Roberto, I have read that you would like to read the Trek novels. I offer my complete library to you on one condition: afterwards, you and I will sit down so that I may inform you that it is Trekkie and NOT Trekker. If you knew anything about Trek, you should know that. The Great Bird himself said it was so. I blame you and no one else for the direction the franchise is taking. Save Star Trek from mediocrity. You may even wear that dopey hat.
he talks like he's been doing overtime on the meth rollercoaster. i dunno, i love trek. always have. the movie had some good stuff but they changed things that should have been left alone. Like spock and uhura? Not! Leonard Nimoy should have directed this movie, and all plot twists should have been better thought out . Shatners absence made it feel incomplete. He should have been in there somewhere. along with Nichelle .
@MrJohnnyrace If you mean the Original series episode "The Trouble With Tribbles" it was Written by David Gerrold Then they did a follow-up on the Animated Series & crossover on an episode of DS9 "Trials and Tribblations" which used amazing FX to use TOS footage with the new DS9 footage. check out "/watch?v=l6KGOkzbf_c"
That said. The immense popularity of the TOS ep is what led Nimoy to make ST-IV a comedy. If you account for inflation it's till the most popular (Box Office)Trek film.
I liked the first half of the film but the drilling into the core of planets and to put in black holes which destroy planets is rediculous and impossible but so it the death stars destruction of planets so that idea is no longer a new one. I don't think this story has much good visionary science fiction in it. too usual run of the mill.
For example father kirk would be admiral or star fleet commander or star base commander and his son would be ship captian of his own starship, the enterprise sometime before captian Picard was Captian.
If i wrote the film, I would write in Shatner and Spock as the fathers of their Sons; Kaptain Kirk Jr. ship captain and Spock Junior; As a result they would not have to have that phoney back in time story as a plot complication and no need to devalue Kirk and have him get the captains chair by spocks disqualification. How do you like them apples!
Why even do father/son? Just have them as mentors to a younger crew? Do shows where they used for spotlights for advice for a correct situation or for an event (such and such alien meeting/conference etc.)
I would have had a scene where marooned Spock in his isolation spoke to a imaginary specter of his old best friend reminiscing about old times. An after-effect from multiple mind-melds allowing him to communicate with the remnant of Kirk still in the Nexus (where time has no meaning.)
Yeah. Normally I'd say star wars is special effects and star trek is logic developement, but this movie is more like Star Wars. I liked it better than Star Wars, and worse Than normal Star Trek
In this day of "we can do anything" CGI, I don't buy the deal that "Star Wars" is "only special effects". It's endured because it's modern mythology that resonates on a very primal level, the fight between Good and Evil and the Hero's Journey. If that wasn't true it would have fallen by the wayside like other fads. not still endure after 32 years. Not to mention there wouldn't be millions of people worldwide who list their religion as "Jedi" on census forms.
Maybe. It has a desent plot. But the Star Wars universe is not as developed as that of Star Trek. The even have their own offficial langauage, where as Twiliks merely saying the same phrases multiple times. Star Wars has a good plot, but it is more effects based then Star Trek.
You must be going by the Twiliks in the KOTOR games. In that they repeat the same phrases to save because they didn't have Ben Burtt to translate everything. However in the movies Huttese - (the language all the aliens on Tattooine and the Outer Rim) is based on Peruvian Quechua and Ewokese is based on Tibetan, Mongolian Kalmuck and Native American Lakota. So they are rather developed (all the words are translated), it's just fully original like Klingon. BTW Vulcan was never fully developed.
I meant to say it's just NOT fully developed as Klingon which has it's own dictionary and guys and gals who dress up like Klingons and recite Shakespeare "in the original Klingon". Not my thing but more power to whatever makes someone happy. However I never get why it's socially OK for sports fans to dress up like wack-jobs at games (face and body paint etc) and camp out for tickets but when you do it as a Klingon or a Jedi at the movie theater or a convention your considered a weirdo in a cult.
How developed the individual worlds are depends on if you only count the Canon (the Movies and TV shows) or if you include the Expanded Universes: RPGs, video games, novels, comics etc. Star Wars has the more developed EU since everything is mapped out, follows a strict time-line and ties-in with one another while the Trek novels and comics are stand-alone and follow no time-line. The only time they cross-over with other novels is if they're written by the same author.
Oh yes I agree that Star Wars is driven by it's story-arch and action while traditional Trek is more character driven. And while both (at their best) are Space Opera's, Trek is more Sci-Fi-lite while Star Wars is firmly Space Fantasy. That is until Trek 2009 which is much more action and FX driven IMO. I hope the future entries develop the characters more. Only Bones really felt the same.
It was cool to see Sulu's sword-play from TOS worked in but as exciting as that scene was I don't understand why they had to fight hand-to-hand. Hand-Phasers don't work at high-altitudes? And at that high-altitude wouldn't they have needed breathing masks? (They took their helmets off!)
Guess they were too desperate for a good fighting scene to explain the errors. It was the only truely good fighting scene in the movie. I wonder if they'll make a series out of it. That would be interesting to say the least.
There are defiantly going to be sequels. That is why, as stupidly implausible as it was, Kirk was made Captain by the end of the film. I just hope they make Kirk... more Kirk like. They drop the Spock/Uhura love affair and Sulu gets more to do then just sword-fight. Also I hope the story has less plot-holes and we get a genuine Trek villian. Antonio Bandares as KHAN!
For all the things you wished for in your second to last post....I wouldn't hold your breath on what your asking for. Jar Jar Abrams and Company have their new formula for Trek. And since it made over 300 million, to date, do you really believe they are going to change anything? That's a rhetorical question, of course.
Your not "bursting my bubble". My expectation are low as they where for this film. (And you can read about my issues with the film on this and other boards.) I was just sharing what I thought would improve the series. Obviously I'm not writing the sequel so except for a point of discussion, I'm aware I'm farting in the wind.
They always want a love angle to appeal to young women who they see as reluctant when it come to sci-fi. Since Kirk has to be a PIMP, which they established with him bangin' the very hot Orion cadet (I just love green babes) Spock was the next logical choice in their eyes since he's the OTHER main character. Never mind that it undermines the whole concept of his character this early in the series. That's just a pesky detail only Trekkie/Trekker geeks like us care about. :-P~
I know it's really random, but for some reason it always bothered me that she had green skin but her eyes were blue. If she had enough pigments in her skin to make her green, I'd imagine she'd have as many pigments in her eyes. I'm know I'm just over thinking little details though.
Yea I'm with ya there. There are a lot of things about Spock's character I didn't like. Both about how Kurzman and Orci went about him and how Quinto played him. And I try not to say much cuz people stupidly and blindly praise him like he's a god just cuz they love him as Syler from Heroes, but news flash Heroes fans, HE'S NOT SYLAR IN THE TREK MOVIE. HE'S SPOCK! As a die hard Trek fan and purist, Spock should at least not be the one to have relationships like that. To me, that's TOO unreal.
I'm not to big on Sylar either. Don't get me wrong, he was a great villian in season 1. But, they made the same mistake every comic series does, by reviving him over and over again.
I will admit that the idea that emotion and intuition can be superior to logic at times but holy smokes, do we have to we have to kill ideal which is James T. Kirk to do it?
In my opinion, William Shatner is lucky he was not in this film because James T. Kirk was never there. The thing I think is great about all the films Shatner was in had great writing; the stories went "were no man has gone before" as well as great acting. I do like the story of this new star trek in that is at least original. I hate back in time stories because they have been used to many a time for simple plots with a lot of action and simple science fiction without real depth of idea.
By the end of the movie I wanted to kick Pine's Kirk in the face and say "I...Have had...Enough...Of YOU!" Not reward him with a medal and make him a Captain.
The 1st half of movie was good and exciting special effects were great. I didn't like the plot and story. It seems liked they had to write Leonard Nimoy into the story and the only way to do it was to put in time travel. Captian Kirk was intollerably devalued; Kirk was someonebody exceptional and not ordinary but in this film he is a drunken ploblem man who has to pull himself up from his bootstraps and can only get into the captains chair by spocks resignation unlike the real Kirk.
And yet for no apparent reason Kirk goes from Cadet to Captain of the flagship of Starfleet by the end of the movie. It's that type of writing that keeps this movie from being the brilliant, wonderful, genius, masterpiece that everyone but me seemed to have seen.
Exactly! And the fact that McCoy throws nearly every snide remark he ever made to Spock into one movie. It was like they were trying too hard to make it fit. Also they changed the Spock character we all knew and loved. Spock was who he was due to how he controlled his emotions. Lose that control. Lose our Spock. Hope that made sense.
I agree. That's why Spock's love affair with Uhura seemed so out of place. I could see them introducing it later in the series (although really it should be Nurse Chappel.) But when we're just first introducing Spock to a new audience it should be like the first season of TOS where Spock is trying VERY HARD to be full Vulcan and not display any emotion. Plus he was something of an arrogant dick.
um Dude, most Vulcans are arrogant dicks. It's all that "holier than thou" logic. Throughout all series, they have always come across that way initially, till they hang with humans long enough to adapt and mellow out.
