Topic: So on May the 8th Star trek will die

[Khalee1]

As from what Ive seen of the ship and trailers that is not star trek and that is not the Enterprise. Sorry I'm just not going to go see this piece of garbage or even rent it. Abrams has killed the show, so tired of time travel plots and mirror universes, that killed Enterprise which could have been better if they did not go over two seasons of the time war thingy, three was way too long. But again if what I saw from the trailers is what will be shown on the screen Then I'm not going to go and see it.

The last good star trek movie was number 10

[FoaS_XC]

number 10 was horrible. the last great trek flick was VI. I really think that this movie is going to be fantastic. I'm a pretty hardcore trek fan - why else would I keep playing SFC after a decade - but that doesn't mean that I'm not open to new ideas. It's all about the IDIC, friend: new ideas are never bad.

[knightstorm]

number 10 was horrible. the last great trek flick was VI. I really think that this movie is going to be fantastic. I'm a pretty hardcore trek fan - why else would I keep playing SFC after a decade - but that doesn't mean that I'm not open to new ideas. It's all about the IDIC, friend: new ideas are never bad.

You didn't like first contact?  Also, there's a difference between new ideas and raping and donkey punching Star Trek.

[FoaS_XC]

It was cute, but it wasn't that great, but I'm not going to get into that here. I really don't think that its extreme enough to call it rape and donkey-punching. I'm dissapointed that people have decided to see the movie before they see it.

[Strayy]

Keep in mind the words Kirk told Scotty in Trek III  : "New minds, fresh ideas... be tolerant"
But, dont stand behind Scotty's answer of  " If grandma had wheels, She'd be a wagon" either....   

[Fedman NCC-3758]

I'll see the film, but I too am sick of the time travel schtick.

Without Gene, this ship has lost it's rudder.

[knightstorm]

I'm dissapointed that people have decided to see the movie before they see it.

TROST knows that he is alienating a large portion of the fanbase.  If there was anything in the film that wouldn't generate that sort of reaction, he would have released it to placate us.  He hasn't.  Therefore it probably does not exist.  I really hope this film fails so that there won't be two sequels.

[David Ferrell]

Just saw an ad tonight, 'This is not your father's Star Trek' was the tag line.

If your going to make a Star Trek film for non-fans, why bother???!!! 

I hate it when people take a property and sex-it up and turn it in to a generic
digital explosion fest. 

Why didn't JJ just make 'JJ's Big Space Adventure', instead of peeing in my Wheaties?

Dave

[KBF-Crim]

Just saw an ad tonight, 'This is not your father's Star Trek' was the tag line.

If your going to make a Star Trek film for non-fans, why bother???!!! 

I hate it when people take a property and sex-it up and turn it in to a generic
digital explosion fest. 

Why didn't JJ just make 'JJ's Big Space Adventure', instead of peeing in my Wheaties?

Dave

hehe...reminds me of :

If activision is not going to include SFB in SFC3 why bother?

*whistles innocently*

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

I hate it when people take a property and sex-it up and turn it in to a generic
digital explosion fest. 
Dave

This is exactly why so many new action/sci-fi movies suck. And it's too bad that people eat up stuff like that too.

[marstone]

Just saw an ad tonight, 'This is not your father's Star Trek' was the tag line.

If your going to make a Star Trek film for non-fans, why bother???!!! 

I hate it when people take a property and sex-it up and turn it in to a generic
digital explosion fest. 

Why didn't JJ just make 'JJ's Big Space Adventure', instead of peeing in my Wheaties?

Dave

hehe...reminds me of :

If activision is not going to include SFB in SFC3 why bother?

*whistles innocently*

Well, you have seen what SFC3 has done.  Two houses for one game.  Neither really like the other.  Splitting comunities is not a great idea. 

But that said, I am going to give ST a chance.

[FoaS_XC]

It needs to be okay that its not your dad's trek, I think. There is always going to be someone who objects. Look at it from the perspective of the non-trekkies, to them, Trekkies are an isolated breed. I really think this is an opportunity to show Non-Trekkies what Star Trek could be like. A cynic would say "well, if we have to mutate it for mainstream, then its not trek" and thats not neededly true. I have faith in Abrams. Lets let abrams show non-trekkies what trek is about. And lets keep an open mind - maybe it will be enjoyable to us, too.

Its like the story of galileo five on west wing. President Bartlet hosts a board of NASA experts on TV-in-classrooms to show students whats happening. They were looking for a broader topic and its turns out that NASA lost contact - its not about the probe, its about the fact that some kid in the back row who's afraid of raising his hand gets to see that sometimes its okay to mess up, even the experts do it.

There's a broader theme here at this movie, too. Its not just about satisfying trekkies, or trek lore, or even sylar-lovers. Its about creating an opportunity to show non-trekkies what trek can do. Maybe, there will be a few non-trekkies who go "you know, maybe its not so dorky after all, maybe there's something to it." If that happens, I'd love to be the guy who swoops in and be like "yeah, I'm a trek fan, and I gotta say, a lot of people have it all their preconceptions wrong - im glad to see you enjoyed it" even if I hear of one guy who says that I think the broader point of the movie is reached.

People have asked me why I'm such a trek fan. I tell them its the same reason that I'm a Lord of the Rings fan - there's so much Lore, there's so much history, there's so much in the universe that you dont even hear about in the show/movies. Its so rich. Look what those movies did for the franchise. I know dozens of people who went to the books after they saw the flicks and really enjoyed it. I've always been so bummed when people just go "its too hokey" I think this will cast it in a much less hokey light.


As far as the sex goes. Lets not forget how scantily clad the women were in the original series... if thats not sexual in nature, i don't know what is.

it was Nick Meyers (director of movies of 2 and 6) who said two great nuggets of wisdom: (1) Every piece of art is a result of the time in which it was made. We're never going to have a recreation of the original series, its never going to happen. Even New Frontiers is very different, despite all the visuals being very similar. Its a result of the fact that its modern. Lets take joy in that and see it unfold.
The other nugget of wisdom he mentioned was something from Doyle regarding sherlock. Doyle wasn't all that consistant - he had continuity errors all about, and he just ignored them - its not important. Don't let accuracy get in the way of a good story. In this context: Don't analyze it to death as far as its accuracy to established trek get in the way of it being a good story.

If its a bad story and innacurate, I'll be the first one to go "well that was crap" if its a good story and disposes some canon? I'm fine with that.

