TO BADLY WRITTEN CLIFFHANGER SERIALS.
Which is fine if that is your model of entertainment.
What JJ, Lindeloff, Orci and Kurtzman have done is taken Star Trek and made it like a Star Wars film--that is, they have made it a cliffhanger serial, bad writing, convenience, The Force and all.
Well, that is great. But it isn't Star Trek. Well, it wasn't Star Trek--Now, I guess it is.
Star Trek, for millions of fans was more than just potboiler Sci-Fi Pulp-Magazine adventure fantasies about James T. Kirk, Spock and The ENTERPRISE.
As soon as Roddenberry came on board for the Trek revival in the late seventies he wanted the show to maintain the social commentary, the exploration and excitement of the original show but maybe have the characters mature a little (after all, it was ten years between the last episode and when The Motion Picture premiered). He also wanted the storytelling to grow up as well. Well, The Motion Picture was a big hit financially, but not critically in the wake of Star Wars, so Paramount decided to cut Roddenberry out and make it more a whiz-bang adventure--but when they finally got Meyer to write/direct they got something better--they got a film with a high literary quality to it, evoking classic adventure literature like Hornblower, Tale of Two Cities and Count of Monte Cristo rather than Star Wars--and we all loved them for it.
The rest of the Original Crew films did an admirable job of balancing the feel of the old Trek show with more modern storytelling (with the obvious miscue in Final Frontier)--but by then Roddenberry had been asked back into the Star Trek universe by Paramount and he gave us The Next Generation, which brought millions of new fans into Trek and solidified his idea of Trek for many people.
Were things a little too civilized or utopian for some people? Sure. But Roddenberry kept non-human characters in the mix so that there would always be conflict on either a large or small scale. Say what you will about Rick Berman, Brannon Braga and the other great people who helped shepherd Star Trek for it's second 20 years (Michael Piller, Ira Steven Behr, Robert Hewitt Wolfe, Ronald D. Moore, and others) but for many people, that is when Trek really began to shine, to be cohesive, to entertain and educate.
Sure, the later films after First Contact lost their way and ENTERPRISE could be seen as a mistake, but I think almost all Prequels are a mistake--they usually give us information we never really needed to know at the expense of the central mysteries inherent to drama. Enterprise also took a lot of flack for daring to update the technology of the future past what was possible in the Sixties since so much of the day to day technology we now use is more advanced than most of what was in the original series. A huge schism in the fanbase appeared when faced with this new show that had Vulcans acting more like humans, Huge Alien threats that were never mentioned in any Star Trek show, Klingons that looked right for one series but wrong for another, and a million other things--until finally they had to use the last season as a Band-Aid to patch up all the things that they made worse rather than better.
But we fans took the journey, and rode it out to the end. The market had changed between 1987 and 2005. Perhaps they did indeed go to the well too many times. Perhaps Star Trek's time had simply passed.
We never saw Earth in Trek until The Motion Picture, and never really poked around it until after STIV--Next Generation, DS9 and Voyager were where we really got to see what Roddenberry's idea for Earth was like, what the future could hold for us--and it became increasingly clear that it was going to be different than the real world we inhabit. Who cares if The Eugenics Wars never took place? The Post-Atomic Horror as described in the series and the Bell Riots will probably not take place either--and these are all good things. But the shows used the future to comment on the present or reflect upon the past.
Star Trek used to be about using fiction to help change the world. Now it is a cliffhanger serial.
Forgive me if I don't see that as progress. -
The storyline was lame, lame lame. The music was awful. Most of the acting was pretty good, but the core characters lacked the cohesion and chemistry of the original cast. I give you credit for doing as well as you did with them, though. But so much of the movie was a failure. I hope you'll knock it out of the park with the sequel. And please, drop the lens flares. It is crappy film school experimentation and doesn't deserve to be in a big budget feature.
-
When I said Potboiler Pulp adventures, I don't want people to think I don't love and respect the Original show. I do. I love it.
But for me, It has to be more than just fistfights and space battles--and my whole point was that it was more than that for Roddenberry, the producers and writers of the Original show. The new writers and producers should really take a look at what they did before they make more movies. -
or what he was doing for 25 years. The film isn't about Nero. I covered all this earlier. NOT providing a bunch of "Complete Idiot's Guide to Nero" scenes makes the film BETTER. It builds suspense. What does that guy want? When is he coming back? Nero is a Romulan. They're always hiding somewhere, sneaking around, waiting to strike. If you'd seen him fighting Klingons or attacking other Federation vessels, it would have diminished the impact of his return. Before you ask these questions, ask yourself: Why do I need this information? Would it improve the story? Did they make a conscious decision to withold it?
-
Firstly, My last name is VANCE.
Secondly, they didn't depict Earth because they couldn't afford it. Finally, the big schizm here evidently is fans of the uncounted other iterations of McTrek seem to be the ones with the most sand in their vaginal cavities.
I could give a shit less about the bloated faux history of Deep Space Nine , Voyager and Enterprise. Star Trek to me has always been the first, original, and best series.
The new movie perfectly captures the spirit of the original series, you know, the source material from which it was based on. Of COURSE it's a stylistic departure from the later series, for one- it's watchable. It's fun, it's NOT insipid and self-reverential. It has humor which is what the later series sadly lacked, and most important of all, the science wasnt EVER explained. Roddenberrys notion on science in Trek was that the good guys in Police and western series never paused to explain to the audience how a revolver works, so to then Trek wouldnt have the characters explaining away all the minutia of the future. Kirk points the phaser and fires. He orders a barrage of Torpedoes and they fire. The crew steps into the transporter platform and they beam. He orders warp speed and the ship goes...quite fast. End of story.
Don't confuse the crutch of technobabble with scientific accuracy, this shit came much later to gloss over thin stories and flesh out scenes. Why? Because the God damn characters weren't interesting or fun enough to fill out a 45 minute teleplay on their own merits. As originally concieved the only character intended to spout technobabble was Spock, to provide information. The rest of the crew and characters didn't get caught up in the wonder of it all. They were still too busy being human beings.
You can call that dumbing down if you like but, don't pretend like that is something new. The only watering down of Trek I can think of is the last 20 years under Rick Berman that buried the franchise.
Star Trek has run it's course? No kids, all this new movie demonstrates is that when done RIGHT, and with TLC, Star Trek as a concept has PLENTY of life left in her. -
She was so out of place, it might as well have been Pee Wee Herman playing Spock's mom. Actually, that would have made more sense than a terrible prosthetically-aged Winona. No point in casting her in anything unless she's young and naked.
-
Thank you, I think you hit the nail right on the head.
I'm come to the realization that the one true Roddenberry Star Trek is dead and has been remade into a lesser product. Sure, there is fun to be had here, after all, Pirates of the Caribbean, or the films of Roland and Emmrich, are fun even though they're dumber then a stick and not worth seeing in a theater, but it isn't the same. It isn't Star Trek no matter the title.
And to cymbalta4thedevil: I'm done with you. Explaining the problems inherent in this thing is like trying to explain the color red to a man who's been blind all his life. It's just not possible. Or if you'll permit the next analogy: You love the Snake oil. It doesn't do what it's supposed to do, it's just Snake oil but you swear by it. So fine, enjoy it.
-
You people are defending and trying to preserve and maintain mediocrity, irrelevance, and 20 years of yawn inducing name-brand raping at the hands of a corporate Producer whose sole claim to fame was a Teletubbies type kids show. I speak of RICK BERMAN. The WORST thing that ever happened to Star Trek. Sherry Lansing didn't help either she approved that shit.
-
My favorite series is Deep Space Nine. It has plenty of shows about war and religion and terrorism and political wrangling. It also has shows where they're playing baseball with Vulcans and robbing a casino to save Vic's holodeck program. I predict the next film will give you more of what you expect. They had too much to set up in this one.I'm going to work. Catch up with you guys later.
-
I appreciate an answer. Seriously. I don't agree with you though. If a film is going to have a character admit that there is a 25 year gap between one attack and another then I question what the hell was he doing. So what if he is Romulan. How many people really know what traits Romulans have if they are not ST fans. No suspense. No payoff. No build up. Most of it was due to Bana's character developement. There was none.Again, I do appreciate you answering my question.
-
May 25, 2009 12:56:29 PM CDT
cymbalta, yes I wanted to know where Nero was for 25 years
by snake foreskin
He was one of the weakest parts of the movie.
Khan was a villain that the Star Trek producers and directors seem to want to emulate or recreate to one extent or another in many of the subsequent ST movies. Nero, as per usual, was a bit of a Khan wannabe.
the problem is, he clearly didn't have any of the strong points of Khan. He was one of the weakest villain characters I have ever seen on film. Wouldn't it have been nice to understand why he was so intent upon destroying Vulcan and Earth? And no, I didn't for one minute buy into the crap they through at us about Spock failing to stop the Supernova. That was a laughable plotline!
It would have been nice to believe the backstory that was thrust so lamely at us. It would have been even nicer to give one iota of a crap about his character, especially since he supposedly sustained such immense loss. But he was so badly depicted, so poorly fleshed-out, that no one with an ounce of thoughtfulness could buy into the Nero character or his villainous storyline.
This Star Trek movie was made for people who have little or no interest in putting any thought into their entertainment. Thoughtful viewers need not apply. They should have changed the famous intro to say "To Blandly Go Where We've All Gone Before". -
as a reboot. No originality there. JJ and crew could have simply done a reboot. Have a story about a crazed Romulan wanting revenge on the Federation and anyone else getting in his way. You could have still had the same crew getting together to face the threat. Simply don't have Spock prime. I would have respected the movie more but they went the easy route. Talk about cop outs.
-
Nero was nothing but a rip off of Khan. He turned out to be a watered down version. The better the villian shines, the better the hero shines. ST:TWOK proved that.
-
They were waiting for 25 years in at the Klingon prison Rura Penthe. That answers the question of where he was and what he was doing. If anything, the question should be why was that scene edited out.
-
If you exclude that scenario of the Klingon prison planet, then Nero was FORCED to bide his time, wait, and wait, and wait for 25 years for Elder Spock to emmerge from the singularity. If you notice, there is a difference in Neros behavior from the time they first emmerge then 25 years later. Initially Nero appeared calm and collect, later he was clearly insane. No doubt the point was that like Khan, he stewed and dwelled for 25 years to the point of insanity.
Elder Spock had the red matter, Nero had to wait on him if he planned on destroying Vulcan, Earth, Andor, Delta IV, Tellar etc etc. -
I agree with you about Star Trek being fun. Perfect examples are the DS9 episodes you mention and Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.
I think it is pretty obvious I didn't enjoy the new Trek--and all I have been trying to do is show why. To me, it is an echo, a shadow, a slim reflection of much better source material.
Star Wars and Raiders were breaths of fresh air when they came out because even though they mined all of pop culture for their stories and characters the did it in a fresh and unique way.
To me--and once again, this is my own take--"Star Trek" tries to imitate that formula of taking the Campbellian story structure and stock characters, allusions of the past (Star Wars, old Star Trek dialogue, references to other films in it's story beats and visual tone) and flashy special effects and then throws them all in a pot, stirring it up to make soup.
But where Star Wars and Raiders came together and were great, "Star Trek" doesn't gell for me. Look, I know it is not the consensus--and I know that Alan Moore will come back yet again with RottenTomatoes' 95% approval rating--but it doesn't change that it didn't work for me, and I have been using these talkbacks to try to figure out why.
I thank you Cymbalta, and Joshua (sorry I mistyped your last name--Liberty Valance is a great movie), ClarenceBeaks, IndustryKiller, Dr. PepperSpray, Titbag, necgrey, Dr. Morbius (great reference by the way), ccchhhrrriiisssm, Brightgeist, GreenRiver, BubbaFoom, BendersShineyMetalAss, I Hope You Die, Emvan and everyone else who have kept this thing going for days. It has been really informative.
Now back to reality! Everyone, enjoy your Memorial Day--wherever you are. -
His mind is wiped. His generalities and justifications get more and more vague with each post. His steadfast refusal to get specific about anything that was actually in the film now calcified into rantings about side tangents made up wholesale in his head. Now any plot holes, conveniences, or cheap devices in the script are ok because that's what the writer CHOSE. Which officially negates any plot hole, convenience, weak device ever in the history of cinema, because they were CHOSEN by the writer. No shit Sherlock. It doesn't mean it makes any sense or has an answer beyond "BECAUSE THERE WOULDN'T BE A MOVIE." Also, characters can disappear for 25 years unexplained and that's fine because he isn't the main protagonist of the film. All this and more in "Movie Rules by Cymbalta: Explaining Why No Movie Has Ever Made a Mistake in it's Logic via Apologizing" available on Amazon for $29.99
-
"Industry Killer: How I Boldly Employed Faulty Logic & Bad Grammar In Wasting Days Attempting To Explain That A Movie I And Most Others Enjoyed is Still No Good." You actually get that pamphlet free with every order, whether you request it or not.
-
Thanks for reading and the recognition, I can tell you found it enlightening.
-
Was he in Klingon jail or just stewing? This is what is bad. No definite answer. Always speculation. Doesn't matter what a missing scene suggests. If so then they should put it in the movie. Would have cleared that up immediately.Also, how did Nero know Spock Prime was going to be on his way also? Anyone care to explain this. Really love to hear what the answer is.
