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

[dkazaz]

I honestly can't wait for the sequel, which I'm sure is a sentiment shared by many, many others. This movie set things up perfectly for a second outing capable of being Dark Knight-caliber.

I'm sorry but I've just got to get this out! I get really freaked out when I see people comparing this film to Batman Begins and the Dark Knight.

.....

Gawd, Batman Begins was a turgid POS. Dark Knight was even worse.

.....

I certainly hope no one is comparing STXI to those POS.

Oh yeah, all entirely 'In My Opinion' of course.

To which you're more than entitled

I for one am very happy, both that we agree there was no comparison between the two films and that we disagree on which of the two was a "turgid POS"

 

[dkazaz]

A more accurate analogy:

The hot young girl (Trek) stayed with the guy (Trekkies) after he got fat, stopped caring and took her for granted. He's a jealous control freak who nitpicks every little detail about her and never let's her do anything new or different. He never let's her be vibrant and alive. When she looks at another guy, he always grabs her and says "Mine, mine, MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE!!!!!!"

I just goota say that was so funny! Even though I disagree with the idea...

She finally got sick of his shit, dumped him, and went to look for someone new who would let her be vibrant and alive and try new things. And she's better off for it.

You know I can read a lot into that last sentence

Anyway they both sound pathetic

Anyway, all the relationship analogies aside, since Gene Roddneberry died there's not been anyone around who could really offer Star Trek as anything other than a product. Various talented writers, and directors have come and gone but ultimately the best we had was just having someone like Rick Berman in charge of ST for Paramount. Not that he was any genious but he mostly managed to not go all the way and treat ST as ONLY a commercial property to be exploited. God knows how much worse the shows would have been (though I thought Voyager was actually getting there in terms of being pure cr4p at the end).

Now the "franchise" (think about the term) is in the hands of the Studio only and people who excel at creating purely commercial properties and exploiting them. No artistic or serious storytelling intentions or pretensions whatsoever (if anyone wants to get into the artistic merits of Lost, Alias or Fringr please don't). So we're only getting product - build it cheap, sell it fast. That's all it is. The dissapointment people are feeling is because they were hoping for more, but it didn't happen, too bad, Roddenberry's gone, and his vision with him.

If you want to go back to the relationship analogies, this is what it is.
It was a good relationship but then the girl died. Then the guy started going out with another girl who kind of looked like the dead one. It was good for a while but then he realized this new girl was only with him for his money and now she's started seeing other guys who are younger and richer. Too bad but not the end of the world.

Time to move on.

 

[Feofilakt]

A more accurate analogy:

The hot young girl (Trek) stayed with the guy (Trekkies) after he got fat, stopped caring and took her for granted. He's a jealous control freak who nitpicks every little detail about her and never let's her do anything new or different. He never let's her be vibrant and alive. When she looks at another guy, he always grabs her and says "Mine, mine, MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE!!!!!!"

I just goota say that was so funny! Even though I disagree with the idea...

She finally got sick of his shit, dumped him, and went to look for someone new who would let her be vibrant and alive and try new things. And she's better off for it.

You know I can read a lot into that last sentence

Anyway they both sound pathetic

Anyway, all the relationship analogies aside, since Gene Roddneberry died there's not been anyone around who could really offer Star Trek as anything other than a product. Various talented writers, and directors have come and gone but ultimately the best we had was just having someone like Rick Berman in charge of ST for Paramount. Not that he was any genious but he mostly managed to not go all the way and treat ST as ONLY a commercial property to be exploited. God knows how much worse the shows would have been (though I thought Voyager was actually getting there in terms of being pure cr4p at the end).

Now the "franchise" (think about the term) is in the hands of the Studio only and people who excel at creating purely commercial properties and exploiting them. No artistic or serious storytelling intentions or pretensions whatsoever (if anyone wants to get into the artistic merits of Lost, Alias or Fringr please don't). So we're only getting product - build it cheap, sell it fast. That's all it is. The dissapointment people are feeling is because they were hoping for more, but it didn't happen, too bad, Roddenberry's gone, and his vision with him.

If you want to go back to the relationship analogies, this is what it is.
It was a good relationship but then the girl died. Then the guy started going out with another girl who kind of looked like the dead one. It was good for a while but then he realized this new girl was only with him for his money and now she's started seeing other guys who are younger and richer. Too bad but not the end of the world.

Time to move on.

Sad, but true. The malevolent spirit of capitalism strikes again!

