Star Trek: The Future Begins is TINO

[cmdrbolly]

Star Trek: The Future Begins (ST:TFB) or ST:11 is TINO, or Trek in Name Only.

The Star Trek created by Roddenberry in TOS, the movies, and ST:TNG was about good science, science fiction that made sense, and stories that had a positive point about humanity using human/alien or human/technology to flesh that out.

The movie, ST:TFB is a take off of Star Wars with characters who have names like Kirk, Spock, and Pike. ST:TFB has phaser battles, hand-to-hand combat, torture, and weird aliens from Hoth (oh, I meant Delta Vega).

TOS, TNG, TWOK, TVH, TUC, FC, DS9, and ENT (Manny Coto year) all did a good job with good science, plausible science fiction, and stories that showed the conflict between man and alien, man and technology, and man against society.

ST:TFB only ranks a little higher than Voyager, or Lost in Space Trek because of the good special effects, explosions, and good acting. The story, however, is hogwash and bad science.

For example, we have to believe that some star goes supernova and the explosion threatens not only Romulus (who mourns for Remas) but the whole quadrant?

And, when Spock goes out to save the day he's late. When has Spock been late?

The explosion from another star (remember the supernova sun wasn't Romulus) travels so fast that the Romulans don't have like a couple of years to escape its effect (explosions from supernovas don't travel faster than the speed of light).

Spock needs this red matter stuff (never explained) to save the quadrant, and he only has to use a pinch, so he brings a 60 gallon bag of the stuff?

Also, Starfleet is in such need of recruits that it picks up a drunkard townie who picks fights with the cadets. Yes, this is something we can believe in.

When the crisis hits and a dozen or more ships depart from Earth, who gets the call. Not the experienced officers of all these ships, but all the cadets from the Academy.

And, to be even more picky, the engineering deck looked like waste management facility from 2009.

But. the worst part of the movie is when Spock strangles Kirk. Anyone who knows anything about Spock knows that Spock wouldn't strangle Kirk (without at least good dose of spores). Spock would never lose his cool like this, and especially not because because some jerk, about to expelled, already thrown off the ship officer is taunting him.

This movie wasn't made for Trekkers. It was a standard issue Hollywood movie that was filled with a lot of under 25 year-old actors and no mature adults. It was meant to grab the teen dollar, not to recapture the vision of Roddenberry. Paramount doesn't care and didn't care when it signed off on this movie that the movie rips and tears down the concept of Star Trek.

A good pick up the pace film set after Nemesis could have been made, or if a prequel had to be made, we could find out how Kirk got the Palm Leaf of Axanar. That sounds like a story that needs to be told. Enterprise had a few good episodes about the formation of the early Federation (Manny Coto) and a decent (as I look back on it) time bending story involving the Xindi. These concepts could have been explored in a prequel without destroying the characters we know, and tearing down the Star Trek universe.

But, in the end, Paramount wasn't concerned about the Trekkers, they were concerned about making a buck and they really wanted to change things so they could write more rubbish using the concepts from TOS because when it really comes down to it, they are lazy too.

Opened this thread to find out what 'TINO' meant.

Now that I do, I gotta ask, WTF kinda fucktard posts bullshit like this?

 

[Daneel]

Did anyone release something called ST:TFB and I haven't seen the ads?

Nope. "The Future Begins" was used as a tagline for some of the posters and other advertisements, but the person who started this thread seems to think it's the film's subtitle. Needless to say, it isn't.

Anyway, to address the issues in the OP, yes, this film has some bad science. So does a lot of Trek. Sometimes, when it's really, painfully, obviously bad, this can be irksome, but most of the time it can be excused. Why? By and large, Trek isn't about accurate scientific concepts -- it's about the human condition, how we interact with each other (the people in our lives that we know well and those we meet who are different from us), "what ifs?", exploring the unknown, the characters we've come to know and love, excitement/adventure, thought-provoking stories, hope for the future, etc. Sometimes real (or theoretical) science can play a role in this, but most of the time, pseudo-science is used simply to further the plot in mundane ways (i.e. warp drive, transporters, and the like), or occasionally create some interesting stories that are beyond scientific plausibility.

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not a particular Trek story can engage you, not what scientific concepts are behind it. Clearly this movie didn't engage you -- that's too bad, but to each his own. Many of us do like it, and consider it to be "real" Trek as much as the rest of the franchise. As for the rest of your points, some are fair, and you certainly aren't the only one who's taken issue with them, but most of them didn't really bother me too much -- so I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The Star Trek created by Roddenberry in TOS, the movies, and ST:TNG was about good science, science fiction that made sense, and stories that had a positive point about humanity using human/alien or human/technology to flesh that out.

