STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

[Admiral Buzzkill]

In theory one could write the story about how the group got together by just using original back story as source material, instead of what we were treated to.

That movie would have never been greenlit.

Really - because who besides a Trekkie gives a fuck about Finnegan and Gary Mitchell?

 

[Aragorn]

^ One poster on this board said (before it was released) the entire movie would be ruined for him if Gary Mitchell wasn't in it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

^ One poster on this board said (before it was released) the entire movie would be ruined for him if Gary Mitchell wasn't in it.

Trek developed a lot of throwaway backstory over the decades, and very little of it was intrinsically interesting - the few details we're given about Mitchell and Kirk at the Academy, for instance, are commonplace trivia. They serve the purpose of establishing a grounding for the relationship that is interesting, that of Kirk in comflict with his best friend in the present.

The Kobyashi Maru was at least a bit interesting, as an incident, because it was specifically revelatory about Kirk's essential character. It was handled about as well as it could be, in this movie - the problem with Kirk cheating, after all, is that if he expected to get away with it he's an asshole. The only way he doesn't come out badly is if the cheating is an act of defiance intended to be recognized as such.

 

[Starbreaker]

If this had been a movie about Kirk and Dr. Piper and Kelso I would have probably been bored to tears.

 

[Rusty0918]

Well, as for the blogger who comments on it, I can see where he's coming from.

To me though, the real test of this reboot will be the sequel. Now that they got all the introductory stuff out of the way, it will give us more a feel for these folks.

 

[startrekrcks]

well wonder what the sequel would be like good or bad who knows