I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.
- Thread starter Gepard
- Start date
No need to duck. Now that you mention it, this would be a good place to cross-post something I said in the Trek Movies forum:
Which pretty much comes back around to the third-act-was-a-letdown element from earlier in the thread. It's like movies these days have forgotten how to write story arcs because they can chuck all that messy personal stuff at the end and have a big boss fight instead. It's hard for me to care about characters when it ends up feeling like their development existed merely as a tool to justify maneuvering them into a flashy finale.
I do kind of role my eyes at this part. Pike's whole "You can graduate in 4 years. You can have your own command in 8."
Really? Once you graduate from Starfleet Academy, it only take 4 extra years before you're put in command of a starship?
Um, tell that to Harry Kim.
If only Star Trek had been as well-written as the first 10 episodes of Battlestar Galactica season 5.
Don't blame me for that. That's Berman and Braga's fault..
I don't have much to add to the discussion here, and I believe it is good for Star Trek to get all these positive reviews from critics, to gain new fans and to have more movies coming, so I want to be optimistic.
I saw the film last week and I'm one of those that while enjoying it on screen - more or less -, I felt unsure and confused after leaving the theater. Sad because of Vulcan getting destroyed, of the plot holes that were apparent without much thinking and mostly because I felt something missing. Now, a week later, all I can say is that I forgot most about it except the general feeling that it was ok, I might watch it another time if I get the chance and that's all. I wanted to be enthusiastic, exhilarated, happy about it, I just wasn't
I saw the film last week and I'm one of those that while enjoying it on screen - more or less -, I felt unsure and confused after leaving the theater. Sad because of Vulcan getting destroyed, of the plot holes that were apparent without much thinking and mostly because I felt something missing. Now, a week later, all I can say is that I forgot most about it except the general feeling that it was ok, I might watch it another time if I get the chance and that's all. I wanted to be enthusiastic, exhilarated, happy about it, I just wasn't
I felt unsure and confused after leaving the theater. Sad because of Vulcan getting destroyed, of the plot holes that were apparent without much thinking and mostly because I felt something missing. Now, a week later, all I can say is that I forgot most about it except the general feeling that it was ok, I might watch it another time if I get the chance and that's all. I wanted to be enthusiastic, exhilarated, happy about it, I just wasn't
What do you think this "missing" thing is?
I felt unsure and confused after leaving the theater. Sad because of Vulcan getting destroyed, of the plot holes that were apparent without much thinking and mostly because I felt something missing. Now, a week later, all I can say is that I forgot most about it except the general feeling that it was ok, I might watch it another time if I get the chance and that's all. I wanted to be enthusiastic, exhilarated, happy about it, I just wasn't
What do you think this "missing" thing is?
This is difficult for me to answer, because I'm describing a subjective feeling and not something concrete. I suppose I expected to feel wonder, to be able to open up to the new story and I didn't. I did love the opening sequence - it was brilliant.
I'd say that a development of themes was lacking. The story offered several in the beginning--a rehash of the "no win" idea, the idea of working hard to improve oneself, some thoughts on choosing one's path in life, and the notion of emotional pain, loss and grief, having to face a conflicted nature, and, by the writers' own admission, a theme about having to change what you know.
Which might be part of the problem, actually. The script had so many thematic balls in the air at once with no clear sense of how they related to each other beyond that they were happening to a bunch of people at the same time that it came across as lacking focus. Again, as setup, that's fine--I'd rather see a story be ambitious and try to tackle a lot of themes rather than too few; but it's when we got to the end of the story and it didn't do anything to pull all those threads together into a cohesive whole that the movie retroactively fell apart.
All IMHO, of course, but it's a problem I hope to see addressed in the next film.
Which might be part of the problem, actually. The script had so many thematic balls in the air at once with no clear sense of how they related to each other beyond that they were happening to a bunch of people at the same time that it came across as lacking focus. Again, as setup, that's fine--I'd rather see a story be ambitious and try to tackle a lot of themes rather than too few; but it's when we got to the end of the story and it didn't do anything to pull all those threads together into a cohesive whole that the movie retroactively fell apart.
All IMHO, of course, but it's a problem I hope to see addressed in the next film.
Well, yeah, obviously. And clearly the majority don't either, considering the reviews it's getting. But I can only speak from experience and analyze why it didn't work for me. Everyone else: go about loving your film. I won't stop you.
And maybe you'll love the next one!
Sweetie, it's Trek not Shakespeare - don't overthink or overanalyse. That's what destroyed my love of Shakespeare for 20 years.
I can only hope.
On the other hand, I can see the advantages of the Zero Punctuation method of anticipation, which is to abandon hope ahead of time and assume that everything will suck balls, such that if it doesn't it might be a pleasant surprise.
