How can you praise this movie and bash VOY, ENT and Nemesis?

[startrekwatcher]

Let the ratings (and numbers) do the talking.

Voyager declined, Enterprise ended early, and Nemesis BOMBED at the box office.

Star Trek is constantly praised, introducing new fans to the franchise, and breaking ALL previous Trek box office records.

Ratings don't always tell the whole story. I'd also point out that the reason ST XI is doing so well is that people wanted to see what someone other than Berman could do with Trek coupled with a four year drought of new Trek.

I also forgot to mention in my earlier post that both VOY and ENT had better action adventure tele-films/movies that were better executed than XI--Scorpion, Caretaker, The Vulcan trilogy, The Council/Countdown/Zero Hour, Broken Bow.

 

[neozeks]

Let the ratings (and numbers) do the talking.

Voyager declined, Enterprise ended early, and Nemesis BOMBED at the box office.

Star Trek is constantly praised, introducing new fans to the franchise, and breaking ALL previous Trek box office records.

Why is this so hard to accept? I hate people that can't enjoy a good thing when it's in their hands. Y'all are pathetic.

Yup, all true. Still doesn't mean it shouldn't be criticised just the same as VOY, ENT or NEM. And in what way exactly is it introducing them? You think this is a good represantation of Trek? What defining qualities of Trek are in this movie except for the characters? People may as well think Trek is pretty much like Star Wars from watching this movie.
And no namecalling!

 

[Roshi]

the reason ST XI is doing so well is that people wanted to see what someone other than Berman could do with Trek

Ah ah ah ah ah yeah right! And people returned again and again just to corroborate your hypothesis!

 

[startrekwatcher]

the reason ST XI is doing so well is that people wanted to see what someone other than Berman could do with Trek

Ah ah ah ah ah yeah right! And people returned again and again just to corroborate your hypothesis!

No need to be defensive. If it is as good as you say then no worries.

 

[theFirebottle]

People bashed VOY for the over use of time travel. Here we have it. Critics bashed B&B's idea of someone going back in time to change Trek history with FG/Temporal Cold War and fucking over the Trek universe. That's exactly what Abrams did and everyone is loving it.

Abrams fixed time travel in Trek to make it sensical. You can't just go back and fix the past now, you've created a quantum branch. This is in line with current scientific speculation about how time travel might work if it weren't completely fictional. Time travel will no longer be a convenient plot device, it is only a convenient meta-fictional device for the one-time purpose of fixing a moribund franchise.

People complained that B&B resorted to appealing to the hornboys with Seven & T'Pol in a catsuit yet I hear nothing of Uhura's superfluous striptease.

That scene set up an important plot point (Uhura intercepting and translating a message that led to Kirk identifying the threat they were facing) and was also a nice little character moment for Uhura. She is so confident that she can stand in front of a guy who acted pretty sketchy to her in the past, in her underwear, without being self-conscious or freaked out. Most women would cover themselves up and be creeped out; she kicks Kirk out without even batting an eye. Also, did you catch the line about how Uhura can hear the sound of Kirk breathing even under the bed? There are so many subtle little nods to her being a consummate professional comms officer: she's got great hearing (excuse me, "aural sensitivity") and knows a stack of languages.

People complained that VOY/ENT relied on action and VFX rather than good writing. Yet XI is great.

Yes, because VOY and ENT didn't have the requisite character strength, interaction, and development to back up their lack of plot advancement or sophistication. XI had good character writing in spades, and it more than made up for the weaknesses of the plot. VOY and ENT had bland characters which they did very little with for many seasons of stories; XI has interesting characters it did lots with in very little time.

 

[startrekwatcher]

People bashed VOY for the over use of time travel. Here we have it. Critics bashed B&B's idea of someone going back in time to change Trek history with FG/Temporal Cold War and fucking over the Trek universe. That's exactly what Abrams did and everyone is loving it.

Abrams fixed time travel in Trek to make it sensical. You can't just go back and fix the past now, you've created a quantum branch. This is in line with current scientific speculation about how time travel might work if it weren't completely fictional. Time travel will no longer be a convenient plot device, it is only a convenient meta-fictional device for the one-time purpose of fixing a moribund franchise.

One could argue that was the purpose of the Temporal Cold War--to allow B&B some leeway in telling the stories they wanted. Everyone couldn't get past the fact that we had never heard of the Suliban or the Xindi. Nevermind that the Xindi arc was quite good.

People complained that B&B resorted to appealing to the hornboys with Seven & T'Pol in a catsuit yet I hear nothing of Uhura's superfluous striptease.

