How can you praise this movie and bash VOY, ENT and Nemesis?
- Thread starter neozeks
- Start date
I have to disagree. Most of the characters are shadows of their former. The key is in the budget, mo money means mo ... well you know.
Here's what I think the over-all issue is. You've seen people complain about things in those other series or movies that you personally perceive in Trek 2009. The only problem? You can't (or just haven't, take your pick) tie the complaints and lack of complaints to the same people. You've seen people complain about those certain things, but there is no proof that those exact people are overlooking those issues.
Or it's an issue where you personally think those mistakes are happening, but people don't agree.
Or it might be an issue where your complaints are so broad and non-specific, that you can make them apply to both series. How were people complaining about cliches? What specifically did folks think about time travel in the other movies and series? How do we know that you're not just making the complaints so broad that they will fit your needs?
Or maybe it's just an issue that you didn't like the movie, and feel that the folks who did like it must defend themselves to you rather than like it themselves.
I gotta say... none of those options really excite me. How about you?
Or it's an issue where you personally think those mistakes are happening, but people don't agree.
Or it might be an issue where your complaints are so broad and non-specific, that you can make them apply to both series. How were people complaining about cliches? What specifically did folks think about time travel in the other movies and series? How do we know that you're not just making the complaints so broad that they will fit your needs?
Or maybe it's just an issue that you didn't like the movie, and feel that the folks who did like it must defend themselves to you rather than like it themselves.
I gotta say... none of those options really excite me. How about you?
Shinzon already had his revenge on Romulus: he killed the entire Senate. He then decided to destroy the UFP because that was a goal the pompous Romulan Senate had never been able to achieve.
No, he's saying the same people bashing VOY, ENT and NEM are gushing over STXI.
You're making the same vague assertions he did.
One group of people could be bitching about VOY, a separate group about ENT, and a third praising STXI.
For his argument to be anything other than yet another "how can you be a fan and like this movie", he has to show the hypocrsy he's claimed to have seen on numerous occasions.
And you really believe i can look through thousands of posts to find a specific example?Well, come to think of it, just look at the post above you. 'had ZERO internal consistancy or adherence to its own premise' for VOY - i think the same could be said for ST09 and yet it isn't a problem for this poster.
No, I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt that this was an actual trend you had noticed BEFORE you made your backhanded swipe at those who dared to like this movie.
You didn't.
You just had a vague feeling of resentment toward your fellow fans, casual moviegoers and movie critics, all of whom like a movie you don't.
Ok.. let's share my view.
On glancing through the thread it was said that Star Trek brought back the fun into the franchise and i wholeheartedly agree. Remember Star Trek 4? Basically a Star Trek themed comedy with an eco message but it was fun.. where's the problem with that?
Does Star Trek always have to be so dead serious? I'm not a big fan on TOS but sometimes i think they should just tone it down a notch with the preachiness (a hallmark of new Trek.. especially TNG) and go with the flow. Who cares why and how some systems act up and why this space phenomenon disables warp travel?
JJ and crew took some of the best aspects and cobbled them together to form a hugely entertaining movie and he had the luck to have near perfectly cast the crew.. Pine as Kirk and Quinto as Spock now own the roles and this is no small feat going "against" Shatner and Nimoy.
Now this is the first movie of a so called reboot and time will tell what comes next.. i've overlooked some things now because it's an origin movie and those seldom are really flawless but i hope they find new and refreshing ways to tell stories.
This is exactly why i can bash VOY, ENT and NEM.. they have retread the same old again and again and again often disregarding their own continuity and basic writing. I recall an ENT episode where two characters were stranded in a shuttle.. a basic "get to know each other episode" and it nearly made me shut off the screen because it was so bland. Another one was a character having to work with an enemy to overcome odds.. all this has been done to death before (and better) so why should i watch it?
All these were a staple of VOY and what came after.. lazy writing saved by a Deus ex Machina and a reset button.. i can't count how many times the Voyager got severely hit and almost destroyed only to sail through space an episode later as if she just left the dock to make her maiden voyage. Nemesis had just the biggest reset button ever conceived when they ham fisted B4 into the script.. he had NO function to the story other than to leave an opening in case that they would do another TNG movie and would need Data again.
If Star Trek were written by those hacks destroying Vulcan would have been rectified by the end of the movie through some technobabble bullshit (possibly reversing the polarity of red matter so it becomes blue matter).
