Movie review: Star Trek

posted at 9:15 am on May 10, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Ever since I was young, I have been fascinated by the Star Trek franchise, more so than any other science-fiction series.  The Utopian concept worked in that time frame, especially since in the original series they frequently let it fray around the edges.  In The Next Generation, they took it far more seriously, sometimes to a tiresome level.  By the time DS-9 rolled around, the series took a Casablanca vibe that started off well and then got strangely messianic, and finally the entire enterprise lost me at Voyager and, well, Enterprise.  It had lost its sense of fun and ability to surprise, and almost seemed like a religion — or maybe a lecture series — more than a speculative fantasy.

Nevertheless, I didn’t initially believe that the new “reboot” movie Star Trek would be an improvement.  The previews looked like Star Trek mated with Transformers by way of Dawson’s Creek, or perhaps Starship Troopers.  Like almost all of the previews that accompanied the film, it looked like a chaotic mess of special effects combined with cliché-driven dialogue (which comprised the entirety of Transformers, whose sequel is one of the previews).  It would, I supposed, do nothing but exploit the careful crafting of the Trek universe and its characters for steroidal explosions, manic dialogue, moronic love triangles, and cheap laughs.

Oddly enough, while these elements do exist in Star Trek, the movie itself is a winning combination of rethinking, swashbuckling, and most critically a respect for the characterizations that made the original series so much of a classic that it launched six motion pictures more than a decade after its cancellation.  It plays hell with the Trek “canon”, but only the geekiest of the geeks and the nerdiest of the nerds will mind, especially since the movie has an explanation for it, which is itself an homage to the Trek universe.  It brings a surprise return of a beloved cast member in a key role befitting his standing.

I don’t want to give too much away in the overall review, so below I will discuss some of the details of what worked and what didn’t for me as a long-time Trek fan in white text so that readers can choose whether to see it.  There were plenty of both, but perhaps I was so surprised to find myself legitimately entertained that I was more than happy to excuse the latter while I enjoyed the former.  In all truth, we Trek fans have to admit that the television series had their own brand of cheesiness, and the Bay-like elements of this film simply replace those with a more modern type.  If this film is shorter on philosophy and soap-opera elements (and not that much shorter on the soap opera, actually), it’s the fastest-paced Trek film I can recall from first to last.  Unlike most of those films, non-Trekkies will find themselves enchanted, too.

The cast does a fine job, perhaps especially Zachary Quinto as Spock and Eric Bana as Nero, a grittier and less flamboyant villain than in most Trek movies, which isn’t hard to accomplish.  Bruce Greenwood is excellent as Christopher Pike, the original commander of the Enterprise, and one hopes to see more of him in the sequels. Chris Pine does a good job of making Kirk into a bad boy, and Zoe Saldana makes Uhura much more than just a comms officer.  Karl Urban does a good Bones McCoy, after his terrific turn as Eomer in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but I couldn’t quite shake the resemblance to Tommy Christopher.  I’ve seen Tommy in a Star Trek uniform and it’s not pretty.

I do have one non-spoiler gripe, however.  For a series that has always taken its science seriously, at least internally, why do Star Trek movies always have sound effects for explosions in space?  The only series I recall that actually handled that properly, Firefly and its movie follow-up Serenity, had no such scientific pretenses but knew that sound doesn’t travel in a vacuum — and for that matter, fireballs don’t exist in space either.

Spoilers follow in the rest of the review. Highlight to the bottom of the post to read further.

So what works and what doesn’t?  I thought the explanation of the disruption of the time sequence was good, and it allowed the producers to change the “canon” to suit their purposes for the reboot.  It moved the series away from the Roddenberry era, which had been happening anyway for most of the last 15-20 years.  It didn’t quite explain the differences in rank that existed in the original series, though.  Pavel Chekov and Hikaru Sulu were significantly younger than Kirk, and their inclusion at the Academy at the same time doesn’t make much sense.  Chekov’s presence is explained by making him a prodigy, which he clearly wasn’t during the original series; he was a rebellious wiseguy, included to attract the counterculture during the Summer of Love.

A few exchanges made me raise one eyebrow, Spock-like, during the movie.  First, Pike’s decision to make Kirk the first officer made no sense at all.  In the assembly, we saw dozens of graduates who would have outranked Kirk, some of whom wound up on Enterprise for the mission.  Why pick the guy who just got his butt in a sling for not taking a key test seriously?  The emotional outburst of Spock seemed utterly contrived, so much so that one would hope that any Vulcan that gullible would not be made responsible for Star Fleet finances.  The writers appeared to lack a clear idea of how to get Kirk into the captain’s chair by proving his brilliance, but instead had to make everyone else around Kirk so stupid that he was the only option left.  Military discipline seemed completely absent, which is something that the original series actually did fairly well, even when they made it more casual and natural.

But this is supposed to be fun, not serious business, which is something Trek 1.0 forgot.  It’s fun to have the old gang back again, this time with a new cast portraying them.  If that means we need a couple of black holes and the destruction of Vulcan and six billion Vulcans, including Winona Ryder, then so be it.  It’s the Next Generation, after all, and I’ll be there on opening weekend for the next Trek.

Update: Some comments may have spoilers, so proceed with caution.  Also, I’m reminded that Babylon 5 handled space destruction sequences realistically, too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

One final observation: In the trailer, Kirk is kissing a prone woman. I assumed it was Ohura. It aint!

kurtzz3 on May 10, 2009 at 10:43 PM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Elric66 on May 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Elric66 on May 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM

One of the original series episodes dealt with this. They had a war with the Romulans before TOS.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Earth-Romulan_War

Asher on May 10, 2009 at 11:19 PM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Bear in mind that in First Contact, the Borg went back in time to prevent Cochrane’s warp experiment from taking place when a Vulcan ship happened to be close enough to detect it. The Enterprise-D went back to prevent the prevention, and two of its crew members were aboard the experimental craft. That changed the timeline in unknowable ways, as did the “temporal cold war” of ST:Enterprise.

That justified all sorts of deviations from “canon”.

The only way that traveling back in time makes any sense is if, at the moment the traveler appears in the past, the timeline splits into parallel universes. The probability of the traveler interfering with his own past and producing a causal loop is just too high.

