Star Trek Mashup Mayhem – The Prime Timeline Strikes Back | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek Mashup Mayhem – The Prime Timeline Strikes Back August 3, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Fan Productions,Humor,Star Trek (2009 film),Trek Franchise , trackback

Sometimes it seems YouTube was invented just for Star Trek fans to publish creative mash-ups. The new Star Trek movie has inspired a few, with a number of them focusing on how the crews of the ‘prime timeline’ might react to the events of the new movie. Below we have a selection of some of the best (including one just published), and all from YouTubers presented before here at TrekMovie.

 

Star Trek XI Picard Vs Abrams Edition
by DMPhoenix

Star Trek XI’s Repercussions
by GeneralGrin

TOS & TNG crews react to new Star Trek movie
by GeneralGrin

Kirk & Crew vs JJ Abrams (2 parts)
by Sopmylo

 

Thanks to Ulrich, Dan and anyone else who send in links.

Comments

1. Adam - August 3, 2009

WOOOO

2. Duncan MacLeod - August 3, 2009

2003?

3. Sunfell - August 3, 2009

LMAO! We have enough digital Trek to roll entirely new episodes.

…that scares me…

4. Jeyl - August 3, 2009

“You never have to see Star Trek to love this movie. We’re not making Star Trek for Star Trek fans. We’re making Star Trek for movie goers.”

Well, I was always under the assumption that when Star Trek first started out it wasn’t made for fans because it didn’t even have a FREAKING FAN BASE! They didn’t have any classical Trek moments that they spoofed, threw in as montages or duplicate lines to poke fans with. How can you say that you’re not making Star Trek for fans when Star Trek itself wasn’t even made for fans?

These elements that fans love about the show weren’t put there to drive people away, they were there to serve the story. You take those out and reduce Star Trek to a “leave your brain at the door” summer action flick than you aren’t aiming Trek in the right direction. Nothing about this new movie got me to care for the story, the characters or even it’s own universe. We’re now stuck with a new trek series that, like Star Wars (which JJ is a much bigger fan of), is about a bunch of arrogant a**holes who don’t develop into better characters nor have any true sense of right or wrong.

So what happens after these movie goers become fans of this new movie? You going to try and say you’re not going to make another movie for fans and reduce Star Trek to a low-brainer action flick that will appeal only to teen audiences? Frell, I’d love to get my hands on JJ’s series and tell everyone that I’m not going to make a movie/series for fans and everything that made the show unique I’m just going to replace it with cliches and tropes.

JJ, you are talent, but you’re going in the wrong direction.

5. Mel - August 3, 2009

I never realized how many times the word “timeline” was mentioned in Star Trek!

6. Ian Watson - August 3, 2009

#2: 2003 was probably picked because it was close enough to the actual time, and it was easiest to edit Data’s “2063” line to remove the 60.

7. ger - August 3, 2009

Those last two videos are so true, about the quality of the movie, and about Nimoy’s intentions. Perfect.

8. John from Cincinnati - August 3, 2009

Everyone says the Prime timeline had to happen in order for the new movie to take place, therefore preserving canon even though they are resetting the universe.

Star Trek is the history of the future. Except now it’s gutted and raped. The Mirror universe is proof that multiple parallel universes exist. Kirk, you’re not in Iowa anymore.

Anyone who have ever watched original Star Trek and knows the character of Spock knows he will not accept his defeat lightly. He blames himself for failing to save Romulus, therefore he set into the motion the events that led to his mother’s death and the destruction of billions of Vucan that should have never died. For Prime Spock once to say “there always are possibilite” and came back from death himself, it would be quite illogical and wrong for the writers to not have Spock slinghost around the sun or use the Guardian of Forever to return the universe to order.

9. John from Cincinnati - August 3, 2009

Stop patronizing people by telling them the prime timeline had to happen in order for Star Trek 09 to happen, therefore canon was preserved. Some people are just too intelligent for that.

10. dalek - August 3, 2009

#8 Spock wouldn’t have left Kirk in that nexus, nor would he have accepted Kirk’s death. They were never able to tell a story about Spock going back for Kirk because hell, Berman and Sherry Lansing never wanted Shatner to return, and they definitely didn’t want to do anything TOS related.