I've been more or less repulsed by some of the fan's attitudes, new and old, since the movie came out. This is not the trek or community I experienced even 6 years ago, or the one time I went to a convention with my father when I was a kid. All things in nature do die eventually, I guess the only question is what I shift my attention to.

 

[Cryogenic]

I honestly can't wait for the sequel, which I'm sure is a sentiment shared by many, many others. This movie set things up perfectly for a second outing capable of being Dark Knight-caliber.

I'm sorry but I've just got to get this out! I get really freaked out when I see people comparing this film to Batman Begins and the Dark Knight.

Honestly the only thing I think they have in common is being commercial successes based on a 'franchise'. But to compare these films in any other way is simply delusional (sorry I don't mean to offend but I feel pretty strongly about it).

What do people feel they have in common? The complex and layered plot of the Batman films? The subtle but intense direction shich effectively showed less to say more? The performances of a stellar cast of some of today's greatest actors (we're talking about Christian Bale, Morgan Freeman, Michael Kane, Heath Ledger and Gary Oldman - all widely aknowledged masters of the art). Or is it the intelligent way of portraying an entertaining fiction in a adult way but staying faithful to the original in both form and meaning? Preserving the core of the characters as well as the point of them?

If you're looking for a Batman franchise film to compare Star Trek XI to, I suggest you look to "Batman Forever" - a similarly campy blockbuster, and set your expectations for a sequel to the tune of "Batman & Robin" cause that's what you got and that's what you're getting.

If you're comparing Star Trek XI to properly the most artistically successful genre/superhero film to date, you must be smoking something good!

Gawd, Batman Begins was a turgid POS. Dark Knight was even worse.

You had superfluous characters created with the express desire to gin up the cast in the hopes that some respectability would rub off on the film. Obviously a paycheque movie for the likes of Caine and Freeman ( talk about superfluous - 'look, you can have your Obi Wan AND your Yoda too!' ) Nonsense script with loads of unlikely things happening. And that silly sequence on the ferries? Talk about ham-fisted BS designed to elicit intellectual palpitations from those generally too obtuse to recognize it in real pieces of art.

To add insult to injury, Christian Bale was acting like he had a ball gag in his mouth and a strap on up his arse whenever he had the suit on. Ledger was average. Nolan prolly knew he had an inert lump of coal and was prolly hoping for a miracle when Ledger died. Voila - instant goodwill!

I certainly hope no one is comparing STXI to those POS.

Oh yeah, all entirely 'In My Opinion' of course.

cmdrbolly, I may have misjudged you. This is one hell of a post. I actually appreciate someone who can speak their mind, so please feel free to excoriate me for being a jerk earlier -- I'll gladly take it this time!

I couldn't agree more with what you wrote about Nolan's crapfests. The whole thing was melodramatic with big names, as you said, "ginning up" the cast from the moment Qui-Gon Ducard appeared. That's such an on-the-nose assessement of the ferry scene, too.

Also: Why did the second have to be so sadistic? Oh, yeah. Darker = Better. In Hollywoodland, anyway. And why the hell did Nolan have scenes like Bruce smashing the early Batman cowl in BB? Oh, yeah. Pseudo Art = Art. Again, in Hollywoodland.

I've never taken to these films.

P.S. In my opinion. Edited for weasel words. LOL!

 

[exodus]

Diff'rent Strokes? My ass.

Let's take another look at my beautifully concise post:

Sure, not everyone stays for the "deep and meaningful stuff", the rich characters, the great craftmanship or whatever else, but it's usually the things certain people found Trek XI lacking in, if not totally bereft of, that endear a film or a series to me.

See the final words?

Let's read them, children:

"that endear a film or a series" ... *drum roll* ... "to me".

Not to you, not to your next-door neighbour's cat, not to God Almighty, but, to me.

If other people love the new Star Trek film, that is their business, not mine. I never said otherwise. Nor did I consciously imply anything about anyone that does.

Diff'rent Strokes? Try singing those lyrics back to yourself and stop preaching to others just because they expressed their opinion *and* annotated it as such.

Your own quote from post #324:
Anyone who actually derides three decades of Star Trek film history to prop up Abrams' entry is seriously misguided. Do you realise what you're saying about his movie?

You've never said what now?

 

[Cryogenic]

Diff'rent Strokes? My ass.

Let's take another look at my beautifully concise post:

Sure, not everyone stays for the "deep and meaningful stuff", the rich characters, the great craftmanship or whatever else, but it's usually the things certain people found Trek XI lacking in, if not totally bereft of, that endear a film or a series to me.

See the final words?

Let's read them, children:

"that endear a film or a series" ... *drum roll* ... "to me".

