Sound Off: J.J. Abrams' Star Trek - What Did You Think?

May 8, 2009

Star Trek

Now that you've seen it, what did you think? Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise. Who would've thought that J.J. Abrams could reboot one of the greatest science fiction franchises ever and pump it full of new life and energy? But did it live up to all of your expectations? Were you a Trekkie who hated it or a non-Trekkie who loved it (or vice versa)? Did J.J. Abrams pull off one of the most exciting origin stories we've seen in a long time, or was it a dull, boring, geeky ensemble mess not worth all the hype? Sound off below, leave your thoughts, and let us know what you thought of Star Trek!

To fuel the fire, as I already said in my review, I absolutely loved Star Trek. First of all, it looks gorgeous, thanks to all of the work Abrams and his creative team put into this. Secondly, I had a blast watching it, it's a great experience full of so much excitement. I've seen it twice now and it only gets better the more I watch it. There are some minor issues with the script, but overall it's a great story that I enjoyed watching it play out. And third, the acting was unbelievably top notch - Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto kick some ass, and so do Karl Urban, Bruce Greenwood, and of course, Leonard Nimoy. All around a solid summer blockbuster.

What did you think of J.J. Abrams' Star Trek? Epic sci-fi at its finest or glorious trash?

Find more posts: Discuss, Hype, Sound Off



um...winona ryder (spocks mom) and tyler perry wtf? and didnt we see spock visit his mom in "the voyage home" on Vulcan to continue his training? the love affair between spock and uhura blah...why did they we dumbed down spock? we loved him because of his logic...they made him look like an ass.too much was going on in this film to really pay attention to anything. the first fight sequence on the drill was all over the place. i thought everyone was well casted as always in jj joints. the romulans looked too modern and the villain strangely resembled the villain in Nemesis (picards clone). and what ever happened to the bug attached to captain pikes brain stem?but all in all i feel the same way i have always felt about star trek movies,,,their just entertaining...but not much more. it's almost like the tv shows should have never made a transition to was never meant to be. j.n.l

J.N.L on May 8, 2009


oh and what's with the little rock headed dwarf that follows scotty....why?

J.N.L on May 8, 2009


Personally, I really enjoyed it! I'm not really a Trekkie, but I have always been a fan of the series. This movie seemed like a breath of fresh air. And I know that all the Trekkie's out there are complaining that spock was too emotional... But personally I feel more attached to this alternate spock than the previous one. At least it was better than Star Wars: Episode 1!!! I also think that a youthful Kirk , with a bad boy side, is much better than the cheesy Shatner... Just ask yourself: When you were a kid, watching Star Trek, was it Kirk or Spock that you remember?

Ramone on May 8, 2009


Very Disappointing. The plot made no sense, it seemed like they just put in the story because you can't make a movie out of one big action sequence. It was basically a series of over caffeinated CG explosions strung together. It was like watching a little kid play with toy spaceships only with better effects. Thanks for making a Star Trek in the mold of a bad action movie Abrams, you can go jump in a lake.

Knightsofni on May 8, 2009


This movie blew me away. From the first fight sequence to the last, it had me on the edge of my seat, and left me wanting more. I plan on seeing it at least two more times, and it's already my favorite movie of the year.

Rorschach90 on May 8, 2009


Any haters out there don't know JACK about what they saw....In one word " TREKTASTIC ". It's a blend of old Trek story telling and J.J. Abrams surgical directing married with a sexy and smart script. The movie is perfect and is canon as of today! And for any Trekkie & Trekker out there that doesn't agree with this alternate timeline of Trek...One theory concerning this says " The original timeline isn't erased but does coexist with the new alternate timeline. Making all realities possible. Therefor, this Star Trek exist as the one B4 it " The movie has brought Star Trek to the forefront of true Space Opera on a level of Epic scale. Any true fan of sci-fi will see this movie merits and enjoy the new breath of fresh air given to the franchise.... Star Trek will be alive another 20+ years....and will just keep getting better...nuff said!

Lazarus on May 8, 2009


#1 - Of all the things to complain about, it's Tyler Perry?! Okay, you mention some other things, but Perry had a super small role and was only on screen about 5 minutes. Why the heck do you care about him appearing in this at all?! #4 - I think the plot made "no sense" because you couldn't understand it? It made a LOT of sense. It felt a part of the Star Trek world yet still unique and refreshing...

Alex Billington on May 8, 2009


I have been waiting for this movie for many years. JJ Abrams has given us a Star Trek that I had imagined could someday be possible when I watched TOS when first broadcast in 1966, at age 11. The action, special effects, and all stage sets are totally believable and the acting is better than most if not all that preceded it. Having a young crew energizes the series and gives us a chance to grow with them for hopefully many more movies. Now that we have the talent and technology in place to produce such epic fun rides, the bigger challenge for the next voyages will be to create stories that are new, bringing us all to places that we've never been before.

Dave from Miami on May 8, 2009


i liked it

erik on May 8, 2009


Best. Space movie. Ever.

Farris on May 8, 2009


#7 have to be kidding me. I kept wanting to see a flashback of winona as spocks mother just to justify the old people make up she was wearing and yes Tyler Perry bother's me...always has and the plot wasn't the best. I read the lastest issue of Creative Screenwriting with Kurztman and Orci and they went on and on about being true fan boys and this is what they give us? Lets not forget that Spock was very much in control of his emotions back in the first series. Plus they made Uhura out to be this dumb slut...she didn't get her moment and she really need it. It was rediculous seeing her at the transporter with spock (MY GOD THIS IS REALLY SACRILEGE IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT)....they back lash JJ,KURTZ and ORCI are going to recieve from the TREKKIES is going to be UNPRECEDENTED!!!! I promise, BUT yes if I weren't a Trekkie I would have enjoyed the film better.

J.N.L on May 8, 2009


#10Best. Space movie. Ever....hmmmm. there's your problem right there people...Star Trek isn't just a space movie,but thats what people like you were going to see and exactly what you got. OMG!

J.N.L on May 8, 2009


Amazing! Definitely the best movie I've seen in theaters all year, and one of the most enjoyable times I've had in a movie theater. I want to see it again tonight.

step on May 8, 2009


Awesome movie. Very fun. Great reboot. People always going to fuss about something. "Oh no the dust on Vulcan was the wrong color this movie blows."

benlomand on May 8, 2009


To J.N.L, Get off your Trek high horse and do us all a favor. I'm a Star Trek fan, grew up in the late 80's and early 90's watching Picard and grew on TV. My first Trek movie at the theater was The Undiscovered Country. Be thankful it didn't get the Star Wars prequel treatment. Tyler Perry/Wyonna Ryder, who cares, you could have gotten a Jar Jar Binks-like character. Obviously Paramount and J.J. Abrams saw the writing on the wall when the general movie public and Trekkies alike shunned Nemisis at the box office (I liked it, though it was certainly not equal to Khan, First Contact or The Undiscovered Country). Something had to give, because Trek was pronounced dead. Like I said, I'm a Trek fan, not a Trekkie. Sometimes you just need a 2 hour excuse to watch old friends on the big screen. The old way just doesn't work anymore, trends change. You can tell right there in the trailer to quote a critic "this isn't your fathers Star Trek." Before you start bashing me, I haven't seen this movie yet. But after the sh*t that was Wolverine, or any other movie to come out so far this year (I haven't seen one yet I was blown away by). After reading all the positive reviews from the paid professionals (90-something rating on RT), your opinion means nothing. Time to move on.

Dustin on May 8, 2009


There's a case to be made about this being nothing more than big summer action popcorn Sci Fi space opera, unlike standard Star Trek, that was much deeper on a concept level. It's great entertainment. But so is Transformers. It's gonna be great to see a new wave of Star Trek, but i wonder how much of an impact will this movie have, if much of an impact at all, when we look back to it in 3 or 4 years time.

Darunia on May 8, 2009


Saw the first regular showing last night (Thursday 5/7) was really and women (not just the guys) were cheering and applauding during and after. Please, go see it and make this the biggest Trek opening weekend ever! #1 -- Do you not understand that the timeline and associated events have now been altered (which also makes Kirk more of a rebel...and leave Capt. Pike much better nuff said.

Ken on May 8, 2009


Trekkies..what a bunch of ...but that's not the point here Ain't seen this movie yet...why? well, not as if you would give a damn, but.. 1) i'm not a star trek fan. I really belive it's ridiculous, i LOVE Sci fi, but startrek is cheesy. Like stargate. And heroes. And..yea, you get the point. 2) i'm going to see it, on dvd when it cames out. 3) i belive there are other movies coming this year that are far better. no point going thru what i've experienced starting with matrix 3 and ending with watchmen (exiting the cinema with a bitter, bitter taste in my mouth, and it wasn;t the popcorn)...

Frogger on May 8, 2009


Although i would have preferred the writers to use existing Trek history, rather than writing their own (destruction of Vulcan, Kirk's birthplace and childhood, etc) i enjoyed this very much! I came in not wanting to like Chris Pine (the thought of anyone playing Kirk other than Shatner was difficult), i loved him! It took very little time for me to see him AS a young kirk. He had the charm and swagger down pat! Quinto as Spock was phenomenal! But what the heck was that relationship between Spock and Uhura? Saldana was PERFECT as Uhura! And Karl Urban as McCoy was a gift from heaven! He had the cadence and attitude of McCoy and i think he played the young McCoy perfectly. As i say, i would have preferred a storyline that did not come from an alternate timeline but the cast did a wonderful job making the characters their own while still following their predecessors. i look forward to seeing it again.

Randi on May 8, 2009


LOVED IT. and the thing about it was, i wasnt going in with any set expectations besides explosions and maybe some over the top sillyness. But you know what I realised after a while? I was kinda on the edge of my seat, gradually at first but definitely thru the middle and final acts. Seriously. I mean I would love to see what they do with another one, with more tricks and development bits. Of course there is the one part i know people will criticise which is: spock appears right in time to wave the fire and save jim from the LOST PLANET monster? really? Now i dont care cuz that part was fine for me, the introduction was nice and early and every minute of dialogue between them - great. Plus it goes to show later how though kirk grew up differently, the seeds of his mischievous personality were still there - flourishing later with the "only 4% chance of success" "it'll work, dont worry!". yea loved it. I liked how they got a person for spock's dad, felt right. uhura is unreal hot. scene with spock and kirk about to transport and the quips, the chemistry building between them - great. Actually its not so much character development here besides simple foundation points, like bullet points, from which we can build upon. and to that end the only thing BUILT in an arc here is the relationship between spock and kirk, as a character itself. The look and feel was good too, didnt mind the lens flares and overall brightness, actually they make you get used to it early on and it gets paid off in the scenes so doesnt seem as random. Also the twists on the music I really liked, slightly different versions of the themes and melodies, so new but with some heritage. cool. Ok that's all I think it was well paced (need to see a second time to find out if the first half becomes tedious or not), found myself with adrenaline after it was done, somewhat exhilarated, and to me, thats what i pay to sit in a big theater for.

el rolio on May 8, 2009


I've been a fan of Trek since TOS when I was a kid, TNG in my late teens and early twenties, DS9 and Voyager. I've seen all of the movies multiple times and last night I watched 'Star Trek' for the second time. It does a great job of bringing a well loved but worn out 'franchise' up to date. The effects are spot on, the story flows unrelentingly without stalling on prime directives or atmosphere sucking peace conferences. The "should we use this vast array of weaponry" soul searchig is redundant because at all times they are only fighting to survive, the technobable is almost non-existant. Uhuru makes a wery velcome return to the mini-skirt. All actors carry their characters well, the enterprise looks great (if shiny, hey, its new!!) and thank god its got some decent firepower now. The costumes are realistic, believable, evoke the original and revoke the cheese you feel when now looking at TOS. Its not perfect, it has some flaws, but these flaws are so minor that they are quickly and easily forgotten in the rollercoaster ride and the emotional embrace of a crew in very real danger. In My Humble Opinion (and thats all this is, like your opionion is only that - yours) this is my favourite of all Trek films. Will it stand the test of time? Only time will tell.

Dr. Duvel on May 8, 2009


With full disclosure that I've never really been a Trekkie, I thought it was an amazing film. I loved it from start to finish - great effects, awesome performances and an interesting story. There wasn't a weak spot in the cast, although I did do a double take when I saw Tyler Perry and Winona Ryder. Karl Urban, Zachary Quinto and Simon Pegg were all standouts.

DeWayne Hamby on May 8, 2009


Well I thought the movie was awesome Is anybody talking about the manuerisms of the movie. The writers should get a Oscar. I liked Bana's role although it was brief. He was intense and came across genuine. They guys that played Spock and Kirk did great too!. Hell, my girlfriend who NEVER even seen a star trek show at all was glued to it Im going to see it again. The last movie I did that with was Dark Knight and Ironman!!!!!

