All Star Trek Discussion Thread ("Into Darkness" trailer released)

[King Postwhore]

Um, he's not the outcast on earth as he was in Vulcan.  If you remember it was the Vulcan's who thought that.  Besides the series needed something new and fresh because TV ratings and Movie sales were down and this change in the ST timeline was needed to bring in some new fans.  It did without pissing off the hardcore fanbase.  You are in the minority here 5.

[5]

Um, he's not the outcast on earth as he was in Vulcan.  If you remember it was the Vulcan's who thought that.

A character who tries to maintain his logical and 'cool' nature among emotional humans strikes me as being an outsider, at least to a certain degree. And if even he didn't, this doesn't really change anything, does it? With his home planet destroyed, he can't be an outcast among his own kind anymore - and even ST XI established this as the basis for the character.

Besides the series needed something new and fresh because TV ratings and Movie sales were down and this change in the ST timeline was needed to bring in some new fans.

And it shows, it really shows that this was to "bring in some new fans" because to me, ST XI was just hollow and mindless - unlike the older ST, unlike even the TNG movies in which Picard suddenly became an action man. Like I said, the new star trek is aesthetically pleasing, action packed and fast paced - but still, compared to the old ST it's hollow, soulless and full of plastic characters parading on the iBridge.

It did without pissing off the hardcore fanbase.  You are in the minority here 5.

Oh, the hardcore fanbase is pissed, all right. And I don't mind being in the minority, to be honest

[El Barto]

Are those from televised Shakespeare productions he did?

In the bottom one he's Claudius in the BBC's Hamlet (Derick Jacobi  ).  I'm not sure, but I think the top one is from I, Claudius; never watched it.

Anyway, I had a thought while watching The Search for Spock last night. If Spock transferred his katra to Bones, why wasn't he just an "empty shell" instead of giving Kirk the emotional "I have been, and always shall be, your friend" speech?

From the context of it being a mind meld, I gather it was more akin to running off a copy of his katra, rather than handing the whole thing over.  Truth be told, I don't think they had given that any thought at all when they offed Spock.  They weren't planning on bringing him back.  I suspect that they added the whole "remember" thing as an escape route should they change their mind, which they did, and then they just bullshitted the whole Katra thing.  

Besides the series needed something new and fresh because TV ratings and Movie sales were down and this change in the ST timeline was needed to bring in some new fans.  It did without pissing off the hardcore fanbase.  You are in the minority here 5.

Yes and no.  I understand creating a new timeline.  As much as I don't like it, I think it was actually a pretty clever idea.  It gives them a whole new tableau to work with.  There aren't many franchises where that idea would work well, but given the strict adherence to canon over the years, and the necessity to stay within the basic framework of the characters,  it was probably the right move.

That said, the movie sucked balls.  The story was just thrown together as an excuse for a lot of in-jokes, references and CGI explosions.  I tried re-watching it a while back and couldn't make it halfway through.  The new actors were great--loved them.  Just thought it was a crappy film.  I actually do have hopes for the sequel.  Now that they've established the new foundation, maybe they'll make some good flicks out of it.  I certainly hope so.

Something to ponder.  In every one of the series, there are plenty of really good episodes where nobody dies and nothing gets blown up.  Star Trek cranked out countless great, character driven episodes.  Does anybody think they could make a character driven movie nowadays?  I don't think they could or would even try.  Audiences today want gee-whiz CGI, and if they tried to do another ST-IV or ST-TMP,  it'd be the death of the franchise.  Now that's a real shame.

[5]

I agree with pretty much everything said above. With the possible exception of the actors - with the exception of Simon Pegg and Quinto, I didn't really care for them. And Uhura was just annoying.

[Q]

I think I have my righhtful place in 'ere, seeing as I'm the only omnipotent being in this here universe

[5]

<3

[King Postwhore]

Well El Barto,  I remember people complaining that Star Trek: Insurrection was made too much like a TV series show.  I think movies are a different beast.  Unlike TV that has the ability to have a story line arch over a season a movie has only 2 hours so action is a necessity of sorts.  And like you said, the first movie in the new regime is always a set up of character.  Remember the Superman Movie from the 70's and how much better the second movie was?  The movie had a very good reception from the core fans.  Maybe they were just starved for new Star Trek.

