This is an article I so agree with

[Dukhat]

I'm not a huge fan of ENT, but I don't feel the need to constantly bitch about it on the ENT forum years after it's gone off the air by quoting what some other idiot on the internet thinks about it.

Oh, and BTW:

With the Kelvin, supposedly being such a unremarkable ship, it sure raised a big stink when I got wasted....I mean I am sure Starfleet lost better ones, and never caused such an event that everyone's still talking about it more than two decades later.

Did you not actually watch the movie? It wasn't the fact that it was the Kelvin that was destroyed, it was the fact of how it was destroyed, i.e. "a huge honking Romulan ship that appeared out of nowhere during a giant unexplained storm in space and completely disabled the Kelvin in a few seconds, when the Romulans couldn't possibly have that that kind of technology, and then said ship was never seen or heard from again." This was made very clear in the movie; I don't know how you missed it.

 

[malchya]

I, also, pretty much agree with the blog link. Just because it has been said before, which most of it has, doesn't render it untrue. And with filming about to begin on the next installment of JJ Trek it seems reasonable for people to reexamine their feelings about the preceding movie. If you harbor an opinion that differs from this, fine. I'm glad. We each have our own perspective. But name calling and denigrating remarks are uncalled for. If you are so tired and jaded with the community perhaps you should absent yourself or seek entertainment in another venue. While you do so, those of us who still have an interest will carry on.

I enjoyed the film. I'm glad it was released. It had some excellent moments. It also had some truly stupid moments. Is it TOS? No. Is it Star Trek? Yep. My idea of what Star Trek should have been? Nope. If I had JJ's money and skills then I would have made an entirely different film. Would it have been TOS? No. Would it have been anyone else's idea of what Star Trek should have been? Maybe, maybe not. I'm looking forward to the next one and hope that it will be an improvement. I'm not holding my breath, mind you, but I am hoping.

 

[Cyke101]

Plus the Kelvin is is bigger and more powerful than the Enterprise, our original Enterprise, which makes it feel more like a reboot.

Bigger yes, but how do we know the Kelvin was more powerful than the TOS Enterprise? There were rules in the show that implied the ship was powerful enough to slag a planet, but the Kelvin had no such feats (you would think that would be helpful in such a battle).

But yes, TOS never established the Constitution class as the biggest, merely one of the most advanced. It could very well be a precedent followed by the Intrepid and Defiant -- smaller ships that packed more wallop than older, bigger ships like the Ambassador and the Excelsior (or even the E-D vs. the E-E).

Had to be bigger, since we saw like 2 dozen shuttles. But why would they go from little ships in the Archer era, then to bigger ships, and then back to little again? And I never recalled any other ship with batteries of phasers that send out a shower of weapons fire.

Um, if you reread my post, you'll see that I AGREED that the Kelvin was bigger than the TOS Enterprise. But if you're asking why ships keep changing size, I have to ask: where were you 10 years ago when Voyager and DS9 showed us smaller but stronger ships? Different ships have different purposes after all, and we were never told what the Kelvin's original mission was, which seems to determine ship size in Trek.

As for older ships with batteries of phasers, let's remember that the TOS Enterprise occasionally fired pulse phasers in TOS and most notably in TWOK. And the TOS Enterprise could do something no other ship in the history of Trek ever did: detonate phaser blasts at set distances as proximity blasts. Additionally, the pop-out turrets are clearly inspired by the NX-01's phase cannons, which is an older design both in-universe and out.

With the Kelvin, supposedly being such a unremarkable ship, it sure raised a big stink when I got wasted....I mean I am sure Starfleet lost better ones, and never caused such an event that everyone's still talking about it more than two decades later.

Yeah, it's not like we have a memorial for the USS Arizona, a ship sunk seven decades ago. Oh wait, we do! Just like the Arizona, the Kelvin is remembered for how it was destroyed, as Dukhat pointed out.

 

[Hythlodeus]

man, what a moronic article. the author obviously hasn't seen the movie or had difficulties to understand what was going on most of the time.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The guy rejects the notion that the movie is an alternative timeline, despite Abrams telling everyone it is an alternative timeline and injecting dialogue into the movie that more or less screams THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE TIMELINE!!! and then goes on to bitch about things that don't matter in an alternative timeline.

Yeesh, that guy gives obsessed fans a bad name.

an alternate reality means that things are the same up to a certain point in time, but diverge after that.

Wrong. The timeline could have always been separate, under multi-verse theory which holds that the cosmos is made up of an infinite number of parallel realities which came into existence simultaneously, in the Big Bang. Some of those realities will differ only by the flap of one butterfly's wings. Some will differ in only a few insignificant ways that might not impact what's going on in front of the camera. Some will be wildly different.

