The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

[jkladis]

My friend, who has some decent screen time as an extra (cadet) said months ago "looks like fanwank" then later "looks excellent". This film succeeds at fulfilling just about every expectation, touched on every continuity direction (including reverse). It pulled in the majority of the fans while also rekindling its mass appeal. What an accomplished piece of work.

I had a great time -- exciting. Serious, funny, sad, excellent characters. Nothing too deep, but thank God they didn't go that route -- too early.

My investment in the fandom is about 30 years, so yeah, I had a hard time swallowing a lot of this. But I'll take in a repeat viewing (gotta bolster that sequel) and refine my opinion.

I gave it an above average grade for Excellent quality work minus old curmudgeon fan (with an open mind).

 

[Mr. Chubbykins]

I hate this film.

I thought it was a great piece of cinema - in just the first 10 minutes, JJ got me really upset that George died! I thought it tied in very well with accepted Trek "rules" - all of the continuity differences made sense in the context of the timeline change caused by the black hole. I thought the new cast were perfect - no-one felt out of place.

I could have loved this film if they had just gone for "parallel universe" instead of "alternate timeline". As all true (aka borderline-OCD) Trek fans know, parallel universes like the Mirror Universe continue alongside the "standard" universe. Events that happen there don't replace those that happen in the "standard" universe. But when a time-travel event takes place that results in an alternate timeline, like the stranding of Tasha Yar in the past in "Yesterday's Enterprise", the new reality is the "standard" universe. And in the new film, it was an alternate timeline that was created.

All of the events depicted in TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY will never happen. Kirk will never defend Spock's loyalty to Stiles when they first see Romulans. Spock won't grapple with his first command on the Galileo shuttlecraft and he'll never give that delighted cry of "Jim!" when he realises he didn't kill his friend on Vulcan. Sarek and Spock will never tease Amanda in Sickbay. I could go on, but I'm starting to get even more depressed than when I came out of the cinema.

Does anyone else think Parallel Universe would have been a better idea? Would that teeny, tiny script change have left a better taste in your mouth?

 

[Cyke101]

Does anyone else think Parallel Universe would have been a better idea? Would that teeny, tiny script change have left a better taste in your mouth?

Y'know, for the vast majority of people (including the writers), parallel universe and alternate reality are synonymous. If you're arguing for a parallel universe, there's still 40 yrs of Trek continuity that will be ongoing in other forms of media.

Just as a black hole is a quantum singularity, a rose is still a rose by any other name (woo! A trek cliche and a mainstream cliche rolled into one!)

 

[eriklatranyi]

Re: A personal take on... that movie

The negative comments can be summed up so far:

1) Typical Star Trek fan nit-picking of EVERY movie.
2) The desire for the return of Shatner and the original cast even though that can happen in later movies.
3) The thinking that what happens today in military academies must also happen in the 23rd century.
4) Contrarians (which explains many in point 1 above)

 

[Kelso]

I hate this film.

I thought it was a great piece of cinema

Do you work for The Onion?

 

[Cyke101]

Re: A personal take on... that movie

Given the story we have in the film there is ... No Kolinar for Spock.

It seems that Spock quit Kolinar before anything could affect him. Who's to say he didn't quit Kolinar in the prime universe? When we saw him fail to pass Kolinar in TMP, he was already in his 40s. He could have quit it twice (frankly, I'm so pleasantly surprised that a reference to the much-maligned TMP was even mentioned here).

Doctors do not attend the academy.

Why not? There could be more to space travel for doctors than we think. It's not unlike the current military system in the US with an accelerated program for those who qualify. McCoy spent 3 years at the Academy, as opposed to the X+ years that modern military docs have to progress.

 

[eriklatranyi]

I hate this film.

Does anyone else think Parallel Universe would have been a better idea? Would that teeny, tiny script change have left a better taste in your mouth?

The idea that going back in time "fixes" the timeline is your first mistake, I believe.

There are those who believe that once an event is encountered with multiple potential outcomes that alternative timelines automatically exist for each possible outcome. Viewers are only watching a single timeline (and in the case of a "fix") a timeline that diverted to an alternative outcome.

