I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.

[Odo's_Bucket]

Yep, pretty much.

Those of us with a disssenting view are labelled "troll" & banned from the forum. The reason many of you don't know who I am is because I was banned from this board by mods with a god complex. Instead of banning the people who attacked me, they banned *ME* instead.

The only reason I returned was so I could gloat a little bit, and hopefully awaken some of you from your slumber.

I was watching Star Trek before many of you were even BORN, but yet I'm a troll? Go fuck yourselves.

Many of you, including some mods, don't even know what Trek is about, and therefore cannot fathom how royally JJ fucked this up.

If those of you with more than 2 brain cells would stop & think for a second, you might wonder why Paramount would give Star Trek to someone who in the past addmitted he *HATED* Trek.....

TO KIL IT.

Why wasn't Manny Coto, or someone who loved Trek given the job? The answer is so fucking obvious, a moron could figure it out with one hand tied behind his back.

TO KILL IT.

JJ is *ON RECORD* saying he hated Trek & was never a Trekker, but I'm a "troll" for pointing that out?

GO GET STUFFED!

But is it a good movie? Yes, it is. One of the best action movies I've seen in a long time, but it is *not* Trek.

Many will point to the huge sales that this movie has generated, but that's because it's a good action movie, not because it's Trek.

This movie *obliterates* any & all previous Treks, due to the actions of Nero. Billions on Vulcan alone have DIED. Many billions more will die due to the changing of the time line.

In this timeline, there will probably not be a TNG, DS9 or Voyager, simply because the people who shaped those events, many of whom were from Vulcan, now no longer EXIST.

Some of you might bring up the talk of a sequel......Don't bother. I've seen many movies that had higher grosses than this one, yet they got no sequel.

The memorable moments of Spock on his homeworld of Vulcan can now never happen, irrevocably changing Trek FOREVER.

A bunch of 20 somethings hopping around the galaxy blowing shit up is not Star Trek.

WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Quoted for truth.

Yes, QFT. Quoted for Trollery.

So now it's against the rules to agree with someone?

 

[Borgminister]

The only reason I returned was so I could gloat a little bit, and hopefully awaken some of you from your slumber.

One.

I was watching Star Trek before many of you were even BORN, but yet I'm a troll? Go fuck yourselves.

Two.

Well, the latter is flaming, I guess.

Anyway, sorry I said anything, really not my place.

But it is truly sad to see unbridled vitriol like this being spewed by an actual Star Trek fan...

Like I said, my personal favorite--I'd say by far--is Deep Space 9.

But that doesn't mean I can't appreciate what went into resurrecting the franchise for future fans, both casual and passionate.

The ultra-hard-core I've never been able to fathom, I guess.

Perhaps I'm missing that 3rd brain cell. Another nice moment in that diatribe you endorse.

Oh well.

 

[Gepard]

Ooh. Yeah, this is getting little off-message. Can we return to the calm and reasonable discussion that was taking place before things got nasty? Please?

 

[pookha]

were did i insult you???
and i have posted elsewhere in the forum why i liked the film.
i just find it odd the need for some (if not you) to declare that true trek fans wouldnt like the film.. that they must be newbies.

Well I never said that. You went after my "Trek knowledge" for finding the new movie dumb. Which is my opinion and I stand by it. To me, it's no deeper than Wolverine or the last Die Hard movie. Over the top action for action's sake, logic be damned. That's just not what Trek is to me (and I believe, quite a few people).

And you called me an idiot. Twice.

the only time i could have been said to have questioned your trek knowledge was a lot earlier when you were discussing the coincidence that happened with old spock meeting kirk ect when i just pointed out that tos had it's own share of moments like that.

frankly the use of coincidence has been a part of dramatic license since the days of the greek playwrights.
read oedipus sometime.

as for the other stuff..
i think you have me confused with another poster probably butters.

i think you need to check the quotes.

 

[RoJoHen]

Ooh. Yeah, this is getting little off-message. Can we return to the calm and reasonable discussion that was taking place before things got nasty? Please?

It was bound to happen eventually. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[Gepard]

It was bound to happen eventually. It's the nature of the beast.

Ah, but this time as the OP, I have the privilege of being able to ask and have it carry some weight. *grunts and heaves lead pipe*

 

[RoJoHen]

I do give you props for starting a thread that stayed civil for as long as this one did.

 

[pookha]

gep sorry about that but i just wanted to get it straight that i had not said what another poster claimed i had said...

what i respect are the fans who dont like the film but also dont feel the need to go after the fans who do like it.

