Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
What were we talking about again? I seem to have forgotten already, and when I scroll up, I see nothing.
Invisible Flying Motorbikes, superpowered kids, what's there to remember anyway?
Original Star Wars actors to take center stage in new movie
Invisible Flying Motorbikes, superpowered kids, what's there to remember anyway?
sabrinathecat
Explorer
Time Traveling rouge agents traveling to Nazi Germany...
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him)
Hey, even Nazi wives needed makeup.
I like the idea of a send off for the older characters. Now that I am in my mid 50s I get tired of every movie and every show being dominated by twenty somethings. A perfect movie would be the older actors in positions of authority with the younger cast being the action heroes.
As for JJ Trek they are not Trek plain and simple they are generic scifi action popcorn flicks. Hobo's opinion aside the majority of Trek fans like the preachy message of Trek. I grew up om scifi that had a message. Looking back on the SF from the 60s and 70s many writers were using it to address the issues facing society of that day. They were morality plays and that was how Roddenberry envisioned Trek. Yes it was supposed to be exciting and full of adventure but it was supposed to have a message of hope that no we were not going to blow ourselves up. That there would be race and sexual equality all three of those were big topic issues back in the 60s.
Personally DS9 is my favorite Trek I think it has the best writing and the most character development. Voyager had so much potential but the writers could not find a voice for the show they kept chickening out with stories. For example thew Maquis and the Starfleet crew were not supposed to get along as soon as they did. Enterprise had issues but fourth season was really good under Manny Coto it was a shame they never gave it a chance.
JJ version missed so much. With the exception of Karl Urban and John Cho most of the characters were caricatures of the original characters. Simon Pegg was way over the top they did tone him down in the second movie. Chekov did not look like a 17 year old and the whole gag with his security code having two Vs in it was ham handed. Not to mention the horrible plot of instead of warning my planet we are going to hang around 25 years and destroy the federation and punish Spock because somehow it was the Federation's fault that a supernova a natural phenomena destroyed their home planet. I can go and on and on but I won't.
Not every SF story needs to be a morality tale but Trek should have it.
The BSG reboot was some excellent drama wrapped in a scifi coating. As a long time fan I did understand why so many old time fans were upset. We wanted a continuation not a reboot. The original show viewed now is cheesy it is very much a product of its time. But when it came on it blew me away it had theatrical special effects. It had some lame episodes but at the time they didn't seem that lame. Originally it was supposed to be a series of movies. But the ratings were so good the network made the decision to go to a series format which was a mistake. It was to expensive to do the special effects hence the reuse of effects from the pilot.
I like SG1 and Atlantis. I wanted to like SGU but for the most part I found it boring. I do know that they alienated a lot of Atlantis fan who felt that the show was pushed aside for SGU.
I like a lot of JJ shows I liked Fringe, Lost, Alias. When I saw his version of Trek I nicknamed them Trek Wars because I felt like I was watching a Trek movie that was made as a Star Wars film. I said at the time that he would make a good Star Wars film. I hope that it turns out that I was right.
As for JJ Trek they are not Trek plain and simple they are generic scifi action popcorn flicks. Hobo's opinion aside the majority of Trek fans like the preachy message of Trek. I grew up om scifi that had a message. Looking back on the SF from the 60s and 70s many writers were using it to address the issues facing society of that day. They were morality plays and that was how Roddenberry envisioned Trek. Yes it was supposed to be exciting and full of adventure but it was supposed to have a message of hope that no we were not going to blow ourselves up. That there would be race and sexual equality all three of those were big topic issues back in the 60s.
Personally DS9 is my favorite Trek I think it has the best writing and the most character development. Voyager had so much potential but the writers could not find a voice for the show they kept chickening out with stories. For example thew Maquis and the Starfleet crew were not supposed to get along as soon as they did. Enterprise had issues but fourth season was really good under Manny Coto it was a shame they never gave it a chance.
JJ version missed so much. With the exception of Karl Urban and John Cho most of the characters were caricatures of the original characters. Simon Pegg was way over the top they did tone him down in the second movie. Chekov did not look like a 17 year old and the whole gag with his security code having two Vs in it was ham handed. Not to mention the horrible plot of instead of warning my planet we are going to hang around 25 years and destroy the federation and punish Spock because somehow it was the Federation's fault that a supernova a natural phenomena destroyed their home planet. I can go and on and on but I won't.
Not every SF story needs to be a morality tale but Trek should have it.
The BSG reboot was some excellent drama wrapped in a scifi coating. As a long time fan I did understand why so many old time fans were upset. We wanted a continuation not a reboot. The original show viewed now is cheesy it is very much a product of its time. But when it came on it blew me away it had theatrical special effects. It had some lame episodes but at the time they didn't seem that lame. Originally it was supposed to be a series of movies. But the ratings were so good the network made the decision to go to a series format which was a mistake. It was to expensive to do the special effects hence the reuse of effects from the pilot.
I like SG1 and Atlantis. I wanted to like SGU but for the most part I found it boring. I do know that they alienated a lot of Atlantis fan who felt that the show was pushed aside for SGU.