Here’s my classic example of what’s wrong with going back in time. You build a time machine and decide to prevent Hitler from taking power in Germany. So you do that, which means that he never did the things that would make you want to go back and prevent him from taking power, so you wouldn’t do that, which means that he would take power, so that you would go back and prevent it….

The Monster on May 11, 2009 at 12:11 AM

I’m a fan of TOS from when it first aired. A few years ago I spent a week with my then 12 year old daughter who was home sick (a really, really bad flu or cold) watching our own TOS marathon. We made a point of watching the episodes in the order they were produced. She dug it so much, she watched every episode at least twice.

I understand the producers’ desire for a reboot. But there are better ways to get to where the producers want the rebooted franchise to be. This is a very poorly written and designed motion picture. Damn, there were several times I thought I was watching the STAR WARS prequels.

However, kudos to the casting director and to the actors. The new actors playing the crew appear to be able to carry on in their roles admirably in the next adventure.

But getting back to this movie. It sucked! And it didn’t have to be that way.

Ira on May 11, 2009 at 12:32 AM

and finally the entire enterprise lost me at Voyager and, well, Enterprise. It had lost its sense of fun and ability to surprise, and almost seemed like a religion — or maybe a lecture series — more than a speculative fantasy.

I don’t often agree with you on entertainment but I think you have this part spot on. The last ‘generations’ of Star Trek left no excitement to the idea of space exploration and “seeking new life and new civilizations.”

I mean, come on now. Terrans are almost minorities on Federation crews.

Okay. My plastic spock ears are showing. Oh what the heck.

I GROCK SPOCK!

P.S. Thanks for hiding the spoiler. Nice touch.

shick on May 11, 2009 at 1:27 AM

For a series that has always taken its science seriously, at least internally, why do Star Trek movies always have sound effects for explosions in space?

Yes, but this film finally acknowledged that space has a vacuum, and did it quite well.

The Star Wars films are guilty of that as well. (Along with plenty of other eschewing of space physics as well. My favorite is when a disabled Star Destroyer sinks into the Death Star in Jedi, when there is no reason for it to go down in space. Why would the Death Star have a gravitational pull?)

I loved this film. I could not have been more amazed. And I speak as a longtime, devoted fan who notices and critiques all the little details.

This film was so entertaining that I was willing to roll with the concept. The plot takes some indulgence, but I appreciate that they had a clear reason (Star Trek-wise, anyway) for Nimoy to be there. (Read Star Trek: Countdown, if you get a chance. It tells of what happens “prior” to the movie, i.e. what happens in the future. The Next Gen crew is involved. Sure wish they could have filmed that.)

Seen it twice already. Plan to see it at least once more. This needs to be experienced on the big screen.

Glad to see the return of Trek going so well, given the opening weekend box office and overall positive reviews.

It’s about time.

One surprise was that during the final credits I saw Winona Ryder’s name. Completely missed her.

kurtzz3 on May 10, 2009 at 10:41 PM

Spock’s mom.

One final observation: In the trailer, Kirk is kissing a prone woman. I assumed it was Ohura. It aint!

kurtzz3 on May 10, 2009 at 10:43 PM

I thought that as well, and was very glad it wasn’t. That would have been so cliche’d and expected.

Now, what actually happens with Uhura and a certain someone….I thought that was pretty cool. Certainly didn’t see that coming.

If that means we need a couple [spoilers redacted] then so be it.

Hear, hear.

Hawkins1701 on May 11, 2009 at 3:07 AM

Saw it, loved it. I hope they do another one or two or three.

capitalist piglet on May 11, 2009 at 3:43 AM

Star Trek is a great way to usher in the start of the Summer 2009 movie season, and there is no doubt that Star Trek is going to be the biggest movie of the summer, if not the biggest of the year.

pilamaye on May 10, 2009 at 10:15 PM

If it wasn’t for “Harry Potter 6″, then I would agree with you.

The new Star Trek movie rocked amazingly, though. :) :) :)

Theophile on May 11, 2009 at 4:53 AM

Don’t worry about Vulcan. In the amazingly elastic timeline that is Star Trek, they can just bring it back…

gridlock2 on May 11, 2009 at 5:31 AM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Elric66 on May 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM

One of the original series episodes dealt with this. They had a war with the Romulans before TOS.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Earth-Romulan_War

Asher on May 10, 2009 at 11:19 PM

There was no VISUAL ship to ship communication with the Romulons during the Earth-Romulon war. ALSO the Romulon had no warp drive.
I wish they would have just made a REMAKE instead of bringing in the old spock too.

Bladerunner1701 on May 11, 2009 at 5:41 AM

The Enterprise-D went back to prevent the prevention, and two of its crew members were aboard the experimental craft.

It was the Enterprise-E, not the Enterprise-D. The Enterprise-D was destroyed in the previous film. Lesson learned: Never give Deanna Troi control of the helm.

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 6:46 AM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Elric66 on May 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Romulans were known because of the war but what they looked like was not known; which was kind of hard to believe because Spock knew they were originally Vulcan. Which means the Vulcans for some reason kept their knowledge a secret for a 100 years.

Ok on to your main issues.

In TOS they discover what Romulans look like because the Enterprise engages in a space battle with them. In the new movie while they don’t specifically state that they do not know what they look like they do get a lot of screen time because of a space battle between the Enterprise and the Romulans. The things I see in common here are space battle, Enterprise, Kirk, Spock etc…. I guess the biggest issue could be that Pike was in command when they first encountered the Romulans rather then Kirk but the battle that took out the Romulans was during Kirks command. So I really don’t see that much of a deviation from cannon especially when we are dealing with a new timeline.

jmarcure on May 11, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Elric66 on May 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Spoilers below: There was a past war with the Romulans which is revealed in an episode of TOS. That particualr episode is one of the best IMO, it’s militaristic, a classic “subamarine” duel in space if you will.

The timeline in the new Trek movie is an “alternate reality” from the original series and shows as explained in the movie.

I had a problem with the Spocks talking to one another – I seem to recall something from physics that the same matter from two separate times cannot occupy the same space/time in one particualr moment without causing a paradox itself, but that’s a minor quibble I suppose.