Finally Nimoy is involved in Trek again, and they leave Kirk dead. They could have brough Shatner back and had his resurrection explained in one of the comics (like they did for Data). Or simply put Kirk’s resurrection as part of the Nimoy flashback — which was a few minutes of exposition anyway.

I have to wonder what the film would have been like with Kirk and Spock from the future back in time meeting their younger selves. Nimoy’s Spock took such a passive approach to his arrival in the past. Let the new kids sort it. Kirk wasn’t even a qualified officer. Why would a cadet have to take control of a ship?

Kirk Prime would have beamed on the ship himself and took a more active role working together with his younger self to save the day. It would have made more sense the older Kirk would come up with a strategy that the younger cadet could learn from. It would also have been fun to see Older and Younger Kirk in conflict with each other. The script would only have required a minor rewrite to accomplish this.

11. Andy Patterson - August 3, 2009

Sopmylo,

Love it brother! Someone who thinks of the new film the way I do. LOVE IT! Beautiful….just Brilliant!

12. Paul B. - August 3, 2009

9. John from Cincinnati — I guess I’m not too intelligent, then. I accept the “prime timeline had to happen in order for Star Trek 09 to happen” idea. It was a perfect compromise between “complete reboot” and “slavishly detailed sequel.”

In post #8 you even say “The Mirror universe is proof that multiple parallel universes exist.” Well, the new timeline is a parallel universe–or an “alternate reality” or “alternate timeline.” Since you say those have been proven to exist in Trek, what’s the problem with the new timeline?

It’s fine for you to disagree about the new film leaving the prime canon intact, but please don’t insult those of us who accept it. I’m pretty intelligent, thank you very much, so please stop being patronizing about YOUR decision not to accept it.

13. AJ - August 3, 2009

John:

Spock Prime did not lose his mother. He outlived both Amanda and Sarek in his timeline.

For him to ‘blame himself’ for the destruction of Romulus is not logical, as he did all that was within his power, except to get there on time due to an unforeseen random element.

Now, as “there are always possibilities,” he knows he can save Romulus in this timeline, and achieve a degree of balance in “the universe,” and do his best to resettle the remaining Vulcans to a new colony.

I can’t think of a better way to live out one’s remaining days usefully.

14. Trekker9 - August 3, 2009

First one was the best by far LOL….

15. Paul B. - August 3, 2009

The first mashup is pretty cute–especially since it manages to restore the timeline AND wipe out the TNG crew all at once!

But the rest of them…just boring! Too long, too unfunny. Seeing the TOS crew react to the Abrams crew by passing out and raising eyebrows was amusing–once. But it just went on and on like a bad SNL skit (redundant, I know).

16. larraby - August 3, 2009

In the third video, I love Spock’s reaction after seeing his younger self!

17. Jim Nightshade - August 3, 2009

HA HA these videos are great…Just wait til everyone has a copy of the whole new movie to use, I think we will really see some funny videos then! I cant wait ! AHAHAH,….

Also looks like the spoof videos are attracting those more critical of the new movie again too..hmmmmmmmmmm

I hope Roberto gets to see these spoof videos they are great

18. Eli - August 3, 2009

#8, that’s an interesting premise. Could the original Spock become the villain in the next film?

The early onset of Bendaii syndrome, or whatever illness his father died of makes Spock give into his emotional side and he decides to do whatever is necessary to restore the original time line and prevent the destruction of Vulcan, even if it means destroying his doppelganger and his ship and crew mates in the process…

19. TrekkieJan - August 3, 2009

#7 – I don’t know where you get your information about Mr. Nimoy’s intentions. Certainly not from anything he’s said publicly. The fact is, he’s rich and didn’t need to do this for the money.

20. Chess - August 3, 2009

Awesome! Spock and the flower scene had me rolling!

21. DGill - August 3, 2009

Hmm, the Enterprise E blowing up JJ Abrams. Sounds like a dream come true, except Orci and Kurtzman should have been in the building as well. :P

22. james vincent - August 3, 2009

21. DGill

I want too.

23. james vincent - August 3, 2009

They say they preserve canon, but then go around and say “only my time travel theories exist in this new universe”.