You have a point. However having Spock like that for the entire movie keeps him from endearing himself to the audience the way Nimoy's Spock did in TOS and that is a big element of Star Trek's success. However in the next movie he'll probably be more like the Spock we know and love. I think Quinto can pull it off. I don't have the same faith with Pine as Kirk. He didn't impress me. Sure part of it is that Mr. Shatner is just a hard act to follow however he just never had Kirk's charm.
Well i gave Chris Pine the Benefit of a Doubt. Who knows, Maybe the Shat and Pine will hang out and Bill can give Chris some pointers/coaching. Remember, Nimoy and Quinto did alot of hanging out together on the set. Pine didnt have Kirks Charm?! i beg to differ. The Kobiashi Maru with Kirk being Smug eating the apple, i thought was very reminicient of Kirks Swagger. The only thing i didnt agree with so much is Pine getting his butt kicked left and right. Kirk was supposed to be a pimp in fights.
I hated the way they did the Kobyashi Maru scene. They should have had Kirk make the scenario winnable but difficult . It was just so obvious he reprogrammed it and he acted like an arrogant punk about it. That wasn't the classic Kirk swagger IMO.
Oh and what are the chances they would put Kirk down in the same square mile that Nero puts Old Spock down. It's a PLANET. They could have been put anywhere on that planet and two separate people get marooned on the exact same spot? Two people that just so happen to have a personal connection? Come on. There's suspension of disbelief but that's really hard to fathom. It's like the Star Wars prequels where stuff happens because it's suppose to, not because it organically emanates from the story.
Yet another nugget of evidence suggesting this whole film was contrived from beginning to end. Orci isn't a writer, he's a fanboy writing fan-fiction.
I can see Kirk being let down on planet near a Federation outpost. Young Spock didn't want to kill him. It's just Nero putting Spock in the exact same place as Kirk (and Scotty) is way too much. And if Scotty has now invented Trans-Warp interstellar transportation, why do we need Starships? And how did they know just where in Warp Space the Enterprise was? It's like hitting a bullet, mid-air blindfolded. I can suspend disbelief but only so far. Then there is Kirk going from Cadet to Captain..
If this all happens in an alternate universe, then it isn't our Spock to begin with. But I think that this is just the begining of his quest for self-control and dealing with those pesky humans. This movie is only the begining of a whole new Trek. I for one am ready to wait and see how it all develops. There will be new writers and new directors in the next movies. As one of my friends said, the alternative is no Trek at all.
Saying that the alternative is "no Trek at all" doesn't excuse ridiculous contrivances by the screenwriters. I can still enjoying the film for that reason much like I still enjoy the Star Wars prequels despite their faults. However I don't go around saying they're "brilliant".
I completely agree. But faced with the daunting task of reviving the Trek francise (or flogging a dead horse) the producers of this movie did come up with a good idea. Setting the whole thing in an alternate universe gives future writers the opportunity to re-explore the characters in new situations. Sure, there are many things I didn't like about this movie (Chris Pine) but the possibilities it opens up are "fascinating".
I don't get how Nero going back in time could have had an effect on the technology of the Federation being so different and more advanced. Even the U.S.S. Kelvin at the beginning looked like something out of "Wrath of Khan" not TOS. So really it was an alternative time line to begin with I would think.
i tried to find the comment of mine which you responded, but using ctrl+f i discovered you totally trolled this video with your shitty poopinions, anyway about the transformers... you are sucha fag dude... such a fag.
"seriously star trek is the best sci-fi movie since transformers 2007, and you fucking nerds hating need to seriously shut up about your little opinions already,"
There's your post dumbass. And to avoid yet another pointless argument with another immature idiot, yes I am a fag. Grow up. And tell us all when your graduating from middle school. I'll send a card.
@JMYodaTHX I couldnt agree more. If they wanted this type of writing/ storyline for the movie, where theres no plot and too much makes no sense at all then they should have gotten Quentin Tarentino to write it.. lol.....could you imagine how that one would have went :-)
@JMYodaTHX But of course! lol...and you know Samuel Jackson would have to have a part in QT's Trek and that guy that played "Q" in TNG and Voyager. I just loved his character. So funny.
@toriElena - YES, SLJ. must be in QT's TREK. In the tradition of a list we made in a Star Wars club I use to belong to , here is SLJ in QT's TREK.. , "Hand me my phaser, it's the one that says bad motherf***er on it!", "Varon-T Disruptor, when you absolutely, positively, have to kill every single motherf***er in the room; ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTE!", "I'm tired of these mother f***ing tribbles on this motherf***ing space-station!!" (the last one wasn't QT inspired but I had to add it....)
@JMYodaTHX red matter, borgified tribble ship with space trucker from hell, Vulcan being destroyed, overall retarded plot and dumbing down of tech for the mindless masses and the ugliest Enterprise I've ever seen. What they created was a dud timeline for morons, by morons.
i saw all original 6 movies on blu ray last week (im proud of purchasing that pack, movies look INCREDIBLY WELL), im really hoping that jj abrams and co. add bill shatner in XII, the man deserves that!; come on!, the time line CHANGED now, that means that kirk-prime MIGHT BE alive, so, there might be a way to bring him back! (if the script is good enough of course, i have faith)
That's what makes me sad - hyperactive twelve year olds calling people "fukin fags" over the internet and thinking they're cool, and then saying that star trek is awesome. nice one, roberto. it could've been a film for adults - but then you couldn't have written that could you?
LOL, if you followed Spock through the wormhole then the movie exist in the present on two different senses, one is that Old Spock is standing right in front of you. His past has not been erased.
There is no time paradox in an alternate universe.
And two, even if reincarnation was a possibility you could still only live one life at a time meaning Young Tiberius is living in the present his one and only life. Old Kirk did not disappear also because Old Spock is standing right in front of you.
Well I dont know if it was his fault or the director and they screwed his vision, but there were some serious problems with the story that the fancy light show combat couldn't even hide.
yea, i could tell your gay throughout the whole movie, even with the special effects... seriously star trek is the best sci-fi movie since transformers 2007, and you fucking nerds hating need to seriously shut up about your little opinions already, people that take movie flaws out their ass just cause they are fuckin geeks.... i pitty all of you
orci comes across as an arrogant douche in this interview.
maybe it's coz he's hubristic enough to say that his film's going to be a cultural landmark, maybe coz he's so dismissive of fans who don't buy into his particularly half-baked fan-fiction, or maybe coz he's idiotically wearing a cowboy hat, but I really dislike this guy.
whatever man. if you love this film, then good for you. i liked it too, but it disappointed me quite a bit. and you don't have call people names over the internet just to prove your point - it's just obnoxious.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
in the internet i can call people whatever the fuck i want, and also people you defend gave you a minus comment which i changed giving you a plus. fuck people who claim grea t movies suck.
Well I thought the new movie was very good, a 8/10.
And I am a VERY big fan of TOS. I mean like, I love that show. When I heard they were making a new movie, I was like very excited...I have always wanted them to remake Trek.
This movie is a great robot, and lets them tie into the old while still being able to restart the series. I don't know. Even as a true Trekkie, I still loved...truly gives the meaning "Where no man has gone before".
But I wish it had the magic the old one did. All-well!
Im unsubscribing to this channel because Im sick and tired of getting this STAR TREK abomination carp in my inbox Bill you suck, they didnt have you in the film and your prising them like sigh fuck it I want no part of it this is not STAR TREK!
I hate to say it, but I believe there must be a clause in all of their contracts that states this: "you are not to talk negative, or in any way denigrate, any Star trek movie or TV show."
Have you ever heard any former or current actor say, "It was okay" or "I thought it was horribly done.'' Hell, I've never heard anyone of them say, ''no comment." No you haven't and I don't think you ever will.
I only watched 30 seconds of this fucking waste of Vulcan planet destroying wankers WTF was he saying under all this fucking noise in the background and take that stupid fucking hat off you look like fucking Vulcan planet destroying GEEK!
I keep reading that this movie has "so many plot holes"...sigh, this is true, it does. But so does every movie ever. What I am noticing is that most of you WANT to hate this movie. If you look at any movie hard enough you will find plot holes. But really ask yourself, was this star trek really as bad as most of the crap out there today? I actually think that this movie is one of the better movies I've seen recently. Is it high art? of course not, but it isn't crap.
I don't want to hate it, nor do I. On the contrary, I really liked it. Don't get me wrong - acting was great, direction was great. The only failure was the mediocre writing which let those other elements down. I'm just sad because it had the potential to be something close to art and a commercial success at the same time. In so doing, it could have set a higher standard for other films.
That about sums it up. The movie was great when compared to other Hollywood films, but it was nothing compared to what a Star Trek film is meant to be.