[FoaS_XC]

I hate it when people take a property and sex-it up and turn it in to a generic
digital explosion fest. 
Dave

This is exactly why so many new action/sci-fi movies suck. And it's too bad that people eat up stuff like that too.

We don't know thats what they are doing. All I've seen is a planet explode (cuz star wars or even trek has never done that ..... </sarcasm>) a space battle (The wrath of khan had those, it turned out great), and one flash of a sex scene. That doesn't neededly mean that the entire movie is explosions and sex...

[knightstorm]

It needs to be okay that its not your dad's trek, I think. There is always going to be someone who objects. Look at it from the perspective of the non-trekkies, to them, Trekkies are an isolated breed. I really think this is an opportunity to show Non-Trekkies what Star Trek could be like. A cynic would say "well, if we have to mutate it for mainstream, then its not trek" and thats not neededly true. I have faith in Abrams. Lets let abrams show non-trekkies what trek is about. And lets keep an open mind - maybe it will be enjoyable to us, too.

Its like the story of galileo five on west wing. President Bartlet hosts a board of NASA experts on TV-in-classrooms to show students whats happening. They were looking for a broader topic and its turns out that NASA lost contact - its not about the probe, its about the fact that some kid in the back row who's afraid of raising his hand gets to see that sometimes its okay to mess up, even the experts do it.

There's a broader theme here at this movie, too. Its not just about satisfying trekkies, or trek lore, or even sylar-lovers. Its about creating an opportunity to show non-trekkies what trek can do. Maybe, there will be a few non-trekkies who go "you know, maybe its not so dorky after all, maybe there's something to it." If that happens, I'd love to be the guy who swoops in and be like "yeah, I'm a trek fan, and I gotta say, a lot of people have it all their preconceptions wrong - im glad to see you enjoyed it" even if I hear of one guy who says that I think the broader point of the movie is reached.

People have asked me why I'm such a trek fan. I tell them its the same reason that I'm a Lord of the Rings fan - there's so much Lore, there's so much history, there's so much in the universe that you dont even hear about in the show/movies. Its so rich. Look what those movies did for the franchise. I know dozens of people who went to the books after they saw the flicks and really enjoyed it. I've always been so bummed when people just go "its too hokey" I think this will cast it in a much less hokey light.


As far as the sex goes. Lets not forget how scantily clad the women were in the original series... if thats not sexual in nature, i don't know what is.

it was Nick Meyers (director of movies of 2 and 6) who said two great nuggets of wisdom: (1) Every piece of art is a result of the time in which it was made. We're never going to have a recreation of the original series, its never going to happen. Even New Frontiers is very different, despite all the visuals being very similar. Its a result of the fact that its modern. Lets take joy in that and see it unfold.
The other nugget of wisdom he mentioned was something from Doyle regarding sherlock. Doyle wasn't all that consistant - he had continuity errors all about, and he just ignored them - its not important. Don't let accuracy get in the way of a good story. In this context: Don't analyze it to death as far as its accuracy to established trek get in the way of it being a good story.

If its a bad story and innacurate, I'll be the first one to go "well that was crap" if its a good story and disposes some canon? I'm fine with that.

But this film won't be showing non-trek lovers what Star Trek is like, because it isn't Star Trek.  You want to attract non Trek fans to the franchise, you produce good films within the franchise.  You don't rape it.

[FoaS_XC]

It needs to be okay that its not your dad's trek, I think. There is always going to be someone who objects. Look at it from the perspective of the non-trekkies, to them, Trekkies are an isolated breed. I really think this is an opportunity to show Non-Trekkies what Star Trek could be like. A cynic would say "well, if we have to mutate it for mainstream, then its not trek" and thats not neededly true. I have faith in Abrams. Lets let abrams show non-trekkies what trek is about. And lets keep an open mind - maybe it will be enjoyable to us, too.

Its like the story of galileo five on west wing. President Bartlet hosts a board of NASA experts on TV-in-classrooms to show students whats happening. They were looking for a broader topic and its turns out that NASA lost contact - its not about the probe, its about the fact that some kid in the back row who's afraid of raising his hand gets to see that sometimes its okay to mess up, even the experts do it.

There's a broader theme here at this movie, too. Its not just about satisfying trekkies, or trek lore, or even sylar-lovers. Its about creating an opportunity to show non-trekkies what trek can do. Maybe, there will be a few non-trekkies who go "you know, maybe its not so dorky after all, maybe there's something to it." If that happens, I'd love to be the guy who swoops in and be like "yeah, I'm a trek fan, and I gotta say, a lot of people have it all their preconceptions wrong - im glad to see you enjoyed it" even if I hear of one guy who says that I think the broader point of the movie is reached.

People have asked me why I'm such a trek fan. I tell them its the same reason that I'm a Lord of the Rings fan - there's so much Lore, there's so much history, there's so much in the universe that you dont even hear about in the show/movies. Its so rich. Look what those movies did for the franchise. I know dozens of people who went to the books after they saw the flicks and really enjoyed it. I've always been so bummed when people just go "its too hokey" I think this will cast it in a much less hokey light.


As far as the sex goes. Lets not forget how scantily clad the women were in the original series... if thats not sexual in nature, i don't know what is.

it was Nick Meyers (director of movies of 2 and 6) who said two great nuggets of wisdom: (1) Every piece of art is a result of the time in which it was made. We're never going to have a recreation of the original series, its never going to happen. Even New Frontiers is very different, despite all the visuals being very similar. Its a result of the fact that its modern. Lets take joy in that and see it unfold.
The other nugget of wisdom he mentioned was something from Doyle regarding sherlock. Doyle wasn't all that consistant - he had continuity errors all about, and he just ignored them - its not important. Don't let accuracy get in the way of a good story. In this context: Don't analyze it to death as far as its accuracy to established trek get in the way of it being a good story.

If its a bad story and innacurate, I'll be the first one to go "well that was crap" if its a good story and disposes some canon? I'm fine with that.

But this film won't be showing non-trek lovers what Star Trek is like, because it isn't Star Trek.

See my paragraph regarding cynicism.

We don't know that. We haven't seen it yet. If it turns out that its bad Star Trek, then I'll be the first to come back here and go "yeah, that was crap, i take it all back" but it may turn out to be very good Star Trek. My point is we won't know until we see it. I don't understand how people have decided that its not star trek without even seeing it.

[knightstorm]

See my paragraph regarding cynicism.

We don't know that. We haven't seen it yet. If it turns out that its bad Star Trek, then I'll be the first to come back here and go "yeah, that was crap, i take it all back" but it may turn out to be very good Star Trek. My point is we won't know until we see it. I don't understand how people have decided that its not star trek without even seeing it.

