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

[Ovation]

This wasn't a good Star Trek movie for me because everyone who had the rank of captain were far more interesting, likable and better characters than Kirk was. And that's a shame because when his story starts, the story doesn't really care if Kirk is a good man or not since all it wants to do is get him to the status quo of being the Captain of the Enterprise. No apologies, no tolerance, no respect and no concept of experience or appreciation.

Why does everyone think that Kirk being an arrogant, sexual harrasing douche bag are what makes him the best captain?

What sexual harassment? Seriously. What harassment did you see?

The story didn't even give his character any flaws.

Being an arrogant jerk who starts bar fights when he's drunk isn't a character flaw?

I don't understand why people like this character at all.

That is for every person to decide individually. I liked him because he was willing to take Pike's challenge (a coward would have simply stayed drunk at the bar the next day); because he did not simply accept what he's told without question; because he showed flashes of what made his character great in other iterations and yet left room to grow into that character. But again, that's up to every individual to decide and I don't expect anyone else to like (or dislike) the character for my reasons.

And the worst part? Everyone and their mother says that this is what made the old Kirk so good. Oh ya, never mind that the original Kirk understood the mistakes he made in the line of duty,

Part of that continued character growth they've made room to explore in future iterations.

offered compassion to his enemies rather then shooting them while they're down,

He offered it, it was refused, he knows (from Spock "prime") that the Narada has survived a previous singularity like the one it is in at that moment and, the last time that happened, Nero wrought havoc when he emerged on the other side. Not to mention that even making the slightest "humanitarian gesture" to someone who just committed genocide on a planetary scale beggars belief (NO ONE is that good).

risks his entire career to help his friends,

The insubordination that leads to his marooning on Delta Vega was certainly, at that moment, a "risk to his career".

confronts and acknowledges his insubordinate actions rather than try to defend them

Amok Time, anyone? His insubordination to Komack and Starfleet are only offset by T'Pau--Kirk never apologized for that and was prepared to defend it. Trouble with Tribbles? Kirk never apologizes for his insubordination there.

and respect those who aren't him.

Respect is earned, not automatic. Is he insufficiently respectful during the movie? Yes. Again, part of the maturing process that remains incomplete and to be explored further. But he does show respect to those to whom he thinks deserves it (Pike, Sulu and McCoy and, later, Spock, to name some examples).

Again, liking or disliking the character as portrayed is an individual choice. Moreover, you are free to (and no doubt will) disagree with my points. But it is clearly not incomprehensible for someone to like the character, even if you don't. When I think of a character no one can like, well, actually, I can't. Every character has admirers, whether few or many and whether for "rational" or "irrational" reasons.

 

[Silent_Bob]

This wasn't a good Star Trek movie for me because everyone who had the rank of captain were far more interesting, likable and better characters than Kirk was. And that's a shame because when his story starts, the story doesn't really care if Kirk is a good man or not since all it wants to do is get him to the status quo of being the Captain of the Enterprise. No apologies, no tolerance, no respect and no concept of experience or appreciation.

Why does everyone think that Kirk being an arrogant, sexual harrasing douche bag are what makes him the best captain?

What sexual harassment? Seriously. What harassment did you see?

If you're refering to kirk trying his luck with uhura in the bar scene then you've got the wrong end of a very long stick. Trying to get laid by attempting to charm young ladies in social evironments with the assistance of alcohol is a perfectly normal and healthy activity. Also, if you'll note, Uhura was enjoying the attention.

Hitting on her in a bar thats fine. Its when after she rejects him and he doesnt take the hint that it verges into harassment. Thats what some people have a problem with. Me, i thought the film had bigger issues than making Kirk a sex pest.

That is for every person to decide individually. I liked him because he was willing to take Pike's challenge (a coward would have simply stayed drunk at the bar the next day); because he did not simply accept what he's told without question; because he showed flashes of what made his character great in other iterations and yet left room to grow into that character. But again, that's up to every individual to decide and I don't expect anyone else to like (or dislike) the character for my reasons.

Had this not been a Star Trek film, i probably would have agreed with Jeyl and said he was unlikable. But you are right, it was the glimpses of what he could be that kept this version of Kirk from being completely obnoxious. Thankfully he grows up somewhat by the end of the film.

 

[Praetor]

For my part, I enjoyed the movie because it entertained me. It was nowhere near perfect in the writing department, I didn't agree with a good few of the choices that were made, and it wasn't nearly as smart as I would have hoped it would be, but I was entertained. I'd prefer my Trek to be heady and have deeper meaning and more subtlety, but I did enjoy it. These days, that has to count for something.

