91 replies to this topic

[Gothneo]

Lol! Well played FHC. I'm not saying JJ is "Killing" Trek... I'm not such a Fan of the 1st two years of ENT... but the last two I'm an absolute fan!  Likewise, there are more than a couple stinkers in the list of movies.

 

It'll go on. and when there is a movie or a new TV show I like I'll enjoy that!

[FHC]

I'm just saying that as long as someone says "HERE"S MONEY TO BURN" any director is going to use it. With only 2 some hours to work with, something is going to suffer. You either pull back on your "Creative Vision" or you give on some plot development. Only when you say, here's the limit, make due, is when you have to work hard to tell a story because that's all you have. Some of the best movies/TV ever made were made cheap, because all they could afford was to tell a story. Babylon Five is a good example.

[Gothneo]

I totally agree. Personally, I think "Primer" is an example of a surprisingly good sic-fi movie made on the cheap.  $7000 total. Its not flashy, no special effects, but its a thinker. 

 

[VulcanFanatic]

The drama of the so called " long drawn out discourses" of dialogue in Star Trek is every bit as important any action sequence is. How would humans ever make it to the 23rd century without the ability to communicate in something more than two sentences before firing a photon torpedo. TNG had many episodes that featured long sequences of dialogue, and it was great and effective. TOS's Five year mission was to seek out new life and new civilizations, to learn from and study them, not to blow them up. Of course conflict did happen, but it wasnt because Kirk was looking for the fight. He just handled it. And so did Picard. And Sisko and Janeway. Enterprise was an earlier attempt to draw in a younger, wider fanbase with a show that broke with Canon and alienated many longtime fans. Ratings were not that good and by season 4 the powers that be got that they needed to return to what they had abandoned the first three seasons, but the damage was already done. JJ Abrams Star Trek went even further to alienate long time fans by throwing the Canon out of the window and starting over. It took me a while to warm up to this new Star Trek and i like it, but the way i look at it is that this is Star Trek in a parallel universe, not the same universe that Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was in. They are two different animals. New episodes of the Star Trek that i enjoyed all my life are now only available in comics, fan films or novels. JJ Abrams Star Trek is the new generation of Star Trek, and while i enjoy the characters and adventures, its like the New Testament of Star Trek, with all that came before being the Old Testament.

[Gothneo]

Another very positive review from the folks at bleeding cool.com 

 

Looks like lens flares are still in style with JJ!

[Whirlygig]

 

I'm talking about how different they were to each other and how the fans didn't like change from Kirk to Picard but in the end, many fans embraced it and it was that change that served up 18 years of continuous Star Trek and brought in an entirely new generation of fan.

 

But we have fans yelling this isn't Star Trek! Or this is an insult to fans and it's all really very very ridiculous because, WHAT IS STAR TREK?

 

When you ask "what is Star Trek", do you suppose 716 TV episodes might have more to say on that subject than 11 films?

 

Most fans (not all, some still aren't over it) got over the change from Kirk to Picard because in the end they realized that the change was not so much to the underlying spirit of Star Trek, just to the direct setting and characters.

 

JJ-Trek has its own spirit, but I don't find anything unique enough about that spirit to set it apart from every other franchise out there so I don't see how I can qualify it as "Star Trek spirit" if it's really just "generic future sci-fi actioner with themes of honor and friendship" spirit.  Those things are certainly a part of the Star Trek spirit but the full effect of Trek requires a lot more than that.  Still waiting for the new universe to figure that out and display it for us somehow.

 

Not sure the film medium will ever be able to deliver that TV Trek spirit, which is the Trek I care for most.

 

Here's a quote from Ron Moore I just ran into on another forum:

 

Moore: People have to understand that the Star Trek films are a different animal. And that goes for the original series’ movies, as well as those from The Next Generation, and from J.J. By their nature, the Star Trek films are much more action-oriented, with space battles, big villains, lots of running and jumping. The stakes for Earth and the universe are always enormous.

But the lifeblood of Star Trek’s television shows is its morality plays and social commentary. It’s sci-fi that provides a prism on human society and culture. The movies are never really going to do what the episodes do, like split Picard into two in a transporter beam and then talk philosophically about the nature of humanity, which parts of our strength come from good and which from evil. The movies are never going to do that. Star Trek: The Next Generation was about those moral issues, about how societies grow and are differently affected. None of these are topics that the movies are going to tackle.