See my previous post.  Everything TROST has released indicates that he is raping Star Trek.  If he wasn't, he would have released a trailer to placate the fanbase.  He hasn't.  I refuse to even risk seeing this in theaters, because he's contracted to expand this film into a trilogy if its successful.  I'm not going to help him do that.

[FoaS_XC]

See my paragraph regarding cynicism.

We don't know that. We haven't seen it yet. If it turns out that its bad Star Trek, then I'll be the first to come back here and go "yeah, that was crap, i take it all back" but it may turn out to be very good Star Trek. My point is we won't know until we see it. I don't understand how people have decided that its not star trek without even seeing it.

See my previous post.  Everything TROST has released indicates that he is raping Star Trek.  If he wasn't, he would have released a trailer to placate the fanbase.  He hasn't.  I refuse to even risk seeing this in theaters, because he's contracted to expand this film into a trilogy if its successful.  I'm not going to help him do that.

Enjoy your night at home, I guess. I'm going to at least give it a try.

[FoaS_XC]

Im quoting a friend on this post

You know, the older I get, the less I like my fellow geeks; I've never seen people suck the fun out of what they claim to enjoy as much as we do (and I'm just as guilty of it as other geeks are at times). As a long time, albeit lapsed, trekkie, I think as long as they get the characters right (and from the tiny bits we've seen, looks...  Read more like they're on the right track), they get some exciting visuals (but manage to avoid losing that special human touch), and tell a decent story, it's going to rock, and still manage to stay true to the things that drew folks to the series in the first place.

[knightstorm]

Im quoting a friend on this post

You know, the older I get, the less I like my fellow geeks; I've never seen people suck the fun out of what they claim to enjoy as much as we do (and I'm just as guilty of it as other geeks are at times). As a long time, albeit lapsed, trekkie, I think as long as they get the characters right (and from the tiny bits we've seen, looks...  Read more like they're on the right track), they get some exciting visuals (but manage to avoid losing that special human touch), and tell a decent story, it's going to rock, and still manage to stay true to the things that drew folks to the series in the first place.

Is your friend aware that a major element of the plot revolves around McCoy smuggling cadet Kirk onto the ship?  Did he see the scene where Spock loses it and attacks Kirk in the trailer?

[FoaS_XC]

Watch the spoilers.

I don't care about all that. They are taking a new stab at it - I'm okay with that, even with those elements. We also know that Vulcans do have emotions, but are more adept at hiding them. Kirk got Spock to burn through a brainwashing spore by ticking him off in the original series, so it has a precedent. As far as the McCoy? I'm okay with that even still.

[knightstorm]

Watch the spoilers.

I don't care about all that. They are taking a new stab at it - I'm okay with that, even with those elements. We also know that Vulcans do have emotions, but are more adept at hiding them. Kirk got Spock to burn through a brainwashing spore by ticking him off in the original series, so it has a precedent. As far as the McCoy? I'm okay with that even still.

Spock only lost it during TOS when he was under the influence of something, and considering the fact that TOS was produced during the 60s, that was rather frequent.

[EmeraldEdge]

Heh, Crim.  I wasn't going to touch that one.

Here's my take, if they don't want it to be "your Dad's Star Trek" then why are they using "your Dad's Star Trek".  Why not create a new world, new characters, etc. and throw all your flash and style in there, instead of changing things around.  Another thing, CUT OUT ALL THIS STUPID TIME TRAVEL STUFF!  I mean, really! lol.  Does it look like it has some cool stuff?  Sure.  There are some things I'm having a bit of trouble with.  I probably won't see it in theatres (I don't go much), and I do kind of hope there isn't a trilogy if it is a genearl rape job.

[Starfox1701]

While I can honestly say there is a lot about the move that will undoubtedly touble me this is the 5th time I have been through some "major univeres changing" Star Trek thing. I am old enough to remeber when TOS was Star Trek. Before every body screems that it is forever heresy Think about how much each show has changed what came before it. And go back and look at SFC and SFB. If nothing had ever changed in Trek from the beginning TNG would have been like SFB and TOS not completly different then TOS.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Not too concerned about Spock loosing his cool, after all he is half-human.  And if you watch the Cage, you see him there not controlling his emotions.  McCoy and Kirk's relationship goes back much farther than Kirk and Spock's, I'm not sure how much of that is going to change simply because of a screwed up timeline.

I'm not ok with Chekov being in the movie.  Nor am I really ok with Pike being Kirk's "Adoptive Father."  Pike should be more like Kirk's older brother.

I may watch it, I may not.  I'm not as dead set against it as I was a few months ago, but I still don't like what i've seen thus far.  Maybe I'll buy six more boxes of Honey Smacks (I do love that cereal) and get the free Star Trek Jump Drive.  It's supposed to come pre-loaded with Movie Content.

[EmeraldEdge]

While I can honestly say there is a lot about the move that will undoubtedly touble me this is the 5th time I have been through some "major univeres changing" Star Trek thing. I am old enough to remeber when TOS was Star Trek. Before every body screems that it is forever heresy Think about how much each show has changed what came before it. And go back and look at SFC and SFB. If nothing had ever changed in Trek from the beginning TNG would have been like SFB and TOS not completly different then TOS.

Heh, yeah, except that all those subsequent series changed the face of Trek by creating a world that came after that which came before (except Enterprise, which was a big mistake despite a great cast).  This seeks to change the face of what was.  Totally different.  If they had done the same story in the future of Trek with all new character names, I'm sure Trek fans would have eaten it up with a spoon, but you're messin' with history here (which is one of the reasons, along with bad writing, that Enterprise had it's problems, imo).

[FoaS_XC]

I enjoyed enterprise.

How many times has superman been rebooted? How many times has X-Men? people shouldn't be so nailed down to a single mythology.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Part of X-Men has always been the Multi-verse.  A universe where Xavier leads the X-men, a universe where Magneto leads the X-men.  A universe where mutants are hunted, a universe where mutants are the hunters.  It was sometimes confusing (especially when you missed a few comics), but that is part of what it is.

For whatever reason I didn't like Superman, but the same can be said for Batman.  That's been rebooted too often, although the latest version, I am liking very much.

[KBF-Crim]

Heh, Crim.  I wasn't going to touch that one.

