superdeluxe

Tracer Bullet

Could the story have been better? Sure. But by your comments it seems to me that you don't think this movie is faithful to the spirit of Star Trek, when it's a hell of a lot more faithful to it then Enterprise, Voyager, and the TNG movies. It's right on par with the TOS movies in that regard.

OldBoy

Rotten Tomatoes Reviews:
Fresh:160 Rotten:08 (95% as of 5/08/09)
RT Link...

MScottM

As a long time Trek fan I was not impressed with it. There are so many flaws that its difficult to know where to start and I really don't have time right now so I wil just say,

Join Star Fleet the only service in history were you can go from cadet to most powerful ship in the fleet Captain in 2.3 hours.

And one more thing. What is it with recent movies that try to stuff so much action into so little relative time? This whole movie from the time Kirk stepped on the ship to go to Vulcan until the end, all of the events occurred within "movie time" hours. I thought it would take time to get to Vulcan but evidently you could eat breakfast in San Fransico and have lunch on Vulcan. Got to love the transwarp 35 speed drives in this "rebooted" universe.

The Bus

Nacelles!

chuckd21

I'm not sure what all you guys are complaining about with the timeline. The entire Trek history you know and love is not gone or wiped out by this movie. Apparently the whole scene where they bashed it over our heads that this was an alternate timeline didn't smash into you guys hard enough.

Everything we've known and seen in previous Treks, from Enterprise to Voyager, still happens. Spock Prime is proof of this. Everything that happened still happens. This is an alternate timeline.

And as far as the "what's up with this amazing new technology that they didn't have" blah blah blah... I would imagine if a hugeass Romulan ship shows up and utterly annihilates a Starfleet vessel, you better believe that they're going to step up their game tenfold with research and development.

Solid Snake

3 years actually....

BartleyR7

I agree with this. Let me preface my post by saying that I'm a big Star Trek fan, and I have been ever since the latter TOS movies. I don't self-identify as a "hard core fan," but I do enjoy the series, the pseudo-science, and the characters. Probably my favorite two series are TNG and DS9. I found Voyager to be passable and "good for fun," and I thought Enterprise was okay. I'm just now going back and re-watching all of the TOS episodes (starting with the Blu-Ray of S1 I just picked up), and I'm surprised by how much I forgot. I'm not talking about the major plot points; rather I was surprised by how campy (and funny) the original episodes actually are. I'm sure I knew this before, but it had just become lost in the drama-heavy later series (such as DS9).

With that being said, I really enjoyed the new movie as a whole. I understand the need to reboot the franchise, and I'm really not offended by it. I believe it was Ronald D. Moore (or someone else heavily involved in DS9) that said the cannon was really hindering the story process. Every time they had an idea, they'd have to go back and do so much research to make sure it didn't violate (in a major way) what happened previously. I think it just gets to a point where that becomes too much of a burden, and it's necessary to start over in a sense. I feel that's what Abrams and company have done here.

I did have some minor issues with the story. The whole felt very odd. It took a lot of guts to and I'm interested to see how that plays out in subsequent movies. Like some others, I felt that Nero wasn't given as much screen time as I would have liked, and I thought his back-story could have been a little more developed. However, I did download all four of the Nero/Spock comics for the iPod Touch, and that helped flesh out Nero (if ever so slightly). I don't mind the alternate timeline explanation of events. I'm sure there were other things to do, but I don't see anything wrong with this explanation. But that's part of the Trek appeal (to me); I buy all of these explanations. Some may cause me naive or easy to please, but Trek has always been about the suspension of disbelief, and it's always been self-serving. The technology works when it needs to work.

I guess I could see where die-hard Trekkies are upset with the new movie, but I certainly don't share that opinion. I think it all needs to be taken in stride. Yes, this isn't old-school Trek, but I think it's just as good. If it does nothing else, it stays truer to TOS than Voyager and Enterprise ever did. For me, it was a great movie, and I'm looking forward to more in the series.