I enjoyed the movie (saw it yesterday on IMAX). I enjoyed the referances to the other shows (there was a referance to Enterprise where Scotty had transported Admiral Archers beagle, the Kobayashi Maru test Krik took as a cadet, amongst others).

It was a good movie. I know this is almost sacrilege nowadays, but they shouldn’t make a sequel – too many sequels being made and almost all of them suck.

catmman on May 11, 2009 at 8:49 AM

jmarcure on May 11, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Correct.

However one needs to keep in mind that Pike was the original Captain of the enterprise as shown in TOS original pilot and a later episode (with Kirk now in command) where Spock is court martialed for sezing the Enterprise to take Pike back to the planet of the telepathic aliens.

That was the original “maiden voyage” of the Enterprise, but the new timeline in the new movie is the out for messing with the original “dogma”.

catmman on May 11, 2009 at 8:53 AM

of the two movies I saw so far this summer (Star Trek and Wolverine) Star Trek is going to be hard to beat. Phenomenal!

Wolverine, however, was a disappointment. It was good on it’s own but fails when it tries to link itself into the first X-men movies. The age of Cyclops in the this movie plus the realtionship between Wolverine and Sabertooth in the Origins movie will ruin the first X-Men for you going forward.

Pcoop on May 11, 2009 at 9:02 AM

I’ve always been a fan; my wife never one. Just got back from the show and she loved it for the simple reason that it started – literally – from the beginning and allowed her to come up to speed on the characters

This is my story too. Mrs. Crazy Legs never “got” the original series and only saw a few episodes of TNG. She absolutely loved this movie, and loved the fact that she didn’t need to know 40+ years of “canon” to understand what was going on.

crazy_legs on May 11, 2009 at 9:26 AM

I don’t know if this has been mentioned, but they are all in the Academy at the same time because Kirk is about 10 years late getting there. The death of his father changed his life dramatically.

I rank this one in the top three.

Krydor on May 11, 2009 at 9:48 AM

Ed, I thought it was the best Star Trek movie yet.

George Noory had a Coast To Coast guest once who asked George to name the greatest prophet for our modern time (having made the point that prophecies are as fallible as the people making them). Noory mentioned two. The guest wisely answered that the most accurate prophets we have today have been authors of SCIENCE FICTION.

Firefly and its movie follow-up Serenity,

This trek version of Captain Kirk reminded me of Firefly, btw.

I really enjoyed the NEW casting of all characters, and the parallel universe within the plot, allowing time travel and all that implies.

The only “fault” in the plot SPOILER ALERT dealt with the technologically unhampered drilling–AS IF the planets involved were so totally inhabited by “peaceful evolution” that the civilizations, though hosting Star Fleet Academy, had no means to defend themselves. THAT actually reflects on the USA and UN to the conservative mantra rather than the damned dhimmi PC propaganda. So actually, the plot’s “fault” tells its own story.

Your faulting of sound effects neglects to account for a few things. Simplistically, if a tree falls and no one hears it crash, did it make a noise. Metaphysically, with or without people or creatures to “hear” vibrations, the vibrations do exist. If we didn’t have ears or if we were deaf, would we insist that all others have no means to hear in order to be more “real” to us? What of the occupants in the spaceships, as THEY most certainly FELT the vibrations which DO REGISTER in the brain and throughout the entire being. Enjoy the show with sound, or go the silent movie route and either watch in deafness or apply music in the background. There are matters of science that we fathom, and yet there are many more mysteries yet to be realized, discovered, and studied, and so many theories of how things apply to us in our own little existence.

maverick muse on May 11, 2009 at 9:53 AM

Who was Admiral Archer?

sultanp on May 11, 2009 at 10:02 AM

maverick muse on May 11, 2009 at 9:53 AM

They couldn’t defend themselves. Nero took out a Klingon fleet of 47 starships and summarily beat the crap out of the Starfleet fleet in a matter of seconds.

The only reason the Enterprise initially survived was simply because Nero wanted to a) see young Spock and b) get the access codes from Pike.

Krydor on May 11, 2009 at 10:03 AM

I loved it. Was it just me or did Karl Urban’s portrayal of Bones steal every scene he was in?

I also really liked the Uhura/Spock romance – I thought it added complexity and depth to both characters.

gwelf on May 11, 2009 at 10:10 AM

The only reason the Enterprise initially survived was simply because Nero wanted to a) see young Spock and b) get the access codes from Pike.

My first thought as to why Nero spared the Enteprise was because if young Spock were killed, old Spock would no longer exist. And Nero wanted old Spock to witness the destruction of Vulcan.

But then, things get a little confusing when time travel is involved.

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM

Was it just me or did Karl Urban’s portrayal of Bones steal every scene he was in?

It isn’t just you. Karl Urban was a joy to watch.

I also admit SPOILERS

the scene where Old Spock talks to Kirk about their friendship got me misty-eyed.

crazy_legs on May 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM

I thought Urban was fine as McCoy. I thought Matt Long might have worked, too, but McCoy as 6-8 years older than the others fits with how I remember TOS characterization.

I’m not sure how I buy the mechanics of the disaster Spock was trying to prevent; that was sort of glossed over. Don’t the Romulans specialize in artificial quantum singularities?

DrSteve on May 11, 2009 at 10:26 AM

the scene where Old Spock talks to Kirk about their friendship got me misty-eyed.

crazy_legs on May 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM

I thought the movie did an amazing job of ‘rebooting’ Star Trek while simultaneously drawing on, acknowledging, and respecting what has come before. The reboot seems to build on what was already there instead of just ignoring it.

gwelf on May 11, 2009 at 10:26 AM

Loved it. Pure Trek.

I watched TOS after school, along with Batman and Hogan’s Heroes. Was turned off by the first season of TNG, thought subsequent seasons were ok, though Picard got tiresome. Didn’t see the TNG movies, saw a few episodes of DS9, a scene or two from Voyager, nothing from Enterprise.

So call me an “old-school” Trekker. I could list my quibbles with the film, but why bother? It was everything a Trek movie should be, and more:

A time warp resulting in plot holes you can drive a starship through.

Kirk making out with a green-skinned babe. (FTW!)

Bones going off on a tirade.

“Dammit Jim, I’m a doctor!”

Kirk and Sulu doing some mano-a-mano.