Here's my take, if they don't want it to be "your Dad's Star Trek" then why are they using "your Dad's Star Trek".  Why not create a new world, new characters, etc. and throw all your flash and style in there, instead of changing things around.  Another thing, CUT OUT ALL THIS STUPID TIME TRAVEL STUFF!  I mean, really! lol.  Does it look like it has some cool stuff?  Sure.  There are some things I'm having a bit of trouble with.  I probably won't see it in theatres (I don't go much), and I do kind of hope there isn't a trilogy if it is a genearl rape job.

bait and switch

[KBF-Crim]

Just when the industry says "we done it all".....something like the matrix comes out...

Just glad they didnt make Kirk and Spock gay lovers...yet...

[EmeraldEdge]

Just when the industry says "we done it all".....something like the matrix comes out...

Just glad they didnt make Kirk and Spock gay lovers...yet...

Heh, it'll come.  In movie two we find that during Pon Far, a Vulcan actually changes gender. lol.  That's why it's so painful.  They are put together with a mate who is of an opposing cycle so that they are always able to mate.  There it is.  Wow, that's edgy.  It's gotta be in there, and people are going to love it. 

[toasty0]

Just when the industry says "we done it all".....something like the matrix comes out...

Just glad they didnt make Kirk and Spock gay lovers...yet...

They're not? I've always thought Kirk started acting a bit effeminate/emotional when Spock was around...and Bones? Bones was the nagging mother-n-law.

[Nemesis]

For whatever reason I didn't like Superman, but the same can be said for Batman.  That's been rebooted too often, although the latest version, I am liking very much.

There are differences between "rebooting" Star Trek and "rebooting" a super hero comic.

The comic books make a fundamental mistake.  They hook events in the comic books to the real world while not letting the characters age proportional to those events.  For example Iron Man originated in the Korean war and is still active 50 years later, either the character should be in his 70s or older or they needed to rewrite it (into the Vietnam war last I read).  Batman is even worse as he was a mature man when the character was created in the 1930's.  The age of the characters no longer matched the events of their lives, a reboot was needed to compensate.  Even with the reboots they tried to be true to the character as originally created.

Star Trek as a (primarily) live action TV based "future world" has not been tied to events in the real world.  The characters could be allowed to age as the actors aged. 

Keep in mind the words Kirk told Scotty in Trek III  : "New minds, fresh ideas... be tolerant"
But, dont stand behind Scotty's answer of  " If grandma had wheels, She'd be a wagon" either....   

No one objects to new idea, only to changing what already exists.  I object to the revision of the Klingons post TOS, not the appearance but the culture.  I don't object to the Vulcans as they are effectively the same race (allowing for changes with time).

Consecutive series have been based in different eras and it was definitely possible to keep the series consistant without conflicts between them.  The movies could be put into the same context.  Many fans (argurably most) don't want to see this continuity wantonly broken when there is no need.  Myself among them.

It was possible with this movie to make it in a fashion that was compatible with the history that went before, they have apparently chosen not to.  It was possible to create Enterprise while respecting what went before.  What overwhelming need did they have to ignore the continuity when "creating" Enterprise? 

Why could they not have used a different ship the co-existed with the NCC-1701 and created a new crew for it if they wanted to do THIS story is the Star Trek Universe?   They could even have used the 1701B and filled in some of the missing history.  They didn't NEED to revise what was already part of the series.

You didn't like first contact?  Also, there's a difference between new ideas and raping and donkey punching Star Trek.

Could they not have filmed First Contact without moving Zefram Cochrane from Alpha Centauri to Earth?  Why do they make these wanton changes?

So WHY do they need to reboot?

If activision is not going to include SFB in SFC3 why bother?

The objection is actually the same.  SFC 3 is changed so much it deserves a new name.  Change Star Trek enough and again it should be divorced from Star Trek and given its own new identity. 

[Dash Jones]

Just like they did with James Bond...right...

Ah...but that's RIGHT...they DID do a reboot with James Bond...and it was pretty good.

No idea if this Star Trek will be good or bad until I see it.

[KBF-Crim]

Just like they did with James Bond...right...

Ah...but that's RIGHT...they DID do a reboot with James Bond...and it was pretty good.

No idea if this Star Trek will be good or bad until I see it.

Bond?...good?

I was so pissed off by the end of solace I may never see another bond flick again...

Matt helm was better....hell...in like flint was better....HELL>>> THE MAN FROM UNCLE WAS BETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*bangs head on desk*

[Nemesis]

Ah...but that's RIGHT...they DID do a reboot with James Bond...and it was pretty good.

Bond, like the comic books was set on a back drop of the real world, that forces him to either age or get reboots.   It also didn't have its own continuity as Trek does.   Each "episode" was pretty much stand alone. 

[Age]

Just saw an ad tonight, 'This is not your father's Star Trek' was the tag line.

If your going to make a Star Trek film for non-fans, why bother???!!! 

I hate it when people take a property and sex-it up and turn it in to a generic
digital explosion fest. 

Why didn't JJ just make 'JJ's Big Space Adventure', instead of peeing in my Wheaties?

Dave

hehe...reminds me of :

If activision is not going to include SFB in SFC3 why bother?

*whistles innocently*

They did though instead of bpv you get mass and instead of ecm/eccm you got av.

This has more of a new BFG look to it except I still don't like the ship.

[WarSears]

I heard a lot of the same talk about BSG and it turned out great. I'm going to gave it a chance. But I hope there isn't any time travel.

[FCM_SFHQ_XC]

Abrams has killed the show,

Want to know what really kills shows?

Thoughts like that.

It is so easy to blame the director, isn't it?

[Czar Mohab]

When this comes out, there's going to be 4 types of people watching it:

Those who theater-go and pay lots of money to see it,

Those who rent it (through various means) and pay a lot less to see it,

Those who go to the library after a few years and check it out,

Those who don't see it, ever.

I feel that no matter the course of the film, those in the fourth group will be missing out.

As for my family's history of Trek:

My dad would go to his mother's house on Wednesdays to watch it on the color TV.
My brother cried when the Big E blew up at the end of III.
My Trek was TNG, and I admit I cried a little when the Big E-D crashed in Generations.
My Wife's Trek was Enterprise, and while she did complain that the time travel BS was overdone, she and I liked it.

Honestly, 11 should be about how something happens in the post-Nemisis time and some ship and some crew happen to save the day. The best that I could hope for with any subsequent movie (which now looks like it won't happen) would be that the new ship with all new crew is staged in the movie and setting the stage for a new series, with the same crew and same ship; all the Trek-no-bable and Trek Lore we've all come to love.