WTF!!!

Spock would never sacrifice his family and homeworld to save Romulas. I wouldn0t. It’s not logical. Kill some to save some. NO NO NO

24. ProperTrekkieUK - August 3, 2009

Get over it!

New film was great…I have no difficulty in ignoring the alternate time line jazz and accepting the events of ST09 as the history of Kirk and Co

While equally I have no difficulty in accepting that it is entirely fictional and therefore I can happily watch new Kirk stories without them somehow compramising TOS, as they are two connected but seperate fictional entities

25. Brad - August 3, 2009

@John from Cincinnati

Yea, I would agree that it would be great to see some kind of story arc, possibly spanning several movies, where Spock tries to restore the original timeline, or at least as much of it as possible, somehow restoring saving Vulcan AND Romulus and which brings about peace between the two races. I don’t want to see Spock ever turn into some kind of villian or anti-hero though. I think Spock should always remain true to his logic and integrity.

It might even be fun to bring the Q back, though I wouldn’t count on de Lancie playing the part. I think he’s getting too old too look like himself as a Q, since they’re basically ageless.

26. NoCrybaby - August 3, 2009

“All I’m getting is a whine…”

There has to be a way to use that line in a context about the backlash. It’s too perfect to pass up.

27. Nathan - August 3, 2009

The whole “now time travel works this way!” thing still bugs me, since it ignores and retcons almost all previous canon, as exemplified by the second video above. Sure, it was a good movie–but I’m still definitely not in love with the “new” incarnation of Trek. Hopefully, the sequel will be able to change my mind.

I’m not holding my breath, though.

28. Robert - August 3, 2009

Prime timeline FTW!

29. cagmar - August 3, 2009

#18, #8 – Yeaaah. That’s a great idea!

Imagine, Spock Prime sees that these new characters are making a decision he fundamentally and wholeheartedly believes to be in error. We can get two strong sides on an uncertain issue — like with Wesley’s stunt at the academy. And we can see Spock face himself. It would challenge audiences in so many ways. I love it!

30. Charlie - August 3, 2009

ONG… THAT was the funniest stuff I’ve seen in years!

TOP SHELF… ALL OF IT!!!

31. Charlie - August 3, 2009

That should say OMG

32. Xai - August 3, 2009

“9. John from Cincinnati – August 3, 2009
Stop patronizing people by telling them the prime timeline had to happen in order for Star Trek 09 to happen, therefore canon was preserved. Some people are just too intelligent for that.”

Thanks for the insult.
If you actually look at it, the prime timeline DOES have to happen for this movie to occur. Don’t let your well-known dislike for Trek (’09) color your decision.
Your insults certainly diminish any point you were trying to make.

33. Rocket Scientist - August 3, 2009

Let’s face it: this incarnation of Trek has a different energy and emphasis than the one we grew up on. I enjoyed it tremendously but upon reflection am not 100% onboard with all the creative decisions that were made,

Yet the bottom line is that I did enjoy it. A lot. If this be the state of 21st century Trek, then by all means, “let’s see what’s out there!”

34. desertrat - August 3, 2009

Great movie..too bad the nerds can’t understand it!

35. Bill Peters - August 3, 2009

I am a fan of the the 5 Series and 10 movies that came before and I love this new feel to trek! it is great to get new men behind the helm of Star Trek…Some of the hardcore fans will have to deal with the fact that what people want to see also drives this film as well as what we the fans like! Or would you rather Star Trek Stayed in the state it was with Berman? I for one am glad Star Trek Lives Again!

36. Finding Nimoy - August 3, 2009

Jeyl, John from Cincinnati, etc…

Then why, oh why, do you spend time on the site that has championed Trek 2009 from the get go?

We know how you feel, because you come here day after day to bash a film that was released in MAY.

You guys would have a little more credibility if you just stuck with “I just didn’t like it”.

Using words like “raped” to describe a film, which, in reality makes-up a drop in the bucket of all Trek ever produced, is irrational at best. I’d love to have a psychologist do a write-up on why a certain faction of Trekkies are so threatened by this movie.

