My message to the naysayers of this film.

[Amaris]

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.

The thing is, I would see you as someone who simply didn't like the movie and chalk it up to different tastes in Trek, which is cool with me. A naysayer, in my opinion, is someone who actively hates the film, and wishes it to fail, tells everyone it will, and when it doesn't, starts going off on how the whole of Star Trek is now destroyed and we're all non-Star Trek fans who just want a stupid action flick without any thought. You know I have a few people in mind for that one, too. That, in my opinion, is a naysayer.

J.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Just imagine how much better it could have been if they actually but in the effort to make it fit with Star Trek.

That wouldn't have made it one bit better.

It just would make some fanboys more comfortable. So what?

 

[Alex1939]

Just imagine how much better it could have been if they actually but in the effort to make it fit with Star Trek.

That wouldn't have made it one bit better.

It just would make some fanboys more comfortable. So what?

That's pretty ridiculous. Better by what standards? This isn't the best space or science fiction story I've ever seen by a long shot. Not even best Star Trek story, by a long shot.

You can't act like this is the best story ever told.

 

[Nightcreature]

I'm still proud to say I'm not watching this movie until it comes out on TV and I don't have to spend a nickel on it. I don't support it.

For me, no one should play James T Kirk except Shatner and Spock/Nimoy even though he has a guest appearance in this movie. Even if I watch it, I automatically put it below every single Trek movie because I agree with recasting characters that don't need to be recast. Imagine Picard and the crew of TNG recast years from now? Might as well go through all the Trek spinoffs.

I'll stick to reading my New Frontier books. Even though its non canon, I'm positive it's so much more enjoyable than this movie.

 

[Captain_Rogers]

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.

19th Century..uh huh. And you've seen a lot of 19th century boiler rooms have you?

Personally I think the smooth polished ridiculously un-functional engine room is what looks retarded. Sorry to break any tightly held beliefs but engine rooms are not clean neat tidy shiny places. Thinking they will be in another 150 years is pretty silly. Sorry but function over style. The engine room FINALLY actually looked realistic and about time at that.

And for the all of two minutes from the entire film that we see it, hardly a point worth even giving time to.

 

[Captain_Rogers]

For me, no one should play James T Kirk except Shatner and Spock/Nimoy even though he has a guest appearance in this movie. Even if I watch it, I automatically put it below every single Trek movie because I agree with recasting characters that don't need to be recast. Imagine Picard and the crew of TNG recast years from now? Might as well go through all the Trek spinoffs.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm still proud to say I'm not watching this movie until it comes out on TV and I don't have to spend a nickel on it. I don't support it.

Amazing what small "accomplishments" folks can take pride in.

Message to naysayers: Busy. Please try again later. Or never.

 

[Ghrakh]

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

Really? So "Kirk" and the "Enterprise" and "Vulcan" and all that weren't in it? And it wasn't called "Star Trek"?

Wow.

But seriously:

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.

How exactly was the story better?

 

[What's his face]

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

Really? So "Kirk" and the "Enterprise" and "Vulcan" and all that weren't in it? And it wasn't called "Star Trek"?

Wow.

But seriously:

Don't be an idiot. You know exactly what I mean. NuTrek is free to follow any story the writers want to, now. They're not restricted by "canon" (canon is a ridiculous concept, anyways. What's "real" in a fictional universe? Whatever the hell any of us want - it's fictional! If I want Kirk to live after Generations, then to me he's alive.)

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.

How exactly was the story better?[/QUOTE]

My problem with old trek is that there was soo much history and trivia one had to take into account when writing a story, the writer would have to jump through hoops and use lame plot devices to get his or her story done while being consistent.

Just an example: in the old universe, the Enterprise crew encountered the Ferengi, but because "canon" says that they weren't discovered until TNG, the writers had to write in a hokey, unbelievable plot point about the Ferengi never identifying themselves and other silly stuff. Now that all that is gone, whose to say the TOS crew can't have a Ferengi storylike if JJ so decides?

 

[alienFanatic]

My problem with old trek is that there was soo much history and trivia one had to take into account when writing a story, the writer would have to jump through hoops and use lame plot devices to get his or her story done while being consistent.

Just an example: in the old universe, the Enterprise crew encountered the Ferengi, but because "canon" says that they weren't discovered until TNG, the writers had to write in a hokey, unbelievable plot point about the Ferengi never identifying themselves and other silly stuff. Now that all that is gone, whose to say the TOS crew can't have a Ferengi storylike if JJ so decides?

I registered, strangely enough, to reply to this one thing. While it's true that this can be ignored--and they can bring the Ferengi in at a different time--the fact is that ONLY time moving forward has so far been impacted. Klingons still mistrust humans. Romulans, aside from Nero, are still unknown (and Romulus still exists, for now). Khan is still alive and kicking. The Doomsday Device is still gobbling planets. And all of the other races are as they should be.

What's most impacted are the characters we've enjoyed for all this time. Canon still exists (since there was a rich history established prior to TOS), but everything that happens AFTER TOS (TNG, DS9, etc.) is now defunct. It'll be interesting to see where this takes the franchise. Like others, I didn't love the film nor did I hate it. It was a good action movie.

