New Star Trek movie kicks ASS!!!

[SlaverTickler]

I STILL don't get the hostility against this movie. How did it disrespect longtime fans. Matter of fact, like I said before, not only is this NOT a reboot/prequel, but this could be said to take place AFTER Nemesis (in a sense, at least in that the movie's conflict originated there). This doesn't go back and simply retell Kirk and Spock's first meeting because this takes place in an alternate history created from future events happening in the main timeline.

I am at a loss to understand how this movie could be a reboot, retelling, or disrespect towards longtime fans. Besides the fact that it was completely awesome, it doesn't violate main canon in any way (it barely even touches it). Since it's an alternate history rather than a rewrite (if anything, this movie follows Dragon Ball Z's laws of time travel, not Back to the Future's), it doesn't negate ANYTHING that happened in the Original Series (or any other series/movie for that matter). I could understand if one didn't like the movie, but how is this disrespect towards longtime fans?

Based on what your saying is they negate everything thats happened.

 

[SlaverTickler]

Research and diplomacy aren't. Remind me when one out of three became a victory?

It's a victory because the it was stated that Star Fleet is not (as in at all) military, yet through out the series it is proven over and over again that they did perform military acts, there command structure is a done in a military fashion so obviously they are a military organization to some dagre. The for I am right yet again.

OOOOOOOOH yeah! If they aren't military then why is it that in the episode "The Ultimate Computer" they do a military drill called War Games.

 

[Korastus]

It's a victory because the it was stated that Star Fleet is not (as in at all) military, yet through out the series it is proven over and over again that they did perform military acts, there command structure is a done in a military fashion so obviously they are a military organization to some dagre. The for I am right yet again.

Even IF that point were conceded to you, "yet again" is hardly appropriate. I can't recall where else you've been right since, like everyone else, your statements have been completely based on personal opinion.

 

[SlaverTickler]

SPOILERS!!!!

Even IF that point were conceded to you, "yet again" is hardly appropriate. I can't recall where else you've been right since, like everyone else, your statements have been completely based on personal opinion.

Personal opinion based on facts. Everything I have argued has been based on what was in the show before Abram decided to have inbred Romulans travel through time and blow up the planet Vulcan. One thing that still would stand no matter what happened to Vulcan is the fact that Kirk would not have been some snot nosed kid going on the Enterprise, it's clearly stated that he was an experienced officer who succeeds Capt Pike as he is leaving the Enterprise for his new position as Fleet Captain (or something like that). Now maybe Pike wouldn't have gotten (or excepted) said promotion witch might mean Kirk would end up on a different ship, but I don't see how he would be any younger going on the Enterprise.

 

[Korastus]

Personal opinion based on facts.

Well, now you're just trying to make it a pissing contest.
What facts are those? "The movie sucks" "abrams is a hack" "the writers aren't fans" "rawhhrahrkalhrakrlar"
Minority opinions, you'll find, and you couldn't prove those to be facts even if that wasn't the case.

 

[Goodieluver]

Don't you think that if man goes that far out into space, and if they are colonising other planets that they are going to need a military force to protect them from hostile aliens, and that Star Fleet would, as part of it's purpose in Kirk's time, be to DEFEND those people as a military force?

Is there a military group in Starfleet? Yes, just like there is an intelligence division and a science division and construction\corps of engineering

You calling starfleet a military is like calling the USA or UN a military force. People who enlist in starfleet don't necessarily make them soldiers.

 

[SlaverTickler]

Well, now you're just trying to make it a pissing contest.
What facts are those? "The movie sucks" "abrams is a hack" "the writers aren't fans" "rawhhrahrkalhrakrlar"
Minority opinions, you'll find, and you couldn't prove those to be facts even if that wasn't the case.

I edited that post. However I would like to know if you've been reading all my posts or just the ones you feel like. What it really comes down to is, don't fuck with a beloved classic.