To create Star Trek in the form that people are familiar with requires another television series, and I think it will be successful again in that medium. You have to spend some time talking about its form and structure, and how to update it again for a new audience. You still want the “boldly go where no one has gone before” part with a ship, crew and ongoing mission. That’s part and parcel of the franchise.

But you have to be able to tackle big ideas, which are larger than chasing the villain of the week. That’s really not what the series was very good at. I mean, you could look back at the original Star Trek series or The Next Generation and find some cool action-adventure episodes with space battles, but the show is about so much more than that. If you were trying to do that flavor of Star Trek on television every week, it would just fail....

 

Also, Gothneo, thanks for the like, but apparently that doesn't do anything but send me a personal notification?  The thread page itself shows no indication of "likes" that I can see so it seems like a useless feature???

[Gothneo]

Also, Gothneo, thanks for the like, but apparently that doesn't do anything but send me a personal notification?  The thread page itself shows no indication of "likes" that I can see so it seems like a useless feature???

 

Lol! yeah... I guess its a feature not fully realized yet! oh well.

 

I think you hit it on the nail with the info you provided.

 

For me the spirit of Trek is embodied in the TV shows. The movies were always a bit of a bonus for the fans. I think that's the problem for me, they are trying to go straight to the big screen and I (personally) find it a bit "empty".

[VorlonKosh]

I'm trying to start a new topic on this, but it isn't going through for some reason...anyway, Trekmovie.com is reporting Star Trek Into Darkness toys are available at Burger King in Mexico...anyone from there or know someone?

[Whirlygig]

So just as Star Trek II reinvigorated the franchise, JJ Abrams Trek is doing the same so perhaps rather than relating to TNG, I should relate back to Wrath of Khan.

 

As for the spirit of Star Trek, it may mean something to you and then something completely different to me and fans can argue until their blood turns vulcan green, it isn't going to change the fact that Star Trek's spirit cannot be defined as one thing or another.

 

If the movies lead to a TV series, that would be fantastic.  I don't think it's pulling in the numbers that today's studio mentality requires for that though. Would love to be wrong.  But realize that the TV series wouldn't star these actors and as a result probably would not center around the TOS crew.  Who knows what it would be?

 

As for whether you can define the spirit of Star Trek (in a way everyone would agree on), I completely disagree that you can't and no amount of hand waving and repetition will convince me otherwise.  Only an honest attempt to do so accompanied by a clear failure would convince me.  I think it would be rather easy, we could all list bullet points as to key elements of the spirit of Star Trek, spanning both TV and movies, and I am almost sure we could all agree on every last one of those points given time to work it out.

 

Then the task would be to take that list, and identify which of those elements are featured prominantly in JJ-Trek.  And then identify which of them are featured in other franchises.  Through this exercise I firmly believe everyone would realize what many of us fans are talking about.  Which is that the elements present in JJ-Trek are the same elements you'll find in any other number of franchises and that those elements which are more unique to Star Trek are largely absent from JJ-Trek (or at least, having not seen STID yet, then from ST09).

 

And let me remind you that overall I have made a distinction between TV Trek and Movie Trek (which is backed up by Ron Moore), and admit that what I am saying may well apply to most of the other films too.  Just as Gothneo noted, the films usually grow out of the TV series as a "bonus" for fans.  Now they are trying to have it the opposite way.

[robster]

Not BK in Mexico,KFC. Here's a link to the article over on Trekmovie. Cheap tat that I love,hope to get this,lol!

 

Seeing the movie on Thursday,soon as I get home for a quick visit. Cautiously optimistic about the movie,and the major disappointments from reading the spoilers have died down a little.

 

J-R!

[robster]

Ooops,almost forgot the link! lol!

 

http://trekmovie.com...sia-kfc-mexico/

 

J-R!

[Alex]

For me the spirit of Trek is embodied in the TV shows. The movies were always a bit of a bonus for the fans. I think that's the problem for me, they are trying to go straight to the big screen and I (personally) find it a bit "empty".