A doomed redshirt.

Spock raising an eyebrow.

Checkov trying to pronounce the letter V.

Scotty feeling very pleased with himself for achieving a technical feat.

Kirk getting his butt kicked in a fistfight. (The young actor positively *nailed* Shatner’s cough after being choked.)

A planet with styrofoam scenery.

Finally, Nimoy’s reprisal of Spock was far deeper and more moving that I expected, but totally true to the character.

skydaddy on May 11, 2009 at 10:36 AM

I saw this on Saturday, and sitting through the credits, wanted to do it again immediately. Saw it again yesterday. Still want to see it again. And this is a big deal for me. I don’t go to the movies as often as I used to (I used to go at least once a week!) And it’s been a long time since I went to see something (other than a Potter film or LOTR) twice in the theater. So the fact that I’ll see this sucker AGAIN is amazing to me.

My favorite parts: Anything with Nemoy.
Anything involving Simon Pegg, as Scotty. He was just plain perfect. And as to the comment earlier about his little side-kick and the fear he’d become Jar-Jar. No worries there, he doesn’t speak. Yay. I thought he was cute. (“Get Doon!”)

tickleddragon on May 11, 2009 at 10:39 AM

Just saw it on Sunday. I gotta say, the level of disappointment I had when I realized they were doing another “Let’s go back in time and change everything” story was immeasurable.

I liked the actors, the effects, the pacing of the story was nice, but I just can’t get over the fact that it was another lame time travel story.

grahsco on May 11, 2009 at 10:43 AM

sultanp on May 11, 2009 at 10:02 AM

If you watched Enterprise (the most recent “Star Trek” show), Archer was the Captain.

Enterprise was a series “prequel” to TOS. Enterprise at this time is the first Warp 5 ship, the Vulcans meddle in human affairs, etc. It wasn’t a bad show (it only lasted three seasons).

Archer had a dog, a beagle, on the show Enterprise. That was the referance Scotty makes in the film, transporting Admiral Archers beagle.

catmman on May 11, 2009 at 10:52 AM

I also agree that having all but a few thousand Vulcans stay home seems inconsistent with the species’ well-established curiosity (isn’t Vulcan curiosity what destroyed the Intrepid?).

DrSteve on May 11, 2009 at 11:12 AM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Elric66 on May 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM

They didn’t discover them–remember, a crew member (might have even been Scotty) hated them because of some prior incident involving the death of a family member. However, they were extremely mysterious and nobody had ever seen what they looked like, so it was a stunning revelation that they were almost undifferentiable from Vulcans.

Blacklake on May 11, 2009 at 11:21 AM

My first thought as to why Nero spared the Enteprise was because if young Spock were killed, old Spock would no longer exist. And Nero wanted old Spock to witness the destruction of Vulcan…
eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM

They said rather explicitly in one conversation that (this time) the time travel had created an alternate reality. So just as destroying Vulcan didn’t erase Old Spock’s memories of having lived in a timeline where Vulcan existed, or Kirk’s father had lived, killing Young Spock wouldn’t have made Old Spock disappear, since Old Spock was essentially from a different universe anyway.

And yes, this is not consistent with the way time travel is treated in other Trek fiction. But that fiction isn’t even consistent with itself. Time travel inherently makes no sense, though the best way to handle it is the way Abrams and his writers are doing it on “Lost” (wherein time travel is deterministic, and if you go back in time you absolutely cannot change anything–no matter what you try, you will fail, or even inadvertantly cause the result you were trying to alter).

Blacklake on May 11, 2009 at 11:27 AM

I’m not sure how I buy the mechanics of the disaster Spock was trying to prevent; that was sort of glossed over. Don’t the Romulans specialize in artificial quantum singularities?

DrSteve on May 11, 2009 at 10:26 AM

Hey, good catch. They use singularities to power their ships, as opposed to anti-matter.

Blacklake on May 11, 2009 at 11:30 AM

The wife and I will be taking her mom to see it for a late Mother’s Day gift. She was a fan of TOS and *ONLY* TOS.

Neither myself nor the Beautiful Mrs.737 were ever Trek fans but this movie looks great.

You either like Star Trek or Star WARS and we prefer SW but so does the director of this film so it should be awesome.

I did however like “Enterprise”, the only one with a cool looking ship, and more shooting than talking. Love the intro too. As a non-Trekkie, it gave a good background. I always thought that in TOS that they were the only Earth ship out there, didn’t know there were others too. Archer’s cabin had pix of the aircraft carrier and space shuttle Enterprise on the wall. Pretty cool if you’re a patriotic American.

Tony737 on May 11, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Blacklake on May 11, 2009 at 11:30 AM

They could have explained it away via reference to some sort of treaty, even… that maybe the Romulans agreed to abandon use or development of the technology. Otherwise, they could easily have saved themselves without the whole Red Matter McGuffin.

DrSteve on May 11, 2009 at 11:54 AM

My biggest gripe was that the Romulans were known in this movie. If memory serves me, in the original series, they stumbled onto the Romulans as an unknown species which they were in shock to find out they were descendant from the Vulcans.

Nope the Romulan neutral Zone predated events in the original series. The first episode featuring Mark Lenard, portraying a romulan, shows it. That episode was a lot like “Enemy Below” a WWII classic.

I have decided to wait for this ST movie to hit the $5 bargain bin.

dogsoldier on May 11, 2009 at 11:56 AM

catmman: thanks for the Archer info.

dogsoldier: it would be a mistake to not see this on the big screen.

My question: what’s this red-matter stuff? If it’s so potent that a drop will make a planet go black-hole, then why send Spock out with gallons of it?

Also, if Nero was supposed to be a miner who was off-planet when Romulus got destroyed, then why does his mining-ship have all these weapons? And why would a crew of miners wait around 25 years for their captain to get revenge? What kind of loyalty oath do miners take?

Still, I loved the bit with Kirk asking Spock about Uhuru’s first name!

sultanp on May 11, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Saw the movie in IMAX on Friday.

Yup, there were some pretty massive plot holes, but the casting was an absolute delight and they avoided hundreds of potential mis-steps.

They managed to honor the spirit of the original but not get too reverential OR too archly-hip about it.