 

[Butters]

Re: I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.

Snippy snippy.

were did i insult you???

And you called me an idiot. Twice.

i think you have me confused with another poster probably butters.

i think you need to check the quotes.

Proabably was me, but to clarify. I'm not calling anyone an idiot, only calling what is said idiotic.

Dumb would be to make a film that appeals to the purists, that alienates the crowds makes a massive loss. To some people, Star Trek is Entertainment, to some its a way of life but to the powers that be its just another investment vehicle.

This film is smart because it proved the masses have a stomach for Star Trek, it proved a sequel is viable and thats exactly what trek needs now. Not some preachy message of love and tolerance or a two hour introspective on Riker's beard.

There is a film belief within the hardcore that trek is unique in its specialness. That its moral crusade has saved the world, its science inspired nobel prize winners and it adventure set astronauts on the path to excruciating physical and mental endurance to qualify for the space program. That star trek has a philosophy, a road map to the future, a defining moment in understanding ourselves, the key to the human condition, is an incredibly ignorant and arrogant assertion that fails under scrutiny.

In believing the hype and perpetuating the myth that trekdom is smart, and the new film is dumb because it lacks (allegedly) the qualities that make the true star trek great, an argument is presented that can be challenged and easily proven false. Anyone spouting such nonsense sounds, therefore, like an idiot.

 

[Scatter]

Haven't posted here for ages. Saw the movie on opening night and thought of posting about it here - but thought better of it. I really didn't fancy defending my opinion to the masses as I expected to be in a very small minority. Refreshing that it appears I'm not.

In short - the movie is borderline bloody awful.

Twenty minutes or so in I leaned over to the missus and said that it was shaping up to be absolutely brilliant. I jinxed it. Big time. Not long after it went downhill and never recovered.

Just wtf was with the Hoth rip off anyway ffs?

I really could go on for ages and ages as to why this film was so poor, but for now I'll just sum it all up with: Stylictically and visually it was absolutely superb. The actors were all either very good or excellent. The character dialogue was also very, very strong. The story however, was a convoluted, disjointed mess lacking in any sort of direction or sense.

 

[3D Master]

Snippy snippy.

And you called me an idiot. Twice.

i think you have me confused with another poster probably butters.

i think you need to check the quotes.

Proabably was me, but to clarify. I'm not calling anyone an idiot, only calling what is said idiotic.

Dumb would be to make a film that appeals to the purists, that alienates the crowds makes a massive loss. To some people, Star Trek is Entertainment, to some its a way of life but to the powers that be its just another investment vehicle.

This film is smart because it proved the masses have a stomach for Star Trek, it proved a sequel is viable and thats exactly what trek needs now. Not some preachy message of love and tolerance or a two hour introspective on Riker's beard.

This is complete bullshit. A great fantastic SF movie with action does not need to be reduced to an empty pile of shit SFX scene after SFX scene strung together with jokes that has not a single little bit of intelligence and heart to it.

Don't believe me? Go watching The Terminator and Terminator 2. Universally heralded as some of the greatest movies ever. And why? Because they're not Commando. Commando is nothing but empty action fest. The Terminator and Terminator 2 have stories to tell. They action packed, and yet, there's enough time to delve into multiple layers of themes, genuine characters, character interaction, and shitloads of intelligence.

But Star Trek is nothing like that. It doesn't even come close.

A movie that appeals to the "purists" can be made that is also a fantastic movie on its own. There is no need for another Insurrection, nor this pile of shit they turned out.

 

[cmdrbolly]

Snippy snippy.

And you called me an idiot. Twice.

i think you have me confused with another poster probably butters.

i think you need to check the quotes.

Proabably was me, but to clarify. I'm not calling anyone an idiot, only calling what is said idiotic.

Dumb would be to make a film that appeals to the purists, that alienates the crowds makes a massive loss. To some people, Star Trek is Entertainment, to some its a way of life but to the powers that be its just another investment vehicle.

This film is smart because it proved the masses have a stomach for Star Trek, it proved a sequel is viable and thats exactly what trek needs now. Not some preachy message of love and tolerance or a two hour introspective on Riker's beard.

There is a film belief within the hardcore that trek is unique in its specialness. That its moral crusade has saved the world, its science inspired nobel prize winners and it adventure set astronauts on the path to excruciating physical and mental endurance to qualify for the space program. That star trek has a philosophy, a road map to the future, a defining moment in understanding ourselves, the key to the human condition, is an incredibly ignorant and arrogant assertion that fails under scrutiny.

