The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

[startrekwatcher]

It's different from what B&B were giving us, and I can understand why people like the novelty of that. It's not bad in the same way that stuff was. It's bad in a whole different way.

I've never had the hate for B&B the way some fans have. I actually would point to the Xindi arc as an example of how you can successfully give an audience a mindless action adventure romp with plenty of eye candy, big battles with lots of ships with little in the way of deep social commentary but where the villians' motivations for destroying a planet make sense. Plus there was a whole lot more in the way of reaction to Earth's attack in "The Expanse" and "Twilight" than we ever saw to Vulcan's destruction in the film.

 

[adamisme]

The fact that all of future Spock's memories were still intact says that the original timeline did happen. If those events didn't happen, the older Spock may not have existed, or may not have had any recollection of the timeline we all know happened...

It's confusing, but interesting nonetheless.

Time Travel gives me a headache The way I see it everything pre this film happened, its just the effect of Nero coming back in time to the point where Kirk was born changed everything after that. Future Spock wasn't affected because he was caught in the phenomenan that sent him back in time, so was outside time when the obvious changes that happened to his past happened, so he remains unaffected with memory of the original timeline that happened without Nero interfering and destroying Vulcan.

Okay anyone got an asprin

You've pretty much clocked it exactly (seewhutididthr?). The timeline changed at the moment of Nero's appearance in the 23rd Century. Spock Prime survived because of the magical TrekScience that means the people time travelling are unaffected by changing events (see: First Contact). Prior to that moment, the timeline preceded as seen in Enterprise. After it, it went entirely new direction.
To be honest, I can't see how some people aren't grasping this - I don't think the conversation on the bridge could have driven it home any harder if Spock had pulled down a projector screen and mapped it out.

yep, now maths for me is hard..time travel easy peesy. Its plain and simple all they had to do was connect the dots on the projector screen lol. The way I see it with Trek, its pretty much like alternate universe like the mirror universe, Spock Prime was born, served with Captain Pike and the Captain Kirk, he eventually became an ambassador and after Nemesis got involved with Nero and the events he tells the alternate Kirk unfold. So out there is the original universe which had TNG, DS9 and Voyager, but it now believed that Spock Prime is dead, but in fact he's in a parallel timeline

 

[JoeD80]

For instance, if it is true that they had already sent their ships to destroy Earth's defenses, a quick 1 minute shot of those ships attacking Earth's defenses would have cleared that right up. That said, since when does a mining ship have enough fire power to take out EARTH's defense net?? One little mining ship would never have been enough for that.

Lazy writing specifically relates to things the viewers have to fill in for themselves. These points were *covered* in the film. You're using the wrong term if you just want more elaboration. The ships at Earth were sent away earlier. They were the ones destroyed right before the Enterprise jumped out of warp. The Admiral said they were the only ships at Earth and they were sending them all to investigate. Everybody else was at the Laurentian system. The Earth's defense net was compromised because Nero tortured Pike for the codes, which was *said in the film*.

It may not be the way that makes a lot of sense to some, and some may have written it differently, but it's *not* lazy writing if it's *covered in the film*.

Sounds like you're taking the whole constructive critisism personally. You're not one of the writers are you?

No, not taking the constructive criticism personally. Just taking the term *lazy writing* personally, because yes, I am a writer, but no, not of this film. I don't really care who likes or doesn't like this film; that's up to each individual. That'd be like me telling someone they should like Pepsi instead of Coke. But in context here the OP used the term in relation to "the paucity of Vulcan/Earth's defenses" as something that wasn't explained when it was. It's just the term that grates; not the content of people's comments.

 

[weemies]

I hated it, but frankly I expected that. It's just a soulless clone of every other modern action movie for the ADHD generation, only in a Star Trek type universe.

 

[lawman]

It would have been easy enough to explain away Vulcan's and/or Earth's paucity of defenses.

Vulcan was clueless. They thought it was only natural phenomena. Earth didn't have defenses because Nero had the defense net codes after torturing Pike and they had already sent their ships to be destroyed earlier. Those points were mentioned in the movie. If you didn't like that story, that's up to you, but saying it was "lazy writing" is an odd argument because these points were actually explained.