-
That these guys didn't just make up wholesale with no support whatsoever from the script. OR you'll get some toss away answer justifying why this is somehow ok for being utterly nonsensical and lazy But also don't forget If Nero was just stewing somewhere hiding in the galaxy, how did he know exactly when SPock was going to come out the other side of the magic time traveling black hole so he could catch him? Clearly Starfleet would have been monitoring a spontaneous black hole that just appeared and regurgitated a large killer ship, so I assume he wasn't just waiting there for him. And if he was in a Klingon prison (which the movie never says so we can't just assume something that specific, deleted scene or not) then it's again awfully convenient that he is let out, gets his ship back, and reassembles his wayward crew just in time for SPock to randomly come through. And how DID he know SPock would come through since he didn't even see him get sucked in. Odd that a mere miner would know so much about magical time traveling black holes (perhaps Klingon Prison Libraries are that comprehensive??). The mounting questions for this one little scene alone is completely ridiculous.
-
Bada Boom.
-
You fuckers seriously have battered wife syndrome. You sound pathetic, have you actually READ your posts because clearly you either didn't SEE the movie, or didn't pay attention.
They knew WHEN Spock would appear based on their calculations and it explicitly says that in the movie.
You fucking unimaginative killjoys have WAY too much time on your hands. Are you that mentally deficient that you require every single aspect of every single throwaway scene and line explained away to you like a God damn 5 year old? I've heard of ADD but you fuckers take the cake, they have medication for that shit you know. If you people are this way with every single movie that comes out you seriously don't need to be watching movies fucking RAINMAN. God almighty you guys are seriously trying HARD not to love this movie, like I said it's battered wife syndrome.
Give it fucking time, just like with every other spect of accumulated Trek knowledge you have spanning 40 years, it will come through technical manuals , interviews, putting two and two together, and generally NOT being dickheads. You guys are going WAY overboard with it now, it was cute and fun at first but, seriously this shitis starting to stink of mental illness. -
What Nero WASN'T doing for 25 years, he wasn't sitting in a chat forum crying and pouting about aa fucking kickass Star Trek movie that's for damn certain. Why not go waste your time on a forum dedicated to a true piece of shit like Terminator or Wolverine, you know something more productive than arguing semantics and generally jerking off.
-
this entire talkback is like the story of idiocracy...the people with a clue say what they think, and everyone else calls them stupid masturbaters. but no amount of name calling will ever stop the truth from coming out!
-
May 25, 2009 5:19:07 PM CDT
WHO CARES WHEN JON AND KATE WILL BE FUCKING YOUR EYEBALLS
by bringingsexyback
at 9PM EST?
-
What exactly was the line? You don't need to know it verbatim but paraphrase it for me, who says it, and when? And what fucking "calculations" could have possibly figured that out to the exact moment? I'm skeptical as to whether that was even in the movie, it certainly sounds like you made that up, but if it was I hope it was more than just "Our calculations say Spock will be 25 years behind us."
-
Star Trek is a gigantic hit and the haters are just venting their bile. They've had their balls cut off and want to whine. Who cares? Trek wins, end of story. Fuck you, haters. I laugh at the inferior intellects.
-
Sorry haters but this movie kicks all kinds of ass and it was definitely Trek. I've seen every single Trek movie released. Some of the better ones multiple times. I wouldn't consider myself a Trekkie though. I haven't seen every episode of the original series or The Next Generation or Deep Space nine and I haven't seen even a single episode of Enterprise or Voyager.
So I can't speak as a hardcore Star Trek fan, but I can speak as a casual Sci-Fi / Action movie fan who has seen every Trek film and this movie is Trek and it kicks all kinds of ass and wanting more.
It successfully reboots the series without pissing on continuity and does so in a pretty neat fashion. More importantly, it captures the spirit of the original and the characters while kicking things up a notch and bringing Star Trek back into the A movie / block buster level.
For those bitching about some of the holes in the science. Guys, this is Science Fiction. Let me repeat .. Science ... Fiction. Again .. Fiction. It doesn't matter if there are some logic holes here and there. What matters is if you come to care about the characters, if the story is engaging and if it's true to the spirit of the original. The answer to all three is yes. I'll be seeing this baby again in theaters. This will be the first time for a Trek movie that I've done that. -
Good lord, go back and watch those shows and try not to crap your pants laughing. Anybody who venerates Roddenberry's rancid piss of an idea is an idiot anyway. Star Trek didn't become good until the old fucker died and better people took over. Even then, more than half of all Trek is crap. People bashing this movie are ignoring the same faults in their precious Star Trek shows. What a pathetic bunch of dumb fuckers. I'd like to run barbed wire into your mouths and out your assholes and floss out your guts.
-
Calculating Spock's arrival time was easy.
-
May 25, 2009 7:53:45 PM CDT
So I just finished a way long on-line conversation . . .
by royston lodge
. . . with my brother-in-law about the consequences of this new Abrams continuity, and we came up with some pretty interesting ideas about where the franchise could go from here and all the mind-bending stories they could come up with if they wanted to.
I'm not going to bore you with the entire exchange, cuz it's like a Vulcan Talmud it's so long.
But I'm so proud of the final thought that sprung from my mind during the exchange, I simply HAVE NO CHOICE but to share it with you all.
Ahem...(Royston clears his throat and takes a sip of water. A hush falls over the auditoreum.)
WHAT THE HELL IS THIS NERO GUY'S FRIGGIN' PROBLEM?!?!?!?!
DUDE!!! You're free-as-a-bird in the friggin' past with a friggin’ AWESOME spaceship that TOTALLY blows ANYBODY ELSE'S spaceship away, man!
And you just kKNOW those green chicks would totally dig your trés rebellious tattoos! Am I wrong? So DUDE! Stop beig such a fuckin' chump, go party like it’s 2099 and then drop in on your great-great-grandparents for shits and giggles!You’re a Romulan from the future fer cryin’ out loud! HOW COOL IS THAT?
Go make yourself rich selling your ship’s supply of 100-year-old Romulan Ale that actually won’t even be bottled for another 40 years!!!
IT’S MARKETING GOLD THAT WOULD MAKE A FERENGI WEEP, YOU FRIGGIN’ JACKASS!!!!
No, instead you waste all that awesome coolness that Harry Mudd would friggin' DIE FOR on hunting down the younger version of the guy who you blame for destroying your planet in the future and making him feel bad about something he hasn't even done yet and MAY NEVER DO BECAUSE YOU CHANGED HISTORY BY TRAVELLING BACK IN TIME!!!
Your planet EXISTS, you idiot!!!
Drop by your ancestors' pad in your cool-as-fuck spaceship, build a few more of them, and TAKE OVER THE FRIGGIN' ALPHA QUADRANT!!!
Then you'd be able to GET ALL THE GREEN CHICK POON YOU CAN HANDLE!!!
No? You'd rather be a psychopathic, suicidal DOUCHE INSTEAD? Fair enough.
.
.
jackass...
(Just to be clear, I loved Abrams' Star Trek. I just think this alternate interpretation is an utter TRIUMPH of geek comedy gold.Gold, Jerry! Gold! -
YOU ASSHOLES BETTER START AMUSING ME A WHOLE LOT BETTER WITH YOUR "GEE, THIS MOVIE DOESN'T HAVE ANY PLOT HOLES BECAUSE I'VE GOT A JJ FURBY DOLL AND IT SAYS SO" BULLSHIT.
C'MON YOU FUCKING PLEBS. MAKE ME LAUGH SOME MORE. DANCE YOU FUCKERS, DANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!
DANCE!!DANCE!!DANCE!!DANCE!!
FASTERBITCHESFASTER!!!!!!!!!!! -
...and I say this with the love of a true, blue, nit-picking Trekkie who's only joy in live is finding the plot holes in Star Trek even though it's the only thing that's ever given him pleasure on this planet.
Saying that they let Wesley Crusher pilot the Enterprise-D even though he wasn't even in Starfleet isn't saying much.
The reason for this because of the one episode of Next Generation (I believe it was 11001001) where Picard pilots the ship and shows how rediculously easy that task really is.
In order to plot a friggin' course through deep friggin' space and accelerate a ship that's as long as 2/3 of the width of Central Park from a dead stop to several multiples of the speed of light requires the helmsman push merely FOUR BUTTONS.
Picard presses one button for "starbase".
He presses two buttons for "74".
He presses one button for the warp factor.
He presses one button for "engage".
When it's that easy, why NOT let that little shithead fly the damned ship! I don't see why they need a human at the helm AT ALL!
.
The point, dear friends, is that seeking out plot holes in the minute details is what makes Star Trek so much goddamn FUN!
Anybody who complains about plot holes in one movie without complaining about the plot holes in every single episode of every single series is MISSING THE FRIGGIN' POINT!!!
Plot holes don't make a bad Star Trek movie.
Boring editing makes a bad Star Trek movie (The Motion Picture)
Bad special effects make a bad Star Trek movie (Star Trek V)
A sexy strip tease from a "solidly-built" woman in her 70s is what makes a bad Star Trek movie (Star Trek V)
Utterly retarded dialogue vomitted out of the mouth of everybody's favourite android just to remind us about his newfangled emotion chip that apparently is permanently set to "douche" is what makes a bad Star Trek movie (every TNG movie, give or take).
But plot holes do not a bad Star Trek movie make.
I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically vote "YES" for AbramsTrek, I hope the next writer/director follow this new paradigm with the same level of respect that Abrams did, and I hope Rick Berman and Brannon Braga are never allowed on a Star Trek set again cuz they'd wring all the life out of AbramsTrek.
Plot holes. Almost as tasty as donut holes. -
GOOD GOD SPOKE WAYPASTHISPRIME IS IN A ROMULAN SHIP THAT LOOKS LIKE THE FUTURISTIC EQUIVALENT OF THE SEGWAY. OH FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST. THE SHIP DESIGN FOR THIS TREK WAS EASILY THE WORST IN THE ENTIRE SERIES. GERRY FUCKING ANDERSEN USED TO COME UP WITH BETTER SHIPS FOR HIS SUPERMARIONNETE SHOWS.
THE ROMULAN SHIP IS SO FAST AND ADVANCED, IT CAN'T ZIP AWAY IN TIME BEFORE A FUCKING MINING SHIP CAN LOCK ONTO IT...
AND SPECK WAYPASTHISPRIME...WHAT THE FUCK WAS HE DOING EXACTLY WHEN HE CAME OUT OF THE BLACK HOLE IN THE WALL? WATCHING RERUNS OF GOLDEN GIRLS? OMFG. HONESTLY. HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE WRITING. YOU FUCKING TOOLS WHO THINK THIS IS JUST SO NEAT AND AWESOME HAVE NO EARTHLY CLUE.
OH NO. NERO THE HANDSOME HAS LOCKED ON WITH A TRACTOR BEAM. GOLLY. GUESS I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RIDE THIS ONE OUT, DO NOTHING, AND LET THE MOST DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE IN THE GALAXY FALL INTO HIS HANDS. MAYBE HE'LL JUST USE IT TO INVENT A GREAT NEW FLAVOUR OF TANG.
HMM. WHAT CHANNEL IS MATLOCK ON? -
May 25, 2009 8:33:48 PM CDT
RODDENBERRY: "UPON READING THIS TALKBACK I REWATCHED NEW TREK"
by bringingsexyback
"and enjoyed it immensely. JJ is bringing fun back to Trek, and for a dead guy like me that's rare to come by."
-
...DURING HIS SCENES." LIKE SOMEONE JUST TOLD HIM THAT SPECK WOULD BE MAROONED ON AN ICE PLANET TO WATCH VULCAN GET DESTROYED, BUT THAT HIS CHARACTER HIS GOING TO HAVE TO STAY INSIDE AN ICE CAVE INSTEAD OF STROLLING OVER TO THE FEDERATION OUTPOST DOWN THE CORNER TO TRY AND CALL FOR HELP."
"WAIT. THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. DOH!" -
It was Vulcan - commissioned by the Vulcan Science Academy. Did you even watch the movie, Tit?
-
...WHEN SOMEONE TRIES TO RESPECTFULLY RESPOND TO JOSHUAADVANCINGUPTHEHILLOFFAIL.
IT'S STOCKHOLM SYNDROME. PURE AND SIMPLE. -
CAN'T YOU FUCKING READ?
-
... but Titbag, dude, seriously, unclench. Go download Barbarella off BitTorrent and watch the opening credits a few dozen times. You know, just to unwind.
-
as step one in your final Trek meltdown.
-
1. THE LITTLE OOMPA-LOOMPA THAT WAS SCOTTY'S CUM BUCKET. VERY CUTE. WONDER IF HE USES HIS TEETH?
2. THERE WAS A TINY BIT OF POO ON THE ORION WHORE FROM WHEN SHE HAD HER PINKY STUFFED UP GAY KIRK'S TINY ASSHOLE. NICE BIT OF DETAIL, THAT. VERY CONVINCING. AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS CGI. -
Shoulda quit after I granted you that illustrious No-Prize in honour of "Failing Frequencies Open".
But no, like Nero and Anakin's adopted gay love-child, you let your hatred consume you.
