Added: 3 years ago
From: tvTrequer
Views: 55,720
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (274)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Shatner seems more to be annoyed here over the fact he's not the central star of Star Trek anymore

    I don't think Star Trek is dead. it has gone trought a phase since the show Enterprise and Nemesis. pepole got tired of Star Trek. they then decided to let it rest a few years and then decided to "Regenerate" it to a new generation of IPHONE ADDICTS!

    Seriously thought, the new movie was pretty damn good :D

    and to the one below: the TOS was a melodrama too pretty much. :P

  • Star Trek is dead. It was wounded when Gene died and when TNG went off the air. It was on its way to the hospital with Voyager and Enterprise. And it was pronounced dead when ST IX hit. From now on, Star Trek is just going to be a stupid shallow teenage melodrama. Think Star Trek : Smallville, or Star Trek 90210. So yes its time to say goodbye to Star Trek.

  • @Tuber77 - I agree. I took a while to get my wife into ST but eventually I said forget about all the scifi elements and focus on the human elements. Personally I think we all wish to be part of a group of people that are honest, decent and driven by higher thoughts than greed.

  • The old Star Trek series appealed to people with interest in sociology, technology, anthropology and morality, the new Star Trek movie was created to appeal to Xbox gamers and people with short attention span disorders.

  • J J Abrahms is a douche.

  • star trek is overated and there are other sci fi shows that are better than it is, star trek is dead and there is no point in trying to revive it. if this show didnt have such an overt military theme to it and a sappy humanistic theme on the other spectrum of it that would have made for a far better concept. something like A.E. van voigts voyage of the star beagle paradigm would have made the show much more intriguing.

  • One of these days Rick Berman will be dead and Trek will thrive again under the leadership of someone who cares.

  • Of course Shatner is probably biased, and from what I gather a little too biased for his own good, as regards the Kirk character. Star Trek didn't entirely die when Kirk died, though I suppose the later series did get a little bit too clean-cut and PC in its way losing some of the rawness.

    The turnng point was rather the new movie. Anything left of Roddenberry's vision went there- not only a different feel but things like crass commercialism (product placement? in a world without money?)

  • @thelyniezian I thought he was talking about star trek dying after gene roddenberry died, not kirk

  • @drlove1972 Maybe so. Need to listen again to what he's saying. Even so, I disagree- Trek did manage to not die a little after Roddenberry.

  • @thelyniezian I don't think Shat was referring that it died ENTIRELY; he did say "as we knew it" and he's right a larger part of Trek DIED with Roddenberry. And it did become something very different from Roddenberries portrayal of the series. However, I for one LOVED what TNG turned into, REALLY enjoyed the later seasons of DS9, even some of Voyager was great. Enterprise was the first real death of the franchise, and then Nemesis was the coffin. Trek 09 however was CPR.

  • @dracheous And performing CPR on something dead and buried doesn't bring it back to life.

    Maybe that proves the new movie is the Star Trek equivalent of Frankenstein's monster?

    Otherwise, interesting point.

  • @thelyniezian And yes, I know Frankenstein's monster wasn't brought to life with CPR.

  • @drlove1972  He did, he said after "XI" which would have been Undiscovered Country; Generations would be the XII ((7th)) film.

  • @dracheous Roman numerals don't work that way, X is 10 in Roman numerals, V is 5 and the one you're looking for, as you just called 6 11 and 7 12. You sure are silly.

  • @murphy3162 HAHA Shit you're right, I wanted a V not an X  derp. This is clear indication that I require more time off work and much more alcohol consumption :P.

  • This was sad to watch. For me ST: VI was my absolute favorite ST film. I grew up on TNG, and think it's top-notch, but over the past six months, I went back to TOS, reminding myself to view it in the context within which it was developed and produced, and I've got to say it's my favorite. However, I did also watch DS9 at the same time, and found that story/concept, however divorced from Gene's original view, to be quite touching because of the overall story-arc.

  • I have to agree. Star Trek really began and ended with TOS/Kirk/Roddenberry. Mostly the latter of the three, though. Roddenberry was such an amazing writer and person in general and I've yet to see anyone even come close to that kind of talent. This is why I didn't like the new movie- it was a poor imitation (made to appease 21st century masses) that just couldn't capture the spirit of TOS, or so I felt. Sometimes it felt like they weren't even trying. =(

  • They should've never killed the character in the first place; they should've left him in the Nexus, where maybe the character might've found some peace. I mean, damned, they did something similar to Scotty, and why not leave this American Icon in Limbo, where, in our hearts and minds, someday he might've returned?

  • I even had to return to Voyager and even Enterprise to get more out of them than just the face value of the script for each episode. Will there be another movie, personally, IF J.J. decides to hack up another 'alternative universe' Trek movie, I cannot say I will attend after walking out on the first 'reboot'.....

