World Premiere/Advance screening discussions [SPOILERS GUARANTEED]

[Jefferies]

watch the movie for yourself.

I am sorry to say this, but if this is the type of thing this movie is about then I do not see myself watching it. This is meant to be a utopian future, not some type of armageddon endtime story.

it is a utopian future, but it is our future. bad things have certainly happened in star trek land before, need i remind you.

The destruction of one of the founding worlds that made that utopia happen somehow doesn't make sense. They could have blown up Earth in stead, as far as the Federation is concerned the difference would have been negligible. This is not utopian and if it were realistic in any fashion it would cast a very dark cloud of doom over the Federation for a long, long time. Just imagine if the state of New York were entirely wiped out by terrorists. I doubt America would recover from that any time soon, and nor would the world as there would be hell to pay I'm sure.

 

[urbandk]

I am sorry to say this, but if this is the type of thing this movie is about then I do not see myself watching it. This is meant to be a utopian future, not some type of armageddon endtime story.

it is a utopian future, but it is our future. bad things have certainly happened in star trek land before, need i remind you.

The destruction of one of the founding worlds that made that utopia happen somehow doesn't make sense. They could have blown up Earth in stead, as far as the Federation is concerned the difference would have been negligible. This is not utopian and if it were realistic in any fashion it would cast a very dark cloud of doom over the Federation for a long long time. Just imagine if the state of New York were entirely wiped out by terrorists. I doubt America would recovery from that any time soon, and nor would there world as there would be hell to pay I'm sure.

it is a big deal. but isn't how we face tragedy more a test of who we are as a people than how we face good times?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The destruction of one of the founding worlds that made that utopia happen somehow doesn't make sense.

Oh, I see - this version is less "utopian" than TOS because Vulcan lives are more important than all the people living on those planets that Nomad wiped out (remember, that episode that ended in the characters joking around on the bridge, as usual).

How noble and optimistic.

 

[Jessop]

So that's it? They destroy Vulcan for good??? Is this a frakking joke??? So no more Vulcan in any future incarnations of "Star Trek"? This is the most ludicrous, rdiculous thing I have ever heard them do! Where on earth is the hope and humanity in that as Abrams keeps espousing? That must be billions dead! And don't give me this alternate universe crap with how it's all bright and dandy in the real Star Trek universe. Why is everyone so gang ho on watching an alternate universe anyway? If you hate Star Trek that much go and watch another show! For Christ's sake.

watch the movie for yourself.

I am sorry to say this, but if this is the type of thing this movie is about then I do not see myself watching it. This is meant to be a utopian future, not some type of armageddon endtime story.

No it is not 'meant to be a utopian future'- Star Trek has never been that. Sure, it portrays a humanity which is unified, striving to better itself and find a place in the galaxy but it's not some hippy la la land where nothing bad ever happens. The truth is, bad things do happen. Things beyond our control do happen. Part of our humanity is how we deal with them, how it shapes our lives, how we treat those affected. You sound like you want some perfect world where nothing bad ever happens, might as well have everyone doped up on drugs in holodecks.

 

[Jefferies]

This is meant to be a utopian future, not some type of armageddon endtime story.

Have you ever counted up the billions of intelligent creatures - entire planets - that were wiped out in the episodes of TOS?

Now, was that acceptably "utopian" just because they were people you didn't see, on worlds you had no investment in? Pretty shallow ground in which to stake your argument that this movie somehow violates the optimistic spirit of Star Trek.

My point isn't that there can't be tragedy on Star Trek, but that this type of tragedy is so colossal and close to home, that it will destroy the positive and utopian outlook of the Federation.

 

[Michael]

MUST. STOP. CLICKING. ON. THIS. THREAD.

Do I understand it correctly that the mods have to read this thread? If so I don't envy them.

 

[Jefferies]

it is a utopian future, but it is our future. bad things have certainly happened in star trek land before, need i remind you.

The destruction of one of the founding worlds that made that utopia happen somehow doesn't make sense. They could have blown up Earth in stead, as far as the Federation is concerned the difference would have been negligible. This is not utopian and if it were realistic in any fashion it would cast a very dark cloud of doom over the Federation for a long long time. Just imagine if the state of New York were entirely wiped out by terrorists. I doubt America would recovery from that any time soon, and nor would there world as there would be hell to pay I'm sure.

it is a big deal. but isn't how we face tragedy more a test of who we are as a people than how we face good times?

That is naive and totally simplistic. An extreme disaster like that will not let any people, regardless of how advanced they are just continue as if nothing happened. Dispair and grief seem much more likely and I doubt that was the future Roddenberry had in mind. Star Trek was about a future where we live in safty, where there are no WMDs to scare us shitless any more. That was one of the big morale points of the show - humanity having overcome the Cold War and all those types of conflicts not just with themselves but with a larger community of intelligent beings. This movie seems to make a mockery of that vision.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

My point isn't that there can't be tragedy on Star Trek, but that this type of tragedy is so colossal and close to home, that it will destroy the positive and utopian outlook of the Federation.