I just hope that the next movie improves on this one, now that the setup stuff of the reboot is out of the way.

 

[Jeyl]

If you're refering to kirk trying his luck with uhura in the bar scene then you've got the wrong end of a very long stick. Trying to get laid by attempting to charm young ladies in social evironments with the assistance of alcohol is a perfectly normal and healthy activity. Also, if you'll note, Uhura was enjoying the attention.

How about when he gropes her chest and smiles about it. He didn't seem to mind taking advantage even when it was an accident. It was unwelcome, it was taken as offense and he didn't even acknowledge or apologize for it.

 

[Balrog]

How about when he gropes her chest and smiles about it. He didn't seem to mind taking advantage even when it was an accident. It was unwelcome, it was taken as offense and he didn't even acknowledge or apologize for it.

Hmmmm, TOS' Kirk never had a problem coppin' a feel or two of a hot babe.

 

[Ovation]

If you're refering to kirk trying his luck with uhura in the bar scene then you've got the wrong end of a very long stick. Trying to get laid by attempting to charm young ladies in social evironments with the assistance of alcohol is a perfectly normal and healthy activity. Also, if you'll note, Uhura was enjoying the attention.

How about when he gropes her chest and smiles about it. He didn't seem to mind taking advantage even when it was an accident. It was unwelcome, it was taken as offense and he didn't even acknowledge or apologize for it.

He was drunk (not an excuse, but a strong reason for a lack of an immediate apology or acknowledgement), he was in a fight (no time to apologize) and we don't know he never apologized, we simply didn't see it. It was a juvenile slapstick moment that was not necessary, but it hardly constituted a criminal act. Your initial comment implies Kirk is consistently harassing women in an untoward manner and that is not supported by anything we see in the film.

 

[Jeyl]

It was a juvenile slapstick moment that was not necessary, but it hardly constituted a criminal act.

I'm not trying to toss the arrogant bugger into Jail, I'm just saying that this is one area about his character that I did not like at all.

Your initial comment implies Kirk is consistently harassing women in an untoward manner and that is not supported by anything we see in the film.

I did say it was an accident. And frankly, the way he treats women in this movie doesn't really help him either.

 

[Ovation]

Perhaps I reacted strongly, but I find that "sexual harassment" gets bandied about so much that it loses its meaning. As such, when serious cases arise, people are more dismissive (same applies when "holocaust" is thrown around carelessly). I agree his treatment of women is a bit much BUT I see this as something to see improve over time on his way to becoming the more mature Kirk we first met in TOS.

 

[Jeyl]

and we don't know he never apologized, we simply didn't see it.

That's another problem I have with this film. You have the potential to show some bit of dignity to Kirk's character but it isn't worth showing in the film itself. That's a good way to get the audience to root for your hero. Make him a total a**hole who gets everything in the end for doing stupid things that no one should tolerate.

 

[Ovation]

and we don't know he never apologized, we simply didn't see it.

That's another problem I have with this film. You have the potential to show some bit of dignity to Kirk's character but it isn't worth showing in the film itself. That's a good way to get the audience to root for your hero. Make him a total a**hole who gets everything in the end for doing stupid things that no one should tolerate.

I have to disagree here. He is not rewarded for being an asshole. He is rewarded for his performance as first officer and then acting captain. Clearly not everything he did in the film was something "no one should tolerate".

 

[Jeyl]

He is not rewarded for being an asshole. He is rewarded for his performance as first officer and then acting captain.

Ok, do first officers usually question the captain's orders to the point of being excused from the bridge, and moments later assault federation security officers? Nice performance indeed. Or how about stupidly opening fire on a ship that is clearly being sucked into the black hole and later your ship gets caught in the black hole's pull as a result? Good job thinking about your crew's safety. Naw, let's just shoot the already doomed ship again and again. That black hole won't do anything.

 

[ST-One]

He is not rewarded for being an asshole. He is rewarded for his performance as first officer and then acting captain.

Ok, do first officers usually question the captain's orders to the point of being excused from the bridge, and moments later assault federation security officers? Nice performance indeed. Or how about stupidly opening fire on a ship that is clearly being sucked into the black hole and later your ship gets caught in the black hole's pull as a result? Good job thinking about your crew's safety. Naw, let's just shoot the already doomed ship again and again. That black hole won't do anything.

The Narada wasn't 'doomed'.
The pull of that artificial black hole only increased after the Narada's debris fell in it.