  • I would agree with Mr Shatner; the original connection and concept that made the first series work in its own way died with the passing of Gene. I never had the opportunity to see Gene, to hear his ideas in person, all done primarily in video form only. The following series all had their own merits, granted each series did not lift off correctly in order to fit their own uniqueness. Flaws in each series, some real gems scattered in each.

  • I agree with shat. After gene died there were hints at his optimism in some of trek but berman never seemed to really give a flying fuck about the franchise.

  • How bout an awesome TV special.. Kinda like the stand.. But with star Trek?!

  • The Star Trek never die, if he's near the edge of death, then comes a new series or movie, which exhale inside the star trek a new life ^^ i hope...

  • I can imagine the same sober comments being made about rock and pop sometime in the future. Popular culture no longer has the power to inspire and uplift as it once did,and Star Trek's passing is the beginning of the end. Western culture is in serious and terminal decline,unless we have a renaissance of the values which made it great.

  • Star Trek is half dead right now! who knows what future there is for the franchise! there hasn't been a new series for years! and who know when (or if) another movie will come out?

  • @katakisLives they plan on a sequal to the 09 movie, buuuut after being disappointed with the first one I'm highly skeptical on how well the newer one will be

  • @Leylaashley well with the new movie they had a modernize it to get the younger generation into it. they had to make kirk and spock relatable characters. fans of the original show and tng always talk shit. this movie is what made me a fan of star trek. it was a great movie. it can go where the series and gene roddenberry never went before. isnt that the point of star trek? to go where no one has gone before?

  • @nickcrocker7 In part, it was meant to be where no one has gone before. But the major point of Star Trek was hope for the future. That we can better ourselves a as a race. To end our own hate and prejudice and work together, and with others. To bring peace. It was peace first shoot later, not the other way around. This movie didn't even have a moral plot when all the others did. Yes the latter part of the TNG movies werent as amazing as the others, but they still had moral stories. This was just

  • @nickcrocker7 explosions and loud noises and lets get into an arguement because we dont agree and or be emo.

  • @Leylaashley sorry but i disagree. in the end kirk and spock found something in each other that made them work together in the end. and sure this wasnt a shatner movie or roddenberry movie. thats not the point. this new star trek is supposed to go in a new direction for new fans. now that the fighting and sex shit is done, the movie can be about hope for the future and go where no one has gone before

  • @nickcrocker7 I definitely agree with your analysis about the new movie. Each person will always have a different opinion...however... I agree with you. Even though the new movie may not appeal to older trekkies, everyone must understand that star trek is over 40 years old. 40 years.. with a changing globalized world and changing issues.. we must allow our star trek to change (in some ways) to bring in newer fans. And the new movie did that...and as "old" trekkies ..we must open our mind :)

  • @drockjr thank you, see its people like you who will help keep star trek alive for many more years. they cant just copy what they did in the past movies, they have to be able to go in a new direction to keep things interesting and do things the show and movies couldnt do before.things cant be the same as they were like 25 years ago. things are always gonna be changing and there is nothing we can do. by accepting that we can keep star trek alive for many many years

  • Maybe he can't figure the Star Trek franchise could get along without him being in the 'centre chair'... It should be a compliment that people loved the original so much they wanted the stories and the development of Star Trek to continue.

  • @workstrength He wasnt talking about himself, he was talking about Gene, Kirk technically died in the 7th film Generations, Gene died shortly before or after the sixth film Undiscovered Country

  • Rubbish! With the possible exception of Enterprise (which I haven't seen), all the subsequent series (TNG, DS9, Voy.) were vastly better than TOS!

  • the only star trek i didnt like was DS9

    i didnt mind the others, TNG was the one i grew up. i even found home movies of me n my sis watchin it wen we were 6

  • @boffgirl Personally DS9 was always my favourite, though from your username I'm guessing your a girl and I can see that DS9 is definitely has more appeal to a male audience (it's more war centric in general and it's just not got alot of the episodes that I could see appealing to women as much as the others).

    And before anyone goes calling me sexist, men and women just tend to have different tastes in tv/movies I'm not judging either ;)

  • @locutus9956 well i didnt like dsp but my sister does, i guess cause it wasnt the ones i grew up watching like i did the others.

  • @boffgirl Fair enough :) Personally TNG is the one I most grew up with but I just loved DS9s glimpse into the everyday life in the Federation and then the big dramatic war stories later on. Voyager would have to be my least favourite by far (though I still like it :D)

  • @boffgirl oh just to be clcear I'm not dissing any of the other shows, I loved all of them and yes, even Enterprise and the JJ Abrams movie ;)

  • “Oh its got action, special effects, romance, intensity, story and characters!” Yeah, so did Commando, but that film actually rocked…and story and characters…You mean like 2001 a Space Odyssey? *lol* I’m not here to see Rambo in space, I here to see Star Trek.