(I was also afraid that Braga’s infamous “reset” button would show up at the end of the movie, per Voyager.)

Abelard on May 11, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Another thing I realized I don’t like was the transporter effect. The best one IMHO so far was the Klingon transporter effect from movies III and IV.

joe_doufu on May 11, 2009 at 12:40 PM

The Red Matter is explained in the comic book prequel.

Pretty good prequel that includes the TNG characters.

Krydor on May 11, 2009 at 12:41 PM

As for why a mining ship has weapons? First off, look at that drill. Nero needed Ambassador Spock’s “red matter” to cause artificial black holes, but his own ship’s technology is capable of drilling to the core of a planet. This thing is apparently some kind of planetary strip-mining engine, designed to rip all the valuables out of a planetary crust and leave an ecological wreck behind. Its entirely Romulan to build something like this monstrosity, and also to bolt a bunch of secondary weapons to it in case you have some pre-warp civilization that might, y’know, /object/ to having their continental shelf ripped open so you can take all their geological goodies.

Remember, Nero’s technology is over 150 years more advanced than the people he’s fighting. His weapons didn’t look like anything that could even make a /Galaxy/-class starship nervous. However, he’s not fighting late-TNG-era opponents… he’s fighting early-TOS era ships, and that means even his civilian-level ‘for anti-piracy defense and pushing around primitives’ armament is hitting them harder than anything they’ve ever seen before in their lives.

Chuckg on May 11, 2009 at 1:20 PM

Enterprise gets a bad rap Ed that isn’t it’s fault. I think people hate it because it followed so many crappy shows before it. Next Generation was only good because we hadn’t had new Star Trek television in decades. People were starving and when you’re starving nay food will do. Viewing the series now you quickly realize the bland flavor of the series with paeans to leftists tropes. It somehow seems more dated than the original series! Deep Space 9 is a complete rip off of Babylon 5, except with acting and writing as dull as the setting. Voyager was garbage plain and simple. Filled with generic PC characters, lackluster acting and special effects Voyager was the worst Star Trek series. However, over a decade viewers became use to this style of Star Trek. Simple pablum devoted to alien unity and love democrat-style filled with cardboard characters. Enterprise was different and that difference left viewers scratching their heads. It brought back the original themes of discovery and exploration. The dangers of man’s leap into the star-filled abyss. It did this well. The acting and writing was top notch. You cared about these characters and they had depth. The story lines pulled you in as they dealt with pre-Starfleet space exploration. Rewatch the series sometime Ed. If it hadn’t been for a horrible syndication situation that left the show un-aired in large swaths of the country (included Scott Bakula’s hometown) and the burden of previous shows Enterprise would have been more well-received. Enterprise, love it or hate it, is the most like the original series in terms of theme, characters and entertainment.

chicagojedi on May 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Agree 100%. “Enterprise” is my favorite Star Trek series by far. Great stories & casting. It’s a bloody shame that the series only had 95 or so episodes, while the uber-crappy “Voyager” had 170+ episodes.

I might be a bit biased though, since one of the actresses in Enterprise is a family friend of ours… :-)

Norwegian on May 11, 2009 at 1:26 PM

In reference to the “silence” of space battles, the current king of that title goes without a doubt to Battlestar Galactica. The space battles are unbelievable, and take into account for vector space flight, flipping over to fire backwards, explosions are realistic (not flaming blasts), etc. Often when a ship fires (ballistic rounds awesome!) all you hear is the gun reverberating through the hull.

Trek has never been about ‘realistic space flight and sounds’, puleeze! Being a Trek fan has always required those of us into hard sci-fi (Heinlein fans, etc) to suspend disbelief. Trek is about the story, the tech is just the stage. As in most space opera. I mean, the inclusion of sound in this was the smallest of things to be forgiven. How about beaming someone light years away, onto a space craft moving at warp speed, WHITHOUT knowing its location? Damn, and I thought the Heiseberg Compensator was the biggest nails-on-a-blackboard physics moment in Trek! LOL.

Falconsword on May 11, 2009 at 1:42 PM

BTW – A full 1/4 of the audience in the screening I attended gasped in indignation to hear that Scoty had beamed Porthos into nothingness. Scottish bastard!

Falconsword on May 11, 2009 at 1:44 PM

Agree 100%. “Enterprise” is my favorite Star Trek series by far. Great stories & casting. It’s a bloody shame that the series only had 95 or so episodes, while the uber-crappy “Voyager” had 170+ episodes.

I might be a bit biased though, since one of the actresses in Enterprise is a family friend of ours… :-)

Norwegian on May 11, 2009 at 1:26 PM

I liked Enterprise. But Archer is the lamest captain of any Star Trek franchise.

gwelf on May 11, 2009 at 1:45 PM

I mean, the inclusion of sound in this was the smallest of things to be forgiven.

People, people, people. Don’t you know? Sound is louder in space because there’s no air to dampen it!! :)

crazy_legs on May 11, 2009 at 2:04 PM

Why would the Death Star have a gravitational pull?)

Hawkins1701 on May 11, 2009 at 3:07 AM

Everything has a gravitational pull. Once you lose station-keeping ability, you’ll start being pulled toward the nearest appreciable mass. The bigger you are in relation to an object, the stronger the pull will be. The first Death Star was large enough to be mistaken for ‘a small moon.’ The second one had to be even bigger if all the snub fighters, let alone the Millenium Falcon, could fly inside of it (though, granted, it wasn’t finished yet).

Besides, the possibility exists that the Executor was being attracted by the 3rd moon of Endor and the Death Star just happened to be in the way.

James on May 11, 2009 at 2:09 PM

BTW – A full 1/4 of the audience in the screening I attended gasped in indignation to hear that Scoty had beamed Porthos into nothingness. Scottish bastard!

Scotty only said that the dog hadn’t materialized yet.

This leaves open the possibility for the dog to re-appear in the next movie!

sultanp on May 11, 2009 at 2:27 PM

Krydor on May 11, 2009 at 10:03 AM

It’s definitely worth watching again.

/It seemed that one of those autocops with a machine gun could have done the same trick as took down the drill.

maverick muse on May 11, 2009 at 2:56 PM

BTW – A full 1/4 of the audience in the screening I attended gasped in indignation to hear that Scoty had beamed Porthos into nothingness. Scottish bastard!