Are you guys going to threadcrap here until the Blu-ray is released? How about the sequel? I’m begging you not to. Having you imply that those of us who enjoyed Trek ’09 are unintelligent is getting old. I’m sure that you can rally everyone else who feels as you do and get them to be anti-trolls at miserabletrekkies.com

Check godaddy.com, miserabletrekkies.com is still available. You can even buy infalliblechurchofstartrek.com and have it redirect to miserabletrekkies.com for that one-two punch of wallowing in styrofoam, rubber masks and stock footage sorrow.

37. Techtrekker - August 3, 2009

I loved these mashups. Very funny, especially the first one!

And I do agree with everyone who is a little ticked off for JJ rewriting Trek history. They have that right and it is justified.

Would it have killed anyone to put continuity in the design elements of the movie? For example: When Nero came back in time and encountered the Kelvin, the desginers could have made the Kelvin more of a mix between the designs of ST:Enterprise & ST:TOS. I would have bought the whole story much better if they had done that. Another example: When they showed Spock in the future, couldn’t the designers/writers put in a little more ST:TNG designs in the ships, consoles, make-up of the Romulans, etc. etc. to show the “prime” universe a little more?

But no, they didn’t. They rebooted it completely and tried to gloss over 40 years of creative work from production designers, writers, directors, and actors with a single “flash in the pants” story. (Or should I say “glare in the lens)

Now don’t get me wrong. I LIKED the new movie. I thought it was a unique and interesting way to breath new life into Star Trek. And that needed to be done. And I will be eternally grateful to all those involved that Star Trek will continue to be produced hopefully for another 40 years.

But not to acknowledge that Prime Universe beyond bringing back one single actor, a couple of hidden jokes and a few familiar sound bytes… it just didn’t sit too well with me and with a lot of other Trekkies and Trekkers out there who grew up loving those characters and stories. It is akin to seeing the home you grew up in being torn down and replaced by a brand new Jiffy Mart.

It seems to me that the movie would have had broader appeal if the production designers had simply incorporated a few designs of the previous work done. That’s all. And it wouldn’t have cost much to do it. (A good example of how this worked VERY well is the remastered works of ST:TOS)

Finally, let me just suggest this perspective: this new movie has brought in more money than any other Star Trek movie before it. However, count up ALL the money from ALL the movies and ALL the TV series and ALL the sales linked to those works before ST09… well the new movie looks a little smaller.

Peace!

38. Andy Patterson - August 3, 2009

34

Nerd or not…I understood it. I just didn’t like it.

39. BaronByng - August 3, 2009

One generation had Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes and will always declare his interpretation “the best ever”. Another will always revere the twitchy, mercurial performance by Jeremy Brett in the 80s Granada TV series (a proto-Doctor Who if ever there was). Many say that Hugh Laurie is like a parallel Holmes on House (get it? House…Homes…Holmes? his sidekick’s Wilson, just one step away from Watson?) Now we’ve got (yes) Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law stepping into the roles of Holmes and Watson, in a Guy Ritchie actioner that’ll be full of speed-ramps and fast cuts and anachronisms.

You know why? Because they’re making a movie for a popcorn-cineplex audience 100 years removed from the original books. It doesn’t prevent anyone from reading and enjoying the original Arthur Conan Doyles, nor from enjoying the previous cinematic and television adaptations (of which there are no less than 114 different results on IMDB), which range from serious to spoof, camp midnight movie to Spielberg.

Trek is not nearly as old as Holmes but would you argue that Holmes fans are any less passionate about their stories and characters?

If Trek had started out as pulp sci-fi novels, we might have been more forgiving because even the original TV show would have been an ‘adaptation’. Then again the Trek pulp novel industry generates dozens of different backstories and parallel realities and no one kicks up a fuss about it.

Since Trek started out in the visual medium, we became attached to the very first incarnation of this “literature”, taking its conventions and quirks to be the Holy Word. Well, like print literature, over time, people do remakes, reinventions, alternate takes and anthologies of untold tales. Just like Holmes, or the Knights of the Round Table, or every decade’s need to do a comic book superhero Crisis on Infinite Topographic Oceans of Secret Sauce-Wars that reboots the multiverse.