Trey on May 8, 2009


The true hallmark of the movie is clear...the writers & producers were dead set to get the blessings and the work ethic of Leonard Nemoy. He was so proud of the story he gave it the " Gene Roddenberry " approval the film needed. He takes Star Trek seriously. So if the original Spock can learn to pass the torch to the new " Original " Enterprise crew, then every Trek fan should have the same faith. And as I said B4...The 2009 is now Trek canon, but doesn't negate the previous canon. We are simply given a new lease on a 40 + year old sci-fi franchise that will inspire many to go...where no one has gone before! Live long and prosper!

Lazarus on May 8, 2009


I am still reeling from this movie, so I so don't have the words necessary to talk about this movie. I loved it, though, and have been babbling about how much I loved it, since I saw it Wednesday night at a screening. Just... wow. I want more! The cast was -fantastic-. I loved everyone. Perfect casting.

Meg on May 8, 2009


didn't read your review, didn't read any comments, just came by via the RSS feed to say that I absolutely hate the fact that you run these things right before I get to see the movies. Most of us have day jobs man, why the hell are you spoiling it for the rest of us? "now that you've seen it?" are you out of your damn mind? only early viewers and critics have had the time to see it yet. Yes, I'm aware that it was released early in some places, but the vast majority of people will be seeing it tonight or tomorrow.

tiki god on May 8, 2009


Ridiculously good, great script, acting, CGI, & humor. Truly a 10!. ( I did not like the old Star Trek shows......boring!)

Jeffrey allen on May 8, 2009


I LOVED IT!! The action. The Acting. The Music. I mean this is what cinema is all about!! I laugh also when I see people complain about no story or plot in movies that actually have one, the only reason why they say that is because they dont understand it. This had story and reestablished a new timeline for them to explore instead of remaking episodes from the old series. Im excited to see where this goes and I can't recommend enough to GO SEE THIS IN THEATERS!! You will not be disappointed.

Unseen on May 8, 2009


I would not in anyway consider myself a Star Trek fan....BEFORE...This movie is amazing! Seen it twice already and it's even better the second time. The cast, action, story, visual effects (Wolverine take note) were simply astonishing. This is truly what summer movies are all about. And I'm obsessed with Zoe Saldana now. She is a 10!!

Rabs on May 8, 2009


Brilliant. This is exactly the kind of scifi we should get back to: character driven, intelligently written, action packed. I was skeptical at first about this movie (I HATE reboots), but the way in which they overcame that with the time-travel (a Star Trek staple) absolutely blew me away. It keeps the current continuity in play so that universe can continue untouched, while setting up a whole new series of events for modern audiences. Characters: I was amazed at how perfectly the actors captured the "spirit" of the characters, some more perfectly than others. I have totally reconsidered my opinion of Keith Urban after this - it was like watching a clone of Deforest Kelly up there. And yes, while Kirk seemed slightly offbase at first with his "Wild Ones in Space" attitude, by the end of the movie you realize that Kirk would have had to be that kind of arrogant d-bag to become the smooth, over-confident manly man he was in the original series and throughout the movie you definitely see this cocky rebellious farm boy become the Kirk we know and love. Story: Awesome. Never lulls, keeps at a strong pace throughout. There are a few things I didn't love (like Scotty's buddy), but it all pieces together to become something far greater than the sum of it's parts. JJ Abrams knows how to make a movie. It was smart, funny, and thrilling. Effects: Holy Motherf**king Sh**!!! This movie was everything that the Star Wars prequels SHOULD have been. The space ship battles were breathtaking, and I don't mean that in some weak half-handed complimentary kind of way. I mean that they literally made me hold my breath at times. I expected the same kind of Star Trek fight as all the previous shows and movies and was blown away by how huge and visceral they were. THAT'S what a space battle should be. I would watch the movie a hundred times just for those scenes. All in all, I expected a lot from this movie because it was super hyped and I'm always super critical of remakes and reboots. I went in to this movie expected to rip it apart and nitpick it to death and I just couldn't. This is an amazing film. I plan on seeing it at least a few more times in theaters, buying it on DVD, telling friends to see it. It's funny... if you had told me ten years ago that I would come to despise everything to do with Star Wars and that I'd be this excited about a Star Trek movie, I would have laughed in your face. But that's where we are - Abrams has pulled off an amazing feat and made an exciting, fan-appreciative, intelligent science fiction movie that non-fans can still watch, understand, and love. 10/10

Pete the Geek on May 8, 2009


Ha - That's supposed to say KARL Urban, not Keith Urban. WTB an edit button. 🙂

Pete the Geek on May 8, 2009


Some of the best casting ever. I am very eager to see more movies with this group of actors. I'm not a Trekkie and I really enjoyed this. Lots of fun, great visuals, emotional in some parts, exciting, and a nice line of appropriate comedy throughout. I'm recommending to friends.

ebbie on May 8, 2009


I've seen a lot of comments about how this movie throws away the porevious movies and I don't understand how anyone could say that. There is a clear explanation built right into the movie that explains that everything we have seen before is still canon, but now things are different. This was a great way to honor every previous movie, but give the creators the freedom to hopefully continue making Star Trek films with this new cast. Now on to my thoughts The easiest way i can sum up my feelings is this: This is the most fun I've had in a movie theater sine Iron Man. Abrams, Kurtzman, and Orci have delivered a reboot that is near perfect. It is a lot of fun, with plenty of fan service and plenty of great moments everyone one will love.

Necrothug on May 8, 2009


Pretty dang good. Was by no means uber-great. A bit too much "cheesy/silly" for my taste in scifi (esp. Trek - the seriousness is why it's so geeky!!) Perhaps the sequel(s) will be a bit more un-silly/cheesy. Just mho. My copyrighted trademarked new name for this movie is.... Lost in Star Trek. Reminded me lots of Lost in Space (the movie), some Lost thrown in there, and a lot of Trek. Ah, and the whole... jettisoning the warp core(s) to escape the black hole... too much and too far off canon. All nitpicking though really - first movie I've seen in quite a while that I'd consider seeing again in the theater. Wonderful job JJ & cast. REALLY looking forward to the sequel now that the introductions are out of the way. More ship to ship combat hopefully.

bozoconnors on May 8, 2009


Saw it. Loved it. 'nuff said. My question that I've had for a long time is why do you ask this question on a FRIDAY MORNING? It would seem that Monday morning would be a more appropriate time and would garner even more comments and discussion. Not everyone doesn't have a life like me and goes to the 10pm showing on Thursday 🙂 Oh, and let me repeat: Saw it, loved it. Eagerly awaiting number two.

William Mize on May 8, 2009


The movie was great and can't wait to see it again. There will always be nitpickers no matter how well the movie is made. They just live a sad life and want to bring everyone down with them.

Bezelbub on May 8, 2009


i'm non-Trekkie who loved it story-check plot-check action-check great sci-fi-check funny but not cheesy-check it was awsome

greak on May 8, 2009


You all need your hearts spoon fed to ya..the movie was not a fan film. Spocks character although well played was not who Spock was. We love Spock because he was Vulcan and they took that away from him with the seen in the lift with Uhura.

JEFFREY on May 8, 2009


Star Trek was an absolute thrill ride and I loved every minute of it. The space fights were some of the most breathtaking visuals I've seen in years and as soon as the movie finished, I walked straight to the box office and asked for another ticket. It was phenomenal. I don't see the possibility of ANYTHING this summer being better than this. I know this is a lofty statement, but I believe that if given the attention and praise it deserves, AND if JJ Abrams was still attached to the project, that Star Trek has a very real chance to become the Star Wars of this generation.

Clark M. Lamson on May 8, 2009


It was really, really good and laid all the ground work for Star Trek to continue. J.J. Made a very successful reboot a film I thought was great for the whole family. I honestly seen one thing that I wouldve worked on and that was the fight choreography on the drill you can see Kirk and guy just holding each other. LOL. But fantastic movie a must see.

Black Dynomite on May 8, 2009


ohmagawsh, how could i forget to mention a tiny detail but one that stuck with me and its one of those dicey bits. I LOVE love love what they did with transition to warp. like a frikken GUNshot into subspace. wowzers. its cool and i smirked or smiled everytime they punched it.

el rolio on May 8, 2009


It was amazing. I am not a big trek fan and never saw it in its heyday, but watching lenard nimoy act as spock...he was born for that role. As for the whole plot, in the beginning i didnt know if they could pull it off, it seemed a little far fetched. But in the end i was completely convinced that they could do that and pull it off which they did. I'm gonna go see it again and again and again.

Dan on May 8, 2009


Abrams played a magnificent game of checkers using his dad's chess set. It was such an amazing game that now non chess players demand that all chess games be played "Abrams style."

Motu on May 8, 2009


If you haven't seen it, go and enjoy it! If you saw it and didn't like it, watch some classic Trek and then see it again. There was one moment when Zachary Quinto looked exactly like young Nimoy when he was kneeling down and beaming onto Vulcan. I could not tell it wasn't him. Uhura was NOT a slut. How anyone could think that is beyond me. Spoiler******Do not read further if you haven't seen it*********She never did anything more than kiss. Sheesh. This movie gave her more intelligence and expertise than her counterpart. She is the one who backed up Kirk due to her diligence and because of her speaking up, they listened to his theory that it was a trap. I'm a woman and I thought she was awesome. What legs, too! I think people may need to re-watch some of the old t.v. shows to get all of what they pulled off in this movie. At many of the classic lines, the audience did not seem to get it. It was amazing and better than all of what came before it. The director really did quite a job. The use of music was interesting especially in the opening sequence at a very tragic moment. I went to a 7 p.m. showing on May 7th. Most people didn't know it came out on Thursday. There were no posters and nothing on the outside to indicate it was playing. I look forward to watching the DVD for the deleted scenes and director and cast commentary. Well done and good job to the many people who worked on this movie. I stayed through the end credits to see if there was anything extra. Besides dedicating it to the Roddenberrys (which I would have liked at the beginning), there were no extra scenes or any other treat at the very end. All in all, it did what movies are supposed to do and then some. I look forward to the next ones.

Missy on May 8, 2009


Everyone has an opinion, weather YOU liked it or hated it, I don't entirely care. But, I can tell you that I am a Trekkie, I have loved Star Trek since I was a kid. And I very much enjoyed this movie. I thought the actors did really well, and lay off Spock, Quinto is supposed to play a representation of what Spock probably went through, it seemed like a logical origin, it would be hard to be a child of two world's, we love Spock because he LEARNED to control his human emotions, people want that, but you gotta first have them to learn to control them. I have nothing bad to say. I went with two Trekkies and a newbie and all parties were pleased, I'd say JJ and friends did a phenomenal job!

Mandy on May 8, 2009


# 44 – I totally agree! She was far more intelligently represented in this film. Back in the old days (before) the movies, she was often just a woman on the bridge, they brought her in and made her more of the crew. I like her movie persona better then her TV persona.

Mandy on May 8, 2009


I don't know shit about fraking Star Trek,but in the hands of JJ Abrams I felt safe walking in and in the end felt that I had made a right choice seeing this. I'm usually quite skeptical about sci-fi movies,this mass geekery of silly costumes and even sillier dialogue-most of this franchise additions or remakes have either of two purposes:to make a crapload of money in the box office by creating something that existing fans might forever denounce and boycott,or something strictly for fans that everyone else finds inaccessible.This Star Trek however,will satisfy both Trekkies and noobs alike I expect. I liked most the directness of the story-there was no pausing to highlight some cool gadget or obscure fan-fact,leaving fanciness out of the equation the film stuck to a very practical angle.No frilly romances,pompous drama,no excess-it was trim,clear-headed and cautious about every detail in the story.On the downside,its this vagueness in the plot that kills it too for some reason,I felt for a major part of the film things felt too neatly into place and a lot of things just happened to happen at the most convenient times.It was like it ran on clock that rung every 15-20 minutes to call for an action scene,and between these action scenes ran a series of menial events that feel too organized-trouble would ensue,only for loose ends to be tied together by the simplest of answers-ie someone would just teleport their way out of there before the last second.And this pattern would ride up to the very end,concluding on a fairy-tale ending even a pony could predict. Besides that,the CGI was amazing and complimented well by the music-the ensemble cast was very strong,Chris Pine proves more than a blue-eyed beachface and Zachary Quinto,Eric Bana and John Cho (whose single fight scene I was very pleased by) deserve praise.I wasn't too happy about what they turned Simon Pegg into-I'm a huge fan of his (since the Shaun of the Dead days),but to hire a talented actor only to restrict him to the role of a fumbling buffoon just infruriates me-the same thing happened with Pegg in How to Lose Friends & Alienate People,Run Fatboy Run-everytime he aggrees to appear in one of this movies only to play the English idiot my respect for him wanes,I'd prefer he'd be like Ricky Gervais (who reportedly turns down more than half of the offers made to him) and be more selective with parts,to avoid this typecast he's forcing himself into. That's my critique.I'm sure any other review would've spent more time talking about other stuff,definitely not a whole paragraph on Simon Pegg's very,very small and unessential contribution.That's what matters to me anyway,before and after I'm still completely uninterested in Star Trek but wouldn't mind seeing another Star Trek movie,as long as they throw in something else (in this case,it was JJ Abrams in the directors seat+Eric Bana as a villian & John Cho kicking ass).

twispious on May 8, 2009


The movie looks good but why in God's name did Abrams choose an Englishman to play Scotty? I love Simon Pegg as an actor but his accent is absolutely terrible. It ranks alongside Dick Van Dyke's cockney accent in Mary Poppins. With so many good Scottish actors out there I can't see why they employed an Englishman.