BUT,  11's going to be something different. Let it be. Let it lead to two more shows that (hopefully) expand on what's happened here and tells us all that things will be OK. Let this be the Trek that people are willing to drive 50+ miles to watch on a friend/relative's Blu-Ray + 60" HDTV because their 25 incher just isn't good enough. Let this be the Trek where newcomers have a few quibbles, but ultimately enjoyed the show. Let this be the Trek where the audience feels the emotions of a particular scene, perhaps crying over a lost loved one.

It is someone else's turn at the helm. Let them have it for a while. If they crash the ship, she'll still float. What is loved endures, and Star Trek... Star Trek will endure this. Just as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow.

Czar "If JJ flubs this one, I have a feeling I'll need to take a number and get in line to let him have it  " Mohab

[Nemesis]

Want to know what really kills shows?

What kills shows is delivering what the fans don't want to watch.

Messing with continuity (Showing Firefly out of sequence and Enterprise for 2 examples)

Not understanding your audience (Galactica 1980.  Enough said?)

Putting it in a time slot where the fans can't or won't watch it.

Constantly changing the time slot.

Executives saying "I don't like it so it can't be popular" instead of checking in with reality (see the death of the "country shows" like the Beverly Hillbillies and Green Acres for example)

[Ravok]

Just when the industry says "we done it all".....something like the matrix comes out...

Just glad they didnt make Kirk and Spock gay lovers...yet...

 I don't understand Crim??

 You didn't like the Matrix???

[Lieutenant_Q]

Personally, I liked the Matrix.  What I hate is these cheesy knock-offs of the Matrix style movie.

I hated Transformers.  Kill Bill was annoying.  What was that stupid movie with Jet Li?

Why is it that producers have to pile on a "style"?  That style then gets tired and worn out so fast, I don't think I can watch another movie that has that annoying sllloooowwww mooottttiiioooonn style...

[Centurus]

Not even in the Scary Movie movies?

[toasty0]

I hated Transformers.  Kill Bill was annoying.  What was that stupid movie with Jet Li?

The One

[FPF-DieHard]

No idea if this Star Trek will be good or bad until I see it.

Bingo.

I'm a huge DC comics fan.  Reboots/retcons/etc don't throw me for a loop.  Think of it as a parallel universe and move on.

[KBF-Crim]

Just when the industry says "we done it all".....something like the matrix comes out...

Just glad they didnt make Kirk and Spock gay lovers...yet...

 I don't understand Crim??

 You didn't like the Matrix???

No Sir...I absolutely LOVED them...but I would edit them down to just the best of the best and make a single movie out of it...*snicker*

My point is that hollywood is pre-occupied with remakes...claiming they have pumped the well dry...

When in fact ...many original gems pop out here and there...putting that claim to  falsehood....

What it is.... is laziness....

I dont mind sequels so much...as long as they arent totally different from the first movie/s

Such as a sequel being done by a completely different actor or director or having a "new fresh look" and totally changing the feel of the original movie....

But then they just cant help themselves....and they crank out Friday the 13th part 13 the original story....bleh.....done to death allready...shoot it in the head and bury it.

Superman?.....please

Batman?...eh.....maybe....

X-men?....well....it rocks...sue me...I love mutants....

Star trek?....*sigh*....couldnt someone come up with an original script?????????

Time traveling romulans from the future?...angry spock?....criminal Kirk?...entrprise built on the ground?????? WTF?...the ship couldnt even handle getting into shallow orbit....much less take off or land on a planet....LAME....

Let me use starwars as an example....

It rocked...chessy graphics and all....why?...because it original...it was something we hadnt seen before...a full fleshed out sci-fi universe.....young skywalker...jedi hero...darth...pure evil...

A well defined space opera...

then...after hooking us on the story line and plot...do we get more of the story?

eh....no...we'd already seen the meat of the story....the best part....

as lucas cherry picked the only part he thought had a hope of comercial success...he didnt even think he had a chance at another movie at first....and when it was a HUGE success...he was kinda trapped into taking the story from there....

Oh..but after he's a multi millionair  thanks to us?

We get a lucas morality play on blue screen...darth vader is actually the hero...story story isnt about luke at all...it's about his pappy....and we get a lucas finger wagged at us for going to war with terrorists...and we get a bait and switch to get us to pay for it...

And I'm certian I'm not the only one who, in retrospect...was utterly diappointed with everything but the eye candy...

This sums my feelings up pretty well.....

"it's like Lucas didnt even see the first three movies"

http://www.foldedspace.org/weblog/2005/04/why_star_wars_sucks.html

Sorry for the rant...

So...am I down on the new trek before I have even seen it?

Yep...I'm utterly disapointed that they couldnt find a part of trek to make that we havent seen before....

I'll accept it as part of an alternate universe and pass...it's been done to death in this universe...

[Ravok]

 Thanks Crim.  For the most part I agree.

 And I absolutely agree about the Matrix. I fear that was a once in a life time SF concept.
 We need more and better ideas , for scripts

 But I'm going to give the movie a chance. I subscribe to the parallel universe idea as well.

 You never know. 

[KBF-Crim]

Kung fu hustle....now THAT is a great movie...killier kung fu...and I laughed my ass off...

[Ravok]

Kung fu hustle....now THAT is a great movie...killier kung fu...and I laughed my ass off...

 

 One of my favorites !! Another that was inventive, and fresh.

 I think allot of the problem is too many Studios, and producers, pick scrips for the critics, not for the movie goer.
 
 If it cant be advertised as " A Touching picture of the soul " or some other inane drama crap, the critics don't want anything to do with it.

[KBF-Crim]

Kung fu hustle....now THAT is a great movie...killier kung fu...and I laughed my ass off...

 

 One of my favorites !! Another that was inventive, and fresh.

 I think allot of the problem is too many Studios, and producers, pick scrips for the critics, not for the movie goer.
 
 If it cant be advertised as " A Touching picture of the soul " or some other inane drama crap, the critics don't want anything to do with it.

No one ever erected a statue to a critic...

[Don Karnage]

if startrek is good, we will see.

but beside the startrek movie i have see something weird at the movie theater.

first the movie fast and furious is show now, weird cause i have rent that movie last year, so how com they show it like it was a new movie?

two: the ugly ducking and me, its weir cause i have download that movie i think in 2007 and it look like a amateur movie and yet the show it in theater, so what's happening?, nothing new to show so you go get old movies and some amateur movies to fill the void?

[Age]

I would still like to see a movie that brings Kirk back to life.