This would mean there are trillions and trillions of timelines out there as almost every event has another potential outcome.

Lastly, the movie addresses the issue of fate in a unique way that is all Star Trek.

It is fate that this crew end up together....even when all events are pulling them apart.

 

[Cyke101]

It is fate that this crew end up together....even when all events are pulling them apart.

Heck, if you want to count the Mirror Universe, that means we already have three examples of the crew destined to serve together.

 

[pookha]

as long as some of the priesthood either left the planet or were already off the planet most of the traditions will be preserved.

I
Does anyone else think Parallel Universe would have been a better idea? Would that teeny, tiny script change have left a better taste in your mouth?

from what orci has said that is how he views it no matter if the term alternate has been used.

the whole intent was that what happened before still happened.

now they have this different branch off of the stream of the time line.

nothing has been wiped out.

as people have said trek for a long time had alternate/parallel universes going at the same time.

heck if moonves who hates trek were ever to leave as head of the tv side of things you still might get a series set in the the classic verse.

what is interesting is most non fans or fans not buried in trek seem to grasp this.
that the star trek they have seen still exists.
well as much as a work of fiction can exist.

 

[Mr. Chubbykins]

The idea that going back in time "fixes" the timeline is your first mistake, I believe.

There are those who believe that once an event is encountered with multiple potential outcomes that alternative timelines automatically exist for each possible outcome. Viewers are only watching a single timeline (and in the case of a "fix") a timeline that diverted to an alternative outcome.

This would mean there are trillions and trillions of timelines out there as almost every event has another potential outcome.

I'm not talking about real-world physics theories. Start that and we'll end up asking why we can hear the space battles . I'm talking about how Trek has always treated timetravel. The logic of "Yesterday's Enterprise" may make theoretical physicists twitch, but that treatment has been very consistent across all versions of Trek.

And according to Trek rules, the future we have watched has been wiped. Call me a crazed fanatic if you like, but that makes me sad.

 

[Cyke101]

The idea that going back in time "fixes" the timeline is your first mistake, I believe.

There are those who believe that once an event is encountered with multiple potential outcomes that alternative timelines automatically exist for each possible outcome. Viewers are only watching a single timeline (and in the case of a "fix") a timeline that diverted to an alternative outcome.

This would mean there are trillions and trillions of timelines out there as almost every event has another potential outcome.

I'm not talking about real-world physics theories. Start that and we'll end up asking why we can hear the space battles . I'm talking about how Trek has always treated timetravel. The logic of "Yesterday's Enterprise" may make theoretical physicists twitch, but that treatment has been very consistent across all versions of Trek.

And according to Trek rules, the future we have watched has been wiped. Call me a crazed fanatic if you like, but that makes me sad.

No it doesn't. It continues on in books and video games and other ways, maybe a TV show down the line or so. The writers outright referenced "Parallels" on TrekWeb as an example of how split timelines can co-exist. The Mirror Universe continued to thrive across two additional spinoffs after Kirk and Co. left it. Nothing's been wiped out.

 

[Agent Richard07]

The fact-of-the-matter is, more deep moviies like, say, The Wrath of Khan just wouldn't work today.

The Dark Knight showed that it could be done.

 

[eriklatranyi]

I disagree. It was only wiped in this timeline. The original timeline (without Romulus) carries on because nothing was done to change its creation.

This "rebooted" timeline was created by the existence of Nero and his destruction of the Kelvin. Nothing was done to change its creation.

Therefore, we have two timelines as represented by Spock and Spock Prime.

 

[SalvorHardin]

The fact-of-the-matter is, more deep moviies like, say, The Wrath of Khan just wouldn't work today.

The Dark Knight showed that it could be done.

The Dark Knight was sequel to a movie that had already done the job of resurrecting the Batman franchise.
Which is Star Trek's main goal here.

Maybe Star Trek's sequel will play the DK role now that (as things so far indicate) Trek seems to be recovering from past failures.

 

[Snaploud]

Excellent

Two nit-picks:

1. I hated the way they messed with the ranking system (allowing Kirk to go from cadet to captain being the prime example).

2. How did Nero know that he killed Kirk's father? That guy made very little sense. He seemed to just fill the plot when needed (including doing nothing for 25 years...).