I like a lot of JJ shows I liked Fringe, Lost, Alias. When I saw his version of Trek I nicknamed them Trek Wars because I felt like I was watching a Trek movie that was made as a Star Wars film. I said at the time that he would make a good Star Wars film. I hope that it turns out that I was right.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
Abrahms and Trek Spoilers ahead:
I am not so sure about the first movie, but the second had a message - Kirk was basically willing to give up Starfleet principles for a moment, and then did not, instead of assassinating someone without a trial, he brought him back the Federation and trying to figure out what was really going on. Th
We've seen Kirk doing something similar before, too, in the original timeline - Startrek VI. He hated the Klingons for killing his son, and wanted them to die - but he did in the end fight for the peace treaty and stop the conspiracy to halt the peace treaty.
And in both cases we had members of Starfleet that have sworn to protect the ideals of the Federation betraying them, believing that was the only way to protect it.
So there are two "moral lessons" here, that both seem relevant in our time:
-We cannot allow ourselves to be blinded by a thirst for revenge and let us forget our principles.
-We must be careful that we do not to sacrifice the ideals our society is build on in our attempts to protect that very society.
Interestingly, the second lesson particularly is also something touched in DS9, my favorite show of all Trek series, and the favorite episode of many DS9 fans - "In Pale Moonlight", in which the conclusion is different. Sisko was able to accept having lied and aided murdering someone against any Starfleet ideals, if it meant saving the Alpha Quadrant and the Federation. (But make no mistake, DS9 also made the opposite point, particularly in regards to Section 31).
Last edited:
The second Trek movie had the whole Kirk grows as a person lesson. And the message does resonate today with what is going on with drone strikes. Which is all I am going to say about that because of the no political talk rule. They also reigned in Simon Pegg performance of Scotty which made him much more believable. Though I still don't know why he needs his Star Wars side kick.
I am a huge Benedict Cumberbatch fan and he was terrific as a bad guy but he was not Khan he lacked the fire and passion of Khan.
Plus the sheer stupidity of Starfleet officers they clearly show the one character giving his daughter the cure then he goes into his office and instead of warning anyone he blows up the building. Bad writing. If he was under any other threat they should have showed it. Also the entire lets park the ship underwater, why they have shuttles they could have easily accomplished the mission from space and still have had Kirk tale the ship in to rescue Spock. Yes I know it was to cause conflict between Spock and Kirk and for Kirk to lose command of the ship but it was heavy handed.
One of my biggest complaints is just how heavy handed so much of the writing is in both movies.
The_Silversword
Explorer
The problem I had with the new Trek is they just changed up too much stuff, I mean I realize its a reboot and stuff is going to change, but comeon, killing off Spock's mom? Destroying Vulcan? Was any of that really necessary? I think I would have liked it more if they made it more like a prequel instead of working so hard to make sure you understood that this isnt the same Trek, I mean yeah, we get that. Another thing I hate about reboots in general is that theyre basically saying, hey remember all those great episodes/movies/comics/whatever that you loved as a kid? Well forget it cause now none of that ever happened. Ive had some people argue with me about the new Trek about how the original Timeline exists, that the new movies are just an alternate timeline or whatever, but anyone whos watched Trek should know, thats not how time travel works in the Trek Multiverse. When Mcoy went back and saved whats her name from dying did it just create an alternate timeline? No, it changed the actual time line that they was in so they had to go back and make sure she died. So, someone needs to go back in time and stop Spock from going back in time, cause its messed the whole timeline up. And Spocks the one who was always going on about how they cant do anything that might change the natural course of history, but now hes all cool about it? Like screw it, if the timeline is all screwed up anyways I may as well go all out and hang out with my younger self and give him key details to help him out in any sort of crisis that they may find themselves in, Oh crap its a giant space amoeba, better call old spock to see how we handle this one cause we're incapable of thinking for ourselves.
And another thing, Spock had the means and know how to travel back to the future and make sure everything was ok, so why didnt he? Any other time hed be like ok we need to go back and fix this, but for whatever reason in the new movie hes like my moms dead, vulcan is destroyed, guess Ill just hang out here with my younger self and its all good. What the hell Spock? So now when younger Spock and the rest of the crew find that time portal and Mccoy goes back in time and saves whats her name from dying and totally changes everything, young spock will just be like ah well Timelines change all the time, nothing we can do about it.
And another thing, Spock had the means and know how to travel back to the future and make sure everything was ok, so why didnt he? Any other time hed be like ok we need to go back and fix this, but for whatever reason in the new movie hes like my moms dead, vulcan is destroyed, guess Ill just hang out here with my younger self and its all good. What the hell Spock? So now when younger Spock and the rest of the crew find that time portal and Mccoy goes back in time and saves whats her name from dying and totally changes everything, young spock will just be like ah well Timelines change all the time, nothing we can do about it.
MarkB
Legend
The timeline change in the movie is a little trickier to unwind than the average such event. Spock can't simply go to the future and re-do things because that future doesn't exist in the present timeline. He'd need to find some way of preventing Nero's ship from being flung back into the past in the first place, and that's not easy to accomplish given that it was flung from an alternate, inaccessible timeline.
The_Silversword
Explorer
I dunno, this is Spock were talking about here, he woulda found a way, for instance he coulda slingshoted around a star or something, entered time warp, come out at a point just before the Romulan star went supernova and stopped it from happening like he attempted to do in the first place, that way Nero woulda never even went on his quest for revenge in the first place. At the very least he coulda gone to the future and gotten a cooler ship. But for Spock to basically give up and just to decide to hang out with his younger self just seemed out of character to me, and highly illogical.
Zombie_Babies
First Post
Whoa, bro. His ship was plenty cool.
Similar Threads