[Calexandre]

No need to diss the new Trek yet - movies have to suit the times otherwise there won't be revenue left to drive the franchise.

I was surprised how Nemesis had such bad reviews from the majority of the Trek community. But for those having a first contact with Trek, and thus watch the film without any prior expectations, they are quite frankly "assimilated" rather easily by how fluid and lifelike a Trek story can be - unlike the common misconception of technobabble, mucho talking and no action, which was the perception I was brought up with (a Star Wars fangroup you could tell).

Nemesis, and a liking for starships and naval strategy in general led me to the Bridge Commander game and then time and time again unearth a dusty copy of SFC: OP - because no other naval strategy conveyed that sense of tactical complexity as starships struggle for positional advantage.

Naturally, the lack of "intellectually complex" media led me to purchase season after season of Voyager, watch every single Trek film there was starting from the classic Wrath of Khan (why don't they make more films like those! Simple scenario yet so deep and immersive because the characters play themselves out!), and of course the fantastic TNG films.

Addiction for what I term "technobabble" has also spawned many hours of staring through technical manuals and the TOS novels - all that for a "crappy" movie like Nemesis

As an "enlightened" individual the new film might not have the impact Nemesis (on a rewatch I found only the ship to ship battles interesting) made on my person but for others, might be their first steps to discovering the magic of Star Trek.

[Starfox1701]

Look By now it should be obvious to anyone who has been a fan for mor than 20 minutes that Parmount  does not really listen to us the fans until they have so screwed the pooch they are losing money big time. Am I a fan of rebooting no. plane and simple but if you look at the state of continuity after Enterprise it was a bloody mess pure and simple and as much as I would have loved to see anything new and back in the time frame that the studio seems much better at writing for the Enterprise mess really needed some cleanup. What seems to be happening is a completly new Trek universe is being laid down. If the hard work of the actors; who by the way are the ones who have to carry this; is to be given a fair and honest evaluation; which unless you have precognitive power none of the rest of use beifit from; must wait untill after we see the movie. Do I like the ship no but for me its like redesigning Bond' Austin Martin from Gold Finger and passing it of as the original deal. But if the ever remake Gold Finger you can bet Bond will have a different car. Like everything or not anyone can nit pick things they don't like about a film to death. Hell I havehated something about every Trek film ever made. And remember I'm old enough to have seen them ALL in theaters. That does not mean most of them sucked. Infact over the years I have found something redeaming in each film and I have no reason to beleve this film will be any different.

[Czar Mohab]

Yeah, what he said!

Besides, the sound track sounds halfway decent.

Czar " " Mohab

[psytce]

I kind of tired of hearing how this movie is going to be the worst thing since sliced bread.

I have these questions to ask the naysayers:
How can they continue the original Star Trek when the actors playing the characters are too old, or gone?
Where to they go after Nemisis. which almost nobody liked?

And to everyone who is complaining about the "Time Travel, Altenate Universe", please explain to me how much complaining we would have to hear if they did this movie in the regular time line? What if the got 1 thing wrong .... most of you "Canonites"    would blow a gasket.......

I believe Gene himself had said something about New people and new stories, I don't remember the exact quote, but I know that what is going on right now is kind of what he was talking about ....


Give this a chance before you say all this bad stuff about it .....
I, for one, hope that this brings Star Trek back .......

[Starfox1701]

For the mouth of Lenard Nimoy to your ears listen and learn

"Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae," Nimoy told Reuters. "Open your mind! Be a 'Star Trek' fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'."

[marstone]

For the mouth of Lenard Nimoy to your ears listen and learn

"Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae," Nimoy told Reuters. "Open your mind! Be a 'Star Trek' fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'."

I will agree, I am going to give it a chance.  What the heck.  But I do put in this, if I watch a TV series, start to really like it, but every few months the storylines change, (Jim killed Bob, but later on Jack was the one who killed Bob), the characters change randomly (gosh, wasn't the lead a man?).  I think after alittle while I might lose interest in watching, even if each episode was good.

That being said, I like to look at each episode/movie as it's own little world.  If the main characters are the same (act mostly the same) just enjoy each story as a stand alone and be  happy.  It was how the series started, they didn't really worry about what was in the next episode, or what was in the last.  They were stand alone.

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

That being said, I like to look at each episode/movie as it's own little world.  If the main characters are the same (act mostly the same) just enjoy each story as a stand alone and be  happy.  It was how the series started, they didn't really worry about what was in the next episode, or what was in the last.  They were stand alone.

I agree. The stand-alone factor was one of the reasons TOS and The Next Gen are great. You could just jump in and enjoy it, although some of the continuity like Q and the Borg throughout the seasons of TNG were nice... but they were never about anything like a continuing war. That being said, my favorite shows currently airing are 24 and Lost, which are about the least stand-alone there is.

[knightstorm]

I wonder how much Nimoy is being paid for that BS.  And psytche, you may be tired of being told how much this film is going to suck, but I'm tired of being derisively called a cannonite, and being told that I should give this film a chance.  TROST has released nothing to indicate that this film is not going to be a rape of Star Trek.  As for why I'm complaining, I consider released elements of the film's plotline to be unbelievable stupid.  I also see TROST retconning away elements of the Star Trek cannon which I felt set it apart from low brow scifi.  I think its idiotic that he has to stuff the entire TOS cast onto the Enterprise on its maiden voyage.  And I don't even want to go into discussing Sulu with the folding katana here.

[Ronin]

It's a movie, gents. No one is altering time or remaking the universe we live in here. Yes, I have my own opinion about it, but really, is it worth arguing over?

I am reminded of a certain phrase we have all likely heard.

"Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." - St. Francis of Assisi

Though really... I have to admit... the arguing is entertaining.

*cloaks*

[Ravok]

I wonder how much Nimoy is being paid for that BS.  And psytche, you may be tired of being told how much this film is going to suck, but I'm tired of being derisively called a cannonite, and being told that I should give this film a chance.  TROST has released nothing to indicate that this film is not going to be a rape of Star Trek.  As for why I'm complaining, I consider released elements of the film's plotline to be unbelievable stupid.  I also see TROST retconning away elements of the Star Trek cannon which I felt set it apart from low brow scifi.  I think its idiotic that he has to stuff the entire TOS cast onto the Enterprise on its maiden voyage.  And I don't even want to go into discussing Sulu with the folding katana here.

 Jesus !! aren't you just Mr Merry Sunshine.

 Everybody is entitled to an opinion, show the same respect they have shown you.