That scene set up an important plot point (Uhura intercepting and translating a message that led to Kirk identifying the threat they were facing)

And I could argue that the Trip/T'Pol decon scrubdown set up an important plot point yet I hear to this day ranting and raving about it.

and was also a nice little character moment for Uhura. She is so confident that she can stand in front of a guy who acted pretty sketchy to her in the past, in her underwear, without being self-conscious or freaked out. Most women would cover themselves up and be creeped out; she kicks Kirk out without even batting an eye.

You are really reaching here trying to make a character scene out of a titty shot.

People complained that VOY/ENT relied on action and VFX rather than good writing. Yet XI is great.

Yes, because VOY and ENT didn't have the requisite character strength, interaction, and development to back up their lack of plot advancement or sophistication.

I won't argue that the crew was well cast and the characters were interesting but most of the time they were providing exposition or being action figures. There wasn't nearly enough of the crew.

XI had good character writing in spades, and it more than made up for the weaknesses of the plot.

I don't know if I would say it had good character writing. The writers were successful in taking what other writers had done in developing these characters on TOS and following that template. But I wouldn't call this a character-driven film.

 

[-Brett-]

The same thing people were complaining about in VOY or ENT or NEM, only now it doesn't really matter cause it's, you know, fun!

Pretty much. As opposed to Voyager, Enterprise and Nemesis which, y'know, weren't.

People complained charachters on Voyager never changed. Well, Kirk jr doesn't really change either. No journey, no consequences for his actions (say, cheating)....

You do realize that the whole Kobayashi Maru sequence, including Kirk cheating on it, was lifted right out of The Wrath of Khan, right? It's been more than 20 years, and no one had a problem with it until now. Just a thing that makes me go "hmmmm".

Technobbable - i was amazed to see some reviews praising it for getting rid of technobable - ahem, red matter? Transport in warp over how many light years pulled out of the hat? The drilling rig conveniently blocking transporters and coms?

None of that is technobabble. Try again.

Romulan villain (although we had one just in the last movie)?

I don't blame you for having blocked Nemesis out of your memory, but in fact there was no Romulan villain in that movie. Try again.

But, Voyager was also often fun, with lots of action.

It really wasn't, and it really didn't. Unless you count that ten second "action sequence", which wasn't particularly fun the first time much less after they started using it in every episode. You know the one I mean.

"They're firing" *camera shakes, cast acts like they're on a rollercoaster* "Hail them" "They're not answering" "Target their weapons array" *pewpew*

"Action sequence" over. Total time 9.684 seconds.

Not my idea of fun or action.

 

[theFirebottle]

You are really reaching here trying to make a character scene out of a titty shot.

Your inability to see the subtleties in multilayered scriptwriting, directing, and acting is really not my fault.


The scrubdowns in ENT were excuses to combine boring exposition conversation between the characters with some visually alluring, gratuitous non-sexual sexuality. The intent behind those scenes was to have sex appeal disguised as a practical necessity in that age -- the characters were supposed to be just going about their business while the audience got an eyeful. But it really made no sense at all. If you're worried about bringing pathogens back from the planet's surface, some disinfectant and UV light would be like putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound. In reality, you'd either need to go down there in full biohazard suits, or go through a decon sequence like the one in the novel The Andromeda Strain. Not just some scrubby gel that only gets applied to the parts your modest-for-television underwear doesn't cover.

EDIT: For those unfamiliar with Andromeda Strain, it had a lengthy sequence where the characters went through increasingly intrusive procedures to ensure their bodies were completely free of Earth contaminants. They went so far as to purge their digestive systems with suppositories, burn off the top layers of their skin, and (IIRC) swim through deep baths of very harsh disinfectants.

 

[Cdr MacDuff]

Who exactly is the "people" in this scenario? I would image people who like the movie or hate the movie have all sorts of variety of opinions on the Trek shows. For example I liked the movie and I feel TOS and Ds9 were the best. I also like Voyager and Enterprise better than I do TNG. Janeways is my second favorite captain behind Kirk and I think Ds9's second season was it's best. Most Ds9 fans proably don't even like the second season and most Ds9 fans proably won't admit they liked Janeway better than Sisko, even if they do like Janeway better.

I guess what I am saying is people aren't cliches. People are going to have a variety of opinions on trek and you can't really judge those opinions based on their opinion of the movie.