It's got high ratings because it's lowest common denominator crap. Most people giving it 10/10 will have forgotten about it in a month, I only wish I could do the same.
Seemed to me like they were just making it up as they went along. I refuse to believe a grown man was responsible for writing the screenplay for this god-awful crap. Actually it's more unbelievable reading the positive reviews for what was basically 2 hours of Trek ruining, soul destroying, tedious nonsense. Please stop saying good things or they'll just keep making crap like this. Just watch the new Terminator for proof.
i must say thay the movie was "entertaining" but was not as good as i was hoping. the script and seemingly non-stop comedy relief was a big letdown and annoyance. i felt that this movie was almost afraid to take itself too seriously; which is a shame because it would have been a lot better if it had. the trimmings and decorations were stunning,of course,but content was lacking. just my opinion folks! fanboys need not reply ^_^
"Culturally behind the times" indeed Mr. Orci. Trek XI is indicative of a culture that denies intelligence, shuns the accumulation of information, shirks responsibility and who's only concept of expansion of their personality seems to be self-aggrandizement. If this what is hip and up to date in our culture, I'll remain in the past thank you.
This coming from a person that owns 21 Star Trek novels in paperback. So I love my Star Trek and original characters...and I thought the movie was great.
The nitpicking come from people who would rather have a very good story than just a bunch of special effects, fast camera shots, loud space battles, and girls in bras. That's all.
Saying a movie is fundamentally and fatally flawed is hardly "nitpicking" either.
The real stupidity is coming from those with the positive reviews that strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.
"If you ignore the red matter, it was a good movie with pretty effects and lots of action!"
What? Camera shaking "action"?
Am I the only one who was expecting Sulu to open up a can of Jet Li whoop ass, only to see him stand there, sword in one hand, dick in the other, as the camera shook around?
And how many idiots have described this as a "popcorn" movie? Like that's a good thing?
Compare that to 'Aliens'. People quoting Hudson, "Game over man! Game over!", (notice I remember his name), and sticking their hands on their faces going, "Arrrrghhh!". And when I saw Paul Reiser on 'Mad About You', a decade later, I was like, "Hey! You're that fucking son-of-a-bitch who tried to fuck everyone over for a goddamned percentage! Don't trust him Helen Hunt!"
Seeing this film didn't make me want to be, emulate, or feel anything for the characters, (apart from think were all a bunch of whiny little emo bitches). They didn't say or do anything interesting or memorable. They didn't have an adventure I'd like to be part of. They didn't even face any situations that made me think, during or after the film, (except to repeatedly think, why didn't they just do something that actually makes sense instead? And it's hard to beat Mission to Mars on that score).
Just a bunch of guys I didn't give a shit about doing stuff for and hour on a disconnected 2-dimensional screen.
I hope you're reading this and taking notes Orci you useless pinhead, (and lose the cowboy hat it makes you? look gay).
I'd say, "Meh" and be done with it - it would be nothing, neutral, meaningless to me - save the build up, the cost of my time, but most of all the fact that it shits on the Star Trek name and legacy and kills it's future.
It was a good story. And the actors captured the essence of the characters.
To be flippant and say the only reason why people like the movie cause those same people see shiny things and get distracted is the kind of slapdash pseudo-intellectual response that means nothing because of your vagueness on how awful the film was (IT HAD NO STORY) which is no different from those that simply say "UR A HATER". Your opinion is no different and carries no more weight.
If you read all of my posts on this page and that of others like me { especially IRONMANAustralia } you would know that our arguments with this new Trek movie are numerous.
And I never said anything about the actors that portrayed the Star Trek characters. I actually thought they all did a really good job. Especially the Spock and McCoy actors.
And finally I think that the "masses" liked this movie because of the SFX over plot. My opinion!
Well, unlike you, I don't get into the whys and whatfors of why people DIDN'T like the movie...because I simply don't care. I know I did like it. I just find it galling when people make such a gross simplistic argument that the only people that like a movie like this are mental midgets. Maybe you didn't say those exact words but the implication was made.
However, as you stated you are entitled to your opinion. So...Touchè.
Again, your putting words in my mouth. I never said "the only people that liked this movie are mental midgets." I said that "the majority of people that liked this movie was because mostly of it's fast paced action, fast camera shots, SPX, and breasts." These are the same people that are saying that this "is the best Trek movie ever." Where I just don't see it that way because the lack of a solid story and a contrived plot.
Your ad hominem attack aside...dunno why there was further discussion on this as I said that you were entitled to your opinion.
Unless the point was to make some overtly judgmental attack disguised as a furtherance of the conversation when really it's just an excuse to make some silly personal attack. Either way...suit yourself.
The movie was terrible........this coming from a Trekkie that owns 2,100 Star Trek books. Nitpicking is usually done for the problems with the ignorance of canon and continuity {which are abundant in the film}. However, the griping is done for the fact that this story is awful by Star Trek standards. Written by a man that claims to be a serious fan.
The continuity argument falls flat because this was not a continuation of anything, but a way in which to take these characters on a different arc.
The story itself was ABOUT the characters. Since to my mind the characters remained true to who and what they were/are...I can accept the new direction they were/are taking them in.
This movie is not a continuation of anything? Where did Spock prime and Nero come from? The future of an already established timeline. THAT is continuity by the definition used in sci fi.
You mistake, homage for continuity. This is a parallel universe as was said in the movies by the "future Spock" and was said by the writers and directs of the current series.
They are making and shaping their own destinies...the characters and the producers/writers/directors.
You misunderstand the meaning of continuity as set forth for sci fi. It is NOT a parallel universe. It is an alternate timeline. A parallel universe is like the mirror universe. The events that take place in the movie are from the existing universe we have come to know. Watch the TNG episode "Parallels" where the concept of the quantum signature is dicussed. That ends any debate that what we see is a parallel universe. Again, continuity.
You say alternate timeline, I say parallel universe, the meaning is the same (for me). Their experiences as characters are altered from the version of the Star Trek universe that came before it. Therefore to say it's a continuation is a logical fallacy because it is NOT continuing the story that came before...but creating a new one with the old personalities.
Read a novel called, Corrupting Dr. Nice. It explains parallel universe, dimension, time and that's what they're doing here.
Dude it's simple parallel universe and alternate timelines are not the same thing check out 'physics of the impossible' by Micho Kaku
an alternate timeline is how it exactly sounds for example someone altering history to create a new timeline.
a parallel universe is in a diffent universe which is parallel to our own but not of the same time and therefo cannot be an alternate timeline which only exists in your 'own' universe not the parallel one.
But for the sake of argument...and time and sanity...let's say alternate timeline.
Continuity arguments still fall flat. If it is an altered timeline, then it is not a continuation of anything because everything that came before it is altered because of Old Spock very presence in this new track of time alters it.
Once again, just because the characters are the same doesn't mean their experiences have to be.
First time I saw it I really enjoyed it. Second time was a bit more critical.
I think Orci just wrote a love-letter to TOS and what he would liked to have seen, while linking with TNG because... well, I have no idea. You'd think he could put in the hours to create a coherent, cogent storyline - especially as it was billed as accessible to non-fans. All that stuff about paralled universes etc. is apt to confuse a lot of people. I'm just pissed because it could've been so much better.
This film was so badly written it's not even funny. It was saved by excellent acting and talented direction, but c'mon!! this story was contrived from beginning to end (e.g. blackhole = time machine? just at the right moment to kill kirk's dad. what was nero doing for 25 years - just hanging out? i could go on, and on, and fucking on). it felt like badly written fan-fiction.
And the studio has signed the writers and actors on for 2 more sequels based on this alternate timeline, heck the characters all understood it and accepted it just as many fans old and new have :)
You know something. I like Mr. Shatner and I loved his portrayal of Captain Kirk, but I believe his time playing that character is over. Let it rest. He went out in Generations.
What's next...are we going to see him in a wheelchair like Capt Pike in "The Menagerie?" in the next movie?
You know, a lot of people here complain that the new movie negates classic Trek. And it does, and honestly that's probably for the best. I mean, classic Trek became kinda... huge. It was unwieldily and near impossible to work with and had a lot of -really- bad stuff it in. Just like what happened with the Batman movies, really and hardly anyone is complaining about those reboots.
Seriously, some of you people need to sit back, relax and just enjoy a film.
I see, so it's the audience's fault for not liking it?
They just need to sit back, relax, turn their brains off, and then they'll enjoy the film.
Thanks for the advice.
It's not the changes that anyone is objecting to so much. I"m not a purist, I don't go to conventions in uniform, TOS wasn't even my favourite series, and I liked what I saw of the remakes of those.
If you are going to make major changes you need to do it well.
But even if it wasn't a ST movie, it would still suck.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Except that MOST audiences DID like it. So much so that it's grossed twice its budget in a single month! The movie WAS done well. Critics agree and many FANS agree.
Yeah, I heard David Manning described it as, "The best movie ever!". How stupid are you?