If we manage not to completely screw up THIS planet, then I’m certain Star Trek will eventually filter into the public domain and you’ll start to see more people doing interesting takes on the original source material.

I’m hoping the sequel delves deeper into the characters. I want to see more McCoy, specifically, and learn more about Uhura. But this movie was about rivals becoming friends in the middle of a crisis. The Kirk-Spock friendship is at the core of Trek and wow – what a way to tell that story. I don’t feel betrayed at all; I feel like for once we got a real insight into the characters (with a lot of eye candy, which doesn’t hurt.)

To me, these kinds of mashups are the petulant whining of children. Or worse: the nitpicking negative nabobbbery of Questies.

40. NoCrybaby - August 3, 2009

One of the main complaints I have with the movie about appealing to continuity-hungry fans is that they may have hit us too hard over the head with “this is an alternate continuity and we’re free to play. you still have your old continuity but this is our sandbox now.” The scene when Spock figured it out hammered it in so much I was expecting them to make a moral out of it. But no, it’s just an attempt to appease the unappeasable.

That said, I’m mixed on design and continuity. I’m fond of the redesign of the uniforms (for a brief time I thought the black collars of the original design WERE undershirts), and I would have liked to see more updates on the classic designs. A bridge that looks like if you designed the TOS one with modern sensibilities would be great, and the person who puts a TOS-style notepad with an obvious video screen would have my undying loyalty.

I liked parts, I didn’t like parts, but aaalll of these videos are nothing more than crying about reasonable or justified things.

41. devon - August 4, 2009

I for one will be happy to see the next film or multiple films, and will eat my popcorn and rejoice that, yes indeed, Star Trek Lives!!! Before J.J.’s interpretation of the Original Series ( albeit, alternate or divergent timeline) it was beginning to look as if Trek was really dead & gone, but alas , like the phoenix it has arisen from its ashes… and appears to be more exciting than ever! See you at the theatre, if you dare to boldly go…

42. S. John Ross - August 4, 2009

#4 “You take those out and reduce Star Trek to a “leave your brain at the door” summer action flick […]”

I think that’s an understatement. There’s more nuance, plot, character and social insight in a typical 1990s Jean Claude Van Damme movie than there was in this particular take on Star Trek.

43. S. John Ross - August 4, 2009

#21: “Hmm, the Enterprise E blowing up JJ Abrams. Sounds like a dream come true, except Orci and Kurtzman should have been in the building as well. :P”

Hey, easy now. Roberto Orci has been extremely generous with his time here. In honor of that, he should have been far from the building, on a remote island without any contact with the outside world, but provided with enough food and water to live out his life peacefully … only to be recalled if someone needs another remake of Parts: The Clonus Horror.

I mean, really. Show some respect.

44. William Kirk - August 4, 2009

It´s fun. Pitty, that the first ended with destruction of the E, but the beginning was great :-D The new film is officialy said to be alternate timeline, with no influence on the 40-year Trek history, so because of theis I have no problem with the new movie. I didn´t like it, but no bad feelings, like other movies I didn´t like.

45. NCC-73515 - August 4, 2009

They should be on the DVD!

46. ger - August 4, 2009

“I mean, really. Show some respect.”

LOL, yeah. Hypocrisy I say. Just because Orci is here feeding the nerds with some bits here and there, people need to show “respect”. But it’s okay to trashtalk other guys from the business who haven’t shown up here, I guess?

If Orci writes trash, he has to live with the fact that there are people who call his work trash. And yes, his script for Trek 2009 is pure garbage. Unfortunately, garbage makes a shitload of money these days, which is why he won’t have to rethink the way he writes scripts.

47. james vincent - August 4, 2009

36. Finding Nimoy – August 3, 2009

Stop your bi*chin.

This forum is for opinions of all kinds.
He can say WTF he wants.
U dont like it, dont read it.

And I generally liked the film, just not that now we only have 1 type of time travel because Orci says so. That is SO un-trek. If he wants star trek turned unside down, then maybe he should write a non star trek sci fi movie. I would have enjoyed that more. I dont want summer action film, I want summer star trek film.