Not to you, not to your next-door neighbour's cat, not to God Almighty, but, to me.

If other people love the new Star Trek film, that is their business, not mine. I never said otherwise. Nor did I consciously imply anything about anyone that does.

Diff'rent Strokes? Try singing those lyrics back to yourself and stop preaching to others just because they expressed their opinion *and* annotated it as such.

Your own quote from post #324:
Anyone who actually derides three decades of Star Trek film history to prop up Abrams' entry is seriously misguided. Do you realise what you're saying about his movie?

You've never said what now?

Do you seriously want to get into this?

Seems like you're looking for trouble.

For starters, your earlier post was clearly a condescending response to that other, more recent post of mine, so it seems you're desperate to prove something by dredging up other stuff I've written. That's never good.

Second, I wrote that older message in response to perceived belligerence/baiting by another poster. It was written in a slightly testy way on purpose. My real thoughts are encapsulated elsewhere.

Third, who is the intolerant one, here? Read the opening post again. The topic starter set this thread up to collate critical responses to Star Trek XI from like-minded individuals. There are positive threads, negative threads and neutral threads on this forum. You ambled into a negative thread and decided to get cross at people because you knew there'd be people to get cross at. Looks and sounds a bit troll-ish, to me.

 

[Qonos]

I honestly can't wait for the sequel, which I'm sure is a sentiment shared by many, many others. This movie set things up perfectly for a second outing capable of being Dark Knight-caliber.

I'm sorry but I've just got to get this out! I get really freaked out when I see people comparing this film to Batman Begins and the Dark Knight.

Honestly the only thing I think they have in common is being commercial successes based on a 'franchise'. But to compare these films in any other way is simply delusional (sorry I don't mean to offend but I feel pretty strongly about it).

What do people feel they have in common? The complex and layered plot of the Batman films? The subtle but intense direction shich effectively showed less to say more? The performances of a stellar cast of some of today's greatest actors (we're talking about Christian Bale, Morgan Freeman, Michael Kane, Heath Ledger and Gary Oldman - all widely aknowledged masters of the art). Or is it the intelligent way of portraying an entertaining fiction in a adult way but staying faithful to the original in both form and meaning? Preserving the core of the characters as well as the point of them?

If you're looking for a Batman franchise film to compare Star Trek XI to, I suggest you look to "Batman Forever" - a similarly campy blockbuster, and set your expectations for a sequel to the tune of "Batman & Robin" cause that's what you got and that's what you're getting.

If you're comparing Star Trek XI to properly the most artistically successful genre/superhero film to date, you must be smoking something good!

Remove Heath Ledger from the Joker role the movie is shit.

AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD Tell Bale to stop grunting as Batman it's hard to understand a god damn word he's saying.

 

[Qonos]

I see allot of people quoting what they think Trek should be but I think Picard said it best: "We re highly evolved people who live to better ourselves."

However, looking at some of the comments I don't see that here. I see many people standing stagnant unwilling to evolve their point of view.

If you don't like the film, fine but let's stop treating Trek like it's the Bible and everything in it is written in stone.

I and others are perfectly willing to evolve their point of view.

There is a major difference between willing to evolve one's point of view, and after careful examination deciding that a view has to be changed to, is a degeneration of one's point of view, and thus not changing one's point of view.

With me, and I more than suspect others who don't like this movie, it's the latter.

And those like you, who were NEVER going to like the movie (You've had a bias from the outset) Your point of view doesn't matter. Sorry 3d this is just more of you being a 2 yr old and crying because this movie wasn't what you wanted it to be. Which is dull and boring.. Remember I've read your fanfics.

 

[ST-One]

I see allot of people quoting what they think Trek should be but I think Picard said it best: "We re highly evolved people who live to better ourselves."

However, looking at some of the comments I don't see that here. I see many people standing stagnant unwilling to evolve their point of view.

If you don't like the film, fine but let's stop treating Trek like it's the Bible and everything in it is written in stone.

I and others are perfectly willing to evolve their point of view.

There is a major difference between willing to evolve one's point of view, and after careful examination deciding that a view has to be changed to, is a degeneration of one's point of view, and thus not changing one's point of view.

With me, and I more than suspect others who don't like this movie, it's the latter.

And those like you, who were NEVER going to like the movie (You've had a bias from the outset) Your point of view doesn't matter. Sorry 3d this is just more of you being a 2 yr old and crying because this movie wasn't what you wanted it to be. Which is dull and boring.. Remember I've read your fanfics.