In believing the hype and perpetuating the myth that trekdom is smart, and the new film is dumb because it lacks (allegedly) the qualities that make the true star trek great, an argument is presented that can be challenged and easily proven false. Anyone spouting such nonsense sounds, therefore, like an idiot.

Great post, Butters. I like your stated mission to poke holes in the silly idea that ST is 'intellectual'/'cerebral'.

Funny, I don't see many of the 'true' fans taking the bait though. Perhaps deep down they recognize much of Trek for the twaddle it is.

 

[cmdrbolly]

Don't believe me? Go watching The Terminator and Terminator 2. Universally heralded as some of the greatest movies ever. And why? Because they're not Commando. Commando is nothing but empty action fest. The Terminator and Terminator 2 have stories to tell. They action packed, and yet, there's enough time to delve into multiple layers of themes, genuine characters, character interaction, and shitloads of intelligence.
.

Terminator? Bwahahahaaaaaaa!! Here I was thinking you were going to pull out a real film.

'Terminator' and 'Terminator 2': Entertaining disposable garbage.

Commando :Not-so-entertaining disposable garbage.

 

[Butters]

Re: I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.

Snippy snippy.

i think you have me confused with another poster probably butters.

i think you need to check the quotes.

Proabably was me, but to clarify. I'm not calling anyone an idiot, only calling what is said idiotic.

Dumb would be to make a film that appeals to the purists, that alienates the crowds makes a massive loss. To some people, Star Trek is Entertainment, to some its a way of life but to the powers that be its just another investment vehicle.

This film is smart because it proved the masses have a stomach for Star Trek, it proved a sequel is viable and thats exactly what trek needs now. Not some preachy message of love and tolerance or a two hour introspective on Riker's beard.

This is complete bullshit. A great fantastic SF movie with action does not need to be reduced to an empty pile of shit SFX scene after SFX scene strung together with jokes that has not a single little bit of intelligence and heart to it.

Don't believe me? Go watching The Terminator and Terminator 2. Universally heralded as some of the greatest movies ever. And why? Because they're not Commando. Commando is nothing but empty action fest. The Terminator and Terminator 2 have stories to tell. They action packed, and yet, there's enough time to delve into multiple layers of themes, genuine characters, character interaction, and shitloads of intelligence.

But Star Trek is nothing like that. It doesn't even come close.

A movie that appeals to the "purists" can be made that is also a fantastic movie on its own. There is no need for another Insurrection, nor this pile of shit they turned out.

Bullshit to you to.

What you hold there in the angry teeth of your foaming rabid mouth is an opinion that you have every right to hold. But, as with your case, opinions can be wrong.

Trek is so diverse in its portrayal that its hard to pin down what it is anymore. We're the last films Trek, as you understand trek to be? If so why?

Nemesis was about revenge, lots of revenge, so much revenge you can't miss it, and anger and a few other stuff. But it was utter crap.

Was Insurrection trek? With it message of standing up for whats right, david against goliath? Or was in some shit about some minor power corrupting the principles of the federation for some unproven technology to reach an end that could just be acheived by just visiting the damn planet for a week or so. And it was utter crap

How far back do you have to go before you find an installment that deserves the name? And how many people would actualy want more of that version.

The new film is doing very well, a lot of people like it, and a few of the faithful don't. So what, you've had Trek for 40 years and it got stale, time to sacrafice your trek for the greater good.

Young minds fresh ideas. If the masses want mindless action, not that Star Trek quite deserves that label, then I'm affraid that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or weren't you paying attention.

 

[Butters]

Re: I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.

Great post, Butters. I like your stated mission to poke holes in the silly idea that ST is 'intellectual'/'cerebral'.

Funny, I don't see many of the 'true' fans taking the bait though. Perhaps deep down they recognize much of Trek for the twaddle it is.

Thank you.

Is it ironic that here I am, challenging the views of those who hate this film, when I didn't think it was that special anyway? I just want to live in a world where all men can enjoy trek as equals free from the stigma of quasi-intellectual dogma.

 

[Ethan_Hunt_IMF]

It’s been a difficult road to travel to commit to this opinion; after all, there’s been so much fun and anticipation over the last two years on this board--SHOUTING SPOCK, Blue Warp Nacelles, the sombreros, Badass Robau and, of course, the Generic Parody Thread which was the reason I registered after lurking for years. And I’ve really had a wonderful time looking forward to the premier with everyone on this forum. But I’ll just say it.

Star Trek is not good. I watched it twice, and, after careful consideration, I don’t like it.