Now i'm really curious how the next movie will do.. Star Trek had me laughing, gotten a lump in my throat (the last stage before actually crying.. big one for me to cry because of a movie) and gripped me so many times in a "Whoa Fuck!" moment i lost count. The origin is done and they can really set out to make their own way and i hope they can find some original and entertaining story.. i'm strongly against anything old Trek related. I don't want to see their take on Khan and i certainly don't want to see kid Picard staring wide eyed at Kirk when he's about to save the universe.
So i can bash VOY and ilk.. i hope they lie good i their graves and become footnotes. I want to be entertained and not groaning when actors rattle off some pseudo-scientific sounding terms which miraculously save them from destruction.
On glancing through the thread it was said that Star Trek brought back the fun into the franchise and i wholeheartedly agree. Remember Star Trek 4? Basically a Star Trek themed comedy with an eco message but it was fun.. where's the problem with that?
Does Star Trek always have to be so dead serious? I'm not a big fan on TOS but sometimes i think they should just tone it down a notch with the preachiness (a hallmark of new Trek.. especially TNG) and go with the flow. Who cares why and how some systems act up and why this space phenomenon disables warp travel?
JJ and crew took some of the best aspects and cobbled them together to form a hugely entertaining movie and he had the luck to have near perfectly cast the crew.. Pine as Kirk and Quinto as Spock now own the roles and this is no small feat going "against" Shatner and Nimoy.
Now this is the first movie of a so called reboot and time will tell what comes next.. i've overlooked some things now because it's an origin movie and those seldom are really flawless but i hope they find new and refreshing ways to tell stories.
This is exactly why i can bash VOY, ENT and NEM.. they have retread the same old again and again and again often disregarding their own continuity and basic writing. I recall an ENT episode where two characters were stranded in a shuttle.. a basic "get to know each other episode" and it nearly made me shut off the screen because it was so bland. Another one was a character having to work with an enemy to overcome odds.. all this has been done to death before (and better) so why should i watch it?
All these were a staple of VOY and what came after.. lazy writing saved by a Deus ex Machina and a reset button.. i can't count how many times the Voyager got severely hit and almost destroyed only to sail through space an episode later as if she just left the dock to make her maiden voyage. Nemesis had just the biggest reset button ever conceived when they ham fisted B4 into the script.. he had NO function to the story other than to leave an opening in case that they would do another TNG movie and would need Data again.
If Star Trek were written by those hacks destroying Vulcan would have been rectified by the end of the movie through some technobabble bullshit (possibly reversing the polarity of red matter so it becomes blue matter
).Now i'm really curious how the next movie will do.. Star Trek had me laughing, gotten a lump in my throat (the last stage before actually crying.. big one for me to cry because of a movie) and gripped me so many times in a "Whoa Fuck!" moment i lost count. The origin is done and they can really set out to make their own way and i hope they can find some original and entertaining story.. i'm strongly against anything old Trek related. I don't want to see their take on Khan and i certainly don't want to see kid Picard staring wide eyed at Kirk when he's about to save the universe.
So i can bash VOY and ilk.. i hope they lie good i their graves and become footnotes. I want to be entertained and not groaning when actors rattle off some pseudo-scientific sounding terms which miraculously save them from destruction.
Well, no, of course I can't give you solid proof about the same exact persons. But I can draw a reasonable conclusion, based on the reaction of most people in the first and in the second case.
Ok, completely possible. But then, please, i listed a number of complaints in the very first post, explain to me why you don't agree.
Because i tried to give you some specific examples, and i believe startrekwatcher did the same. Anyway, in how many ways can you exactly complain about a cliche? Say, Time travel - you can say it's overused, not needed or badly executed. I believe all those complaints were put up against the earlier treks and i put it up against STXI as well.
Nope. I just want a good discussion with solid arguments. No one is forcing anyone to participate.
Uhura, Sulu, Chekov and Chapel were pretty much shadows in most of TOS!
Uhura, Sulu and Chekov got more to do and say in this new movie than their predecessors' entire body of ST TV work in TOS.
Yeah, I agree, everyone got their screen time.
And you really believe i can look through thousands of posts to find a specific example?
No, I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt that this was an actual trend you had noticed BEFORE you made your backhanded swipe at those who dared to like this movie.
You didn't.