The issue of whether Trek XI is the branching type of parallel realities or the multi-verse type of parallel realities has never been resolved. If there are differences previous to Nero's incursion, then that argues in favor of the multi-verse theory. (However, we can't rule out the possibility that Trek XI's reality was created by some previous timeline incursion, which would make it impossible to separate from the multi-verse theory so why bother to fret about it?)

 

[number6]

No. That guy gives obsessed fans the name and reputation they deserve.

 

[Dukhat]

The issue of whether Trek XI is the branching type of parallel realities or the multi-verse type of parallel realities has never been resolved. If there are differences previous to Nero's incursion, then that argues in favor of the multi-verse theory. (However, we can't rule out the possibility that Trek XI's reality was created by some previous timeline incursion, which would make it impossible to separate from the multi-verse theory so why bother to fret about it?)

For argument's sake, I'm going to assume that the "prime universe" that exists before Nero's incursion, and the universe where Old Spock comes from, is the same universe as TOS/TNG, which is what the creators of the movie intended anyway.

Now with that said, we never see the prime universe at all before Nero's incursion, because the storm in space/black hole that the Narada appears from already exists at the start of the movie. However, Robau, George Kirk, the Kelvin, her crew, and Starfleet didn't just pop into existence at the same time; they were there originally in the TOS prime universe. And aside from the Kelvin being a large ship (which has also been argued ad nauseum and no good answer has been concluded as to why Starfleet couldn't have had a ship that large at the time), there's no indication why it couldn't fit just fine in the original TOS timeline. In TOS, the Kelvin didn't encounter a storm in space and was blown to bits by a Romulan ship from the future. Winona didn't go into premature labor. The Kelvin returned to Earth, George and Winona went to a hospital in Iowa, and JTK was born normally. End of story. Why is this so hard to grasp for people?

 

[F. King Daniel]

The guy rejects the notion that the movie is an alternative timeline, despite Abrams telling everyone it is an alternative timeline and injecting dialogue into the movie that more or less screams THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE TIMELINE!!! and then goes on to bitch about things that don't matter in an alternative timeline.

Yeesh, that guy gives obsessed fans a bad name.

an alternate reality means that things are the same up to a certain point in time, but diverge after that.

Wrong. The timeline could have always been separate, under multi-verse theory which holds that the cosmos is made up of an infinite number of parallel realities which came into existence simultaneously, in the Big Bang. Some of those realities will differ only by the flap of one butterfly's wings. Some will differ in only a few insignificant ways that might not impact what's going on in front of the camera. Some will be wildly different.

The issue of whether Trek XI is the branching type of parallel realities or the multi-verse type of parallel realities has never been resolved. If there are differences previous to Nero's incursion, then that argues in favor of the multi-verse theory. (However, we can't rule out the possibility that Trek XI's reality was created by some previous timeline incursion, which would make it impossible to separate from the multi-verse theory so why bother to fret about it?)

"word of god" from the makers of the movie have said it's a branching universe. Spock says as much with his "Beginning with the attack on the USS Kelvin" line, as well as the numerous mentions of Nero and Spock going back in time.

All the official tie-ins are instructed to treat it as a branching universe. Really, the only doubt is in the minds of fans who think they know Trek's world better than those who make it.

 

[Gojira]

Reboots are just, to me, the easy, lazy way to pump out a product. Make something original, something that that won't alienate loyal fans who enjoyed the past several decades of Trek, and that can wow the Joe Sixpacks. Look how annoyed Star Wars fans are at Lucas with constantly playing with and changing the films every few years, and turning their once beloved lord of darkness into a whiny emo boy that screams "NOOOOOOO!" every 10 minutes and alienating the long time loyal fans. I'm no Star Wars fan by any means, but I can at least understand their irritation at Lucas.

I am a loyal fan and have been watching Star Trek since 1973 when I was 10 years old. I say this to demonstrate a point. The movie did not alienate all loyal fans nor do I think it was made to wow Joe Sixpack. The most recent Star Trek movie is my favorite and while I may quibble here and there with some of their choices I was very satisfied with the results.

Enjoying any movie is clearly a subjective experience. But what you have done here is taken your subjective experience and universalized it.

I can say I enjoyed the movie and you cannot argue that point because it is true..for me. I did enjoy it!

But when you make claims of why you didn't like it..such as this was an easy, lazy way to pump out a product or that those making the movie have alienate loyal fans who enjoyed the past several decades of Trek are subjective opinions that can be challenged.

One can have the cake and eat it, too, and one can make a Trek story to appeal to the masses, and yet not giving the one fingered salute the fans who've enjoyed the past Trek....I don't think that is too difficult, just takes a little hard work, some research, and what not.

