339 replies to this topic

[Whirlygig]

Today, the RottenTomatoes.com average actually went up by 1%...usually it just goes down.

[Gothneo]

Meta critic got a bump too... With a reviewer giving gifts 100%

Maybe it'll buck the trend?

[WORF22]

SORRY BUT it's a jj movie. i know it is going to suck even b4 i see it. critics suck. if you know nothing John Snow about the world how can you say it's round. if you know nothing about Trek how can you review it. just me...

[1701D]

I'm confused, why would the timeline need to be restored?

If Kirks dad didn't die at the battle with the Narada then the future would be changed.

[1701D]

SORRY BUT it's a jj movie. i know it is going to suck even b4 i see it. critics suck. if you know nothing John Snow about the world how can you say it's round. if you know nothing about Trek how can you review it. just me...

Seriously? Wow.

[robster]

It's a Justin Lin movie,not JJ.

 

J-R!

[Jay K]

JJ is a blanket term for Kelvin Timeline as well (thus, JJprise). Easier to write as well!

[s8film40]

If Kirks dad didn't die at the battle with the Narada then the future would be changed.

You mean the already changed future would be changed. So an entire planet and the vast majority of Vulcans are destroyed and that's all okay, but if Kirks dad doesn't die something has to be done to set the timeline straight. Now that you mention it that sounds about right for JJ Trek.

[Alteran195]

Seriously? You guys do realize that the Narada would STILL BE IN THE TIMELINE regardless of whether they sent Kirks dad back in time. The Kelvin didn't pull Narada into the Kelvin timeline, Spock did in the Prime timeline.

Like I said, if Narada wasn't disabled by the Kelvin, things would be way worse.

Think before you blindly criticize this timeline.

SORRY BUT it's a jj movie. i know it is going to suck even b4 i see it. critics suck. if you know nothing John Snow about the world how can you say it's round. if you know nothing about Trek how can you review it. just me...

Wow, leave it to a Star Trek fan to be so closed minded to something new. If it wasn't for the new movies Star Trek would still be a dead franchise, and we probably wouldn't be getting a new TV series.

[s8film40]

Wow, leave it to a Star Trek fan to be so closed minded to something new. If it wasn't for the new movies Star Trek would still be a dead franchise, and we probably wouldn't be getting a new TV series.

Having an opinion and not blindly accepting anything with the name Star Trek on it is closed minded!?

I can't speak for Worf22 but I went into the new franchise with an open mind. I was extremely disappointed! Even so I still watched the next movie although skipped wasting money on seeing it in the theater. It was more of the same. I'll probably eventually watch at least some of the new movie just to see if it might be better than the previous two. I would say I have a very open mind, in fact open enough that I can watch a movie and judge it based on its own merits not some sort of blind loyalty to anything Star Trek or some idea that supporting this movie will help "keep things alive" for Star Trek until something good can be made.

[Gothneo]

I have no issues with people that just want to see something regardless of what anyone says... Critics or otherwise.

I think we all have our guilty pleasures and we go see them and enjoy them for what they are regardless of the quality of acting, story telling or cinematography... I know I do.

I appreciate the fans that like the kelvin timeline movies... And I hope you get something you enjoy!

I have not enjoyed them... Though I really wanted to... Thus as someone who's on the fence about seeing the movie... I'm looking to see what critics say... What fans say etc.

I've made no secret of my hesitation... But I'm certainly not trying to be outright dismissive or negative of others enthusiasm... At least that's not my goal!

I also don't think lack of movies would completely kill the franchise... It kept a heartbeat with fan films... And now there is a new series coming. No matter how well revived the films are... I think people will judge the new series on its own merits... And it'll thrive or wither based on that.

[robster]

And luckily that's all they are.....opinions. We can agree and we can disagree. I love the new movies,and I also love pizza and Mountain Dew. There,I said it. lol! But really,everyone is actually entitled to their own opinions,you like what you like. Plain and simple. And I won't say amything about Trek fandom as a whole,since what I always thought was a myth is apparently not.

 

JJ movie still? So Transformers are Spielberg movies? LOL!

 

J-R!

