RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,791
Posts: 5,217,823
Members: 24,221
Currently online: 708
Newest member: soccerjerseys29

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 21 2011, 06:41 PM   #166
The Overlord
Captain
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post

But spock prime can use his time ship for the same purpose! Thus, I say to you, this is a useless plot device. And an insult to the intelligence of anybody who can count to 10.

EDIT: Please learn to properly use the quoting system instead of creating these incoherent strings. All I am doing is quoting, did no editing at all to this except adding this comment. Did not edit the quote tags at all.
I'm pretty sure you misused the quoting system, not me. My quotes were fine, your's were not.

And you still haven't addressed my complaints about Shinzon or Nemesis as a whole.
The Overlord is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 06:49 PM   #167
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Santa Kang wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
Because he has no control over where the black hole sends him.
But spock prime does! He has a time ship!

He can go back in time right before nero's planet was destroyed, fix the problem and thus never necessitate the rest of the events of the film!

Oh right, I keep forgetting that JJ and company like to insult peoples intelligence with useless plot devices.
No, he doesn't. He has a ship that is really fast and carries Red Matter.
It makes no sense at all that they can travel back and forth in time using all kinds of techniques (slingshot effect for example) but spock prime would not take this option to effect the time line in nero and spock primes future, thus arbitrarily creating a series of useless plot devices!

How the hell can red matter cause planets to explode at the same time as creating a black hole that is really a time portal? Makes no sense at all. There is zero attempt at explanation of this.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 06:57 PM   #168
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Vulcan was crushed and sucked into the black hole. It didn't "blow up". Shielded starships fared better. Not difficult to comprehend.

As for time travel, that can be applied to EVERY SINGLE episode and movie in Trek. Even Nemesis - why didn't they go back and undo that? What about Voyager - why wasn't the timeline repaired after the events of "Timeless" and "Endgame"?
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:07 PM   #169
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post

But spock prime does! He has a time ship!

He can go back in time right before nero's planet was destroyed, fix the problem and thus never necessitate the rest of the events of the film!

Oh right, I keep forgetting that JJ and company like to insult peoples intelligence with useless plot devices.
No, he doesn't. He has a ship that is really fast and carries Red Matter.
It makes no sense at all that they can travel back and forth in time using all kinds of techniques (slingshot effect for example) but spock prime would not take this option to effect the time line in nero and spock primes future, thus arbitrarily creating a series of useless plot devices!

How the hell can red matter cause planets to explode at the same time as creating a black hole that is really a time portal? Makes no sense at all. There is zero attempt at explanation of this.
Then this is true of every single episode and movie of Trek: solve the problem by time travel. Why didn't Picard use time travel to stop Shinzon? Why didn't Kirk use time travel to stop Khan?

The Red matter creates black holes not explosions. Black holes ( more specifically wormholes) have been theorized as being able to create "time portals" and gateways to other Universes. Its also a common SF trope.
__________________
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.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:10 PM   #170
Balrog
Commodore
 
Balrog's Avatar
 
Location: Balrog
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
They outline (their opinions why they didn't like the movie too), (opinions) that most of you (do not hold).
Fixed it for ya'...

1-(as I pointed out already) The main characters are completely OUT of character.
Opinion

2-The human race is suppose to have gotten over its insipid ways by then, and the kirk character is suppose to be an enlightened individual, not a petty 30 year old idiot with a chip on his shoulder and a lust for power (don't even tell me the TOS was not enlightened compared to this idiot we saw in this film).
Revisionist history by the Great Bird himself. Go back to TOS and you will see that is not true.

3-The film was nothing but shallow bombast, literally. The so called 'plot' WAS the filler. And those of you who have the arrogance to compare this to the wrath of khan are simply delusional. TWOK was an amazing movie, this does not compare on any level to that master piece.
This isn't even a criticism. It's a rant at best, and flamebaiting at worst. Next!

4-There is no one to like here. Where is kirk again? All I see is some idiot with an arrogant disposition walking around, acting no better than people of today. That might fit in with some genre films, but not star trek. Star trek was never about humans being exactly the same as they are now, it was about them being BETTER than they are now so we would have something to inspire us to the future.
Opinion. And again, it is influenced by Roddenbery's revisionist history of what TOS and Trek was.

5-The completely DUMB writing that spurts out everywhere all over this movie. To say the film 'is not perfect' is a complete understatement. The characters motivations make absolutely no god damned sense at all. They are like little kids trying to fight their way out of a cardboard box and shredding the box and every bit of logic with it into pieces. The idiocy of nero's actions, the idiocy of spocks actions, the complete overall idiocy of imposter kirk, you have to be of a very short attention span to not suspend disbelief in the face of this pure idiocy. And once again, getting promoted from cadet to captain during a training mission is COMPLETELY STUPID AND SHOULD RUIN THE PREMISE OF THE ENTIRE MOVIE TO ANYONE WITH HALF A BRAIN!
And again, a rant - not a criticism. And more flame-baiting.

At least Nemesis made some degree of sense from an x-y-z perspective. At least the characters motivations for doing things weren't 'uh just cause i uh felt like it duh'.
Good. I'm glad you enjoyed NEM. Truly.

I did not.