 

[Gothika]

i just saw it and thought it was a very good movie

 

[SlaverTickler]

Is there a military group in Starfleet? Yes, just like there is an intelligence division and a science division and construction\corps of engineering

You calling starfleet a military is like calling the USA or UN a military force. People who enlist in starfleet don't necessarily make them soldiers.

Why do they have weapons, because they are a military, why to they have a military command structure, because they are a military, why do they carry phaser that can stun or kill, because they are a military, why do they do "war game" drills, because they are a military.

If you are a doctor in a branch of the military you are still in the military.

Have I explained it to you well enough Goodieluver? If you are someone in a uniform that goes out to fight a war you are a solder. If you are person serving on a ship that is used to fight in wars you are probably in the military. Do you get it now... do you understand what I am trying to explain to you?

 

[Goodieluver]

Why do they have weapons, because they are a military, why to they have a military command structure, because they are a military, why do they carry phaser that can stun or kill, because they are a military, why do they do "war game" drills, because they are a military.

If you are a doctor in a branch of the military you are still in the military.

Have I explained it to you well enough Goodieluver? If you are someone in a uniform that goes out to fight a war you are a solder. If you are person serving on a ship that is used to fight in wars you are probably in the military. Do you get it now... do you understand what I am trying to explain to you?

Oh my fucking christ, so cops are a military force now because they carry revolvers? Some cops don't carry a gun, what does that make them?

Are private citizens who own guns in the military cuz they own weapons?

Jesus christ i think i discovered a new dense item on the Periodic Table

I suppose the Ferengi Commerce Guild is a military CUZ THEIR SHIPS HAVE WEAPONS!!!!!!

If fucking starfleet was a military, then that would mean earth is the military dictatorship of the United Federation of Planets, right there that is an error since its a unified group of sovereign planets. Until the Borg and Dominion, they did NOT build ships or weapons for offensive purposes, they had weapons on their ships for basic defenses. Hence why when they were approached by species and would comment they would even say they have superior firepower to be able to defend if needed but right there you will prob infer that since i said "firepower" it means "military"

I guess I am in the military cuz I own a weapon

 

[Sandrock74]

Here is a question to make your head explode:

In this new alternate reality, only the stuff that came before the events in 2233 (Neros attack on the Kelvin) is still valid. This would include the events of the series "Enterprise" (did you catch the mention of Archer in the film?). So, thats all ok.

BUT!

Think back to the events from the movie Star Trek: First Contact. The Enterprise-E travels back in time from 2373 to 2063 and quietly assist in the launch of earths first warp-capable starship, the Phoenix. If this is now an alternate reality, then what happened in 2063? Captain Picard and crew may not even exist in this new reality, much less be together. I just bring up this one instance because it's so highly important to the history of Trek AND featured another crew from a future time from the "current" events.

I think the blanket term of "everything in the future still works out the same" because the destruction of Vulcan is a HUGE event in the history of Starfleet! One of the four founding planets of the UFP is suddenly gone! Most of its very race are gone! That one event is going to change a whole fuckin' lot!!

Here's another brain twister:
With Vulcan destroyed and over 6 billion Vulcans dead, would Tuvok still be alive in the future? Would he be on the Voyager?

Ouch....my head hurts. Really, it does. Star Trek is a highly entertaining movie, but you can't think too much into things. Doing so will only lead to utter maddness!

 

[Sandrock74]

Is there a military group in Starfleet? Yes, just like there is an intelligence division and a science division and construction\corps of engineering

You calling starfleet a military is like calling the USA or UN a military force. People who enlist in starfleet don't necessarily make them soldiers.

I'm just letting the nerd in me out for a stroll for a few minutes. I'd just like to point out that Starfleet was indeed military during the Dominion War (2373-2375). Those two years were the most bloody and destructive in galactic history. Starfleet was in a state of war and ALL officers and enlisted personel were indeed considered soldiers. Hundreds of starships were destroyed and over a billion people were killed over the course of the war.

But of course, none of that is probably valid anymore, so it's unimportant.