Jason

By people i mean the audience and the critics in general. VOY, ENT and NEM obviously had lower ratings than the earlier productions, and i'm pretty sure they were recieved more negatively than previous incarnations. Not many people use DS9 or FC as an example why earlier Trek needed rebooting, but many will use ENT or NEM. And this movie is much closer to the latter than to the former.

Ds9 had low ratings as well so you do got to consider Ds9 in the equation. Basically your asking why this movie was more successful than all the spin-offs and movies that came after TNG.

Yeah, good point. Rating are just rating, and Voyager's were pretty good nevertheless. So that angle is moot.

I simply think it boils down to the fact that people like the new versions of the TOS crew and the movie had a sense of fun to it. It didn't get bogged down in technobabble or politics. It was a nice fun adventure story. Berman trek could take itself to serious, always afraid to break the Roddenberry rules or look hokey. It forgot how to have fun. Another thing is that this movie works as a action movie for the most part. Action-adventure was not a strength of any of the 24th century shows. Even Ds9 wasn't great in this regards. Ds9 had some good ship battles and but for the most part Ds9 worked best when it was dealing with the characters doing something other than shooting things with phasers. All the modern Trek's were like this. The problem is action-adventure should have it's place in Trek. I want drama but when the action happens I don't want to fall asleep.

To me this movie sort of represents what Trek should be about. Fun characters,some dark moments or comments on the human condition so as the movie is more than just fluff and fun action scenes with a little comedy tossed in. Star Trek should never treated like a serious drama and it should never be treated like a mindless action-adventure serious. It should be a combination of both of those things IMO.

Jason

The problem is you can't write a TV series like a blockbuster budget movie. You can't only rely on actions and CGI every weeks for 20+ episodes a year. On the very least, on TV schedule, they don't have time nor the budget to do that. And lets get real, it would get boring pretty fast. A TV shows need some intelligence, mystery and drama to entertain the brain.

I'm certainly glad to have been served with incredible and intelligent stories all along TNG, DS9 and Voyager.

 

[starbuck]

i like this film as it had what i think is the best characters of any trek show ,but do enjoy tng to yoy as they tried to carry on that tradtion of star trek

 

[neozeks]

Pretty much. As opposed to Voyager, Enterprise and Nemesis which, y'know, weren't.

Yeah, well their main goal wasn't to be mostly mindless entertainment aimed at the widest audience possible.

You do realize that the whole Kobayashi Maru sequence, including Kirk cheating on it, was lifted right out of The Wrath of Khan, right? It's been more than 20 years, and no one had a problem with it until now. Just a thing that makes me go "hmmmm".

Yeah, did I say anything different? I have no problem with him cheating. (though i do believe the way he cheated was idiotic and ruined the scene for me) I just said we didn't really see any consequences of it. He didn't learn anything from it, Starfleet didn't learn anything from it.

None of that is technobabble. Try again.

Ok, when i say technobabble i meant (and i said this) convenient tech that works that way just because the writers want it. Which in my book is a worse thing than giving something a 'sciency' name.

I don't blame you for having blocked Nemesis out of your memory, but in fact there was no Romulan villain in that movie. Try again.

Har, har, so he was a human clone in command of Remans, makes such a big difference. In fact he was just as much Romulan in his appearance and actions as Nero (meaning not much).

It really wasn't, and it really didn't. Unless you count that ten second "action sequence", which wasn't particularly fun the first time much less after they started using it in every episode. You know the one I mean.

"They're firing" *camera shakes, cast acts like they're on a rollercoaster* "Hail them" "They're not answering" "Target their weapons array" *pewpew*

"Action sequence" over. Total time 9.684 seconds.

Not my idea of fun or action.

You do realize you are comparing a tv show with a big budget blockbuster movie. Voyager could have had just as good FX and action if it had the same budget.

 

[Jayson]

Ds9 had low ratings as well so you do got to consider Ds9 in the equation. Basically your asking why this movie was more successful than all the spin-offs and movies that came after TNG.

I simply think it boils down to the fact that people like the new versions of the TOS crew and the movie had a sense of fun to it. It didn't get bogged down in technobabble or politics. It was a nice fun adventure story. Berman trek could take itself to serious, always afraid to break the Roddenberry rules or look hokey. It forgot how to have fun. Another thing is that this movie works as a action movie for the most part. Action-adventure was not a strength of any of the 24th century shows. Even Ds9 wasn't great in this regards. Ds9 had some good ship battles and but for the most part Ds9 worked best when it was dealing with the characters doing something other than shooting things with phasers. All the modern Trek's were like this. The problem is action-adventure should have it's place in Trek. I want drama but when the action happens I don't want to fall asleep.