Chris Sullivan on May 8, 2009


I loved it.

FilmMaker2003 on May 8, 2009


#48 News Flash – James Doohan wasn't Scottish either. But, his accent WAS miles better.

Mandy on May 8, 2009


I AM A STAR WARS FAN! An now I am a Star Trek fan. This movie was so f**king awesome! Period. Better then Star Wars Episode 1. Good job JJ!

AllmightyKeim on May 8, 2009


@ el rolio - absolutely - the new warp transition is indeed epic. Talk about sense of urgency - sheesh!!

bozoconnors on May 8, 2009


This movie was CRAZY!!!!!!! J.N.L. (#1 & 2) just mad because he probally went dateless again to the movie....I was surprised to see Tyler Perry and have a great role (cameo), not just some bullshit wisecracking slave role or mystical black guy part.... as for the rest of the movie, it was perfect...I want to see it on Imax now.... ###### WAY BETTER THAN WOLVERINE#############

Stan 'The Viewers Choice' Morrow (Facebook me!) on May 8, 2009


It was enjoyable...I do feel slightly underwhelmed, but I enjoyed it enough to think about watching it again to see if my reaction is the same. I was really excited about seeing this too...

Hiro on May 8, 2009


I hate f****** fanboys - seriously you guys take things - just that - too seriously. Everything has to be EXACTLY the way the original series was - even in the nuances otherwise it's crap. It's idiots like you that ruin movies for the rest of us who actually like to watch movies and are open to new ideas and interpretations. So what if Tyler Perry was in it along with Rider? Who cares if Spock wasn't in control of his emotions - have we forgotten he is young and half human? This is a movie one of many that have been made for this series and as far as I'm concerned it only adds to the Star Trek mythos - it certainly doesn't take anything away from it.

Sam on May 8, 2009


#53 thats classic...its all love baby!!my friend was in this movie so I don't completely hate it. He was one of the Romulans during the drill fight.His name is Damion Poitier (yes he's related). He's a great stunt guy. question...Star Trek is sci fi,but it has always been deeply rooted in fact so tell me this*****SPOILER ALERT******If a black hole is so powerful that not even light can escape it how THE HELL did they just jettison some of the engine core and free themselves when black hole have been devouring galaxies for eons? And why are Vulcans depicted in this movie as being racist? when we all know they hold positions in Starfleet a multinational alliance?****DRINKS ROMULAN ALE****BURP!!! tell me that. J.N.L

JEFFREY on May 8, 2009


Firstly, I have never been a huge Star Trek fan. I mean, i watched some of the series here and there and most of the original movies. I have seen enough to know what it is, and know most of the characters, but not enough to go crazy when they change things. I was going to write up a response about how JJ and the writers did a great thing with the time travel which creates a branching timeline, this way they have the basic backbone of the series, but are able to take a lot more liberties in story telling. But it really comes down to this, the experience of watching the film was amazing. In the opening scene, I felt like I needed to have a seat belt in my theater chair, I thought I was going to fall out into the screen. The movie invokes so many feelings from the viewer, it takes you through a roller coaster ride of emotion. One minutes your adrenaline is pumping during a fight scene, then you are laughing about something that Chekov says, and later on you are completely saddened by the loss of a character. I think that is the same reason I liked Cloverfield so much. It isn't as much about the actual story as it is about the emotional connection you get to the characters. JJ does such a fantastic job making the viewer really feel that they are experiencing everything that the characters experience on screen.

NamelessTed on May 8, 2009


Star Trek sucks. The Millenium Falcon can kill that piece of crap ship. Why did they even bother to make this movie. Hahaha. No im joking. Im excited to see this movie when i get back. Does anyone have a non bias point of view on this movie though?

yeah on May 8, 2009


I'm not a Trekkie, but I did watch some of TNG when I was growing up. Pretty cool stuff, but was always kind of weirded out by TOS (probably because I wasn't born until the 80s). I loved this film, that's all I'll say on that matter. *************HERE BE SPOILERS, DON'T READ ANYMORE OF THIS!!*************** #56 - I wondered the same thing, that black hole problem. If they were traveling faster than the speed of light, what kind of explosion behind them involving matter (not light) could have boosted them to a faster speed? Well, nothing really. The only answer I could come up with was that the explosion acted as a very temporary "cork" to the black hole (maybe not filling the whole thing, just even a bit) and this decreased the gravitational pull on the ship. It's not like they needed very long to get away with this, but then again I'm just making this up, just like Kurtzman and Orci made up whatever their reasoning was 😉 I guess we'll never know! #56 (again) - Like I said, I'm not really familiar with Star Trek, but how were the Vulcans racist?

Tyler Hayes on May 8, 2009


@ #56 - Black hole... until you enter the event horizon of a black hole/singularity (defined as the edge of a black hole where gravity is powerful enough that light cannot escape... essentially, where the black hole appears "black"), then you can indeed "escape" a black hole, as long as you are traveling faster than the escape velocity at that particular point away from the black hole... I guess they jettisoned the engine cores to give them that extra "push" to escape! Me - I enjoyed the film greatly! Definitely not the Star Trek of "old"... the fresh make-over job was welcomed and refreshing, dropping some of the old baggage, injecting a new and different interpretation of the Star Trek mythos, and updating the way the Star Trek movies have been traditionally made (particularly in set design and special effects)... JJ did a good... Although as a Trek fan, I must admit it came as a surprise as to how Sulu pulled off that spin-jump-kick thing on the drill considering that Vulcan's gravity is much higher than Earth's! (yeah, that's just the fanatic fanboy inside me being nitpicky!)

whyme on May 8, 2009


The movie was awesome. Special effects were amazing, acting was enough to make me like ALL of the characters, storyline was interesting, and comic relief was great. All in all it really made me feel like this is how Sci-Fi space adventures SHOULD be... it reminded me of the first Star Wars in many ways, especially the character interactions. A++ JJ, you did it!

BrentD on May 8, 2009


Awesome, and I love that little green dude he made me laugh.

Gavin on May 8, 2009


#48 They used a Canadian to play Scotty for like.............a Zillion episodes, didn't that bother you.

Barry on May 8, 2009


Tyler Perry was a big WTF!? but he did not harm the film. Didn't even notice Mrs. Ryder. Would love to see it again tho.

LARRYDAVID on May 8, 2009


For all of you out there who are continually bashing Spock for having emotions, cram it. This is an ORIGIN story. Spock deals with his emotions multiple times throughout the original series and the original six films (all great). Don't forget, he's half human, so he will always carry those emotions and at one point wil inevitibly make the choice to suppress them completly. Don't forget that Spock's father Sarek, had an emoptional lapse to get in bed with a human women in the first place. Some of you folks sound like your picking at it for the sake of picking at it, beacuse you are in the closet about how awesome this is. I haven't seen it yet, going tonight. Will post something afterwards.

Big Red Moose on May 8, 2009


It was spectacular!!!!! It was absolutely perfect!!! I cannot wait to see it again!

Adam Knudson on May 8, 2009


Just like "Iron Man" did last year which set the bar for the Summer season. J.J. Abrams is BRILLIANT! Star Trek was just amazing. The writing, the acting, the directing, the editing......just feck'n AMAZING. We left the theatre with huge smiles on our faces. ( always the meter for a fine film). And the lens flares were a perfect addition....PERFECT! Going back again to IMAX on Monday! And as a mature adult born with the orginal, this could not have been better. BAD ROBOT stikes again!

Tim "Cloverfield" on May 8, 2009


good movie but.... to all the blind trekkies out there... There are no ships or defenses in Earth's solar system? PLOT HOLE FAIL Maybe some development of Nero and explaining what he's been doing for 25 damn years and before that would help alien ship design? CRAP - who would build a ship like that?!

Jim on May 8, 2009


PS....The SLUSHO reference brought a cheer from alot of us who knew what was up!

Tim "Cloverfield" on May 8, 2009


SO. DAMN. GOOD. In all honesty this SH*TS on all the recent Star Wars films put together! talk about a re-awakening of the Trek Franchise. I cannot for the life of me imagine a better adaptation. Abrams and crew NAILED IT! George Lucas must be pissing himself wishing Episode 1 was HALF the movie this masterpiece turned out to be. the only thing that had me raise an eyebrow was the love affair between Spok and Uhura was a bit questionable but the more i reflect on it the more i find i enjoyed the "spice" it added to Spok's character. P.S. #1 aka J.N.L. im so glade you have nothing to do with making movies what so ever.

Nick S. on May 8, 2009


I've seen all of the Trek shows and films. The stuff the crazy fanbois are whining about show they are just stupid fanbois. There is nothing wrong or bad about young Spock here, in fact it was a perfect show of not only Spock's emotion control issues but also that of all Vulcans. Remember that the most natural Vulcans are the emotional warring Romulans. Vulcans are extremely emotional and that is WHY they spend their lifetimes suppressing or struggling to suppress their natural volatility. Regarding escaping the blackhole. The rode/surfed the blastwave of an anti-matter explosion there...right or wrong, believable or not, that's what occurred (since a couple people appear confused).

Ken on May 8, 2009


everyone needs to stop complaining and just enjoy this. the movie was fantastic on all levels. some people on here are just angry and will find anything to complain about. this movie was great. definitely worth seeing in theaters.

taylor on May 8, 2009



JEFFREY on May 8, 2009


Loved it. OK, there was some sillyness (Beastie Boys? REALLY?) and gaping plotholes, continuity issues etc... but on the whole it was fantastic. Oh yeah, I've been a hardcore fan of Star Trek since 1985. Did a really quick browse-through of the comments above mine, and I really can't see what folks are complaining about.

Wottock Hunt on May 8, 2009


Urgh, that should've read "silliness" instead of "sillyness". Edit button, please. Anyways. Does anyone know what the Battlestar Galactica reference was? I tried looking for it, but didn't notice anything like that. Oh yeah, the sound fx for jumping into warp was fantastic. Can't wait to hear it in my home theater! I also loved the new transporter visual fx.

Wottock Hunt on May 8, 2009


awesome awesome awesome. Anyone who didn't get it should have stayed away, nimoy as spock again was a treat to see.

bc on May 8, 2009


This flick KICKED ASS! All in all, perfectly cast, great effects, well written, and awesomely directed. A VERY worthy mention of Leonard Nimoy in a small, but pivotal role was outstanding. I loved it! I'm checkin' this out again!

Spider on May 8, 2009


I thought the movie was pretty descent! It was a great re-boot and was fun watching an origin version of Star Trek...

The_Phantom on May 8, 2009


Just saw it. Loved it. As good of an origin story as can be. There are a couple of plot holes, but overall, this is a fantastic start of a new vision for the Star Trek universe. I really enjoyed how Abrams and company brought the core crew together. The fx were top-notch, also. I liked the original series as a kid and kept up with it through it's various incarnations over the years, with the exception of Star Trek: Voyager. That one never appealed to me. Without a doubt this movie feels so fresh and left me with such a feeling of relief that a lot of the old baggage was jettisoned. It's like a breath of fresh air. For those of you whining about Spock not being the Spock you knew, this is an ORIGIN story and an alternate ORIGIN story, at that. The relationship between Uhuru and Spock threw me for a loop at first, but, hey, you never know. It could have been worse if they'd followed the cheesier path and had her and Krik hook up. I'm definitely going to see it again and urging my friends to see it, also!

Tim on May 8, 2009



The_Phantom on May 8, 2009


very entertaining .. I will probably watch it again

Rash on May 8, 2009


This has been one of the best movies i have seen in a long time, Carried every aspect a movie should have and not to little or to much of it at that, i did laugh when i saw that the primary art team was Lucas arts who would of thought that combining the minds of star trek and star wars would make one hell of a movie.

splinter on May 8, 2009


the time travel allows for a lot of changes within the characters, like Kirk, that i really enjoyed. this new Kirk is more of a bad-ass of sorts (not that Shatner's version wasn't oozing with personality) but it allows JJ to reinvent his characters... i personally loved it. cant wait for #2!

