• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

My message to the naysayers of this film.

Status
Not open for further replies.

srombomb

Lieutenant
Red Shirt
I have been a fan of Star Trek since I was 7 years old. Growing up I used to go to the local library to rent original series episodes for free to help take my mind off the mass hysteria that was my parents divorce at the time.

That being said, I've seen every movie multiple times, all of the TV shows, and consider myself to be quite the knowledgeable Trek closet Geek:) I know what I feel works for Trek and what does not. So to make it clear: I'm not apart of the new hip audience that loves this movie.

That being said, I loved every single thing about this movie (including some of the overlooked plot points). The opening scene and music is what did it for me. I knew with the Kelvin/Narada sequence that I was in for a rare treat of which I'd never seen before with a Trek production on any scale of any level. It had emotion, it had music playing in exactly the right places to evoke emotion, it had convincing acting right down to the Captain who bites the big one in the first five minutes, and a very capable villain.

Was this movie " exploring strange new worlds"? Not exactly, we have seen anomaly's in Trek before, however, they were never done on such an epic and convincing scale. Every actor in this movie had me convinced they were the people they were portraying. Even John Cho, for as little lines as he had, I was convinced he was Sulu by the end of the movie during the sequence in which he delicately helmed the Enterprise through the rings of Saturn.. he had command of his voice, the timing, and overall aura needed. That takes a great director. JJ Abrams knows exactly what hes doing.

People complain about the engine room? Give me a freaking break. It's the first time a Trek movie ever tried to evoke a sense of realness in parts of the ship. Just nitpicky stuff from people that claim theyre the end all be all for knowing what Trek should be about, yet I challenge them to see a fun movie and just enjoy it for what it was. I am definitely worried about people who can't go into this movie and not walk out semi-blown away.

My 62 year old father who was watching Trek since Vietnam, was raving about this movie and went and saw it again the following night. My friend who is my age (28) who never gets excited over any movies, couldn't stop reminding me what a good movie he thought it was (and the best of the Treks in his eyes). And many other people I've spoken with feel exactly the same.

I still don't understand why people are also knocking the NERO character. Bana made the character beyond menacing from the beginning of the movie with the staring away from Capt. Robah pissed off look he had. I rate him as one of the best Trek villains to date. I only wish he had more screen time.

Lastly, what is with all the butt kissing for the Wrath of Kahn anyway?? I've seen it countless times, I get it: Kahn was awesome. However, the movie itself? It's good, but takes a very long time to get it's own set legs. It also has many many plot holes. So my point is, anyone who wishes to knock the plot holes of the newest movie, outta look no further than Wrath of Kahn and look at all the ubsurd plot holes in that movie. Such as, why would the Federation not immediately send 2-3 ships to intercept the Reliant the minute they broke off communication (considering they were tasked with handling the Genesis project for finding a suitable planet)? Why would the federation not have it's own ship guarding Space Lab Regula one knowing that theyre protecting the most lethal weapon in the universe from other races?? So you send a rescue ship filled with training cadets because it was only ship in the quadrant?? WHAT?!?!? So really, if your going to nitpick, at least nitpick Kahn and you will see that plot holes are meant to be overlooked as long as the movie itself delivers with solid acting, great action sequences, and well developed characters!

I've never been so entertained during a Sci Fi movie, let alone a Trek film. If I can walk out wide eyed, and still asking questions the next day, it's a great film. Indeed Star Trek was as great film. I only wish JJ Abrams had been around during the making of the Motion Picture, he is just the type that would have prevented the slow, prodding sequences of that movie. That always bothered me about the Motion Picture. They had carte blanche to spend on that film, and all they gave us was a movie predominantly shot on a set without anything going on outside the ship? (with exception to the end scene) No one firing hand phasers, no hand to hand combat, no Enterprise fighting another ship in space.