Lazy writing specifically relates to things the viewers have to fill in for themselves. These points were *covered* in the film. You're using the wrong term if you just want more elaboration. The ships at Earth were sent away earlier. They were the ones destroyed right before the Enterprise jumped out of warp. The Admiral said they were the only ships at Earth and they were sending them all to investigate. Everybody else was at the Laurentian system. The Earth's defense net was compromised because Nero tortured Pike for the codes, which was *said in the film*.

It may not be the way that makes a lot of sense to some, and some may have written it differently, but it's *not* lazy writing if it's *covered in the film*.

So you're saying that you buy that the seven ships sent to Vulcan were the only ships near Earth, and they were all sent away? (I don't recall any dialogue to that effect, and it's risible either way.) And that individual starship captains (even without access to their computers) know codes that can not only get you past the Solar system's defensive sensors (that much I can swallow), but also turn off all Earth's defenses, beyond the possibility of override, including even (e.g.) independently piloted small fighters of the sort that could shoot down the drilling platform? All this poses no problem for you? And you thought it was all so obvious and sensible that it didn't need to be shown or even explained in any detail?

Really?

Im sorry, I agree with the "lazy writing" analysis. See, I think that the writers tried to jam too much back story into a short 2 hour film. Personally, I think that certain things did need a more elaborate set up and a much more in-depth development. For instance, if it is true that they had already sent their ships to destroy Earth's defenses, a quick 1 minute shot of those ships attacking Earth's defenses would have cleared that right up...

Remember, we're not bashing on the movie just to bash... we're doing it because we care and want the writers to fix it the next time around... All I ask is not to have my intelligence insulted by one of my favorite series, thats all.

Hear, hear.

Yes, there were problems--Urban's McCoy is a little too similar to DeForest Kelley's...

That struck you as a problem? I thought it was one of the best things about the movie.

 

[JoeD80]

So you're saying that you buy that the seven ships sent to Vulcan were the only ships near Earth, and they were all sent away? (I don't recall any dialogue to that effect, and it's risible either way.)

One of the Admirals says it (was it Komack? I don't remember specifically). He says "these are the only ships close enough to investigate" or something similar.

And that individual starship captains (even without access to their computers) know codes that can not only get you past the Solar system's defensive sensors (that much I can swallow), but also turn off all Earth's defenses, beyond the possibility of override, including even (e.g.) independently piloted small fighters of the sort that could shoot down the drilling platform? All this poses no problem for you? Really?

Personally, I'm not sure how Starfleet's defense net should work. But it's what the movie was saying. Nero's right up in Captain Pike's face with the Ceti-type creature and says "I want all the codes for the defense net" or something similar. The implication is that he got them, since he's drilling Earth shortly after.

 

[archeryguy1701]

[That said, since when does a mining ship have enough fire power to take out EARTH's defense net?? One little mining ship would never have been enough for that.

Well, you have to bear a couple of things in mind. First, it may just be a mining ship, but it's a mining ship that's 120+ years more advanced than anything else in that time period. Second, according to the Countdown comics...
[spoiler = countdown] The Narada was enhanced with Borg technology, hence the "tentacles".[/spoiler]
That alone would make it more than a threat for anything. Finally, the only reason he took Pike was so he could disable the defensive grid. Why blast through it when they could just walk in unimpeaded?

 

[Zeppster]

And I'd add to that that apparently Earth has no planetary defenses either. Not so much as a missile or an armed shuttle.

Just like TMP.

Actually, if iirc there is a line in TMP about V'Ger having taken out Earth planetary defence grid.

And in this one Nero asked for the planetary defensive grid of earth from Pike.

 

[Top41]

I'm going to read through the posts here after putting up my review, so apologies if this is terribly repetitive.

I loved it. Excellent all the way. I made a point of going into the movie spoiler-free, aside from reading two reviews (Variety and Entertainment Weekly). I went in with an open mind.

