Re: Circumstantial Evidence?
No truth. Still exaggerating.
Still wrong, still not changing anything.
Oh, god, I wish it were. Seriously, I wish I was exaggerating. God, do I wish I was exaggerating. Because if I were, although this movie would still have been bad, at least I would still be able to say that my favorite franchise didn't produce a movie this mind-bogglingly awful, that I have to give it the moniker, Unholy Abomination of Unprecedented Proportions.
No truth. Still exaggerating.
This movie has one 4 minute scene with so many plot-holes and idiocies in them, a mind-boggling 13 at least, that is about the same and more likely more, than the first 9 movies combined. And worse off, any plotholes in the first 9 movies, are small ones that get the story going, while these 13, like the communications officer not saying there are no signals coming from Vulcan; they're the result of Beavis and Butthead writing a movie.
Go look up my review of the movie, and go through that, I've named all the ones I noticed at that time. There are just a mind-shattering three scenes that aren't filled with plot-holes, idiocies, and just plain bullshit; and I've since, through discussions with other people, and as a result reviewing the movie in my head, found those aren't even all of them. This movie is like anti-good movie. Where a good movie you peel back layers through discussion or repeat viewings and you find more good stuff, or funny stuff you hadn't noticed the first viewing; with Star Trek every layer you peel away reveals more bad stuff the more surface bad stuff was obscuring.
Still wrong, still not changing anything.