 

[SlaverTickler]

Oh my fucking christ, so cops are a military force now because they carry revolvers? Some cops don't carry a gun, what does that make them?

Are private citizens who own guns in the military cuz they own weapons?

Jesus christ i think i discovered a new dense item on the Periodic Table

I suppose the Ferengi Commerce Guild is a military CUZ THEIR SHIPS HAVE WEAPONS!!!!!!

If fucking starfleet was a military, then that would mean earth is the military dictatorship of the United Federation of Planets, right there that is an error since its a unified group of sovereign planets. Until the Borg and Dominion, they did NOT build ships or weapons for offensive purposes, they had weapons on their ships for basic defenses. Hence why when they were approached by species and would comment they would even say they have superior firepower to be able to defend if needed but right there you will prob infer that since i said "firepower" it means "military"

I guess I am in the military cuz I own a weapon

You have no idea what you are talking about. The federation was at WAR with the Klingon Empire for 75 years, they were at WAR with the Romulans for even longer then they were at WAR with the Kingons, so who was fighting this war... oh yeah that would probably be STAR FLEET, and who fights war... OH YEAH, thats right... the Military, so I guess that would make them what... a military organization wouldn't it JACK ASS!

 

[SlaverTickler]

Here is a question to make your head explode:

In this new alternate reality, only the stuff that came before the events in 2233 (Neros attack on the Kelvin) is still valid. This would include the events of the series "Enterprise" (did you catch the mention of Archer in the film?). So, thats all ok.

BUT!

Think back to the events from the movie Star Trek: First Contact. The Enterprise-E travels back in time from 2373 to 2063 and quietly assist in the launch of earths first warp-capable starship, the Phoenix. If this is now an alternate reality, then what happened in 2063? Captain Picard and crew may not even exist in this new reality, much less be together. I just bring up this one instance because it's so highly important to the history of Trek AND featured another crew from a future time from the "current" events.

I think the blanket term of "everything in the future still works out the same" because the destruction of Vulcan is a HUGE event in the history of Starfleet! One of the four founding planets of the UFP is suddenly gone! Most of its very race are gone! That one event is going to change a whole fuckin' lot!!

Here's another brain twister:
With Vulcan destroyed and over 6 billion Vulcans dead, would Tuvok still be alive in the future? Would he be on the Voyager?

Ouch....my head hurts. Really, it does. Star Trek is a highly entertaining movie, but you can't think too much into things. Doing so will only lead to utter maddness!

Bonk, bonk on the head J.J. Abram, bonk, bonk!

 

[SlaverTickler]

I'm just letting the nerd in me out for a stroll for a few minutes. I'd just like to point out that Starfleet was indeed military during the Dominion War (2373-2375). Those two years were the most bloody and destructive in galactic history. Starfleet was in a state of war and ALL officers and enlisted personel were indeed considered soldiers. Hundreds of starships were destroyed and over a billion people were killed over the course of the war.

But of course, none of that is probably valid anymore, so it's unimportant.

Oh it's important because I am talking about old school Trek. In old school Trek Star Fleet was a military organization. They fought the wars, and protected the peace in the UFP. Goodieluver might not like it, but it's all over every Star Trek series with the exception of "Enterprise" because at that point they weren't at war with anybody in the tradition sense of the word. The "Temperal Cold War" is a different thing then shooting it out with Klingons.

 

[Redmage]

Why do you say Nemesis was bad?

Picard vs his evil Romulan twin? As the basis for a movie? I can't see why I'd need to say more than that, but I'll just point out that Nemesis sold fewer tickets than any other film in the franchise - including Insurrection, which was quite bad enough in its own right.

Voyager did bad because lack of star power and trek was just played out.

No star power, bad writing, some extremely silly plots...A good series can revive a played out franchise. Voyager was not that series. Together with several bad TNG movies that was just about enough to kill the franchise.

The only reason DS9 kept its audience was due to some star power(brooks) and that they pretty much used the Babylon 5 script and tweaked it and involved the entire universe into a massive war.