48. Randy H. - August 4, 2009

#46: Mission: Write a Star Trek script that is consistent with past canon, allows for a new stylistic take on the series, permits a new “future history” to be created, is true to the TOS characters, is respectful of science (while pushing the envelope), and contains an interesting story that makes people think long after the movie is done.

Say what you will, Orci & Co. accomplished the mission.

49. ger - August 4, 2009

I could do that immediately, but I’m sure Paramount will send it back unread. Or won’t send it back because it landed in the trash can unread.

50. SHCone - August 4, 2009

#10– I’m not sure you really understand what an undertaking writing anything is. What you propose is in essence a completely different film in tone and structure. Several new elements have to be constructed to make Old Kirk work.

Do you really think there wouldn’t be a monstrous amount of bandwidth expended across the internets due to fans bitching that Kirk’s resurrection was handled in a *flashback*?

Please.

Kirk’s death isn’t the new creative team’s fault. Other people made those poor decisions, and its frankly not the responsibility of a new team to try and fix those mistakes.

Simple rewrite. Geez….

51. Major Shat Lover - August 4, 2009

The Nimoy diss in the last video just goes too far imo. Shame on them.

52. Exocomp 4 - August 4, 2009

Hehe…they should have included lens flares right after the spores (erm…dollar signs) took effect on Spock, right along with the letterboxing and Paramount watermark at the bottom right. :-P

53. DGill - August 4, 2009

#43

“I mean, really. Show some respect.”

I’ve watched the movie about three times trying to like it a little bit more, and the only things I was able to stomach were the special effects (good job ILM) and the score. Everything else…has already been discussed and written about elsewhere. My last comment was a joke of course, but I don’t really have a lot of respect for Orci and Kurtzman because I did not like their writing at all and that’s my own personal opinion. However, I did enjoy the writing for “Mission: Impossible III”. That was a fantastic film with a great script. They deserve credit for that.

54. colonyearth - August 4, 2009

Um…this only served to bring the nay-sayers back to the surface….jeesh! Enough already. You didn’t like it…we get that. But you’re only 2% of the base. Like the right, so loud but still so few. Ick. If you didn’t like it…fine, don’t watch it again and don’t buy the DVD or BD. I most certainly will. And I’ve been a Trek fan since I was old enough to now what TV is. Hell, I was born the year it premiered! And I LOVED JJ’s new Trek! Can’t wait to see what the Court pulls out for the next one!

55. SChaos1701 - August 4, 2009

36

Right on.

46

Shut up.

56. ger - August 4, 2009

If people who didn’t like the movie were dumb enough to pay for it three times… well, that explains the box office results.

@ 55. No, Sir.

57. james vincent - August 4, 2009

Not all people who paid to see the film 3 times are dumb.

They just prefer ACTION OVER STORY.

Mr. Orci, I prefer STORY over ACTION. Just so you know.

Kirk once said, “I hate time travel.”

Well with your time travel Restrictions, I’d have to agree with him. LOL

58. Rocket Scientist - August 4, 2009

I watched a well-told Trek story that emphasized action and had no more plot holes in it than most other Treks, televised or cinematic. If handed the reins, would I have made the changes these guys did? Probably not. Some of them were more drastic than I would have wanted to see. But what they did worked well enough was very entertaining.

It’s ridiculous to see how RIGHTEOUS some people get over a movie. It’s not real life and it never was.

59. DGill - August 4, 2009

#56

I paid only once, sir. I’m not that stupid.

60. Xav79 - August 4, 2009

The only “respect” i have for Orci/Kurtzman is for their constant crappy writing:

The Island, Legend of Zorro, MI3, Transformers 1 & 2, Trek 09…

They all look like they’ve been written by two 10-year-old kids.

61. Orbitalic - August 4, 2009

Hmmm, I didn’t know we had so many writers visit the site.

62. S. John Ross - August 4, 2009

#46: “LOL, yeah. Hypocrisy I say.”

It’s called irony; I’m sure there’s a Wikipedia page for it if you’re having trouble.

#57: “Not all people who paid to see the film 3 times are dumb.”

You’re a saint.

#58: “I watched a well-told Trek story that emphasized action and had no more plot holes in it than most other Treks, televised or cinematic.”