It wouldn’t have been Porthos. It is conceivable that Archer would still be alive. But Porthos would have been over 70 years old when Scott was born. That would be about 300 in “people years,” so this almost certainly refers to a future pet of his.

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM

fireballs don’t exist in space either.

I know what you meant, but… what, exactly, do you suppose stars to be?

philwynk on May 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Aren’t “Trekies” supposed to be called “Trekers”, or is “Trekers” just the name “Trekies” want “Non-Trekies” to call them so they dont sound so “trekie-like”.

(BTW, i consider myself a TREKIE)

AverageJoe on May 11, 2009 at 3:32 PM

I am still annoyed that my 2 favorite planets in the Star Trek Universe were destroyed. “The Enterprise Incident” is one of my very favorite original episodes. Otherwise, it was a solid film and I am looking forward to how the resurrect Vulan and Romulus.

Mutnodjmet on May 11, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Romulus wasn’t destroyed in the new timeline. Presumably that star is still set to go, but in the new timeline Old Spock has probably notified the authorities well in advance, and they should be able to take care of it.

joe_doufu on May 11, 2009 at 3:59 PM

I loved the movie even with the plot holes which were, yeah, big enough to fire a photon torpedo through. Most of those have been mentioned by others, but one did bother me:

SPOILER ALERT

If someone embued with superstrength backs down before any injury is caused because daddy calls his name, well, then he isn’t really incapacitated. He stopped himself. I would have preferred Bones sneak up on him or something.

Still, that isn’t enough to keep it from being a great movie. And the explosions only made noise inside. You get out into space and they went silent.

TwilightAuthor on May 11, 2009 at 4:14 PM

Presumably that star is still set to go, but in the new timeline Old Spock has probably notified the authorities well in advance, and they should be able to take care of it.

Star Trek has always had a way of hitting the “undo” button. Even in the comic prequel to this movie, the managed to resurrect Data.

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Star Trek 2.0 II: The Search for Vulcan…

Well, I had to go back and watch a couple of my favorite TOS episodes this weekend after watching the reboot. I watched “The Devil In The Dark”, (I’m a doctor not a bricklayer!); and the classic “The City of the Edge of Forever”.

I also watched Star Trek: The Motion Picture, a mostly undderated and unappreciated film, which I think was a brilliant peice of hard sci-fi. Much of the same vein as 2001.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 11, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Simon Pegg – Brilliant as Scotty. Brilliant!! Needed more of him.

Karl Urban – Brilliant as McCoy. Best line!

“Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence.”

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 11, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Btw I think Peter O’Toole should have been cast as Sarek. Anyone agree?

OneGyT on May 11, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Karl Urban – Brilliant as McCoy

SPOILER!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I love it that one of the classic friendships of pop culture began with the words “I may throw up on you.”

crazy_legs on May 11, 2009 at 5:20 PM

I liked the movie a lot, and don’t quite know why. Maybe most of the previous films set the bar pretty low. I thought they struck a proper balance between new storyline and retro look and tech. Most all the criticisms are valid, but I strongly agree with whoever said, the movie was so entertaining that I was willing to roll with it. My only problem is kind of stupid: The new Spock is great, he has the mannerisms and facial expressions down pat, but his young man’s voice is going to take some getting used to.

—–oo—–

FWIW, I hated TNG with the burning passion of 1000 flaming suns. The Captain is denied the trappings of command, he sits in a pit with the little Political Correctness Officer at his side, and makes bold assertions like, sure Mr Riker, it’s a malevolent alien that killed your girlfriend, but it has as much right to be here as we do. As if that weren’t bad enough, the entire franchise was completely barren of tension or drama of any kind. Captain, the ship is about to explode. (pushes several buttons) There, fixed it. Obama’s America, devoid of risk or chance. No sorrow, no Joy. Terrible.
.

wkgdyw on May 11, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Star Trek has always had a way of hitting the “undo” button. Even in the comic prequel to this movie, the managed to resurrect Data.

I loved that, it was one big “f&%# you” to Nemesis, easily the worst of the Trek movies. Not only did they kill off Data for no discernible reason other than shock value, they weaseled out of it by leaving behind an earlier version of him for a sequel that would never happen.

TheMightyMonarch on May 11, 2009 at 6:25 PM

They couldn’t defend themselves. Nero took out a Klingon fleet of 47 starships and summarily beat the crap out of the Starfleet fleet in a matter of seconds…

Krydor on May 11, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Yeah, which just doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe if it was TNG/DS9-era Warbird. But a mining ship? Come on. Maybe if they spent the 25 year wait re-configuring it into a combat vessel I could buy it (and it would make sense if they had done so–it would even explain why it took them a long time to destroy Kirk’s father’s ship). But that’s something that probably should’ve been mentioned in the course of the film.

Blacklake on May 11, 2009 at 6:33 PM

I loved it! My husband and I have been fans since we were kids. It was really fun to see how the characters met and developed their friendships. The choice of young actors was perfect…young Kirk and Spock, fantastic! I will wait anxiously for the second installment.

Shelly on May 11, 2009 at 6:38 PM

I loved that, it was one big “f&%# you” to Nemesis, easily the worst of the Trek movies. Not only did they kill off Data for no discernible reason other than shock value, they weaseled out of it by leaving behind an earlier version of him for a sequel that would never happen.

If I remember correctly, the decision to kill off Data was proposed by Brent Spiner; he felt it was unrealistic for an aging actor to play an immortal android. To this, I would respond with two words: aging subroutine.

I am just annoyed that no mention was made at all to Lore. It might have made for a better story had the other android been Lore rather than the retarded prototype. I also believe Patrick Stewart should have played Shinzon.

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 6:45 PM

BTW – A full 1/4 of the audience in the screening I attended gasped in indignation to hear that Scoty had beamed Porthos into nothingness. Scottish bastard!

Falconsword on May 11, 2009 at 1:44 PM

Odd…mine chuckled.