 

[Mr. Chubbykins]

The writers outright referenced "Parallels" on TrekWeb as an example of how split timelines can co-exist. The Mirror Universe continued to thrive across two additional spinoffs after Kirk and Co. left it. Nothing's been wiped out.

Ooh, a Trek-logic counter-arguement. Cool!

Right, just did a quick double-check of "Parallels". Mmm... okay, I see where you and Bob Orico ( http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob...-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/ ) are coming from. But my interpretation of Trek-logic is that the events in that episode did not involve timetravel, and were more closely related to the rules Trek applies to the Mirror Universe. This quote from the article was pretty relevant:

Anthony: Star Trek has not always been consistent in this regard. For example both "Yesterday’s Enterprise" and "City on the Edge of Forever" seem to follow the Back to the Future rules of time travel, where new timelines overwrite previous timelines.
Bob: We have to deal with it, with the fact that Star Trek episodes that don’t conform to our theory of it, also do notconform to the latest greatest, most highly tested scientific theory in human history. So Iwould default that it is the science that counts. And say in the case of "Star Trek IV," it could go either way. They cross over to a parallel universe and grab some whales and bring them back and save their own universe.

*hits head on keyboard* This isn't like deciding Klingons would look scarier with cooler prosthetics, this is like saying physics precludes faster than light travel so they've decided turn the Enterprise into a generation ship. It seems if Kirk had paid more attention in Basics of Quantum Mechanics class he could have decided to live happily ever after with Edith, safe in the knowledge that "his" future timeline was just fine. Somewhere.

 

[Cyke101]

The writers outright referenced "Parallels" on TrekWeb as an example of how split timelines can co-exist. The Mirror Universe continued to thrive across two additional spinoffs after Kirk and Co. left it. Nothing's been wiped out.

Ooh, a Trek-logic counter-arguement. Cool!

Right, just did a quick double-check of "Parallels". Mmm... okay, I see where you and Bob Orico ( http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob...-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/ ) are coming from. But my interpretation of Trek-logic is that the events in that episode did not involve timetravel, and were more closely related to the rules Trek applies to the Mirror Universe. This quote from the article was pretty relevant:

Anthony: Star Trek has not always been consistent in this regard. For example both "Yesterday’s Enterprise" and "City on the Edge of Forever" seem to follow the Back to the Future rules of time travel, where new timelines overwrite previous timelines.
Bob: We have to deal with it, with the fact that Star Trek episodes that don’t conform to our theory of it, also do notconform to the latest greatest, most highly tested scientific theory in human history. So Iwould default that it is the science that counts. And say in the case of "Star Trek IV," it could go either way. They cross over to a parallel universe and grab some whales and bring them back and save their own universe.

*hits head on keyboard* This isn't like deciding Klingons would look scarier with cooler prosthetics, this is like saying physics precludes faster than light travel so they've decided turn the Enterprise into a generation ship. It seems if Kirk had paid more attention in Basics of Quantum Mechanics class he could have decided to live happily ever after with Edith, safe in the knowledge that "his" future timeline was just fine. Somewhere.

Say, perhaps, a Nexus of some sort? Then again, one man's cabin is another man's subconscious-Freudian-expression-for-his-familial-need fantasy.

 

[indranee]

Re: A personal take on... that movie

So. Um....

So.

Given the story we have in the film there is -- or will be -- no Journey to Babel. No Amok Time. No Kolinar for Spock. No Balance of Terror. No Menagerie. No Shore Leave. No Where No Man Has Gone Before. No This Side of Paradise.

Heck, to think of it, Spock never comes back after Wrath of Khan as there's no Vulcan temple for a priestess to perform the refusion of his katra and body. Come to think of it, given this story line, Kirk would never have hooked up with Carol Marcus. No David, then. And no "successful" Genesis test, as it was DAVID'S choice to use protomatter that made it... um... work.

So how come we all already know about Romulan ships? Kirk recognizes it and knows who they were. And Uhura already knows all three (!) Romulan dialects.

Doctors do not attend the academy. They aren't line officers. Ensigns are not 17. They are graduates of the academy, and 21 at least.