I think this is what really irks me about the JJ–Verse as well. TWOK and FC proved that you could incorporate "action flick" elements into Trek and still tell an excellent story, NEM had its flaws, but it too tried to tell a morality play with a bit more of an action–flick angle. With the JJ–Verse, I feel that the morality play angle isn't there, particularly with regards to two–dimensional antagonists, at least based on what I've seen so far. I would be fine with the action–flick angle if we also had some of the classic morality play elements executed as well as they were in the Prime Universe.

 

I've met more than a few fans who've finally said what I've felt for awhile now: a reboot was needed in '09 as much as it was needed in '87. The only difference here is that the creative team decided to take the quick and easy way out with the reboot, instead of actually putting some thought into how to expand the unique universe of Trek. The JJ–verse just doesn't feel "unique" in my opinion; it feels like the Bayformers universe with starships instead of sentient alien robots, and with more lens flares. The more militarisitic Federation also rubs me the wrong way, and is symptomatic of what I personally consider to be the "flaws" of the JJ–verse.

 

I honestly think that it's a mistake to not have Prime Universe Trek on TV and JJ–verse Trek in theaters. That particular combination would be the best for Trek as a whole, and while I do have issues with the JJ–verse, I do think that it's well designed for the purpose of movies, but I wouldn't want to see it as a weekly TV show. The Prime Universe had problems adapting to the big screen at times for the very reason that it was designed for TV, and with two post–Enterprise movies now completed, the thing Trek needs most is a new TV show, and one that will preferrably be everything that the films aren't and can't be. This would allow both halves of Trek to act as a whole, which is what would ultimately be best for the franchise.

[Destructor!!!]

Just saw it.

 

I'm angry. Hot-headed, wall-punchingly angry.

 

1701, you and I are not going to agree on this one.

[Gothneo]

Uh oh... care to share any specifics? use the spolier feature so as not to give anything away unless people want to know...

[Destructor!!!]

I'm pretty burned out. I couldn't sleep after seeing it, knowing this is the future of Star Trek... I feel like I'm losing a family member.

 

Then, on four hours of sleep, I'm woken by a phonecall (voicemail) telling me that my mother "has had a -=muffled by wind=- in the car park of the garden centre here". Frantic scramble to find out what that missing word is, followed by frantic scramble to get a neighbour to give me a lift to the garden centre to get her. She's fine. She tripped and fell, and is bruised and grazed, but she's ok.

 

Why'd I tell you that? To explain the lack of formatting that follows. But first, a coherent answer to your question:

 

THERE BE SPOILERS HERE

 

Spoiler

Despite not being the right morphology, personality, accent or ethnicity, Cumby is Khan.

His blood can bring Tribbles back from the dead.

They outright re-enact the most cherished scenes in Star Trek history, nearly word for word, but with a lame twist and an obvious solution staring us in the face. Then they did that thing... you know, the one thing, the thing that every non-fan knows about Star Trek II, that scream. But with the same lame twist. And it's so frakking lame.

Warp speed is faster than it was last movie - two minutes from Earth to Qo'nos.

Earth's gravity will preferentially pull large starships instead of the debris that used to be part of those starships. It'll pull them from lunar orbit to the surface in about 2 minutes. The Moon just hovers there.

The last lines of the film make no sense.

 

And in case I missed anything, here's my stream of consciousness from Reddit this afternoon...

 

MOAR SPOYLARS (and unfiltered rage)

 

Spoiler

When 'batch said "My name is Khan..." goddamn. such a sinking feeling. no more capitals at the start of sentences. jJ took them away.

I'm so f1cking angry at this utter sacrilege.

Meaningless, obvious drivel... and it cuts all the deeper with the glimmers of potential it showed - the models in Marcus' office (wasn't anyone like "What's that one?" at the unmarked top-secret behemoth at the end of the shelf?), Section 31, Klingon space... but then it all went to sh2t.

"KHAAAAAAN!". No. No to Spock saying it and NO to the 'Batch, fine actor that he is, playing a hispanic Indian megalomaniac... no.

We're stranded near Qo'Nos, but nobody's detected us even while we're making interstellar phonecalls. AND TALKING TO PEOPLE ON THE SURFACE! Or even when ANOTHER FEDERATION SHIP ARRIVES!

We're disabled near Earth, where at least one other ship was docked 20 minutes ago... should we call for help?