SouthernGent on May 11, 2009 at 7:00 PM

my favorite line captain pike asks sulu if the parking brake on. lol by the way to any jeffrey hunter fans check NO MAN IS AN ISLAND true story about a usn man iWW2 guam. 1962 movie filmed in the philippines. VERY GOOD MOVIE.

kippyc on May 11, 2009 at 7:08 PM

I am a hardcore Trekkie from way back and I simply Loved it… despite the the upsetting of the traditional canon. Even the wife, he scoffs at sci-fi in general and detests Star Trek in particular gave it a 9 out of 10… Amazing!

RobertCSampson on May 11, 2009 at 7:09 PM

that should have been “who” scoffs not “he”

RobertCSampson on May 11, 2009 at 7:10 PM

The thing that bothered me the most was Chekov’s completly overdone and annoying accent. Complete distraction to an otherwise great movie.

msjake on May 11, 2009 at 8:47 PM

I went and saw it yesterday and thought it was quite good. I went into the movie not expecting much but was pleasantly surprised by what I saw. I especially liked the way in which the writers crafted the storyline so that they didn’t have to stick to so closely to the mythology of the original series. Which means that going foward with any sequels their hands aren’t tied with the storey lines, which will help to keep any new movies fresh and interesting.

Dreadnought223 on May 11, 2009 at 8:54 PM

The thing that bothered me the most was Chekov’s completly overdone and annoying accent. Complete distraction to an otherwise great movie.

I have to agree with you on Chekov. The character reminded me a little of Thandie Newton’s portrayal of Condi in “W” in that it seemed very cartoonish.

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 9:38 PM

Yeah, which just doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe if it was TNG/DS9-era Warbird. But a mining ship? Come on. Maybe if they spent the 25 year wait re-configuring it into a combat vessel I could buy it (and it would make sense if they had done so–it would even explain why it took them a long time to destroy Kirk’s father’s ship). But that’s something that probably should’ve been mentioned in the course of the film.

Blacklake on May 11, 2009 at 6:33 PM

I really loved the new movie, but that exact same thing occurred to me as well – a simple line of dialogue between Nero and his Number One Guy about spending 25 years preparing weapons would have done the trick. Presumably Nero’s ship could have strip-mined a couple of planets to get resources for building those nasty little missiles – ideally silly planets no one would miss, like the ones full of Nazis, or the one populated by idiot-savant brain surgeons in fur bikinis. Actually, that could have been a hilarious sequence for longtime Trek fans: a three-minute montage showing Nero’s ship destroying the more ridiculous planets from The Original Series to get the materials they needed, with a wickedly smiling Nero superimposed over images of screaming hippies and gangsters.

I always notice when lazy writing creates moments that could have been explained, but instead wind up sticking in the audience’s craw. A good sci-fi writer could come up with reasons why Jeff Goldblum’s Mac laptop could crash the computer systems of the alien mothership in “Independence Day,” or why a race of aliens that dissolves in water would attack a planet largely covered with water in “Signs.” The fact that the scriptwriters didn’t bother to ask any good sci-fi writers to help them with these matters just seems indolent.

[spoilers ahead!]

I also wondered why it never occurred to any of the characters to ask why Nero didn’t head for Romulus and use his 150-year head start to get them ready for the cosmic apocalypse that would destroy their planet. They’d listen to them. Hideously advanced weapons technology always buys you an audience with warlike empires. He could have blown away those 47 Klingons as his audition for an audience with the Empire’s rulers. Nero’s reasons for refusing to do this would have been interesting.

It would have been nice to know why both Earth and Vulcan were largely undefended. A simple reference to whatever they were all supposed to be off fighting on the other side of the Federation would have been nice.

Old Spock’s willingness to risk the destruction of Earth, just to make sure Young Spock and Kirk meet and become best buds, struck some critics as ridiculous. It could have been addressed by having Old Spock tell Young Spock that many other crises, some worse than Nero, lie ahead for them, and he believes only a united Enterprise crew could meet those challenges, so it was worth taking a chance to get them together.

Kirk’s sudden promotion to captain seems ridiculous even in light of his heroic deeds in the battle against Nero… but it could easily have been explained by suggesting Old Spock presented himself to the Federation government, explained who he is, and urged them to give Kirk his early promotion. They would have listened to him. Wise old time-travelers with super-genius knowledge of advanced technology and future history always get the attention of peaceful technocracies.

I’ve heard it said that risking the Enterprise in close proximity to the black hole, just to fire a final volley into Nero’s ship, was foolish and should have gotten Kirk kicked out of Starfleet, not promoted. I would give them a pass on the Michael Myers Principle, which states it is always wise to empty your ammo into the villain’s head after he’s down, to make sure he doesn’t get back up again. A comment by Kirk about how it’s best not to take chances that Nero’s incredible future technology would allow him to survive the black hole would have been nice.

Doctor Zero on May 11, 2009 at 9:52 PM

I was VERY impressed with the new “reboot” movie. It showed how the TOS characters melded together a long time ago. It was a nice refreshing of the series. Kuddos!

p51d007 on May 11, 2009 at 10:34 PM

I had two favorite scenes in the film. The first scene was the addition of Kirk eating an apple during the Kobayashi Maru test. This mirrors the apple-eating he does in the Genesis cave in Star Trek II while he’s retelling the story of altering the test. A very subtle and clever touch.

The second is a quick bit of comedy with the allergic reaction to McCoy’s vaccine, while Kirk is questioning Uhura about an intercepted transmission from a Klingon prison outpost.

“Dahp Kingomm appack – muzz ip dab Bombhubanths?”

“Was it who?”

“Buzz ip dabh PROBUWAMMS??”

And then McCoy injects Kirk with yet another medication.

“OW QUIBBIT!”

Great, great old-timey Trek goodness!

DarthBrooks on May 11, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Btw I think Peter O’Toole should have been cast as Sarek. Anyone agree?

OneGyT on May 11, 2009 at 4:58 PM

No I thought Ben Cross was excellent. He had the bearing and dignity that the character needed. Mark Lenard did the same when he played Sarek, which I thought was one of the best casting decisions they ever made. He and Nimoy made a convincing pair as father and son even though they were very close in age. Indeed I thought the entire cast was excellent; not a bad choice anywhere.

Peter O’Toole would have been too rickety as Sarek. Look at what he did as King Priam in “Troy”.