 

[Overgeeked]

and we don't know he never apologized, we simply didn't see it.

That's another problem I have with this film. You have the potential to show some bit of dignity to Kirk's character but it isn't worth showing in the film itself. That's a good way to get the audience to root for your hero. Make him a total a**hole who gets everything in the end for doing stupid things that no one should tolerate.

I have to disagree here. He is not rewarded for being an asshole. He is rewarded for his performance as first officer and then acting captain. Clearly not everything he did in the film was something "no one should tolerate".

He's rewarded despite being an asshole. Something that flies in the face of 40+ years of Trek iterations. The good guys win, the good guys get promoted; the assholes are found out, the assholes are thrown out.

 

[Silanda]

Or how about stupidly opening fire on a ship that is clearly being sucked into the black hole and later your ship gets caught in the black hole's pull as a result? Good job thinking about your crew's safety. Naw, let's just shoot the already doomed ship again and again. That black hole won't do anything.

I second ST-One's opinion here. The Narada wasn't doomed, it had already survived travelling through a black hole before. Would it have been a responsible command decision to let a hostile vessel with bad intentions potentially escape further into the past where it could not be stopped?

 

[ST-One]

Or how about stupidly opening fire on a ship that is clearly being sucked into the black hole and later your ship gets caught in the black hole's pull as a result? Good job thinking about your crew's safety. Naw, let's just shoot the already doomed ship again and again. That black hole won't do anything.

I second ST-One's opinion here. The Narada wasn't doomed, it had already survived travelling through a black hole before. Would it have been a responsible command decision to let a hostile vessel with bad intentions potentially escape further into the past where it could not be stopped?

Of course. Kirk always lets those off the hook who are hell-bent on destroying the universe. Just ask General Chang.

Oh... wait...

 

[wojski]

I agree in general... I too was "Conflicted" leaving the theaters... on 1 side:

a) The success of this movie..keeps the franchise alive/viable for years to come
b) Good (not great) movie--well paced...story, action, effects, a few memorable scenes
c) Entertaining.

BUT on the other hand

a) Uhura and Spock ? C'mon
b) Throw the word "Canon" out..this Ain't your Father's Star Trek is right.
c) a Cadet -> CAPTAIN so quickly ?
d) The engineering section of the ship looks like a crappy refinery
e) Space battles/ Hand Phaser sequences--copies look and feel of Star Wars
f) Every Cadet -> Senior officer positions so quickly
g) Is this alternate universe or a new timeline ?
h) The Warp reactor is now multiple Warp Reactors
i) The new Hand Phaser design are ugly
j) Where's Kirk love interest ?-- no Romanlus ? in the original timeline we knew then...the Enterprise looks more sophisticated than the NCC-1701E...
k) The whole idea of Star Trek "exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and new civilizations" OUT --- IN: Action, fighting, Phaser fights, fist fights, cute one liners , fast paced story -masked as: "Character Development"
l) Gene Roddenberry would Not have approved...But again, this movie brings back/reboots the franchise alright...and hopefully draws in new fans...but this isn't the Star Trek of old...this should be called: STAR TREK-Lite. or Star Trek: The Derivative


Sounds like griping..But Hey, i care enough alright ?

Who out there agrees with me ???

You have missed one important point. This film is like entire Paramount - Oh my god what we gonna do? Lets do Armageddon but with Star Trek franchise. Doesn't matter it screws entire idea of Star Trek, years of tv shows, millons of fans until it looks good in trailer. Maybe we get some money on this one.

I have a conditioned reflex when I see film that hits you with everything you have seen in the trailer in its first 5 minutes. This movie simply excels in that. After 5 minutes holes in the plot start to burn my brain out but ok I am used to it. Most characters are so boring that they should eat their shirts with envy if they ever met Naomi Wildman. So what's left is my popcorn. Few more explosions, end credits.

Now seriously, I have seen this film some 2 weeks ago and I don't remember what was it about. Was it about Vulcan's emotional problems or writer's strong believe that acting like having severe ADHD makes you perfect captain or maybe that you should never kill someone's wife cos he may bring his black hole dispenser and suck your house, your wife, car and favourite pub into singularity.

I must admit, I cried. I had tears in my eyes laughing when I've heard Nero's story about taking revenge because his wife is dead. If I was only a crewman scrapping plasma conduits on his ship I would take a gun and shoot his empty skull and you know what? I strongly feel, every member of his crew would agree with me.

