Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....
Santa Kang wrote:
Uhura was the third lead.
I keep forgetting that hollywoods idea of 'lead' for women is them acting all bitchy and menstrual while being swooning with affection for some guy. So in that sense you are right.
But seriously, what am I missing here? I don't see any depth at all in these characters. You people have to be making this stuff up, there is nothing involved in these characters, nothing developmentally viable (kirk is the same at the end of the film as in the beginning). Nothing to make me care whether they live or die.
Another thing is, if these are alternate dimension versions of all the main characters who exist in their own time line, separate from the real prime universe characters, why care about them at all? What's at stake? What's the point? It's really stupid.
If you missed it, then perhaps you're the one with ADD and are easily distracted by explosions.
Bitchy and menstrual? That's how you interpret Uhura's character in the film? Okay.
Not to keen on women with a mind of their own I guess.
Kirk is a directionless boy at the start of the film. By film's end he had found his direction and purpose. Yes, he's still a cocky SOB at times, but that part of who Kirk is (thanks to Shatner's take more than what GR put on the page)
Spock suffers great loss not only a parent but an entire world.
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.