What Did You Think Of Star Trek? (Spoiler Discussion)
May 8, 2009 by Vic HoltremanNeed a place to talk about the Star Trek movie, including spoilers? Come on in…
Regular Screen Rant reader “790″ suggested I set up a discussion post for the Star Trek movie, where people can feel free to talk about all aspects of the film without having to worry about spoiling it for others. I had meant to set one of these up for Wolverine but just never got around to it.
Considering how popular I think Star Trek will be (moreso than Wolvie), I thought it might be a good idea to get this set up ASAP. 
So discuss the film below to your heart’s content!
Around the web:
Loading ...
@Andrew – Welcome to site bud. Enjoy your stay and visit often.
I have heard many people complain that the movies they have already made can now no longer happen. I don’t understand how people can think that is that so? Will the DVD Nazi show up at your door and take them by force? This was never really billed as a prequel or origin story so they had the ability to do what they needed to revitalize the franchise and make it profitable again.
So to the people complaining about the precious movies and shows not being to occur in this current universe I would say, every time you put in the DVD and watch the movie or show it does happen. Things like this are usually easier to handle when you turn your brain off and just enjoy the NEW story with the same characters.
@ Andrew, like I’ve said to someone else who had those same concerns, according to what Spock have said about the timeline splitting due to Nero’s actions, that means that the reality you already know from the other shows still exist, they are just branched off from the reality in this one. I guess the theory they subscribe to in this movie is the one that states that the second something is changed about a timeline, it splits from the original and forms its own “dimension.” So technically speaking, the chain of events that lead to the continuity that you’re used to does, in fact, happen, just in a different dimension from the one shown and established by this movie.
Vic –
The Uhura Spock thing in TOS was very subtle.
It’s early first season. There’s one episode – Charlie X I believe, where Spock is playing his Vulcan harp and Uhura sings a song about him with a little encouragement from yeoman Rand. It wasen’t a relationship per se but it was flirtatous.
Also in the episode The Man Trap, Uhura again flirts with Spock, she asks him to “tell me I’m a beautiful young-lady” and asks about Vulcan. Stuff like that.
It’s there but it was never really followed up on.
Why is it so hard for people to understand that there are now two timelines? The minute Nero goes back in time the movie is occuring in an alternate timeline, side-by-side with the original, but the original is still taking place.
I don’t know if I have enough brain power to care about the characters in TWO timelines . . .
Fury2701, Pine and Quinto came out to plug the new film on Weekend Update, then at the very end Nimoy came out (applause !!). He said that Pine was a perfect Kirk and then looked at Quinto, paused and said, “You were almost a perfect Spock.” (Laughs!!)
He then said, “Anyone who doesn’t go out and see the film is a “dickhead”… (More laughs, stunned laughs). True!
^
Lol, Kahless,
The Temporal Prime Directive seems like a rite of passage for Starfleet captains. Kirk and Janeway would say, “those are just guidelines.”
Remember when Sisko went back and altered the Tribbles episode.
^
This is “Star Trek The Next Dimension,,” folks!
I understand the time travel logic and no you wouldn’t explode if you touched your self in the past. Spock is dead in the future anyway. Be cool to see a Voyager timeline Starfleet movie about the ramifications of the Super Nova and Romulus blowing up.
@ Matt
You can’t have 2 timelines! It is a timeLINE. If you travel back you are creating a timeCIRCLE. It becomes a paradox. It doesn’t branch off. You’re thinking of parallel/alternate universes which are on parallel/alternate timelines but you can’t have 2 timelines in the SAME universe (which Nero and old Spock are from). Think about it.
My head is starting to hurt.
@vfrederic
Actually, you are making one speculation after another. Obviously time travel doesn’t currently occur, so nobody knows for sure, but many physicists have very comprehensive theories regarding time travel and splitting timelines…
Time travel is used to much in the Trek universe. With that said here is a common theory in present day physics about time travel.