Boy, am I glad I did. I'm glad I didn't know about Kirk's father dying in the opening scene--that made me cry. I'm glad I didn't know about Spock getting picked on by a group of Vulcan children--his first line made me laugh. I'm glad I didn't know that Spock and Uhura were together--that made me grin. I'm glad I didn't know that Kirk and Spock would be at each other's throats--literally! That tension made for some surprising and wonderful scenes. I'm glad I didn't know that Kirk would find Scotty on some far away planet, on the most remote of starbases. That made me laugh. I'm glad I didn't know that Young Spock and Old Spock would end up meeting. The way Old Spock spoke about the friendship between himself and Kirk made me tear up.

The movie wasn't perfect--Nero's motivation didn't make a whole lot of sense and he wasn't a particularly compelling bad guy. I admit I'm still not sure how I feel about Vulcan being destroyed. It worked in the movie--it was essential for the movie, even--but as a Trekkie of twenty-some years, that part does pull at the heartstrings more than a little bit.

The casting was brilliant--the actors didn't ape the old performances, but they inhabited the characters in a way that really did them justice. Star Trek's strength has always been its characters, and this movie effectively brought that out. As it should be, the characters are the strongest part of the film. This is a truly great beginning.

 

[Blue_Trek]

Gave it an excellent.

First Contact is still my favorite, this is second now.

It's a very interesting way to change some things in the Trek Universe up, I didn't mind the changes. Vulcan getting blown away, is a terrible blow.
Despite all that they did, later on they contributed little to the major battles in the DS9 series. We can get along without the planet Vulcan but not the race of Vulcans.

Spock's trigger for emotion is his mother, he has a very soft spot for her.
I count three time when his emotions flared up when his mother was criticized.
1) As child when he was bullied by the three vulcans.
2) In front of the Vulcan council, he was seething mad, his "live long and prosper" salutation had the tone of "screw you, you bunch of old fools"
3) When Kirk taunted him about Vulcan and his mother.

I found this to be more about Spock than Kirk really, both Spocks seemed more emotional, although maybe because of his home planet getting blown up that is to be expected.

The battlefield commission handed by out by Pike, may have seemed strange
but it's in keeping with sci-fi tradition, Captains suddenly promoted to Admirals in other series for example. Also these were all newbie cadets Pike picked a disqualified cadet, with great leadership abilities, who else was he going to pick Sulu, he couldn't even get the ship going.

At the end of the movie, you really do want to see the next adventure this particular group will encounter as they go to warp. And that is what makes this movie the best success, you want to see the sequel.

Only the best movies can do that.

For those that hated it, Star Trek has outgrown you, now. It's sad but true. This level of success equals more movies and a new and larger fan base.

How is that bad?

 

[Amaris]

I'll just say that all the people voting excellent and saying this is the best Star Trek film ever, I hope I don't see any of you looking down your noses at Independence Day and Armageddon, as has been quite common around these parts.

Why would I? I like ID4 and Armageddon for what they are. I love this Star Trek movie for what it is, and am quite content with it (well, except for the desire to watch it again and again). I don't look down my nose at people for what movies they like. Hell, one of my favorite movies is Star Trek V, and it's lambasted on a regular basis. For me, though, this movie has been excellent, and I am so excited about Star Trek again!

J.

 

[dkehler]

I'll just say that all the people voting excellent and saying this is the best Star Trek film ever, I hope I don't see any of you looking down your noses at Independence Day and Armageddon, as has been quite common around these parts.

Why would I? I like ID4 and Armageddon for what they are. I love this Star Trek movie for what it is, and am quite content with it (well, except for the desire to watch it again and again). I don't look down my nose at people for what movies they like. Hell, one of my favorite movies is Star Trek V, and it's lambasted on a regular basis. For me, though, this movie has been excellent, and I am so excited about Star Trek again!

J.

Okay, that's one ...

 

[CaptainCanada]

The casting was brilliant--the actors didn't ape the old performances, but they inhabited the characters in a way that really did them justice.