Spock and Uhura? The hell?

Could the camera have been any more frenetic in its moves and angles? Jeezus, could we have had more lens flare?

So the Enterprise doesn't have a brig, Spock has to actually eject Kirk off onto an ice planet? Since when is marooning people to their possible deaths part of Starfleet regs? Ah, I know. It was necessary for the plot. Kirk meeting "Spock Prime" *that way* was really contrived. "How did you find me?" -- REALLY. (And Vulcan has an *ice* moon that has an atmosphere?)

Promoting a third-year cadet to first officer? And then captain? The hell? Oh, I guess there's no Obsession, either. No Private Little War.

And... hey. Afterthought. You mean someone can't fire a photon torpedo or something at that drill? Vulcan has NO planetary defenses?

Yeah, I'm kinda happy there was no Magic Reset Button -- but... damn. Losing Vulcan was a hell of a change to make for the sake of an "ooh ahh" factor. It totally overshadows the Enterprise redesign issues (I'm not a big fan of the James Cameron's Titanic engine room take on the Enterprise interiors. Yuck. Why are there big glass tubes full of water running around in engineering?

Yeah, it was a good movie.

But it wasn't MY Star Trek. Among other things, I really missed my "Trek music" cues. The beauty shots of the Enterprise *screamed* for them. Will I see it again? Yeah, probably. I will buy the DVD, of course.

But... damn. I'm really not happy.

you've no reason to be.

ALL those things did and do and will happen... in the other timeline. the original one. and, I keep trying to say this, given necessity, we can see it happening if we choose to (in dvds etc AND on screen). JJ and crew can easily show us the original timeline if they want to.

I have no idea why people are so upset. cheer up, people, Star Trek is back and kicking.

 

[jamestyler]

I'm afraid to leave this thread alone for more than a few minutes at a time because if I don't check it for more than an hour or two, it absolutely explodes to the point where it's nearly impossible to catch back up!

Seconded! I left for a second viewing yesterday and there are almost three hundred new posts! I barely got through a third of that trying to catch up.

I went with a non-Trek fan yeserday and she came back converted. The film started at 5:15 (so 5:30 really) and she was still talking about it until the early hours of the morning about how good it was, how much she loved the actors and how all her buried memories of the original popped up. She was almost in tears at the Kelvin sequence and was hooked throughout.

My dad also saw it for the first time and sent me his thoughts, which were:

Well - What can I say? STUNNED!!! What a movie and close to perfection. The actors - every one of them - were fantastic, the sets awesome and the script just brilliant! Star Trek lived up to its billing - and more, much, much more! Changing the timeline was just brilliant and for the very first time - since the original TV series and including ALL movies and shows - this took us back to Captain Kirk and his crew and the energy it lost with an older crew and future crews. Energy? Man it's over six hours later and I'm still tingling! I loved the Captain Pike role (from the Star Trek pilot) and the irony that he was in a wheelchair at the end (as was his his character in the second series of Star Trek). I loved the guy who played "Bones" - if I shut my eyes I can hear the original! Pine's Kirk is the James T. Kirk we loved in the TV series and the Kirk that Shatner couldn't revive in the movies - too old! Pegg as Scottie took a while to make an appearance but boy it was well worth the wait - he took the character, and it wasn't Doohan - it was the Scottie we loved in the sixties. The change in timeline and events bringing Spock's feelings to the fore is THE stroke of genious - Nimoy had always been limited in this role - there is room now for a new and improved and developing character in Spock. Brilliant!

Even before the credits came up there was sporadic applause in the theater and when the closing credits did come up there was a spontanious applause from all of the audience - us too. What a wonderful feeling, 40 years a Trekkie and this was my proudest moment - this was the BEST it gets. LOVED IT!!!

May be geeky, but considering at times all me and my dad had in common (he pretty much raised me on it) was Star Trek it feels great to know he loved it too.

 

[Ravager]

I was BLOWN away! I loved it.
I loved the way they Warped. The sound in the theater was amazing.

Chris Pine had me laughing my but off with the Kirk Impressions (William Shatner).



Also Is there a thread discussing ships seen in the movie?