You just had a vague feeling of resentment toward your fellow fans, casual moviegoers and movie critics, all of whom like a movie you don't.
Please, don't start going personal, i have no wish for that.
I said, it was just a feeling i got by surfing on the net. I DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF. I'm just drawing a conclusion and i may be wrong. The way I see it: 1)most people didn't like VOY, ENT and NEM (ratings, critics, general view)
2)most people like this movie
3)I see the same flaws in both
4)therefore, i see a contradiction
It wasn't anything specific, directed to anybody in particular. Maybe i didn't phrase the title well. Lets put it this way. Do you see the flaws I listed in the previous productions? Do you see them in ST09? If yes or no, why? If you see the same in both, why do you think one is better than the other?
[sarcasm]Oh wow he killed the ruling members who are basically a small part of the population that enslaved his Reman buddies and just stopped there instead of oh I don't enslaving the rest of them for some poetic justice, pretty much so he could do something that would HELP the Romulans who enslaved his buds, wow he's just good at this Reman betterment thing.[/sarcasm]
We don't know whether the Romulan civilian population were pro Reman slavery or not. You didn't really want the whole movie to be concerned with Romulan politics, did you?
Um, yeah, because i registered today, wanting to talk about the movie?
Please, something more constructive than 'sockpuppet'...
Since you asked, here are my feelings on the four sub-franchises in question:
1. I watched every episode of TNG and DS9 and was stoked for VOY. However, I really felt the show ignored the most interesting aspects of its premise (conflict within the crew) and used the same plot devices over and over (how many shuttles where there on that ship exactly).
I also felt the writers made some odd choices. You sent the ship all the way across the galaxy so the crew could still run into Klingons and Romulans, through wormholes and such?
That said, I appreciated the show more once Braga took over, replaced a character I didn't like (Kes), with one I did (7 of 9) and introduced some really intense action sequences.
So basically, VOY saw Trek for me go from "appointment" TV to something I watched only occasionally, though I did tend to enjoy it when I did watch it, especially in the later years.
2. Enterprise was much of the same for me. I felt the show set up a great premise (birth of the federation) and then ran from it as fast as it possibly could.
Why? I don't know and I think it would be wrong of me to speculate.
I was mildly intrigued by the Suliban and the temporal cold war, and had ABSOLUTELY NO interest in the Xindi.
What I wanted to see was how the Federation came to be and a ship that was even more wild and wooley than the TOS Enterprise.
What I got was some stories that didnt seem to tie into the birth of the federation and a crew that felt much more like a TNG era crew than a TOS era crew.
If you look at First Contact, the crew of Cochrane's ship, what we see of them, had a much more TOS feel to me. Boozing, rough cut, maverick dreamers who had their own agendas and came together to fulfill a dream.
The ENT crew seemed like they would get along with Picard and crew in a way the TOS crew and those characters from First Contact *never* would.
3. I thought Nemesis was pretty bad but I didn't think it was much worse than Insurrection or Generations. I really only loved one of the TNG movies and that was First Contact.
So my feelings on NEM weren't that out of line for my feelings for the TNG movies as a whole. Obviously others disagreed based on the movie's box office.
4. TOS is my second favorite Trek series and has the best cast of characters of any of the shows imo.
I always saw Kirk and Spock as the Arthur and Lancelot of our time and felt other actors getting a crack at those characters was inevitable.
And the movie delivered what I wanted from a new TOS movie.
Kirk the maverick? Check.
Tension among the crew? Check.
A trek movie with action and humor at the same time? Check.
In short, unlike VOY and ENT, which I felt had promse they didn't deliver on, STXI had promise that it DID deliver on.
1. Pulling the audience in. There's a "rule" in movie-writing that says you've ten minutes to "hook" your audience in and pull them into the plot of the movie. In the first ten minutes of ST09 we've had a beautifully shot, composed, acted and scripted series of scenes the culminates into Winona Kirk giving birth to a young Jim Kirk -a man who even non-fans should know has a special destiny. First 10 Minutes of NEM? We get the melting-Romulan scene, the oh-so-cute and light wedding scene, Worf bitching about being naked, our first major plot contrivance (finding the Soong-Type android put there by the Romulans to "capture" the Enterprise), and Picard cutting off Riker's balls in front of the bridge crew. (I was generous and waited for 12 minutes, discounting the time that the opening title sequence takes up and to get our first major plot-hook.)
