Spoiler-ific Movie Discussion Thread

I would argue the events of Enterprise are still relevant. Everything presented in the film upholds that.

Maybe.

It could be like the Mirror Universe, which is basically the same thing as this reboot... but a universe where many more things have been changed.

I understand the difference between reality and fiction, but Star Trek has become so ingrained in our society, and so many people have grown up watching the series' and movies that its a part of us and to go and make like everything we knew before is irrelevent because we are in a new timeline so forget what happened before because we are going to redo all of Star Trek history now so that we cant wring more money out of the poor addicted souls that love the show. Many people associate Star Trek with their childhoods, young adulthoods, and thats part of what makes it special to them, because they can relive that time over and over again, but now its blown all out of the water. Sure, you can rewrite a book or remake a movie all you want to, but Star Trek was a classic piece that Paramount should have respected more given the livelihood its reaped from the franchise. You will say that Paramount was trying to invigorate the franchise by injecting new blood and a modern cast and you say that that will make it appeal to younger folks, but i say that this could still backfire and serve to turn away a lot of the older audience, that probably has the most money to spend in the market on Star Trek items connected with this movie. Yes, i could watch the old movies and series over and over again, but the feeling i have is that the old has been rejected in favor of the dumbed down new stuff, and that makes me sad and angry at the same time. I want new Star Trek from the original timeline, how can you just throw it all out like this Paramount?

So, in the final analysis, I take it that you don't really care for the movie VF?

I went to it once with a friend. And we came out of it and both said the same thing. It was fun. we felt like we got our moneys worth, but we had seen that movie before... then (I think it was FHC) posted that you tube video where they show it's basically the same thing as Star Wars Ep IV! Funny stuff, but like I said, it showed that they were basically the same movie. I'm not angry or sad by what they did. Apathetic I think is the right word. The movie just didn't make me care that much short of being entertained for the 2 hours it did so. As a result, I've not been compelled to purchase any of the movie merchandise.

When it comes out on DVD I'll watch it again, and maybe more viewings will make it catch on with me.

Well, its complicated to answer that. As long as i disconnect this movie from the Star Trek franchise i have known and loved for pretty much my entire life, i say that i like the new movie. To reconnect it, i am appalled pretty much by the treatment of Vulcan and the rest of the proper timeline, pretty much just throwing it all out the window to make another Star Wars prequel series of never ending monsters, action and blowing up sh*t. If it hadnt been for this alternate timeline, and throwing Canon out the airlock i think it could have been so much better. The actors did a pretty decent job, i can even deal with redesign of the Enterprise, but redesigning the whole timeline, which pretty much changes everything in the TOS, i cannot forgive. Its a travesty.

This movie does not disregard anything. This is an alternate reality, same as the "Mirror Universe," and all the other alternate time-lines that we have seen. They are all happening all at once. The version of events that many are crying about having been discarded, is ludicrous. The Trek reality that we have predominantly seen for the last 43-44 years continues on just as it was, save for the aftermath of the supernova and the geopolitical consequences of the Romulans loosing there home world, and can be revisited at any time.

For 100 to 125 years you still have Romulus and without a strong Vulcan ally. Imagine the shift of power now!

But there still are enough Vulcan's left to keep the civilization and knowledge/heritage alive and going. In one interview the writers said that they couldn't fathom every Vulcan always being on the Planet Vulcan all the time, and that there should be a lot of "off worlders," that would have been spared, and the 10,000 person survival number that Spock stated in his log wouldn't have applied to them.

Here is an interesting thought! With the destruction of Vulcan, what if a large number of surviving Vulcan's migrate to Romulus! Despite the deep philosophical rifts that now exist between the 2 cultures, the Romulans are still the closest relatives the Vulcan's have to turn to for support. I can imagine a lot of social commentary stories that could be drawn from real world events with that scenario.

ha! Sorry Sybeck1... I know that reads wrong, and that's my fault. I ment to refer to the original universe, which, lost the Romulan home world and Spock 'Prime'.

But yes, now, I think you do have a real power shift.

I agree. In fact, I think this was an alternate universe even before Nero screwed with it. Too much is different already on the USS Kelvin and the universe as a whole.