Nick S. on May 8, 2009


55 nailed it you fucking fanboys annoy the hell outta me, you critique every little fucking thing about a movie and expect it to mirror everything in the TV show, like someone said things evolve...if they had made it the exact way the show used to be it would have been a shit ass boring movie and you know stop your fucking bitching and enjoy a incredibly awesome and well done movie. Also JNL seriously winona and perry who the fuck cares, honestly your just TRYING to find something bad about the movie so you can bitch about it and the be 'that one guy who said it sucked'. P.S. dont give a fuck what fanboys lashbacks come back to me its as simple as just enjoying a good first summer awesomefest.

Cody on May 8, 2009


It will forever and always be fracking AWESOME!!! I can't wait to see where they take the series now.

Tim C on May 8, 2009


@ 85: No... JNL is like *this* close to being the next big thing in movie making. Just ask him, he'll tell you. You're absolutely correct, his criticisms only target fringe elements of the film. Winona Ryder and Tyler Perry's collective screen time probably doesn't add up to 20 minutes; but their presence ruined the film. Sure it did. Somebody should tell him that reading 'Film-Making for Dummies' doesn't count as a film school degree. The movie was very well put together. It is easily the best Trek film, since Wrath of Khan. The summer movie season has started; and this is exactly what a great summer movie should be, fast paced and fun. It may not have the weight that The Dark Knight had last summer; but it is every bit as entertaining as Iron Man. I saw it at a regular theater; and I'm thinking that seeing it in IMAX would be well worth the trip.

Dave Lister, J.M.C. on May 8, 2009


Gees J.N.L sounds like an angry man! I'm a Trek fan and if you watch the 1980 version of Star Trek The Motion Picture it will show Spock on a far away Vulcan planet where he is spending his time trying to find Pure Logic. This is because Spock is half human and he was trying to shut off this part of him. If you also recall when he did return to the Enterprise in the same movie Kirk and the crew were trying to welcome him to the ship but he showed no emotion like he was almost insulted for people being happy to see him. One of the female characters said, "It's how we feel Spock". So for Spock to feel or show some emotion in the PREQUEL makes perfect sense according to the above. All I can say is relax J.N.L, it's a movie not world politics, sit back and enjoy it for what it is.

ezza72 on May 8, 2009


Non-Trekkie who loved it =)

David Banner on May 8, 2009


Loved it, can't wait to see it again! Star Wars Episode 1 (Jar Jar) = Utter Shit. Star Trek Episode 1 ( JJ edition ) = EPIC as FUCK.

tehstaton on May 8, 2009


Can someone please explain to me the plot, i just didnt get the whole time travel thing

logan deck on May 8, 2009


it was amazing but i hated that every second like half of kirks and spocks face was covered with like beams of light

eric on May 8, 2009


Then watch it again and pay attention. There are already too many details/spoilers being posted. 🙂

Ken on May 8, 2009


Brilliant - went along for the ride and enjoyed every minute! Devoted Trekkie.

Godstrike on May 8, 2009


ABSOLUTELY LOVED IT. I don't consider myself a Trekkie at all... I've only seen a few eps of TNG and maybe 3 or 4 movies, but, my god, this is TRULY an epic film. The acting, storyline, soundtrack, and cinematography were all top-notch. The last 20 mins of the movie I was sitting on the edge of my seat, not knowing whether to laugh or cry, a big grin on my face. And the closing scene with Nimoy's voiceover? Sent chills up my spine. SERIOUSLY good. Best film I've seen since probably The Dark Knight.

inspiredefined on May 8, 2009


I saw it yesterday and lurved it! I was so surprised to see it come out a day early at my theater. I actually squeeled. Anywho. It was a lot more funny than I expected. And the lens flares, after being distracted the first few scenes I saw it, didn't bother me a bit. It just looked pretty. 😛

Agent Manders on May 8, 2009


loved every second.

Stuart Mellor on May 8, 2009


Well, I can see a lot of people liked it, which is great because SOMEONE should be entertained. I certainly wasn't one of them. Below is my honest opinion. Respond as your maturity level allows. ----- Fast-paced action and stellar effects will undoubtedly win over a new generation of fans, but Paramount's attempt to reboot a depleted franchise fails to prune away the very elements that led to its ruin. The greatest strength of the new STAR TREK lies in its casting, particularly Zachary Quinto as Spock, credibly and literally standing alongside the character's originator, Leonard Nimoy. If Spock is the super-ego of the Enterprise, James T. Kirk is its id. Chris Pine brings all the bravado of the legendary captain yet the script neglects to probe his psyche with any care. Karl Urban nails the part of Dr. McCoy, the ship's ego. Urban channels the spirit of the original McCoy, DeForest Kelley, while bringing new and fresh elements of his own. Screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman beautifully present Spock's struggle with his own humanity in ways not previously seen in the character. An overused plot device is employed brilliantly, re-imagining the franchise without ignoring everything that came before. Unfortunately, that's about all the innovation this story can provide. While the original series mined the innovative talents of Hugo award-winning writers, Orci and Kurtzman fall back on the tired conceits of Trek's lesser series, creating black holes in the narrative bigger than those on screen. Plot contrivances and implausible scenarios abound. And even when played with passion and gusto by Eric Bana, Captain Nero is just another cookie-cutter villain seen countless times before. With his television background, director J. J. Abrams seems unable to transition to the big screen. Despite a huge budget, his film plays like a glorified television show. His Enterprise bridge is reminiscent of the Apple store at the mall and engineering, shot in a brewery, looks like one. While allowing for minute character development, Abrams warps past every moment that might hold a modicum of psychological weight. As a result, the Federation feels small, the galaxy feels small -- indeed, history itself feels small. STAR TREK is a hyperbolic experience capable of attracting Paramount's target demographic and mildly entertaining even to those who desired so much more.

Whatnot on May 8, 2009


now let me get this straight...the gajillion $$$ Starship Enterprise is going to be helmed by a former punk ass car thief who must now be all of maybe 23 years old?? geez JJ, you really got a great plot there...certainly my top choice for such a position of responsibility...pathetic and totally laughable....I'll save my $$$ for the next Bruce Campbell film....

cornholio_by_the_sea on May 8, 2009


There's a lot of love and hate here for this movie which is to be understood. If everyone liked the same movie I guess we would all be the same and that would be boring. I really hated Wolverine but I'm not going to make fun of those that liked it. And the same goes here. I really loved this film. I went in with an open mind and for two hours I got to watch cinema at it's best. This movie entertained and that's why we go to the movies. The last Star Trek film "Nemesis" was a very weak movie and this has brought Trek back to it's former glory. Thankyou JJ Abrams. You did a fantastic job.

Last Son on May 8, 2009


i'm a fanboy and i loved it. had a big grin from start to fin. thank god fox did'nt have anything to do with it.

allamerican_97 on May 8, 2009



J.N.L on May 8, 2009


I totally started laughing at the end of the movie saying....hahaha"They destroyed Vulcan"ahaha

Super Kyle on May 8, 2009



J.N.L on May 8, 2009


I like the movie but THEY DESTROYED VULCAN! That really messes up the Star Trek timeline.

Kane on May 8, 2009



J.N.L on May 8, 2009


JNL, don't cry just because you got called out, for repeatedly making half-assed assessments, and for trying to sound like some high-rolling insider... ("My second-cousin's uncle's neighbor's dog walker worked the food service, on the movie... blah, blah, blah...") If you want to read an honest, negative criticism, of the film, check post #98. Whatnot actually offers substantive criticisms, backed up, with cogent arguments; while you just cry about everybody calling bullshit, for the bullshit you wrote.

Dave Lister, J.M.C. on May 8, 2009


J.N.L, you have a lot to say here. If you can't say what you need to say in one paragraph, then you shouldn't bother. People will not listen to you. You where the first to give your view on this film and you obviously were annoyed at certain aspects of it. I won't judge you on your findings as I wouldn't with anyone else, because I believe that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but seriously man make one comment and leave it at that. If someone says something against you don't take it to heart. It is after all just a movie and your letting others get to you.

Last Son on May 8, 2009


Shhh... Last Son... that's what makes it so fun.

Dave Lister, J.M.C. on May 8, 2009


Mr. Abrams, I applaud you. It was a fine film and one both myself and my 10 year old son enjoyed.

Chris on May 8, 2009


I loved it..nice...we truly enjoyed it. Our theater applauded at the end...great job.

Bry from Chi on May 8, 2009


I mean now its like star trek IV the voyage home never happened and star trek 3 where they bring spock back to vulcan in the klingon bird if prey. and then star star trek 4 on the planet vulcan with the klingon bird of prey and of course spocks mom is there for his re-training so these great movies never happened??? JJ abrams LOST!!!!!

BullDurham on May 8, 2009


Exceeded my expectations in just about every area, with the notable exception of music. Hate to say it, but I walked out thinking the plot and acting were both excellent for the venue...but Michael Giacchino's What a downer. I loved his work on The Incredibles and on Rataouille..maybe I expected too much. I bought the cd today before seeing the movie. I hope it grows better with time... So, in the end, per Freemont's Fig Rating Scale, I give the movie itself 4 figs, but alas, the soundtrack only 2 figs. Still, I will see it at least two more times in the theater, and look forward to the Blu-Ray...

Dark Helmet on May 8, 2009


The acting and the CGI were excellent! And kudos to J.J. and the crew for the sound. From the sound of the Federation starships going to warp speed to the Enterprise fireing her wepons, the sound was simply awesome. Also the new sound effects for the phasers was a very nice update. During a certain phaser shoot-out the shots hitting the walls gave a very hard hitting and satisfying feel to the classic Star Trek weapon. Next up?.........IMAX!!!!

mdeedon on May 8, 2009


Amazing movie, loved it. Go see for youself.

Christ on May 8, 2009


Hit it this afternoon with my 8 year old son. Loved it. The plot is oddly simple and complex at the same time. Karl Urban as Bones was a show-stealer, as was Simon Pegg as Scotty. Quinto and Pine were both excellent as well. Bruce Greenwood as Christopher THIS universe has the esteemed Captain fulfilling a much more deserved destiny. And Leonard Nimoy...what can I say? Simply amazing. A wonderful homage to all that *was* Trek, and a beautiful new beginning...and a great vehicle to aid in teaching my son about leadership...Oh, to be Captain of a Starship, even just for 12 minutes...

Jakenstein on May 8, 2009


#112 go and watch the movie again and then when you understand it read your post and tell us it makes any sense. Good Day.

Unseen on May 8, 2009


Ok...I'll leave out the trekkieness as I'm still torn because of it. Yeah, it was good, but as a minor trekkie, it sucked. So...yeah. Still better than Wolverine anyway you look at it though. The flares were too much. My word they were over the top and sometimes didn't even make sense. Using cameras a lot, there were flares JJ just felt like using IMO. He got flare happy. Everything else has to do with the plot and how he fucked it up to the nth degree. But now he can do whatever he wants with Star Trek as it's on a whole new line.

LSP on May 9, 2009


just got back from sitting front row I-MAX and i got to say although the explosions blew me away the movie really didn't. Now I'm not saying it was a bad movie, for a TREK fan this is a pretty great remake. But It just felt to much like i was watching an episode of an expensive TV show. Not enjoying a blockbuster action flick. Its not a bad take by J.J. Abrams, but IMPO the mans directing is shoddy. i say see it don't see it doesn't really matter its still just the same old STAR TREK

DoomCanoe on May 9, 2009


It has grossed $7M on Thursday night. And it grossed $26 million on Friday!!! SOURCE: Try to get as many people to see it this weekend as possible for a stellar opening weekend! If you want to see it again, don't wait...see it again this weekend. We need to send the signal to all involved that we want more Star Trek.

Ken on May 9, 2009


I was amazed. I am a critic if there ever was one, and I have nothing bad to say about this awesome sci-fi flick.

Mark on May 9, 2009


Good movie worth watching but two major flaws for me was the dayum Stone looking sidekick of Scotty. What a joke, reminded me of jar jar binks in a bad way. Chekov was the weak link in the whole ansemble. Just overly done! Other than that I thought the movie was awesome!

dee on May 9, 2009


Nerds.... The movie was fantastic. It was very enjoyable and well casted. JJ Abrams is the man. Can't wait to be in the sequel 😉

Barnaby Barrilla on May 9, 2009


I just got back from the film. It was a good film, BUT for Trek fans who love the series and Gene, i came away disappointed to think Vulcan is gone!! It can’t be. All canon and Gene’s vision has been neglected. All trek fans must demand that the timeline is restored!!! What about Spock in the season 5 ep. reunification - what about the birth of Tuvok?? We must have vulcan back. THE TEMPORAL ACCORDS WILL HOPEFULLY RESTORE VULCAN - WE CAN'T WASTE 45 YEARS OF GENE RODDENBERRY'S VISION. THIS WOULD STILL ALLOW NEW FANS TO ENJOY STAR TREK WHILE NOT GETTING RID OF THE MILLIONS OF FANS WHO KEPT THE SHOW ALIVE. PLEASE FIX THIS IN THE NEXT FILM.