One thing they could have done was had the klingon ships attack the Enterprise before they moved in on the cloud, and once they did, the Enterprise witnesses their demise from a safe distance, albeit disabled from the Klingons whipping their butt. That would have been one way to work in some more action. Or have a race between the Klingons and Kirk and co to get to the Veger orifice, knowing whoever got their first might hold the key to unraveling the mystery behind veger. You could have had Kirk and Spock in spacesuits outside the ship engaging Klingons in spacesuits who were trying to prevent the Federation from getting to Veger first. Really my point is, they just needed to have a better script in place before shooting. With this new movie, everyone was in agreement on the story that mattered. The Director loved it, the writers loved it, and the studio loved it enough to bump it to summer.

Ok I am off my soapbox now.

Thanks for reading!
 
I just signed up to say that I really enjoyed the movie. I thank God (Abrams?) that Trek was brought back from the dead.

But not only that, but we've got a chance at a whole new beginning now. Something none of us would have predicted 5 years ago, I think.

Anyway...I hope you all enjoyed it.
 
To paraphrase a great book, "...the naysayers we will have with us always."

Very nice testimonial; thank you! I couldn't sleep the night after I saw the movie the first time; I couldn't stop dreaming about it.
 
But the Enterprise was built on THE GROUND!!! in IOWA!!!!
Trek is dead :(

Just kidding. Loved the movie. Can't wait for a sequel.
 
I have been a fan of Star Trek since I was 7 years old. Growing up I used to go to the local library to rent original series episodes for free to help take my mind off the mass hysteria that was my parents divorce at the time.

That being said, I've seen every movie multiple times, all of the TV shows, and consider myself to be quite the knowledgeable Trek closet Geek:) I know what I feel works for Trek and what does not. So to make it clear: I'm not apart of the new hip audience that loves this movie.

That being said, I loved every single thing about this movie (including some of the overlooked plot points). The opening scene and music is what did it for me. I knew with the Kelvin/Narada sequence that I was in for a rare treat of which I'd never seen before with a Trek production on any scale of any level. It had emotion, it had music playing in exactly the right places to evoke emotion, it had convincing acting right down to the Captain who bites the big one in the first five minutes, and a very capable villain.

Was this movie " exploring strange new worlds"? Not exactly, we have seen anomaly's in Trek before, however, they were never done on such an epic and convincing scale. Every actor in this movie had me convinced they were the people they were portraying. Even John Cho, for as little lines as he had, I was convinced he was Sulu by the end of the movie during the sequence in which he delicately helmed the Enterprise through the rings of Saturn.. he had command of his voice, the timing, and overall aura needed. That takes a great director. JJ Abrams knows exactly what hes doing.

People complain about the engine room? Give me a freaking break. It's the first time a Trek movie ever tried to evoke a sense of realness in parts of the ship. Just nitpicky stuff from people that claim theyre the end all be all for knowing what Trek should be about, yet I challenge them to see a fun movie and just enjoy it for what it was. I am definitely worried about people who can't go into this movie and not walk out semi-blown away.

My 62 year old father who was watching Trek since Vietnam, was raving about this movie and went and saw it again the following night. My friend who is my age (28) who never gets excited over any movies, couldn't stop reminding me what a good movie he thought it was (and the best of the Treks in his eyes). And many other people I've spoken with feel exactly the same.

I still don't understand why people are also knocking the NERO character. Bana made the character beyond menacing from the beginning of the movie with the staring away from Capt. Robah pissed off look he had. I rate him as one of the best Trek villains to date. I only wish he had more screen time.

Lastly, what is with all the butt kissing for the Wrath of Kahn anyway?? I've seen it countless times, I get it: Kahn was awesome. However, the movie itself? It's good, but takes a very long time to get it's own set legs. It also has many many plot holes. So my point is, anyone who wishes to knock the plot holes of the newest movie, outta look no further than Wrath of Kahn and look at all the ubsurd plot holes in that movie. Such as, why would the Federation not immediately send 2-3 ships to intercept the Reliant the minute they broke off communication (considering they were tasked with handling the Genesis project for finding a suitable planet)? Why would the federation not have it's own ship guarding Space Lab Regula one knowing that theyre protecting the most lethal weapon in the universe from other races?? So you send a rescue ship filled with training cadets because it was only ship in the quadrant?? WHAT?!?!? So really, if your going to nitpick, at least nitpick Kahn and you will see that plot holes are meant to be overlooked as long as the movie itself delivers with solid acting, great action sequences, and well developed characters!