 Just because somebody disagrees with you, does not mean they insulting you, or are against you.

[toasty0]

I'm starting to become concernced about what amounts to some people's obsession with Sulu's katana. It's a family film fer gawd's sake!

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

I'm starting to become concernced about what amounts to some people's obsession with Sulu's katana. It's a family film fer gawd's sake!

LOL, I think the problem was that he had a rapier in the original show. In an interview, Takei said that the writers wanted him originally to have a katana, but he told them that, as a kid, he played "make believe" as a swashbuckler, not a samurai... so the writers changed it around.

For the new movie, Sulu's character shouldn't have to carry around a samurai sword just because he is Japanese. His character wasn't stereotyped in the original show, so I don't get why they would do that now.

[knightstorm]

I'm starting to become concernced about what amounts to some people's obsession with Sulu's katana. It's a family film fer gawd's sake!

Roy pretty much summed up my objection to that scene.  For me it comes as another one of those WTF moments.

[toasty0]

Ok, so the problem is that you find it stereotyping that he now has a katana instead of a rapier but the fact that his name is Sulu never bothered you as stereotyping?

*shrug*

 

[knightstorm]

Ok, so the problem is that you find it stereotyping that he now has a katana instead of a rapier but the fact that his name is Sulu never bothered you as stereotyping?

*shrug*

 

He's an American of Filipino/Japanese ancestry, so the name isn't that stereotypical.  However, I wouldn't expect someone from his background to fight with a Katana, anymore than you would expect me to fight with a shillelagh. 

[toasty0]

Hikaru Sulu

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikaru

[Ravok]

Ok, so the problem is that you find it stereotyping that he now has a katana instead of a rapier but the fact that his name is Sulu never bothered you as stereotyping?

*shrug*

 

.

     The fictional character Hikaru Sulu was born in San Francisco[8], to Japanese and Filipino parents. He was shown as the USS Enterprise's staff physicist in the pilot episode, "Where No Man Has Gone Before",[9] but served as helmsman throughout the rest of the series, during which he held the rank of lieutenant.[3]

Throughout the series, Sulu is shown having many interests and hobbies, including botany,[10] fencing,[11] and ancient weaponry[12] (Spock says that he "is at heart a swashbuckler out of the 18th century").[13]

The character is promoted to lieutenant commander some time before Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and to full commander by the time of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.[8] During the first five Star Trek movies, he serves as helmsman aboard both the USS Enterprise and USS Enterprise-A.[3] He is promoted to captain and given command of the USS Excelsior three years before the events of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.[8]

Star Trek Generations[14] introduces Hikaru's daughter, Demora Sulu,[3] whose origins are also depicted in Peter David's non-canon novel The Captain's Daughter

He's an American of Filipino/Japanese ancestry, so the name isn't that stereotypical.  However, I wouldn't expect someone from his background to fight with a Katana, anymore than you would expect me to fight with a shillelagh












 

 

[Kruk]

I bet no one knows why they named the character Sulu.

I attended the Scifi spectacular at the NAC in Ottawa 2 weeks ago and it was hosted by George Takei. He said that Gene couldn't come up with a name that would represent all the Asians. Ex: Wong is chinese, Takei is japanese etc...

So he looked at the world map and saw a sea named Sulu. That sea touches most Asian countrys and therefore he named the character Sulu. Meaning it would represent all Asians in general.

I didn't know that and it was pretty interesting he mentionned that during the show.

Can't wait for the movie to come up.

Death to the cannonites   

[knightstorm]

I bet no one knows why they named the character Sulu.

I attended the Scifi spectacular at the NAC in Ottawa 2 weeks ago and it was hosted by George Takei. He said that Gene couldn't come up with a name that would represent all the Asians. Ex: Wong is chinese, Takei is japanese etc...

So he looked at the world map and saw a sea named Sulu. That sea touches most Asian countrys and therefore he named the character Sulu. Meaning it would represent all Asians in general.

Yes, I knew that, although I was under the impression that he represented Asian Americans, hence the point of him being born in San Francisco, and wielding a rapier instead of a katana.

Death to the cannonites   

You first.

[Calexandre]

In today's papers in my little part of the world there appeared an interview with the director as well as reviews by "die hard" Trekkers.

Director: I wasn't a fan of the iconic TV series.... Other Trek movies were slow in execution and lacked action

Fans: I liked the new cast, brought a wild element to Kirk... Too similar to Nemesis... but great special effects, action packed to appeal to a younger audience... flirtatious behaviour

Not to spoil the scene, but a little heads-up of what might be expected.

I for one preferred the "old and slow" approach to movies, where plot buildup occurs mostly in the viewer's brain - the action merely being a "suggested answer" to the Kirk-wannabe, so to speak.

As for the new cast - I thought, bleh, they all look rather stereotypical.  While the concept of having "hunks" to woo young people into watching is perfectly valid, I don't watch Trek for that reason. I skipped the newer Trek games for their arcadey approach to starship combat - and it looks like I am sticking to Voyager for my sci fi dose.

[Ravok]

 The thing about the new cast members,that bothers me too much, is they look way too young, to be doing the jobs they are doing.

 Its just not plausible.

 I mean for Pets sake!! Spock would still be considered a young child on Vulcan.

[Nemesis]

I would still like to see a movie that brings Kirk back to life.

Been there.  Done that.  Move on to something new.

Just how many characters have to be brought back from the dead? 

[Nemesis]

The thing about the new cast members,that bothers me too much, is they look way too young, to be doing the jobs they are doing.

Considers Ravok's age.

How young are those University graduates looking to you today? 

Don't forget with advancing medical technology people are looking younger longer and by the time of Kirk that could easily explain their youthful appearance while being much older than we would think based on their looks.

[Ravok]

The thing about the new cast members,that bothers me too much, is they look way too young, to be doing the jobs they are doing.

Considers Revokes age.

How young are those University graduates looking to you today? 

Don't forget with advancing medical technology people are looking younger longer and by the time of Kirk that could easily explain their youthful appearance while being much older than we would think based on their looks.

 Granted. but kirks still too young for command of a ship.

 And Spock ? I haven't seen the movie yet and don't know if they mentioned his age.
 But a 30 year old Vulcan is still considered a child.

 But being a Vulcan, he could be older and look younger.

[Nemesis]

Granted. but kirks still too young for command of a ship.

 And Spock ? I haven't seen the movie yet and don't know if they mentioned his age.
 But a 30 year old Vulcan is still considered a child.

 But being a Vulcan, he could be older and look younger.