You, like Hollywood, think that whether or not a movie makes money the first week is a reliable metric as to whether it has artistic merit.
That's like saying the hot dogs you get at Yankee Stadium must be the best gourmet food on the planet because they sell so many and people are willing to pay so much for them.
Like Phantom Menace made money? Crystal Skull? Alien^3? Starship Troopers 2? Dipshit.
They made millions of dollars at the expense of compromising the billions the franchise was making and/or could have made in the future.
Nice going.
Talk about killing the golden goose.
If I spent $100 million making a crap movie, I might put a few more million into shills and 'Emperor's New Clothes' marketing too. A few more arses on seats would help me recoup my pending loss, or even make money in the short-term.
Doesn't mean they can piss in my ear and tell me it's rainin'.
Wow, you're just the king of logical fallacies, aren't you? The movie IS successful. Many people are making repeat viewings. And artistic merit? Yes. I'm sure the last 5 Star Trek movies were just laden with that.
And do you think pretty explosions and lens flare is all it takes to create a phenomenon like the whole Trekkie thing?
I bet there were people who liked Lost in Space too, but there's a difference between a show about people in silver jump-suits "doing stuff" in 'space' for an hour, and Star Trek. I'm sure there are even self-proclaimed Star Trek "fans" who don't - and never did - know the difference.
All you've done is resort to personal attacks and making invalid comparisons. The hot dogs at Yankee Stadium are expensive because they are very much governed by the laws of supply and demand, alongside a convenience factor.
And you aren't even saying what makes a Star Trek movie. What Star Trek are we going by? TOS where Kirk and crew team up with alien construct Lincoln? TNG Q? DS9 super seriousness?
Star Trek is large and varied. Don't say it isn't a Trek movie because you want to whine.
It's simple. It's the same reason people on American Idol don't know they can't sing. It sounds the same to them, but to anyone without a tin-ear it's not.
If I wanted to remake Twilight Zone, I can't just write a story about guys "doing stuff" for an hour, then have a twist at the end. That does not capture what the show was about.
Excluding the occasional bad episode, there was a philosophical point to each story. If you miss that, then you miss the point, and it's not the Twilight Zone.
And spare me the "insult = Ad Hom" bullshit numbnuts. Look it up. You obviously don't know a logical fallacy from a hole in the ground.
The hot dog analogy is sound.
If only movie companies supply major movie entertainment, and Hollywood only turns out sausage-factory schlock, what are the customers going to consume when they want major movie entertainment?
Supply and demand.
I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like cheaper, better food at baseball games too.
Yes, there are NO other movies. Only Star Trek came out. Your analogy is ALSO flawed because you seem to think that people HAVE to go out to see a movie. When in reality, they don't. They could just as easily stay in. Your logical fallacy is that you make generalizations that make no sense.
Also, to say that each Star Trek episode had a philosophical point is laughable. You're just remembering the ham-fisted political statments it made sometmes
"Yes, there are NO other movies. Only Star Trek came out. Blah, blah ..."
Strawman.
Didn't you say something about logical fallacies before?
Oh, and I love this one:
"Your logical fallacy is that you make generalizations that make no sense."
Generalisation.
Thanks for proving my point about people with a tin-ear. I know you don't get it, and write it off as "ham-fisted political statments".That's just it.
And you REALLY need to look up exactly what Ad Hom is dude. Seriously.
"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim."
See: you not making actual claims and instead just using terms like "numbnuts"
You have to say, or strongly imply, that the argument is incorrect BECAUSE of a negative personal characteristic of your opponent, (usually without making a valid counterargument). Merely insulting them is not Ad Hom.
IT COMPLETELY BUCHERS STAR TREK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MegaTitanicboy 7 months ago
Roberto, I have read that you would like to read the Trek novels. I offer my complete library to you on one condition: afterwards, you and I will sit down so that I may inform you that it is Trekkie and NOT Trekker. If you knew anything about Trek, you should know that. The Great Bird himself said it was so. I blame you and no one else for the direction the franchise is taking. Save Star Trek from mediocrity. You may even wear that dopey hat.
Section31Captain 1 year ago 2
So.... "We named a character in the movie after him", would that be Mark Lenard being his uncle?
Coresk 1 year ago
he talks like he's been doing overtime on the meth rollercoaster. i dunno, i love trek. always have. the movie had some good stuff but they changed things that should have been left alone. Like spock and uhura? Not! Leonard Nimoy should have directed this movie, and all plot twists should have been better thought out . Shatners absence made it feel incomplete. He should have been in there somewhere. along with Nichelle .
toriElena 1 year ago 2
something wrong with his speech in a strokey kind of way
JetBeetle 2 years ago
Thankyou very much!! LIVE LONG AND PROSPER !!!
MrJohnnyrace 2 years ago
But, TRIBBLES!!!! Who wrote that episode. I love Star Trek old and new!!
MrJohnnyrace 2 years ago
MrJohnnyrace,
David Gerrold wrote the original episode for Star Trek's second season.
fmscribs 2 years ago
@MrJohnnyrace If you mean the Original series episode "The Trouble With Tribbles" it was Written by David Gerrold Then they did a follow-up on the Animated Series & crossover on an episode of DS9 "Trials and Tribblations" which used amazing FX to use TOS footage with the new DS9 footage. check out "/watch?v=l6KGOkzbf_c"
That said. The immense popularity of the TOS ep is what led Nimoy to make ST-IV a comedy. If you account for inflation it's till the most popular (Box Office)Trek film.
JMYodaTHX 1 year ago
@JMYodaTHX Thankyou very much !!!!! I love Star Trek !!!
MrJohnnyrace 1 year ago
@MrJohnnyrace Your welcome. :)
JMYodaTHX 1 year ago
Roberto, I'm surprised no-one has ever told you this, but you're a shitty writer who can only do movies for hyperactive twelve year-olds.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
True ... And yet while we sit here on YouTube he's making millions in Hollywood and probably sipping Cristal off of Megan Fox's ass crack.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Funny old world, innit? Thanks for that visual btw.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
Your welcome. Heh. :)
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
I liked the first half of the film but the drilling into the core of planets and to put in black holes which destroy planets is rediculous and impossible but so it the death stars destruction of planets so that idea is no longer a new one. I don't think this story has much good visionary science fiction in it. too usual run of the mill.
rockpianoguy 2 years ago
"and to put in black holes which destroy planets is rediculous and impossible"
Wait, did you just say something in Star Trek is "impossible?"
Hmm.
Zenutheduck 2 years ago
For example father kirk would be admiral or star fleet commander or star base commander and his son would be ship captian of his own starship, the enterprise sometime before captian Picard was Captian.
geoffreyah 2 years ago
If i wrote the film, I would write in Shatner and Spock as the fathers of their Sons; Kaptain Kirk Jr. ship captain and Spock Junior; As a result they would not have to have that phoney back in time story as a plot complication and no need to devalue Kirk and have him get the captains chair by spocks disqualification. How do you like them apples!
geoffreyah 2 years ago
Why even do father/son? Just have them as mentors to a younger crew? Do shows where they used for spotlights for advice for a correct situation or for an event (such and such alien meeting/conference etc.)
alistua 2 years ago
Meant "where they are used for spotlights....)
alistua 2 years ago
I would have had a scene where marooned Spock in his isolation spoke to a imaginary specter of his old best friend reminiscing about old times. An after-effect from multiple mind-melds allowing him to communicate with the remnant of Kirk still in the Nexus (where time has no meaning.)
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
If only the Star Wars prequels were that good. Am i right?
darthviger 2 years ago
Yeah. Normally I'd say star wars is special effects and star trek is logic developement, but this movie is more like Star Wars. I liked it better than Star Wars, and worse Than normal Star Trek
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
In this day of "we can do anything" CGI, I don't buy the deal that "Star Wars" is "only special effects". It's endured because it's modern mythology that resonates on a very primal level, the fight between Good and Evil and the Hero's Journey. If that wasn't true it would have fallen by the wayside like other fads. not still endure after 32 years. Not to mention there wouldn't be millions of people worldwide who list their religion as "Jedi" on census forms.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Maybe. It has a desent plot. But the Star Wars universe is not as developed as that of Star Trek. The even have their own offficial langauage, where as Twiliks merely saying the same phrases multiple times. Star Wars has a good plot, but it is more effects based then Star Trek.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
You must be going by the Twiliks in the KOTOR games. In that they repeat the same phrases to save because they didn't have Ben Burtt to translate everything. However in the movies Huttese - (the language all the aliens on Tattooine and the Outer Rim) is based on Peruvian Quechua and Ewokese is based on Tibetan, Mongolian Kalmuck and Native American Lakota. So they are rather developed (all the words are translated), it's just fully original like Klingon. BTW Vulcan was never fully developed.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
I meant to say it's just NOT fully developed as Klingon which has it's own dictionary and guys and gals who dress up like Klingons and recite Shakespeare "in the original Klingon". Not my thing but more power to whatever makes someone happy. However I never get why it's socially OK for sports fans to dress up like wack-jobs at games (face and body paint etc) and camp out for tickets but when you do it as a Klingon or a Jedi at the movie theater or a convention your considered a weirdo in a cult.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
How developed the individual worlds are depends on if you only count the Canon (the Movies and TV shows) or if you include the Expanded Universes: RPGs, video games, novels, comics etc. Star Wars has the more developed EU since everything is mapped out, follows a strict time-line and ties-in with one another while the Trek novels and comics are stand-alone and follow no time-line. The only time they cross-over with other novels is if they're written by the same author.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Oh yes I agree that Star Wars is driven by it's story-arch and action while traditional Trek is more character driven. And while both (at their best) are Space Opera's, Trek is more Sci-Fi-lite while Star Wars is firmly Space Fantasy. That is until Trek 2009 which is much more action and FX driven IMO. I hope the future entries develop the characters more. Only Bones really felt the same.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
I think Sulu was my favorite. I like samurai, and his sword is even cooler in the movie
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
It was cool to see Sulu's sword-play from TOS worked in but as exciting as that scene was I don't understand why they had to fight hand-to-hand. Hand-Phasers don't work at high-altitudes? And at that high-altitude wouldn't they have needed breathing masks? (They took their helmets off!)