Anthony O'Leary on May 9, 2009


This is my 2nd viewing one month after i watched the premiere in Sydney. I had to say after the first viewing, the movie had a lot of faults more to do with the plot (red matter device) and the underselling of Nero. But i took it for what it was and and enjoyed the movie with the injection of action and character development by Abrams. After watching a second viewing with friends i found that i enjoyed the movie even more than i did @ the premiere. I can see clear similarities to Batman Begins. If Kurtzman and Orci can just find some inspiration from a classic trek story with some simple philosophical morale (for mainstream audiences) that becomes a theme throughout the movie. Add that with JJ Abrams direction + (more action set pieces) then u can have a real sequel that can rival Dark Knight.

bluheat on May 9, 2009


STAR TREK BLEW ME AWAY!!!! It was everything I hoped and dreamed it would be. It was action packed, sexy, and funny in all the right parts. <3

Lacey on May 9, 2009


leave J.N.L alone!!! He's right...I saw the movie last night and I have to say it was indeed lacking. I mean how does Kirk go from a bar fight to becoming the captain of the Enterprise????????????????

esophus on May 9, 2009


Very very Good! The film has got everything I wish for. I always thought previous Star Trek films had very low standards. This is just different The only flaw I see in the scrip/story is that I 've always seen Vulcans as Hi tech hierarchycal civilitation that helped humanity for their own interest. How come a vessel simply goes into vulcan orbit, throws a thing that drills into their planet without nobody putting up a fight?? That's the impresson you get from the film The same could apply for human earth. (yeah, yeah, even if nero got the frecuencies for the communications defense system blah blah) . At least a plane??? no? Anyway ,great film. I'd love to see more of this Kirk and Spock

Xav on May 9, 2009


^I thought the same thing. The drill is not even guarded and there wasn't on ship flying up there to blow it out of the sky. Even now, rednecks would be out with their rifles and shotguns shooting at it and everyone could only stare like a bunch of idiots.

LSP on May 9, 2009


Star Trek: it's not just for geeks anymore. I've seen my share of Star Trek but am by no means a Trekkie and I LOVED it! Great action, great effects, and the cast was outstanding. Chris Pine owns his pre-Shat Kirk. Yes, Tyler Perry was a bit distracting, as was the abundance of lens flare but the rest of the movie so overshadowed what few problems there were. I think J.J. Abrams has finally made a Trekkie of me.

PrincessRoney on May 9, 2009


Absolutly blew away every expectation I had. I thought I had most of the core plot elements figured out, turns out, I was wrong. All the assumptions I made going into this were way off. I couldn't figure out how the timeline worked with the original stories, didn't make any sense to me. That didn't deter me whatsoever because I knew it was going to be a fun ride, but I was worried about the plot, especially after seeing Cloverfield (small budget movie that unfortunatly got a big budget, but still cool). The time travel thing actually made perfect sense and was a key moving forward. Abrams has basically given himself a license to do whatever he so chooses moving forward with this alternate reality. He can even include past characters with a different take on them. Anyone wanna see Kirk versus Khan round 3??? I think that would be epic. Think of the CGI for a new Genesis probe. Speaking of the CGI, it was flawless in my eyes. I couldn't find anything that looked off, but that is something we have come to expect from ILM. As far as the lens flares, they were a bit annoying, but having read Abram's reasoning for them, they do seem to brighten it up a bit (caught myself squinting from time to time), while adding a sense of realism and making you think you were there, in a tangible place. The design of the ship was fantastic, the whole industrial look of engineering made it feel a little more human and real, almost attainable. That casting was near perfect. I didn't even know Karl Urban could act (Doom anyone??), and he pulled it off perfectly. Chris Pine brought that sense of foolhardy cockines with being to vain. Zachary Quinto was fantastic. Zoe Saldana was gorgeous in every way. John Cho will make a great replacment of George Takai (anybody else get the fencing reference?). Simon Pegg was awesome in the short role he had, who cares if he's English. Eric Bana finally didn't ruin a movie by being terrible. The only drawback in the casting I think was Anton Yelchin as Chekov. He souded like he was struggling and trying too hard, the elements are there for an excellent character. I took my fiancee with me to see this, and going in she was the most uninterested person in the whole theatre. Thank you Chris Pine for being a dashing hero, and far less corny than Shatner. She is totally into this now and that is great for a fan like myself. I am by no means a full fledged Trekkie, and find people who base so much of their lives on the culture of such things a little disturbing (especially you Star Wars geeks. You know who you are, and you know it's a movie, not a cultural revolution). Like I said before, anyone who has something to pick about this film is still in the closet about how awesome this is. Enjoy it for what it is, not for what it used to be, because this is something else. This is not Gene Roddenbary's version, but I think it is an excellent interpretation on what his vision was, and still is. I'll finish by simply saying that this could not have been a better jumping off point for hopefully another longstanding and classic franchise.

Big Red Moose on May 9, 2009


I AM a Trekkie, not a Die Hard tho, in fact I dont have much love for the original series, although I do have a fondness for it. I grew up on TNG and DS9 and Voyager, after that I stopped watching. I thought this movie was generally good. Lets just say this, we went with 8 people, me and my dad, the trek lovers and my sisters, mom wife her friend and her boyfriend all people who have watched (mostly because the tv was monopolized ) the series, but dont *really* care too much about it and they all loved it, they couldn't stop talking about how cool it was, etc. Me and my dad just smiled and nodded, the Trekkie, smile and nod lol. I appreciate the affects, the casting, the vision but it just didnt have that ST feel to it. OK Im gonna be blunt here, while watching this is what I was saying to myself: The music is Star Wars... The space battles are Firefly/Serenity The story is weak. Wheres Earths Defenses? I mean a Mining Vessel cant be blown outta the Sky? Wheres Starfleet? No one called to say hey guys there's a chance Earth might get blown up. A drop of red matter makes a black hole yet they blew up like 500 gallons of it right over earth and nothing *bad* happened heh. Earths biggest Alley has been decimated... Earth/Starfleet is completely screwed. The one liners were I *think* ok I say think because of course the entire audience went crazy laughing when they happened so they really stood out as cheesy and I couldn't appreciate them like I should have been able to I think. The writers couldn't figure out how to save Vulcan like true star trek writers who know how to save the day? the 500 gallons of red matter couldn't have opened up a sick ass time warp that they could have somehow gone through and destroyed the mining vessel about to blow up Vulcan and save it then get sucked into another black hole and another until Scotty figures out how to blow them far enough back or SOMETHING c'mon! This might be nitpicking but it just didn't *feel* like Star Trek, but... for most people and many Trekkie's it was a good movie.

Richard on May 9, 2009


I personally loved that little "rock head dwarf" that followed Scotty. Chekov, Bones, and Scotty where cast perfectly to me. Zachary Quinto bothered me a little. I'm not sure what it was. Maybe I just love Leonard Nimoy's Spock too much. And it technically can be considered not a reboot. ***SEMI-SPOILER*** Spock coming back in time is kind of a continuation of the story. ***/SEMI-SPOILER*** Way better than Wolverine, sadly. WAY better. I loved the score, especially in the beginning of the movie. The score in the first scene definitely had a great Star Trek feel to it.

Lauren on May 9, 2009


HEY 117 OBVIOUSLY you were not a trek fan before this one my message made perfect since in star trek 3 is where they take the klingon ship back to VULCAN with spock in tow so they can switch his brain and bones brain back where they belong!!!then at the start of star trek IV they are still on VULCAN at the start of the movie and spock is still re-training he's mind and he mother is there to remind him he is still half human and needs to embrace that!!!!that is why my message makes PERFECT since watch those 2 GREAT films and maybe you too will understand #117 WAKE UP as i said before JJ you were LOST!!he admitted he wasnt a star trek fan before and it shows yes the cast was FANTASTIC BONES was brilliant but killing spocks mom and destroying vulcan before they have even embarked on there 5 year mission "TOS" is just STUPID and makes no sense what so ever!!!! Thankyou!!!!

BullDurham on May 9, 2009


Great Job JJ & Crew! the original series was my first trip into the world of Sci Fi I loved it & the following series were all ok but exposition heavy. This film for me returns us to what Trek originally was FUN! I also love that they took everything that was and crumpled it up & threw it away, no longer restrained by what was they can now give us whatever & the best part, is that that kind of thinking goes with Start Trek. And to all the Spock wasn’t this or Kirk wasn’t that or his mom was here and that’s not right all I can say is Alternate reality! And to number 1 poster who said the Romulans were to modern Um THEY WERE FROM THE FUTURE! LOL

Justin Case on May 9, 2009


Yeah justin the movie was great but it wasnt startrek at all and to youre comment "they took everything that was and crumpled it up & threw it away, no longer restrained" yeah thats what they did they took everything that we knew up to this point and threw in the trash this is not his twilight zone like TV show "lost" this was supposed to be the begginging of startrek not jj's twilight zone version of it!!! i mean they visited vulcan in the original series and the movies just NON-SENSE great looking movie great cast DUMB story!!!!!such a shame to!!!Almost JJ Almost!!!

BullDurham on May 9, 2009


Awesome! Thought it was great. It could have been a little longer, but all-in-all it was very good, and worth seeing multiple times. Wasn't all that crazy about some of the comedic moments, but i got used to it.

Brian on May 9, 2009


Ok...the soundtrack is sounding better....

Dark Helmet on May 9, 2009


Amazing... I wanted to see this movie first for Karl Urban (I'm a huge fan) and second because it looked amazing. It did not disappoint. For those "trekkies" who think the plot makes no sense or your mad because it basically erases everything that has happened before this movie... get over it. All good things must come to an end and this was a great new begining for this franchise. I think they explained it beautifully.

Diana on May 9, 2009


I caught the 11 pm showing and the movie was thrilling right from the get go! I'd highly recommend sci-fi and non-trekkie fans to watch this movie. This movie met my expectations. [=

EvOiSGooD on May 9, 2009


Spoiler Alert A Disgrace to the whole Star Trek Universe and to anyones intellegence: The plot seems to have been written by someone who has never seen a single Episode or movie from the Star Trek franchise. 1. Vulkan destroyed?!?!? Ok, its probably just the 2nd most important Planet in Star Trek. Now its gone?!?!? 2. People being able to be beamed from one planet to the other, when in TNG it was merely possible to beam someone 40k Kilometers (about 26k miles) (change of timeline) 3. A supernova threatening the universe to be destroyed?!?!?!? Commen sense, Astro physiks, Astronomy and Star Trek itself tought me that this is absolutly impossible. Destroy the system? Yes. Destroy the Universe? NO!!! Ridiculous starting idea for a plot. 4. Nero comings into the past to destroy Vulkan to make Spock pay and watch?!?!?!? This is where the whole storyline drifts into total Chaos. The question every logical or even not so logical thinking being after ur homeplanet was destroyed wouldnt be: "How can I mess with the one person (Spock) who actually tried to help?!?!?" but rather "Ok my Planet is gone, I traveled 200 years in the past with a ship that is far supirior to anything out there, Romulos still exists in this time and I dont only have the oportunity to tell them: " Hey guys, Im from the future and I know for a fact that ur, our Planet will be destryed. Take steps now to prevent it!" But can also give them my technologies and knowledge of the future so Romulus would become the absolute power in the Alpha-Quadrant." NO, Nero goes on some senseless rampage to avenge his loss and eventually fails. RIDICULOUS!!!!! 5. Since when is Vulcan one of two binary planets? Im bringing this up cuz Spock is watching his planet from some other planet which somehow is right next to Vulcan. (aproxymatly the same distance the moon has from earth, maybe even closer) 6. Making Kirk (who is a cadet) Captain after only one Mission is not only obscure but unthinkable as well. As much as the whole story messed up this movie and the rest of the Star Trek universe (timeline) I thought the actors where doing a fine job. They where quite entertaining and pretty well cast. The action sequences where alright, but: I will never understand, why Filmmakers think, that when u keep shaking the camera everytime something happens, the actionscenes will be more realistic and more excitng is just STUPID. Even in the space fighting scenes the camera keeps shaking. PATHETIC. Any Space battle in DS9 was more exciting cuz there u could actually see what was happening. In conclusion the movie is a stap in the back of every Star Trek fan who spend and enjoyed any amounts of time watching the shows and the other movies. I know this movie will be a big boxoffice hit due to the huge amount of marketing and hype and the many Star Trek fans. Never the less I wish JJ Abrams would have never been given the opportunity to mess up things that bad. I now wish this movie could be undone but it sadly cant. The last thing I want to say about this whole prequel thing is, that I find it more than strange that after the Enterprise show was such a debacle, why would u wanna make another prequel?!?!? It doesnt get into my head. Why dont they show us what happens after Nemesis? Why dont they bring out a new show? Titan for example. Why would u keep going into the past with a show that actually plays in the future. People and management at Paramount are completely useless. With regards German Jake. please excuse my spelling and gramma

Calibretto on May 9, 2009


this movie was amazing....not just the action and adventure part of it, but the actors had you feel for them, like when spock lost his planet or when Kirks father drove into the ship in the beginning. The great script that was funny at times to lighten things up yet very serious all of sudden when things started getting serious. Overall, one of the better films i have seen this year.

david on May 9, 2009


I thought the film was quite clever in how it rebooted the Star Trek series, while also acknowledging what came before.