Sadly, I couldn't help but leave in a reflective mood. Leonard Nimoy's performance really affected me, but not as the character of Spock. I realized, looking at Mr. Nimoy, that this might be the very last time I see such a beloved actor playing a favorite character on screen. I read articles about how he wept on the set, remembering how much he misses people that are no longer around, like DeForest Kelly.

They may bring Mr. Nimoy back for the next one, though I doubt it. While the franchise will continue, we'll soon lose the remainder of the actual PEOPLE that made the franchise what it is to begin with. I think that for those of us that are less satisfied, this is the unspoken truth of it. We're having a hard time letting go of the people that made Star Trek such an experience. (The new guys will get their shot, I'm guessing, but they'll never eclipse the old crew to those of us that adored them.) It's just hard to let go of the things we've become accustomed to. Some folks find it easier than others.

 

[CobraCommander]

alienFanatic, you are right about how its sad that the original actors are fading away. In regards to the new film, I will see it when it comes out on TV or when Video King puts it on the 99 cents per day rental rack. I don't support the direction that this film has gone in. Can I convince others to hate this film... no. To every man/ woman his own. I'm also no fan of the Berman/ Braga era. They missed so many opportunities and squandered the franchise with poor writing and stiff acting/ direction. All I can ask current viewers of this film is the following: How does the plot compare with the rest of the Trek films? How is the story and the writing. Cobra

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

But the Enterprise was built on THE GROUND!!! in IOWA!!!!
Trek is dead

You mean it wasn't originally?!?

That's what the movie says. Thus, it has always been so.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

For me, no one should play James T Kirk except Shatner and Spock/Nimoy even though he has a guest appearance in this movie. Even if I watch it, I automatically put it below every single Trek movie because I agree with recasting characters that don't need to be recast.

Riiiiight... because it would be completely plausible for William Shatner to portray a 22-year-old. I suppose that you also think we should exhume De Kelley and Majel Barrett Roddenberry for the next movie. Next you'll be telling us that no one should ever play James Bond again except for 78-year-old Sir Sean Connery.

Puh-lease.

 

[cbspock]

As has been mentioned, the opening shot of the Kelvin, I knew this was going to be a very different ride. I also really liked the new bridge, and I thought I was going to hate it from the first pictures that were released of it. Something about having the viewscreen be a real window with a HUD was a really cool idea.

The pipes all over the lower decks, didn't care for that so much, although Trek had them on the original series to a lesser extent.


-Chris

 

[Alrik]

For me, no one should play James T Kirk except Shatner and Spock/Nimoy even though he has a guest appearance in this movie. Even if I watch it, I automatically put it below every single Trek movie because I agree with recasting characters that don't need to be recast.

Riiiiight... because it would be completely plausible for William Shatner to portray a 22-year-old. I suppose that you also think we should exhume De Kelley and Majel Barrett Roddenberry for the next movie. Next you'll be telling us that no one should ever play James Bond again except for 78-year-old Sir Sean Connery.

Puh-lease.

Don't forget to get Jimmy Doohan's ashes from space.

Even after all these years here, I still find it difficult to get over just how closed minded some people are. All I know is, after seeing it yesterday, it left me with the same sense of hope and thoughts of possiblities that TOS gave me as a child in the early 70's.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

I'm still proud to say I'm not watching this movie until it comes out on TV and I don't have to spend a nickel on it. I don't support it.

For me, no one should play James T Kirk except Shatner and Spock/Nimoy even though he has a guest appearance in this movie. Even if I watch it, I automatically put it below every single Trek movie because I agree with recasting characters that don't need to be recast. Imagine Picard and the crew of TNG recast years from now? Might as well go through all the Trek spinoffs.

I'll stick to reading my New Frontier books. Even though its non canon, I'm positive it's so much more enjoyable than this movie.

Good for you. Congratulations. A real reason to be proud of yourself, because I know how much pain it must cause you not to see something you're sure you won't like anyway.


As for the "naysayers"....well, people, we're all entitled to an opinion. I won't call anyone names for not liking nuTrek, and I'm actually not offended by people insulting my intelligence for liking, no, loving it to bits.

This film is the hottest thing in town right now. I hope they keep up the brilliant work.

Cheers.

 

[TheGodBen]

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.

Nero had none of these elements; Nero was a villain because he was villainous, and he was villainous because he was a villain. He's in the same league as Dr Claw from Inspector Gadget.

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.

Oh please, a bad movie is a bad movie and special effects don't even play a part in why I think that TFF was a bad movie. That is Shatner's excuse as to why people panned his movie, along with how he wasn't able to budget fire-breathing rock-men, and the fact that he uses these as a defence shows how little he understands about the art of making a good movie.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Here we go with the Nero thing again.

 

[kay1864]

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.

Thank you.

The bridge looked like 200+ years of technological advancement.

The engine room, uh, no.

 

[AdmiralSteven]

Great movie. I'll be seeing this one again, and again if I can.