You definitely saw a different cut than they showed in the local cinemas. I hope they put yours out on DVD; it sounds cool.

#60: “They all look like they’ve been written by two 10-year-old kids.”

They may well have been. If the 10-year-old kids ever come forward and sue, we’ll know. But I really think they just cut-and-paste from other screenplays, not from pre-teen fanfic.

63. Rocket Scientist - August 4, 2009

My perception of Trek is that it’s big enough to accomodate different styles of storytelling, be it drama, thriller, comedy, etc. This time around it chose to be big on action, no doubt because it needs to reflect a modern sensibility.

I found it to have a decent story too. Unlike some, I didn’t feel I had to “forgive” or “overlook” any more plot oversights than most other incarnations of Trek. They all have their flaws, but I find something to like in just about every one.

Sure, I’ve got criticisms of the movie, but didn’t find it to be the dumbed down stinker some make it out to be. Then again, I didn’t walk into the theater ready to bash it.

64. S. John Ross - August 5, 2009

#63: “This time around it chose to be big on action, no doubt because it needs to reflect a modern sensibility. ”

I think that’s unfair to modern sensibilities, though. Lots of kickass, balls-to-the-wall, rock-out-with-your-cock-out and blow-up-the-baddies action movies are simultaneously clever, populated with likeable, heroic characters, and actually have plot, nuance, and meaning. Star Trek could have, too; there’s no “modern sensibility” served by making it dumber than dirt.

Virtually every big-budget action movie I can think of from the past 15 years, with the possible exception of the other Orci & Kurtzman films, were smarter and more substantial than Trek09 was … the Pirates of the Caribbean films, the Spider-Man films, Iron Man, Harry Potter, whatever … all of them have more cooking under the lid than this thing did.

I liked Star Trek09. I think it’s a fun, funny, action-packed thrillride. But man, it’s dumber than DIRT. And I don’t mean the smarter dirt; I mean the dirt that has to ride the special bus to school.

65. captain_neill - August 5, 2009

64

agreed

I liked then new Trek movie but it was very dumbed down from the Trek I love

66. wickedjacob - August 5, 2009

Let me see if I’ve been following this discussion correctly:

“its stupid”
“no, you’re stupid”
“no you are”
“no way”
“yes huh”
“shut up”

did I miss anything?

67. The REAL Trek Fan - August 5, 2009

“9. John from Cincinnati – August 3, 2009
Stop patronizing people by telling them the prime timeline had to happen in order for Star Trek 09 to happen, therefore canon was preserved. Some people are just too intelligent for that.”

Actually, JJ Abrams himself said that. So did Robert Orci. So I guess the folks who actually made the movie must not have been too intelligent either. Well, that’s debatable. After all, they did, for all intents and purposes, completely erase the last 43 years of Star Trek from existence. And they did it with just a two hour movie. Impressive. Most impressive.

68. Son of a Maui Portagee - August 5, 2009

#67.

Not really, Harlan Ellison’s script(s) completely wiped out about 100 years of Federation time line from existence in far fewer words and screen time. And by some estimates, it took the same number of writers to get the story to screen.

And while much is made of the concept of “repairing” timelines, once The Guardian threw McCoy into the past, neither reconstituted timelines (his or Kirk’s) were exactly as it passed the first time around. And thus, the “original” timeline was “destroyed”. It’s just that Kirk’s had fewer disparities and thus, was close enough, at least, by whatever rule governs The Guardian.

69. james vincent - August 5, 2009

67. The REAL Trek Fan

After all, they did, for all intents and purposes, completely erase the last 43 years of Star Trek from existence.

Thats what I’ve been trying to say. And I don’t like it.

The movie was an OK action flick, but I still can’t except that 43 years of Trek just went down the drain. That is a NO NO in my book.

70. S. John Ross - August 5, 2009

#68: “It’s just that Kirk’s had fewer disparities”

For example, the Enterprise crew were still admirable men and women with a basic sense of right and wrong and the will to incorporate it into their choices.

71. S. John Ross - August 5, 2009

#67: “Actually, JJ Abrams himself said that. So did Robert Orci. So I guess the folks who actually made the movie must not have been too intelligent either.”