Now please tell me - has any of main characters gone through some significant change? Was the hero emerged changed, augmented, become wiser then he was before? Yes - Kirk he was some bottom feeder in the academy, suddenly in a matter of seconds he takes the bridge and everything is alright - everyone agrees! Is that all? So the bottom line is - You may be emotionally imparied idiot and looser but because you are main character you save the world. Who can compete with that one?

I think it won't take long. One or maybe two films like that and Paramount will sell Star Trek to anyone willing to buy that dying universe. Maybe then we will get what we want.

 

[Ovation]

He is not rewarded for being an asshole. He is rewarded for his performance as first officer and then acting captain.

Ok, do first officers usually question the captain's orders to the point of being excused from the bridge, and moments later assault federation security officers? Nice performance indeed. Or how about stupidly opening fire on a ship that is clearly being sucked into the black hole and later your ship gets caught in the black hole's pull as a result? Good job thinking about your crew's safety. Naw, let's just shoot the already doomed ship again and again. That black hole won't do anything.

I already answered your objection above on this point. Here it is again:

He offered it [help to Nero], it was refused, he knows (from Spock "prime") that the Narada has survived a previous singularity like the one it is in at that moment and, the last time that happened, Nero wrought havoc when he emerged on the other side. Not to mention that even making the slightest "humanitarian gesture" to someone who just committed genocide on a planetary scale beggars belief (NO ONE is that good).

 

[stonester1]

Maybe then we will get what we want.

Tell me one thing. Who is "we"?

 

[Jeyl]

[/B]Not to mention that even making the slightest "humanitarian gesture" to someone who just committed genocide on a planetary scale beggars belief (NO ONE is that good).

Well, there are a lot of elements in the original series and movies where Kirk and crew faced similar circumstances. Like in "The Arena" when Kirk was fighting the Gorn that completely destroyed Cestus III. Kirk had the Gorn all beaten, but in the end Kirk refused to kill him. And in "Day of the Dove" when Kirk believes that the Klingons used a weapon to eliminate a colony populated by men, women and children, Kirk didn't kill commander Kang. He actually beamed him on board the Enterprise, rescued the remainder of his crew and promised he would be well treated. Or Commander Kruge, the ruthless klingon who not only forced Kirk to destroy the Enterprise, but also gave the order to kill Kirk's son. Kirk didn't want to kill him even when Kirk had the advantage.

This Star Trek just wants to have an overly cliched bad guy who's angry for no good reason and does something drastic. Genocide or not, the original Kirk was above this because Kirk actually gives compasion where this Kirk just offers. Offering compassion and actually giving compassion are two different things. And if helping out Nero is the worst he can possibly experience, why not just help him out for that reason alone? Of course this isn't our father's Star Trek, but I like that Trek a lot more than I like this one.

 

[Ovation]

[/B]Not to mention that even making the slightest "humanitarian gesture" to someone who just committed genocide on a planetary scale beggars belief (NO ONE is that good).

Well, there are a lot of elements in the original series and movies where Kirk and crew faced similar circumstances. Like in "The Arena" when Kirk was fighting the Gorn that completely destroyed Cestus III. Kirk had the Gorn all beaten, but in the end Kirk refused to kill him. And in "Day of the Dove" when Kirk believes that the Klingons used a weapon to eliminate a colony populated by men, women and children, Kirk didn't kill commander Kang. He actually beamed him on board the Enterprise, rescued the remainder of his crew and promised he would be well treated. Or Commander Kruge, the ruthless klingon who not only forced Kirk to destroy the Enterprise, but also gave the order to kill Kirk's son. Kirk didn't want to kill him even when Kirk had the advantage.

This Star Trek just wants to have an overly cliched bad guy who's angry for no good reason and does something drastic. Genocide or not, the original Kirk was above this because Kirk actually gives compasion where this Kirk just offers. Offering compassion and actually giving compassion are two different things. And if helping out Nero is the worst he can possibly experience, why not just help him out for that reason alone? Of course this isn't our father's Star Trek, but I like that Trek a lot more than I like this one.

I would argue that none of those examples compares to the scale of what Nero has done. Furthermore, the Kirk who went further in those examples is a more mature one who has perhaps experienced previous situations when he lacked that maturity (as in the new film) and grew from mistakes or poor judgement in his past. The Kirk in the new film is not as fully formed as the Kirk we came to know--or have you not learned to be kinder or more compassionate as you've grown in maturity? Again, you are free to read the character differently from me, but where you see disappointment I see a less mature character with room for growth and improvement.