Then he's an ever bigger idiot than he appeared.
If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....
- Thread starter trek_futurist
- Start date
- Status
Then he's an ever bigger idiot than he appeared.
Now, now.... no one wants to end up on Santa's naughty list do they? Or maybe they do!
I liked both Nemesis and Strek Trek 2009, each for their individual qualities on trek story telling.
I liked both Nemesis and Strek Trek 2009, each for their individual qualities on trek story telling.
Actually he appeared to be far more intelligent than you do.
Perhaps we should all get back on topic and drop this line of discussion for the forum's sake. I for one do not want to be on anyone's naughty list.
Nemesis is an ok film and I felt it had some genuine emotion, espeically with the sense of jeapordy in the climax, but I like the 2009 feature better because it featured my favorite not-so alien character, Mr. Spock. So maybe I am biased in what I like, I don't know.
Nemesis is an ok film and I felt it had some genuine emotion, espeically with the sense of jeapordy in the climax, but I like the 2009 feature better because it featured my favorite not-so alien character, Mr. Spock. So maybe I am biased in what I like, I don't know.
Yep. While Kirk is certainly shown to be willing to extend mercy to an enemy he's not willing to do so at the cost of his own life when that enemy refuses said mercy.
On an amusing personal note, "Kirk on a volcano boot stompin' a Klingon" has long been a shorthand between my wife and I when we are indicating that we are totally sick of someone's shit but might be overheard.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
And?
Nobody is saying that ST09 is a perfect movie, and nobody is saying you have to like it. A lot of people don't like it. But you know what? Even more people disliked Nemesis.
Thank you for linking to a three year old Youtube video about a review from some internet nerds whose personal opinions are no more credible than yours are.
Last edited:
I didn't watch the video, but I have one important question about it- did they provide an accurate or credible definition for what is or isn't a Star Trek fan?
"trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
They outline the reason the movie sucked, reasons that most of you are conveniently ignoring.
Here are a couple.
1-(as I pointed out already) The main characters are completely OUT of character.
2-The human race is suppose to have gotten over its insipid ways by then, and the kirk character is suppose to be an enlightened individual, not a petty 30 year old idiot with a chip on his shoulder and a lust for power (don't even tell me the TOS was not enlightened compared to this idiot we saw in this film).
3-The film was nothing but shallow bombast, literally. The so called 'plot' WAS the filler. And those of you who have the arrogance to compare this to the wrath of khan are simply delusional. TWOK was an amazing movie, this does not compare on any level to that master piece.
4-There is no one to like here. Where is kirk again? All I see is some idiot with an arrogant disposition walking around, acting no better than people of today. That might fit in with some genre films, but not star trek. Star trek was never about humans being exactly the same as they are now, it was about them being BETTER than they are now so we would have something to inspire us to the future.
5-The completely DUMB writing that spurts out everywhere all over this movie. To say the film 'is not perfect' is a complete understatement. The characters motivations make absolutely no god damned sense at all. They are like little kids trying to fight their way out of a cardboard box and shredding the box and every bit of logic with it into pieces. The idiocy of nero's actions, the idiocy of spocks actions, the complete overall idiocy of imposter kirk, you have to be of a very short attention span to not suspend disbelief in the face of this pure idiocy. And once again, getting promoted from cadet to captain during a training mission is COMPLETELY STUPID AND SHOULD RUIN THE PREMISE OF THE ENTIRE MOVIE TO ANYONE WITH HALF A BRAIN!
At least Nemesis made some degree of sense from an x-y-z perspective. At least the characters motivations for doing things weren't 'uh just cause i uh felt like it duh'.
Star trek 2009 is NOT a star trek movie, it is a movie for people who hate star trek, to insult the real essence of star trek with. It is pure garbage for the masses and people with short attention spans who will just as easily like transformers and twilight.
Here are a couple.
1-(as I pointed out already) The main characters are completely OUT of character.
2-The human race is suppose to have gotten over its insipid ways by then, and the kirk character is suppose to be an enlightened individual, not a petty 30 year old idiot with a chip on his shoulder and a lust for power (don't even tell me the TOS was not enlightened compared to this idiot we saw in this film).
3-The film was nothing but shallow bombast, literally. The so called 'plot' WAS the filler. And those of you who have the arrogance to compare this to the wrath of khan are simply delusional. TWOK was an amazing movie, this does not compare on any level to that master piece.
4-There is no one to like here. Where is kirk again? All I see is some idiot with an arrogant disposition walking around, acting no better than people of today. That might fit in with some genre films, but not star trek. Star trek was never about humans being exactly the same as they are now, it was about them being BETTER than they are now so we would have something to inspire us to the future.
5-The completely DUMB writing that spurts out everywhere all over this movie. To say the film 'is not perfect' is a complete understatement. The characters motivations make absolutely no god damned sense at all. They are like little kids trying to fight their way out of a cardboard box and shredding the box and every bit of logic with it into pieces. The idiocy of nero's actions, the idiocy of spocks actions, the complete overall idiocy of imposter kirk, you have to be of a very short attention span to not suspend disbelief in the face of this pure idiocy. And once again, getting promoted from cadet to captain during a training mission is COMPLETELY STUPID AND SHOULD RUIN THE PREMISE OF THE ENTIRE MOVIE TO ANYONE WITH HALF A BRAIN!
At least Nemesis made some degree of sense from an x-y-z perspective. At least the characters motivations for doing things weren't 'uh just cause i uh felt like it duh'.