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Guess they were too desperate for a good fighting scene to explain the errors. It was the only truely good fighting scene in the movie. I wonder if they'll make a series out of it. That would be interesting to say the least.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
There are defiantly going to be sequels. That is why, as stupidly implausible as it was, Kirk was made Captain by the end of the film. I just hope they make Kirk... more Kirk like. They drop the Spock/Uhura love affair and Sulu gets more to do then just sword-fight. Also I hope the story has less plot-holes and we get a genuine Trek villian. Antonio Bandares as KHAN!
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago 2
JMYodaTHX,
For all the things you wished for in your second to last post....I wouldn't hold your breath on what your asking for. Jar Jar Abrams and Company have their new formula for Trek. And since it made over 300 million, to date, do you really believe they are going to change anything? That's a rhetorical question, of course.
Qa'Pla
fmscribs 2 years ago
I'd say your most likely correct but we can hope can't we? lol
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
JMYodaTHX,
Of course you can hope, but that isn't going to change a bloody thing.
Sorry if I'm always bursting your bubbles, but I'm a realist at heart.
Peace and Long Life.
mfscribs 2 years ago
Your not "bursting my bubble". My expectation are low as they where for this film. (And you can read about my issues with the film on this and other boards.) I was just sharing what I thought would improve the series. Obviously I'm not writing the sequel so except for a point of discussion, I'm aware I'm farting in the wind.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Yeah. What wa sup with the whole Spock/Uhura thing. Any good writer tries to keep characters within their character
Matrixcompy 2 years ago 8
They always want a love angle to appeal to young women who they see as reluctant when it come to sci-fi. Since Kirk has to be a PIMP, which they established with him bangin' the very hot Orion cadet (I just love green babes) Spock was the next logical choice in their eyes since he's the OTHER main character. Never mind that it undermines the whole concept of his character this early in the series. That's just a pesky detail only Trekkie/Trekker geeks like us care about. :-P~
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
I know it's really random, but for some reason it always bothered me that she had green skin but her eyes were blue. If she had enough pigments in her skin to make her green, I'd imagine she'd have as many pigments in her eyes. I'm know I'm just over thinking little details though.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
She... Had eyes?? :)
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Yea I'm with ya there. There are a lot of things about Spock's character I didn't like. Both about how Kurzman and Orci went about him and how Quinto played him. And I try not to say much cuz people stupidly and blindly praise him like he's a god just cuz they love him as Syler from Heroes, but news flash Heroes fans, HE'S NOT SYLAR IN THE TREK MOVIE. HE'S SPOCK! As a die hard Trek fan and purist, Spock should at least not be the one to have relationships like that. To me, that's TOO unreal.
musicispower84 2 years ago 3
I'm not to big on Sylar either. Don't get me wrong, he was a great villian in season 1. But, they made the same mistake every comic series does, by reviving him over and over again.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
I will admit that the idea that emotion and intuition can be superior to logic at times but holy smokes, do we have to we have to kill ideal which is James T. Kirk to do it?
geoffreyah 2 years ago
In my opinion, William Shatner is lucky he was not in this film because James T. Kirk was never there. The thing I think is great about all the films Shatner was in had great writing; the stories went "were no man has gone before" as well as great acting. I do like the story of this new star trek in that is at least original. I hate back in time stories because they have been used to many a time for simple plots with a lot of action and simple science fiction without real depth of idea.
geoffreyah 2 years ago
By the end of the movie I wanted to kick Pine's Kirk in the face and say "I...Have had...Enough...Of YOU!" Not reward him with a medal and make him a Captain.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
The 1st half of movie was good and exciting special effects were great. I didn't like the plot and story. It seems liked they had to write Leonard Nimoy into the story and the only way to do it was to put in time travel. Captian Kirk was intollerably devalued; Kirk was someonebody exceptional and not ordinary but in this film he is a drunken ploblem man who has to pull himself up from his bootstraps and can only get into the captains chair by spocks resignation unlike the real Kirk.
geoffreyah 2 years ago
And yet for no apparent reason Kirk goes from Cadet to Captain of the flagship of Starfleet by the end of the movie. It's that type of writing that keeps this movie from being the brilliant, wonderful, genius, masterpiece that everyone but me seemed to have seen.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago 11
Exactly! And the fact that McCoy throws nearly every snide remark he ever made to Spock into one movie. It was like they were trying too hard to make it fit. Also they changed the Spock character we all knew and loved. Spock was who he was due to how he controlled his emotions. Lose that control. Lose our Spock. Hope that made sense.
alistua 2 years ago
I agree. That's why Spock's love affair with Uhura seemed so out of place. I could see them introducing it later in the series (although really it should be Nurse Chappel.) But when we're just first introducing Spock to a new audience it should be like the first season of TOS where Spock is trying VERY HARD to be full Vulcan and not display any emotion. Plus he was something of an arrogant dick.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
um Dude, most Vulcans are arrogant dicks. It's all that "holier than thou" logic. Throughout all series, they have always come across that way initially, till they hang with humans long enough to adapt and mellow out.
LordBicen 2 years ago
You have a point. However having Spock like that for the entire movie keeps him from endearing himself to the audience the way Nimoy's Spock did in TOS and that is a big element of Star Trek's success. However in the next movie he'll probably be more like the Spock we know and love. I think Quinto can pull it off. I don't have the same faith with Pine as Kirk. He didn't impress me. Sure part of it is that Mr. Shatner is just a hard act to follow however he just never had Kirk's charm.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Well i gave Chris Pine the Benefit of a Doubt. Who knows, Maybe the Shat and Pine will hang out and Bill can give Chris some pointers/coaching. Remember, Nimoy and Quinto did alot of hanging out together on the set. Pine didnt have Kirks Charm?! i beg to differ. The Kobiashi Maru with Kirk being Smug eating the apple, i thought was very reminicient of Kirks Swagger. The only thing i didnt agree with so much is Pine getting his butt kicked left and right. Kirk was supposed to be a pimp in fights.
LordBicen 2 years ago
And where the hell was the Kirk Signature Drop Kick?!?
LordBicen 2 years ago
Yes, I was thinking that as well. He didn't have a signature "Kirk moment" either, like "Khhaaannn!!!!" or "I... Have had...Enough... Of you!"
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
I was waiting for the torn shirt. *waggles eyebrows* :)
alistua 2 years ago
Oh thats a good one! touche' But we dudes dont look for that. ;-) unless they got a little sugar in the system.
LordBicen 2 years ago
I hated the way they did the Kobyashi Maru scene. They should have had Kirk make the scenario winnable but difficult . It was just so obvious he reprogrammed it and he acted like an arrogant punk about it. That wasn't the classic Kirk swagger IMO.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Oh and what are the chances they would put Kirk down in the same square mile that Nero puts Old Spock down. It's a PLANET. They could have been put anywhere on that planet and two separate people get marooned on the exact same spot? Two people that just so happen to have a personal connection? Come on. There's suspension of disbelief but that's really hard to fathom. It's like the Star Wars prequels where stuff happens because it's suppose to, not because it organically emanates from the story.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
Yet another nugget of evidence suggesting this whole film was contrived from beginning to end. Orci isn't a writer, he's a fanboy writing fan-fiction.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
JMYodaTHX,
And not only were the old Spock and young Kirk characters within a mile of one another. Both of them were within a few miles of Scotty.
Like the Church Lady used to say, "how convenient."