No.

 

[gomtuu20]

"Masterbating to its own cannon" - That is a great line!

 

[-Brett-]

What is this "Star Trek: The Future Begins"? I've never heard of it.

 

[FailedLurker]

I'm pretty sure any discussion of Star Trek: The Future Begins belongs in the Lit forum.

 

[Peter the Younger]

How many threads do we need to have on this same damn subject on that the movie is "not Trek." We get it. You don't like it. That's fine. Do we need a new thread everyday from a different member?

But are they really different members? Sometimes I gotta wonder.

 

[Destructor]

Star Trek: The Future Begins (ST:TFB) or ST:11 is TINO, or Trek in Name Only.

Groan! Stopped reading here, because I've READ THIS ALL BEFORE when Enterprise aired. Look, I respect your opinion and don't think you should change it, but leave the rest of us alone, would you?

 

[smosquito]

Groan! Stopped reading here, because I've READ THIS ALL BEFORE when Enterprise aired. Look, I respect your opinion and don't think you should change it, but leave the rest of us alone, would you?
Today 04:29 AM

No. This is a bulletin board. Instead of posting graffiti, people do this. On the whole it's more healthy.

BTW:

Originally Posted by jonahfish7
Star Trek: The Future Begins (ST:TFB) or ST:11 is TINO, or Trek in Name Only.

The Star Trek created by Roddenberry in TOS, the movies, and ST:TNG was about good science, science fiction that made sense, and stories that had a positive point about humanity using human/alien or human/technology to flesh that out.

The movie, ST:TFB is a take off of Star Wars with characters who have names like Kirk, Spock, and Pike. ST:TFB has phaser battles, hand-to-hand combat, torture, and weird aliens from Hoth (oh, I meant Delta Vega).

TOS, TNG, TWOK, TVH, TUC, FC, DS9, and ENT (Manny Coto year) all did a good job with good science, plausible science fiction, and stories that showed the conflict between man and alien, man and technology, and man against society.

ST:TFB only ranks a little higher than Voyager, or Lost in Space Trek because of the good special effects, explosions, and good acting. The story, however, is hogwash and bad science.

For example, we have to believe that some star goes supernova and the explosion threatens not only Romulus (who mourns for Remas) but the whole quadrant?

And, when Spock goes out to save the day he's late. When has Spock been late?

The explosion from another star (remember the supernova sun wasn't Romulus) travels so fast that the Romulans don't have like a couple of years to escape its effect (explosions from supernovas don't travel faster than the speed of light).

Spock needs this red matter stuff (never explained) to save the quadrant, and he only has to use a pinch, so he brings a 60 gallon bag of the stuff?

Also, Starfleet is in such need of recruits that it picks up a drunkard townie who picks fights with the cadets. Yes, this is something we can believe in.

When the crisis hits and a dozen or more ships depart from Earth, who gets the call. Not the experienced officers of all these ships, but all the cadets from the Academy.

And, to be even more picky, the engineering deck looked like waste management facility from 2009.

But. the worst part of the movie is when Spock strangles Kirk. Anyone who knows anything about Spock knows that Spock wouldn't strangle Kirk (without at least good dose of spores). Spock would never lose his cool like this, and especially not because because some jerk, about to expelled, already thrown off the ship officer is taunting him.

This movie wasn't made for Trekkers. It was a standard issue Hollywood movie that was filled with a lot of under 25 year-old actors and no mature adults. It was meant to grab the teen dollar, not to recapture the vision of Roddenberry. Paramount doesn't care and didn't care when it signed off on this movie that the movie rips and tears down the concept of Star Trek.

A good pick up the pace film set after Nemesis could have been made, or if a prequel had to be made, we could find out how Kirk got the Palm Leaf of Axanar. That sounds like a story that needs to be told. Enterprise had a few good episodes about the formation of the early Federation (Manny Coto) and a decent (as I look back on it) time bending story involving the Xindi. These concepts could have been explored in a prequel without destroying the characters we know, and tearing down the Star Trek universe.

But, in the end, Paramount wasn't concerned about the Trekkers, they were concerned about making a buck and they really wanted to change things so they could write more rubbish using the concepts from TOS because when it really comes down to it, they are lazy too.