  • That term is just a copout from actually critiquing and questioning the film. Apparently no one who likes this film has the knack to critique or question anything. In fact, I never saw one review that actually criticized the film besides talking about it.

  • The person who said that only 80% of the watchers of this film are not ST fans, well he is half right. There are two types of people who like this film, those who hated the franchise and those who would like anything. The cliché term “open-minded” is just not an excuse to like and dislike anything. That’s not being open minded, that’s A.D.D.....

  • What I didn't like about this film is that it is as far away from Star Trek as you can possibly get, from concept, to scenery, to atmosphere, to the flow, and to the premise.

    The Writing was just flat soda, no one seemed to care or think about what they were writing. Which is sad, because that's Star Treks BGF9000 . The film was just rushed.

    JJ just wanted to make a money maker. I think this new idea would have been better for a TV show. Plenty of time for growth, which played to STs strengths.

  • Shatner's right, but a lot of people here are misinterpreting him. I don't think he's saying that Star Trek has gone downhill, or that the franchise is no longer good... just that these new incarnations are just not the same as the Star Trek Gene made. Star Trek, as the original was, is gone, and the atmosphere created in TOS can never be recreated. That doesn't mean the other installations are bad... just different.

  • Star Trek in all it's incarnations has a mix of good and bad - luckily far more good than bad. Star Trek - TOS had the blueprint which allowed some fantastic episodes especially from 1st and 2nd seasons. TNG sprung to life from season 3 onwards as did DS9. Voyager was pretty much up and down right the way through (Good seven of nine, bad Neelix) and Enterprise was again just getting better and better when the rug was pulled. The movies were at their peak in the mid 80's - in my opinion.

  • Nothing compared with the original series. Shatner is right. Stewart was ok I suppose but then it just got silly. It's as if they felt the need to tick every politically correct box in the book....black Captain...female Captain (Kate Mulgrew for Christ Sake!!!). Just got pointless....

  • Shatner is right on the money.

  • I feel that those who came after Gene Roddenberry are those people who truly made Star Trek great. Gene Roddenberry died after the first 2 seasons of TNG and they were really nothing special. DS9 and Voyager were very good as well. It was only after Enterprise came out that the franchise went down the toilet for cheap thrills. The new star trek movie by the "Lost" director is an abomination. A Frankensteinian freak show that has resuscitated dead characters into grotesque versions of the origin.

  • Please God ... kill J.J. too

  • Politcal corretness code for "fascist" killed SNG. The writers had to make sure nobody gets left out, everybody gets a trophy. Even last place.

    Leave it to some small vocal group. To screw everybody else. Maybe one day people will ba able to speak there minds. Without fear or worry that some goverment agents are going to bust thier door down. Drag them to some mock court. Then toss them in prison for life.

  • Star Trek has 11 motion-pictures, 5 television series, and 1 animated series. In order to watch all of these, one must spend over 850 hours watching the television. If you watch 1 hour of Trek a day it will take you aprox. 2 years 3 months to watch each episode & movie once. There are also over 500 Star Trek comic book issues, and over 1,000 Star Trek novels. And yet we still want more Star Trek...fasinating!

  • @zinnith23 BECAUSE WE ARE TREK ADICTS... which is very fascinating.... expecially that I yelled

  • @zinnith23 whos we?

  • Shatner's right... R.IP. Mr. Roddenberry

  • And unfortunately this isn't limited to film, but also TV and music. All this reality TV stuff is garbage, but it's what people want to see, so it's saturated the market.

    Music, don't even get me started...

  • he really let himself go over the years lol

  • Even Roddenberry said its not Star Trek

    unless i say its star trek. He was so right.

  • You people are just upset that star Trek is going without Roddenberry. or the old actors. Even if the movie was absolutly perfect in every way you treckies would have a problem with it because it's not the OLD one. Get over it. would you, because your just making true what everyone says about treckies : They are Virginal and live in their parents basements, they wear pocket protectors and can't get a date, so Please get over it.

  • he is so right post-Roddenberry Star Trek is so NOT Star Trek including the new movie

  • like Evil Sulu said in the Mirror episode: "When the cat's away"

    I mean poor Gene He created something so absolutely indescribable that people practically worship it including myself.

    I think I agree with Shatner. I think Star Trek died with Gene Roddenberry. Youll notice the new movie lacked a certain quality that was found in the other movies right? A kind of intelligence - and the scripts made you think of God and big universal things. This new Trek movie just wears the "destiny" theme out.

  • Thats the problem, you guys worship this franchise so much that you get pissed when someone else has a dream, a vision, and wants to do something with it. Even if the movie were made absolutly perfect you all would find something wrong with it. Don't get me wrong I love star treck and Star wars, But I don't worship the franchise and pretned I a am a vulcan queen or something. Geesh

  • I'm just pissed that a proper model kit of the new Enterprise wasn't put out instead we just got a fucking toy with voices!!!!!!!