Well, I think Urban skates pretty close to this. He was good, mind you, but he could easily have gone wrong there.

 

[Nimthim]

I'll just say that all the people voting excellent and saying this is the best Star Trek film ever, I hope I don't see any of you looking down your noses at Independence Day and Armageddon, as has been quite common around these parts.

I re-watch both of these movies on occasion - and still enjoy them. And I voted excellent.

 

[indranee]

The casting was brilliant--the actors didn't ape the old performances, but they inhabited the characters in a way that really did them justice.

Well, I think Urban skates pretty close to this. He was good, mind you, but he could easily have gone wrong there.

yeah but Dr. McCoy always bordered a bit on self-parody.

 

[dkehler]

I'll just say that all the people voting excellent and saying this is the best Star Trek film ever, I hope I don't see any of you looking down your noses at Independence Day and Armageddon, as has been quite common around these parts.

I re-watch both of these movies on occasion - and still enjoy them. And I voted excellent.

I'm happy for you. Now, let's hear from the many, many people on this BBS who have dumped on those movies in the past. I want to know what they thought of Star Trek.

 

[indranee]

I love nuTrek, but hated Armageddon. ID4 is a guilty pleasure. I watch it furtively, alone, with microwaved popcorn. I even rewind the Brent Spiner death scene multiple times.

that satisfy you?

 

[lawman]

So you're saying that you buy that the seven ships sent to Vulcan were the only ships near Earth, and they were all sent away? (I don't recall any dialogue to that effect, and it's risible either way.)

One of the Admirals says it (was it Komack? I don't remember specifically). He says "these are the only ships close enough to investigate" or something similar.

And that individual starship captains (even without access to their computers) know codes that can not only get you past the Solar system's defensive sensors (that much I can swallow), but also turn off all Earth's defenses, beyond the possibility of override, including even (e.g.) independently piloted small fighters of the sort that could shoot down the drilling platform? All this poses no problem for you? Really?

Personally, I'm not sure how Starfleet's defense net should work. But it's what the movie was saying. Nero's right up in Captain Pike's face with the Ceti-type creature and says "I want all the codes for the defense net" or something similar. The implication is that he got them, since he's drilling Earth shortly after.

So, IOW, two things that should be serious plot points are dismissed with throwaway lines of dialogue that require viewers to swallow implausible premises... but you don't consider this lazy writing.

C'mon. The cast was talented, the money was there for good visuals... but the story just didn't hold up. It's got more holes than a fishnet. There are any number of Trek novelists—heck, I'd bet there are ordinary posters on these forums—who could dream up a much more coherent, compelling story than this was. (And still hit the key points the studio required by way of a "reboot," if it came to that.)

At the end of the movie, you really do want to see the next adventure this particular group will encounter as they go to warp. And that is what makes this movie the best success, you want to see the sequel.

I really don't. Honestly. My enthusiasm for seeing what these writers and director will do next is pretty much nonexistent.

I note a lot of people around here posting things like "well, the next one can be about exploration and thoughtful issues and logical storytelling"... but IMHO they're kidding themselves. A movie makes money like this, the only message Hollywood gets is "make another just like this one." IOW, another style-over-substance extravaganza.

For those that hated it, Star Trek has outgrown you, now. It's sad but true.

How do you figure? I think the general thesis from those who didn't like it is not that it's grown but that it's regressed, into something simpler and less thoughtful than the original.

This level of success equals more movies and a new and larger fan base.

How is that bad?

How is it good, unless the actual movies are? I could care less how much money Trek makes, or how many people watch it; what I'm concerned about is the stories it tells.

 

[dkehler]

I love nuTrek, but hated Armageddon. ID4 is a guilty pleasure. I watch it furtively, alone, with microwaved popcorn. I even rewind the Brent Spiner death scene multiple times.

that satisfy you?

Yes. So what makes Star Trek better than those other two movies other than featuring characters that we "know" much better? I suggest to you there is little to no difference. And that's too bad.

 

[indranee]

^simple. it's Trek.