For EVERY action we make there are two possible outcomes. It’s like a fork in the road. Each fork leads in a different direction and has different outcomes. And the outcomes are infinite. Many call them parallel universes just like the mirror universe episodes in the Trek TV series. If you took a left the first time and then omeone comes back and causes you to take a right then you come to a different outcome.
Anyone remember the mirror universe in the original series, DS9, or Enterprise? It’s the same concept but no one complaing about them?
I understand that you have to make a movie that makes money and as such it needs mass appeal. However, writing a story with no real deep moments, that barely makes sense and falls to pieces when examined, where characters who have so much depth to them but is never really explored on any level, is truely nothing short of tragic stroy telling.
People argue that this is a good movie because they liked it and have never really seen Star Trek before. Or someone who didn’t like Star Trek before now likes the movie. Well, that say’s it all. If you don’t like something, it’s because it has certain characteristics that you dislike. The fact that many people who didn’t like Star Trek, like this movie says to me that it has LOST the characteristics that millions of fans world wide love. I don’t like Def Leppard and a re-write of their songs shouldn’t make me like it. If it does, then it wouldn’t really be Def Leppard anymore.
I for one didn’t want silly camera angles, lens flare, close ups where you can’t tell what the hell is going on in fights and battles, the stupid pet Scotty had, enginering that looks older than that of Archers Enterprise, and an alternative time line so as to create myserty about what can happen to the characters.
It seems that most of the people who like the movie havn’t realized that Star Trek is a CULTURE, not just a movie. It’s about a vision of good story telling that deals with human issues in a futuristic context. This movie lets the franchise down, in that it was designed to make as much money as possible and doesn’t tell a good story about the struggles of the human condition. Insted it opts for special effects, a music sound track designed to sell CDs, and a stupidly clumbsy story full of holes. As such it appeals to many because it lacks depth. Depth and implied subtext is something that goes along with Star Trek like bacon and eggs. Remove that and all you have is a summer blockbuster with some characters in it that resemble a shallow version of their true counterparts.
I didn’t like this movie and here’s why.
*Nero’s motivation makes little sense.
*Why he doesn’t warn his home planet about there impending doom makes no sense
*Even if his motivation did make sense why didn’t go to home planet and help build up an army then destroy Vulcan.
*Why he waits 20 years for the red matter when he can take out an entire fleet of star ships makes the movie pointless.
*Aside from Kirk and Spock all the other characters are wasted.
*I still don’t understand how a black hole is the answer to a supernova.
*Spock becoming Captain then First Office was a hat trick the movie didn’t need.
*Product placement!!!! I never want to hear Beastie Boys ever again.
*I understand that Kirk cheats when taking the Kobiashi Maru but I know that when cheating on test you’re supposed make it look like your not cheating. Honestly Kirk deserved to get caught.
*Two Spocks in the same time line WTF!!
J.J. Abrams just wanted to open with a bang to draw people in and didn’t want to wade through tons of Trek chronology. It’s sort of a cop out, but I can’t blame him. It gives him freedom to experiment with story ideas without worrying about how it lines up with established history. I view this movie as a sequel by using Nero as the starting point and how he changed the timeline. The destruction of Vulcan was pretty major and I still haven’t thought through all of the changes that can cause. Otherwise, they can still keep many of the basic tenets of Trek lore, just different. There were plenty of holes that I hope will be smoothed out in the sequels to come. Overall I enjoyed it just as much or more than all the other movies. Nero was definitely underdeveloped. Chris Pine kept to the spirit of the Kirk character without aping Shatner. I did see moments where the cast tried too hard to mimic the originals, especially at the end. The action was great and was a lot more than I usually expect from a Trek movie.
Of course your SPOCK-LIKE logic completely forgot about all of the people who DID like Star Trek who also liked this movie. What does THAT tell you?