 

 

[Alteran195]

This movie has new writers, and a new director. The director has stated multiple times that he is an actual Star Trek fan, unlike Abrams.

Simon Pegg is also a Trek fan.

Will the movie have action, and be faster paced than the old TV shows? Yes, because it's a movie.

[WORF22]

Seriously? You guys do realize that the Narada would STILL BE IN THE TIMELINE regardless of whether they sent Kirks dad back in time. The Kelvin didn't pull Narada into the Kelvin timeline, Spock did in the Prime timeline.

Like I said, if Narada wasn't disabled by the Kelvin, things would be way worse.

Think before you blindly criticize this timeline.

Wow, leave it to a Star Trek fan to be so closed minded to something new. If it wasn't for the new movies Star Trek would still be a dead franchise, and we probably wouldn't be getting a new TV series.

 

On the contrary I think I am a very open-minded but it’s like that old saying. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me a third time and I deserve it. Are you going to sit there and tell me the 2^nd jj movie was good? You can’t take bits and pieces from eps smash them together and call it a movie. He did the same thing with Star Wars smh. 

[Alteran195]

Into Darkness had issues, but I enjoyed it. Certainly more than Insurrection, Nemesis, Generations, And Final Frontier.

All I'm saying is that Beyond is being made by different people with different writers so just dismissing it doesn't make sense to me.

[Whirlygig]

Either way we're looking at a time travel story which hasn't been done significantly in a Trek movie since Star Trek: First Contact, 20!!! Years ago.

 

Trek has a history of "event X did/didn't happen, so the entire future is doomed."  Edith Keeler survives, First Contact is prevented, the Xindi aren't stopped, the whales go extinct, etc, etc, etc.

 

But emo NuTrek would most certainly make it all about Kirk and how if Kirk's dad didn't die, or whatever else they come up with, then Kirk wouldn't have turned into awesome biff-pang-zow savior of humanity and the entire galaxy.  That feels like complete balony for multiple reasons.  For one, just think how much better an officer Kirk might have been if he had the influence growing up of one of Starfleet's alleged greatest instead of some jerk?  For another, just ask yourself what kind of a Starfleet is Starfleet if there's only 1 person in a population of billions capable of doing the same things Kirk managed to do.  Kirk is no "god" and I really, really hate it when fandom/fanboyism/reverse-mary-sue-ism-or-whatever try to make him into one.  No Kirk, no future -- complete BS.  I also read a spoilerish things about Beyond that makes me think there is some stuff in it that might be more of the same of that crap.

 

Contrast with another such story...  Picard is never stabbed by Nausicaans.  Well, what happened?  Starfleet managed to survive.  The galaxy still existed.  It was just a personal story.  He didn't live up to his full potential.  But the fate of the universe as we know it didn't hang in the balance.

 

Anyway...

 

How can you say a time travel story hasn't been done significantly in a Trek movie since FC?  It was done in JJTrek 2009.  It was the entire crux of the story and this universe.  Prime Trek did time travel every 4th film.  NuTrek wants to do it every 3rd, including the 1st?

[WORF22]

Having an opinion and not blindly accepting anything with the name Star Trek on it is closed minded!?

I can't speak for Worf22 but I went into the new franchise with an open mind. I was extremely disappointed! Even so I still watched the next movie although skipped wasting money on seeing it in the theater. It was more of the same. I'll probably eventually watch at least some of the new movie just to see if it might be better than the previous two. I would say I have a very open mind, in fact open enough that I can watch a movie and judge it based on its own merits not some sort of blind loyalty to anything Star Trek or some idea that supporting this movie will help "keep things alive" for Star Trek until something good can be made.

 

 

Into Darkness had issues, but I enjoyed it. Certainly more than Insurrection, Nemesis, Generations, And Final Frontier.

All I'm saying is that Beyond is being made by different people with different writers so just dismissing it doesn't make sense to me.

 

 

 

now I am not saying Insurrection, Nemesis, Generations, And Final Frontier are better movies than what we have seen in the new universe not at all.  but as crappy as some of them are  they still have a fundamental Roddenberry feel to them as did TNG, DS9, VOY, and even ENT. And let’s not even get into ENT because as much as I loved the show it still had some things that I did not like about it but overall it still had that Roddenberry Trek feel to it. 