No it won't.

Hell, my country is recovering from something that was tragic and awful and quite a shock to us - "this changes everything," everyone here told one another in 2001. What's remarkable, eight years later, is how little Americans have changed and how optimistic we remain.

(Oh, and Earth's optimism seems to have weathered the Xindi attack as well. )

 

[Jefferies]

My point isn't that there can't be tragedy on Star Trek, but that this type of tragedy is so colossal and close to home, that it will destroy the positive and utopian outlook of the Federation.

No it won't.

Hell, my country is recovering from something that was tragic and awful and quite a shock to us - "this changes everything," everyone here told one another in 2001. What's remarkable, eight years later, is how little Americans have changed and how optimistic we remain.

(Oh, and Earth's optimism seems to have weathered the Xindi attack as well. )

The collapse of two buildings compares to the destruction of a large and ancient civilization how exactly? A comparable disaster (scaled down to earth proportions) would have been the nuclear carpet bombing of an entire state with a large population. I doubt America would be settling any time soon after an attack like that.

 

[mswood]

And Really we have had several planetary sized disasters from the Doomsday Machine destroying full planets, to Nomad, to the damned space aomeba (sp). And just because the planet is destroyed doesn't mean that the Vulcan's people are all destroyed or their importance to the Federation.

 

[Brent]

And Really we have had several planetary sized disasters from the Doomsday Machine destroying full planets, to Nomad, to the damned space aomeba (sp). And just because the planet is destroyed doesn't mean that the Vulcan's people are all destroyed or their importance to the Federation.

precisely, i'm sure they had colonies and such, i doubt all vulcans are dead, their species will live on

 

[perigee]

Oh, for crying out loud; wear black and go light a candle. Maybe somebody will launch a Genesis device into the rubble and the whole lot of 'em will reincarnate.

"Don't Change Anything" - "All The Stories Are The Same"
"It's A Rehash" - "Maybe They Can Meet Khan Again."
"Reboots Suck" - "Maybe They Can Reboot TNG"

"Reboot," "Alternate Universe," Whatever. It's what we've got. Deal with it - and the consequences of this new storyline - or lock yourself away with your reruns and write fanfic. It is what it is.

 

[locborg]

well the most prominent problem i can foresee is that star trek will seize to exist the way we knew it.

if this movie happens to be a success at the box office the next movie will most likely pick up where this one has ended. all future tv series are likely to feature storylines which are connected to this alternate reality.

dont get me wrong, this might be an enjoyable flick but if this movie is a success "nuStar Trek" might alter our view on the things which seperate a Star Trek movie from every other big budget sci fi movie

 

[Jefferies]

And Really we have had several planetary sized disasters from the Doomsday Machine destroying full planets, to Nomad, to the damned space aomeba (sp). And just because the planet is destroyed doesn't mean that the Vulcan's people are all destroyed or their importance to the Federation.

I wonder what would happen to America if 90% of its population and territory were destroyed? You think this wouldn't have apocalyptic ramafications for the American people and the world at large? And comparing the destruction of Vulcan to unnamed meaningless worlds makes little sense.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

The destruction of one of the founding worlds that made that utopia happen somehow doesn't make sense. They could have blown up Earth in stead, as far as the Federation is concerned the difference would have been negligible. This is not utopian and if it were realistic in any fashion it would cast a very dark cloud of doom over the Federation for a long long time. Just imagine if the state of New York were entirely wiped out by terrorists. I doubt America would recovery from that any time soon, and nor would there world as there would be hell to pay I'm sure.

it is a big deal. but isn't how we face tragedy more a test of who we are as a people than how we face good times?

That is naive and totally simplistic. An extreme disaster like that will not let any people, regardless of how advanced they are just continue as if nothing happened. Dispair and grief seem much more likely and I doubt that was the future Roddenberry had in mind. Star Trek was about a future where we live in safty, where there are no WMDs to scare us shitless any more. That was one of the big morale points of the show - humanity having overcome the Cold War and all those types of conflicts not just with themselves but with a larger community of intelligent beings. This movie seems to make a mockery of that vision.

Excuse me, but we had 9/11. We ARE at peace with other beings. VULCUNS !!!! OTHER ALIENS !!!!

The Planet Killer destroyed planets and starships (the Doomsday Machine).

Vejur destroyed countless worlds.

Star Trek is not about us being in a Utopia, it is about us being better, and surviving to that future.

There was conflict with the Romulans and the Klingons.