Memorial Day, indeed... -
WAS ONE OF THE MOST AWEFUL FUCKING BITS OF WRITING AND PANDERING THAT I'VE EVER WITNESSED IN THE CINEMA. THIS WAS NOSTALGIA FED THROUGH A MEAT GRINDER AND RUBBED ON JJ'S COCK.
THE LEAST THEY COULD HAVE DONE WAS HAVE SULU WHIP AROUND AND GIVE KIRK A BIG WET ONE WHEN THE FIGHT WAS OVER, FFS. I MEAN, WTF? -
NO ONE USES 'JUMP THE SHARK' ANYMORE YOU FUCKTARD.
-
..SUDDENLY FLY DOWN AND FUCK SULU IN THE ASS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE
CAMEO
OF
THE
YEAR.
FULL SUPERMAN GET UP AND ALL. OMFG. GENIUS, THAT. -
"THE LEAST THEY COULD HAVE DONE WAS HAVE SULU WHIP AROUND AND GIVE KIRK A BIG WET ONE WHEN THE FIGHT WAS OVER, FFS. I MEAN, WTF?"
Gotta save something for the DVD. -
Looks like Titbag gets to bitch directly to the big dog now.
-
I MUST KNOW THIS. DON'T LIE, CAUSE I'LL FUCKING WELL KNOW.
DID THE ORION WHORE TICKLE KIRK'S BALLS WHILE SHE WAS PLOWING HIM IN THE ASS WITH THAT GIANT DILDO?
OKAY, TWO QUESTIONS ACTUALLY.
DID SHE GO DRY OR GIVE IT THE OLD 'TIJUANA LUBE JOB' (A QUICK HOCK OF SPIT ON THE PALM AND A ONCE OVER ON THE SHAFT).
THANKS BOB. AWESOME JOB ON THE NEW TREK. -
Canon is ambiguous on the matter.
-
Mission accomplished. Project New Trek is a success. Rendevous at Starfleet headquarters for ice cream and cake.
-
*Tear*
-
THERE'S A SCENE WHERE ZOE SALDANA IS SITTING IN HER CHAIR AND JUMPS A LITTLE BIT.
WAS THAT BECAUSE SPECK WAS PRESSING THE BUTTON THAT ACTIVATED THE REMOTE CONTROLLED VIBRATOR STUFFED UP HER PRETTY LITTLE ASSHOLE?
THANKS.
IN THE SEQUEL WILL YOU MAKE BONES A LITTLE BEEFIER? HE'S DREAMY. -
his name is his mark
his taste in his ass. -
Nero destroyed the Krevin. He decided to stick around for 25 years because Spock Prime was coming. He sat in a ship, kept it at the exact location, and prepared for Spock Prime's arrival. The Federation didn't come after him. Nobody knew he was there. Yeah. Right. Also, if Nero knew he was in a different time period I am surprised that he didn't go search out Romulus of that era. Instead we get a half assed written villian once again.
-
THEN WHY ARE YOU LAUGHING SO HARD AT ALL MY POSTS YOU WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT. THAT'S NOT A QUESTION, BTW.
-
Nero went to a Klingon prison planet, spent most of time there. Romulus was not in danger of the supernova for another 104 years. His plan now was to destroy the Federation with Red Matter, so Romulus "can truly be free".
-
...A SPECK OF FART DUST BUT A GIANT PHALLIC SQUID EMERGING FROM A BLACK HOLE GOES UNNOTICED.
MAKES PERFECT SENSE.
BLACK HOLE. GOD. I WILL NEVER GET OVER THAT TIL THE DAY I DIE. BLACK HOLE. CHRIST. DID JJ AND CO SIMPLY WATCH THAT DISNEY MOVIE AND GET TO WORK OR WHAT? BLACK HOLE. FUCK YOU. -
We take no position on where Nero spent those 25 years. If only what appears on screen is canon, than that's a gap to be filled at a later date or not.
-
It's obvious the average age of responders here has gone down sharply. I think I'll go see Star Trek again. See you cumwads later.
-
DURING THE CLOSING CREDITS WOULD HAVE COMPLETELY CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT THIS FILM.
-
My calculations were off. Too much Titbag static interference.
-
I got an answer for everything, all canon-compatible.
-
If you are still reading this forum , I'd like for you to acknowledge this message. As a life-long Trek fan , I want you and the creative team to know you did Star Trek proud. Seriously. It's clear you get the spirit of Trek, and translated that spirit to this new film.
Seriously, you have to know there would always be three or four village idiots that would cry havoc, but from someone that lives and breathes classic Star Trek, I want you guys to truly know the future of Roddenberrys concept is secure. I want to thank you for rescuing Star Trek from the mediocrity and bland era of Rick Berman. My only request is that all of you NOT rest on your laurels, and make a sequel as inspired, touching, humorous, and most importantly, FUN Bob, make it as FUN as this film was. That is the spirit of classic Trek- FUN. -
OH, AND TELL ME AGAIN ABOUT YOUR VIEWS ON TOS YOU FUCKING TWAT.
-
Noted. Have read your various defenses of the movie and it is appreciated!
-
NOW THAT YOU ARE DONE SUCKING FAKE BOBORCI'S COCK, YOU MIGHT WANT TO CLEAN UP THAT LITTLE CUM SPOT YOU MISSED ON YOUR CHEEK.
IF YOU ARE THAT GRATEFUL TOWARDS A FAKE, WHAT WOULD YOU DO FOR THE REAL THING? -
Had a great Memorial Day, hope you all did as well.
Bob--How did a mathematical formula help Spock and Scotty project a Transporter beam across the Galaxy to a moving Starship (at Warp), hit the ship and not lose any of their pattern in mix.
How much energy would that take and how could a small transporter built in a Shuttle do the job, let alone the fact that Spock Prime wouldn't know where the Enterprise is since events are unfolding differently than they happened the first time?
That said, hope you had a good holiday and have bought a new Pony with all the money that NuTrek is netting for you guys... -
WHEN YOU WERE DOING YOUR RESEARCH FOR THIS NEW TREK FILM, HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU AND THE TEAM WATCH STAR WARS THE PHANTOM MENACE?
DON'T LIKE, CAUSE I'LL FUCKING WELL KNOW. -
WHEN YOU AND YOUR CRACK WRITING TEAM WERE WORKING ON THE NEW TREK, DID YOU HAVE TO COVER THEIR EYES EVERY TIME A SCARY PART HAPPENED IN THE PHANTOM MENACE?
HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU HAVE TO STOP AND REFILL THEIR SIPPY CUPS IN ANY GIVEN DAY?
DID YOU GET SICK OF YOUR CRACK WRITING STAFF INSISTING ON WATCHING DORA THE EXPLORA EVERY 1/2 HOUR?
DON'T LIE, CAUSE I'LL FUCKING WELL KNOW. -
Nothing about this movie needs to be "defended." What distinguishes this film from the usual science -fiction pap is that we are moving away from cynical, dark science fiction films. No one wants to see shit that reminds them of their daily life. This film is a success Bob because it's unabashed fun and that is a big turn on for people. Positive optimism. A bright future. Bonafied heroes. Champions. This crew are heroes all, and that's what we need in this era. The era of anti-heroes is over with.
Also let me say this from one Trek fan to another Bob. This movie had heart. I don't cry at movies or get emotional, but I want you to know how moving and touching the scene with George Kirk sacrificing his life was. That was pure human condition shit going on there- gallantry, heroism, nobility. All of these qualities are what make the Enterprise crew the champions they are. Now with the sequel, promise me this, now that Kirk has got his space-legs, let's see him physically bust some ass up old school Jim Kirk style. Yes I know he fought 4 security guys, and then Romulans, each three times as strong as him, but in the sequel, lets see some Kirk kicking ass. -
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
MY LAST COUPLE OF POSTS EVEN MADE ME LAUGH.
FUNNY SHIT.
CAN I WORK ON THE NEXT TREK?
I'LL BRING MY OWN FLUFFER! -
I'M USING YOUR NAME WITHOUT INSULTS BECAUSE....MY GOD...YOU TRULY ARE A FUCKING TOOL.
-
"Bob--How did a mathematical formula help Spock and Scotty project a Transporter beam across the Galaxy to a moving Starship (at Warp), hit the ship and not lose any of their pattern in mix." Same way a mathematical formula like E=MC2 helped unlock the energy of the atom.
"How much energy would that take and how could a small transporter built in a Shuttle do the job, let alone the fact that Spock Prime wouldn't know where the Enterprise is since events are unfolding differently than they happened the first time?" The shuttle was in a Starfleet Outpost, so power could've been drawn from it, and as mentioned above, the equation may unlock unknown energies (like Einstein's equation did). As for the location, the Starfleet outpost computers would've surely had telemetry indicating the trajectory and moment of warp of the Enterprise, allowing for one of Spock's Star Trek IV-like best guesses.
-
"I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT THE FUCK I'M TALKING ABOUT."
-
went to a Klingon planet? Please don't suggest a missing scene or that crap comic that came out earlier. If that is true, then how did he get there? How did he escape? How did he know exactly where Spock Prime was going to arrive? How come Vulcan's demise didn't leave any shockwaves to the ice planet? How come Scotty didn't know anything about Vulcan or the ships above in orbit? How come the Federation did nothing when Nero started zapping Earth? Why didn't anyone go after the Nero when he destroyed the Klevin? Why go after Earth when Spock Prime failed to destroy Romulus? Come on people.
-
Have you read the blog by Kate Gosselin's sister-in-law's sister? Holy Singularity Batman! Check it out here:
http://truthbreedshatred.blogspot.com/
This is a real blog confirmed by Aunt Jodi herself! Here we find out the truth about Kate locking her brother and sister-in-law out of their lives because they dared to show concern about the kids' welfare on the show. Also, read the part where Kate went to Jon AND TOLD HIM HE COULD HAVE A GIRLFRIEND AS LONG AS HE CONTINUED TO FULFILL HIS RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE SHOW. No wonder he hooked up with Deanne Hummel! His wife told him to!!
I used to think Kate was a great mom but now she's just a fame whore who doesn't give a shit about her children. -
Don't waste your time trying to explain or defend something to these people. It's an inescapable quagmire, because it isn't legitimate answers they are seeking they are simply pissed the film isn't what they wanted it to be. They wanted a Voyager or Deep Space Nine movie.
The squeeky wheel doesn't need the grease, don't concern yourself with detractors- they miss the entire point of the film and you can't "win them over". You would best serve everyone that enjoyed this film immensely to deliver us a Kick-ass balls to the wall sequel that expands on what you guys have begun. Remember FUN is the name of the game. Also, don't get bogged down in useless technobabble. The audience aside from these 4 idiots don't need to be pandered or talked to like children. The script was fine. -
Sorry. It's true. Maybe the sequel will be better. Better writers. Better villian.
-
Is that true about Kate?Are you pulling my leg?
-
Nothing else exists when you're playing Wii.
-
Check out that blog, aint no joke. There's a vid embedded with Jodi attesting that it is her sister's blog. And Radaronline.com has 3 interview vids with Kevin and Aunt Jodi. This is real inflammatory stuff. Kate just opened a black hole through which her angelic reputation will vanish forever.
-
... of time. This is part of the fun of fandom, only since I am behind the scenes I have to be content with nitpicking the nitpicks. It's just as fun, though. And the fact that some fans will never be happy has become part of the coverage of this movie, so the haters have actually helped to market this movie in the way we hoped.
-
I would've bought it. Any plans for one?
-
there's an arcade style game for X-box.
-
Lemme google it.
-
Can you give us ANY remote clues at all even this premature as to where the sequel might go? Any one word hints what you guys are starting to think of? Klingons? Mirror Universe? Shatner as a VILLAIN mirror universe Kirk heh heh. That would be a kick-ass twist.
-
May 25, 2009 10:02:47 PM CDT
BOB - I ONLY SEE THE STAR TREK LEGACY GAME FROM 2006
by bringingsexyback
I'd like to battle Nero / Narada on the 360. Can you talk to JJ for us? Thnx!
-
Thanks for the movie! I can't believe that so many people read way too much into this show/movie. Some things are best left to the imagination -- like what Spock was doing in that light-porducing devince in order to save the Enterprise in STAR TREK 2. Who cares! The important thing is that he saved the Enterprise...and died during the process.Don't over analyze, guys. It is just a movie.
-
http://kotaku.com/5224336/star-trek-d+a+c-boldly-goes-official
-
Too early!!
-
I'll check it out at Gamespot, thanks Bobbo.
-
You guys take that well deserved vacation and let an idea germinate awhile, the sequel in many ways will be even more challenging than this first film. NOW you can really let loose and kick major ass with the concept. Everything is in place.
-
your mummy's calling you
i just finished whupping her -
May 25, 2009 10:23:34 PM CDT
joshuavance1701 and BobOrci in a shameless suck'n'fuck.
by dr_pepperspray
Josh, I knew it was only a matter of time before you broke down and started masturbating in the corner to the voices in your head.
-
This movie's main purpose was to introduce all the bridge characters and set up a new Star Trek universe to "relaunch" the franchise. It was not the seond film in a series after a three year TV series. Khan didn't need to take time out to relaunch anything. It didn't need to dedicate lots of time to introducing the good guys. Totally different kind of movie, and it allowed them to create an incredibly strong villain. It just wouldn't have been possible with everything else going on in the new flick, even if they could find an actor that could replicate Montalban's success. I swear, most of you would have a hard time finding a way to enjoy a fucking ice cream cone. Could you just loosen up your shorts for two hours and enjoy a fucking good time? NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED... sometimes you sacrifice a plot point for fun, and sometimes you sacrifice some accuracy for dramatic impact. Shit you people are ANAL.