  • Time travel is very complicated, all those values that kirk would have learned from his father are gone all those value that spock learned from his mother the value of being human and vulcan and the ppl of vulcan are gone he wiped out a key planet in the star trek universe Gene must be rolling in his grave god rest his soul.. for the next star trek what else is he gonna take out the klingons i know many a nerd that would kill JJ for something like that..he went to far with the whole damn movie

  • I think Youtube should do its own fucking Roast J.J. Abrams! get my meaning! The fucking cunt! Id shove a fucking warp engine up his ass and send him on his fucking way, to Alpha Centauri far out of reach of fucking pen and paper!

  • Well I kinder liked Star Trek for a six-track Dolby digital point of view. But J.J. fucking crossed the line far too much with Romulus and Vulcan! Why didnt he just started off by shoving a leash up our fucking asses and destroyed planet Earth at the very start and end it all there.

    You know fucking pisses me off about the guy the most! This fucker hasnt gone grey, well I have. I but just a fucking year younger than him, and he wares fucking geek cum over my fucking glasses!

  • And umm i know i keep going on lol sorry for that but i have one more thing the young and old spock being in the same place at the same time and touching hmmm science will tell you that to ppl that are the same can not share the same place at the same time the universe would try every to for those to back together in a very painful way just buy them touching...

  • That is the poor excuse with science fiction. Same goes with the Terminator time travel. Its all going to happen all over again. So well have Terminator 6 Kyle Goes Back in Time! Talk about getting long in the tooth.

  • Really? What theory or law says that?

  • Temporal Theory... Two being that are on the same wavelength can not occupy the same space at the sametime...if it were dealing with multiverses then you would be dealing with to ppl that are on the say wavelength becouse everything vibrates to its own universe,,but in the case of star trek Xi Spock came back in time from the same universe but only a different history.. so abit of Temporal and String Theory..

  • Typo** Wouldnt be dealing with two pp; that are on the same wavelenght.

  • Well, it's certainly true that two particles on the same wavelength cannot occupy the same space. What happens if they try? They collide. Just like you and I would if we tried to walk through each other. As unpleasant as that might be for us, it's wouldn't be fatal.

    Even if that doesn't convince you, consider the fact that you are constantly exchanging matter with the outside world. You in 40 years is not, materially, you now.

  • I like Star Trek for what it can produce as show. Im a rather late Trekker of the late 60s and never show till around early 1970s, and Ive liked it ever since. Im not over excited too much with, the next-generation its neat show and it works in some places and in others not so well and yes boring. Original Star Trek had few boring ones or it wasnt to are liking, as we want Klingons on the starboard bow firing phases at the Enterprise! LOL

  • He's just pissed that he wasn't asked to be in the new movie. The new Star Trek ROCKED! I've watched it several times and I catch new stuff everytime.

  • Only the Star Trek produced by Gene is canon.

    Thats TOS, movies 1 - 6, and TNG seasons 1 - 3.

  • ok really, I seen the new movie just yesterday, and honestly I thought it kicked ass. what was wrong with it? Why are you people having such a problem with it. I thought it had everything in it, action, humor, romance, and sci fi. You people really need to expand your horizons and be open minded.

  • @ pam4rob - I think its because of its incoherent story, crappy villain, piss poor sets, really REALLY badly redesigned ship and contrived plot points. But mostly because its a kick in the teeth to every thing that had gone before to the point where other than the names of the ship and the crew it can be considered an entirety different franchise.

  • Star Trek NEVER died, it WILL live forever because the new Trek film proves this. Vulcan was destroyed. However, pull your one angled brain out of the shitter and THINK! It could always be averted because time is ever constant (including time travel!) Think Mirror Universe, you retard! Whew! You fellow Trek nerds piss me off sometimes. You're being selfish and want Trek to die with you because you're getting old. Trek will live LONG after me and you've died. Rejoice it. It's Gene's dream.

  • Amen to that. I feel exactly the same way as you. I will say that I have seen both star treks with Picard and Kirk, and nothing beats cptn kirk, I'm sorry but he is just so kick ass. the ones with picard were just BORING as hell to me. Not to mention, the cast with kirk was awesome, the chemistry was amazing you could see it on screen, and in the new ones It seems as though thy may have the same chemistry on set as well. I loved the new movie. I can't wait for the next one..

  • Star Trek was not dead. But it was never the same. Shatner is right.

    ST09 is good. But I think a SCI-FI adventure would still have been a better choice.

    TNG was good, the movies were fun too, but the movies couldn't compete with the TNG series.

  • I agree, Mr. Shatner. You were WAY out of character in movie 7, and it had been a DISASTROUS transition with the TNG crew. I will say that Star Trek 09 was a nice transition from sci-fi adventure to sci-fi action though.. But Star Trek is Captain Kirk, and Mr. Spock, and Bones and Scotty and Uhura. Nothing beats Kirk and co. in character from 1966 to 1991!

