Ok I've read both the reviews earlier in the thread. The negative one was far too negative Ok I've read both the reviews earlier in the thread. The negative one was far too negative but did make some valid points. The positive one skates over the flaws and enjoyed it for what it was. I'm somewhere in the middle. I enjoyed the movie but, like Trek 2009, it could have been improved considerably in my eyes if they had tweaked some of the sillier moments to have more internal logic.
The main things I agree with are:
"The Klingon homeworld Qo’noS apparently has no sensor defense system. A top secret shipyard building a next generation warship is completely and totally unguarded.
Khan is able to beam himself from Earth to Qo’noS using a personal hyperwarp transporter device. The fact that such a device exists calls into question the need for space ships at all. The device can be carried in your hands, and it can beam you sixteen light years without a problem. The film actually abuses the hell out of the transporter; there’s a reason why the transporter is generally limited in the Star Trek
A bigger problem moving forward, though, is this: death has been cured at the end of this film. Khan’s blood can revive the deceased.
The good news is that the cast remains the strongest part of the new Star Trek
franchise, and they’re probably locked in for another movie."
It's also worth noting that Earth doesn't seem to have any functional defences or active security forces. Marcus could have used the Pre-fix code.
Plus, I'm still not sure I understand what was going on with the bodies in the bombs or why Marcus needed Khan at all. Khan would have been far more interesting if he'd recruited some other mercenaries to commit terrorist acts against the Klingon Empire and the focus became tracking him down (similar to the Enterprise episode with the augments) leading eventually to the Klingon homeworld.
Admiral Buzzkill wrote:
Trek fans have been making excuses for bad storytelling since the 1960's.
That doesn't make it right!
make attempts to compare nuTrek unfavorably to oldTrek wrong
on this score.
Frankly, someone could come along and produce an Oscar-winning Star Trek
film that was internationally hailed as a masterpiece and knocked Avatar
off to become the most successful film in history...and some trek fans would call it "an okay film but bad Star Trek
" because it was different
and didn't respect "canon."
I think I'm holding NuTrek up to the same standards as old Trek but old Trek certainly had its fair share of ludicrous moments. I did have an issue with how silly it was to promote Kirk the jerk so quickly and for no obvious reason other than he got lucky and, you know what, they owned up to it and put a well-received scene in this movie to redress the stupidity of that decision. If the old guard had not pointed out that the emperor had no clothes they might have missed an excellent opportunity to develop the character into something more rounded.
My issue with the Trek tech is that they have opened up a can of worms and they can't really go back so they have to overlook obvious solutions to the problems they create like basic security protocols that we have in the 21st century such as ID to get on board a top secret base, sensors to detect unknown transports, automated alarms, CCTV, automated security systems to block off the ship by sealing doors, cancelling gravity, raising internal force fields etc, or if you are a villain, why be coy, beam intruders back out into space by scanning the area into which they've just beamed (they can beam 72 missiles but not 2 intruders?).