Star Trek XI Stinks (Spoilers)

[weyoun782]

I just watched the movie, and it was horrible, alternate reality or not, It just was not star trek at all. here are my list of complaints.

1. The remodeled enterprise looks dumb. why not just stick with the original design?

2. The dialogue wasn't so good compared to other star treks, where they would quote famous pieces of works in literature, and just the overall dialogue was really dumbed down.

3. Destroy vulcan? nuff said.

4. The narada looked really stupid.

5. Engineering looked like an oil refinery, why?!

6. The actors were annoying trying to be like the original cast, seriously, none of the original members could be replaced. The guy that played spock annoyed me the most.

7. Spock displays emotions? c'mon.

8. the weaponary looked more like star wars. no phasers or photon torpedos? it was all lasers and rockets for crying out loud.

9. Why would spock eject kirk from the enterprise? and then he so happens to find future spock on this ice planet? So many plot holes.

Well I can just go on and on, I will not see another trek movie with abrams at the helm, it was just terrible, I went into seeing the movie with an open mind, but I could not accept what I saw, it is not my star trek that I have loved and cherrished for years growing up. They made it more like star wars, I like both, star trek more so, but keep them separate.

I just felt so empty after seeing it.

YouTube - Star Trek VI - The Undiscovered Country - Teaser Trailer

^ to me that is real trek, watch the little clip.

I am so mad right now

[Warborg]

This is the 3rd thread on the movie on this forum..

Anyways, the movie itself was good but it was screwed up for Star Trek history.

Also you should warn of spoilers as I will respond to a few of yours

Spoiler:

1) All remakes improve an old design
2) No problem here for me
3) I agree with you here
5) I kind of liked it but it didn't match with the bridge. Why such a difference on the same ship?
6) Too many changes in the way they behaved
7) The same as he did in TOS
9) I agree

[Monster_user]

Originally Posted by weyoun782

1. The remodeled enterprise looks dumb. why not just stick with the original design?

The original design was outdated, and looked primitive. They had to remake it the last time they brought it to the screen.

Trekkies would have rioted if the TMP model, or a slight variation, was used. Because it would not have been accurate to the timeline.

They would have been miffed if the U.S.S. Defiant model from "ST: Enterprise" had not been used and the movie had remained in the canon storyline

So while I don't like the new design, I do feel that an update was necessary.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

2. The dialogue wasn't so good compared to other star treks, where they would quote famous pieces of works in literature, and just the overall dialogue was really dumbed down.

Only half the target audience would get the literature references anyway. I am ashamed to admit, I am not particularly well read myself. Thus many such references to Hamlet, or other famous works of literature, went unnoticed until pointed out.

One day I will actually sit down and review a Shakespearean play, or study a classic novel such as Moby Dick.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

3. Destroy vulcan? nuff said.

I wonder if it was enough, I may well have done more.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

6. The actors were annoying trying to be like the original cast, seriously, none of the original members could be replaced. The guy that played spock annoyed me the most.

This is one of my biggest faults with the movie.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

7. Spock displays emotions? c'mon.

Perhaps Mr Quinto did play Spock a little too emotional. He should have been more subdued. His childhood did seem very accurate, but nothing new for a true trekkie.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

8. the weaponary looked more like star wars. no phasers or photon torpedos? it was all lasers and rockets for crying out loud.

Its not that bad, have you seen Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn? The effects were handled by Industrial Light and Magic, a division of Lucas Film's effects studio. Which are considered by many to be the best in the business.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

9. Why would spock eject kirk from the enterprise? and then he so happens to find future spock on this ice planet? So many plot holes.

I might have rewritten that sequence, but it would have still had the same result.

Spock would remove Kirk from command, only to have Kirk and classic Spock team up.

[Aerilon]

Originally Posted by weyoun782

1. The remodeled enterprise looks dumb. why not just stick with the original design?

Like what has already been said, they could hardly create a new movie, and shove a TOS-style Constitution in there. It just wouldn't have looked right for starters, being that the new film, deserved a new ship.

Granted they could have designed the new Enteprise a little better, but a redesign was needed.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

2. The dialogue wasn't so good compared to other star treks, where they would quote famous pieces of works in literature, and just the overall dialogue was really dumbed down.

To be honest, I didn't see no problem with this.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

3. Destroy vulcan? nuff said.

Alternate Reality, and something big had to have happened to make a significant change on the timeline. Did it suck? Yeah, was it nessecery? Perhalps. At the end of the day though, the destruction of Vulcan is one of the key factors of this alternate timeline.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

4. The narada looked really stupid.

I agree here. They should have used a typical Romulan design, not some alien-based design, that didn't even fit into classic Romulan style.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

5. Engineering looked like an oil refinery, why?!

I suppose, the reason for this would be to give it more of an 'engineering' feel. For people that haven't seen Star Trek in the past (the new fans that were being brought in), this would have been more than suitable.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

6. The actors were annoying trying to be like the original cast, seriously, none of the original members could be replaced. The guy that played spock annoyed me the most.