  • part 2...Enterprise looked so upgraded becouse of and most likly the reading they took from the Kelvin..of the romulan ship the upgraded..and with older spock there to fearther pollute the TimeLine...

  • I would like to inform everyone that kami's rant is all in 1 sentence.

    Buddy, learn how to type before you bash on the new Star Trek.

  • Sorry to Say But JJ Abrams Killed

    Star Trek and you know how he did it with this movie that when back in time and changed everything we knew about

    Star Trek and he did it to make money now if theres another Star Trek he can put whatever the hell he wants becouse its a new Time Line so he can get alway with it..all that stuff that happen in the normal Time line is Gone.. with the fall of Vulcan you can tell and the Beaming that mr scott would have invented and you can tell thats why the,,,,

  • You assume there is a "normal" timeline, but I don't see any labels or other indication of normal timelines and unusual timelines. What if the original series was a distorted timeline?

  • well to us the Tos Time like is the narmal one so any changes to that time line would seem different to us but we know that the Tos time line was change by the actions of the Enterprise E crew and them going back with the borg to first contact that changed the time line abit but the destruction of vulcan thats a major change, hell Tuvok from voyager mite not even be born who can really tell the out come of the vulcan race you know the vulcan are a key race in the Star Trek universe..

  • When a person speaks for himself or herself, he or she usually uses "me" to refer to himself or herself in a prepositional phrase. If you are speaking for a significant other, I can understand an exception. Anyway, the creation of one time line does not alter or destroy another time line.

    Besides, even if you personally wish that things stick to the time line represented by TOS, there is nothing to keep things from unfolding in a similar manner in the time line introduced in Star Trek.

  • I would also like to add that the destruction of Vulcan does not extinguish Vulcans as a species.

  • Or maybe hes one of the survives his family survived the destruction! Yeah damn you, J.J. Set phsers to stun lets take him alive and shove one of those slug things down his month and see what answers we can get from him. Why did you destroy Vulcan J.J.. Answer me! lol

  • Man thats like a really easy answer he wanted to make his own universe so when he makes another movie which i think he will he can put fucking clown on unicycles and say well well this is another universe and get away with it well maybe not clown on unicycles but you get my point but i wonder what happen to the history and the future of star trek like with the wrath of khan when the Enterprise E went back just to first contact that changed the time line just a bit with the borg being in the past

  • Its like all about making money with JJ he doesnt care what happen to the history of star trek or what he's doing to the future of it. like that guy i think we've have all seen his trailer on you tube with his version of the enterprise and we all thought that was gonna be the one in the movie and it look great classic but kinda upgraded but here comes JJ he even disrespected us by changing the Enterprise and NO ONE I MEAN NO ON TOUCHES MY BABY LOL!

  • i always wanted to meet him

  • Whoa, guys. A, Shatner has an ego, we know it. Hell he wrote a book where he comes back to live, he believes his own hype so i dont listen to anything he says ST related, despite his great past (Bravo). But the people here who are calling the people who liked the movie, 'Halo, Itunes' lovers. The second you start believing your better than average people is the second the movie company says, well fuck you. Why would they cater for the arrogant? Dont look down on people who want fun at thecinema.

  • in some way it realy died but it come to life like spock - little different but alive so...live long and prosper :)

  • Star Trek never die !!!!! \\//_

  • I agree Shatner and I say more: the last movie was horrible.

  • Yup. It was a stupid movie. I'm not a Trekker, just an observer.

  • Now THAT is interesting, since 80% of the people who loved the movie are also "not star trek fans"

    But yeah I agree with you. Yet so many people think we're idiots for thinking such things. It's a familliar feeling, like .. like .. oh yeah, like in 2003 when I said the Iraq war was stupid and Bush was a moron and everyone said I was a commie pinko for saying such anti-american things.

    GIve it time, comrade, give it time ^_^.

  • I know exactly what you mean. It was really weird supporting both the war and the president while being surrounded by commies who said the Iraq war was stupid and that the President was a moron.

    Shoes on the other foot now tovarich!

  • I'm so sorry. Would you like some borsht? It'll make you feel better. XD

  • Ugh. Borsht is the most evil food to ever be created!

  • wrong the most evil food is Vegan Stew, especially when you boil the vegans first

  • Thats what I told my wife, but she is still making it.

  • you still are a commie pinko ... nothing has changed.

  • Yup the film was horrible and it is stuped and not at all original some times I'm asking myself is it ST huh ??? Blowing up ships and planets is not what ST is about :(

  • What?  Have you ever seen startrek?

  • Well I have and as I've said in my previous post that's not what star trek is about. Does any of that stuff happen in "the offspring" "city on the edge of forever", "the inner light" ,"the visitor" etc. No because they're episodes about people and that's what trek is.