I'm not asking Trek to reach amazing heights of artistic merit; I'm asking that it be a well-told story, something that even good children's books and prior Trek films have accomplished. Take TWoK: they developed themes, built characterization, then resolved them in the finale by paying off the ideas that had been sewn through the story earlier. I'm not comparing Star Trek to Shakespeare; I'm comparing Star Trek to Star Trek and still finding it lacking. Just how much of my brain am I supposed to switch off, anyway?
Wait, wasn't there a Chekovgate thing in TWOK?
The Genesis aside was a bit contrived too.
But still, TWOK was a great movie.
For what it had to do, so was ... Star Trek.
The Genesis aside was a bit contrived too.
But still, TWOK was a great movie.
For what it had to do, so was ... Star Trek.
I just can't keep my mouth closed any more. I know I'm a n00b to the board, but I have to ask...what is wrong with you people 
Okay, its not TOS, its not TNG, its not DS9 and, thankfully its not that abomination they called Voyager. I understand, I get it. But I think too many Trekkies, Trekkers and Trekmonkeys are missing the ride here and allowing the old shows to color opinions. I have never in my life seen so many different versions of "Yeah, it was a good movie but..."
Look, Star Trek lore, much like Star Wars, can not stand up to legit scrutiny under the best conditions. Both...canons if we can use that word without making to many people cringe...are plodding wrecks full of cheesey goodness, and thats why this movie fits the mold so well. All the plot holes, unlikely science and turns of events, over-the-top suddeness and bad dialogue are not unique to this Star Trek story...they are the rule. This movie fits right into the mold. We all ignored that before, why is it so hard now?
What Abrams has done is give us back the possibility of expanding the Trek Universe. He has proven that if done right the hunger for the Enterprise and its crew is still HUGE. And he is done so in a way that allows us to recognize the universe while seeing new stories and even the retelling of old ones.
I am willing to give this new crew a chance.
Okay, its not TOS, its not TNG, its not DS9 and, thankfully its not that abomination they called Voyager. I understand, I get it. But I think too many Trekkies, Trekkers and Trekmonkeys are missing the ride here and allowing the old shows to color opinions. I have never in my life seen so many different versions of "Yeah, it was a good movie but..."
Look, Star Trek lore, much like Star Wars, can not stand up to legit scrutiny under the best conditions. Both...canons if we can use that word without making to many people cringe...are plodding wrecks full of cheesey goodness, and thats why this movie fits the mold so well. All the plot holes, unlikely science and turns of events, over-the-top suddeness and bad dialogue are not unique to this Star Trek story...they are the rule. This movie fits right into the mold. We all ignored that before, why is it so hard now?
What Abrams has done is give us back the possibility of expanding the Trek Universe. He has proven that if done right the hunger for the Enterprise and its crew is still HUGE. And he is done so in a way that allows us to recognize the universe while seeing new stories and even the retelling of old ones.
I am willing to give this new crew a chance.
In all fairness, I like this thread a lot more than some of the vitriol expressed elsewhere. I'm all for thoughtful reflections, for or against this film. I've been totally swept away by this film, so while I'm not blind to its faults, I hesitate even to criticize, because the film so thoroughly entertained me and I am so happy to have Star Trek back, and in a different form than that in which it's been languishing for the last twenty years.
For the record, my stance--and intent in starting this thread--is pretty much the opposite. I'm glad they got rid of a lot of the stylistic and continuity-driven shit that bogged Trek down in later years. I'm even glad they destroyed Vulcan--those guys were boring anyway. I just don't think it was a good movie. It was an okay movie, perfectly entertaining but easily forgotten: just not all that good, and definitely not great. (I will say that if it wasn't for it being Star Trek, I wouldn't be expending this much energy on analyzing it; I probably would have just shrugged, said "huh, that was kind of lame" and moved on.)
So this is not "Yeah, it was a good movie but...," but instead, "Yeah it was Star Trek, but it wasn't good."
Fair enough. I can respect that though for the most part I disagree. To me this was the return of an old friend, someone I have not seen in a long time. Yeah, he looks different...I bit thinner and somewhat shorter but he is still my friend. I am curious to see where he goes from here.
One thing I have to be honest about though is that if this were not a Trek film I would very likely feel the same way you do. Decent, but nothing to write home about.
But there are two things here...first it IS a Trek film and we are lucky to have it. And two...and this'll piss a few folks off...is that I like the new Crew
I can't help but think back to the first season if TNG. I remember a lot of conversations just like this one. Even into the 90s and the advent of the internet that argument still rages. I have to wonder how long this one will go on.
Similar threads