Sean Kelly on May 9, 2009


I could not have said it any better than GERMAN JAKE you are so right this movie makes it so not only star treks 1 through 10 never happened but also erases the original series whichs vists vulcan and spocks mom it also erases the next generation which had several episodes concerning vulcan and spocks father who dies in the next generation timeline and his mother is there as well..and erases Deep Space Nine as well NEVER HAPPENED and Voyager !!!only the worst of the TV series is possible Enterprise!!!wow i wasted the better part of my life watching all that stuff that now never happened lol..... THATS why JJ is PERFECT for a show like LOST and maybe the LAST person for Startrek!!! Thanks....

BullDurham on May 9, 2009



esophus on May 9, 2009


#141, are you F**king kidding me. This movie was awesome. Maybe you should go and watch Star Trek Nemesis again and then come back and tell that this movie still sucks.

Last Son on May 9, 2009


146, Nemesis was star trek, this was star trek wars serenity. Everything he said was TRUE.

Richard on May 9, 2009


I just saw the movie tonight. I've never really watched the original series but Star Trek Voyager was a favourite show of mine. I really loved the movie . There's parts of it, little nitpicks, that I may have, but the movie was a blast! Btw, what is this big fuss over Matthew Perry? Was he the actor who played Spock's father? I thought he was fine. The comedic moments were hilarious and so was the action. As a science student I was a little inredulous at how they portrayed the black hole's relativistic effects (or lack thereof), but it was amazing action. Kirk was amazing, and it was so great to see John Cho & Simon Pegg playing some 'serious' roles (or at least more serious than their usual fare). Greatacting all around.

jman571 on May 9, 2009


#141 and one gives a rats' ass what happens after Nemesis and the NG crew. Great in their heyday, but that's done and gone (1 good movie, 2 ok and 1 awful). JJ Abrams' Star Trek is a fresh take on a stale idea. Trekkies gave up on Star Trek, and Paramount wasn't about to let this go off into the sunset. This is Star Trek's version of Casino Royale, in reference to the James Bond reboot. The creative minds behind this wanted to pay tribute to 40+ years of tradition while trying to attract people who actually leave their basement and have lives, and that includes me. Obviously Leonard Nimoy thought it was pretty good. Having said that... What a great way to kick off the summer. 2 hours of escapism with a few old friends. Everyone was spot on, especially Karl Urban and Chris Pine. And I must say, I'm totally in love with Zoe Saldana, she is stunning and god bless the miniskirt. I'm proud to get in touch with my inner dork again.... Star Trek, its so nice to have you back.

Dustin on May 9, 2009


Some people were just so desperate for a new star trek that i guess you were willing to accept ANYTHING..this script is a CHILDLIKE Fantasy if they had to DUMB trek down this much then they should have just left it alone i mean for christs sake Spock and Uhura making out on the turbolift jeez they really were after a DUMBER audience and by the tone of the majority of this thread they found the braindead idiots they were looking for !!! Its all FLASH and no SUBSTANCE!!!! the way simple minds like it !!!

BullDurham on May 9, 2009


i liked the lens flares

Tom V on May 9, 2009


guess what sells tickets... obviously not your beloved sci-fi mumbo jumbo. It's an origins story, lets see what they do with a sequel.

Dustin on May 9, 2009


Okay, one - not a trekkie, trekker, trekster, or whatever group is decided by now. One, the movie was made to appeal to everyone. Kids, mothers, dads, fathers, star trek fans, sci fi fans, and hopefully one hobbit like individual with a very serious skin condition fan out there. Two, descrepancies, sure. It is a movie. Just be happy that this movie helps keep the Star Trek world continuing on without it failing as it has in the past years. My wife an avid sci fi hater. Why, the cheese. As much as I enjoy the new star trek, I am not a big fan of the cheese in the older series. I honestly prefer sci fi on the realms of Battlestar, or Space: Above and Beyond. Heck, even V the miniseries could be totally awesome if it had better direction. But this movie, was entertaining, it retained lots of the familiar things we love about star trek, and it changed a lot of things about star trek. Even Star Trek included a quote that comes to be its reality. I think it was on Insurrection, where Abrahams character stated that Starfleet is old and seriously fighting for its own survival. Sure, not exact quotes but it relates to the theme of what I am saying. Star Trek has failed to get new viewers, and it has failed to retain most of the moderate fans who just like the world of Star Trek. JJ Abrams brought a new fancy, probably over glorified version of Star Trek to mainstream. Guess what, it adpated and it was successful. If my wife watches star trek now, it is because of this movie. In fact, she walked out saying, I might have to watch the older episodes. I warned her about them, and told her probably not a good idea. Just stick to watching star trek now and any newer movies and or hopefully newer episodes that come out. Why, because they were stale stories, used over and over again, and the cheese. This was a more real world star trek, something you could possibly believe to be true. Nothing outrageous, but plausible. Old companies still exist, like the beer commercials. We still listen to 200 to 300 year old classical music. Just like they will probably still be listening to Beastie Boys. But, there are some issues I think are a little bit used and warn out, but could understand how they would fit, nonetheless annoying at times. The lens flare, yes it created realism, but there was a place where it would be unlikely to exist like on the planet Delta Vega in the shade. really. The black hole, unless the future can pass through a black hole on the other side, I thought it was the crushing gravitational pull that destroys matter and even light. SO, it being used as a time travel element instead of wormhole is confusing. The mining ship, hello - it was from the future. It would have been more advance and more powerful energy wise and weaponry wise, so even the latest and greatest enterprise of the time would still be difficult to handle. Notice how Spocks ship handled it. Did pretty good to me. The ship on the exterior looked fine. But the interior was like a factory floor. I have been to a Naval vessel, and scene schematics. I would have thought in two hundred years they would have found a way to improve even on an earlier version of a star ship. Like I said realism, but it did not fit well. But, I can live with that because it was a fun movie, it had pretty much everything little bit of drama, lots of action, thriller at times, the famous red shirt easy kill of a crew member, romance in a small but manageable way, and comedy. Nero, I totally understand his anger, but to go back in time to do what he did. You really had to hold a grudge, but was it any different than Kahn. I mean, with Kahn, there was an event that changed the planets orbit and caused them to be stranded on a dying planet and left there to die. So, that almost resembles Nero's case in that a planet was destroyed, but see, billions of people died, not just a stranded group of intelligent superbeings. I would think that would be enough reason to destroy a race. When I hear how weak and the motivation was for him, I have to say, he was pretty bad ass. You kill a billion people in our time and boy, you get a little outraged here. Hmmm WWII, anyone. Another thing, Kirk was given command as a first officer, so when pike was captured and spocked was emotional, he was the likely choice. And Yes, pike saw something in kirk, remember, there was three years at the academy and I am sure pike paid attention to a top student to lead. Also, remember, that normally there are different paths to leadership at the academy as there are in our academies. Some cadets are supply officers, others are diplomats, language experts, engineers, and combat troops. So, when someone says, it does not make since for kirk to be captain when there were other officers. That maybe true that there were other officers, but not everyone is a true leader. You can notice a leader, Checkov, not a leader too young. Sulu, just arrived on the ship. Uhura, communications. Bones, the doctor. Scottie the engineer. The likely choice would be kirk. Yeah, he messed up a simulator. The initiative and the perserverance to win at something that you were suppose to fail, that took guts which some leaders use well. Great movie. Get over the minute details, but no that there could be things better, but complaining about tyler perry's five minute performance and winona ryders motherhood is a little far.

bishopsring on May 9, 2009


JUST AWFUL. As a longtime Trek fan, and after seeing the positive critical reception, I went into this movie with high expectations. I came out thinking, what is everyone else seeing in this movie? As an action movie it's passable; but as Star Trek it's terrible! 1. The plot is weak. As another commenter said, it's a bunch of action scenes stitched together. Great effects, and the fights are well choreographed, but this is standard popcorn-action fare at best. I enjoyed Wolverine more (also a pretty mediocre movie) purely as a collection of fight sequences. 2. This isn't Star Trek at all, it's Starship Troopers. TOS is about the day-to-day business of running a starship in the midst of danger and the unknown. Too many of the Trek movies (this one included) are about saving the galaxy from the villain of the month. OK, maybe you need a big grandiose plot to fill up a two-hour movie, but come on. What's so great about the old Star Trek is that it's basically a procedural drama in space. They do the same thing from week to week. They follow their protocols, even when they're sailing beyond the edge of the galaxy, or some giant energy being is squashing their ship. They push human civilization out into the unknown. In this movie, some random villain we've never heard of (where the heck does he get all his resources and manpower anyway?) is turning the galaxy upside down for poorly explained reasons, and the whole thing runs from crisis to crisis and battle to battle at breakneck speed. A reasonable plot for an action blockbuster? Sure. Star Trek? Absolutely not. 3. They throw continuity out the window. I'm all for mind-bending time-travel plots, they're a staple of sci-fi. But I wanted to see the back story of the REAL Star Trek universe that I know and love. Here they use some time travel nonsense to invent a new universe where nothing is the way we knew it, or maybe it is or will yet be, who knows? OK, maybe this is a clever way to have their cake and eat it too by "paying tribute" yet starting over. But it also means that the real back story of the actual Kirk and Spock we watched on TOS (the one experienced by the ancient Spock in the movie) is still untold. When do we get to see that story? 4. Kirk and Spock act like idiots and spend most of their time onscreen together either posturing or beating the living crap out of each other. These are not the same people depicted in TOS and the movies. 5. The key plot elements are unoriginal. The villain and his plan are basically the same as Nemesis. The technology the villain uses to carry out the plan is basically the same as the Genesis device from ST II. The villain even uses the EXACT SAME METHOD THAT KHAN DID (which was cool and original way back in ST II) to force compliance from his prisoners! At least in Nemesis (and in ST II) they explained what the villain's technology was and where it came from. Here they rely on some random thing called "red matter." What the heck is that? 6. How is this movie supposed to be better than Nemesis? As noted above, the plot is similar. At least that one had our old friends Picard, Data, et al. acting like their old selves. This one had "Kirk" and "Spock" acting like jerks and beating each other senseless. 7. Nimoy appears, but he doesn't act like Spock; he acts like, well, Nimoy. He's all kindly and avuncular and smiling. He says all the gospel ("I have been and always shall be your friend"; "Space, the final frontier") but it feels hollow and totally unprepared. Nimoy's performance here suggests that when a Vulcan reaches the final wisdom and maturity of old age, he mellows out to the point where he becomes, well, human. That's totally contrary to everything that Spock stands for in the old show. 8. The Spock and Uhura thing was just creepy. 9. Simon Pegg is funny, but that's not how Scotty behaves. Watch the old episodes again. He's not some impish goofball. He's mostly serious with a flash of the childish prankster/troublemaker that comes out every now and then. 10. Since when does a Romulan warbird have all those crazy odd angles? On the outside it looks like Shinzon's ship (Nemesis again!) but on the inside it's transparently the work of a production designer who wanted lots of catwalks and ledges that Kirk and his enemies could jump around on, hang on to, and fall off of. I realize I'm in a tiny minority here, with most everyone else in the critical and public audience heaping praise on Abrams's achievement. But in my mind they've distorted Star Trek beyond recognition, cheapening and diluting it in an attempt to (re)create a brand with mass appeal. Ugh.