Oops, add @Dave to my comment
Good points Dave, I agree with everything you had to say, I guess I had fun with the film even with all those faults because I know that, that’s as good as it gets these days.
The story could have been deeper, but that’s just not what makes money, in the eyes of studio execs. these days,,,
I know Nero used Pike’s defense codes to fake out the federation, but I did wonder why his huge, hostile-looking ship dropping a giant anchor through the earth’s atmosphere didn’t elicit a response from the cops or the national guard or even a news helicopter.(sarcasm)
As a Trek fan, I’m just glad to have a new movie(a pretty good one too) considering Chris Berman and Brandon Braga had pretty much killed the franchise.
When you guys say killed the franchise, are you referring to “Enterprise?” I think it was Rick Berman wasn’t it?
What did you guys think about the last Star Trek movie with Moby as the villain? lol
@ Cookie Garris
Yes I understand the fork in the road theories of infinite outcomes and parallel universes. But I stress you can’t have infinite timelines in the SAME universe. Otherwise you would have infinite copies of yourself populating that SAME universe.
If Nero believes he is still in his timeline but in the past, why would he not just prevent Romulus from being destroyed in the future? And if he saves Romulus then this whole thing would’ve never happened. IT’S A PARADOX.
If he is in an “alternate” timeline then the purpose of destroying Vulcan would be meaningless to old Spock as he knows in HIS timeline it’s still there. It doesn’t make sense either way.
Im not as old as you other Star Trek fans but someone graduating and going to major in Astronomy and minor in Quantum Mechanics this movie seemed like it would fit my liking. (really enjoyed the scenes with Black Holes and Supernovas) Since i have no prior knowledge to the original Star Trek, I would have two give it two thumbs up 5/5.
Did anyone else notice or think that the role of Pavel Chekov (played by Anton Yelchin who is actually Russian born..) accent seemed fake and very cheesy? I found it a bit distracting.
@Valis
I can’t answer all your questions and I’m not saying the film is perfect but I’ll give it a shot:
*Nero’s motivation makes little sense.
Unfortunately if you want to know his real motivation you have to pick up the 4 issue prequel comic. It’s made quite clear there.
*Why he doesn’t warn his home planet about there impending doom makes no sense
Something cut out of the movie is the fact that he was captured by Klingons and thrown into Rura Penthe, that ice planet prison, for 20 of those 25 years. Scenes were shot but cut out of the movie. No doubt they’ll be on the DVD version.
*Even if his motivation did make sense why didn’t go to home planet and help build up an army then destroy Vulcan.
See above (although that still gives him 5 years). He was also (from the prequel story) disgusted with the Romulan leaders.
*Why he waits 20 years for the red matter when he can take out an entire fleet of star ships makes the movie pointless.
Again, see above.
*Aside from Kirk and Spock all the other characters are wasted.
Have you really paid attention to previous Trek films? I think the secondary characters actually got more screen time here than in the original cast movies.
*I still don’t understand how a black hole is the answer to a supernova.
Ya got me there.
*Spock becoming Captain then First Office was a hat trick the movie didn’t need.
That did seem a bit convoluted.
*Product placement!!!! I never want to hear Beastie Boys ever again.
Forget that, how about a shot of a freaking Nokia logo?
*I understand that Kirk cheats when taking the Kobiashi Maru but I know that when cheating on test you’re supposed make it look like your not cheating. Honestly Kirk deserved to get caught.
I believe that was the point – they didn’t want Kirk to look like someone who cheats on a test to get a grade he didn’t deserve, it was to prove that he could BEAT their unbeatable test his own way.
*Two Spocks in the same time line WTF!!
That sort of thing has been done before lots of times in other sci-fi movies.
Vic
@vfrederik
You do realize that by alternate timeline, it automatically is an alternate universe too right? The “fork in the road” is talking about splitting into separate dimensions. More than one time can’t happen at the same time, so a splitting of time will not technically be in the same “universe” as in occupying the same space.