-
I'm a Star Trek fan.I loved the film IMMENSELY. I wanted the writer to know that.
I don't have a GOD DAMN thing to prove to you. Now go fuck yourself whore. -
"loosen up your shorts.." ..."anal" ..Where the fuck are you going with this, unless you're suggesting JJ rap----*gasp!*
-
And you did a good job Son, now wipe that lipstick and plastic eyes off your fist - it's getting silly now.
-
Isn't there a Wolverine of Watchmen talkback for you to be whoring around in? This forum is a dedicated talkback to a movie about champions, not shit-stained rim jobs with posters of Brannon Braga licking Rick Berman.
-
People like Heffer Spray, Shitbag, Quasimodo lives, Bright shits, and Industry shitter simply don't comprehend the awesome power of Kirk's Fat swollen bloated hands. Especially as they play slap nuts with the bloated hands to ensure these peoples testicles drop. All of you WISH you had a lil' buddy like Scottys lil' buddy. But alas, no Fat swollen bloated Kirk hands for you, you sinners are stuck with Ruafo and his face stretching exercises. or worse. Shinzon. Or make that Shits on.
-
Dude...do you have to come across as a crybaby? Just because someone actually enjoyed this film...do you have to spit on him? Get a life, dude. Your childish insults are annoying.
-
He's just Mr. Poopy pants because his testicles are misaligned and women laugh at him. It's a tough nut to crack having morbidly misshapen testicles isn't it Shitter spray.
-
You ARE your own FLUFFER.Complete with a BUKAKE finishHappy Gobbling!!!
-
jus kiddin'
-
Not surprised he's here wallowing in the shallow praise of a guy like Joshua Vance and completely sidestepping all the real grievances people have with the film. I'd just like him to know that every writer in LA (and I'm not a writer so the only bitterness I have is toward watching their shitty movies) talk about the Orci/Kurtzman duo as if they were sent by Satan to devalue their craft. I'm sure they would laugh that off publicly, but deep down, just before they go to bed at night, somewhere in their mind they hate themselves for being hacks and wish desperately for real talent. But they love money for nothing so they'll just continue to be thought of as the Brett Ratners of the screenwriting world.
-
On the contrary turd boy, it was quite sincere heartfelt.
The writers need to know above all else they are to be commended for reviving a DEAD property with class, heart, and clear LOVE for the source material. Who gives a FUCK someone pissed in your Cheerios? I'M happy, that's what counts. -
What was that post on "bad science" all about? Do you even know what String Theory is? From a scientist, what you're saying makes no sense at all. It sounds like everything you think you know about physics you learned from watching sci-fi on TV.
-
Hell no he doesn't conceptualize string theory because even string-theorists only posstulate suppositions. As a matter of fact that's the majority of science- Hypothetical suppositions.
Nothing, nothing played loose with scientific endeavor more than Star Trek over the past 40 years. To attack the "science" of this film is pure assinine and demonstrates nothing more than bias. To attack the science of ANY science fiction film is pure assinine. There's alot of intellectual sophistry going on in this thread. It's laughably bad.
We can debate the merits of multi-dimensional super-string theory, infinite parallel universes and multi-verse theory, quantum mechanics, theology and spirituality, phenomenoly , hell even UFO's until we are blue in the face but no one has anymore ground to stand on than anyone else. Hell creationists can present all day long examples to reinforce their belief in a 6000 year old Earth. Likewise evolutionists and cosmologists can give examples all day long of an infinitely old universe. People tend to skew their knowledge towards reinforcing presupposed beliefs. That's human nature. -
Lock target on plotholes and fire!!!!
-
He knows strong theory. I've heard him talk about it on the radio a hundred times but I still don't have a clue. Beats listening to Britney though.
-
See, I can't even spell it it's so baffling.
-
has been BringingBullshitBack and Titfag shooting themselves in that face repeatedly..
what the hell...makes for good sport..keep pissing on your own pants guys. -
Watch that friendly fire!!!
-
Kettle. Pot. Black.
/walking away -
May 26, 2009 8:41:55 AM CDT
"in their mind they hate themselves for being hacks and wish des
by alan_moore
Well, in scanning the thread, IndustryKiller, I see you've been here since last thursday ranting against the script...yet also somewhere in here admitted that you added to the movie's box office and you enjoyed it. LOL! Now THAT's real talent. And a very productive use of your surely valuable time, I must say. You win my vote for the hack who truly hates himself...
-
"I'd just like him to know that every writer in LA talk about the Orci/Kurtzman duo as if they were sent by Satan to devalue their craft." Wow. You really got Bob there! I doubt he'll be able to carry on with his amazingly successful career after reading that comment from an anonymous nitwit. My question is, why is "every writer in LA" confiding in you? Do you spend your days on all fours acting as a coffee table they can go over their scripts on?
-
for people who are used to watching TV shows about ONE THING. And seven cast members weighing in on that one thing. And then they have a half assed technobabble way of eliminating or fixing that one thing. Or the captain has a philosophical discussion with that one thing and convinces the one thing to leave them alone.I've demonstrated over and over again that there would be no point in having an extra scene that talks about THIS or some dialogue that explains THAT, because these complainers didn't PAY ATTENTION to the scenes and dialogue they were ALREADY PRESENTED WITH. Their constant factual errors and misreading of scenes and dialogue proves that.And not only are they not paying attention to the movie, they aren't paying attention to my explanations. I've posted long analyses of individual "plot holes" only to be told I have no support for my conclusions? It used to be WHAT FILM WERE YOU WATCHING? Now it's WHICH POST ARE YOU READING?These people would probably enjoy THE THIRD MAN more if we knew from the beginning that Harry Lime was still alive. And the film kept cutting to scenes of Harry Lime explaining to the audience what he's been up to, so the audience never gets confused. And instead of a few brief scenes of Orson Welles being mischievous, mysterious and menacing, we got an extra half an hour of information we don't need to follow and enjoy the story.It's hard to talk to people who have a plank in front of their eyes. It's hard to talk to people with a board up their butt. These people have their head so far up their own ass they're trying to save money by using the same piece of wood for both.
-
..YOU TWINKY FAGGOTS WHO ARE LICKING FAKE BOBORCI'S BALLS ARE THE MOST SELF-DILUTED TWITS IMAGINABLE. I'M STRUGGLING TO GET MY ARMS AROUND THE CONCEPT OF A BUNCH OF PASTY WHITE 20 SOMETHINGS ASKING A FAKE SCREEN-NAME IF HE CAN GIVE ANY CLUES AS TO THE SEQUEL OR TELL US HOW TRANSPORTER PHYSICS WORKS, BUT I COME UP EMPTY EVERY TIME.
CONGRATULATIONS YOU MONGS. YOU'VE SET A NEW STANDARD FOR RETARDATION ON THE TALK BACKS.
"HEY BOB! LOVED THE MOVIE. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT SCOTTY LIKES TO EAT FOR A MID-DAY SNACK?"
OMFG. -
It was in the movie. Did you even watch it?
-
Does he like them too?
-
That's "self-deluded". Not "diluted". FFS man.
-
CAN'T YOU FUCKING READ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
-
Any chance you're gonna bring your A-game today?
-
"HEY BOB! LOVED THE MOVIE. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT SCOTTY LIKES TO EAT FOR A MID-DAY SNACK?"
I believe sandwiches were mentioned as canon. -
I went through 1000 questions on Trekmovie.com
-
"HE'S SUING JJ & CO FOR MAKING THE UNAUTHORIZED NEXT STAR WARS CHAPTER. TRUE STORY."
-
If you are still lurking, is there a way you can convey to all the actors they are more than embraced by the audience as these characters? I think that's important some of them seemed genuinely nervous. But tell them to fret not, for a Star Trek film to make over 100 million dollars is a true accomplshment. For it to be pushing 200 million with legs still is a rare alignment of planets and stars.
Chris Pine IS James Tiberius Kirk, Zach Quinto IS Spock, Karl Urban IS Leonard "Bones" Fucking McCoy, Anton Yelchin IS Pavel Chekov, Zoey Saldana IS Nyota Uhura, John Choe IS Hikaru Sulu, Simon Pegg IS Montgomery Scott. They need to know this. -
Shitbag IS an intellectually challenged half baked failure to launch obtuse piece of flotsam. I've seen stools and power shits with more character. They need to know this.
-
VVVAT AH KUNTREEY, KEPTIN!!!!
-
I don't know where you got "thousands" of questions from, I saw a list somewhere int eh tens. And, surprise surprise, it deals with almost none of the plot holes or ridiculous conveniences. The only thing you answer is what was Nero doing for 25 years and yous ay its "Up to fanfiction" Now I dont blame you for that problem because I know a scene with Kilingongs got cut, but its still a problem with the film. A Big problem. And saying it's "up to fan faction" is bullshit. Then I guess ANY inconsistency is just "up to fan fiction" How did Spock grossly miscalculate when the supernova was hitting Vulcan? Fan fiction! Why didn't the ROmulans evacuate when they have limitless space travel? Fan fiction! It goes on and on. Face it Orci you have no valuable explainations that aren't ridiculous apologies for your own script. Why don't you at least blame it partially on the writers strike, that would be fair. You don't have to come here and make shit up wholesale and use silly justifications. But the fact that you are is pretty indicative that you're aware and bothered by the criticism. If that is in fact eh real you, which is about 50/50.
-
...THEIR CAREERS AS SHAMPOO COMMERICAL ACTORS ARE READY RIGHT WHERE THEY LEFT THEM AFTER LUCAS' LAWSUIT DESTROYS THIS FRANCHISE REBIRTH FIASCO?
EXCEPT FOR THAT UGLY FUCKER QUINTO. HE'S GOT A FATE WORSE THAN SHAMPOO COMMERICIAL ACTING: A RETURN TO THAT GODAWFUL FUCKING HORROR SHOW THAT IS HEROES.
OI VEI! -
I read nearly a thousand questions. Many repeating. You didn't read shit if you don't think we dealt with the plot holes. And I respond for fun, not because I'm losing ANY sleep over what your friends who want my job think.
-
Ok, I'll play ball here.
BOB, I would love to see you actually attempt to answer Industry Killer's questions without copping out. You can't use "Fan Fiction", or "Because earlier Star Trek films had plot holes.." or "That's Starfleet for ya". Yeah yeah yeah. Stop sucking up praise. If your movie is such genius then you're going to have to try harder to answer some tough questions.
Now If you concede and simply say "it's just a mindless pop-corn flick" then fine. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'll accept that.
-
Break time is up! "Every writer in LA" needs their coffee table back. Get back down on all fours. Look, they promised to let you have sunday off so you could go see Star Trek again. Hahaha!!
-
http://trekmovie.com/2009/05/18/orci-kurtzman-to-answer-fan-questions-at-trekmovie-transcript-of-last-weeks-impromptu-qa/#comments
Here you go, so you can be informed before you waste your time attributing answers to me that I didn't give. -
That's fact my friend. The list of questions on trekmovie addressed ONLY the ONE plot hole I mentioned and your excuse was to call upon the powers of fan fiction. As far as stuff like your answer to ships built on the ground (it isn't one of my main complaints but I'll take it on), you can't just make that shit up after the fact, especially when cannon has a precedent for it. The fact that Starfleet would make structurally unsound ships in order to commemorate a dead man was not only NOT in the film, it's a cheap excuse for a cheesy cliche image you ripped off of Star Wars. You clearly came up with it to justify an aesthetic choice at the expense of story rather than let the story write the aesthetic choice. Go back and read this forum (I have no interest in re-posting everything for you and you wouldnt answer it anyway) for some actual questions. Hell I'd like to see your response from the two I put in my last post. And on a personal note, may I recommend Ambien?
-
May 26, 2009 3:17:56 PM CDT
Boborci, Pepperspra is refering to the typical apologist
by industrykiller!
answers here. Try to avoid those.
-
"FAKE BOB, YOU AREN'T FOOLING ANYBODY YOU FUCKING PRICK. YOU'RE NICHOLAS MEYER, YOU WHORE. I'LL NEVER FORGIVE YOU FOR THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY, BUT AT LEAST IT WAS BETTER THAN THIS ABORTION"
-
...by the difference between a plot hole and an omission. Not showing exactly where Nero is for 25 yearsis not a plot hole any more than not showing you Spock's time in the academy is a plot hole. As for Romulus, they obviously didn't believe Spock (like residents of Krypton or New Orleans). Ship on the ground still bothering you? Really? You don't figure the USS Enterprise can accomplish what the Space Shuttle does every month? And if you notice the Salt shaker in the diner, it is clearly the KELVIN, but perhaps that was too subtle for you. Will try to dumb it down more next time.
As for Romulus, they obviously didn't believe Spock (like residents of Krypton or New Orleans). -
I already read it Bob. None of us are up in Arms about the length of the Enterprise, or whether string theory applies here. Ours is a story-telling beef, not ones about Technobabble.