I've never been so entertained during a Sci Fi movie, let alone a Trek film. If I can walk out wide eyed, and still asking questions the next day, it's a great film. Indeed Star Trek was as great film. I only wish JJ Abrams had been around during the making of the Motion Picture, he is just the type that would have prevented the slow, prodding sequences of that movie. That always bothered me about the Motion Picture. They had carte blanche to spend on that film, and all they gave us was a movie predominantly shot on a set without anything going on outside the ship? (with exception to the end scene) No one firing hand phasers, no hand to hand combat, no Enterprise fighting another ship in space.

One thing they could have done was had the klingon ships attack the Enterprise before they moved in on the cloud, and once they did, the Enterprise witnesses their demise from a safe distance, albeit disabled from the Klingons whipping their butt. That would have been one way to work in some more action. Or have a race between the Klingons and Kirk and co to get to the Veger orifice, knowing whoever got their first might hold the key to unraveling the mystery behind veger. You could have had Kirk and Spock in spacesuits outside the ship engaging Klingons in spacesuits who were trying to prevent the Federation from getting to Veger first. Really my point is, they just needed to have a better script in place before shooting. With this new movie, everyone was in agreement on the story that mattered. The Director loved it, the writers loved it, and the studio loved it enough to bump it to summer.

Ok I am off my soapbox now.

Thanks for reading!

Nicely stated! For the record, I love the movie and I've been a Star Trek fan 25 of my 29 years.

With that being said, I have no problem with someone not liking the movie. We're all different, we all have preferences. I'm no big fan of Voyager, but there are people who adore that show. I love Star Trek V, but it is constantly lambasted by many. My problem is with the people who want everyone to not only hate the movie, but it seems like they want to punish J.J. and the creative team for "daring" to try a new flavor of Star Trek.

They want it all to fail, they want the people to hate it and they want people to feel as terrible as they do, even if they haven't seen the movie! It's incredible the number of "I haven't seen it yet but I hate it already" posts there are, and they argue with people who have seen it. It's absurd. It's beyond silly, and I think there are people who need to seriously grow up. Don't like the movie if you don't want to, no skin off my nose, but don't sit there and trash talk it in the hopes of making people hate it when you haven't seen it yourself. That includes those who have seen it but wanted to hate it from the start and only saw it to deepen that hate. Crazy. You wonder why their lives revolve around hatred for a movie someone else likes. It's sad, but I'm seeing it in this forum.

And I will step down from my own soapbox.

J.
 
People criticize aspects of it, just like they do for any other ST movie. That warrants a defensive rant? :confused:

Lastly, what is with all the butt kissing for the Wrath of Kahn anyway?? I've seen it countless times, I get it: Kahn was awesome. However, the movie itself? It's good, but takes a very long time to get it's own set legs. It also has many many plot holes. So my point is, anyone who wishes to knock the plot holes of the newest movie, outta look no further than Wrath of Kahn and look at all the ubsurd plot holes in that movie.
Plot holes don't suck less just because they're in the new film...
 
As a diehard fan of Star Trek since 1966, I am definitely NOT a naysayer. I absolutely loved the movie and can't stop thinking about it! I don't care about plot holes if it means we'll be spared "Spock's Brain" and a remake of "Star Trek V."
 
As a diehard fan of Star Trek since 1966, I am definitely NOT a naysayer. I absolutely loved the movie and can't stop thinking about it! I don't care about plot holes if it means we'll be spared "Spock's Brain" and a remake of "Star Trek V."


See srombomb?! See?! I can't win!

I kid, I kid. ;)


J.
 
My problem is with the people who want everyone to not only hate the movie, but it seems like they want to punish J.J. and the creative team for "daring" to try a new flavor of Star Trek.