I'd say, "how contrived !"
fmscribs 2 years ago
I can see Kirk being let down on planet near a Federation outpost. Young Spock didn't want to kill him. It's just Nero putting Spock in the exact same place as Kirk (and Scotty) is way too much. And if Scotty has now invented Trans-Warp interstellar transportation, why do we need Starships? And how did they know just where in Warp Space the Enterprise was? It's like hitting a bullet, mid-air blindfolded. I can suspend disbelief but only so far. Then there is Kirk going from Cadet to Captain..
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
If this all happens in an alternate universe, then it isn't our Spock to begin with. But I think that this is just the begining of his quest for self-control and dealing with those pesky humans. This movie is only the begining of a whole new Trek. I for one am ready to wait and see how it all develops. There will be new writers and new directors in the next movies. As one of my friends said, the alternative is no Trek at all.
spacecowboy5000 2 years ago
Saying that the alternative is "no Trek at all" doesn't excuse ridiculous contrivances by the screenwriters. I can still enjoying the film for that reason much like I still enjoy the Star Wars prequels despite their faults. However I don't go around saying they're "brilliant".
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
I completely agree. But faced with the daunting task of reviving the Trek francise (or flogging a dead horse) the producers of this movie did come up with a good idea. Setting the whole thing in an alternate universe gives future writers the opportunity to re-explore the characters in new situations. Sure, there are many things I didn't like about this movie (Chris Pine) but the possibilities it opens up are "fascinating".
spacecowboy5000 2 years ago
I don't get how Nero going back in time could have had an effect on the technology of the Federation being so different and more advanced. Even the U.S.S. Kelvin at the beginning looked like something out of "Wrath of Khan" not TOS. So really it was an alternative time line to begin with I would think.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
@JMYodaTHX Thank God someone else noticed it. I thought I was the only one.
shinconvoy 11 months ago
"Saying that the alternative is "no Trek at all" doesn't excuse ridiculous contrivances by the screenwriters."
That's sort of a signature thing for Star Trek.
Zenutheduck 2 years ago
i tried to find the comment of mine which you responded, but using ctrl+f i discovered you totally trolled this video with your shitty poopinions, anyway about the transformers... you are sucha fag dude... such a fag.
peterscoop 2 years ago
"seriously star trek is the best sci-fi movie since transformers 2007, and you fucking nerds hating need to seriously shut up about your little opinions already,"
There's your post dumbass. And to avoid yet another pointless argument with another immature idiot, yes I am a fag. Grow up. And tell us all when your graduating from middle school. I'll send a card.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
@JMYodaTHX I couldnt agree more. If they wanted this type of writing/ storyline for the movie, where theres no plot and too much makes no sense at all then they should have gotten Quentin Tarentino to write it.. lol.....could you imagine how that one would have went :-)
toriElena 1 year ago
@toriElena I think QT's Trek would be awesome. He'd bring back Bill Shatner and make him the villain... Just because he can! :)
JMYodaTHX 1 year ago
@JMYodaTHX But of course! lol...and you know Samuel Jackson would have to have a part in QT's Trek and that guy that played "Q" in TNG and Voyager. I just loved his character. So funny.
toriElena 1 year ago
@toriElena - YES, SLJ. must be in QT's TREK. In the tradition of a list we made in a Star Wars club I use to belong to , here is SLJ in QT's TREK.. , "Hand me my phaser, it's the one that says bad motherf***er on it!", "Varon-T Disruptor, when you absolutely, positively, have to kill every single motherf***er in the room; ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTE!", "I'm tired of these mother f***ing tribbles on this motherf***ing space-station!!" (the last one wasn't QT inspired but I had to add it....)
JMYodaTHX 1 year ago
@JMYodaTHX red matter, borgified tribble ship with space trucker from hell, Vulcan being destroyed, overall retarded plot and dumbing down of tech for the mindless masses and the ugliest Enterprise I've ever seen. What they created was a dud timeline for morons, by morons.
fpsBeaTt 6 months ago
i saw all original 6 movies on blu ray last week (im proud of purchasing that pack, movies look INCREDIBLY WELL), im really hoping that jj abrams and co. add bill shatner in XII, the man deserves that!; come on!, the time line CHANGED now, that means that kirk-prime MIGHT BE alive, so, there might be a way to bring him back! (if the script is good enough of course, i have faith)
x827 2 years ago
XI was good but the next movie is gonna be really outstanding.
I don't go to trek conventions so it's kewl to see all the old trekkies in the theaters again!
kristell9 2 years ago
That's what makes me sad - hyperactive twelve year olds calling people "fukin fags" over the internet and thinking they're cool, and then saying that star trek is awesome. nice one, roberto. it could've been a film for adults - but then you couldn't have written that could you?
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
LOL, if you followed Spock through the wormhole then the movie exist in the present on two different senses, one is that Old Spock is standing right in front of you. His past has not been erased.
There is no time paradox in an alternate universe.
And two, even if reincarnation was a possibility you could still only live one life at a time meaning Young Tiberius is living in the present his one and only life. Old Kirk did not disappear also because Old Spock is standing right in front of you.
geniegogo 2 years ago
Well I dont know if it was his fault or the director and they screwed his vision, but there were some serious problems with the story that the fancy light show combat couldn't even hide.
vinnygunnz 2 years ago 4
yea, i could tell your gay throughout the whole movie, even with the special effects... seriously star trek is the best sci-fi movie since transformers 2007, and you fucking nerds hating need to seriously shut up about your little opinions already, people that take movie flaws out their ass just cause they are fuckin geeks.... i pitty all of you
peterscoop 2 years ago
If your idea of a good Sci-Fi movie is a steaming pile of Michael Bay's feces (Transformers), it's hard to take your opinion seriously.
JMYodaTHX 2 years ago
yes, he's very aware of the stupid fanboys. i'm sure he likes checkin out IMDB from time to time.
ronniepage 2 years ago
Roberto Orci makes the grade. Now which character is named after his uncle? That's trivia that will get me a lot of nerd points in about ten years.
smillar98 2 years ago
orci comes across as an arrogant douche in this interview.
maybe it's coz he's hubristic enough to say that his film's going to be a cultural landmark, maybe coz he's so dismissive of fans who don't buy into his particularly half-baked fan-fiction, or maybe coz he's idiotically wearing a cowboy hat, but I really dislike this guy.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
Yes! I have to agree!
Robert Orci is as big a hack and a douche bag as J.J. Abrams!
Good thing this film is a "stand alone" that can be ignored.
Actionguy1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
maybe cause your a fuckin fag
peterscoop 2 years ago
whatever man. if you love this film, then good for you. i liked it too, but it disappointed me quite a bit. and you don't have call people names over the internet just to prove your point - it's just obnoxious.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
in the internet i can call people whatever the fuck i want, and also people you defend gave you a minus comment which i changed giving you a plus. fuck people who claim grea t movies suck.
peterscoop 2 years ago
Well I thought the new movie was very good, a 8/10.
And I am a VERY big fan of TOS. I mean like, I love that show. When I heard they were making a new movie, I was like very excited...I have always wanted them to remake Trek.
This movie is a great robot, and lets them tie into the old while still being able to restart the series. I don't know. Even as a true Trekkie, I still loved...truly gives the meaning "Where no man has gone before".
But I wish it had the magic the old one did. All-well!
ScypaxPictures 2 years ago
Im unsubscribing to this channel because Im sick and tired of getting this STAR TREK abomination carp in my inbox Bill you suck, they didnt have you in the film and your prising them like sigh fuck it I want no part of it this is not STAR TREK!
IntermittentSprocket 2 years ago
I hate to say it, but I believe there must be a clause in all of their contracts that states this: "you are not to talk negative, or in any way denigrate, any Star trek movie or TV show."
Have you ever heard any former or current actor say, "It was okay" or "I thought it was horribly done.'' Hell, I've never heard anyone of them say, ''no comment." No you haven't and I don't think you ever will.
fmscribs 2 years ago
I only watched 30 seconds of this fucking waste of Vulcan planet destroying wankers WTF was he saying under all this fucking noise in the background and take that stupid fucking hat off you look like fucking Vulcan planet destroying GEEK!
IntermittentSprocket 2 years ago
So he is reasonable for blowing up Vulcan! Set phasers to KILL!!!!!
No wonder hes warring a cowboy hat! hes a fucking amateur writer who blow Vulcan up! Set phasers to KILL!
IntermittentSprocket 2 years ago 3
William Shatner attack!
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
I keep reading that this movie has "so many plot holes"...sigh, this is true, it does. But so does every movie ever. What I am noticing is that most of you WANT to hate this movie. If you look at any movie hard enough you will find plot holes. But really ask yourself, was this star trek really as bad as most of the crap out there today? I actually think that this movie is one of the better movies I've seen recently. Is it high art? of course not, but it isn't crap.
And Chaple was in it.
bububub2 2 years ago
I don't want to hate it, nor do I. On the contrary, I really liked it. Don't get me wrong - acting was great, direction was great. The only failure was the mediocre writing which let those other elements down. I'm just sad because it had the potential to be something close to art and a commercial success at the same time. In so doing, it could have set a higher standard for other films.