Where was Nero for 25 years? Klingon Prison? Then why didn't the Klingon's gut his ship, or send his ass back to Romulus? How did he assemble all his crew then, or didn't change in the least other then he had a cut ear most of us would never notice?
Why did Nero go out of his way to put Spock on planet Hoth *delta HAR Vega* just so he could witness the destruction of his planet, where he obviously wouldn't have been able to when he could have just seen it from the deck of the Narada which would have at least made sense. Don't say "fan fiction" Dr, or "Because Nero is insane" Dr. That's a cop-out and you know it. That scene is also not impressionistic, it doesn't hold water.
Why was Spock just farting around in that Cave rather then making his way to the Federation outpost to warn the rest of Star-fleet? I know the Answer, BOB, it's because you needed that Scene with Kirk. You wrote yourself into a corner and couldn't figure out any other way to do it.
How did Kirk go from being a petty officer to Captain of what might as well be analogous to a modern day air-craft carrier in a Day. That's an awfully big Jump for a guy who just got into a physical confrontation with his superior officer because he didn't agree with him. Let's not over-look the fact that he was a stowaway, as well as a known cheater. I understand a recommendation, but Captain?
You know what? Fuck this. You got a mouse-pad, why don't you scroll upstairs and get a real piece of those questions? -
May 26, 2009 3:29:55 PM CDT
You don't figure the USS Enterprise can accomplish what the Spac
by dr_pepperspray
No I don't Bob. The Space shuttle is a glider, not a massive fusalage with a gigantic saucer sitting on it's thin neck. No, I don't buy that this makes sense.
Yes, I know earlier Trek's have shown this possible, but you guys were supposed to be producing a smarter beast then those early shows. Or at least I was hoping you might be... -
1. Nero -- answered above
2. Unnecessary risk to keep Spock aboard ship where he may find a way to foil Nero. And if you don't like impressionistic answer, than fine, Hoth is a moon near Vulca, or he "felt" it like he felt the death of hundreds of Vulcans in the original series (before Star Wars).
3. Spock avoiding storm. on his way to outpost, which is why he knows about it as he indicates in dialogue.
4. Saving the world stood out in his resume.
5. I've read every post. Scroll through my answers at Trek Movie. It's all covered. -
"The Space shuttle is a glider, not a massive fusalage with a gigantic saucer sitting on it's thin neck. No, I don't buy that this makes sense."
Talk about thin. So you admit it's canon to have space ships in earth's atmosphere!
The Enterprise is a ship capable of sustaining such an extreme curvature of spacetime (which is equivalent with gravity, according to Einstein, and which is otherwise known as warp speed in this universe), that it literally travels faster than light, but you don't think it can sustain the comparably light gravity well of the earth? We'll just have to disagree on that. -
#1: So is it an intentional omission, or accidental omission? Because the later is more forgivable. You guys just screwed up. It happens, you still got paid and you're getting a sequel.
#2: That's definitely an answer. Given you wrote your Romulans lacking even the basic ability to kick a guy off a platform with no hand-rails, even when he's dangling by his finger-tips, I can understand why. Romulans lack the ability to step on hands - I expect you to use this fact in later scripts.
#2.1: Vulcan has no moons. Or did that change too when Nero wandered out of the plot device hole?
#3: Storm. Gotcha.
#4: I guess Spock didn't help. Wasn't he the next in the chain of command? Oh that's right, he was "emotionally compromised." I saw how he just broke down Bob, it's a wonder they'd let him back on ANY ship given his shattered state.
-
In regards to the Spock thing. My question is how did Spock and ALL the Romulans simply miscalculate when a comic event edging ever closer toward them, that took hundreds of thousands of years to occur even in the first place, was actually going to strike their planet? The line in the film is Spock saying "And then the unexpected happened" right before showing Romulus blow up. Actually that was completely fucking expected by all parties, they just all seem to be morons who miscalculated the whole thing. I mean seriously, they ALL miscalculated when a giant wave of fire and death moving toward then was actually going to connect?As for building ships on Earth, a salt shaker?? I'm supposed to assume salt shaker = George Kirk Memorial Shipyard? Come on man. Peddle that shit to someone who has already drank the kool aid.And alright if you want to get into Semantics then yes Neros whereabouts are an omission, but still a hgue one. And why would he be waiting around for 25 years when he has no idea when or IF Spock will ever come through that portal, and how was he waiting for him when he did? That's awfully lucky of him.
-
Canon off aye?! - You really have me beat. I don't read Star Trek tech manuals, but if we're going to get super nit-picky, why Iowa exactly? Because of George Kirk? They can remember him enough to dedicate a Ship yard to his name but no one seems to be able to remember the Big ass ship he Kamikazee'd. You know, the one that we're told is still lurking out there.
-
You expect me to believe Nero was worried about an old man foiling his plan while he was standing right there. It was a convenient device to get Kirk and SPock together and that's why you did it and you know it. Its the same reason Bond villains tie him to a death machine and leave the room. And why didn't SPock, knowing there was a Starfleet fort nearby, IMMEDIATELY go there and try to warn Starfleet. You can come up with cheap excuses for ANY cheap device in ANY movie, that doesn't make them good. And making a proclamation that you've "covered it all" doesn't make it true.
-
..PAINFULLY KNOWS A FUCK OF A LOT LESS THAN THE FAKE BOBORCI IN THIS TALKBACK.
THE CHARADE CAN NOW END. -
put Khan in a Trek movie.. well.. that will be $12 x 3 less that movie will make.. do something original PLEASEhow about getting back to that whole 'Space the Final Frontier' thing.. ahhh the talkback is fermenting!!
-
I was thinking that earlier. I wish aintitcool's Bob Orci wrote the thing. It probably would have been better and he'd wouldn't have to make so many excuses for the real schmuck.
-
...THE FAKE BOBORCI'S RESPONSES ACTUALLY MAKE MORE SENSE THAT WHAT WE SAW ON THE SCREEN FFS. BARELY, THOUGH. JUST BARELY. STILL A LOT OF NONSENSICAL DRIVEL, BUT IT'S A START.
-
Let's
-
Just
-
Make
-
Grand.
/Adios. -
I'm just trying to sort this out... and maybe someone such as Hobocode can help me with this. Is the poster with the handle "Boborci" *really* Bob Orci, and are other posters here at AICN actually blasting him? I mean, do we actually have a group of dedicated fans and aspiring filmmakers criticizing a writer who’s helped put Star Trek back on the map? Or, perhaps, criticizing someone who’s simply posing to be said writer? Okaaaaay. Whatever the case I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It had some minor flaws, but JJ Abrams and his crew continue to be as detail-oriented as ever. They not only integrated the concepts of the gravity well and Kobayashi Maru into the story, they even went through the trouble of using an offshoot of the Kuleshov Effect in some of the early trailers. Giacchino's score even impressed an associate of mine--- who happens to be an Associate Dean of a College of Music. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I'm curious as to how this movie could fall into the "suck" category for any serious film lover.
-
If this is really you–congratulations again on your success. I have a few questions and if you have time I'd love to read your reply.#1. Comparing writing for TV and writing for movies: What are your time constraints like? I know TV requires 'The Long Narrative' approach especially for shows like 'Alias' and 'Fringe'. Did you take the same approach for 'Star Trek' or do you do one movie at a time?#2. Do you think that Finnegan and Ruth will make an appearance in the next movie?Thanks.
-
"You expect me to believe Nero was worried about an old man foiling his plan...?"
The old man did foil his plan, as a matter of fact. So clearly his concerns were justified. Also he wanted him to suffer watching his planet die while marooned in a horrible place. He wants him to suffer. -
"Canon off aye?! - You really have me beat. I don't read Star Trek tech manuals, but if we're going to get super nit-picky, why Iowa exactly? Because of George Kirk? They can remember him enough to dedicate a Ship yard to his name but no one seems to be able to remember the Big ass ship he Kamikazee'd. You know, the one that we're told is still lurking out there."They do remember the ship. Pike wrote his dissertation on it, which is mentioned twice.
-
"In regards to the Spock thing. My question is how did Spock and ALL the Romulans simply miscalculate when a comic event edging ever closer toward them, that took hundreds of thousands of years to occur even in the first place, was actually going to strike their planet? The line in the film is Spock saying "And then the unexpected happened" right before showing Romulus blow up. Actually that was completely fucking expected by all parties, they just all seem to be morons who miscalculated the whole thing. I mean seriously, they ALL miscalculated when a giant wave of fire and death moving toward then was actually going to connect?"
As for building ships on Earth, a salt shaker?? I'm supposed to assume salt shaker = George Kirk Memorial Shipyard? Come on man. Peddle that shit to someone who has already drank the kool aid. And alright if you want to get into Semantics then yes Neros whereabouts are an omission, but still a hgue one. And why would he be waiting around for 25 years when he has no idea when or IF Spock will ever come through that portal, and how was he waiting for him when he did? That's awfully lucky of him."
I believe the line was, "the unthinkable..." indicating Spock Prime hoped to make it on time, but he didn't. In fact, Spock Prime takes the blame, saying, in essence, that he failed, so even assuming your scenario, it still fits. 2. The salt shaker thing is a layer to be discovered by those who care. With or without it, the story works, but we weren't gonna spoon feed ya'! 3. Luck had nothing to do with Nero finding Spock, since Ayel tells him, "it's time..." they clearly calculated his emergence in time and space. -
Tv is like being an ER doctor in constant triage as you try to make deadlines. A movie is more like a scheduled 9 hour surgery. As for the sequel, everything is on the table.
-
High five!
-
ENOUGH, YOU FUCKING EARWAX FILLED PONCE. THE SHIT SPILLING OUT OF YOUR HOLE IS GETTING DUMBER BY THE SECOND. FFS. GO PRETEND YOU'RE JAMES CAMERON IN THE AVATAR THREAD. THEY NEED YOU THERE RIGHT ABOUT NOW YOU PIECE OF SHIT AND, KNOWING CAMERON FLUNKIES, A LOT MORE PEOPLE THERE WILL BELIEVE YOU'RE THE REAL MCCOY.
GET IT? THE REAL MCCOY?
MONG. -
You should mention Dr. Michio Kaku somehow, he's a renowned professor of theoretical physics and has a show on the Science Channel. You work him in somehow, maybe as Sulu's great-grandfather or whose work was behind warp drive ... you'll be getting massive props from the scientific community.
-
Personally I don't feel they are worthy of bantering back and forth with but, I can see how you could be mildly entertained tit-for tatting several cynical talkbackers as you sit back and enjoy the fruits, and paycheck, of your labors.
It's ironic isn't it? The hyperbolic rhetoric in here. On one hand you have several posters convinced the film has huge gaping plotholes and professing their intellectual prowess at having observed them, then paradoxically on the other hand, said intellectual cumquats apparently need every single aspect of this film spoon-fed to them laundry list style like a God damn 5th grader.
Hey fellas, if you have deluded yourself into thinking you are so Khan-like in intellectual agility, here's an idea for you, TRY exercising your imaginations and filling the holes in your head yourselves rather than having the film author spell out every single solitary minute detail laundry list style. You guys aren't a washington think tank. It's sad. Oh I can respect and appreciate the devotion of Trek fans completely, I grant you, but it almost appears slightly behaviorally skewed now. The REAL question here is, once it's made clear you have fault with the film for all the world to see, why consume yourself with it?
Bob watch your back, I can envision you opening your cupboard and out springs Industry shitter "Where was NERO for 25 years God dammit??" , or Shitbag pops his head out of your toilet "Roddenberry is dissapointed Bob!", or Bones under your bed "The logistical spatial locality of the Narada precludes an informed supposition for the impending arrival of Ambassador Spock through the event horizon of the quantum singularity."
They make fan-boy pepper spray Bob, it repells rather effectively , look for it , it's called women. -
...AT THE END - AS AN ALTERNATE TO WHAT REALLY HAPPENS TO HIM - IS THE MOST PATHETIC FUCKING BIT OF WRITING I'VE SEEN. EVER.
-
That's the real Bob - Mori confirmed his ID long ago. Time to dust off that A-game and bring it. This talkback ain't gonna last much longer.
-
was extremely moving.
-
TITBAG
...THE FAKE BOBORCI'S RESPONSES ACTUALLY MAKE MORE SENSE THAT WHAT WE SAW ON THE SCREEN FFS. BARELY, THOUGH. JUST BARELY. STILL A LOT OF NONSENSICAL DRIVEL, BUT IT'S A START."
A compliment I'll take, whoever I am! -
... wow. Rest assured that you've put me in my "place." Or something. Whatever the case, no worries and no hard feelings, fellow poster. IndustryKiller... while I get your point, you *have* to admit that the quote, "you expect me to believe Nero was worried about an old man foiling his plan" is just downright funny. It sounds like a setup for Matlock to come walking into the room. Boborci... seriously, are you the real deal, or just a diehard fan of this film? If you're the former, thanks for taking the time in this talkback (though I don't understand why Harry hasn't just given you a talkback of your own). If you're the later, I hope you've considered how Orci might receive someone else writing posts in his name. Whatever the case, you insights are appreciated.
-
Balellujah! The Dark Side is now without its retardest warrior!
-
Bruce Greenwood cannot get enough work. He's amazing.