[McCoy] Oh, good... he writes fanfic.[/McCoy]

 

[Qonos]

Fanfic isn't bad in and of itself and I myself have written some uminaginative Transformers Fan Fiction. But he writes his Star Trek the way HE enjoys it. I didn't enjoy it and If he had gotten a movie like he Enjoys his Trek I doubt we'd be tracking a multi-million dollar blockbuster and it would have optimistically done slightly better the Nemesis.

 

[Surefire]

I found the movie above average, but not great (unlike the hugely positive reviews on Rotten Tomato indicated--which seemed to paint this as the best sci fi movie since Empire Strikes Back)

********SPOILER ALERT*********DON'T read below if you haven't seen the movie....






























Things I liked:
1. Kirk/Spock character conficts
2. Uhura
3 Ties into original series feel



Things I did not like:
1. Vulcan being destroyed, and the timeline continuing with no Vulcan and few of the species alive
2. Nero (seemed very much like another copy of Shinzon)
3. Ships going into black holes and surviving
4. Kirk being promoted from an enlisted (non-commissioned) cadit to first officer at the blink of an eye
5. Alternative Universe

Overall, I think it was a good effort, I just wish they went a different way in terms of plots. I think all these time travel and alternative universe stories are way overused in Trek

 

[Qonos]

I found the movie above average, but not great (unlike the hugely positive reviews on Rotten Tomato indicated--which seemed to paint this as the best sci fi movie since Empire Strikes Back)

********SPOILER ALERT*********DON'T read below if you haven't seen the movie....






























Things I liked:
1. Kirk/Spock character conficts
2. Uhura
3 Ties into original series feel



Things I did not like:
1. Vulcan being destroyed, and the timeline continuing with no Vulcan and few of the species alive
2. Nero (seemed very much like another copy of Shinzon)
3. Ships going into black holes and surviving
4. Kirk being promoted from an enlisted (non-commissioned) cadit to first officer at the blink of an eye
5. Alternative Universe

Overall, I think it was a good effort, I just wish they went a different way in terms of plots. I think all these time travel and alternative universe stories are way overused in Trek

He was taking the Kobiashi Maru Test so that means in was in Officer Training, they don't make everyone take the KM, only those who want to command.

 

[Anticitizen]

It’s been a difficult road to travel to commit to this opinion...

Gep, I haven't yet read a single post in this thread beyond yours yet, and I just saw the movie for the first time about an hour ago... but I wanted to say, before getting caught up in the inevitable discussion, that I identify with what you're saying exactly, and that you are a far better writer than I, as you put down into words what I could not. I also found the film quite enjoyable, but walked out of the theater feeling uneasy...

 

[Middle Earther]

Good or bad - this movie drove me back to trekbbs after being gone for two years - I'm reading some (not all) previous posts because I just have to understand what's going on with this movie. I'm completely conflicted about this movie. It had moments that stand out, but I am not sure what to do about the alternate timeline idea. I gave up very quickly on the Terminator TV series because I couldn't stand the timeline idea. It seems to be a 'cop out' in some ways. It would have taken more brilliant and creative writing to stay within the framework of the ST universe, so they just ditched it all. Honestly, I don't know what to think about the movie in the end.

 

[Trek4Ever]

Good or bad - this movie drove me back to trekbbs after being gone for two years - I'm reading some (not all) previous posts because I just have to understand what's going on with this movie. I'm completely conflicted about this movie. It had moments that stand out, but I am not sure what to do about the alternate timeline idea. I gave up very quickly on the Terminator TV series because I couldn't stand the timeline idea. It seems to be a 'cop out' in some ways. It would have taken more brilliant and creative writing to stay within the framework of the ST universe, so they just ditched it all. Honestly, I don't know what to think about the movie in the end.

Couldn't agree with you any more, yes I loved many parts of the film, it was exciting and good to have Trek back, but parts of it I found nagging.

I am ambivalent about the alternate timeline it seems like a copout and makes the film feel like Star Trek for Dummies i.e. the non fan who doesn't know Kirk's exact background. It was a difficult balancing act that Abrams and co. had in pleasing us fans and newcomers and I'm not sure if they pulled it off.

But what got to me were two things: 1) Some things like Kirk jumping in rank made no sense. I would've been OK with Kirk getting some kind of field promotion to lieutenant, but that's just me. Another why doesn't old Spock try to restore the timeline? Which leads me to the next point: 2) I can't shake the feeling that this timeline is temporary, if you look carefully the foundation for restoring the timeline are there i.e. Vulcan, Kirk finding out about this father, etc. And if its temporary it's kind of hard for me to get involved with it.