I don't much agree, but the bottom line is, DS9 did keep its audience. It worked. Voyager didn't.

My only problem came comparing the originals to the new cast. Urban was spot on as McCoy but i disliked the comic relief part of Scotty and parts of Quinto irked me as spock. Ive already stated my disdain for Bana in this movie as well.

Scotty was frequently used for comic relief in the series. Two words for you: "It's green."

I haven't seen anything from Quinto that makes me think Nimoy will be unhappy with his portrayal of Spock.

as for the klingon aspect, yeah its been a long standing debate, but DS9\Worf said it best "Its a part of our history we don't discuss with outsiders"

Which was intended as a humorous line in an episode that was riffing off the original series.

The fact that this is a long-standing debate makes my point: There's nothing to debate. It was a matter of Roddenberry's makeup budget and the advances in special effects over 20+ years. It's just that simple. But ultra-orthodox trekkies can't let it rest at that. It has to be rationalized and worked into the canon that forms the basis of their religion.

Of course people like that are going to be unhappy with a movie like this. It's heretical. But let's face it: movie heresy is a little silly.

 

[Redmage]

I edited that post. However I would like to know if you've been reading all my posts or just the ones you feel like. What it really comes down to is, don't fuck with a beloved classic.

Ah. Like, say, "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves." Or perhaps "Peter Pan," or maybe "The Three Musketeers."

Yes, only a fool would make a movie that reinterprets classics like those. A film like that couldn't possibly sell.

 

[Redmage]

First of all, I am aware that the Star Trek universe is a fiction place.

Well that's a relief. You had me worried.

Are you aware that as a fan who has (how many times have I said this?) invested his time an money I feel I have a right to be pissed when somebody comes along and decides "Fuck you loyal viewers we are going to take everything thats come before, take a big shit on it and rub it in your face!".

You have the right to make up any story you like and get angry about it if that's what makes you happy. You don't have the right to expect people to agree with your made up story.

 

[tkpatience]

Jean-Luc Picard.

Not only is he a great captain, if he concentrates on you hard enough he can kill you with an annoying sound.

 

[Goodieluver]

Picard vs his evil Romulan twin? As the basis for a movie? I can't see why I'd need to say more than that, but I'll just point out that Nemesis sold fewer tickets than any other film in the franchise - including Insurrection, which was quite bad enough in its own right.

No star power, bad writing, some extremely silly plots...A good series can revive a played out franchise. Voyager was not that series. Together with several bad TNG movies that was just about enough to kill the franchise.

I don't much agree, but the bottom line is, DS9 did keep its audience. It worked. Voyager didn't.

Scotty was frequently used for comic relief in the series. Two words for you: "It's green."

I haven't seen anything from Quinto that makes me think Nimoy will be unhappy with his portrayal of Spock.

Which was intended as a humorous line in an episode that was riffing off the original series.

The fact that this is a long-standing debate makes my point: There's nothing to debate. It was a matter of Roddenberry's makeup budget and the advances in special effects over 20+ years. It's just that simple. But ultra-orthodox trekkies can't let it rest at that. It has to be rationalized and worked into the canon that forms the basis of their religion.

Of course people like that are going to be unhappy with a movie like this. It's heretical. But let's face it: movie heresy is a little silly.

Nemesis was close to a look at alt history. What if Picard didn't grow up in the luxury of Earth and raised in a hell hole. That was Shinzon. He was the exact polar opposite of Picard yet being the same. Yeah it did bad at the BO but thats cuz trek in general was failing.

I know you disagree but DS9 was trek's take on Babylon 5 almost to a letter. It was an established plot that worked. Also I assume it drew heavier audiences when they started the new Klingon War then the war with the Dominion.

But the thing I enjoyed about DS9 and to a lesser extent VOY was the stories were linear. Things that happened in prior episodes directly had an impact on the later ones.

 

[Redmage]

Nemesis was close to a look at alt history. What if Picard didn't grow up in the luxury of Earth and raised in a hell hole. That was Shinzon. He was the exact polar opposite of Picard yet being the same. Yeah it did bad at the BO but thats cuz trek in general was failing.