Star trek 2009 is NOT a star trek movie, it is a movie for people who hate star trek, to insult the real essence of star trek with. It is pure garbage for the masses and people with short attention spans who will just as easily like transformers and twilight.
I found the characters likable, familiar (although modernized) and the film itself true to Trek's ideals. There was more racial diversity in this film than any prior Star Trek. A UNITED Earth, going out into space.
Sorry it didn't work for you.
Sorry it didn't work for you.
Shinzon's motivations are as vague as Nero's. Of course you can explain them, Shinzon should hates the Romulans but he also hates his humanness because this was the case for his mistreatment so he tries to blow up Earth. Nero hates the guy who tried to save his planet ... because he failed? Because he is a Vulcan?
While I agree that the movie had its dumb moments and while I prefer Trek that gets the right mixture between interesting themes and a thrilling plot (TWOK, TUC and FC being the best examples) I think you largely overstate the problems of ST09.
Sure, it might have been more interesting if Kirk had more in common with the few notes about his background we learnt during the first season of TOS but once you accept the premise of him being a maverick he is a fine character in ST09. Spock was a more problematic character as he threw Kirk off the ship and basically said that revenge is good.
One can and should criticize ST09 but not in a biased, overblown fashion. Despite its questionable script and the lack of what I would call the Trek spirit it is undeniably the Trek movie with best effects and overall prduction, not to mention that all the actors played very well.
Take it as what it is, a decent, shallow summer blockbuster that captures not the intelligence but the fun of TOS.
No, I just meant they had already ended the show with All Good Things the same year which was a great end, then they release Generations which is another "conclusion" to the series but worse.
They would have been much better off leaving us with All Good Things and ST VI as the last big adventures of Kirk and Picard, instead of puking all over both of them simultaneously with Generations.
Edit: *Facepalm* I thought I was talking Generations here today. But to my point, Generations was the first "re-concluding" of TNG I was referring to. Both it and Nemesis tried to be a big farewell movie for TNG (and in the case of Generations, TOS as well) and both were terrible, especially when compared to All Good Things.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
Modernized? I found them antiquated actually. I found the characters of TOS, TNG, VOY and DS9 modernized, civilized, evolved and in keeping with the ideals of the original star trek vision for humanity. These characters? Found them to be idiotic grunts from the past.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
Shinzon's motivations are as vague as Nero's. Of course you can explain them, Shinzon should hates the Romulans but he also hates his humanness because this was the case for his mistreatment so he tries to blow up Earth. Nero hates the guy who tried to save his planet ... because he failed? Because he is a Vulcan?
While I agree that the movie had its dumb moments and while I prefer Trek that gets the right mixture between interesting themes and a thrilling plot (TWOK, TUC and FC being the best examples) I think you largely overstate the problems of ST09.
Sure, it might have been more interesting if Kirk had more in common with the few notes about his background we learnt during the first season of TOS but once you accept the premise of him being a maverick he is a fine character in ST09. Spock was a more problematic character as he threw Kirk off the ship and basically said that revenge is good.
One can and should criticize ST09 but not in a biased, overblown fashion. Despite its questionable script and the lack of what I would call the Trek spirit it is undeniably the Trek movie with best effects and overall prduction, not to mention that all the actors played very well.
Take it as what it is, a decent, shallow summer blockbuster that captures not the intelligence but the fun of TOS.
Everything you say here is the same unsupported refrain I hear from adopters of the 2009 film. And it is completely illogical and non-sensical.
The 'fun' of star trek?
The FUN of star trek was always in exploring not only new worlds, but the scientific understanding of these new worlds, and of seeing how we have bettered ourselves as a species compared to how we are today.
If you find nothing but endless bombast 'fun' you
1-Are 10 years old
2-Will just as easily like transformers
3-Probably hate the majority of all the high minded star trek films and shows that have been released, which, like it or not, were the very essence that made it what star trek has been come to be known for.
I won't even address the Shinzon non-sense you spewed because it is completely unfounded. He was a romulan clone of picard who was programmed to reach a point of malevolence toward picard and the federation at a certain point of his life. That is all I will say about that, put the rest of the pieces together yourself.
That same DS9 that went out of it's way to show that humans aren't nearly as civilized at they want the galaxy to think? The one where the Federation permits murder and genocide?
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
Even generations was better than this heaping pile of manure called star trek 2009.
Even if it seems like a two part episide, and even if the death of kirk was not as noble as we would have liked, it is a far better movie philosophically and intellectually, than this thing called star trek 2009.
The only thing that I will say upsets me about the film is the fact that scotty appears in it, which should not have been the case since when he appeared in TNG episode 'relics' and he emerges from the transporter pattern buffer he makes a comment that kirk must have sent the enterprise himself. Now it could be that he was momentarily disoriented but if not it is a serious contradiction since he witnessed kirks death in the beginning of generations.
But other than this one little thing, far better trek film than star trek 2009 (which really wasn't even a trek film). And generations has never ranked as one of my favorite trek films, so it shows how much I really hate this thing that bears the trek namesake called star trek 2009.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
That same DS9 that went out of it's way to show that humans aren't nearly as civilized at they want the galaxy to think? The one where the Federation permits murder and genocide?
No, the humans in DS9 were still as civilized as they were in TNG. You are confusing the fact that they had to deal with a dominion war, the cardassians and a Ferengi who was constantly trying to pull the wool over their eyes, with them not being civilized. At no point in the show did they behave with malevolence or cowardice toward other humans or other species. They always tempered their judgment with logic and seriously considered their actions, and never did captain sisko and company shoot down a sitting duck ship!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