  • and the new one wasn't about people? Are you kidding me? It was all about the characters, and how they became who they all are. There was romance, violence, sci fi, explosions, humor, there was something for everyone in it. I felt the old star treck actually lacked a bit in that area. Don't get me wrong, they were great, but I think the new movie, did a great job in filming the human emotions.

  • The film couldn't be bothered to get us to really know these people a good example of that is that pointless car scene at the cliff. So any emotions they were going for like the uhura/spock thing weren't convincing and I just couldn't care at all. The movie just had a real generic feeling to it and it lacked substance.

  • Well of course it did, because you watched it with the idea that it was going to be bad. So of course you don't like it, because it's not your precious rodenberry movie. I happen to think the Uhura/Spock thing was romantic and believable. and I didn't think it was generic whatsoever. The car scene was stating that Kirk loved to take risks, and was somewhat of a dare devil, and really didn't fear much.

  • On the contrary I went into the film hoping I would like it. I just didn't like what I saw. And I don't have as high of an opinion of Roddenbury like some fans do. He was a great visionary and he created the characters we know and love but he wasn't really that great of a writer. The spock/uhura relationship came out of nowhere with no build up whatsoever so I couldn't care about it. And all that scene told me about this kirk was that he was a dick, he trashed someone's car.

  • That car was his stepfathers, and he sounded pretty abusive. Go back and watch that part. As far as you not liking the movie I don't know what to tell you other than if it wasn't a star Trek movie and was called something else, you wouldn't be so hard on it .

  • No he sounded pretty angry and I don't blame him and as for him supposedly being abusive well that's not in the film so if the filmmakers didn't think that was important enough to be in the film then it's not a part of the scene. Well if it wasn't called star trek it would still have the flaws it has but I wouldn't be that bothered about it because I could then easily dismiss it but since it does have the trek name on it then I'm less forgiving because it's not how trek should be.

  • I think the scene was corny and they went to too great of lengths to try to portray Kirk as a hell-raiser. Much like they went overboard trying to portray Scotty as some adolescent out of control party animal.

    It was campy, face it. Then again I don't even know why I'm wasting my time debating with somebody who thinks TNG was horrible and the new ST movie was "great". You obviously possess poor taste and this conversation is much like fighting with The Borg... futile.

  • the only saving grace in this is quinto and nimoy had they not been in this movie it would have tanked balls. the movies i enjoyed were 1-4 and first contact, simply because they got the music correctly. the music for star trek 2009 sucked ass. hated they took out the straight lasers wich make star trek unique and the humor of spock/kirk/mccoy replaced with constant fighting, the humor and comradrie between the three made the original series.tng i love but the movies sucked assed removing music

  • @JunmaiShu loved your remark.. LOL Altho I admit TNG was hard for me to get used to, I did come to love it as much as TOS. Loved Voyager too and Enterprise..didn't like Deep Space Nine as much. I love how JJ has not only breathed new life into this whole Star Trek idea--I think Gene would have loved it..he has reset the timeline so that all that happened is still canon but now we have a brand new timeline and I hope many new adventures to follow.. Can't wait to see where they take it next.

  • @JunmaiShu Resistance is futile =x

  • @JunmaiShu sorry but i think the new movie was awesome. its what made me watch star trek. i dont care about your opinion but i have to say that JJ Abrams did a great job on this movie.

  • Star Trek : Shatner is dead

  • are you a retard?

  • Bill is absolutely correct. When Gene Roddenberry died, the soul of Star Trek was dead, the creator, the framer in essence. But Star Trek (TOS) and TNG live on to represent Gene in spirit. The new movie was a great action movie, but it really missed the core of what made the original series so great, a message about life and philosophy. I thought the Leonard Nimoy parts were the best parts of the movie actually. That Zachary Quinto kid looks similar, but can't compete with Leonard.

  • I thought the Leonard Nimoy parts were the weakest parts of the movie because it just didn't fit into the plot well. It was as though they forced Nimoy into the film for the old fans when to be honest he wasn't needed.

  • As I like to put it: The new movie was a good actionflick, a decent sci-fi flick and a horrible star trek-flick.

  • I think Zachary did good but your right no one can replace or compete with Nimoy he is Spock and obviously proud of it.

  • Star Trek : Shatner is dead

  • but you're missing the point "kjpdqpb" ... the reason they had to briung in the shitty 4th season brent spinner and all the other stupid ideas ws because, by the end of season 3 the viewership/ratings have dropped so far down, that paramount said that they'll continue the "piece of shit" only if the 4th season pays off ... which it thankfully never did

  • It's an alternate reality people. Nothing canon has been destroyed, nothing established has been changed. Much like the Mirror mirror episodes, this chronicles what happens if the timeline is messed with or a look at a different aspect of how humanity could have evolved. just get over it and accept the fact that unlike a lot of people, they're trying to keep the franchise alive even if just on life support. Deal with it and quit whining already.