As tired I am of time travel plots, the next film or two if begging for this to be resolved.

 

[Praetor]

Spock never took the Kobayashi Maru (in the novel for TWOK he did) let alone programmed the thing and wasn't a CDR yet.

Spock never took the KM, no matter what the novel of TWOK said. According to his dialog at the end of the film (TWOK) itself, "I never took the Kobayashi Maru test... until now. What do you think... of my solution?" The novel contradicts the movie, so the novel was wrong.

Second, Spock was indeed a Commander in the new film. He was addressed as such and wore a Commander's braid in the new film. Also, what precluded him from having programmed the test in this new film? He was supervising it in TWOK.

4. Kirk being promoted from an enlisted (non-commissioned) cadit to first officer at the blink of an eye

He was taking the Kobiashi Maru Test so that means in was in Officer Training, they don't make everyone take the KM, only those who want to command.

True, but Saavik (who's the only other person we've actually seen take it) was a Lieutenant in TWOK, which means probably that she was a cadet who'd graduated the Academy proper already and went on for "post-graduate" command training. Cadets are by definition not commissioned, even if "enlisted" in modern terms means something slightly different.

No matter how Starfleet specifically treats its cadets, the new film might have probably done better to have skipped a few years, have had Kirk get some service under his belt and be at least a Lieutenant (like Saavik) when taking the test.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

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

You've never said what now?

Do you seriously want to get into this?

Seems like you're looking for trouble.

This dick-waving contest is seriously boring and off-topic...and unimpressive all around.

 

[ckret2]

It’s been a difficult road to travel to commit to this opinion(...)

Quoted to indicate that I'm responding to the first post and the first post alone, and not all the stuff that came afterwards. (From some of the chatter on the last page, seems that things took something of a diversion from the original point.)

I'm a new Trek fan. Converted by the movie, in fact, just over a week ago. So it's not like I even had any prior knowledge of canon to compare the movie against, just various factoids I picked up from pop culture and my mom. (Spock is logical and has pointy ears; Scotty beams you up; "live long and prosper," that sort of stuff.) But I got that same feeling from the movie that you described, like I'm enjoying it and think it's cool while I'm watching it, but walk out of the theater and that feeling of excitement doesn't linger with me like it does with really good movies.

Still, the new movie's most definitely got at least some merit. For one thing, although the excitement faded, it stuck to me long enough to introduce me to Star Trek as a whole; I'm now working my way through TOS, and am already halfway through the first season. And I'm enjoying the heck out of it.

So, without any foundation of Star Trek knowledge that might lead me to complain about the contradictions in canon, the (mis?)characterizations, the whatever-it-is-veteran-fans-don't-like... I still got the sense you described: that it was a fun and exciting movie for as long as it kept playing, but was just missing something underneath. That was just my feeling. And now, watching the original series (with 60's special effects, dubious scientific equipment/explanations, and Shatner acting), I feel like I'm getting a lot more out of the show than I did from the movie. I don't know what it is that I'm getting, but it's definitely a lot of fun so far.

 

[Gepard]

So, without any foundation of Star Trek knowledge that might lead me to complain about the contradictions in canon, the (mis?)characterizations, the whatever-it-is-veteran-fans-don't-like... I still got the sense you described: that it was a fun and exciting movie for as long as it kept playing, but was just missing something underneath. That was just my feeling. And now, watching the original series (with 60's special effects, dubious scientific equipment/explanations, and Shatner acting), I feel like I'm getting a lot more out of the show than I did from the movie. I don't know what it is that I'm getting, but it's definitely a lot of fun so far.

Thank you. That, stripped of all these absurd concerns about canon and continuity and the sizes of ships and such, is exactly what I was trying to get at.

Welcome to the board and Trek fandom, by the way. It's a fun madhouse that will never, ever let you go. Enjoy your cell...er, stay.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

I saw it tonight. I enjoyed it. I'm not going to go out of my way to overanalyze it too much. Far from perfect, but I see a lot of potential for the sequels. I got chills at times, because the portrayals were so spot-on. The actors all exceeded my expections. Well, other than the guy who played Chekov. He was totally lame. It looked like he was reading all of his lines from a teleprompter, and his accent was even more ridiculous than Walter Koenig's. He was just completely lifeless. I guess we were supposed to laugh when he kept saying "Wulcan," but it was no "nuclear wessles," for damn sure.
It made me sad to see Leonard Nimoy soooo old, though. These people seemed immortal to me as a kid, and now they're all starting to die off. Still, it was good to see him playing Spock again.