I considered titling this “Thread for People of Conflicted Opinion,” because that’s also how I feel right now. Sitting in the theater, surrounded by lots of other people, watching the movie was very enjoyable. I laughed when we were expected to laugh, I cried at Kirk’s birth and over Spock and Sarek’s conversation on the transporter pad. I loved seeing Nimoy again. All the new actors had their characters spot-on. I dug the references to all the past Trek productions. And yet, somehow, a malaise set in over the course of the film and as it entered the third act I felt unfulfilled as a viewer. After my friends and I left the theater opening night, having enjoyed ourselves immensely, I got to wondering why it seemed like I hadn’t had as good a time as I thought I had. When I get right down to it, I asked myself “Was this a good movie?”

And my gut reaction was: “no.”

Sure, it was fun, funny, moving, energetic, shiny, charming, charismatic, and all the things that should make for a great film, but somehow they didn’t gel, and I can’t escape the impression of the movie as a fast-talking car salesman who keeps the patter going so you feel good and don’t notice that you’re being fleeced.

It’s difficult to articulate why; I’m one of those people who often finds that others can articulate how I feel about things better than I can, and so I often look to other posters to find a better version of what I wish I could post. But in this case, the majority opinion is that ST is very, very good. And I’m happy for them; it’s the reaction we’d all been hoping for, and that I’d been wishing to experience myself. And while there is a dissenting minority, it seems to consist of whiny unhappy fanboys whose primary concern is keeping things in line with a stilted checklist of minutiae from past productions; these two viewpoints find themselves at odds in every thread of this forum and stifle productive discussion about the merits and failings of the movie and how things could have or should have been improved. Hell, the one thread here where some of that seemed to be happening got shut down as a result of actions by two of the film’s supporters. I think there are grounds for serious critiques of what Abrams and company have created, yet it can’t seem to find a voice around here thanks to a polarization of the forum that had its groundwork laid years ago.

So I’m left to wonder: where is the constructive criticism? The input from people who don’t think this movie is all that but still want to see it, or some variation of it, succeed? Are constructive criticisms or grey-area opinions even possible? Because I’m not against the concept of a reboot, or rejuvenation, or remake, or whatever you want to call it; quite the contrary. The promise of JJTrek was more than we’d seen in years, and on some level I’m upset that I don’t feel the way about the movie that I’d hoped I would. But the whole production was so glib, so willing to crack the joke or take the teeth out of the drama by pulling some silly-but-entertaining stunt that it was all too often impossible to invest emotionally in what was happening. It seems to be failing of a lot of Hollywood films these days, to use character drama to set up a final, third-act fight, which, once underway, makes characterization extraneous and that reduces the finale to a string of meaningless punches and explosions. That’s not where I wanted to see these characters or this world go, and I don’t know that there’s a place here any more for this kind of discussion, at least not as a way to score a cheap shot against the other side.

So...what say you, denizens of the Trek XI forum? Am I alone on this?

You're not alone here but you sure have presented it the best. I mean, I liked it but its not my favorite Trek.

 

[TheGodBen]

Many people, including the die-hard fans of TOS, thought TNG would never make it on tv and look what happened. Then many thought it wouldn't work as a movie series and look what happened. It just takes TIME to adjust and accept change. It happened with TNG and it WILL happen with the "new" crew. I am one that thought ENTERPRISE was not a very good series. I watched about half of the first season and stopped watching it. However, a few years after it was cancelled and it was eventually in syndication, I managed to catch a few episodes here and there and I began to enjoy it more than I did. I now have the entire series on DVD. The fact is, even though I thought it was a bad series, I found life in it that I didn't expect and the same can be said for this new movie and those after it. If you don't like it now, you will later. It's inevitable.

Nonsense, and you completely fail to grasp the complaints that most of us are making which is that this movie just plain isn't good.

You know why most people complained about TNG when it first started? Because it was rubbish, that first season is the worst thing Star Trek ever produced and people were right dismiss it because it was a bad show. Later on in the third season they changed the style of the show into something much better, and that is the show that people now revere. People didn't adapt to enjoy TNG, TNG adapted to suit its audience. The same can be said for Enterprise, that show only took off in seasons 3 & 4 after they changed the style of the show away from something that the audience wasn't responding to.

It seems very likely now that there will be a Trek XII, and if they put some real effort into the script and make a great movie rather than an action flick then of course I and many other people who were underwhelmed by this movie will praise it. But it wont be because we will have changed to accept this new direction of the franchise, it will be because the movie was good as a movie. However, if they decide to go for another brainless action romp then I'm just not going to be interested in seeing it.