To me this movie sort of represents what Trek should be about. Fun characters,some dark moments or comments on the human condition so as the movie is more than just fluff and fun action scenes with a little comedy tossed in. Star Trek should never treated like a serious drama and it should never be treated like a mindless action-adventure serious. It should be a combination of both of those things IMO.

Jason

Okay, fun, but exactly what kind of fun - bar brawling, simple slapstick, swolen hands, Scotty in a tube? How does that mesh with a genocide of a civilization? How can you mix that?
I hope you're not trying to say the Dominion War was action that makes you fall asleep?
Your last paragraph pretty much well describes, say, First Contact. That movie had a good balance. This one was much too tilted to the mindless adventure, and even that wasn't exceptional IMHO.

Some of those scenes you mention happen before Vulcan is destroyed. The scenes I was thinking of though would be young Kirk in the stolen car or Kirk running from the snow monsters or Kirk having sex with the Orion girl or even Scotty's sidekick. Also all the nod's to TOS were fun. I found these things amusing. Granted i'm not happy with everything in the movie. There are 3 things that bother me. Kirk being shot out of the ship,Spock wanting Nero to die at the end and the whole 3 years in the academy and then you become a officer. For the most part though I enjoyed the movie.

I don't see anything wrong with the tone of the movie. Humor and drama con interconnect with each other. Some people are even brilliant at combing these elements such as Josh Whedon. Abrams isn't quite on that level but he did okay in this movie.

You mentioned "First Contact" but that movie was successful at the box office which should have been a indication of what people like in trek. It had good action with the Borg and it had drama with Picard's emotional flight and humor and lightness with the stuff on the planet with Cochrane. Modern Trek wasn't always like this.

As for the Dominion War I do think some of the action scenes were boring. Ship battles were kind of fun. When I think of boring action I always think more to hand combat and people running through halls shotting phasers at each other. All the trek's were bad at this. Just think of the Ds9 ep "To the Death." All the stuff with the Ds9 crew having to work with the Dominion was fun. The final battle though were they fight the Jem-Haddar just wasn't that intresting to me. Not because I dislike action but because the action never really felt all that creative to me on modern Trek.

Jason

 

[Arlo]

"How can you praise this movie and bash VOY, ENT and Nemesis?"

Easy -- they sucked, and ST09 didn't.

 

[EnsignRicky]

I liked Voyager, and Enterprise had it's moments. Insurrection and Nemesis on the other hand were just plain insulting.

 

[-Brett-]

Pretty much. As opposed to Voyager, Enterprise and Nemesis which, y'know, weren't.

Yeah, well their main goal wasn't to be mostly mindless entertainment aimed at the widest audience possible.

That was exactly their main goal. They failed on several different levels.

I don't blame you for having blocked Nemesis out of your memory, but in fact there was no Romulan villain in that movie. Try again.

Har, har, so he was a human clone in command of Remans, makes such a big difference. In fact he was just as much Romulan in his appearance and actions as Nero (meaning not much).

So the Nemesis guy was not-a-Romulan, bossing around not-Romulans, with only a peripheral blink-and-you-miss-it connection to Romulans, and that makes him a Romulan, or close enough? Oooookay. Might as well call Nero yet another Klingon villain while you're at it.

You do realize you are comparing a tv show with a big budget blockbuster movie. Voyager could have had just as good FX and action if it had the same budget.

No. They couldn't have. DS9 was a TV show, on a budget (I'd be willing to bet a smaller one than Voyagers), and it's action sequences were not only better, but infinitely better.

A budget is only an excuse to a certain point. The Voyager writers and special effects teams were just lazy and unimaginative. All the money in the world wouldn't have changed that.

 

[Therin of Andor]

What was original again?

Ummmm.... Stuff we've never seen before: Kirk's parents, Starfleet Academy, first meetings of Kirk/Uhura, Kirk/Pike, Kirk/McCoy and Spock/Kirk, a fresh take on Spock/Uhura, the destruction of a founding planet of the UFP, an alternate story for Pike, who doesn't get marginalised off on Talos IV...

Plenty more.

...say, First Contact. That movie had a good balance. This one was much too tilted to the mindless adventure, and even that wasn't exceptional IMHO.

And JJ's ST had to outperform "First Contact" just to break even. So striking the same balance would not have necessarily helped.