So, a viewer who watched Nemesis has no momentum in watching the first ten minutes, no emotional hook, was likely perplexed by melting Vulcans, and chuckled a few times on the "jokes." Fans "squeeed" over seeing Guinan at the wedding and shook their fists and rang out a Seinfeldian, "Wesley!" at Picard's best-man speech.
A viewer watching ST09? First 10 minutes? (Assuming 10 minutes in we get to the title card. That sounds about right, may be longer; we'll just say not 10-minutes but to first plot hook) We've met our villain and don't know his plans but can see he's ruthless and "silent" (his first officer doing his biddings) and we've had the emotional impact with the loss of Kirk's father and seen his birth. Points to ST09.
2. Music. Nemesis has a score? Not sure that's true. It's more like the "music wallpaper" Berman was so fond of. ST09's score still resonates in my mind, esp the "hero theme" for the Enterprise and the action theme on the drilling platform. Points to ST09.
3. Emotional impact. In Nemesis.... Wait. What's the emotional impact in this movie? Why do we give a shit what's going on and happening to these characters? Does anything happen to them over the course of this movie? Sure, Data "dies" at the end (which is gimped by B4's "hints of Data") but there's no other emotional "hook" to reel in the audience. Nothing happens!!! We go from one pointless "action scene" to the next but nothing really happens in between. ST09: Our two main characters, Kirk and Spock, go through changes and emotions. With Spock it's finding an embrace and balance between his human and Vulcan sides as well as overcoming the loss of his mother. For Kirk it's about "growing up" a bit, taking charge and becoming the man he's destined to be. The death of Amanda is treated with warmth and sympathy culminating to Spock nearly at tears on the transporter pad talking to his father who admits he married Amanda because he loved her. Kirk finds his path in taking charge of the ship and doing what feels is right and best for everyone, and then by the end of the movie Kirk and Spock have arrived at being friends and found a way to work together. Points to: ST09
4. Villain: Nero is pissed at the loss of his wife and unborn child. So pissed he's focused on nothing else and has thrown rationality out the window to avenge her death on those he feels let it happen: The Federation. Which he intends to destroy starting with it's primary planets (in the case of this movie Vulcan and Earth.) Yeah, his plan doesn't make a lot of sense, yeah there's gaps in it, but he has an emotional drive and reason to do what he wants. Shinzon is really mad at Earth... for some reason. Even though the people who imprisoned him, created him, and have put him down over the course of his entire life were Romulans. Not humans. But, we care more about Earth than Romulus so he goes after Earth. Just because.
5. Space battles. Seemingly Nero's ship and Shinzon's ship are identical in their power over the hero ships. But there are differences. In Nemesis Shinzon's ship's specs are read off like something from a website called the "USS Fanboy." Geordi (or someone) reads it off and it's pretty much "2,500 disruptor strips, 10,000 torpedo tubes, multiphasic-ultra shielding and she can has a flawless cloak that can even allow the ship to fire! The Enterprise is TOAST!!!!" Keep in mind, the Romulans and Strafleet have pretty much always been handled as being on an even playing-field technologically. Yeah, the hero ship should be "weaker" than the villain ship as it makes the "win" that much better. But this isn't even David and Goliath. It's more like David and a fucking pack of T-Rexes! Nero's ship, while it greatly out matches the Starfleet ships we see them take a pounding and still pretty much bustle along (sorta) and there's at least a reason Nero's ship overpowers them. It's from the future. So how is it beat? The heroes also use a ship from the future. And we're even shown that when Nero's ship is "down" it is vulnerable. Points to ST09.
6. Production values: Nemesis used Voyager's sets. Granted, this is probably a push with ST09's use of a brewery for Engineering. But TV show's sets are hardly of a "quality" to be used in a movie. But the whole movie (NEM) has this "trapped" feel. The Romulan senate looks like the city council room of a growing city. Not the council for a galactic superpower. Also, only a fraction of the movie's action takes place in an open setting -the chase on the planet of overexposed film to find retarded-Data. ST09 has an entire sequence set outside on a drilling platform. The movie also has a much cleaner, more modern feel to it that doesn't feel like some set. I've never "bought" the -E's bridge it just looks like and feels like a TV set. ST09's production values are much higher and it shows. Points to ST09.