-
Have you ever heard of someone impersonating the scapegoats of the industry, otherwise known as "screenwriters?"
-
continue treating this crew as the heroes they are and all will be well in the universe. DAMN it's been too long. If I had to sit through another piece of shit flaccid dour Next generation movie or McTrek franchised tv show I was gonna scream. You tell whoever at Paramount that woke the hell up finally, I said thank you it's about fricking time! Star Trek is back Baby.
-
Also; thanks for answering my question, BSB. I'm quite amazed that a screenwriter who visits AICN would have to fight tooth and nail with the fans.
-
Appreciate your quick response.Not trying to monopolize the discussion, please excuse the excess questions.Did you learn visual shortcuts for character development from your TV work? I thought both 'MI:3' and 'Star Trek' had some very smart (and visual) character 'bits' (the lip reading in 'MI:3'; Kirk's cocksure bravado in approaching Uhura). Is this something you and Alex Kurtzman feel is a strength in your writing?Again, thanks for your reply.
-
We share an affinity for capslock, though he abuses it more than I.
-
May 26, 2009 7:12:08 PM CDT
DEEJAY - TO ME, BOB PROVED HIS PROFESSIONALISM WITH NEW TREK
by bringingsexyback
Bale would be proud. I don't envy anyone who had to rescuscitate a dead franchise but shit did he and Abrams do a fantastic job.
-
...HARRY AND THE OTHER AICN STAFF LICKED JJ'S BALLS. WAS THERE SOMEONE THERE CONSTANTLY POURING WATER ON THE ACTION TO PREVENT MASSIVE FRICTION BURN?
-
You just got to first base on that one. Still a long way to go.
-
Man wasn't your watch at Long John Silvers supposed to start an hour ago? Get your ass to work man there's floors to be mopped. Oh and tell them they suck ever since they took away the fake docks and rope outside the restaurant.
-
I hope you appreciated our defenses of your film. Industry Killer was right. I'm now broken, a sad shell of a man, crying myself to sleep at night because some dickheads on the internet disagree with me about your movie. I can only hope I can recover in time to comment when they don't understand AVATAR either.
-
... point taken. Unfortunately, stranger things have happened here on AICN (with posters using multiple identities, going off on geopolitical tirades, etc.).
-
Shitbag is to spew as tomatoes are to ketchup. Discuss!
-
All you gotta do is write a scene in the sequel where Kirks fat swollen bloated hands play slapnuts with Shitbag and Industry shitters failure to drop testies. Make the next villain the Romulan Emperor Testiclees.
-
Has TITBAG ever actually FELT a tit? Vote Early and Often.
-
Are you shitting me? It's clear he cops up his daddies man Tits quite often. I've seen Aria Giovanni suckle a FAT tit but Damn Shitbag takes the cake. Breath ShitBag breath! Don't take that teet in all at once homeboy you're gonna give Pops a hernia.
-
That Long John Silvers crack is worthy of 200 internets.
-
... considering the range of projects you've worked on, would you be willing to have your own talkback here at AICN? Perhaps Moriarty or someone else could "moderate" by filtering the questions in advance? This is something that Knowles and company did with Sylvester Stallone, a while back. You likely have limited time for such things, but it's just a thought.
-
NOW THEN. I'M OFF CORRECTING PEOPLE IN THE NEW 'AVATAR' TB. THERE'S A FAIR SHARE OF SENSELESS FUCKING MORONS OVER THERE, BUT I SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE QUICK WORK OF THEM. BRB.
-
LJS DOES suck since they took the fake dock and ropes away, hell, if I wanted to go to a seafood place that looks like an average restaurant I'd hit Moby Dick or Hungry Pelican. The whole POINT of LJS was walking up on the fake dock.
That's the problem with America, everything is homogenized and bland, Wal-martized.
That's like Pizza Hut and taco Bell, who the fucks idea was it to get rid of the red pizza hut?? Or the big Taco Bell, to hell with them. -
-- the fun is to just mix it up in the casual talkbalk with no formality or rules... otherwise it's a stuffy affair, no?
-
It isn't Shitbag it's Shit-HAG?? HA HA HA HA, that, or Shitbag has some serious man boobs going on.
Admit it Shitbag, you show up here because my posts are EPIC. -
As a courtesy how about a two second throw-away line in the sequel reffering to a crewman "Joshua Vance." I'd buy THAT for a dollar. Plus my Mom would finally have something to be proud of me about hah hah hah hah.
-
Bruce Willis got one. You should too.
-
Where do you want to see the sequel go? Klingons? Khan? Mirror Universe?
My honest git feeling is, go with something bran spanking new, new to Trek. Klingons are tired, they are in three-fourths of the movies. Khan, well, everyone EXPECTS that so, I'd surprise them. Mirror Universe may be cool. -
Young hip Captain Kirk of the starship Enterprise vs. Old swollen Shatner evil Kirk of the I.S.S Enterprise? Holy shit the film might melt with the machismo going on.
-
YOUR MUM ISN'T PROUD OF YOUR HANDSOME YET DELICATE NEW BOYFRIEND?
-
... I can dig it. Whatever the case, you and the guys did a great job with "Star Trek." Now, I'm just hoping that your "other" big budget summer movie stays true to the themes you established in its first installment.
-
...ASS RAPED MY OWN DAUGHTER."
-
She aint proud. She wants me to bring a REAL man home so, when you get off at Rallys come by the house I'll throw a burger down your throat before you blow me. I promise.
-
"...DAMN. NOW I FEEL A WHOLE LOT BETTER ABOUT MY POS FILM! WHAT A FUCKING RELIEF! FUCK THAT WIFE BEATER CAMERON!"
-
So if you have Tits, shouldn't it be TITBAGS, plural?
-
... I think they might have to do something new. This recent film referenced the Klingon armada taking a pretty big hit (something like 47 ships were destroyed by that juiced-up mining vessel). Hopefully, one of the Klingon warriors was responsible for mangling Nero's right ear. For all of their trouble, I hope they at least got a symbolic victory along those lines.
-
Let's at least get away from Time travel for a few films. An in-universe adventure is probably in order for a couple films now.
-
May 26, 2009 7:48:38 PM CDT
JOSH - I WANT THE SEQUEL TO GO WHERE NO TREK HAS GONE BEFORE
by bringingsexyback
I'm with you. I want something fresh and mind-blowing. No Khan, no Borg. I wouldn't mind something with the Klingons of course, because that could mean some kick-ass space battles. Bob, Abrams & Co. brought their A-game with New Trek - they're already on the right track.
-
You guys were great on "Life After Film School" even if he 'takes half the money.' I laughed out loud with that.
-
Klingons arekind of played out seriously. They are fun when they are villains but, the PC cushy moronic Klingons of the Next Gen era turned me off on them. Damn how many films have had Klingons now-
The Motion Picture, Search for Spock, Voyage Home, Final Frontier, Undiscovered Country, Generations. Holy shit Bob, let's avoid some Klingons awhile. -
STICK WITH TIME TRAVEL AGAIN. PLEASE. IT WORKED SO WELL.
-
May 26, 2009 7:50:18 PM CDT
BESIDES, KLINGONS HAVE BEEN PART OF TREK LORE SINCE DAY 1
by bringingsexyback
Without Klingons eventually, it ain't Trek.
-
All souped up CGI and modern 21st century style? That might be cool.
Theres a pretty kickass video on Youtube someone did for their song that has an animated Trek movie where Kirks girlfriend/wife gets killed by the Gorn and he blows the fuck out of them, has anyone else seen that? I think it's called "it's now something else." -
IT AIN'T TREK EITHER. JUST SAYIN'.
-
Check it out peoples , very moody and kickass
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htkRLJjQCvY -
May 26, 2009 7:57:00 PM CDT
I WANT A SHIT TON OF SPACE BATTLES AND PHASER FIGHTS
by bringingsexyback
I might get pay xtra for a D-Box chair for the sequel.
-
Trek may have had plot holes in logic you may have disagreed with, but seriously , the movie had humanity in spades.
Kirk blows the fuck out of those ole Gorn. -
until the singularity event.
-
but, this is funny as hell.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =iAaX8Aq6smQ
-
Because the answers I'm getting are the answers I was afraid I was going to get and I don't think Orci and I have the same idea of what good screenwriting is. I could go on forever explaining why these answers are silly and he could go on forever disagreeing with me. So let's try something else since we seem to have an opportunity here. I'm going to tell you what I did like about the film and what I hope to see continue in the next one. I think since we're all sitting down talking that would be the most constructive thing to do since there will be a sequel. First of all I thought the place where the best of the script lies is in the fact that no character is slighted their abilities. I really got the sense of a capable crew where everyone get's their little moment to shine. It could have easily just been the Kirk show and it wasn't. I really hope that doesn't get lost in the sequel. You could take even a little more time with that. It won't be boring to show some more of the machinations of the ship. It'll just flesh out the worldOk secondly, and just humor me for a minute here, when you are going to write something like Red Matter into the script, just give it SOME sort of scientific significance. They don't need to have a seven minute conversation about it's origins, just a few lines to make it seem less a device and more something organically interwoven. That's all i ask.I don't think I need to go too deep into fixing the plot holes cause I think you do get it, you're not stupid. I think also the writers strike had something to do with it. Just give the story a little more room to breathe, that's the only way I can really quantify it. Cause the fact of the matter here is that it isn't Star Wars, it's Star Trek and you can afford to have a little more patience and take a little time to flesh out the world. It IS important that we know what a character has been doing for 25 years, it gets to the heart of his psychology and part of what allows us to fear a villain is a chance to relate to him a little bit, to see what's human about him (even if he isn't). This may not have been your fault, so then I guess it's a note to JJ.And I'm going to echo the other talkback sentiments when they say PLEASE don't do Khan. Half of what makes Wrath of Khan work is the backstory between Kirk and Khan from the Space Seed episode and you cannot fit that entire arc into one film. Also the next film needs to be a story less specific to Earth and the Enterprise Crew. Really dig in tot he exploration and new exciting adventure side of Trek. This Universe you've created needs to be fleshed out a little bit to really become Star Trek, take advantage of that opportunity. Khan is so specifically an Earth villain I feel like it would be a waste of such a broad canvass in favor of sentimentality. At the very least save that for a later film.And last but most importantly, don't write directly at your audience. Most audiences we know don't need much to be happy, so if you write something a little more cerebral I guarantee they won't turn on you and you'll have the added benefit of getting the more discerning among us. And even those of us who ask for nothing more than action will feel, whether they can pinpoint it or not, the added weight of the proceedings and it will only enrich their experience. Cheers.
-
The movie DID have humanity and that's why its popular. Which is a good thing. Now if they can just add that extra layer the next time around we could seriously have a genuinely amazing franchise on our hands. I think we can agree on that. I AM looking forward to the possibilities of the sequel.
-
Star Trek writer has interview on Star Wars website!!111!! Total chaos! Universe implodes! Dogs and cats, living together!!
-
Your last post has the most cogent and precise description of your point of view. Good job there. I don't know if I agree with the 'more cerebral' part because honestly, I don't really see that in 'Star Trek' as a franchise. It's not a truly demanding show or series of movies. It's not exactly 'Children of Men' or literary SF like Gibson or Stevenson. But, at it's best it can be great entertainment.I think the Red Matter point was great. The question is: How do you not get bogged down in psudo–science gibberish which bogs the story in exposition and/or jargon. I for one like to READ jargon (as long as it's not dry–unlike my current post) but I have no patience for it onscreen.
-
Typos. Nuked. My. Fridge.
-
We need starship battles and phaser fights!!!!
-
The HUMANITY of starship battles and phaser fights!
You know, real Private Ryan type shit with photon mortar concussions, phaser burns, incinerated limbs, gaping holes burned through peoples innards. But most importantly, the return/revenge of Kirk's fat swollen bloated hands. Man, I havent had a spontaneous belly laugh like that since well, someone said Terminator Shitvation was better than T2. -
I think Bana did a good job with Nero, but do we really need to know his full backstory? The focus of the reboot was, and should have been, the forces that brought Kirk and crew together for the 5-year mission. That's it. And Nero served that purpose.
We can explore other villains in greater depth later, but to have focused too much on Nero would've bored an already cynical audience - who has been betrayed by shit movie after shit movie - to death. This was just enough bad guy to make it exciting, and to help us get acquainted with the new crew.
Speaking of which I like the dynamic of the new crew and hope we don't focus too heavily on Kirk/Spock/McCoy only, as the old movies did. I want full involvement of Uhura, Sulu, Chekov and Scotty. -
The New Trek phaser fights were kind of a refreshing change from bullets and machine gun fire used so often now in movies and TV.I thought the phaser shootouts would look hokey like TPM, but they were way better than the Star Wars prequels.
-
Well said Industry Killer. I sincerely hope, for your sake, that Bob Orci is the one who'll make those decisions and he'll put a little something extra in just for you.
Me? Sorry Bob, ya lost me. Your responses are the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your face-palming explanations did you even come close to anything that could be considered a rational response. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Ain't I a stink'ah?! - Now gimmie my money back you Snake oil salesman!
-
I really fucking love it.
-
That's a given.
-
Khan had the benefit of being set-up with the backstory from Space Seed. Granted, the film was deliberately written as a sequel to that episode, yet it would have worked just fine as a stand alone film without the benefit of the backstory. It simply would have posed more questions. Who the hell is Khans wife? Why was he so pissy with Kirk? Why was he exiled on a desert world?