I haven't seen it myself but the impression I have had is that Kirk is not the Captain of the ship but is a junior officer who is forced into the role of acting Captain due to being the highest line rank there. 

McCoy for example is not a line officer and Spock may not have been at that time so even if they outranked him he might still have been the commanding officer in the circumstances.

[Sirgod]

The thing about the new cast members,that bothers me too much, is they look way too young, to be doing the jobs they are doing.

Considers Ravok's age.

How young are those University graduates looking to you today? 

Don't forget with advancing medical technology people are looking younger longer and by the time of Kirk that could easily explain their youthful appearance while being much older than we would think based on their looks.

Ravok has a point here. The thing that tore me up with the last superman movie, was Lois was way to young.  then she had Supes kid (ok I can get past that) but going by her age, that would have made Supes a pedophile.

Stephen

[Nemesis]

I just looked up the ages of the new actors for old Trek characters.  The Enterprise crew except for Chekov are all at least in their late 20's. 

[marstone]

The thing about the new cast members,that bothers me too much, is they look way too young, to be doing the jobs they are doing.

Considers Revokes age.

How young are those University graduates looking to you today? 

Don't forget with advancing medical technology people are looking younger longer and by the time of Kirk that could easily explain their youthful appearance while being much older than we would think based on their looks.

 Granted. but kirks still too young for command of a ship.

 And Spock ? I haven't seen the movie yet and don't know if they mentioned his age.
 But a 30 year old Vulcan is still considered a child.

 But being a Vulcan, he could be older and look younger.

being half human would mess with the Vulcan aging process.

[PigUp]

My thoughts in random order, some positive, most negative (spoilers below):

• Why is the Narada so large and yet only needs a small portion of it to do any drilling? Of special note are the apparently useless spires on the front of the ship which seemingly exist to increase its size and make it more evil looking (nothing says evil like spires!).
• If the Enterprise has left Vulcan's solar system at warp 3 about 15 minutes previously, how did they manage to beam aboard? By the time they figured out how to do it the Enterprise was long gone.
• Fairly weak musical score, only two pieces of the music in this movie fit with what's going on the screen and aren't below average.
• "Action" shots had poor camera placement and cut away too quickly (though watching this in IMAX might have skewed my perception since this movie was clearly not designed to fit on a IMAX screen).
• Apparently humans dominate Starfleet's ranks by a billion to one in this time period  .
• Why do hyposprays hurt? JJ should have focused more on making sense and less on comedy.
• Incredibly funny, almost a comedy.
• How many warp cores does the Enterpise have? Or, when ejected, does it split up?
• The cast was very well picked, however I thought Kirk was off. I suppose the reason he was less confident in the face of danger is lack of experience (judging by the expression on his face, he almost wet himself running away from the creatures on Delta Vega
• Unfortunately you never get to see the other Starfleet ships that make up the attacking fleet, of what I did saw I thought looked good.
• I didn't like the new Romulan look, the tattoos did nothing to make them more menacing.
• Black hole equals time travel?
• Spock, apparently, does not care about interfering with another timeline even though it wouldn't affect his own. He should have never helped out.
• A hover bike is slower than a 300 year old wheel based vehicle?
• Was all the swearing really necessary? Overusing it just devalues any extra oomph the words have.

This list can go on forever, in a nutshell, where is the Star Trek in this movie? It has the characters, places, some of the technology, but not the feeling. To me it was a like watching some other sci-fi movie with Star Trek painted over it.

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

Fairly weak musical score, only two pieces of the music in this movie fit with what's going on the screen and aren't below average.

Does this mean they don't use the classic Goldsmith format of Motion Picture theme combined with the unique movie theme?

Also, how is the technobabble situation in the new movie? Some of the coolest episodes of TNG like "Cause and Effect" or "Parallels" are great until the very ending, where the only way to resolve the plot is by reversing the polarity of the spatial duodynetic phase discriminator.

Just for kicks, http://everything2.com/title/Technobabble%2520Generator

[PigUp]

Fairly weak musical score, only two pieces of the music in this movie fit with what's going on the screen and aren't below average.

Does this mean they don't use the classic Goldsmith format of Motion Picture theme combined with the unique movie theme?

Nope. The only piece of music from any of the shows or movies is TOS's opening/closing credit piece. Which I found hilarious because of all the older pieces to choose from they picked the one I liked the least  .

Also, how is the technobabble situation in the new movie? Some of the coolest episodes of TNG like "Cause and Effect" or "Parallels" are great until the very ending, where the only way to resolve the plot is by reversing the polarity of the spatial duodynetic phase discriminator.

Just for kicks, http://everything2.com/title/Technobabble%2520Generator

Outside of the transporter scene I mentioned, not much technobabble is there.

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

Fairly weak musical score, only two pieces of the music in this movie fit with what's going on the screen and aren't below average.

Does this mean they don't use the classic Goldsmith format of Motion Picture theme combined with the unique movie theme?

Nope. The only piece of music from any of the shows or movies is TOS's opening/closing credit piece. Which I found hilarious because of all the older pieces to choose from they picked the one I liked the least  .

Also, how is the technobabble situation in the new movie? Some of the coolest episodes of TNG like "Cause and Effect" or "Parallels" are great until the very ending, where the only way to resolve the plot is by reversing the polarity of the spatial duodynetic phase discriminator.

Just for kicks, http://everything2.com/title/Technobabble%2520Generator

Outside of the transporter scene I mentioned, not much technobabble is there.

Cool, thanks. That's funny they chose the old theme... I guess I've gotten used to it. 

[Lloyd007]

My thoughts: Pretty darn good overall... Really recaptured the feel of TOS to me which was much more important than being strictly accurate to the timeline and nitpicky details which it kinda threw out anyway.

Characterizations were spot on IMO except for Checkov who was way too Wesley Crusher. Uhura was very different as well but I though it was a good difference.

Plot was weak but eh wasn't looking for 2001 and the characters drove the movie which made up for it. Nemesis rip off.

Villain wasn't developed enough... came off as a disgruntled postman with a nuke.

Nimoy was superfluous but harmless...

SFX were awesome...

If you are a canonite you'll hate it but otherwise it gives a "This is good Trek" feel... beats the crap out of all the TNG movies...

[FPF-DieHard]

trek didn't die, it was rebooted.  Cannon Trek was a joke to begin with with all the contradictions, retcons, etc. . .

[FA Frey XC]

Looks like 76 million it's first weekend isn't that bad.

Move the discussion to the new thread... LAWKED.

Regards,