Star trek 2009 is NOT a star trek movie, it is a movie for people who hate star trek, to insult the real essence of star trek with. It is pure garbage for the masses and people with short attention spans who will just as easily like transformers and twilight.
Your opinion.
__________________
Anybody got some peppermint?
Balrog was Lloyd Dobler
Balrog is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:16 PM   #171
Balrog
Commodore
 
Balrog's Avatar
 
Location: Balrog
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
I found the characters of TOS, TNG, VOY and DS9 modernized, civilized, evolved and in keeping with the ideals of the original star trek vision for humanity.
Was Sisko being the modernized, civilized and evolved piece of humanity you espouse them to be in "In the Pale Moonlight"? Was Janeway in "Equinox"?
__________________
Anybody got some peppermint?
Balrog was Lloyd Dobler

Last edited by Balrog; December 21 2011 at 07:30 PM.
Balrog is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:22 PM   #172
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

As for the characters behaving "out of character," I think we're forgetting that these people are younger than we ever saw them in the show. When we first met Kirk, he was already in command of the Enterprise. Here, we're meeting him as a teenager. We're also meeting him in an alternate timeline, a timeline where he didn't have his father around to influence his development. OF COURSE he's going to act like a different person.

I would also argue that Star Trek has never been about "exploring new worlds." It's about using the sci-fi setting to explore the human condition, and I think ST09 did a great job of that! We got to explore Kirk's development from a drunken farmboy to a cadet at the Academy to someone who was put in a very difficult situation and had to take command of a starship. We got to explore it through Spock, from his relationship to his father, to the death of his mother and the destruction of his world. Spock and Sarek, in the prime universe, had a very uneasy relationship. I very much hope that, in this new timeline, we get to explore their relationship from a different angle, now that Amanda is gone.

Yes, there was a lot of silly action, and Nero's motivations may not have made perfect sense, but to say that the movie lacked the spirit of Star Trek is, quite frankly, wrong.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:25 PM   #173
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post

1-(as I pointed out already) The main characters are completely OUT of character.
Since Star Trek 2009 takes place seven to ten years prior to Star Trek: The Original Series this would stand to reason. Are you the same person you were seven to ten years ago? Would you even be remotely the same person if someone had brutally murdered one of your parents?

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
No, they are what made star trek popular and what was DEFINITELY and WITHOUT A SHRED OF DOUBT lacking in the thing called star trek 2009.
What made Star Trek popular was the uncanny chemistry between Shatner, Nimoy and Kelley and to a lesser extent Stewart and Spiner. What makes the reboot tolerable is that Pine, Quinto and Urban seem to have some chemistry working together. Everything else is simply window dressing... tasty window dressing but window dressing nonetheless.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:28 PM   #174
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

TOS was an action adventure show that occasionally gave us a "feel good" message by the final act. A message usually proceeded by fisticuffs and gunfire. If they could have afforded explosions every week, we would have them too.
__________________
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.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:53 PM   #175
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

In order to create a space/time portal, like the one witnessed in DS9, that we know as a 'wormhole' you have to have two points of the curvature of space/time meeting and effectively lessening the distance between two points. But in DS9, with the bajoran wormhole, it was space you were traversing, not time. But the same parameters apply. Both are based in relativity, and have potential for logical scientific explanation even in a fictional universe based on scientific principles. This red matter/black hole/time portal non-sense does not!
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:54 PM   #176
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Santa Kang wrote: View Post
TOS was an action adventure show that occasionally gave us a "feel good" message by the final act. A message usually proceeded by fisticuffs and gunfire. If they could have afforded explosions every week, we would have them too.
Every single episode of TOS had a philosophical or scientific message of some kind. Stop trying to revise history please.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 07:59 PM   #177
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
TOS was an action adventure show that occasionally gave us a "feel good" message by the final act. A message usually proceeded by fisticuffs and gunfire. If they could have afforded explosions every week, we would have them too.
Every single episode of TOS had a philosophical or scientific message of some kind. Stop trying to revise history please.
The philosophical and scientific messages have been highly overinterpreted. Star Trek is a campy children's show from the 60s. But the children are grown ups now and still like it, so they try to find deep substance in the show where none is.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:01 PM   #178
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
In order to create a space/time portal, like the one witnessed in DS9, that we know as a 'wormhole' you have to have two points of the curvature of space/time meeting and effectively lessening the distance between two points. But in DS9, with the bajoran wormhole, it was space you were traversing, not time. But the same parameters apply. Both are based in relativity, and have potential for logical scientific explanation even in a fictional universe based on scientific principles. This red matter/black hole/time portal non-sense does not!
Nitpicking time travel in Star Trek is one of the most ridiculous things a person could do. Even the characters have admitted they have no idea how it works!
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:03 PM   #179
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
As for the characters behaving "out of character," I think we're forgetting that these people are younger than we ever saw them in the show.
So that justifies starfleet cadets acting like complete imbeciles with knee jerk reactions to everything?

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
When we first met Kirk, he was already in command of the Enterprise. Here, we're meeting him as a teenager. We're also meeting him in an alternate timeline, a timeline where he didn't have his father around to influence his development. OF COURSE he's going to act like a different person.
A different person, meaning a complete imbecile? If TOS taught us anything, it's that people with alcohol problems would have gotten help long before they would be able to go on this series of mis-steps. Yes, there was the bar fight in trouble with tribbles, but it did not alter the central characters, or their moral approach to other humans and other species.

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
I would also argue that Star Trek has never been about "exploring new worlds." It's about using the sci-fi setting to explore the human condition, and I think ST09 did a great job of that!
When? Where?
RoJoHen wrote: View Post
We got to explore Kirk's development from a drunken farmboy to a cadet at the Academy to someone who was put in a very difficult situation and had to take command of a starship.
Kirk is the exact same person at the end of this film as he was in the beginning. An obnoxious, arrogant idiot. How he orders the destruction of nero's ship despite the fact that it was a sitting duck is ample evidence of that. This arrogant idiot does not deserve command of a starship! He is not kirk, he is an imposter.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:06 PM   #180
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Pretty sure he was called "Kirk" in the script.
__________________
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.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
nemesis, philosophy, science, star trek (2009 film)

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.