There were plenty of people that adored that film when it was released that didn't have the benefit of being aware of the episode space seed, and the film worked for them.
Nero didn't spawn from any Trek episode, so some of the criticisms , the same criticisms, that could have been made against Khan are made against him. Orci as a courtesy wrote a comic backstory to set up Nero so, it all works out the same way. -
I'm not asking for a Nero backstory, just a scene that explains what he did for 25 years. I don't need to see him like, hanging out with his wife. There was one but Abrams idiotically cut it form the picture, so Bob Orci is not responsible for this. You can't tell me that scene would not have been valuable, showing that not only had he endured the destruction of his planet, which apparently Spock and ALL of Romulus miscalculated...ugh, but then he spends 25 years in a warlike race's prison. Thats good fodder for why he would have become compeltely insane. As it stands it just seems like Nero was biding his time hoping that Spock would one day appear out of that portal and he would just HAPPEN to be there to catch him, which is completely absurd. Im assuming this was done because they didn't know exactly where they wanted to go with the Klingons and didnt wanted to be tied to anything in the next film, if only they had thought of that in pre.
-
the explanations I've been giving you sourpusses for about a week now. I was right on the money about everything. :^P
-
I'm sure Titbag is still questioning Luthor's motive and background and how the transport of nuclear warheads could have had such lax security, but that doesn't stop Superman from being the greatest superhero movie ever made.
-
See Josh I don't think Khan works without Space Seed. Khan, without that episode, would just seem like a cheap plot to device so we could have a movie. Even if you had never seen Space Seed, the fact that it's there gives it precedent and a richer life. Something that is definitively canon and onscreen that gives the story a pivot. Otherwise it's all just sound and fury signifying nothing. If they didn't have Space Seed they would have written a backstory that would have been present in that film one way or the other.Cymbalta, God you are insufferable. How many more posts are you going to write congratulating yourself for your vagaries and non-specifics?
-
if in SUperman Luthor was introduced, then disappears for 25 years and comes back with Zero explanation I think it would have bothered you. When I say a characters background I dont mean their entire life story, but what Nero was doing for so long is relevant to the plot. Oh, And Dark Knight is the best superhero film ever made.
-
But the point is alot of people saw Wrath and enjoyed it without having seen Space Seed. We all saw Space Seed, hell I remember NBC broadcast it right before Khan was released.
The point of the comic was probably to indulge more discerning fans with a little back story, but you have to remember something, the average fil mgoer isn't as interested in Trek history or minute details as we are, they want a more visceral experience. We are the sticklers so, the comic book was undoubtedly a little gift to us. -
If anything can be inferred from the film based solely ON the film for that 25 year span.
We see the Narada severely damaged in 2233 I believe from the Kelvin sacrifice.
Kirk is 25 now,we see a clearly psychologically disturbed Nero laying down sulking, and we see the Narada gunning back to the location of the singularity to intercept Old man Spock.
There is implication that "it is time" and the coordinates and location of Spocks arrival would be known.
We get a statement from Uhuru that a shitload of Klingon warships was destroyed. So clearly Nero was in Klingon space.
Nero states he has waited 25 years for that moment and doesnt want to kill Spock he wants to make him watch something. Also, Nero has visible damage to his ear, and seems alot less in control of himself than he did when he attacked the Kelvin.
So, what can we infer from these scenes that were in the film alone? -
Nero's only concern was punishing Old man Spock by destroying Vulcan, so Nero HAD to wait 25 years for old man Spock and the red matter.
-
May 26, 2009 11:11:10 PM CDT
Wrath of Khan needs that depth of history Space Seed provides
by tallboy66
Everyone is all jumping into KAAAHHHNNNNN!!! for part 2 in the JJ-verse Trek, but the reason why TWOK works so well is the multi-year gap between the two. It gives Khan's hatred historical depth. If they did Khan for Part 2, it wouldn't have the ompth without Khan hating on Kirk for a reasonable amount of time. It'd just feel rushed. My guess - make Khan a minor player in Part 2, establish his relationship with Kirk, let the main thrust of the movie be a different story but it still ends with Khan and Kirk parting on mildly good terms ala Space Seed with Khan being left on Ceti Alpha 5. And THEN for Trek 3 - do the full-on Wrath of Khan. It needs that gap.
-
That Nero simply roamed the galaxy for 25 years biding his time and waiting for elder Spock, so consumed with grief and revenge? Is it possible his ear was damaged from the Kelvin ramming the Narada?
Is it possible that like Khan, he couldn't see anything else but revenge and havoc? Khans own first officer Joachim even questioned him since they now had a ship. Khan wasn't hearing it. -
It took awhile to repair the damage from the Kelvin, certainly not 25 years, but awhile at any rate. So then, he can't destroy Vulcan or Earth without the red matter, so attacking the Federation is a no go, maybe the poor bastard literally huffed and puffed for 25 long years staying out of histories way until HIS time came.
-
He and Titbag were locked in an epic flame war. Also he hates Scriptgirl.
-
I gotta give it to Nero, he would demonstrate epic FAIL to Shitbag. Nero seemed alot more pissy than Shitbag does. But you know what, that green chick Kirk banged, she seemed about 25 didn't she hmmmmmmm. Kirk was banging Nero and Shitbags love child.
-
Now that one of the writers of the film has pointed out what a pointless pedantic tool you really are, my work here is done.joshuavance: Don't give him specific answers. I did that days ago and he's STILL claiming I didn't, even though boborci said exactly the same things.
-
Ah, how nice to see the idiocy still in full bloom. I saw Star Trek again, and I've got to say, it gets better each time I see it. So much better than chubby old Shatner prancing around like Nimoy's dick has broken off in his asshole. This new movie is far more relevant and has more to say than any silly pedantic episode of TOS. All in all, the best Trek movie they've made. But you faggots probably prefer The Final Frontier. I bet you were all jerking off as Shatner's younger, more-fit, stuntman climbed the rock wall. I bet you all soiled a gym sock while watching Bones, Spock and Kirk sing around a campfire. What a bunch of fucking twits you all are. I'd say eat my shit, but you aren't worthy to munch my corn-ridden stool.
-
That's my word :-)
-
The stench of stools and five day old fecal matter permeates the talk back. Ah but what a tangled web the geek brigade weaves.
-
Ugh , The Final Frontier, man I'm STILL in therapy over that one hah hah hah. That was a COLD sad day in '89 I shit you not.
-
The Undiscovered Country more than made up for it in '91, I still remember around Christmas time walking up Bashford manor mall here in Louisville and buying a couple old AMT Star Trek models, man those were the days.
-
Is the only reason people liked Undiscovered Country. Anything would have been good by comparison, but it was a major barrel of diarrhea as well.
-
With the Voyage Home. That film saw Shatner's own personality engulf that of James T. Kirk. That's when Kirk really died. Not in Generations.
-
was aping Shatner's acting style, now that you mention it.
-
They must've stopped at every burger outpost between Genesis and Earth.
-
Saying you prefer JJ's Trek to The Undiscovered country is like saying you prefer Hamburger Helper to Prime Rib.
You seriously have no fucking taste if that's the case and your answers henceforth are to be taken lightly. -
STAR TREK doesn't EXIST. It's made up. On the Fly. 40 years of complete and utter BULLSHIT. It's FUN. I love it as much as you do. But it isn't REAL. And beyond being real, it isn't even REALISTIC.Transporters are a Cheat. A Convenience. A way to move the plot forward when they work or slow it down when they're malfunctioning. A way to get out of having to shoot shuttles landing on a planet or another ship. That's all they are. That's all they've ever been. It doesn't matter how much minutia you've memorized or how many Starfleet Technical Manuals you've masturbated over. TRANSPORTERS DON'T EXIST.But let's say they did exist. And let's say Montgomery Scott, our favorite engineer, the head of the Starfleet Corp of Engineers, a fictional character who's inspired real people in the real world to become engineers, figured out a way to use them DIFFERENTLY. And his old friend Spock, trapped in an alternate universe, bumps into a younger version of Scotty and gives him his own formula.You people have swallowed worse bullshit than this. And like Oliver Twist, said "Please Sir. I want MORE." But when JJ and boborci and their pals decide to substitute some HORSESHIT instead of the cow patties you've been munching on since you were a wee bairn, you REBEL. It takes you right out of the movie. You can't accept that the pseudoscientific rules of a FICTIONAL CONSTRUCT have changed.Let that sink in for a few minutes before you respond. You people have wasted hours of your lives arguing. Not about politics or religion or which wine to have with dinner or methods of pleasuring a woman. You've been debating DUNG.Bullshit! Horseshit! It Tastes Great!But it's Less Filling! That's what this has deteriorated to. It's a movie. Just like the other movies. A magic trick. Light and Shadows on a Wall. Enjoy it or don't. But please stop pretending that any of the others have ever made more sense than this one does.
-
You both make great points!
-
When I make myself laugh, I know you're laughing too.
-
(Repeat)
-
I was born in '77 so I missed the TOS, but of course saw re-runs as a kid.
I was never a hard-core Trekkie, but I did watch every episode of The Next Generation. I think the show came out at the perfect age for a kid geek. Post Next Generation, I was bored silly by Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise. The movies seemed stale to me too - the same folks who have been hating on the new Star Trek thought that Kirk's death was handled in a correct fashion too, I assume? Left under a pile of rocks after going out like a punk?
At least in my opinion, none of the Star Trek films is a work of high art. They are fun diversions with fun characters. The Motion Picture was trippy spectacle, and the V'ger story was pretty cool. Wrath of Khan is classic, because it defied the traditional Star Trek story of corniness and took itself more seriously. But after WOK, can anyone honestly say that Star Trek was anything but a ham sandwich wrapped in cornbread? Especially 3 and 4. We got to see yet more time travel (overused in the TOS), Hippy Spock, whales, and overall cheesiness.
And yes, kicking an alien on the knee and making it drop because it's nards are on it's knees is CHEESY.
Besides Kirk's death being handled unbelievably poorly, we got to see yet more time travel so that the Enterprise crew could help out that Cochran guy with Warp Drive while blasting Born to be Wild or whatever else song it was, and who could forget Insurrection, which looked like the entire movie was shot in the courtyard of a Days Inn.
I never even saw Nemesis, because Star Trek went from being cool to a total joke. Exposition and talky-talk is boring. Aliens with nubs on their nose to differentiate themselves from humans are boring.
I LOVE that JJ's Trek focuses on the TOS, because it's uncharted movie territory - the previous movies tried something different, which in my opinion didn't always work.
Anyway that's just my opinion. I started rewatching the TOS on Netflix (streaming), and not only is the TOS full of bad acting, plot holes, and bad set design, it is FUN! The same fun I think the new Star Trek managed to capture. -
I LIKE WHERE YOU ARE GOING WITH ALL THIS YOU COCKROT BASTARD.
-
THAT WOULD BE HOT. FINGERING KIRK'S BUTTHOLE. AND A FAR SUPERIOR PLOT THAT WAS WAS BEHELD IN THIS FUCKING PATHETIC EXCUSE FOR A MOVIE.
A SUBPLOT COULD BE THAT MCCOY STARTS TELLING SPECK THAT HIS PENIS ISN'T NEAR AS LARGE AS KIRK'S, AND VISA VERSA
HOT.
THE WHOLE THING COULD BE ONE BIG GAY TREK. WHICH WASN'T THAT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE GOT THIS TIME, ACTUALLY. BUT, OH, THE POSSIBILITIES! HOT!!! -
AND A SWORDFIGHT, OF COURSE.
FUCKING WELL HOOOOOOOOOTTTT!!!! -
EARTH-ROMULAN WAR!!!
I WANT MY EARTH-ROMULAN WAR!!!
WHEN, LORD? WHEN WILL I GET MY EARTH-ROMULAN WAR?!?!?!?!
Pant, pant, pant, pant, pant... -
Kirk: "What en garde? We don't have swords."
Sulu: "Oh yes we do."
*Unzips pants*
You like that, asseater? -
Shitbag you aren't fooling anybody, I've unlocked your secrets. Admit freely now you are that chick that played T'Tits on Enterprise merely pissed you can't find a job and all is forgiven. You know Hooters is always hiring don't you? You stand up on that table and sing me Happy Birthday NOW!
-
And SMILE SMILE SMILE! :-D
-
NOW THAT MADE ME LAUGH MOFO.
JOSHUAPLOPPINGDOWNONAFATCOCK, TAKE NOTE. -
Both are successful. Both have a fan following and tell EXTREME stories. Both make lame excuses for why they didn't do the simplest things. In Rob Liefeld's case, not drawing hands, feet or putting muscles where they have no business being, in Bob's it's omitting where your Villain has been for 25 years. Seems to me the only difference is people eventually caught on to guys like Liefeld.
Oh Time.
-
It would have been in the post Enterprise/pre-TOS gap. Nero blowing up the Kelvin didn't change that.
-
I simply can't subscribe to your brand of humor, it's a bit too 90's and prepubescent for me. Ah it sucks getting older.