Trek was failing when the latest movie came out too - in fact, it's been failing for even longer. But this movie is succeeding because it's good. Nemesis failed because it wasn't good. The state of the franchise depends on the success of the films and TV series, not the other way round.

Like I said, making a movie out of Picard's evil Romulan twin was a bad idea from the start. It was poorly executed on top of that. Make up any excuses for it that you like, but the millions being brought in at the box office right now disagree with you.

But the thing I enjoyed about DS9 and to a lesser extent VOY was the stories were linear. Things that happened in prior episodes directly had an impact on the later ones.

That was true in TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. Heck, it was even true to some extent on TOS, as the sequential encounters with Harry Mudd and a few other recurring characters show.

 

[venray]

I am one of the biggest Trek fans around. I watched the original series weekly as they aired.....and everything Trek made ever since...

You need to look at it this way.....the Trek we knew before has played out it's time line and we are now in a new one with a whole new reality starting over....

What happened before does not exist here....none of it..so we take it a as different beginning and boldly go where no Trek fan has gone before....or have we....

 

[kurchatovium]

In this limited economy I am saving up my money to watch Terminator: Salvation and the new Xmen movie. Sequels that trash timelines and storylines are just not on my list. Sorry JJ. 😛

 

[jkb]

Based on what your saying is they negate everything thats happened.

No, I'm saying the opposite. You DID see the movie, right? It's pretty clear in the movie that NOTHING was negated and that everything from the main timeline is still perfectly intact. Like I said, this movie follows Dragon Ball Z's laws of time travel, not Back to the Future's. What that means is as follows:

--In Back to the Future, if you went back in time and changed history, the timeline you knew was GONE FOREVER, replaced by a new path. In Back to the Future 2, Biff receives a sports almanac from his future self in 1955, changing history. The 1985 that Marty and Doc knew had disappeared from history, replaced with a completely new 1985 where Biff had power over everybody. If the Star Trek movie followed this law of time travel, then every Trek film and episode you've ever seen no longer "exists", so to speak. But that is NOT the case. Instead:

--In Dragon Ball Z, if you went back in time and changed history, the timeline you knew was NOT gone forever and still perfectly intact, but a new alternate history reflecting your changes would coexist along with it. In DBZ, when Trunks traveled back from the Dead Future to give Goku the heart medication so he (Goku) could destroy the androids that destroyed the world, he DIDN'T negate the dark future he grew up in. When Trunks traveled back to the future, he still ended up in his own post-apocalyptic timeline and had to fight the androids himself. But because of his interference, an alternate non-apocalyptic timeline was ALSO created where Goku fought Cell, Majin Buu, and searched for the Black Star Dragon Balls (in other words, where the main series continued to take place). Neither timeline negated, erased, or overwrote the other; rather they BOTH exist. THIS same principle is present in the Star Trek movie. BOTH the main series we all grew up with AND this movie exist together, side-by-side (along with the Mirror Universe, of course).

So nothing has been negated. The main series timeline still exists, intact and untouched. Nothing has been rebooted, reloaded, reentered, reimagined, rewound, etc. Not only is this NOT a prequel, but this is closer to a SEQUEL. The story REALLY begins AFTER Nemesis and the franchise will likely continue from there. Any other stories taking place in the Chris Pine/Zachary Quinto universe are no different and have no more bearing on the franchise than stories taking place in the Mirror Universe. So unless you think Spock with a beard destroyed the Trek franchise, just chill out. Everything's fine.

Cool?

 

[jkb]

In this limited economy I am saving up my money to watch Terminator: Salvation and the new Xmen movie. Sequels that trash timelines and storylines are just not on my list. Sorry JJ. 😛

See the above post. The franchise's storyline couldn't be more intact if they put in a titanium case, buried it in the Pacific Ocean, and left the entrance password in Gene Roddenberry's corpse's pocket.