If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by trek_futurist, Dec 14, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. matsuiny2004

    matsuiny2004 Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2011
    Nero is too dangerous to imprison and Nero is not a helpless sitting duck. He lost a fight that he had the chance to win. There was no viable alternative Nero refused to be taken prisoner. end of story
     
  2. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    Nero murdered 6 billion. Kirk Prime (and Chris Pine's is just as "real") never came up against ANYTHING like that - not from anyone accountable (i.e. not the doomsday machine)
     
  3. trek_futurist

    trek_futurist Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    There have been continuity errors, but these were usually made by mishap, or were explained in novels (I.E the broader trekverse).

    What we're discussing here has a greater magnitude than just continuity mishaps, what we are dealing with is

    1-The intentional defecation on canon, unprecedented than in any pre-ENT star trek show (yes, enterprise set the precedent for this intentional abuse of canon) and

    2-The intentional abuse of character continuity, behavior traits and basic essentials of what made a character who they were (back to kirk destroying neros ship when it was a sitting duck in space), which was a major part of the trek universe, and a big part of what made it unique and special. Having the characters act no different than any other generic action hero from any number of films condescendingly derides the original essence of them.

    Now, call me a trek purist, but I cannot comprehend how someone can be a star trek fan if they deride everything that made it unique and and entity unto itself. That is, the philosophy, the characterization (humans being portrayed as essentially better than they are by todays standards) and, perhaps most importantly, the pursuit of science!
     
  4. trek_futurist

    trek_futurist Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    non-sense.

    Khan had every intention of killing billions with the genesis device, kirk still did not blow him out of the sky when the reliant was a sitting duck. That is the character of kirk, and the mark of a good starfleet officer who practices the principles espoused by the federation.
     
  5. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Sorry, been a fan since 1966.

    Doesn't matter, as your conclusion is indefensible based on any reality-based premises and/or criteria.
     
  6. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    I'm afriad *I* can't see how someone can be so judgemental of others and still be a Trek fan.

    I gave you my take on the characterizations and morals of the film in a prior post.

    And, frankly, you're wrong about the continuity of Trek. Massive and deliberate retcons have been going on for it's entire run -just look at the Klingons in TMP! Look at fundamentally incompatible episodes like "The Q and the Grey" and "True Q" or "The Immunity Syndrome" and "Where Silence has Lease". Galaxy-spanning warp speeds in TOS, TAS, STV, TNG, DS9 and ENT vs the far slower warp speeds in Voyager. Trek's continuity had always been an illusion, albeit a good one.
     
  7. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    You mean like when Kirk offered to help Nero and his crew, even over Spock's objections?
    What you see as a crime, I see as Kirk ensuring that there was NO CHANCE Nero or any part of his ship could survive to reek havok further in the past. Something he only did AFTER his offer of mercy was rejected.
     
  8. trek_futurist

    trek_futurist Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Those 'galaxy spanning' warp speeds were usually the result of an extraneous source, often resulting in near compromise of structural integrity.

    No, most of the blunders between TOS and TNG were either mistakes or lapses in memory on the part of the writers. Nothing that intentionally devours canon as in ENT and the 2009 thing.
     
  9. trek_futurist

    trek_futurist Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    That logic is silly. Mercy was 'rejected'? Real kirk would have taken him prisoner and seen that justice was met without destroying his sitting duck vessel like a coward. Regardless of whether his 'mercy was rejected'. And by the way, I find imposter kirks 'mercy' quite condescending and arrogant in those final moments.

    My take is that the writers were trying to appeal to people who think it's okay to destroy other people in times of war, that some 'gung ho' behavior is acceptable. This more closely resembles todays awful political climate when it comes to moral acts in times of war. It's sickening.
     
  10. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
  11. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
     
  12. Alrik

    Alrik Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Location:
    Alrik is on A deck chair, somewhere....
    Sorry, huge Trek fan since '72. Loved STAR TREK (09). Not taking the bait.
     
  13. Herkimer Jitty

    Herkimer Jitty Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Location:
    Dayglow, New California Republic
    Sorry. You're not a Trek fan.

    We decided it via committee.

    Didn't you get the memo?
     
  14. trek_futurist

    trek_futurist Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    But you already have, as evidenced by...

     
  15. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    Perhaps we should set up some sort of McCarthy hearings?

    "Have you or have you ever been a fan of the imposter Kirk?"

    Something has to be done about all those imposter "Trekkies" posing as Star Trek fans even though they liked the new movie!
     
  16. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    I'm lukewarm to Star Trek 2009 but Nemesis is fecal matter to be perfectly honest.

    We have no idea what Khan planned to do with the Genesis device. And comparing the Kirk's really doesn't cut it, we have no idea what Prime Kirk would have done with Nero. We have no idea because the situations are different, Reliant was trashed and not sitting on a possible escape route when Kirk's help was refused. Khan had not just committed genocide and had not killed Kirk's father.

    If you can't see that Kirk made the right decision in regards to Nero then you're just allowing your dislike of the movie to override your common sense.
     
  17. Alrik

    Alrik Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Location:
    Alrik is on A deck chair, somewhere....

    Aw man! Completely missed the memo. Does that mean I have to turn in my comm badge, decoder ring and Sirtis nude pics too??!! I never get to have any fun. :scream:
     
  18. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    And don't try to show your face at a convention again. The bouncers have been given your name and photo!

    We can't have you deluded nuTrek lovers rubbing shoulders with real Trekkies . . . .
     
  19. Satyrquaze

    Satyrquaze Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Location:
    Satyrquaze
    I’m a bit dumbfounded how you can (rather smugly) say you appreciate Star Trek for its philosophical merits, one of the primary being “Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations”; yet, in your very first statement in your original post you pointedly make an attempt to alienate anyone who disagrees with your point of view by saying they are not Star Trek fans. This, I think is the true intended goal of your post.

    Your original post is divisive, judgmental, hostile, close-minded, and condescending. If this is what Star Trek represents to a “true” fan, I want nothing to do with it.
     
  20. horatio83

    horatio83 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Yep, FluffyTrek lacks substance and I fear potential long-run damage, that the folks who are currently at the helm redefine what Trek is.

    Yet a movie is not merely constituteD of ideas, concepts and themes (unless it is a sleeping pill called TMP). In my eyes ST09 is a stupid summer blockbuster and a mediocre Trek movie. There have been better and there have been worse ... like the one in which Picard drives a buggy. Talking about violating a character, there you have it.

    [​IMG]

    As Jeyl has pointed out, ST09 is to some degree as remake of NEM, just with better acting, effects and overall production.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.