-
I'm so hurt that you are taking my answers "lightly." How can I win back your total respect and be seen in your eyes as a paragon of intellectual steeliness? I'll do anything, because your high regard means more to me than does my scrotum, with its accompanying nuts. I can't believe I've let you down this way. God, I should just kill myself. There's no way this can be put right...
-
Wouldn't want a misfire, you know?
-
Just to be completely certain. Never put all your suicide eggs in one basket.
-
This is getting old, just give it a rest. The movie was good and it's a hit. Live and deal with or beteer yet just fix JJ and Paramount and don't see the next one. Jeez
-
May 27, 2009 9:22:53 PM CDT
Not enough of the Bashers and Haters to make a difference
by the founder
Well it's the truth.
-
..Quit stalling.
-
Well, I was out of bullets, and the rope broke, but before I hit the ground, God gave me a revelation. He pointed out to me just how awful The Undiscovered Country really is, and renewed my faith in my opinion. God also said the new movie rocks, and that both he and Jesus have seen it multiple times. So there.
-
...but paid for 2 tickets to STAR TREK, which i've seen 3 times already.That AsshatLives Douche is wrong (like I didn't know that already!) it still ROCKS!Oh,and TS, meh!
-
Maybe they'll be back... in 25 years? ;^)
-
...STUPIDITY OF YOU ASSHOLES WHO ACTUALLY THOUGHT THIS MOVIE WAS 'NEAT!'.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS THE USUAL BUNCH OF PONCE FAILED WRITERS IN THE TALKBACK WHO PRAISE THE FILM ENDLESSLY (BUT STILL FEEL THE NEED TO BACK UP THEIR HOLLOW CLAIMS OF EXCELLENCE WITH BOX OFFICE NUMBERS, FFS. AS IF THAT WERE EVER A MEASURE OF ANYTHING BUT THE MONG MENTALITY OF THE MASSES).
THIS MOVIE WAS A TOTAL FUCKING TRAINWRECK OF A REBOOT. IT WAS, QUITE SIMPLY YOU FUCKHEADS, ONE OF THE BEST EXAMPLES I CAN POSSIBLY THINK OF WHERE YOU HAVE A 'GOOD IDEA GONE HORRIBLY WRONG.' IT WAS SATURDAY MORNING CARTOON WRITING AT BEST. BUT THEN AGAIN, YOU FUCKTARDS DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ELSE, DO YOU? NAY.
THE WRITING WAS LAZY AND CONVENIENT. LIKE PICKING UP DINNER AT THE GAS & SIP. LET'S TALK ABOUT A MODERN FRAME OF REFERENCE. SERENITY. THERE YOU HAVE A SCRIPT THAT'S ASS TIGHT AS MY VIRGIN ASSHOLE. PERFECTLY PACED. SMART. NOT FUCKING IN LOVE WITH ITSELF (WHICH, EVEN WITH ALL IT'S RETARDED FAULTS, THIS NEW TREK SCRIPT STILL HAS THE BALLS TO FALL IN LOVE WITH ITSELF), INTELLIGENT, AND - MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL - HUMAN.
-
Can you imagine the hatred that would spew forth in these talkbacks if somebody let HIM write a Trek script?If you go to startrek.com and read the links to some of the creative team's responses to fan questions, you will see that this film is actually smarter and more subtle than anyone is giving them credit for. They wanted to imply or infer things and leave some things open for speculation. The Haters want everything spelled out on a BIG GLOWING NEON SIGN and even when it is, they dismiss it or don't understand it. Their critical faculties have been dumbed down by watching an hour of Rick Berman connect the dots technobabble every week for the past twenty years.I hope the DVD has a short film called WHAT NERO DID FOR 25 YEARS. They could have him playing three dimensional chess. Trying to solve a Rubik's Cube. Reading ULYSSES and FINNEGAN'S WAKE. Listening to HOW TO SPEAK KLINGON tapes. Making special recipes for the crew. And scene after scene of him explaining red matter, alternate universes and time travel to his second in command who is almost as stupid as the haters in this talkback.
-
That's okay. I don't expect a lot from some of you. I do appreciate some replies from BSB and josh. I hope the dvd does answer some questions. I hope it explains how the writers were hired and why they were allowed to have so many plotholes. Maybe they can address them in a sequel: Star Trek 2: Swisscheese Anomalies.
-
XXXbag... as the "usual" bunch of "failed writers" normally have very few good things to say about the work of currently successful scribes, I’m at a loss as to how you've grounded your argument. Even still, you might find it interesting that some diehard Joss Whedon fans have written that they felt "Star Trek" was a film quite similar to "Serenity." I can't comment on that myself, as I'm among the majority of people who've not seen "Serenity." Cymbalta... that DVD featurette would be hilarious. However, I got the impression that it would actually take Nero all of 25 years to *solve* one Rubik's Cube. Whatever the case, I agree with you regarding the haters, as they seem to lack much more than 2 moves. The first is to demand answers, and the other is to state why *any* answer simply isn't good enough. You'll note that I count neither name-calling or cussin' tirades as constituting "moves."
-
He gets enough hatred in other talkbacks without including Star Trek.
-
If Serenity were toilet paper I still would be wiping my ass with it. One bad movie.
-
...hahaha! Of course, after that comment, you can expect to be flamed by some of Whedon's fans.
-
Still, I actually enjoyed Firefly. The only problem that I had with the show was the huge cast. Should have started smaller and work its way up. A small nitpick. Thought that the cast they had was terrific. Not a bad show and I do think that FOX gave up way too early.
-
I'd be interested to know why you enjoyed Firefly, but didn't like Serenity. I think some of the more interesting comments come from people who genuinely want to love something but end up just liking it or even disliking it.Bones, for example, comes off like someone who is disappointed by the film rather than angry about it. We can agree to disagree. I think the film benefits from a second viewing. Once you know what you're going to get (and NOT get) you notice more small subtle touches.For example: boborci pointed out in one of the Q&As that people keep complaining they got to
Vulcan too quickly, but when they cut back to Sickbay you can see that McCoy has changed uniforms and you're supposed to assume Kirk has been recovering from what McCoy shot him with. Just another case of angry people not paying attention. -
...AS I HATE JJ YOU FUCKTARDS. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE WORST EPISODE OF FIREFLY WAS 1000X BETTER THAN 30SEC OF THIS NEW TREK MESS.
-
... why don't you write it like you mean it? In your posts, try using some unnecessary profanity, "shout" everything in all caps and employ needless hyperbole. Then we might believe you. Or something. I just find it hard to believe a personality that's as open-minded and harmonic as yours could feel hate. Or something.
-
Is a cocksucker. Firefly and Serenity are after school special pieces of flaccid stool softner. Most people I know say Joss who? Seren what? Fire when? Fringe niche' sci-fi sucks splendid goat ass. It's college english 101 shit.
-
Just heard Trek is now the #1 film of the year domestically. I love it, and so do all of my friends and family members who've seen it. I had a few issues with it, sure, but nothing I couldn't get past for the purposes of enjoyment. And I liked far, far more than I questioned. Gonna round up a few people who haven't seen it and go one more time next weekend.
-
Appreciate the open mind and the patronage!
-
Make the next one GREAT and maybe these haters will cool it? Seeing it for the 3rd time next Tues with a friend who hasn't seen it yet.
-
... on this one, I'll join the choir. I've already seen it twice in theaters. My next viewing likely won't be via the big screen, but I still give you and the guys credit for bringing "Star Trek" back--- and seeing to it that the audience was entertained. Your product has made it big at the box office & has incredibly strong scores on Rottentomatoes (95%) and Metacritic (83). The film may not do it for "everyone," but 95 & 83 aint bad at all.
-
AND DID JOSHUAANTSINHISPANTS SAY HE LIKED FIREFLY? THERE'S HOPE FOR YOU SET YOU FAGGOT.
-
Are you kidding me? I'd rather watch flies fuck than that insipid dour shit Firefly. I've seen Fat chicks with more girth than anything Joss Whedon shits out. I'd rather be damned to a hell that consists of watching Paul WS Anderson films all day than waste my precious time and life watching Serenity or hell even that fuck of the week Battleshits Galactica. I don't LIKE dark oppressive sci-fi.
-
Remember the Kelvin! Also your staunch advocates that braved the abysmal likes of Shitbag and such. As you write the sequel, the throwaway line reffering to crewman "Joshua Vance" will make a geek happy, as well as poo-poo the likes of ole Shitbag, you just can't beat such poetic irony heh.
-
Whedon sucks the cocks of schoolboys. J.J. Abrams is God unto cinema. He made Star Trek finally shine, gave life to the corpse. Whedon fails at everything he does. If his shows were actual fecal matter, our oceans would be nothing but thick shit.
-
I know I’m an idiot for trying to answer questions that have already been answered many times in this talk back. And by one of the films writers none the less, but I can’t hold my tongue.
ClarenceBeaks, I see you’ve been here recently so I shall address you first. Since you’ve given me such a wealth of inane questions to answer, I will just refer to a specific post.
“Where the hell was it stated that Nero went to a Klingon planet? Please don't suggest a missing scene or that crap comic that came out earlier. If that is true, then how did he get there? How did he escape?”
I don’t purport that, Nero was imprisoned by Klingons (though that would be cool) So to get to the root of the question, what he did for 25 years, I assumed he had to: fix his ship, battle to survive, hide, find resources, calculate when and where Spock would emerge, etc. Plenty to do. None of it necessary to plot development.
"How did he know exactly where Spock Prime was going to arrive?"
Again not important to plot development. If how he knew was interesting, or integral to the plot they could've made up any number of explanations. He did have 25 years to figure it out.
“How come Vulcan's demise didn't leave any shockwaves to the ice planet?”
I’ll ignore the grammatical inaccuracies, I get the question. First off we don’t know that shock waves where even produced, as an event like the one portrayed has never happened in actuality. We could only guess at the outcome of an entire planet being consumed by a black hole. I would assert that the shock wave, being a concussive force of gas and other debris would be immediately pulled into the black hole, along with the planet. Only something moving faster than the speed of light would be able to (hypothetically) escape the event horizon.
“How come Scotty didn't know anything about Vulcan or the ships above in orbit?”
He didn’t really seem to attentive to his job, as he hadn’t gone out to retrieve, Kirk either. (Oooo, another plot hole. Tear it apart.) He probably wasn’t monitoring communications. But that’s all supposition. I will remind you that all this was happening fairly quickly, and once the drill was activated it closed off all communications. Also, we don’t know what he did or didn’t know. That’s supposition on your behalf. If he did know he would just think it was an attack, what is he gonna do? Hop in a fighter and join the battle? He’s manning an outpost. A position he clearly detests.
“How come the Federation did nothing when Nero started zapping Earth?”
Again, I don’t know if you caught this in the film, as you are clearly very observant, but the drill stops all communications. It would’ve thrown the Earth for a loop, not really being able to coordinate a response. Not to mention almost all of the fleet was away, as acknowledged in the film several times. And, lets not forget these events were all taking place in a matter of minutes from the time he actually starts attacking Earth with the drill, till he warps after Spock.
“Why didn't anyone go after the Nero when he destroyed the Klevin?”
Maybe they did. It is acknowledged that the ship disappeared. Which would infer that attempts were made to locate it.
“Why go after Earth when Spock Prime failed to destroy Romulus?”
I believe you mean, why go after Earth when Spock failed to save Romulus. He wanted to deal a blow the Federation. Also, as Spock mentioned, he is half human and Earth is the only home had left. But, mainly to hurt the Federation.
“Come on people.”
We’re here, and we’ve got answers.
-
"...BUT THAT FIREFLY WAS PURE GOLD. PLUS, I WOULDN'T MIND STICKING MY PINKY IN MORENA BACCARIN'S PRETTY LITTLE ASSHOLE."
-
Discuss
-
I appreciate your answers. Some were okay. Some were pretty legit. Some of them lead into many other questions but I give you credit for trying.
-
Someone asked some questions. And another talkbacker responded with answers. And the first talkbacker thanked them and said at least a few of them made sense. Noone cursed or insulted anyone's intelligence. Am I on the right website?
-
Look, this flamewar is turning into a bonfire.
I can understand how some of my answers lead to more questions, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. I think that the nature of film will always lead to discussions and disagreements.
However some of the people on this site can get ridiculous with their questioning of every single frame, and then not excepting explanations of what they misunderstood.
So, Clarence, glad I could answer a few of your questions. Even if some of my answers raised more questions. To me movies are meant to be enjoyed, and if their are problems lets discuss them and try to take them apart. To many people here it seems want to cry rape every time someone they are predisposed to loathing makes a film. And that's just not constructive.
So with all this agreeing going on, I think it's safe to say this thread is dead. -
And fuck your mothers, too.
-
I managed to bag the chance to go and see it today!! The only thing I didn't really like was Michael Giacchino's score, other than that the movie was pretty much superb!! Please make the next one as soon as you can!!
-
is here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_yyhm9rZHo
-
I never said what was posted above, and in fact had posted other shit that isn't on here
-
will be your chance to gloat and scream "UP is gonna destroy Trek" hehe. You people are pathetic.
-
Jun 01, 2009 8:45:58 PM CDT
For those who don't think ST was the second coming...
by theewokthatdied
This guy knocks out a lot of points I agree with http://roddysrockinreviews.wordpress.com/2009/05/22/ star-trek-2009-marcs-review/ remove space obviously.