I enjoyed the movie but it wasn't a star trek film but a great action adventure sci fi romp.

The appeal of the 70's trek was the solid story lines making up for the cheesy special effects - I found this to be the inverse. Wow to look at, sexy as hell cast, story was contrived with a paper-thin villain.

I thought Scotty and bones were dead on - Zachary Quinto as Spock maybe ( I can understand a younger more emotional Spock I just hope they develop him better in the sequels) - poor Uhura reduced to a love interest (Yes im on my soapbox!! but in the 70s having a lead role go to a black woman was ground breaking, having her slowly develop into an authority figure with some balls well that just wasn't done in the good ole days)

The onion was dead on cause the truth was in the sarcasm.








































Penis

Well, yeah, I quit watching the show when they moved it to Monday nights, which I thought was a stupid move. Because seriously, there's nothing on Tuesdays to watch but House, but as if I was going to watch anything but Chuck on Monday at 8.

So I didn't actually see the episode in question. But I saw the season up until it moved, and when I heard Kutner had killed himself, I immediately thought of all the things that had laid the groundwork.

For instance, think back to the Christmas episode, where at the end, they showed each character on House's team spending time with friends and loved ones, what did they show Kutner doing? He went to the house of some random guy and apologized for being mean to him in high school, and then spent Christmas alone. As early as the Christmas episode -- by which point we already knew about Kutner's murdered parents -- he was tying up loose ends and making amends for past wrongs, and the show was depicting him alone with no close ties.

Two episodes later was "Painless," where the patient of the week comes into the hospital because he tried to kill himself. This would be the episode where Taub and Kutner debated suicide for most of the episode.

The producers have known for months that Kal Penn was going to leave the show. They've been writing the suicide in with remarkable subtlety, and from what I understand, I think they did a fantastic job with a very difficult scenario. Where most shows might have showed a character moping around or being all emo, House was far more realistic. The clues Kutner slipped were very subtle, but they were there -- his co-workers were just so wrapped up in their own drama that they didn't notice.

I enjoyed the movie but it wasn't a star trek film but a great action adventure sci fi romp.

The appeal of the 70's trek was the solid story lines making up for the cheesy special effects - I found this to be the inverse. Wow to look at, sexy as hell cast, story was contrived with a paper-thin villain.

I thought Scotty and bones were dead on - Zachary Quinto as Spock maybe ( I can understand a younger more emotional Spock I just hope they develop him better in the sequels) - poor Uhura reduced to a love interest (Yes im on my soapbox!! but in the 70s having a lead role go to a black woman was ground breaking, having her slowly develop into an authority figure with some balls well that just wasn't done in the good ole days)

The onion was dead on cause the truth was in the sarcasm.

Penis

Bones, good fit, found they made him a little older than I though in comparison to the rest of the cast

Scotty, like the actor and obviously putting on an accent not difficult for him. They never really protrayed Scotty as a super transporter physics guy in the show so I found that a little off

Spoc, actor good, why they wrote him so emotional I have no clue maybe it was a struggle for him growing up in the lore don't know

Uhura, yes lame and her interaction with the other character romance wise very off.

Sulu-good

Chekov-could be good, need to see more of him in other movies to tell.

Good Sci Fi Movie?-Yes
Good Star Trek Movie?-Was ok let's be honest there have not been THAT many good Star Trek Movies, Khan, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, Insurection

Once again so much better stuff that could have been done plot wise but they took the quick, and stupid way out, do these people even watch the shows?!

Plot wise Reminded me of Generations and Nemisis and that is NOT a good thing.

I'm gonna just assume I shouldn't read anything in here until I see the movie.


Hey dummies, remember this?

I'm gonna just assume I shouldn't read anything in here until I see the movie.


Hey dummies, remember this?

Tried to keep by stuff pretty spoiler free by being as general as I can.

What the delay on talking about content? A month? Movie has been out for a little while now.

Spock, actor good, why they wrote him so emotional I have no clue maybe it was a struggle for him growing up in the lore don't know

Good Star Trek Movie?-Was ok let's be honest there have not been THAT many good Star Trek Movies, Khan, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, Insurection

OK, huge wall of text below... read on at your own risk.