[Dublagent66]

"Annihilation Jim.  Total, complete, absolute annihilation."  

[chknptpie]

I don't think you can speculate on how the story will be affected by the new time line. Who knows what they can and will do with it. Can we speculate on if Roddenberry would have been proud? lol

[El Barto]

Wait a minute,  the second Superman movie was better than the first?  Really?

There have been plenty of character driven movies, and several in the ST universe.  Constant explosions has only recently become a requirement for any movie.

[skydivingninja]

5, it's Sci-Fi dammit!!  Suspend your disbelief!  Also in 2009 we haven't conquered black holes yet either silly.

He does have a point though that sucking up a sun with a black hole would extinguish life on Romulus and Remus anyways, so the most it would do would be to bide time to evacuate everyone.  Still, its not much of a "save Romulus" plan.  

And I agree with the general sentiments Barto and 5 have expressed.  Its clever that they made a new timeline starting with when Nero shows up, and it makes sense to change everything after that.  BUT, it kind of reeks of laziness.  An easy way to ignore the strictly adherred-to canon that Star Trek writers have been working with for years.  Plus, the actual movie wasn't great, though most of the actors did a good job not completely copying the original characters.  I'm interested in seeing a sequel to see if it'll be more-of-the-same or something as great as Wrath of Khan or Voyage Home (though I don't think a movie like TVH would work well in today's market, especially when Star Trek has been rebranded as an action franchise now).

[Super Dude]

I would just like to say I think Chris Pine does an amazing Kirk.  And I thought the movie was awesome, enough from you negative nancies.

[skydivingninja]

If they wanted to make a super-actiony Star Trek movie that still had great, prominent character development they should have made a Deep Space Nine movie.  God I can't wait for it to be available for instant stream on Netflix.

[rumborak]

I would just like to say I think Chris Pine does an amazing Kirk.  And I thought the movie was awesome, enough from you negative nancies.

This. I thought it was a great movie.

rumborak

[5]

If they wanted to make a super-actiony Star Trek movie that still had great, prominent character development they should have made a Deep Space Nine movie.  God I can't wait for it to be available for instant stream on Netflix.

Yes yes yes, the Dominion War would have been amazing material for a good action movie.

[King Postwhore]

I think so.  I love dialogue and storylines but the first Superman movie was drawn out.  There's always a good balance to action and dialogue.  Looking at the box office sales for all Star Trek movies on can't deny how well this reboot movie did.  The best sales for all other movies was the 4th movie at 109 million and the new one did 257 mil statewide.  Hard to dispute those numbers as well as the 94% critics approval rating.  But to each his own.


And Matt,  DS9 movie would have been killer.

[El Barto]

The Phantom Menace absolutely slaughtered the original Star Wars at the box office, so ticket sales don't really mean much in relation to quality or popularity.

Also,  I understand that people nowadays care more about explosions than characters or stories.  I'm not debating that.  I just think it sucks. 

[King Postwhore]

Oh I get you El Barto.  No Doubt.  I just think that the new Star Trek was light years(Pun intended) ahead of lets say The Transformer movies.  On of my favorite movies of all time is L.A. Confidential.  I think that it has a perfect blend of ,dialogue drama, action and the acting is second to none.

[Super Dude]

I don't think in this case it was a bad thing though, because in addition to that we got the return of our favorite grown-up Peter Pan, we got to see the cheated Kobayashi Maru in action, and in my opinion it was really great to see the formation of the crew chemistry we've become so used to in TOS. It wasn't perfect, but it was enough that I'm really looking forward to the sequel.

[Mr. Beale]

As a long time Star Trek fan I have to agree that Abrams' Trek is pretty bad. Not from a fanboy/continuity standpoint, I think they did they best they could of done with the alternate timeline thing (actually clever in a "have your cake and eat it too" way). And I was a skeptic about recasting the original crew but the cast totally proved me wrong, really fun stuff.