  • 6 was the trial with the klingons right? I thought that one was a top tier trek too.

    I was slightly dissapointed with the new movie. I expected UPN's Enterprise to get the movie Nod. Season 3 was Epic.

  • Enterprise season 3 is the new definitive Star trek. Season 4 failed when they tried bringing in Data as Noonian Soong and the no-brained 'augments'. It was Trek suicide. Take the Wii for example. It's awesome because it doesn't try and satisfy a largely unsatisfiable "core" audience. Instead, the wii says "Fuck it." and does something new. Enterprise did this well until season 4. And then they brought in Data = FAIL. The old Spock parts of the new flick are the worst parts of the flick.

  • I hated StarTrek when Picard was Captian. OMG those shows were so boring to me, Maybe it was his monotone voice, I dont know, but I couldnt get into any of the shows or movies made. They didnt have the same chemistry on screen as the old starTrek crew. But I do Love Star Trek 2009 it kicked ass.

  • @Pam4Rob I liked Patrick Stewart (and most of the cast of STTNG), but what I had problems with were that one it seemed as if the bridge was run by a committee, not a captain in the captain's chair (oh yeah there was no captains chair), and the almost in your face political correctness of the series. And the whole idea of families in space on the Enterprise just didn't fit, and never really went anywhere.

  • I follow trek pretty well. ESPECIALLY 'enterprise'. I have seen all 4 seasons 3 times. I love it. I get bored I watch Enterprise every couple of years.

    To me it's now the definitive Trek.

    KK, The timeline... has to correct itself. Spock was late to save Romulus, Romulus was destroyed, timeline was created. Spock knows the Supernova is coming now and will be morally bound to save Romulus in time to prevent the new timeline. 'Enterprise' dealt heavily in time manipulations like this.

  • I'm an old fogie; I enjoyed the movie. It was very good, overall. But now that the "new alternate timline" is creating a new, alternate canon, the show(s?) I grew up on, knew and loved are all wiped out and are meaningless; at least as pertaining to the "Star Trek" Universe. I bet Roddenberry is happy his show got a reboot, but not that they more or less wiped out everything he did, to do it.

  • well technically they didn't it's not like the entire previous canon is all wiped out it's still there, however there probably pushing for a new tv show, probably why they picked a tv actor to be spock. The canon is still there.

  • the old show(s) did not become meaningless.

    It will always be a classic, no matter what the sequels and prequels say.

  • who said the old shows became meaningless? No one said that, and nothing can take the place of the old shows, But you people don't even give the movie a chance because your obsessed so much with the old shows. Movies are meant for Entertainment, Not Obsession. It's pretty bad when there are people out there comming up with a Klingon Language

  • Roddenberry might like know there is a reboot, my guess is, he is rolling over in his grave, so to speak, at the alternate time line.

    As much as I disliked Enterprise, I believe I dislike the new time line ever more.

    If they could have just stuck to blowing up the bad guy with his ship and left Vulcan alone, I think I could have been ok with it.

  • Not a new timeline - an alternate universe.

    They will probably make a trilogy in this universe and then return to the prime universe... just a thought. But they'll bring with them, the re-invigoration of the new films to the prime universe, and continue TNG era films... i would atleast like that. No reason they cant both exist. It's sci-fi.

  • New Time line- new universe/dimension/reality take your pick. It still means something that occurs parallel to the Prime.

    At some point it is likely that the Mirror Universe joined ours at one point but for some random temporal incursion.

    Temporal Mechanics aside, I guess my main point was, destroying Vulcan or any other planet was generally pointless. Star Trek was never about saving Earth, it was about saving/protecting the Federation.

    Old Kirk would have just as likely kamikazi-ed it

  • What's more important.... I really don't care.

    Entertainment is meant to be enjoyed, not obsessed over and analyzed to the brink of insanity.

    I prefer not to take my entertainment TOO seriously. This isn't real, after all. It's just a bit of fun.

    And I intend to have fun watching it =)

  • Amen dude

  • Exactly!!! OMG what is with these people??? They act as if this new movie has thrown THEIR universe into turmoil. lol It was a great movie, and I don't care what these treckies say.

  • I have to disagree on both counts. I like the originals, but TNG was superior in every aspect and a great series. The movies were horrid, no question. And I think the new movie was mediocre, certainly nowhere near worthy of the term "great". Then again no films these days are... it's a lost art. All focus is put on eye candy (i.e. shit blowing up, car chases, tits & ass). The quality of acting, dialog, plot, overall feel ect... pales by comparison.