[Alteran195]

Except that Kirks dads sacrifice is pretty damn important to this timeline. Picard getting stabbed by Nausicanns isn't a major event to the timeline, while the Kelvins destruction is. I don't really get why that is hard to grasp.

Stopping the Kelvins destruction and somehow saving Kirks dad wouldn't make the Kelvin timeline the prime timeline. If the Kelvin didn't cripple the Narada, Nero would have gone on a rampage against Starfleet and the Federation. Things would be much worse.

I don't know where you're getting this idea that the new timeline is saying Kirk is doing things no one else can.

He knew about the Narada because he read Pikes dissertation about the Kelvin recently. It's destruction happened 30 years ago, so it isn't surprising that the specific details from the attack aren't general knowledge. When Kirk brought it up, it seemed to make Pike remember those details which made it more believable.

The plan to stop Neros attack on earth was something the senior staff came up with together, not Kirk alone.

Kirk saving whatever the red planet was in Into Darkensss also isn't extraordinary.

Kirk also volunteered to go after Khan because of his relationship with Pike, again this isn't something that's extraordinary in anyway. Him sacrificing himself to save his ship is the same damn thing.

[s8film40]

now I am not saying Insurrection, Nemesis, Generations, And Final Frontier are better movies than what we have seen in the new universe not at all. 

All of those movies are far better than any of the JJ Abrams Trek movies. I don't even think it's fair to compare them they're in a totally different league.

[Whirlygig]

Alteran, I understand everything you are saying.  I'm about to let loose with some more sarcastic whining and complaining about NuTrek and fandom.  So understand that my tone is not directed at you in any way whatsoever, I'm just ranting.

 

I'm referring to a general feeling that has been building over the years, not just in NuTrek, that Kirk is somehow the Luke Skywalker of the Star Trek universe.  I think it somewhat began with the outrage of Kirk's death in Generations somehow not being "befitting" of the character (despite the fact that he actually in a sense got to die TWICE in one movie, which mere mortals don't get to do, and BOTH of those deaths were in service of what he stood for).  As if they wouldn't be satisfied unless Kirk pretty much lived forever.  This manifests itself again in the way that TOS was chosen for a reboot in the first place, and in the way companies like DST have decided that Kirk (and sometimes Spock) is the only part of Star Trek that matters.  And I feel it especially manifests itself in the NuTrek films because to me they are largely an emo examination of Kirk and a celebration of his worst qualities in service of making him out to be an action hero when Trek is not, at its best IMO, about action heroes.

 

Then I read some more things in a Beyond review, I believe:

 

Spoiler

Something about there being a sequence where multiple Kirks (what's better than 1 Kirk, LOTS OF KIRKS ERMAGRD!) ride multiple motorcycles (WOOOO DOGGIE!) to save the day...  And an ending where Kirk says he couldn't have done it alone all while making a smug expression betraying that he actually thinks he could have done it alone.

 

Yeah, fine, we want to argue that the Kelvin smashing itself into the Narada saved the galaxy at least as far as humans are concerned...and if it doesn't happen, then in this timeline, we're all dead.  Good thing we care more about Earth than Vulcan apparently because they're all already dead.  Wait a minute, why do we care about an alternate universe anyway again?  Cuz there are also millions of other universes where Earth is destroyed too, right?  Let's just move on to a better one where Vulcan and Earth are both fine...amirite?  Or wait, will time travelling Kirk also manage to save Vulcan too?

 

Anyway, ok, Kirk can meet pops, and they can have a few nice moments culminating in committing to go back and sacrifice himself again, and blah blah blah, valor, blah.  And now once again the name Kirk is the most important one in the galaxy.

 

I think there's definitely an implication throughout the new films that there's something unique about Kirk's personality that allowed him to solve all these problems in the right place at the right time and that without that savvy, smart, "sexy", volatile mix of emotion humanity would have been obliterated.  And if that's not expressed explicitly enough in the films, then certainly I can hear it in the voices of fans who love those films.  The notion that the Narada couldn't have been defeated without Elder Kirk and Younger Kirk working across generations in Kirk-tastic co-Kirk-eration exemplifies it.