First, yes Lore-wise, Spock should have been written very emotionally. In the Lore related to Trek, Vulcans do have emotions, they simply fight to push them away and embrace logic--this is addressed really well in the otherwise terrible Enterprise, but its explained in many of the books.

Spock has a particularly hard time with his control because he is part Human, and his mother is emotional (although you don't see this in the movie, she is human so you are supposed to assume it to be the case).

So, that was pretty spot-on. Another illustration of Spock with emotions was missed in your "good Trek movies" The Voyage Home which was priceless, certainly one of the best.

There is a general rule in Trek that the even number movies are the better ones.
Motion picture -- yawn, but it introduced the cast to people who didn't watch the TV show.
Wrath of Kahn -- One of the best sci-fi movies ever (not the best, I know, but certainly in the top 10).
Search for Spock -- Super yawn... really no redeeming qualities I can think of...
Voyage Home -- probably the most cleverly written, and I certainly think this one gets better every time I see it. I mean San Fransisco in the 80's, I can't wait to show this to my kids... haha (Can you tell me where you keep your Nuuuuucleeeeeair Wessles? And Scotty talking into the mouse... come on! Spock swimming in the whale tank fully clothed, priceless!)
Final Frontier -- I wouldn't call this one yawn, exactly, but really I didn't see the point, why did Star Trek have to try to explain god exactly? Oh, wait I forgot-it was the height of consumerism and the only way to fight consumerism is with religion and consumerists are bad because they are like the political party that Hollywood doesn't like (no of course none of this makes sense, but neither did the movie...)
Undiscovered Country -- great action sequences, good movie, but a little over itself at this point, we wanted to see Jean Luc in this one...
Generations -- Yay we got Jean Luc! and Kirk? WTF is this shit? And come on Malcomb McDowell, really? This movie had such potential but was so full of fail...
First Contact -- I know, I know if ratings are in trouble we can just orchestrate and encounter with the Borg. Well, I for one think it worked... I love this movie, its like a 2 part Next Gen episode, but that's ok... (these days it would have gone straight to DVD, and be called Stargate, but hey I liked it anyway)
Insurrection -- OK, I have to completely disagree with you on this one... Insurrection was total fail... I really am disappointed about that too because Jonathan Frakes directed it, and I really had high hopes... but boy did it blow. The only thing that is memorable about it at this point is the whole skin-graft thing... (we can debate the finer points of this later, I suppose).
Then they had to break the whole every other movie is good thing by bringing us Nemesis -- We haven't had the romulans playing a big role in a while, so this could be cool... but no they had to go off and kill Data... DAMN THEM!

So, here I get to my actual point. If things follow suit, this movie will not be as good as the next one. They had to spend time introducing us to the "new" cast and why they are different from the "old" cast.

Kirk's dad died, he didn't have him to look up to, so he's more likely to make different decissions this time around.
Spock's mom died, it seems as though he has decided to honor her by embracing more of his "human" emotional side instead of his stoic vulcan side.
Scotty got some secrety from Spock that aren't supposed to be discovered in Lore for another 20 years=huge technological jump.
Captain, now Admiral, Pike seems to be in a position to hold a more influential role in the universe, as he was not reduced to a box on a wheelchair with a blinky light as his only method of communication... This could potentially play a huge role in the evolution of the federation in this time line...

And so you will have changes, lots of them. And damn it--you'll like them (just kidding). Maybe you'll hate them, maybe you'll stop thinking of this as Star Trek, who knows.

But the basic formula is likely to stay.

The one question I have is what Klingons are going to look like?

Consider this: In the original series, Klingons look like humans wearing gold lemee with darker than average skin. Then in Next Gen, they have lobster on thier faces. But in Enterprise, they have lobsters too.

Well, Enterprise decides to explain this by saying that a virus was killing off the Klingons and that Federation doctors were asked to help save the Klingons. The save was a supersoldier serum invented by Dr. Nunian Sung (great grand father of Data apparently). The super-soldier serum was made from Human dna which caused the ridges to go flat...

A hundred years later, in Next Gen, the ridges had become prominent again -- genetically evolving out of the super soldier serum or something.

So, will the sequel to this movie have ridged Klingons for the pleasure of those who don't know that there was a time when they looked like Mexicans (no offense to any Mexicans) or will they have ridges and skip the entire piece of lore from the ill fated Enterprise, which for all intents and purposes would have happened no longer which time-line we're following...