  • i wouldnt say that but tng and classic trek and ds9 are the the cream of the crop. tng probably has more great episodes than classic trek but thats only because classic trek was cancelled after 3 seasons so its not a fair comparison. tng movies sucked for removing the great music of the series, except first contact wich i liked.

  • I never got into DS9. I saw a couple episodes that were decent, one I'd even call good, but that's about it. I just think TNG had a great "feel" to it. I don't know how to break it all into specifics. The atmosphere of the inside of the ship just seemed so cozy. Great scripts. Some of my favorite episodes don't involve 1 single phaser fired, space war or hot alien women (i.e. The Inner Light, Lessons). Those episodes weren't just a show, they were art.

  • I agree.

    Classic Trek, TNG and DS9 were the cream of the crop.

    Voyager, Enterprise and TNG movies sucked.

    The new movie: I don't care.

  • @tvTrequer I've watch all of the star Trek Shows I've seen Star Trek Enterprise is the only one that sucks

  • @tvTrequer really I would totally group voyager in with the cream of the crop it's enterprise that sent the franchise plummeting.

  • @Pam4Rob

    The term is 'Trekker'~

    And I liked the new movie, too. The loss of canon in the movie can't go unnoticed, but in general it's decent. Plus, it's got new SPORK moments for me to enjoy~

    XD

  • @522loki Well for me--and I am a life long Trekker, this film handled the timeline really well and I believe has left us with a whole new future of Star Trek adventures to look forward to. can't wait..

  • Er.. no star trek isn't about that either. It's about people and their growth as a person through their experiences.

  • Maybe they are just taking a different angle showing the characters where they were before the show started. What is wrong with that exactly. Star Wars did it too. I think Its good. because it helps explain how the characters became who they are,

  • Comment removed

  • That means you dont like it because Vulcan is destroyed, its a bad thing. Star trek cant be all rosey and happy, eventally the bad guy can kick you where it hurts. In battles we do lose sometimes, but i think the story was about making the most they can from a bad situation.

  • Your pissed because the bad guy blew up vulcan???  Why?

  • @Pam4Rob Simple. Without Vulcan, there are now some events that can never happen in this new Trek-verse.

    The events of the TOS episode, "Amok time" cannot happen, Spock cannot go through the Kolinahr training (q.v. Movie 1), Spock's katra cannot be replaced after he is resurrected in Movie 3 (The Search for Spock) after his death in Movie 2 (Wrath of Khan) because all the priests on Mount Seleya are now dead.

    So yeah, Vulcan being destroyed changes the Trek story just a bit.

  • Entertainment is meant to be enjoyed, not obsessed over and analyzed to the brink of insanity.

    I prefer not to take my entertainment TOO seriously. This isn't real, after all. It's just a bit of fun.

    You never know they may do something in the next movie that explains it. They may go back in time again and save Vulcan in the next movie. It's just a movie.

  • Bullshit. DS9 was one of the best ST shows. It had the imagination to actually go beyond the formula. Of course, one of the reasons it was so successful was because Berman and Piller basically followed JMS's storyline for B5 virtually beat for beat. I WILL agree, however, that ENT sucked MAJOR arse.

  • Deep Space Nine was very good creatively, but the very high TNG ratings could not be sustained after it finished.

  • I believe DS9 was the last creative thing done with Star Trek after Roddenberry's death.

    So I don't believe Trek died because he died, although Trek 6 was indeed the last really good movie.

  • I saw the new Star Trek film, and tbh i thought it was pretty good.

  • sorry bill go cry in your beer or something

  • obvious troll is obvious

  • and i actually loved simon pegg as scotty. hes great. i can even look right. just add 100 pounds LOL. NP right!

  • at first i thought the whole "time trek " thing was a bit cliche. but once i realized that it was in this case. being used simply as a tool to set up alternate storylines. in the new alternate reality as spock puts it. this will undoutably help them when all the die hard fan come down on any discrepancies orin any sorylines. and open up a whole new world of possibilities within the franchise. we can only hope it is done with great care and imagination.

  • Well, no. The franhise has stayed very successful actually.

    Is it different, yes.

    For "the Star Trek we knew," go watch reruns. They're available. I love them myself.

    The old is good. The new is good.

  • think about this new fulm is trying to bring star trek to a wider addience and i think its done that and im sure that many new trekkies will go watch the older series and fall in love with it too. i think we will be seeing more iflms and a new series soon ps i think oh all the films the new one is good but you cant beeat first contact

  • old puffy face! still love him for being capt. kirk!

  • Holy shit, lol. The new film is the best Trek ever.

  • Well none of the ST films were very good IMO, so pick your poison. I find it amazing that such a great show (IMO) like TNG could not produce a quality film. On the other hand, I'd like to see how the cast in this movie could handle a weekly 1 hour show given time to create chemistry and whatnot. I'd like to see this theory tested because a film once every few years isn't enough for me. I want another great ST show, and haven't liked anything since TNG.