Power fails, so the ship falls from the moon to Earth in about 2 minutes? Batting debris out of the way the whole time? Debris which was happily floating - neither affected by it's own explosively-imparted original momentum (which should have seen the debris field rapidly dissipating), or even the apparently uber-charged gravity of Earth, which should have seen it falling at the same rate as the ship (for days). Nope.

Khan's blood can... sigh... f3ck off. (Abrams' attitude to sci-fi: Science + future = magic)

Planet Nibiru? Seriously? Are you f4cks referencing one of the most 5ss-hatted conspiracy/truther/f6ckoffanddie bullsh7tspiracies out there? In a movie about a conspiracy? You realise that will make those clowns think you're lending that shit credence... oh sh8t... you are, aren't you? ...Choke on multiple d9ldos.

 

PEOPLE WHO LIKED THIS MOVIE:

I see where you're coming from, really. There was a lot to like - I really swooned over the visuals

Spoiler

near Jupiter

, and there was a lot of cool intrigue going on.

But DO NOT debate me on this. I'm not in a place where I can handle that yet, so prepare to be ignored.

There was a lot more lazy, insensitive dream-trampling going on here than there were positives. Impact-wise, anyway.

 

Give me a few days to possibly be less angry about this.

 

I'm not one to invoke clichès like this, but half way through this movie, something broke inside of me. I realised that Star Trek, the Star Trek that I love, is dead and gone. And thanks to this highly likeable and well-made atrocity, it's never coming back.

 

Spoiler

1u2i3u4u5a6u7i8i9i

[FHC]

WOW dude, you need to get away for awhile and that comes from a guy that has spent over 20 years of his life in and running one of the largest SciFi clubs in the world. I'm a little worried and I am not being sarcastic. I'm really concerned for you.

 

BTW if you post it, you open yourself to debate, I'm not debating you, I'm just saying what you know is true.

 

BTW I know a guy, named Gary and when he watched the TNG Ep Encounter at Farpoint he got so sick he threw up. OH did he curse Picard.

[Gothneo]

Firstly, 

 

Thanks for sharing. 

 

Secondly, as FHC says, Please. Take deep breaths. They can't take away TOS, TNG, or the Prime Universe.

 

I'll just say that you confirmed everything I've thought and said about JJ Abrams and actually, what you described is exactly what I expected.

 

I do appreciate the spoliers as it helps solidify my resolve to wait till this movie hits the Redbox, or maybe wait till I can see it for free at the library!

 

Sadly, my current hold out for a good sci-fi movie this summer looks like it will be Elysium. 

[VorlonKosh]

Sounds like a disaster.... I'll go see it.  However, like the last one, I'll have to approach it as a science fiction blockbuster and not a Star Trek movie.

[Jay K]

Vorlong, that's a great way of dealing with it. I freely admit that the first 'nu' film is a fun movie, but I just can't view it as Star Trek. This one will be the same most likely. 

 

 

I'll put my reply in spoilers, just so I have freedom to cover anything: 

 

Spoiler

Yep, when I saw the bits you mentioned Destructor, but just in the script-form alone, I cringed. I find it unbelievable that they're taking one of the most memorable moments in popular sci-fi (Spock's death), and basically making a joke out of it in my opinion. Also, I really don't like new Spock. This whole thing they've decided to make an 'angle' for story out of, him wrestling with his emotions. Yes, he's half-human, and he picked up some very human traits from his friends, but he never outright lost it (at least, not without some genuine cause). 
Also, I was a bit shocked when I found out that Cumberbatch was Khan - I thought they'd actually make him Gary Mitchell, but I feel now that I gave them too much credit. 

One more also, what the hell is going on with the cyborg on the bridge?
 

One thing that pisses me off to be honest, is how every aspect of Star Trek that non-Trekkies would know, has been monstrously inflated. Truly, these are films for regular joes, and not Trekkies (at least, not me). 
And Destructor, Star Trek isn't dead. TOS, TNG, and soon DS9 coming out on Blu-Ray - that's enough to satisfy me, and let my imagination run wild all over again, for years (probably my life). Also, toy ships.

 

 

I'm happy for the fans that like it though, I envy yee all. Although there's probably more chance of the tooth fairy crawling out of cupboard, I can still dream/hope that one day, some new next gen/DS9 stuff will be made. It never will, but I like to hope.