KillerKane on May 11, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Deep Space 9 is a complete rip off of Babylon 5, except with acting and writing as dull as the setting.
chicagojedi on May 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

**AHEM** Deep Space Nine went on the air a full year before Babylon 5 – so who ripped off who, hmmm?

GrayLoess on May 12, 2009 at 6:33 AM

Bruce Greenwood RULED as Captain Pike.

Ozwitch on May 12, 2009 at 6:43 AM

Yeah, which just doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe if it was TNG/DS9-era Warbird. But a mining ship?

Probably something that should’ve been mentioned in the movie but was only in the prequel comic – after the destruction of Romulus Nero had his ship outfitted with adapted Borg tech. That’s why he has all those high-powered weapons.

crazy_legs on May 12, 2009 at 8:21 AM

**AHEM** Deep Space Nine went on the air a full year before Babylon 5 – so who ripped off who, hmmm?

JMS pitched Babylon 5 to Paramount about a year before DS9 went into production, but he was rejected because “nobody will watch a show about a space station.”

crazy_legs on May 12, 2009 at 8:27 AM

eaglescout1998 on May 11, 2009 at 6:45 PM

This is why the Trek movies died I think.

The only Trek movie which is worth a damn (other than the current movie which I thought was pretty good)is Wrath of Khan. Even though it is a “continuation” of an earlier TOS episode, it worked. Nicholas Myer didn’t simply make it a two hour TV show episode, it was more of a sci-fi/action movie. All the other Trek movies suffered from this – instead of making movies, the Trek ‘enterprise’ simply made two-hour long TV show episodes.

Star Wars suffered from this same fate with the three ‘prequel’ movies; instead of making movies – full of action, etc. the powers that be simply tried cramming decades worth of ‘mythology’ into a few hours of screen time.

I mean, if you watch “Nemesis” you can tell the actors are only half-assing the acting. This movie was simply a contractually generated attempt at scraping every last possible drop of cash from the pockets of hard-core Trek fans.

Even though I liked this movie I have one big beef with the Trek franchiese: As big as the Trek “universe” is, I think in any future Trek movies, the studio needs to get away from the familiar stuff. Every Trek movie is full of knowns, even this one.

Use Trek as a foundation, but there is so much in the “universe” which could make good sci-fi. Someone in an earlier post said it – make a movie just with Klingons for example.

The old “mythos” has been squeezed dry. If we’re going to have any more Trek movies, let’s do something else.

catmman on May 12, 2009 at 8:38 AM

For those who liked Enterprise: It never happened. Three years of Riker and Troi watching the Holodeck. Not canon. Not anything except a waste of time.

The last good Trek was DS-9, the ripoff of B-5.

Krydor on May 12, 2009 at 9:35 AM

Watched it last night on the new Cinemark XD3 screen. The movie was nicely done. Having grown up watching all of the TV series, and having seen ever movie with the original cast, I must say that this new movie added an “edge” that was absent all these years.

jediwebdude on May 12, 2009 at 9:51 AM

I mean, if you watch “Nemesis” you can tell the actors are only half-assing the acting. This movie was simply a contractually generated attempt at scraping every last possible drop of cash from the pockets of hard-core Trek fans.

I am actually more inclined to blame the director. In my opinion, Stuart Baird — who had no prior knowledge of the franchise — is one of the reasons why the film failed at the box office. I believe the movie would have been better had Jonathan Franks directed the film.

My other gripe with Nemesis was the editing. Many of the deleted scenes in the movie were “character moments”, which served to further the characters’ relationships with one another and the reason why they were cut was more emphasis on the battle between the Enterprise-E and the Scimitar.

Of all the deleted scenes, the only one on which I agree with the director was the early introduction to Shinzon. I think it works better cinematically for the audience to share Picard’s shock at seeing a mirror image of himself (which would have been even better had Stewart also played the role).

eaglescout1998 on May 12, 2009 at 10:10 AM

eaglescout1998 on May 12, 2009 at 10:10 AM

Yeah, I can see that – to a point.

I just watched it again (last week I think, it was on AMC or something). Everyone just seems tired to me.

The beginning of the flick at the Romulan Senate made for a promising start, but the movie just kinda went “blah”.

catmman on May 12, 2009 at 12:25 PM

I am actually more inclined to blame the director. In my opinion, Stuart Baird — who had no prior knowledge of the franchise — is one of the reasons why the film failed at the box office

I don’t know about that – Nicholas Myer had no prior knowledge of the franchise, and he turned out what’s considered (possibly up until now) the Star Trek movie in STII, and one of the better movies in ST6, plus having writing and producing credits in 3 and 4. Plus, JJ Abrams is on record saying he signed onto the project as much more of a Star Wars fan than a Trek fan.

Now, if Baird wasn’t knowledgable and kept it that way, then there’s something wrong there. IIRC, Myer watched all 79 episodes once he got the STII gig, and JJ Abrams had two of his buddies who are hard-core Trekkies write the movie.

Ultimately, no matter who you have as a director, if the script stinks there’s no way to get a good movie out of it (case in point – ST5. No one is going to argue with Shatner’s Trek credentials, but it’s still a pretty horrid movie). There was a recent interview with Frakes where he was asked the question would he have been able to save Nemesis. His answer was something along the lines of – “In the state that script was in, no.”

crazy_legs on May 12, 2009 at 1:06 PM

For those who liked Enterprise: It never happened. Three years of Riker and Troi watching the Holodeck. Not canon. Not anything except a waste of time.

The last good Trek was DS-9, the ripoff of B-5.

Krydor on May 12, 2009 at 9:35 AM

LOL! Did anything on Star Trek “really happen”? It’s not a documentary.

I agree the last episodes of “Enterprise” sucked, but that doesn’t take away the fact that the series as a whole was far better written and cast than DS9 or Voyager. I liked TNG the orginal Star Trek, but my clear favorite remains Enterprise.

Norwegian on May 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM

Just saw it.

I have never seen a single episode of Star Trek. I only knew that Spock had pointy ears, could spread his fingers apart, and the name “Captain Kirk” sounded somewhat familiar.

And…

I absolutely LOVED it! I thought every scene was exciting, well-done, and made the entire movie progress well. I especially liked the time travel stuff, because it’s kinda mind-boggling. I hope to see this cast back for another reboot!

iamse7en on May 13, 2009 at 2:34 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3