Once again so much better stuff that could have been done plot wise but they took the quick, and stupid way out, do these people even watch the shows?!

To address this: No, JJ Abrams is not a Trekky. But his two writers both are Trekkies. Frankly, they had to do something if they wanted to reboot the franchise and this seemed like as good an idea as any.

Honestly, I have a major problem with the temporal relationship of this theory. Apparently, however, I am really bad at explaining it without a few drinks, a napkin and a sharpie... so we'll have to discuss this in person some time...

OK, end wall of text...

<--Treky.

geek

geek

Who me?
lol

Ummmm...Kirk wuz hawt.

Also, the spoiler cover doesn't work with Opera Mini.

What I'm wondering is:

Why didn't Nero, having gone back in time and being in possession of the red matter, just destroy the star that would cause the problems in the future? And if that star was Romulus' sun (it was unclear to me whether it was or not), why not at least give your race warning to evacuate?

Or am I over-analyzing?

What I'm wondering is:

Why didn't Nero, having gone back in time and being in possession of the red matter, just destroy the star that would cause the problems in the future? And if that star was Romulus' sun (it was unclear to me whether it was or not), why not at least give your race warning to evacuate?

Or am I over-analyzing?


This is partly because of that whole misuse of time travel thing that I could go into if I were drunker...

Basically, he can't because now that he's gone back in time and killed Kirk's father everything in the Universe could be different and it may never happen.

Apparently when it did go, it was a surprise, so it wasn't just the inevitable happening. So, when he changed the timeline, you never know what would happen.

My head hurts just thinking about time travel...
I need a drink.

Rastus:

He would still have lost his wife. True, his current self would not lose her, but he already did. If he were able to return to his past, she would not be dead from the super nova that he stopped, but might still be dead from some other reason considering the past had been changed. The real crux is that he could not return and was still a psychologically imbalanced Romulan and therefore wanted revenge.

It's a good question though.

What I wonder about that wasn't addressed is this:

According to the original series, no one alive in the federation knew what Romulans looked like. I can find the exact episode and name for reference, but it's the one where they Romulans unveil their first cloaking ship and the actor by the name of Mark Lenard plays the centurion commander in charge of the vessel. The Romulans bare a striking similarity to Vulcans and Spock is immediately under suspicion.

Anyway, the new Spock even proclaims that Vulcans and Romulans have similar physical characteristics as a reason for him to beam aboard the mining vessel.

The only answer I have is that the past has changed in an unexplained way that has caused Romulus and Romulans to be more clearly understood by the federation. My real guess is that the lore in question was ignored in developing this story.

Also, check out youtube for the original television series episodes. They're all there posted by CBS. Pretty cool I think.

I used to know all the names of the original episodes. I know exactly the one you are talking about, but I think I've managed to fry the "Star Trek episode name" brain cells. Oddly enough, the "lyrics to old 22-minute long Rush songs" cells seem to be just fine.

@malinger:


There are about 18 years of unknown after Kirk's dad dies at the hands of a Romulan. The survivors of that encounter would have known about the existance of the Romulans and took that information back to The Federation.

One assumes the next step would be that The Federation and the Vulcans would learn more about them before Kirk and Spock got old enough for the line about looking similar.

Just saw it tonight.

I have seen probably 90% of all Star Trek episodes ever. But I wouldn't say that I've ever debated the lore or timelines.

So as a non closeted uber trekker, I LOVED THIS MOVIE.

If you like Sci Fi, or have ever liked Star Trek at all..... go see it before someone spoils something from it.

I can't say a whole lot on the subject, seeing as I'm no Trekkie, only having seen a handful of episodes here and there, but there wasn't anything that particularly stood out as being wrong. I actually commended this movie for not horrendously screwing up the time continuum plot (almost every movie I've ever seen that deals with time travel/paradox has major logic issues), and I'm usually pretty damn good at pickin' that stuff out. He gave himself a clean slate with it, so whatever he does from here on out goes, more or less, and I think he did a pretty good job with it.

Also, he gets major kudos for that silent space scene.

Also, he gets major kudos for that silent space scene.

I was just talking to my brother about that scene this afternoon!
That was super cool!