And where was Chapel btw? (sp?)
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
That about sums it up. The movie was great when compared to other Hollywood films, but it was nothing compared to what a Star Trek film is meant to be.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
jim, Chaple was referred to by McCoy in a line of dialog (during kirk's reaction to the vaccine), although she wasn't seen on screen.
bububub2 2 years ago
oh yeah, cheers. was she also the sexy nurse that Kirk leered at for a second, despite the fact that he was about to pass out?
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
Which scene is that?
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
the scene where McCoy takes him to sickbay after injecting him.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
Sorry. I can't find my original comment.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
"Purists"? Fuck you and your strawman bullshit!
I guess I'm a Star Wars "purist" for hating Jar-Jar Binks too, right?
And the reems of detailed and consistent 1-star comments on imdb say you're a bleating dipshit.
And now we're trying to "spoil the moment"?! What the motherfucking fuck?
How about fuck you, and the horse Orci rode in on?
(... well, he's wearing the cowboy hat, so I just assumed ... you know ...)
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago 3
Funny the ratings for the new Trek film say otherwise, guess too many purists trying to spoil the moment!
bannedbyMusloons 2 years ago
It's got high ratings because it's lowest common denominator crap. Most people giving it 10/10 will have forgotten about it in a month, I only wish I could do the same.
chonchonchon 2 years ago 6
chonchonchon,
I agree 100%, sir.
fmscribs 2 years ago
This film had a writer!!? What the hell!
Seemed to me like they were just making it up as they went along. I refuse to believe a grown man was responsible for writing the screenplay for this god-awful crap. Actually it's more unbelievable reading the positive reviews for what was basically 2 hours of Trek ruining, soul destroying, tedious nonsense. Please stop saying good things or they'll just keep making crap like this. Just watch the new Terminator for proof.
chonchonchon 2 years ago 8
Why is the new Terminator movie bad, too?
I was thinking of seeing that, but if it's worse than this, I won't.
fmscribs 2 years ago
From what I hear, it doesn't sound like it concludes the series any better than Terminator 3, but they want to make it a new trilogy.
Matrixcompy 2 years ago
I loved the new Startrek movie, but wanted one scene with Bill Shatner in it.
PlayT0E 2 years ago
Boob Orci sucks.
YOURGODISNOWHERE 2 years ago 2
If anyone should be disappointed by the timeline being altered its Kirk. Hes going to be missing out on alot of booty....
workingclassbum 2 years ago 4
Having William Shatner in that movie wouldn't make any fucking sense.
HoribiFuckis 2 years ago
The movie makes no sence So, who cares?!
BondFreek 2 years ago
This guy couldn't write a good film like Wrath of Khan to save his life.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago 6
i must say thay the movie was "entertaining" but was not as good as i was hoping. the script and seemingly non-stop comedy relief was a big letdown and annoyance. i felt that this movie was almost afraid to take itself too seriously; which is a shame because it would have been a lot better if it had. the trimmings and decorations were stunning,of course,but content was lacking. just my opinion folks! fanboys need not reply ^_^
neutonik 2 years ago 2
"Culturally behind the times" indeed Mr. Orci. Trek XI is indicative of a culture that denies intelligence, shuns the accumulation of information, shirks responsibility and who's only concept of expansion of their personality seems to be self-aggrandizement. If this what is hip and up to date in our culture, I'll remain in the past thank you.
OtterVomit 2 years ago 10
Well, hello, fuckface. :D
patsagainstrats 2 years ago
Comment removed
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
Looking forward to seing the movie.
Lachance8 2 years ago
I enjoyed the movie...
This coming from a person that owns 21 Star Trek novels in paperback. So I love my Star Trek and original characters...and I thought the movie was great.
Don't understand all the nitpicky griping.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
The nitpicking come from people who would rather have a very good story than just a bunch of special effects, fast camera shots, loud space battles, and girls in bras. That's all.
fmscribs 2 years ago 6
Saying a movie is fundamentally and fatally flawed is hardly "nitpicking" either.
The real stupidity is coming from those with the positive reviews that strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.
"If you ignore the red matter, it was a good movie with pretty effects and lots of action!"
What? Camera shaking "action"?
Am I the only one who was expecting Sulu to open up a can of Jet Li whoop ass, only to see him stand there, sword in one hand, dick in the other, as the camera shook around?
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago 4
And how many idiots have described this as a "popcorn" movie? Like that's a good thing?
Compare that to 'Aliens'. People quoting Hudson, "Game over man! Game over!", (notice I remember his name), and sticking their hands on their faces going, "Arrrrghhh!". And when I saw Paul Reiser on 'Mad About You', a decade later, I was like, "Hey! You're that fucking son-of-a-bitch who tried to fuck everyone over for a goddamned percentage! Don't trust him Helen Hunt!"
Now THAT'S a good movie.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago 5
Seeing this film didn't make me want to be, emulate, or feel anything for the characters, (apart from think were all a bunch of whiny little emo bitches). They didn't say or do anything interesting or memorable. They didn't have an adventure I'd like to be part of. They didn't even face any situations that made me think, during or after the film, (except to repeatedly think, why didn't they just do something that actually makes sense instead? And it's hard to beat Mission to Mars on that score).
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Just a bunch of guys I didn't give a shit about doing stuff for and hour on a disconnected 2-dimensional screen.
I hope you're reading this and taking notes Orci you useless pinhead, (and lose the cowboy hat it makes you? look gay).
I'd say, "Meh" and be done with it - it would be nothing, neutral, meaningless to me - save the build up, the cost of my time, but most of all the fact that it shits on the Star Trek name and legacy and kills it's future.
For that it gets a big thumbs down.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
It was a good story. And the actors captured the essence of the characters.
To be flippant and say the only reason why people like the movie cause those same people see shiny things and get distracted is the kind of slapdash pseudo-intellectual response that means nothing because of your vagueness on how awful the film was (IT HAD NO STORY) which is no different from those that simply say "UR A HATER". Your opinion is no different and carries no more weight.
Once again...I enjoyed the movie.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
IIIWiiForYou,
I'm very happy you enjoyed the movie.
If you read all of my posts on this page and that of others like me { especially IRONMANAustralia } you would know that our arguments with this new Trek movie are numerous.
And I never said anything about the actors that portrayed the Star Trek characters. I actually thought they all did a really good job. Especially the Spock and McCoy actors.
And finally I think that the "masses" liked this movie because of the SFX over plot. My opinion!
fmscribs 2 years ago 3
Well, unlike you, I don't get into the whys and whatfors of why people DIDN'T like the movie...because I simply don't care. I know I did like it. I just find it galling when people make such a gross simplistic argument that the only people that like a movie like this are mental midgets. Maybe you didn't say those exact words but the implication was made.
However, as you stated you are entitled to your opinion. So...Touchè.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
Again, your putting words in my mouth. I never said "the only people that liked this movie are mental midgets." I said that "the majority of people that liked this movie was because mostly of it's fast paced action, fast camera shots, SPX, and breasts." These are the same people that are saying that this "is the best Trek movie ever." Where I just don't see it that way because the lack of a solid story and a contrived plot.
And you sound like your very pretentious.
fmscribs 2 years ago
Your ad hominem attack aside...dunno why there was further discussion on this as I said that you were entitled to your opinion.
Unless the point was to make some overtly judgmental attack disguised as a furtherance of the conversation when really it's just an excuse to make some silly personal attack. Either way...suit yourself.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
I'm ''entitled to my opinion?" Thank you most pretentious one.
And your right...It is a personal attack upon you.
fmscribs 2 years ago
That was about as obvious a statement as saying that the sun is hot.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
The movie was terrible........this coming from a Trekkie that owns 2,100 Star Trek books. Nitpicking is usually done for the problems with the ignorance of canon and continuity {which are abundant in the film}. However, the griping is done for the fact that this story is awful by Star Trek standards. Written by a man that claims to be a serious fan.
Section31Captain 2 years ago 4
The continuity argument falls flat because this was not a continuation of anything, but a way in which to take these characters on a different arc.
The story itself was ABOUT the characters. Since to my mind the characters remained true to who and what they were/are...I can accept the new direction they were/are taking them in.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
This movie is not a continuation of anything? Where did Spock prime and Nero come from? The future of an already established timeline. THAT is continuity by the definition used in sci fi.
Section31Captain 2 years ago 2
You mistake, homage for continuity. This is a parallel universe as was said in the movies by the "future Spock" and was said by the writers and directs of the current series.
They are making and shaping their own destinies...the characters and the producers/writers/directors.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
You misunderstand the meaning of continuity as set forth for sci fi. It is NOT a parallel universe. It is an alternate timeline. A parallel universe is like the mirror universe. The events that take place in the movie are from the existing universe we have come to know. Watch the TNG episode "Parallels" where the concept of the quantum signature is dicussed. That ends any debate that what we see is a parallel universe. Again, continuity.