7. Cast: As much as I love the TNG cast in NEM they were clearly "going through the motions." They hardly -to me- felt like their characters anymore. But really that may be a general complaint I have with all of the TNG movies (well, mostly just INS and NEM). Maybe it's their age, maybe it's that their "charm" and connection was better on a weekly series, but whatever it is. I didn't "feel" it. The case in ST09? Fan-fucking-tastic. They completely absorbed these classic characters, but on their uniforms, and BECAME them. There's a chemistry and charm to them. In NEM the TNG cast didn't feel like "the TNG cast." Picard goes gallivanting off in a space dune-buggy, raping the PD by shooting at the population. Sorry, that's not the Picard I watched on TV for seven years (to be fair, the Picard in the movies was little like his TV counterpart.) Points to ST09.
8. Cinematography. As much as I hate the lens-flares in ST09 (which work sometimes but when white-light is ABSORBING the screen they've gone too far.) at least it shows SOME attempt at art. There's also a directorial "style" to ST09. In NEM? Not so much. Which is what you get for letting a man who is not a director, well, direct a movie. Points to ST09.
9. Energy. ST09 has an energy to it. It moves along at quick pace, sure, but it's moving! It's doing something! It's going somewhere. Even when characters are standing there talking to another things are happening, the plot is moving forward. As I said, we waste the bulk of the first 10 minutes of NEM on stuff that's doing nothing to advance the plot. The first thing that happens to move the plot forward occurs well after these 10 minutes, after B4 has been discovered, after the Enterprise has been sent to Romulus and even THEN time passes before we've got our first real plot point with the reveal that Shinzon is Picard's clone. That's probably, what, 20 or 25 minutes into the movie? 20 or 25 minutes into ST09 -going from memory- Kirk's on the transport on his way to Starfleet academy! Something has happened! Points to ST09.
10. The Final Battle: NEM - The Enterprise is getting its ass handed to it, the Romulans got their asses handed to them, Shinzon is close to winning by activating his face-melting doom in Plot Contrivance/Not Mutara Nebula. Picard beams over because apparently the Enterprise's ass has been handed to it so much the friggin auto destruct sequence doesn't work (apparently neither does the "off switch" for the containment fields for the antimatter pods) but there's just enough power for Picard to beam over before a bridge console shorts out. Because, you see, when the transporter goes off-line it just has to destroy a bridge station for the fuck of it. Picard beams over, does his Rambo thing, somehow breaks a phaser (pretty high-quality futuristic polymers/metals there, 24th C!) he finally finds Shinzon, kills him and then just kind of... decides not stop the Melty Radiation from doing its thing. Luckily Data has came over and has a portable transporter.
A.
Portable.
Transporter.
A device that takes the trillions of atoms in a human body, turns them into energy -requiring 2000 megatons of energy to do so- stores them, transmits them to a destination, and then reverses the process.
This device the size of a Starlight Mint can do all of this. Oh, and not only that it can do it to itself on top of all of it.
So to understand this. This tiny device generates 2000 megatons of energy -40 times the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated- to convert Picard's mass into energy. It then STORES this energy somewhere and it then TRANSMITS this energy somewhere and it then generates ANOTHER 2000 megatons of energy to turn Picard back into matter. It does most of this while it itself is energy. So it tears itself apart at the atomic level and then still operates.
Yeah.
The energy of Nero and the Kirk/Spock's final battles have a little more energy and action to them and once the respective foes are defeated Kirk and Spock go about their missions. They nail Nero's ass to the wall, offer to save him, and then nail his ass further to the wall when he refuses. Points to: ST09.
ST09 kicks Nemesis' ass in every possible way imaginable.
Soundly.
Thoroughly and
Completely.
Game.
Set.
Match.
'09 Wins.
Last edited:
In the end--it is a work of art--bad or good. Editing, writing, script, performance, direction--this stuff does matter. IT's a PLAY! They're actors. (okay they had the right idea with Picard---a Shakespeare dude--saw I, Claudius--good job Pat) A teleplay! A film! Humor and pacing. Camera angles....passion! Hitchcock--Spielberg---Kurusawa---Kirschner---John Houston---David Lynch---Coppola. It's supposed to be ART. A play. And it should all add up to FUN. TOS had more artistic flare in 5 minutes from one episode than ENT had in 4 seasons. I mean ART---DRAMA---SWEAT! Tears!