The antagonists actions have NOTHING TO DO WITH HUMANITY'S SENSIBILITIES !!!!!

Saying this film violates Gene Roddenberry's visoon of HUMANITY (not Romulans) is absolutely incorrect.

 

[Jefferies]

it is a big deal. but isn't how we face tragedy more a test of who we are as a people than how we face good times?

That is naive and totally simplistic. An extreme disaster like that will not let any people, regardless of how advanced they are just continue as if nothing happened. Dispair and grief seem much more likely and I doubt that was the future Roddenberry had in mind. Star Trek was about a future where we live in safty, where there are no WMDs to scare us shitless any more. That was one of the big morale points of the show - humanity having overcome the Cold War and all those types of conflicts not just with themselves but with a larger community of intelligent beings. This movie seems to make a mockery of that vision.

Excuse me, but we had 9/11. We ARE at peace with other beings. VULCUNS !!!! OTHER ALIENS !!!!

The Planet Killer destroyed planets and starships (the Doomsday Machine).

Vejur destroyed countless worlds.

Star Trek is not about us being in a Utopia, it is about us being better, and surviving to that future.

There was conflict with the Romulans and the Klingons.

The antagonists actions have NOTHING TO DO WITH HUMANITY'S SENSIBILITIES !!!!!

Saying this film violates Gene Roddenberry's visoon of HUMANITY (not Romulans) is absolutely incorrect.

I am getting tired of repeating myself so I wont again. Read what I have already written or don't, I don't care. If you cannot see how this might be at odds with the peacful and hopeful future potrayed in Star Trek then that's your prerogative.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I am getting tired of repeating myself so I wont again. Read what I have already written or don't, I don't care.

Good. You thoroughly failed to make your point convincingly.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

My point isn't that there can't be tragedy on Star Trek, but that this type of tragedy is so colossal and close to home, that it will destroy the positive and utopian outlook of the Federation.

No it won't.

Hell, my country is recovering from something that was tragic and awful and quite a shock to us - "this changes everything," everyone here told one another in 2001. What's remarkable, eight years later, is how little Americans have changed and how optimistic we remain.

(Oh, and Earth's optimism seems to have weathered the Xindi attack as well. )

The collapse of two buildings compares to the destruction of a large and ancient civilization how exactly? A comparable disaster (scaled down to earth proportions) would have been the nuclear carpet bombing of an entire state with a large population. I doubt America would be settling any time soon after an attack like that.

Emotionally, it is very similar. A direct strike, out of nowhere, on something fundamental, with a large loss of life.

Don't reduce it to "two buildings". The families don't. I don't. Al-Qaida don't when they celebrate.

Things happen we all have to deal with, and this is just as true in Star Trek as elsewhere.

Americans are NOT settling down from 9/11, but they are getting on with their lives, doing their best to deal with the aftermath.

The Federation is not tied to any one world. It, like America, is founded much more as an idea, an ideal, that has been made real.

 

[The Super Brando]

This new movie just sounds good. I've read every scrap of info I could find on the screening and it's multiplied my excitement. This apparently is a new and different Star Trek. You know that's life, things change. If it's going to continue into the future it's going to change.

I'm actually ok with people who aren't a fan of the new Star Trek not coming to this forum at all. I mean, this is for fans. I wouldn't want some college basketball fans invading this Star Trek fan forum either. If I didn't like the novels, then I just wouldn't be a fan of the novels and wouldn't go to the novels forum. This is the new direction of Star Trek, like it or not.

Maybe in the coming years some of these guys who are stuck in their ways and not willing to accept anything new or different will disappear from Trek fandom, and this new Star Trek will bring in a lot of new fans who are excited for the new direction.

 

[Jefferies]

Emotionally, it is very similar. A direct strike, out of nowhere, on something fundamental, with a large loss of life.

Don't reduce it to "two buildings". The families don't. I don't. Al-Qaida don't when they celebrate.

Things happen we all have to deal with, and this is just as true in Star Trek as elsewhere.

Americans are NOT settling down from 9/11, but they are getting on with their lives, doing their best to deal with the aftermath.

The Federation is not tied to any one world. It, like America, is founded much more as an idea, an ideal, that has been made real.

Well I certainly don't want to margenalise what happend on 9/11. But what if that attack had been a lot worse, say not just 1000s dead, but 10s of millions? I think the anger, fear and retribution from that would have been understandably worse. In Irak probably hundres of thousands died as a concequence of the invasion which occured indirecctly as the result of what happened on 9/11. So what might have happened if 9/11 had been a lot worse, WWIII? Furthermore, the war in Iraq didn't exactly give me the impression that the American government was holding on to the ideals of the constitution all that tightly. But then again, the Federation might, maybe that's what some are interpreting as utopia in this thread.