Section31Captain 2 years ago 2
You say alternate timeline, I say parallel universe, the meaning is the same (for me). Their experiences as characters are altered from the version of the Star Trek universe that came before it. Therefore to say it's a continuation is a logical fallacy because it is NOT continuing the story that came before...but creating a new one with the old personalities.
Read a novel called, Corrupting Dr. Nice. It explains parallel universe, dimension, time and that's what they're doing here.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
Dude it's simple parallel universe and alternate timelines are not the same thing check out 'physics of the impossible' by Micho Kaku
an alternate timeline is how it exactly sounds for example someone altering history to create a new timeline.
a parallel universe is in a diffent universe which is parallel to our own but not of the same time and therefo cannot be an alternate timeline which only exists in your 'own' universe not the parallel one.
heartsineurope 2 years ago 3
I still say, read Corrupting Dr. Nice.
It explains what they're doing here perfectly.
But for the sake of argument...and time and sanity...let's say alternate timeline.
Continuity arguments still fall flat. If it is an altered timeline, then it is not a continuation of anything because everything that came before it is altered because of Old Spock very presence in this new track of time alters it.
Once again, just because the characters are the same doesn't mean their experiences have to be.
IllWillForYou 2 years ago
First time I saw it I really enjoyed it. Second time was a bit more critical.
I think Orci just wrote a love-letter to TOS and what he would liked to have seen, while linking with TNG because... well, I have no idea. You'd think he could put in the hours to create a coherent, cogent storyline - especially as it was billed as accessible to non-fans. All that stuff about paralled universes etc. is apt to confuse a lot of people. I'm just pissed because it could've been so much better.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
well, alternate universe or time line it's still a poorly written movie with obvious plot holes throughout.
And thanks for the vulgar language, too.
fmscribs 2 years ago
This film was so badly written it's not even funny. It was saved by excellent acting and talented direction, but c'mon!! this story was contrived from beginning to end (e.g. blackhole = time machine? just at the right moment to kill kirk's dad. what was nero doing for 25 years - just hanging out? i could go on, and on, and fucking on). it felt like badly written fan-fiction.
jimbopumbapigsticks 2 years ago
This is the only Star Trek movie I've thought was worth paying to see.
Yeah it had dumb crap in. So does every movie Hollywood ever made. That's not saying much.
mranenome 2 years ago
why is there a belt buckle on your cowboy hat?
phdecora 2 years ago
why is there a "cowboy" hat?
sentient02970 2 years ago
If he likes it.. It's Star Trek... If he doesn't... Christmas is ruined!
TeleShaman 2 years ago
The movie lacks, to put it kindly.
monkeyracetheshill 2 years ago
seriously... its one of the best review highest rated movies of the year.
CreepNarrator 2 years ago
some of these comments made me LOL
And the studio has signed the writers and actors on for 2 more sequels based on this alternate timeline, heck the characters all understood it and accepted it just as many fans old and new have :)
soflabob 2 years ago
Maybe we'll see Bill again in "Star Trek XII!"!? Nobody knows...but I'm looking forward to it.. He's 78 now and I'm afraid he dies soon!!
trekmaster78 2 years ago
LOL Don't wish it on him.
psxwarrior 2 years ago
You know something. I like Mr. Shatner and I loved his portrayal of Captain Kirk, but I believe his time playing that character is over. Let it rest. He went out in Generations.
What's next...are we going to see him in a wheelchair like Capt Pike in "The Menagerie?" in the next movie?
fmscribs 2 years ago
No, he's gonna be evil Mirror-Kirk, and he's going to EAT CHRIS PINE ALIVE! MWAHAHAHAHA!!
sophomorictrash 2 years ago
You know, a lot of people here complain that the new movie negates classic Trek. And it does, and honestly that's probably for the best. I mean, classic Trek became kinda... huge. It was unwieldily and near impossible to work with and had a lot of -really- bad stuff it in. Just like what happened with the Batman movies, really and hardly anyone is complaining about those reboots.
Seriously, some of you people need to sit back, relax and just enjoy a film.
iwantmyisland 2 years ago
I see, so it's the audience's fault for not liking it?
They just need to sit back, relax, turn their brains off, and then they'll enjoy the film.
Thanks for the advice.
It's not the changes that anyone is objecting to so much. I"m not a purist, I don't go to conventions in uniform, TOS wasn't even my favourite series, and I liked what I saw of the remakes of those.
If you are going to make major changes you need to do it well.
But even if it wasn't a ST movie, it would still suck.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Except that MOST audiences DID like it. So much so that it's grossed twice its budget in a single month! The movie WAS done well. Critics agree and many FANS agree.
iwantmyisland 2 years ago
Yeah, I heard David Manning described it as, "The best movie ever!". How stupid are you?
You, like Hollywood, think that whether or not a movie makes money the first week is a reliable metric as to whether it has artistic merit.
That's like saying the hot dogs you get at Yankee Stadium must be the best gourmet food on the planet because they sell so many and people are willing to pay so much for them.
Like Phantom Menace made money? Crystal Skull? Alien^3? Starship Troopers 2? Dipshit.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
They made millions of dollars at the expense of compromising the billions the franchise was making and/or could have made in the future.
Nice going.
Talk about killing the golden goose.
If I spent $100 million making a crap movie, I might put a few more million into shills and 'Emperor's New Clothes' marketing too. A few more arses on seats would help me recoup my pending loss, or even make money in the short-term.
Doesn't mean they can piss in my ear and tell me it's rainin'.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
Wow, you're just the king of logical fallacies, aren't you? The movie IS successful. Many people are making repeat viewings. And artistic merit? Yes. I'm sure the last 5 Star Trek movies were just laden with that.
iwantmyisland 2 years ago
What logical fallacies are those exactly?
And do you think pretty explosions and lens flare is all it takes to create a phenomenon like the whole Trekkie thing?
I bet there were people who liked Lost in Space too, but there's a difference between a show about people in silver jump-suits "doing stuff" in 'space' for an hour, and Star Trek. I'm sure there are even self-proclaimed Star Trek "fans" who don't - and never did - know the difference.
It doesn't make this movie a Star Trek film.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
All you've done is resort to personal attacks and making invalid comparisons. The hot dogs at Yankee Stadium are expensive because they are very much governed by the laws of supply and demand, alongside a convenience factor.
And you aren't even saying what makes a Star Trek movie. What Star Trek are we going by? TOS where Kirk and crew team up with alien construct Lincoln? TNG Q? DS9 super seriousness?
Star Trek is large and varied. Don't say it isn't a Trek movie because you want to whine.
iwantmyisland 2 years ago
It's simple. It's the same reason people on American Idol don't know they can't sing. It sounds the same to them, but to anyone without a tin-ear it's not.
If I wanted to remake Twilight Zone, I can't just write a story about guys "doing stuff" for an hour, then have a twist at the end. That does not capture what the show was about.
Excluding the occasional bad episode, there was a philosophical point to each story. If you miss that, then you miss the point, and it's not the Twilight Zone.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
And spare me the "insult = Ad Hom" bullshit numbnuts. Look it up. You obviously don't know a logical fallacy from a hole in the ground.
The hot dog analogy is sound.
If only movie companies supply major movie entertainment, and Hollywood only turns out sausage-factory schlock, what are the customers going to consume when they want major movie entertainment?
Supply and demand.
I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like cheaper, better food at baseball games too.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
Yes, there are NO other movies. Only Star Trek came out. Your analogy is ALSO flawed because you seem to think that people HAVE to go out to see a movie. When in reality, they don't. They could just as easily stay in. Your logical fallacy is that you make generalizations that make no sense.
Also, to say that each Star Trek episode had a philosophical point is laughable. You're just remembering the ham-fisted political statments it made sometmes
And an ad hom attack just makes YOU look foolish.
iwantmyisland 2 years ago
"Yes, there are NO other movies. Only Star Trek came out. Blah, blah ..."
Strawman.
Didn't you say something about logical fallacies before?
Oh, and I love this one:
"Your logical fallacy is that you make generalizations that make no sense."
Generalisation.
Thanks for proving my point about people with a tin-ear. I know you don't get it, and write it off as "ham-fisted political statments".That's just it.
And you REALLY need to look up exactly what Ad Hom is dude. Seriously.
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago
"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim."
See: you not making actual claims and instead just using terms like "numbnuts"
iwantmyisland 2 years ago
Read on numbnuts:
"Person A makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person A
THEREFORE claim X is false"
You have to say, or strongly imply, that the argument is incorrect BECAUSE of a negative personal characteristic of your opponent, (usually without making a valid counterargument). Merely insulting them is not Ad Hom.
Here's an example for you:
2 + 2 = 4 you fucking idiotic, ugly fuckface.
2 + 2 = 5 you wonderful, awesome, great person.
Get it numbnuts?
IRONMANAustralia 2 years ago