BUT, they have now wiped out all the years (10+?) and missions that happened while Captain Pike was captain of the Enterprise. All the people we saw in the original pilot (the 1st doctor, the crew, Number One, etc.) never met. Also, the second tv pilot crew is gone. Whatever happened to Kirk's best friend Gary Mitchell? All messed up now.

Not a big deal, but frankly the second movie may actually do more damage to the "timeline" if they try to bring in Khan, or any other of the 1st season storylines. By doing that they will be throwing out a good 10-15 years of "established" Prime timeline history. That would be a big mistake. The 2nd story needs to be fresh. Not a rehash. And we need to see the building of the original 12 Constellation class ships.

I wish instead of (or in addition to) a movie they would do three or four 2-3 hour tv miniseries a year. Or even a new tv show. Too many stories to tell in this new universe to have to wait three years.

I'm kinda wondering how you would have felt is they decided NOT to incorporate the old Spock and his timeline. If they had done a complete reboot as they should have. Incorporating the old timeline and the old Spock was only an attempt to sattisfy the existing fanbase.

I'm actually very happy we won't see new shows or movies set in the old timeline anymore. I loved TOS, I loved the TOS-cast movies, I liked DS9 and ENT and I even enjoyed VOY. But it was over 40 years of continuity that killed Star Trek. Going on in the existing timeline would have been suicide. And tying the timelines together with the old Spock was a good idea even though it wasn't necessary.

Watching this new movie, I had the feeling my life was starting over. That my youth was back and that it wasn't restricted by what I have seen after my youth. A fresh start in a familiar universe. That's the closest thing there is to getting a second life. I loved it and I'm longing for sequels and spinoffs (as long as they don't make anothet 70 year jump into the future!)

I had he opportunity to watch the New movie a second time recently. I thought I would see if my opinion changed after some time and a second screening. Here are some of my thoughts...

I originally liked the chemistry and dialog between Quinto and Pine, and the second showing just re-enforced that this is really what makes this movie shine for me.

For me, McCoy is an integral part of the Spock/Kirk relationship. The movie does develop the Kirk and Spock characters well, but I was a bit slighted that McCoy didn't get the same kind of treatment. The second showing re-enforced that for me, but Urban does a bang up job.

After seeing it a second time, I think it was a mistake to add Spock "Prime". It added very little IMO.

Nero is still a poorly developed character here. His motivations are completely irrational. He blames Spock Prime, Vulcan and the Federation for the loss of his homeworld, which was caused by the supernova... you know the one that Spock Prime was trying to stop with the red matter? He knows that Spock got there too late... so why not make using the red matter on the star that will go nova in 70 years the priority? Once the future of Romulus is secured you can go on a your revenge rampage!

I still find the science in this "Science Fiction film" to be more fiction then science. The biggest issue is the whole need to drill a hole in a planet to toss the red matter in! Hello! Spock Prime didn't have to do that when he used it to control the Nova!

In the end I still found it fun. It was just as fun the second time as it was the 1st, but I don't think my opinion really changed much.

I'm a sci-fi fan because a good science fiction movie uses science to enable story telling in a manner that is introspective of humanity or some aspect of the human condition. The question I have to ask is does this movie have anything to offer in that respect. And, I will say after seeing it a second time I think it does. My original issue though was that I don't think the questions involved here really required the use of Science to enable the story. You don't need time travel, or warp speed or red matter or any of that to tell the story of the start of the friendship between two men. So in that respect I still think the movie failed.

Ah heck... other people have written it before me, so I can just quote them!







I generally agree with this sentiment, and I do think the science of the movie not only contradicts it's self (e.g. the way the red matter is handled) but also with known science w/o explaining adequately "why".




I have to agree... Prime Spock really wasn't necessary in this movie.


Really? has CBS said that they won't ever ever ever make a new TV series based on the original universe? I think the book is wide open on this...