ENT was not artistic--it almost seemed like a documentary with a adult contemporary soundtrack.
Shat--Nimoy--Alexander Courage---this was ART! Abrams's captured the PASSION!
Maybe these reasons you list were made by some Trek fans on this board, but for the greater public--even the greater public who casually enjoy Trek--these were NOT the reasons they didn't watch. ENT was too dull, too slow and too uninteresting. And ditto for Voyager.
As you stated, the new movie is fun. Far from dull, it moves quickly and is loaded with humor and story elements people can relate to like the loss of a parent or childbirth whereas more recent Trek centered around the ethics of some vague ethics question involving unknown species.
ENT was not artistic--it almost seemed like a documentary with a adult contemporary soundtrack.
Shat--Nimoy--Alexander Courage---this was ART! Abrams's captured the PASSION!
Maybe these reasons you list were made by some Trek fans on this board, but for the greater public--even the greater public who casually enjoy Trek--these were NOT the reasons they didn't watch. ENT was too dull, too slow and too uninteresting. And ditto for Voyager.
As you stated, the new movie is fun. Far from dull, it moves quickly and is loaded with humor and story elements people can relate to like the loss of a parent or childbirth whereas more recent Trek centered around the ethics of some vague ethics question involving unknown species.
Last edited:
Then you’re just assuming, and your entire argument falls apart if it isn’t the same people. Have you considered that you’re not getting any people defending against your primary argument because you’re asking the wrong people, or that there are very few people that fit the profile?
Ok.
~~~~~
Enterprise was a case of fanboys being fanboys and pissing themselves because the writers screwed up. ST09 didn’t screw with canon, it made its own canon, hence the words “alternate reality”. And it wasn’t a screw up either, the writers were bold and made it obvious what their intent was.
No, this was pretty well a constant throughout the entire franchise. The DS9 Baseball episode, anyone?
Unless you are referring to the very, very end, I don’t see this at all. The entire mood of the movie shifted after the destruction of Vulcan.
Again, your opinion. I thought Kirk made a huge change from the beginning to the end.
Kim never getting promoted never bothered me. Kirk getting promoted didn’t bother me. In fact, they have entire threads devoted to the discussion of Kirk getting promoted, with several reasonable reasons listed. For example, the kid took command and saved all of the Federation. Nothing big. Aren’t you bothered by anyone else? Ships being sent lots of cadets to work? Other cadets currently in the academy having real ranks? Uhura? McCoy?
Find me a movie or TV show that lacks these.
Addressed earlier in the thread.
Ok, I’ll do startrekwatcher’s too in a second. Find me a movie or TV show that doesn’t have clichés. The issue is when they’re abused… say, in every episode or multiple times in the episode. You’re right, time travel wasn’t needed in this case. But do you know why it was used this time? To throw the fans a bone. This way, the writers could do whatever they wanted with fewer pissy fans getting on their case. And I thought it was done well.
Voyager is a weekly show. It shouldn’t need to rely on time travel every couple of episodes to come up with ideas. Did anyone doubt that everything would get fixed in the end with Enterprise? I think the issues had more to do with the episode itself, and the fact that it inevitably would be fixed.
And? Enterprise had a whole season plus some to deal with people’s reactions. ST09 had 2 hours to deal with reactions and get on with the story. And how is B&B dealing with people’s reactions a complaint?
Future guy literally did nothing but stand around and talk, and he literally disappeared when they were done with him. Nero was a real villain. Maybe not a well done one, but he was at least a villain.
“Superfluous striptease?” really? Again, it’s a difference between a 2 minute bit in a movie and a series long thing.
When you oversimplify it that much, yeah you can find something that matches. The complaints against VOY were literally that they switched names and did the exact same story.
I see more people complaining about Delta Vega , Archer, and Porthos than getting “besides themselves”. In fact, most of the discussion for Archer and Porthos is nitpicking.
Again, you’re picking on opinions. You don’t think that ST09 was well written. That doesn’t make it fact
Spiner played a different character than what he’s known for, as Shatner would have. Nimoy played his original character and his character had a real something to do with the story.
EDIT- A response that posted while I was making this one...
Emphasis mine. You're assuming through extension that people disliked the listed shows and movies for the same reasons you did.
Well, the only complaints I've had about the shows were when they weren't entertaining - so Abrams is safe on that score. 
Similar threads