Did you actually bother to read his post? It's excellent.

ST XI could have been about how Kirk got the Palm Leaf of Axanar. Insead we were treated to a brain dead villain and the destruction of the prime universe which all of us presumably like. Plus, the new Enterprise is not the old one which irks me as the old one is so pretty and could have been kept on with very little change.

Finally Mr Scott is Simon Pegg: he has an Ewok; and he's only in the script for comic relief. And worse, engineering - which Star Trek has in the past gone to great lengths to have respect for, though it may have not have had adherence to scientific principles, looks like a waste disposal facility.

This may mean nothing to you. But if you are an engineer yourself, you might have been influenced to get into engineering because you watched Star Trek. I swear to you it irritates (EE's and ME's, though probably not civil) engineers the world over all out of proportion to these things screen time or significance.

I at least take these things personally. So you have not heard the last of this.

But take some comfort. At least I and the poster are not spray painting your house. Plus you can always click the ignore button.

 

[Peter the Younger]

Finally Mr Scott is Simon Pegg: he has an Ewok; and he's only in the script for comic relief. And worse, engineering - which Star Trek has in the past gone to great lengths to have respect for, though it may have not have had adherence to scientific principles, looks like a waste disposal facility.

This may mean nothing to you. But if you are an engineer yourself, you might have been influenced to get into engineering because you watched Star Trek. I swear to you it irritates (EE's and ME's, though probably not civil) engineers the world over all out of proportion to these things screen time or significance.

And all the posters who are engineers, including those how have actually worked on naval and commercial vessels, who say that Engineering is actually more realistic? I suppose they're all idiots.

I at least take these things personally. So you have not heard the last of this.

I just have to know: do you shake your fist in the air when you say this? Possibly while wearing a cape?

But take some comfort. At least I and the poster are not spray painting your house. Plus you can always click the ignore button.

Vandalism. Classy.

 

[M'Sharak]

Star Trek: The Future Begins (ST:TFB) or ST:11 is TINO, or Trek in Name Only.

<snip>

But, in the end, Paramount wasn't concerned about the Trekkers, they were concerned about making a buck and they really wanted to change things so they could write more rubbish using the concepts from TOS because when it really comes down to it, they are lazy too.

Opened this thread to find out what 'TINO' meant.

Now that I do, I gotta ask, WTF kinda fucktard posts bullshit like this?

The content of his post is one thing, but the "fucktard" gets you a warning for flaming.

Groan! Stopped reading here, because I've READ THIS ALL BEFORE when Enterprise aired. Look, I respect your opinion and don't think you should change it, but leave the rest of us alone, would you?
Today 04:29 AM

No. This is a bulletin board. Instead of posting graffiti, people do this. On the whole it's more healthy.

BTW:

Originally Posted by jonahfish7
Star Trek: The Future Begins (ST:TFB) or ST:11 is TINO, or Trek in Name Only.

<snip>

But, in the end, Paramount wasn't concerned about the Trekkers, they were concerned about making a buck and they really wanted to change things so they could write more rubbish using the concepts from TOS because when it really comes down to it, they are lazy too.

Did you actually bother to read his post? It's excellent.

It's rubbish -- mostly a disjointed collection of bumper-sticker slogans which have been heard here dozens of times before (if not hundreds) topped off with a few baseless assumptions and a couple of sketchy fanfic ideas. It's probably also trolling, but I think I'll just close the thread for having lost its way and wandered in circles for several pages.

ST XI could have been about how Kirk got the Palm Leaf of Axanar. Insead we were treated to a brain dead villain and the destruction of the prime universe which all of us presumably like. Plus, the new Enterprise is not the old one which irks me as the old one is so pretty and could have been kept on with very little change.

Finally Mr Scott is Simon Pegg: he has an Ewok; and he's only in the script for comic relief. And worse, engineering - which Star Trek has in the past gone to great lengths to have respect for, though it may have not have had adherence to scientific principles, looks like a waste disposal facility.

This may mean nothing to you. But if you are an engineer yourself, you might have been influenced to get into engineering because you watched Star Trek. I swear to you it irritates (EE's and ME's, though probably not civil) engineers the world over all out of proportion to these things screen time or significance.

I at least take these things personally. So you have not heard the last of this.

That's all very well, but this is still closing. You're welcome to start a thread of your own, preferably one lending itself a bit more to orderly discussion than this one has been.

But take some comfort. At least I and the poster are not spray painting your house. Plus you can always click the ignore button.

True enough.