They want it all to fail, they want the people to hate it and they want people to feel as terrible as they do, even if they haven't seen the movie! It's incredible the number of "I haven't seen it yet but I hate it already" posts there are, and they argue with people who have seen it. It's absurd. It's beyond silly, and I think there are people who need to seriously grow up. Don't like the movie if you don't want to, no skin off my nose, but don't sit there and trash talk it in the hopes of making people hate it when you haven't seen it yourself. That includes those who have seen it but wanted to hate it from the start and only saw it to deepen that hate. Crazy. You wonder why their lives revolve around hatred for a movie someone else likes. It's sad, but I'm seeing it in this forum.

And I will step down from my own soapbox.

J.
QFT
I think that many people decided they hated the movie before they saw it. It could have been brilliant (and it was) yet they'd find some tiny minutiae that they disliked about it and bitch about that for eternity.
 
I have to admit,

Star Trek 5 was and still is a personal favorite of mine. However, if it had a decent effects budget, more people would have warmed up to it. I'm still holding out hope that if Star Trek goes on to make over 200 mil worldwide, Paramount might let Mr. Shatner do whatever he wants to remaster an old Trek movie and make it look more marketable for blu-ray!

I realize everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the new movie. I guess I'm just shocked that with something as hair raising as the new movie, they can still think it wasn't good.

Additionally, did anyone catch the 2001/Kubrick homage being paid during the space jump sequence? Classic and brilliant at the same time just hearing their breathing patterns.

Thats the kind of thing that separates an outstanding filmmaker to that of a Micheal Bay type:)
 
I

People complain about the engine room? Give me a freaking break. It's the first time a Trek movie ever tried to evoke a sense of realness in parts of the ship. Just nitpicky stuff from people that claim theyre the end all be all for knowing what Trek should be about, yet I challenge them to see a fun movie and just enjoy it for what it was. I am definitely worried about people who can't go into this movie and not walk out semi-blown away.

Ok I am off my soapbox now.

Thanks for reading!


My problem wasn't so much with Abram trying to evoke a sense of gritty realism but how he did it. For example if Abram showed a bread factory from the late middle ages as the setting of Enterprise's engine room then most of you would think that is pretty retarded. It's the same thing for us engine room bashers. The 19th century steamer/factory motif just wasn't acceptable. It neither evoked realism nor was it even cool-looking. Bottom line the engine room was imo aesthetically jarring and looked functionally retarded.
 
Just imagine how much better it could have been if they actually but in the effort to make it fit with Star Trek.
 
Just imagine how much better it could have been if they actually but in the effort to make it fit with Star Trek.
Ah, yes, a 16-hour docu-drama where every little piece of trivia ever mentioned in an episode of TOS is explored in nauseating detail, from Finnegan to an explanation why Kirk spoke in Shakespearian style. Not to mention sets made of plywood, painted black, grey and red with Lite Brite buttons.

What I like about this movie is that it gets rid of the prior canon and starts anew. There was just so much prior to this that it's next to impossible to write a decent Star Trek story anymore without violating some sort of canon.
 
My message is... err i have no message. There's no way to send a message of "I'll be adding 10 more bucks to its box office take AND having an incredibly fun two hours in the process."
 
Ah, yes, a 16-hour docu-drama where every little piece of trivia ever mentioned in an episode of TOS is explored in nauseating detail, from Finnegan to an explanation why Kirk spoke in Shakespearian style. Not to mention sets made of plywood, painted black, grey and red with Lite Brite buttons.

I would HATE that. Good thing a Star Trek movie wouldn't have to do that to fit in with Star Trek.

What I like about this movie is that it gets rid of the prior canon and starts anew.

What a sad view. But to each his own.

There was just so much prior to this that it's next to impossible to write a decent Star Trek story anymore without violating some sort of canon.

No it's not.
 
My message to the naysayers is simply, "I'm sorry you didn't like it." I sure did. :)
Best message to us "naysayers" yet. Thanks!

I just don't get why we all seem to have to love the movie or we're 'naysayers.' I prefer to think of myself as an intelligent, discerning consumer who prefers his films and fiction to not be so transparently contrived. And I like to think that somewhere out there are thousands of writers and filmmakers who are capable of achieving that. It's too bad, IMHO, that Pixar would never touch Trek - their level of commitment to the story and to the characters is truly setting the bar in the industry, and still they somehow manage to create highly-entertaining and financially- and critically-successful films time and time again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top