But yes the writing is inexcusably stupid. Huge plot holes and lazy conveniences all over the place. And I'm not one that actively tries to look for them but ugh.

[hefdaddy42]

I enjoyed the new ST film.  It was better than some of the previous films. 

But I also caught Wrath of Khan on TV the other night.  I saw it in theaters when I was a kid.  It is still the most awesome of all ST films.

[Adami]

Wow lots of new posts since I last read.


My thoughts on the latest Star Trek movie.


1. There were plot holes, the biggest being the destruction of Romulas, since it didn't have any effect on that stupid moon that Kirk, Spock and Scotty were on for some reason.

2. The star (not sun) that they tried to destroy with a black hole was not actually Romulas's star, but a huge distant one, so getting rid of it wouldn't have destroyed Romulas.

3. The writing wasn't great, but not awful. Plenty of lame scenes, like the entire moon sequence, Scottys engineering dabacle and such. But for the most part it was good enough.

4. Hey 5, did you seriously just say that Sylar was one of the better actors on that movie? Good god. His Spock was the worst part. Sure he looked like him a great deal, but he didn't capture his character at all. He spoke SUPER fast, with tons of emotional at all times. Never seemed wise, never seemed deliberate, never seemed calculating like the original Spock. Chris Pine was a good Kirk, though re-written for a reason. Uhura was indeed annoying. Simon Pegg was miscast as Scotty, but he was fun to watch. The best part of that movie acting wise was Carl Urban as Bones. He freaking NAILED that part to a cross.

5. I think they need to bring in another writer to help the other 2 (or 3) for the next movie. Lets not forget that Star Trek XI was written by the same people who wrote Transformers 2.

[rumborak]

I don't share the misgivings about either Scotty or Spock. I thought they did a great bridging between the seasoned characters everybody knew, and the fact that they had all just gotten out of Academy. I actually liked that Spock wasn't the totally reserved guy yet that we know him as later, but has some spunk left.

The only thing that actually bugged me as a plot hole was the fact that, even if you collapse something into a black hole, the mass is still the same. So, the gravitational pull stays the same.

rumborak

[Dr. DTVT]

5. I think they need to bring in another writer to help the other 2 (or 3) for the next movie. Lets not forget that Star Trek XI was written by the same people who wrote Transformers 2.

This sums up my problem with the movie pretty well.

Well, that and a whole bunch of other things.

It made money by getting a lot of non-Trekkies to see it, and therein succeeded in doing what they cared about - making money off the movie, as apposed to making a Star Trek movie.

[Adami]

I don't share the misgivings about either Scotty or Spock. I thought they did a great bridging between the seasoned characters everybody knew, and the fact that they had all just gotten out of Academy. I actually liked that Spock wasn't the totally reserved guy yet that we know him as later, but has some spunk left.

rumborak

I just think Sylar completely missed the essence of Spock, even as it was written in the script. That he has all of these emotions that he is actively trying to repress. In the original, he did a great job of that. In this...........there was no repression, he was obviously uber emotional at all times, the repression just seemed fake.

And I'm fine with Scotty, I just think Pegg was cast because he was already a huge star and a huge Star Trek fan. I think Paul McGillion would have been a better choice.

[rumborak]

I don't know. To be honest, watching Pegg I was thinking "this is the character that Doohan was trying to be but couldn't". I always thought the original Scotty was a really clumsy character, and Pegg made him much more coherent and believable.

rumborak

[Adami]

I just think the only thing linking him to the original scotty was the accent and name. If that named him Irishy, and had Pegg to an Irish accent, no one would have noticed.

[rumborak]

I do however agree that Bones was dead on.

rumborak

[Adami]

I do however agree that Bones was dead on.

rumborak

Oh I totally agree. I just think the film could have benefited from slowing down just a little bit. Instead of having a thousand things happening at once, it needed some time to breath, to allow some reflection and to allow some characters reactions to seem genuine instead of randomly placed.

[El Barto]

The original Scotty was an interesting character as Doohan played him.  Obviously, he was mainly interested in tinkering and building/repairing stuff, but if pressed into service, he was an awesome command officer.  Any time he was in the big chair, he was cold as ice, yet still deliberate and thoughtful.  The new Scotty seemed to be more about comic relief, and that's unfortunate. 