I actually thought all of the actors portrayed their roles well.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

7. Spock displays emotions? c'mon.

There have been instances in both TOS, and the TMP movies, where Spock has showed emotion. In addition to this, the Spock on the new film is the 'young spock', perhalps struggling to control his emotions. Later on in his years, he may have been able to control them more. A worthwhile addition to the story I think.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

8. the weaponary looked more like star wars. no phasers or photon torpedos? it was all lasers and rockets for crying out loud.

Sorry, but was you watching the film with your eyes closed?

There were Phasers and Torpedoes in the film. The Kelvin and Enterprise used Phasers, and when the Enterprise was firing on the Nevada at the end, you could clearly see her using Torpedoes (they were blue instead of orange / yellow) but they were torpedoes nonetheless.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

9. Why would spock eject kirk from the enterprise? and then he so happens to find future spock on this ice planet? So many plot holes.

Fate.

Originally Posted by weyoun782

Well I can just go on and on, I will not see another trek movie with abrams at the helm, it was just terrible, I went into seeing the movie with an open mind, but I could not accept what I saw, it is not my star trek that I have loved and cherrished for years growing up. They made it more like star wars, I like both, star trek more so, but keep them separate.

That is unfortunate, but was going to be the case with some Trek fans. There were parts of the movie I didn't like (The Kelvin having 800+ crew), but I've accepted it, not as the Trek I know and love, but as a different 'version' of Trek. All I'm doing, is keeping the two different versions apart from each other.

[Bs|Archaon]

Even if it's not an alternate reality (which we know it is anyway), who ever said that the Vulcan shown in the other series is the original planet? Enough Vulcans survived off-world (IIRC the movie said tens of thousands?) that with the support of the Federation they could easily find, settle, populate and defend a planet similar to the original Vulcan.

[Uwsar-Hat-Anupuw]

I rathered enjoyed it myself, It was well foretolded that it wasn't going to be "like your dads star trek". Then again with the hardcore Trekiee's it looked like it didn't settle to good...Go Nerd rage.

[Aerilon]

Originally Posted by Bs|Archaon

Even if it's not an alternate reality (which we know it is anyway), who ever said that the Vulcan shown in the other series is the original planet? Enough Vulcans survived off-world (IIRC the movie said tens of thousands?) that with the support of the Federation they could easily find, settle, populate and defend a planet similar to the original Vulcan.

Whilst a Logical theory, I doubt this is the case. If the whole point of blowing up Vulcan, only for them to rename another planet the same, and continue like they had always done, then there would be little point to actually blowing the original planet up.

I know we know otherwise, but still worth mentioning.

[MrFancypants]

The destruction of Vulcan was a simple plot device and also a nice trick to force hard-core fans to accept the alternate-timeline thing as it shows that they are serious about screwing up the established Star Trek history.

The only thing I didn't like about it was the way this was handled. You get a nice planet-implode effect, it is briefly mentioned that 8 billion people died, then they basically give a collective shrug and move on. Star Wars did a much better job at describing what the destruction of a planet entails in "A New Hope". Even relatively bad sci-fi movies like Starship Troopers managed to do better than that.

[Bs|Archaon]

Of course, as we've both said it's an alternate timeline which makes it completely irrelevant to the rest of Trek, but that's the sort of thing that could happen in Star Trek given that it's 300 years in the future, technology we can only dream of, the ridiculous level of resources and manpower available to something the size of the Federation etc etc etc.

I actually really loved the film, in the same way I loved Enterprise. I just don't care that they screwed some things up. A lot of the stuff does have 'plausible' explanations, it may not be canon but I think they must have put a lot of thought into making everything they've changed make at least some sense rather than just say "Hey we're doing this, it doesn't make sense but deal with it" and I appreciate that.

I'm happy that we got a good film that screws about with a few things (even if one of them is taking a wrecking ball to a major planet), rather than a bad film that sticks to Star Trek canon.

Only thing I didn't really like was the skydive onto the drill scene. That and I'm glad Simon Pegg wasn't in the entire film or he'd have started to annoy the fuck out of me...but he was in such a short section of the film that he didn't annoy the fuck out of me and I thought he played the part very well.

[Octovon]

Would you rather have this Star Trek movie or no Star Trek movie at all? Because I'd rather have this Star Trek instead of another piece of shit like Insurrection or Nemesis or no Star Trek at all.

Its science fiction, get over it. Enjoy this movie, if they had made a film to satisfy the hardcore trekkies then the film would have been a failure. This film is less "canonical" (its fiction for Christ's sake!) and is made for a much wider audience, a renewal for the franchise, opening it up to new generations.

If they wanted to make a film about Kirk and Spock in the fasion of TOS, then all the writers would need to be on shrooms, work on crappy sets (it looked like it was made in someone's basement) without any sort of solid stories and no continuity. Go back and watch some TOS, that show is fucked up, seriously fucked up.