On another note, I read Ebert's review of the movie, and I really think he just doesn't get it. I won't respond to his review on every point, but there was one that just really irked me. He states (I put it in spoilers just in case):



Come on! How many times (in every Trek series and almost every movie) has the transporter been unusable? I honestly think they've used every reason in every book. Yet Ebert feels it necessary to make this a major complaint? It's the transporter. Part of the appeal of the transporter is that, in dangerous situations, it only works when enough tension has been built into the scene. It happens so frequently, I really think it's just part of the design specifications. That part of his review alone shows me that he is a little out-of-touch with the Trek universe and the way things work in it.

Daytripper

Are you trying to stir up shit? I mean seriously. Stop with the troll like posts and give some constructive criticism about the film. And not smart ass comments about people's responses.

And oh btw, almost all the professional critics are very easy to please too, apparently.

Ronnie Dobbs

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/02LgdXVkXgM&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/02LgdXVkXgM&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

MScottM

No, when he stepped on the ship his official rank was cadet. When he left it some few hours later, his rank was Captain.

hdtv00

"I'm not sure what all you guys are complaining about with the timeline. The entire Trek history you know and love is not gone or wiped out by this movie."

The problem people have with it, is gee I don't know maybe shit like spock running around making out with people multiple times during the fucking movie. Shit like that is why people don't like alt timeline bullshit. Because that's just what it is, or at least what it can be, it's crap.

TGM

LOL at people who can't accept the "reboot" timeline change, yet were the same people who were most likely huge fans of episodes like "Mirror, Mirror", and "Yesterdays Enterprise".

To the original Trek purists, your precious beloved timeline is stored safely away... nothing will EVER change that. It's a different universe... and it is preserved, now and forever in a hermetically sealed vault. Fine. Good. You should feel comfort knowing that.

This, this is an alternate timeline, where shit can get cuh-razy. Whatever they do in this "reboot", or subsequent sequels will never take away any of the storylines and characters you loved from the original timeline. Deal with it nerds.

Solid Snake

He joined Star Fleet, commented on that he'll be captain in 3 years and he does just that. Yes, the cadet advancement is correct but he still becomes captain in 3 years though.

Matthew Chmiel

I read that and again all I see is nerd.

WAH! Spock makes out with women! He's supposed to be logical! WAH!

Solid Snake

Anyone find it odd as to what was the point of having Winona Ryder in the flick? Her part could've been w/ anybody else and still be the same. Anybody?

MBoyd

Heh, maybe. Who knows, maybe she knows someone and wanted in. It's not like she has been doing much recently. What was Tyler Perry's excuse? Or Christian Slater in VI? Besides, a few movies from now they can always

Count me in as another "easily pleased" bumpkin! Perfect summer film. Impressed with the humor too.

MBoyd

And that's why I spoilered my comment, although it was half in jest. Get out of this thread and go see the damn movie!!!

chuckd21

Running around making out with people, lol. Come on.

lordwow

Tyler Perry was in because Abrams asked him, Abrams is apparently a big fan of his.

keyed

I thought that was referring to getting through the Academy in 3 years instead of 4?

It was in response to Pike's comment that he'd be out of the Academy in 4 years, and a captain in 8.

NitroJMS

I checked out your myspace link, and it doesn't list any of the movies or TV shows as among your favorites, so you really shouldn't be criticizing those of us that have been watching the series for a long time by calling us "nerds."

Kal-El

And I'm pretty sure it was mentioned at least twice that the Romulans disabled it. And it made for a kick-ass action sequence.

stingermck

Uhura is hot, and Spock has male parts. It seems logical to me.

Tracer Bullet

Oh no, the Myspace refutation!

I guess this movie proves that there really are two kinds of Star Trek fans. There are those that enjoy the spirit of exploration, of bettering yourself, humanity, and the galaxy, of enjoying the characters and their relationships, and reveling in the action.

Then you have the fans that treat the franchise like obsessive baseball fans, pouring over stats.

If you can't see that one reason why Star Trek collapsed in on itself, it was a slavish devotion to maintaining the purity of every letter of canon. The storytelling that we got in Voyager, Enterprise, and the TNG movies was partly so godawful because of this.