Rob Bocchino on May 9, 2009


OK so I am going to be in the minority. Not only did I not like the movie, I thought it totally stunk in so many areas. Forget the weak story plot and ridiculous black hole science. The film was a mish mash of ridiculously pretentious film styles and was an annoying and ridiculously poor film to have to endure for two hours. 1. A few lens flares is a nice idea. Who doesn't like an occasional lens flare. But 50,000 of them littering every bloody frame of the movie is annoying and tacky as Hell. 2. What a waste of a very good actor. Any B Grade actor in Hollywood could get dressed up in a Romulan miner's outfit and play that one dimensional villain character poor Eric Bana was forced to endure. I found myself in the middle of the film yelling KHAN! KHAN! 3. The science would make Steven Hawking roll around in his wheelchair in frustration and rage. Just ridiculous. 4. The cinematography in cooperation with the hack job directing was beyond annoying. It was offensive, irritating and could seriously make many sick. Why the useless hand held jittery camera? Why the lens flares in every frame? Why so many extreme closeups especially in chaotic fight sequences. Was the film set and the money they got so poor that they needed all the closeups to hide how bad it was? I thought I was going to get either nauseous or suffer from an epileptic seizure having to endure that juvenile MTV schlock style of camera work and directing. 5. The actors all did a decent job considering the useless script and the lack of depth and character development. I mean the character of Uhura should be an insult to all women. All she was concerned with was career advancement and getting laid by Spock. Just a joke and a ridiculous stereotype. She pranced around like her name should have been You Whora. 6. You reinvent the universe and especially the look of the show and so all we get to highlight the changes are extreme closeups and lens flares muting and clouding the look and feel. My God I had to wait until just before the end credits to get a really good look at the Enterprise. 7. The continuity problems and changes to the Star Trek world were outrageous and really showed a tremendous disrespect to Star Trek and it's legion of fans. The destruction of Vulcan, Romulas and the love story between Spock and Uhura were just comical and blasphemous all in one. To understand Spock as a character over the past 43 years is to understand why he has never been laid. Abrams just doesn't get it and in the process he just pissed all over an icon. What's next, the Klingon Empire seizes to exist and the Borg become friendly allies of the Federation? I could go on and on but I'll try not to bore you any longer. I realize I am in the minority here but I just had to let my feelings out. I had high expectations for this film having been a fan for over 30 years and having once owned and operated a Star Trek merchandise store. But all I got was a massive disappointment and a film that made the last two TNG films Nemesis and Insurrection actually seem more palatable. Just total rubbish for and ADD generation that pleases far too easily. Above all, I was disappointed in the way the film was made not from the perspective of a Trekker, but from the perspective of a fan of movies. Will I ever see films that rate up their with the masterpieces of Peter Jackson from anyone else but Peter Jackson?

V Wilson on May 9, 2009


Why do Trekkers or whatever they're called have to be so damned nerdy???? Get over yourselves and have some fun. Remember that SNL skit with Shatner addressing Trek fans? He said, "Get a life." Great advice.

ebbie on May 9, 2009


Does anyone griping about continuity actually know what the hell that means? Go watch the movie again, try and follow the plot, and above all, listen to the damn dialogue! I realize this movie is a little more intricate than "A + B = C," but c'mon...

C on May 9, 2009


Intricate 157 are you serious it seems more like a child wrote that rubbish HOLES galore..

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


Wow. I think alot of you are missing the point of a MOVIE!!! On TV they can fill in the holes and develop characters and get into the hum drum business of running a star ship but in a movie we dont want to pay 10 bucks to watch captain kirk talk to his computer and call people into his office for a meeting!! Also for the complaint that this movie erased all the other movies before it YOUR WRONG!! Those already happened and with this timeline those events have been changed because of Nero coming through into this timeline!! So no maybe they won't have to save a whale or have spock hang with his mom because maybe in this timeline something cooler happens!! This is star trek NOW not 20 years ago when you could get by with bad TV. Star Trek deserves to be sexy and cool and change is good. I liked the first series and Next Generation but that was when I was a kid, Now quality matters to me and I think they did a bang up job. And the next person that talks about plot holes give examples please. with a spoiler warning of course. So far the "plot hole" examples I have read are actually explained in the movie. The star fleet is currently in a battle in another system at the time of the movie, hence all the cadets getting a chance to prove their worth. Also the rest were destroyed when they arived at Vulcan. Hence no protection at Earth when Nero gets there. Also the black hole cause by "50 gallons" of red matter was not in fact detonated over earth if you remember spock led them away from earth when he destroyed the mining laser. So please any other "plot holes" you wanna bring up please do. I normally would'nt defend so eagerly but I think alot of these posters are hating just to be hating and can't admit that this new movie trumps all of star trek past. This movie is amazing and I will defend it to the end. May the Fo....I mean Live long and prosper.

Unseen on May 10, 2009


I heard that they will finally adapt "ESCAPE VELOCITY" since this is doing so well.

Adam Kay on May 10, 2009


this movies rocks my socks! people need to chill out man embrace new things really... i hope it makes loads and loads and loads of cash so we get another and another.

werdnafaz on May 10, 2009


To #155, who wrote, "The science would make Steven Hawking roll around in his wheelchair in frustration and rage. Just ridiculous." If you want science, go see a documentary or stay home and watch PBS. Since when does kissing make a woman a whore? Did you think the green chick was Uhura? In THIS movie, did you see Uhura try to get Spock or anyone else in bed? It's "cease to exist" not "seize". I won't bother with all the other mistakes because your review was indeed boring. This movie was not. The high box office numbers tell us something that you missed.

Missy on May 10, 2009


#154 and #155 keep blogging...your not in the minority!

esophus on May 10, 2009


at first i was very skeptical that they could pull this off, mainly due to changing the characters but also when i had been hearing that they were messing with "canon". but i was just amazed at how good this movie is and how great the next movies should be. hopefully a series is in the cards. star trek is born again!!!!!

brad m on May 10, 2009


quick question I enjoyed it, I think the romulans should of been in more of the film (Bana) anyways The young Kirk says "James Siberius Kirk" but later in the film when he is getting tried and end of film they say "Tiberius" wassup w/ that? Like I said it was good but #155 and #156 have valid points. I think Abrams created that movie has a starter to say this is the route its going. Its an alternate universe so if any one wants to go back to the old way years later they can. just like any new generation films , old timers wont like and the new generation will, its a way of life w/ anything.

Jonah on May 10, 2009


#165, yeah I was thinking the same thing. I kept on getting confused because I could've swore they mentioned "Siberius" first then later changed to Tiberius... I just thought that was kinda awkward. Not a huge Trek fan myself, seen a couple episodes here and there and a couple of the movies... but I enjoyed this movie... a new style for a new generation.. can't wait for the next installments.

Sho' nuff on May 10, 2009


Saw it for the 2nd time last night-IT ONLY GETS BETTER! great movie!

Nick S. on May 10, 2009


There is one thing I have to think about, hearing all those people brag about. Most of those who loved the movie but dislike the constructiv criticism from Trek fans say everything is alright becuz now it is just an alternate Universe (timeline). BUT, we were made to believe in the Media, in comercials and even the Tagline itself that this movie would show us how everything started. For Example: "Watch how the crew of the Enterprise meet for the first time..." "See how Kirk meed Spock..." "The Future begins..." (official tagline to the movie) when indeed all that was utter BS Lines should have been: "Watch the crew meet in an alternate universe, an alternate timeline, an alternate Enterprise..." "See Spock and Kirk meet in a different timeline under totally different circumstances..." "The alternate future begins" They made everyone believe that they would show us it actually started. What they really did was piss on everything that has been before or better was actually supposed to happen and threw it out the window. If paramount thinks they can just start everything new by giving us such a ridiculus excuse. Well, why dont they make it a crossover then as well, Lets have some Star Wars charactrers in there, or better have the Enterprise battle the Death Star. Hell, lets bring in Superman in case Nero comes back from another alternate universe with some badass green matter to help the other Nero finish his already explained totally useless rampage against Spock. Maybe some of the less ignorant people here get my point. In conclusion JJ Abrams and his useless writers and Paramount tricked Millions of Fans and others to go watch that movie when indeed all they did was create a cash mashine by hype and Media which doesnt stick to the old idea and message Star Trek always delivered. Its sad to see how low Hollywood has sunk in the last years as they dont have new ideas anymore. "We dont know what we should do next, so lets reboot all the stuff that was goin well in the past, but put some nice Apple style tuch on it and say its better, faster and original." WHEN ITS NOT Ive got 3 words for that: PATHETIC, REDICULOUS, OUTRAGOUS

Calibretto on May 10, 2009


162 said this "The high box office numbers tell us something that you missed." WRONG it proves what i said that SIMPLE MINDS like films with SIMPLE STUPID PLOTS!!!! to UNSEEN!! There are HOLES galore so you accept the fact that there are now 2 timelines to the same charachters this is elementary school writing. just silliness welcome to the new startrek in the twilight zone!!!Silly!

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


#169 thank u my point exactly

Calibretto on May 10, 2009


20th ceturie fox should make a Star Wars where Darth Vader survives then. That would be fun \o/

Calibretto on May 10, 2009


I have some great more ideas: Lets make a new Lord of the Rings where Frodo dies in the first 20 minutes. He was kinda annoying anyways. (I bet Tolkin fans would love that) Let Vincent Vega survive Pulp Fiction, he was a cool dude. I would love ot see Marti McFly actully get the Sports Almanagh to the present. See him get rich as hell, make party like hell, f**k around all the time and eventually die of a drugoverdose. (lets call it Back to fear and loathing 😉 While were at it let Neo take the other pill and live his normal life. Let Indiana Jones become a dentist instead of an acheologist. He could search for bad teath instead. Sounds like a good plot. Sounds like great ideas for "Hollywould" I think. Maybe I should apply for a job as overpaid writer. I wonder what the writers were striking for when all they bring is crap.

Calibretto on May 10, 2009


Just got out of the theater for my second viewing and it is just as friggin' good the second time! Things I caught the second time around were some of the vast amounts of fanboy easter eggs hidden in the movie. Seriously, they're all over the place. Any Star Trek fanboy who doesn't love this movie has got to be one of those rare convention geeks who is just absolutely impossible to please. You could make a film off of one of their scripts (and they always have a script) and they'd still find a problem with it. The characters were the best part - they are perfect examples of their previous counterparts if they had been put in their specific circumstances. The problem I see is that fans are hoping to see the exact same characters in every single way, instead of conceding that this is a new timeline, new circumstances. Scotty was pretty zany in the original show, and if he had been essentially exiled to an ice planet because he mucked up a transporter test, he'd probably be exactly like he is in the movie. Pine is brilliant as a Kirk who never had his daddy around to inspire him - he's his own man and has more to prove to everyone around him. Quinto is perfect as a Spock who decides to embrace his human flaws above his Vulcan logic, but still tries to hide his rampant emotions under the guise of cold logic. It's not about seeing cardboard cut-outs of the old cast on the screen, it's about seeing how these characters would have changed if their history had been changed. Another thing I loved is how perfectly it fits into JJ Abrams niche of "everyone has a destiny, and no matter how much it changes, the universe tends to course correct". You can warp their entire pasts, but yet through either subtle or not-so-subtle ways, Kirk still ends up Captain of the Enterprise with his core crew around him. There's even a brilliant moment when Spock gives Scotty the correct theory for transporting across space and it echo's Scotty's own sentiment in Star Trek 4. As a whole, it bookends perfectly with the rest of the series while starting a whole new era in the Star Trek universe for the next generation (no pun intended) of fans.

Pete the Geek on May 10, 2009


why from Siberius to Tiberius? HUH....... WHY!!!!! alternate univese baby is the wave of the new generation...LOL cant wait to see the new predator..LOL!!

Jonah on May 10, 2009



Calibretto on May 10, 2009


It seems that so many trekkies must not have seen TOS, that movie was just like TOS except more action! I mean the science wasn’t sound in TOS the plot holes were many in TOS & as far as an alternate universe, who cares. I do believe that if they could’ve TOS would’ve done the same and did on various occasions. just accept it for what it is not what you want it to be. Me im glad that they removed all the exposition. And made it fun again.

Justin Case on May 10, 2009


I could imagine the Predator falling in love with the new Schwarzenegger character at the end making tons of Predator-human hybrids who then party with new Danny Glover Character in the 2nd part. (Why in gods name would u wanna make a reboot of a movie that is not only timeless but flawless in every aspect. This crap can only get worse. Dont care Rodriguez or any other person does it)

Calibretto on May 10, 2009


#172 Calibretto = = Love you're movie ideas i can imagine JJ is trying to find you now he needs some of that crap for ideas!!! if he remade any of those movies he would surely love those plot twists neo taking the blue pill of course and marty mcfly keeping the almanac its PURE JJ writing all over!!!LOL what a joke he made of trek and got all the mindless idiots to BITE sad!!!

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


UMMM #176 said "It seems that so many trekkies must not have seen TOS" I have not only seen them i still own the ENTIRE columbia house videotape collection of TOS,TNG,DS9,VOYAGER and of course all the REAL Startrek movies!! yeah i've seen em !! and thats the PROBLEM i saw everything before and the new movie DESTROYS all THAT!!!!Thanks But NO Thanks!!