[Cool Chris]

The original Scotty was an interesting character as Doohan played him.  Obviously, he was mainly interested in tinkering and building/repairing stuff, but if pressed into service, he was an awesome command officer.  Any time he was in the big chair, he was cold as ice, yet still deliberate and thoughtful.  The new Scotty seemed to be more about comic relief, and that's unfortunate. 

Yes! Kirk never hesitated to put Scotty in the big chair, and he always handled things well. I recall Kirk commending him in the episode when they beam down to the planet that fashioned itself after 1920’s gangsters. Don’t recall the circumstances though.

I saw the newest ST movie in the theater on only a few hours sleep. It was enjoyable, but the more I thought about it later, the less sense it made and the less I liked it. Been meaning to revisit, but not sure I care anymore.

[From the context of it being a mind meld, I gather it was more akin to running off a copy of his katra, rather than handing the whole thing over.  Truth be told, I don't think they had given that any thought at all when they offed Spock.  They weren't planning on bringing him back.  I suspect that they added the whole "remember" thing as an escape route should they change their mind, which they did, and then they just bullshitted the whole Katra thing. 

Right. Recall Spock still had all his faculties to do whatever he did with the reactor, or whatever, to get the warp drive working. On the DVD Harve Bennett brought up the idea of the ‘remember’ with Nimoy late in the game, once he saw how well things were going and how much fun everyone was having. He was a creative guy, but as producer, he has to think along a different set of guidelines, and the potential for a sequel and more revenue was more on his mind than Meyer and the rest. Meyer had no intention of bringing him back. He didn’t even want to film the scene on Genesis where they show the torpedo tube.

[Adami]

Oh and one more thing that bothered me. Engineering.

I get it, it's a different timeline, but why in god's name would the design of that place be SOOOOOOOOOO drastically different. What was wrong with the original? Seemed fine to me. And how in gods name does an engineering the size of a warehouse fit into that ship? The ship isn't THAT big, it would take up damn near half of the bottom section. Also, it didn't feel at all like engineering, it felt like a beer processing plant, because that's what it was. I just didn't see the point in that thing at all.

[King Postwhore]

Oh and one more thing that bothered me. Engineering.

I get it, it's a different timeline, but why in god's name would the design of that place be SOOOOOOOOOO drastically different. What was wrong with the original? Seemed fine to me. And how in gods name does an engineering the size of a warehouse fit into that ship? The ship isn't THAT big, it would take up damn near half of the bottom section. Also, it didn't feel at all like engineering, it felt like a beer processing plant, because that's what it was. I just didn't see the point in that thing at all.

I think they were trying to give engineering a realistic feel.  I know this is a bit of a joke but I don't think any ship has had such a clean engine room as in the Star Trek Universe.

[skydivingninja]

I don't think in this case it was a bad thing though, because in addition to that we got the return of our favorite grown-up Peter Pan, we got to see the cheated Kobayashi Maru in action, and in my opinion it was really great to see the formation of the crew chemistry we've become so used to in TOS. It wasn't perfect, but it was enough that I'm really looking forward to the sequel.

The thing is, while it was cool to see the Kobayashi Maru in action, the point of Kirk beating it in the original movies was that no one KNEW he cheated.  Beating that test was one of the things that put him on the fast track to becoming a legend within Starfleet, in the movie its everyone knew he cheated, and Kirk basically admits to cheating, but nothing really happens because of it.  That moment in WoK where he finally admits he cheated, and it actually looks like he's in a no-win scenario for the first time is a pretty powerful moment, and there wasn't anything like that in Star Trek XI to give the Kobayashi Maru cheating scandal any real significance outside that early point about "experiencing fear" which is forgotten about pretty quickly.  Also, making Spock the designer of the test just seemed sort of contrived, like a "let's see how many nuggets we can fit in!" kind of attitude.

[King Postwhore]

Though you've got to remember, this movie was now a different timeline.  Everything was altered by the Romulans.  Thus this Kirk told people.It was to me a very smart way of changing the characters the way they want with a definition.