This I disagree with. Yes there are continuity issues even with-in the Star Trek Cannon! Heck I was watching the episode of TNG the other day where the "Joined" Trill race was introduced. They completely changed them and the rules of "Joining" when they re-introduced them in DS9! Some of the best episodes of Star Trek ENT where the ones where Manny Coto actually explained continuity issues! The word was that Manny delighted in researching and finding ways to "Fix" the problems. I say a good writer can work with most anything and still write a compelling and fun script.


So the question I have is... why not make another 70 jump?! If its required to advance the story would you really mind? Why is it ok once,but not twice?

The incorporation of Leonard Nimoy and his Character of the Original Spock is what warmed me up to the movie way before it was released. If Leonard Nimoy's Spock was not in the movie i would probably have still seen the movie but with much less enthusiasm. Now that i think about it, i almost wish Leonard Nimoy wasnt in this movie, because his presence on it ties it to the original TOS and that keeps me from being able to dismiss the abomination of the destruction of Vulcan as just something that happened in this movie, and not really connected to the original series universe. I still like the movie, but it still makes me sad to see what they have done to our beloved Star Trek universe. I hope the next movie will redeem this one.

Sounds like somebody's being nurtured through his mid-life crisis! Well, just as well since movies are cheaper than sports cars.

I don't think I've even posted in here yet, but the one thing I will say is this: I don't think a lot of people realize this takes place in an alternate universe. Not even people here necessarily, but what I read around the internet, in magazines, etc. People talk about them destroying Trek/canon, getting facts wrong, on and on and on. But it doesn't matte, because the new Trek isn't even in the same reality as the old Trek. Sure, our Spock is stuck there now, but that's it! Spock being gone from Trek proper, and Romulus being destroyed are the only two things that impact everything else that's occurred.

But my main point being- it's an alternate universe, no ifs, ands or buts about it!

And some people just get old and cranky.

^^^Not me!

Anyhoo, I think it's really obvious that we're not dealing anymore with the old Trek universe. Whatever, our opinions might be about the destruction of Romulus of the old one and the destruction of Vulcan in the new one (a bad move IMO), it's clear this is going to be an altered timeline. Personally, I think the desruction of both planets was an attempt to make a bold statement about changes, but was probably a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Any new fans that this movie may have attracted who might be loyal enough to stick around for thesequel won't care about the decimation of two of Trek's most iconic races in either timeline, but I do get tired of correcting people who assume Romulus no longer exists in the new one because, of course, Nero goes back in time! thereby laying one of the biggest plotholes evey seen in Trek movie history: thusly, why does Nero not simply go back in time to prevent the destruction of Romulus and and kill Spock in the original post-Nemesis era? Don't bother to answer that because it's all about a young new TOS cast which won't apply in the late 23rd century. But it's still lame and makes Nero the dorkiest villain in the Trek pantheon. However, it doesn't rule out Romulans making an appearance in later movies ~ as long as somebody can get them right for a change.

The writers explained in an interview that Nero's plan was to wipe out all the major threats (as perceived by him) to the Romulan Empire in the time line that was created by his arrival, then arrive at Romulus as a conquering savior and become Praetor. He is suppose to be like the "average Working Joe" who goes off the deep end with paranoid delusions after suffering a personal tragedy. As far as the "plot hole" that Julie described, Nero had no control over where the black hole that was created would dump him and Spock. It was a random chance, and would always be a random dump out point no matter how many times he may have created another one to pass through. He decided (as Old Spock would also decide), that he would be better off trying to make the best of the circumstances that he was thrust into. Nero was never ment to be a charasamatic villian at all.

As far as the next movie goes, Abrams and the other members of his Trek Team stated in another recent interview that was posted on Trekmovie.com that the sequel will be an "allegory" to present day world problems, Like the best of Trek's past episodes and movies were, and will be a "lot deeper" than the current movie, which was designed to get old fans back, and gather new fans, without turning them off by hitting them with a really "cerebral" thinking person's story.

I'm of the opinion that anytime the creator is required to explain their creation, they have failed. Parts of this movie makes very little sense w/o having the prolog or w/o the writers explaining the motivations.

Then that would apply to about 85% of all movies. There isn't time to explain all the details in a movie (nore should it be attempted), and many details are ment for the viewer to imply with their own mind.