There is nothing inevitable about it.

 

[Silent_Bob]

Excuse me, but if you yell at me for kicking my dog while you're doing the same, then you can be only one thing - (a) a hypocrite (b) a bloody idiot or (c) One of the Star Trek nutters presently railing against STXI.

Who said anything about blindly accepting the flaws of STXI? I'm talking about blindly accepting the bullshit that is most of Star Trek, and then trying to claim some intellectual high ground in order to dismiss STXI. The large majority of the ST universe is warmed-over, ham-fisted, sermonizing crap. Most of the roles are inhabited by B grade actors who could never have any other sort of career outside of Trek; acting in stories and spewing lines written by pretty average writers ( 'cept maybe Ellison ); directed by, with few exceptions, journeymen hacks. That's the objective truth. On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with liking, even loving their output. But please, have some freaking perspective here.

Again, please show me one example where i have said that previous Star Trek was perfect? I am judging the new film on the exact same standards i have judged every previous film i have seen. Nemesis does not hold up to scrutiny in anyway, shape or form. And dont get me started on Generations.

Nor have i said there is anything wrong with liking their output,if you like the new film fantastic, good for you, i just take exception to the notion that those who dont like the new film are blistering idiots unable to let go of the past.

And you will notice, i didnt resort to personal insults about your mental status whilst replying to your post. But hey im just "a nutter" who didnt like the new film. Or a bloody idiot

 

[ST-One]

1. Spock an Uhura = ??????!!!???
2. Spock and Uhura = WHO WROTE THIS CRAP?

What's so inconceivable about that?

1. Sulu with a Katana = ?!?!?!?!?!?
2. Sulu with a Katan = COME ON = REALLY = RETARDED

Have you seen TOS?

Engineering looks like a whiskey factory = ?!?!?!??????!?!?!?!(Scotty drinks, we get it)

No, engineering looks like, you know, an actual engine room.

Nero as a believable villain = pffffffffff

He was a bit weak as a character, but he worked in the context of the film.

New ship design as a whole explained by 'alternate timeline' even though the Kelvin already looked like a bag of crap before Nero alters the timeline = ????!!?!?!?

Explain. How does the Kelvin look 'like a bag of crap'?

Graduating the Academy one day/ captain the next? = ??//??!?!?!?!!?1/1/1/;fd'';

A stretch, granted. But he was already in training for a command position, got a field promotion to first officer, and saved the Earth. Plus, he probably got a lot of good rep. from Captain Pike (who clearly had some influence in Starfleet).

Scotty's pet = pointless

Does everything in a movie have to have a point?

Chekov on the bridge of a starship at 17 = Wesley Crusher = Dumb

I don't have an explanataion for this...

1. Upside down camera angles + lens flares + NYPD Blue look = bad directing
2. Hey look the camera's upside down and we're going to spin it around now = Dumb

There is no Up and Down in space.

Vulcan destroyed = crap

Really sad, yes.
But at least this time the universe isn't back to the status quo at the end of the movie.

Uniforms = Star Wars + Battlestar Gallactica = Suckfest 2009

The uniforms look almost exactly like in TOS.

Spock loosing his composure = I don't buy it

You also didn't buy it in 'Amok Time', 'Naked Time', 'TMP', ....?

Kirk firing on a helpless enemy = NO WAY IN HELL

So he didn't destroy that Klingon Bird of Prey at the end of TUC?

The ship having turbine engines = Do you not know what a warp core is?

Do you?
And, of course, we have never seen anything spin under the front-caps of the nacelles...

Script = An eight year old's creative writing assignment minus the creative part

Acting = horrible

No, not at all.
Very natural and believable.

 

[Silent_Bob]

1. Sulu with a Katana = ?!?!?!?!?!?
2. Sulu with a Katan = COME ON = REALLY = RETARDED

Have you seen TOS?

Whilst the fencing was in character, i dont like the use of the Katana. It felt like a step back to me, from the point made in TOS - Sulu used a foil, rather than a japanese weapon, implying that ethnicity did not dictate your culture. A Katana just felt cliched - he's asian = katana.

As for an explanation why Chekov should be accepted, i had no issues with him. Yes he was young, but the difference between the two characters is he didnt start telling Pike, Spock et al how they should do their jobs. He was young and smart, but was clearly inexperienced and not as skilled as the professionals who had been in Starfleet for years. Unlike Wesley the superchild.

I agree with Odos Bucket on the lens flares, as ive said earlier. Constant lens flare and shaky cameras do not equal gritty and realistic, they just end up irritating.