All of what you have said can be challenged. Let's look at this objectively. From the box office receipts the numbers would indicate this movie did draw the masses into the theater. An overwhelming majority of Star Trek fans did enjoy the movie.

Whether one feels the makers of this movie were given the fans the one fingered salute certainly is not a universal experience. I can understand from you're perspective that that was the case but you cannot make that perspective a universal statement toward the makers of the movie any more than I can say my subjective opinion is a universal truth about the movie.

Hell, I'm looking at some fan stories online, like Mr. Cowley's Phase 2, and I enjoyed what those guys have done. New stories without having to flush the past 40+ years of stuff down the toilet bowl. And even Mr. Cowley gave the reboot a big with that cute video he did awhile ago.

I am sorry that this movie flushed the past 40+ years of stuff down the toilet bowl for you. For me it did not.

Whether one feels this movie was a middle finger to the fans and flushed all previous trek down the toilet or that it did not do those things will be a subjective opinion.

The problem is that when the haters or the lovers of this movie confuse their opinions with facts.

 

[Cyke101]

Wait, someone flushed 40+ years of my DVDs and Netflix queues down the toilet?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Wait, someone flushed 40+ years of my DVDs and Netflix queues down the toilet?

Someone broke into my house and vandalized my TOS DVDs?

 

[number6]

My childhood is so buttsore.

 

[Set Harth]

The timeline could have always been separate

Why should we assume such a thing without evidence? By extension of that logic we cannot assume that any of the prior Trek films or shows occurred in the same universe. Thus every existing film or episode occurs in a separate timeline/reality, which is clearly not consistent with the intent of the franchise.

 

[The Castellan]

The timeline could have always been separate

Why should we assume such a thing without evidence? By extension of that logic we cannot assume that any of the prior Trek films or shows occurred in the same universe. Thus every existing film or episode occurs in a separate timeline/reality, which is clearly not consistent with the intent of the franchise.

Yep, felt like a reboot, not an alternate universe. And until we see anything else from the universe we've seen for 40+ years, which I doubt we'll see for a long time, if ever, again, I smell reboot/remake, and bye bye universe we've seen previously.

 

[Gojira]

Yep, felt like a reboot, not an alternate universe. And until we see anything else from the universe we've seen for 40+ years, which I doubt we'll see for a long time, if ever, again, I smell reboot/remake, and bye bye universe we've seen previously.

While I have always been of the mind that this was a clear reboot and not an alternate universe despite the writers assertion, which is vaguely depicted on screen at best, is really a moot point.

Any writer or director can resurrect the original time line with a creative stoke of the pen.

Now if that ever happens is another question all together.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I was glad it felt like a reboot anyway. Finally, some freshness. The Kelvin sequence is one of the most awesome sequences in Trek history.

 

[Dukhat]

Yep, felt like a reboot, not an alternate universe. And until we see anything else from the universe we've seen for 40+ years, which I doubt we'll see for a long time, if ever, again, I smell reboot/remake, and bye bye universe we've seen previously.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: If it was supposed to be just a straight reboot, then there was no point in having Nero and Spock come from the future of the prime universe to create this one. But if it helps you to sleep at night, by all means think it's a reboot.

 

[Set Harth]

The timeline could have always been separate

Why should we assume such a thing without evidence? By extension of that logic we cannot assume that any of the prior Trek films or shows occurred in the same universe. Thus every existing film or episode occurs in a separate timeline/reality, which is clearly not consistent with the intent of the franchise.

Yep, felt like a reboot, not an alternate universe. And until we see anything else from the universe we've seen for 40+ years, which I doubt we'll see for a long time, if ever, again, I smell reboot/remake, and bye bye universe we've seen previously.

No, no. Not the "universe" we've seen for 40+ years. The universes we've seen for 40+ years. Each prior TV episode or film took place in its own self-contained universe. That's what we get if we apply your STXI approach globally, as opposed to applying it solely to STXI and nowhere else in canon for no justifiable reason.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Who said STXI was a straight reboot?

@Set Harth: Actually, there were certain elements of TNG season one that suggested a partial reboot of TOS had occurred. The inexplicable warp factor rescaling, the change in command/away team structure, the fact that Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were diced up into the TNG characters, the absence of Vulcans, etc. There's a long list of such things that indicate that TNG was, at least partially, a conscious revision/improvement of TOS, rather than something taking place in TOS's future. The Naked Now itself is essentially a remake of The Naked Time.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Or how about TMP, where everything looked totally different from before and the Klingons were essentially replaced with a new species? Read some old "Best of Trek" books. The reaction was pretty much the same.