Lying to the public doesn’t reflect on someone’s intelligence, only their honesty.

72. Captain Rickover - August 6, 2009

# 68
They’ve said that, yes. But the visible evidence speaks against that theory.

The Prime Universe don’t count anymore and if you take a look on the USS Kelvin and it’s design, it never had for this movie.

Every statement from JJ or Orci just were for tranquilizing the hardcore-fans. You could also say, they’ve lied. But that would be a little bit too harsh; wouldn’t it?

73. S. John Ross - August 6, 2009

#72: “Every statement from JJ or Orci just were for tranquilizing the hardcore-fans.”

Only the very gullible ones.

“You could also say, they’ve lied.”

Yes. Because they’ve lied.

“But that would be a little bit too harsh; wouldn’t it?”

No, although admittedly the word “lied” isn’t permitted (by law) within 500 yards of anyone who works in Hollywood. Within that culture, lying has a long list of euphemistic titles to help people sleep at night with the fact that they can hardly get through the day without lying to someone, and helping them convince themselves that it’s the same for everyone, perhaps. You could say “spun” rather than lied, or “promoted.” Other Hollywood words for lying include “speaking,” “answering” and “signing this contract which includes a clause that the script is original and not ripped off from another movie.”

74. ger - August 6, 2009

Bob Orci has been talking out of his ass for a long time now, in my honest opinion.

75. xai - August 6, 2009

One more time…. No universes were harmed in the making of this film. No one was replaced.

John Ross, what’s with the “lie” stuff? The movie caught you by surprise even though they said “This isn’t your father’s Star Trek”?
Slightly different universes does imply that things will be different. And if that is a little confusing… well, I guess it was not as “dumbed down” as a few here said.
But your opinion matters to you, as mine matters to me. Glad I won’t be sitting next to you at the sequel.

76. cagmar - August 7, 2009

ok, woah!

This thread’s gone crazy. There’s a crow here that’s decided to get rude and use cruel stereotypes and spew hate? For frak’s sake people, I’d agree with the next person that this movie was too dumb for Trek and that the writers need to address that, and that they should be open to fair criticism– but Frak!

People! Show a little class. We have crossed a line (#74, 73, 60). Pull back on the reins. Come about. Whatever you want to call it, STOP.

77. james vincent - August 7, 2009

75. xai
Slightly different universes does imply that things will be different.

I agree with you, different universe will be DIFFERENT.

But the laws of physics in Trek apply to all universes.

They cant just say their time travel theory is the only use-able one.

78. Matt Oracle - August 15, 2009

Ahh… It’s interesting to see so many viewpoints on what the assumed typical viewer would just class as another film (I for one not being in that category, loving Star Trek since first seeing TNG at age three). One thing is very clear (at least to me), Gene Roddenberry would have been pleased to see such a vocal social discourse of all our unique and wonderful opinions examining our perceptions and preconceptions of the world, even if it be a critical evaluation of a representation of a fictional world depicted in the Motion Picture format.

Personally I much enjoyed the film, though as many have seem to have stated here, there and everywhere, I too was left with a bit of a bitter aftertaste upon the movie’s conclusion, pondering on what I perceived as the more ‘sour’ aspects of the feature film (- – -no malice intended).

Credit should be given to appropriate parties when appropriate (and hopefully it isn’t too much of a stretch to think that most people could find at least one element they were happy with). Criticisms should be evaluated and negative comments analyzed for validity (conversely, I think that it isn’t too much of a stretch to think that most people could find at least one element they were not happy with). As life forms living in a linear temporal event (ok, conjectural if one thinks outside the square), the best we can do is reflect on our past to hopefully make improvements and work towards a better future. If that means that in this sense that the latest Star Trek film acts as a jumping off point for even more grandiose motion picture (or television) events than the mores the merrier (it is logical to work towards an optimistic of the future…)

After all, one must remember that even the Great Bird of the Galaxy himself was tasked to run Star Trek through a second pilot seeking improvements and refining. Had the journey ended so soon, sighting rejection after only the first outing, then I could only ponder how poorer the world would be… and how too none of us would be here eliciting such a visceral debate on such a beloved and emotive subject.

All the best…

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.