what I think star trek 2 should improve upon

[tmosler]

I know that the next star trek movie is comming out next year and I would like to share what I think it should do to be better. The first thing I think it should have less plot holes and problems such as in the 2009 movie they put some effort into lining it up with canon in minor ways that didn’t really matter, but not the bigger things like the time travel. Also I think i should be less cheesy as in being senseless and predictable. Also I want there to be less lensflares and no more of the annoying shaky camera. Lastly they should change the look of the horrible looking engine room and maybe even the look of the bridge so it doesnt look like a apple store. There is a lot more I wish to put but please put your ideas on how you want the movie to improve.

[C.E. Evans]

I liked or didn't mind pretty much everything you didn't like.

[roberttj1995]

I suppos all the white and shiny on the bridge they were trying to be too techno. and it would be good to throw in a few other ships and crew draw on all the good bits show us more detail into how a starship is run slow the action (but keep it actiony as well)

[Transwarp Drive]

I think Abrams Trek is going to age quickly; the Kelvin bridge was cool but the Enterprise bridge looked like an operating theatre.

[shivkala]

I recently watched the SF Debris review of Star Trek and he spent the course of four videos mercilessly pointing out all of the flaws in the story. At the end, he gave it a 7/10 though, because, despite all of these problems, it was fun, and overall it worked. Which was the exact opposite of his criticism of Nemesis, which he felt took itself too seriously.

Yes, Star Trek could have been improved, for the reasons you state and more. And, yes, I do hope they fix some things in the sequel, but overall, if I walk out of the sequel every bit as happy as I was after watching Star Trek, I'll be happy. I recently re-watched it, as it's quickly becoming one of those movies I can re-watch over and over again.

As for plot holes, yes, it would be nice if they could avoid those, but sadly, it seems every big-budget movie is filled with them. I'm far more forgiving of plot holes if the movie works and I am enjoying myself.

I personally don't have a problem with the bridge and I actually like it. And while the bridge on the Kelvin was nice, in color scheme and aesthetics it reminded me of the other bridges we've seen on Trek. The Enterprise bridge in this movie stood out as something different, and yet it still was recognizable as a Trek bridge. And I absolutely love the idea of the window viewscreen.

While some are calling it the "Apple Store" bridge, I think that's a compliment for the set designers. All science-fiction is a reflection of where we are today and our ideas of what the "future" will look like. Apple has positioned itself as an innovator and many view their technology as the pinnacle of what our society can produce (and I'm saying this as a PC/Android man, myself). For better or worse, we tend to look at the Apple design aesthetic and think "futuristic." And choosing white is a clear nod, in my mind, to Star Trek's optimistic view of the future. We think of white as being "pure" and "bright," which I think matches nicely with Rodenberry's view of the future, one in which we evolve past our mistakes.

The lens flare and shaky cam are a matter of opinion. Honestly, while it's an easy target for humor, I really only notice the lens flare when I'm looking for it. Again, I think it's an extension of the idea that this is a relatively "bright" future, compared to the dystopian view of the future we so often get in science-fiction.

As for engineering, I'm in the camp that is not a big fan of it. I believe it was in the SF Debris review that he said he didn't have a problem with it, because he felt the engine room should look more functional. From TNG through Voyager, Starfleet engine rooms resemble more computer hubs than actual engines. I can see his point, but I don't think the pipes were the way to go. I actually think Enterprise had a decent idea of the engine room. It was clear what the engine was and the room itself looked more functional. Anyway, I if I recall, we have been told they are filming at the Budweiser distillery again, so it's not likely to change for the second movie.

While I disagree to various degrees with most of your complaints, I still think some of them have a bit of validity to them. However, it really doesn't matter, since most of the decisions have been made already. Sure they still have time to fix somethings, but I doubt they have time to fix sets or major plot elements.

Again, if they end up making as enjoyable a movie as the first one, I'll be happy. Warts and all.

[Procutus]

tmosler wrote:

---

I want there to be less lensflares

This. I could probably accept the Brewery-Deck this time around if they got rid of those blinding lens-flares.

However, from what I've read coming out of the Abrams Camp, it sounds like they decided to go overboard with it yet again.

[Devon]

Procutus wrote:

---

However, from what I've read coming out of the Abrams Camp, it sounds like they decided to go overboard with it yet again.

Please, do share with us all what's been coming out of the Abrams Camp and why they are "going overboard?"

[starburst]

For all the complaints about the engine room, at least it seemed like an industrial area (because it was) like in TOS instead of in later Treks from TMP on. The only problem I had with it was there seemed like there wasnt a proper 'Engine Room' at least from how it was filmed but I like the much more mechanical lower decks.

To be honest I think the movie was good, there may be plot holes but then so did TOS.

[Temis the Vorta]

Besides delivering slam bang action and being a big hit again, here's what the next movie needs to do:

1. More emotion/logic tug of war angst for Spock.

2. Smack Kirk upside the head and give him a serious challenge to overcome, and convince us that the punk deserves a leadership role.

And this would also be nice:

3. Serious focus on another character, such as Uhura or Bones.

But realistically, pushing forward the character arcs of two characters, plus action, plus a new villain and whatever plot line he requires, is more than enough work for a mere two hour movie.

By the end of the movie, Kirk should be a much more solid leader. Spock may be going in the opposite direction. It wouldn't surprise me too much if they start pushing him towards insanity and villainy, in order to set up a really epic third movie/finale.

[Drago-Kazov]

A relativly long speech done by Pike or Spock because they seem the type.

2. Smack Kirk upside the head and give him a serious challenge to overcome, and convince us that the punk deserves a leadership role.

[Kitty]

Develop the relationships between all the characters more. I thought that it was started in the first movie but needed more development.

[Procutus]

Devon wrote:

---

Please, do share with us all what's been coming out of the Abrams Camp and why they are "going overboard?"

There was an article where I believe it was Simon Pegg who was quoted as saying they used a LOT of lens-flare.


I'm just sayin'.

[RoJoHen]

I like to think that the bridge was so white because the ship was rushed into service before they could finish the paint job. I didn't mind the design, but the thing needs some color!

[nightwind1]

tmosler wrote:

---

I know that the next star trek movie is comming out next year and I would like to share what I think it should do to be better. The first thing I think it should have less plot holes and problems such as in the 2009 movie they put some effort into lining it up with canon in minor ways that didn’t really matter, but not the bigger things like the time travel. Also I think i should be less cheesy as in being senseless and predictable. Also I want there to be less lensflares and no more of the annoying shaky camera. Lastly they should change the look of the horrible looking engine room and maybe even the look of the bridge so it doesnt look like a apple store. There is a lot more I wish to put but please put your ideas on how you want the movie to improve.

How original you are in your complaints.

I don't think we've ever heard any of them before.

[StarMan]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

By the end of the movie, Kirk should be a much more solid leader. Spock may be going in the opposite direction. It wouldn't surprise me too much if they start pushing him towards insanity and villainy, in order to set up a really epic third movie/finale.

Now this I like!