 

[Therin of Andor]

did you catch the line about how Uhura can hear the sound of Kirk breathing even under the bed? There are so many subtle little nods to her being a consummate professional comms officer: she's got great hearing

Actually, I took this as being that Uhura knew Gaila really well, and was guessing that the Orion cadet was hiding a guy under the bed. Again.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

I don't blame you for having blocked Nemesis out of your memory, but in fact there was no Romulan villain in that movie. Try again.

Har, har, so he was a human clone in command of Remans, makes such a big difference. In fact he was just as much Romulan in his appearance and actions as Nero (meaning not much).

Lets see

Shinzon: a Human clone pisssed at the Federation because he's a clone of Picard MADE BY THE ROMULANS and TOSSED ON REMUS BY THE ROMULANS who feels that the Feds stand in the Reman's way INSTEAD OF THE ROMULANS THAT ARE ENSLAVING THEM

Nero: a Romulan miner pisssed at the Federation because he believes they sat on their asses while his homeworld, wife, family, and everything else he gave a crap about was destroyed.

so one is pissed AT THE WRONG GROUP, while the other has at least a slightly better reason to be pissed at that same group.

 

[neozeks]

That was exactly their main goal. They failed on several different levels.

Um, no. They may have aimed for action over story (and were criticized for that), but they still had the theme of exploration (and i don't mean just a few lines at the end of the movie), the idea of the Federation and improving oneself and humanity, moral questions. Episodes like Cogenitor, Tuvix, Similitude, the Vulcan trilogy.
Ok, Nemesis was an epic failure, but at least it gave more screen time to it's villain than ST09 .

So the Nemesis guy was not-a-Romulan, bossing around not-Romulans, with only a peripheral blink-and-you-miss-it connection to Romulans, and that makes him a Romulan, or close enough? Oooookay. Might as well call Nero yet another Klingon villain while you're at it.

You know, you actually just as well might. Romulans were always calm, insidious, arogant, secretive. If he didn't have pointy ears and wasn't explained to be Romulan, you'd probably never guess it. Anyway, that wasn't my point. The point is just how similar Shinzon and Nero were in general. (as in, traumatized crazy guys with a grudge against one of our heroes, unplausible actions, and a huge planet-destroying ship; you know, The Cliche; oh, and i don't see how Nero's reason is even slightly better - they even tried to help them, they were just too late, he should probably be more angry at his own people for not taking the threat seriously).

No. They couldn't have. DS9 was a TV show, on a budget (I'd be willing to bet a smaller one than Voyagers), and it's action sequences were not only better, but infinitely better.

A budget is only an excuse to a certain point. The Voyager writers and special effects teams were just lazy and unimaginative. All the money in the world wouldn't have changed that.

Ok, i watched Voyager a long time ago, i do remember it was somewhat repetitive and definitely inferior to ds9, but not that bad. But than, ENT had pretty good effects. And, anyway, so just because ST09 had better FX than VOY it's better Trek ?

 

[Kirby]

Voyager: It had a great premise but the failed to play it out over the course of the series. The ship was almost always in immaculate condition, the Starfleet and Maquis crews blended too well, and too early in the series, and too many stories were resolved with technobabble. Plus, I just didn't like several of the characters. Chakotay and Kim were not interesting at all, Nelix had his moments but was far too annoying for my tastes. The Doctor was great, one of my all time favorite Trek characters.

Enterprise: Save for the theme song, which is possible the worst theme song in the history of sci-fi, I really didn't mind the show all that much. I enjoyed the 3rd and 4th seasons, and the first season wasn't too bad either, especially as other first seasons go. I hated the 2nd season though.

Nemesis: This was ok for a mid-season two part episode, but as a major motion picture it really fell short. The whole B-4 thing didn't make sense, why did they have to take him apart and spread him around on that planet? What happened to Worf's ambassadorship to the Klingon Empire? Why was he a tactical officer despite all of his command experience? Whats-his-name had many chances to get Picard's blood, why didn't he just do it at the beginning and resolve his problem? Why was he so bent on destroying Earth? Humans didn't create him, or even know of his existance. In fact, he probably would have received quite a bit of cooperation from the Federation if he just tried to talk to them. How did the Remans build that huge ship? Aren't they slaves?

I've only seen Star Trek XI once, so who knows what I'll think after repeated viewings, but I enjoyed it. It wasn't perfect, but I was thoroughly entertained for 2 solid hours and when I left I wasn't creating a list of all the things that didn't make sense about it like I did with Nemesis.

You can't really compare series to movies, because the series have 24 episodes per season times 7 seasons (or 4 in Enterprise's case) to tell a story where you only have a couple of hours with a movie.