I really don’t know how else to word it so you understand the current theories of parallel universes. The movie doesn’t defy some theories while it defies other, it really depends on which theory you subscribe to, and IN THE MOVIE Spock makes mention of an alternate timeline forming the second Nero came back and altered it. This shows the movie makers are following the theory that allows for this.
The point of this movie is so you DON’T have to care about two timelines. As has been pointed out numerous times, this allows the writers to do more Star Trek movies without contorting themselves into a back-breaking pose to try to keep everything conformed to canon
The old Star Trek universe is still there, but it’s a dead end now. And good riddance, because that hoary technobabble politically correct monster became unwatchable and nearly destroyed the franchise. The new movie only makes it official the old order is dead. Even if fans were sticking their heads in the ground but Enterprise ended years ago and fans have been living off the fumes, high on the idea that nothing was wrong with the franchise.
So I would say it’s pointless to nitpick over something because it wasn’t like that in “old” Star Trek. This is not your old Star Trek time travel, where you can go back, mess things up, then somehow course correct and then travel back to your own time as if nothing had happened. Here you time travel has consequences, and there’s no undo command. You live with the consequences, time travel or not.
That being said, the more interesting questions are what about the things that are known? V’ger is still out there, as is the alien probe from ST IV. The Borg are also out there. And old Spock knows about them all, so I wonder if he’ll tell.
“And good riddance, because that hoary technobabble politically correct monster became unwatchable and nearly destroyed the franchise.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself vitaboy…
@ Ken J
I understand the current theories of parallel universes.
You just don’t understand what I’m trying to say.
But in another parellel universe you do…
and in another one we agree…
and in another one I understand you…
and in another one I never posted a comment to begin with…
It still doesn’t explain why the future me is typing this.
Yah, you’re right, it has to be me that doesn’t understand…
After skimming all 145 comments, I’m amazed that no one has made a big deal of Spock’s emotions in this movie. There have been a few comments, but none right out front.
I’ve had this pet peeve about Trek always trying to “humanize” the most unique characters. Spock, Data, Odo, Holo-doctor–all of them either trying to be “more human” or the crew is constantly observing how “human” they are. This sickens me, it almost seems racist in nature!
But this was different, and…I like it. In this case, I could say that Spock is conflicted between his human and vulcan aspects. But with the Uhura scenes, it hits me that he’s not always conflicted–as far as love goes, he’s embracing the pleasures of his human side.
I think the TOS Spock could have been badgered into an emotional outburst after losing his mother and his homeworld. But we don’t only see Spock letting down his guard here, we see it elsewhere. I LIKE that the pressure for this Spock is from within…that pressure seems genuine and worth exploring. The hokey “Spock, that was almost…human” was foisted upon him externally.
Anyone digging (or hating) this take on the human/vulcan?
Well, exploring how Vulcan Spock is wouldn’t be much of an exploration now would it? And Data is programmed and built by humans, ditto for the holo-doc… Man, all of this affirmative action politically correct stuff is so annoying…
@ vfrederic
My explanation wasn’t as in depth as it could have been cause I figured people don’t want to read a bunch of stuff about physics and quantum mechanics.
There are so many different theories you really can’t discuss them all here. But your spot on when you said you can’t have 2 timelines in the same universe. I shouldn’t have left that out.
Some theories state there are infinite dimensions and universes. String theory might explain these events better.
We could discuss all these theories in this comment but the majority of readers would be bored by it. That’s why this new movie is doing well. You get your coke and popcorn and sit down and watch.
People want to be entertained and not have to carry a physics dictionary to understand it. TOS didn’t have nearly as much technobabble starting with TNG and beyond.
By the last two movies, Insurrection and Nemesis, the vision of Trek was gone. THOSE ARE THE MOVIES THAT WERE MADE JUST TO MAKE A DOLLOR OR TWO!. Neither of those movies had a soul.