Star Trek XI Alternate Ending: The Prime Timeline is Restored

This is for all you fan boys out there who for some odd reason hate J.J. Trek. IMO it's the greatist Star Trek movie ever made. But for those of you who didn't, here's an alternate ending that you will enjoy.

• Category

  Comedy

[tkmcal]

So nit-picking about arguable scientific inaccuracies (that all sci-fi movies have), differing opinions about the design of the ship, and differences with the prequel comic (that no one cares about) is your response? How desperate are you? That list was pathetic and things that only someone with a preconceived opinion would care about. You just can't bare that Star Trek was remade and isn't exactly scene for scene what the original series/movies are. Your life is pitiful.

[GJEGreatonelives]

no im not. they had an excellent sequel planed after nemiesis. a sequel that every trekkie purist wanted for a long time and that was to bring all five captians together for one final film. and yes nemisis bombed. we know that. but it was still a good film. and besides jj abrams cares nothing about science fiction. thats what gene roddenberry wanted. if he was alive i promise you jj would have never been allowed to touch the star trek saga

[promontorium]

The words story and narrative have deep meanings within our species. Stories are one of the most important aspects of humanity, defining our entire history, inspiring almost every action, maintaining societies, maintaining technological, sociological, and philosophical advancements. Stories and narrative have a purpose, without them we'd be buck naked at each other with sticks today. A story has components, it is not random or arbitrary, a story with any meaning helps guide the human mind.

[Juse Beats]

Google 15 Blunders That Ruined J.J Abrams’ Star Trek And Destroyed The Franchise. Its all there. And.... Suck it!!

[tkmcal]

Ya, because DS9 and TNG movies were almost in pre-production. How'd Star Trek: Nemesis do critically and financially? It bombed. You're delusional

[tkmcal]

The alternative timeline was to have creative freedom you twink. You want a shot for shot remake of all the original movies?

[tkmcal]

One of the few sensible comments on here. You'd get the feeling from these twinks that Abrams burned every copy of the original series and then defecated on the ashes.

[tkmcal]

Who cares? What would it matter if this changed time line or not?

[tkmcal]

The core of it here is that you (and other obsessive Trek fans) have this narrow idea from the original series & movies of what they think it should and anybody that messes with it is committing a mortal sin (and therefore can't possibly make a great movie). Get over it. You're as bad as the comic book nerds that critique super hero movies because they aren't done exactly like the comic books panel for panel. PS-I'm pretty sure Ebert & AO Scott weren't/aren't just obsessed with action.

[tkmcal]

So "trek fans" are the only ones that can determine if a movie about Star Trek is actually a good movie? That's delusional. I'm not a fan of Iron Man so I can't tell if a movie about Iron Man has any emotional depth, character development, etc...? Changed what stuff? Because Abrams did his interpretation of the characters? Because the characters aren't exactly as you think they should be? You're just throwing a fit because it isn't exactly what you want it to be.