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


It was exactlly what i thought it would be. Entertaining but nothing to get excited about. But at least Mr. Billington's life was changed by the umpteenth Star Trek movie. Luckily Leonard Nimoy showed up to save his role from being killed by Zachary Quinto. He tried way to hard

Chris on May 10, 2009


What is with these idiots bitching that they think the kid Jim Kirk said "Siberius"? He didn't, its just how he said his full name that these morons heard something different than most of us. CLEAN YOUR EAR WAX OUT! One of the EXPERT fanbois in these comments actually said something about Spock Prime never having had sex. WHAT?! Spock has had love interests before. What kind of experts are these nutjob fanbois? Did I actually read a fanboi's comments about swapping McCoy and Spocks brains back in the movies? Sorry, their brains never moved. That expert fanboi needs to learn a bit more about Vulcan's and pay attention better to the movies they supposedly know so much about. For all of the crazed fanbois (I am a Trek fan and have seen all Trek stuff and liked the Enterprise TV show (except the theme music), but I am no fanboi and don't go to conventions or consider myself a label such as trekkie or trekker) consider this. This movie is the second reboot. The first reboot was the second pilot episode of TOS. The REAL Star Trek would be the first pilot (The Cage) for TOS, I know later they worked in parts of the 1st pilot into later episodes (The Menagerie) and placed it as events on the Enterprise prior to Kirk taking command, but if you observe and think about a few things, that never really worked out right. Plot holes, inconsistencies, etc. This is normal fare for Trek. My biggest concern is just how the destruction of Vulcan impacts the future of this take of the timeline (there are still 10,000+ Vulcans alive though). In closing, I am just really tired of all of the EXPERT fanbois making so many crazy and inaccurate statements about the franchise and characters they claim to know so much about. P.S.: I would agree that the story/plot is the weakest part of this new film overall, however, the casting folks deserve kudos for finding just great actors for these classic roles. The actors and their performances are the best part of this movie. If JJ stays on, anything could happen...Vulcan could be restored, who knows...he's a master of pulling off things you never expect would be possible. But yes, get new writers for future movies or TV shows, ditch the ones from this movie.

Ken on May 10, 2009


I bet that most of the people who loved the movie also loved Cloverfield. A movie which only lived from its hype. Which didnt deliver at all. Made me Seasick after 15 minutes in a fricken MOVIETHEATRE. Didnt give any explainations at all. And ended after 70 minutes. I actually consider this movie to be one of the worst if not the worst movie ever. I actually was in shock when I heard that Abrams would make a Star Trek reboot, but I gave him another chance. Shouldnt have done it though. Dont get me wrong, I dont hate JJ or anything. I actually am a huge fan of Lost and havent missed a single Episode. Yet I am a hundred percent sure that they wont answer merely the amount of question they put up over the years. Its still to be seen i guess. Abrams just doesnt deliver to all the expectations he raises by all the hype upfront. Its kinda sad all in all...

Calibretto on May 10, 2009


I was so disappointed with Star Wars because I was really hoping that the new episodes would rock, but it flopped. And I was never interested in Star Trek because it was simply too cheesy for me. I was longing for something Sci Fi that I could get excited about. So out of desparation I went to see star trek 2009 and I am won over! Geoge Lucas... PLEASE TAKE NOTES, THIS IS HOW ITS DONE, HONEY!!! Now I'm a Trekkie and a Spock and Uhura shipper! Thanks JJ for making this version of Star Trek because this is the Star Trek we ALL were waiting for.

lovemasterice on May 10, 2009


He didn't say Siberius, he said Tiberius, the kid just didn't say it very well. He's even listed in the IMDb credits as James T. Kirk.

Tyler Hayes on May 10, 2009


It sounds like some wackadoos should go get some "real" Trek here:

Ken on May 10, 2009


The movie was decent, and I've got no problem with how any of the character's personalities were "re"-imagined. There were a couple of big problems for me. 1. Time travel--the most overdone theme in Star Trek series or movies. 2. Related to this J.J. Abrams completely shitting on 50 years of Star Trek lore. Seriously, you destroyed Vulcan AND Romulus in one fell swoop? Really? What the fuck were you thinking, dude?

Scott on May 10, 2009


watch the trailer he says siberius even homeboy that hosts this page made a comment of being siberius!!!

Jonah on May 10, 2009


is not what I hear, Jonah. Besides that...what is with your freaking obsession of an actor's kid's pronunciation?

Ken on May 10, 2009


#181 yeah #181 you are an IDIOT go and see startrek 2 3 and 4 again BRAINLESS at the end of part 2 spock mind melds with bones cause he knows hes about to DIE then in part 3 they recover spock from the GENESIS planet and bones is acting all CRAZY the whole movie cause he sorta has a part of spocks BRAIN in his BRAIN and SAREK tells KIRK he has to get spock back to VULCAN to get there MINDS or as i said BRAINS switched back correctly!!! DONT EVER SAY I DONT KNOW MY TREK LOSER!!!!! get youre facts straight KID!

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


Just saw it. Liked it. I'm confused about what people are complaining about. The movie was advertised as a complete reboot, so you KNEW things would be different going in. The fact that Abrams actually MAINTAINED the old continuity, while also establishing a new one, is more than you were promised. And anyone saying Uhura was a "dumb slut" or a "whore" seriously needs a wake up call. How is an accomplished military officer, who speaks multiple languages, who happens to be in a legitimate relationship, either dumb or promiscuous?

DRM on May 10, 2009


cast - no complaints, can't fault any performances, that's the casting process for ya. Story, they told one. lovely bit of escapism for my Saturday. Rebooted an existing franchise for a new audience so everyone could enjoy it $CAA-CHING$ If it's dead, leave it dead and put some effort into something totally new for the current generation to call their own. think it could have worked as standard sci-fi with out being star trek, but then might not have been hyped enough to attract an audience

dudhit on May 10, 2009


cast - no complaints, can't fault any performances, that's the casting process for ya. Story, they told one. lovely bit of escapism for my Saturday. Rebooted an existing franchise for a new audience so everyone could enjoy it $CAA-CHING$ If it's dead, leave it dead and put some effort into something totally new for the current generation to call their own. Think it could have worked as standard sci-fi without being star trek, but then might not have been hyped enough to attract an audience.

dudhit on May 10, 2009


#189, mind and brain are not the same thing and you are a complete idiot. I could run circles around your Trek knowledge. However, I am not here for that. I am just asking the supposed experts that are critical of this film to stop spewing out incorrect info and bullcrap, such as your idiocy. In closing, I am no kid and am likely older than you. So, please, grow up and go watch some New Voyages or some Hidden Frontier (I bet you LOVE Hidden Frontier).

Ken on May 10, 2009


To Alex Billington (#7): Thank you for taking the time to reply to my post, it's nice to see the author of an article taking an interest in user comments. However, I stand by my statement that the plot made no sense, since that's what you decided to dispute in your post (by the way telling you're readers that they are too stupid to understand a plot if they didn't like it and you did, seems a tad big headed) . Here are a few of my basic problems with the plot (to be fair I'm leaving out the time travel paradoxes, many though they were, because all movies with time travel have them so it's to be expected). [**SPOILERS**] One, I thought it was stupid that the captaincy got thrown around so much. Kirk gets made first officer, then captain at no notice and for no good reason, not to mention that he's only a cadet. That makes no sense. Spock puts Kirk in an escape pod and ejects him from the ship just in time land on an ice planet so we can have a gratuitous monster chase scene (rather than say throwing him in the brig). Then Kirk by sheer happenstance meets future Spock AND Scotty on that very planet and uses a transporter to get back on the ship which is by this point quite far away (boy the transporter really seems to suck up until this point doesn't it? considering it took them 10 minutes to try to beam up Spock's mom so she could die). Character motives were very unconnected with their actions. Old Spock, gets Kirk to go back and be captain and make friends with young Spock by being a jerk to him (which somehow works) so they can go together and blow up Nero and Spock's from-the-future-black-holes-that-allow-time-travel-making ship rather than say bringing it back to Old Spock so he can use it to go back to the future (lol) and stop Nero from going to the past at all (perhaps by actually saving Nero's planet) thereby saving the lives of countless millions of people. But apparently either Old Spock is too stupid to figure this out or he has concluded: Screw em, this new time line is gonna be awesome and can no doubt make paramount a great deal of money. Also the bit at the end where they are using warp speed to keep out of a black hole and escape by ejecting the warp core (which is powering the very engines keeping them out of the black hole at the time) and blowing it up which pushes the ship away without destroying it is particularly stupid. This is like getting stuck on a treadmill you cant turn off and deciding take off a shoe to throw at the plug, not gonna work. I've got lots more if you want it but this post is getting long. Let me just close by saying I also particularly hated the product placement by Nokia and Budweiser (of all things). Really?? They have Budweiser Premium in the future?? The acting in the movie was ok, the action sequences were good, but I need more from my movies than fluff.

Knightsofni on May 10, 2009


Just to remind yall that Zoe Saldana (my babies momma) is Dominican, not black, so Simon Pegg not being Scottish (spell) is not really a big deal. It's all good. Man I am a big Star Wars fan and think the Death Star crushs anything Star Trek but I was very happy with what JJ did with ST. I'm looking forward to new battles with the Klingons in any new movies that come! Awesome casting and great flow of the movie. **Spoiler** Loved the zinger sounds of the phaser fight on the mining ship. All the comedy was good except when Scotty fell out of the water system and made the quip, that one didn't fly very well. My woman, kissing Spock, uhhh that cut me deep. But oh well. Tyler Perry, well at least he wasn't allowed to direct any part of ST and I'm black so no shady grumblings going on here. Chris Pine is s a cocky sob but he did very well in my opinion, looking forward to seeing him in more ST movies. Bones! Brilliant! Talk about a tribute to the original Dr. McCoy and how he got his nickname was CLASSIC!! Again I'm Star Wars guy but this movie just made me cross the Event Horizon. Bravo JJ.

nktwrk on May 10, 2009


#193 you are really really stupid im sorry but there is just no other way to say it i proved what i had said earlier and instead of just admitting you're mistake you continue to show you're stupidy! I would challenge you to a star trek trivia match ANY day as i have already stated earlier i own EVERY single episode of every series except enterprise which i didnt like! and every single startrek movie!! and have watched each and every one serval times as well as reading SEVERAL of the startrek books including those cowritten by william shatner and leonard nimoy YOU would not stand a chance all the points ive made about the NEW crap trek are correct and can be easily verified. i said you know nothing and it shows!!!you should really see treks 2 through 4 easily the best period in the movies!!!give em a look!!!

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


This film falls short not just as a Star Trek film but as a film all together. The audiences in this day and age are becoming increasingly less sophisticated. As long as things blow up and sex and cheap laughs are present people show up in droves. No longer does a film need to carry any dramatic weight, social relevance, or a cleverly constructed narrative to be a hit. People clearly are just going to films for the sole reason to be entertained and nothing more. For that I suppose this movie does it's job. But anyone who has seen previous Trek's can tell you that Star Trek is at it's best when it's commenting on society and current events in some way which this film doesn't do. It's also at it's best when you feel that the characters are in genuine peril which this film never does. It's also at it's best when it's focused on it's characters and their developments rather than action and spectacle. The film is shallow, one dimensional, and highly lacking in originality both in it's writing and in it's direction. The creative forces behind this film show a complete disregard or care for what Star Trek really is at it's core. Instead they twist it around into a Star Wars wannabe to make it relevant to them since they clearly were never fans of Trek. The music is painful in places and screams of blandness. The entire time you keep hoping that Jerry Goldsmith will rise from the grave to show these fools how it's done. The characters and events are manipulated and twisted to an extreme where the qualities that made them popular to begin with are barely even present. Spock having an affair and showing public affection for Uhura for example is about as far from the character as you can possibly get. The script is riddled with cliche and predictable dialogue and narrative. The biggest surprises that come in the movie is just how little respect Abrams seems to have for Star Trek and how badly he manipulates it trying to exploit an unsophisticated audience and turning the series into his own cash cow. These days everything that made me love the cinema as a child seems to be vanishing. Audiences are getting younger and younger and so the studios are targeting them more and more. At this rate rated R films will become extinct. Films that find hidden meanings and messages no matter how big the budget will be brushed to the side for brainless family fare. It's really a shame too because with The Dark Knight I thought that sophisticated Hollywood films were coming back but this summer is showing that not to be the case. Watchmen tried to continue what The Dark Knight started but apparently it was too much for weak minded people to handle. At this rate, Batman will be back to bat nipples in no time. I only hope that Terminator Salvation packs some dimensions or this summer will surely mark the end of good classic cinema.

filmguy on May 10, 2009


WOW this last guy REALLY gets it nice comment like i was saying in an earlier comment the reason so many people like this new trek is because of just how DUMBED down it really is and as i said SIMPLE-MINDED people like KEN enjoy this crap they want boom boom and dont care if you trash an entitre generations favorite scfi franchise!!!Nicely done filmguy!

BullDurham on May 10, 2009


Didn't have much hopes for it seeing it, and was actually sleepy when I went... this movie woke me up. I enjoyed all the cameos, the comedy -- I looove how they covered their asses with the alternate dimension with the time travel so the characters can still be them but branch off into new stories (very nice 😉 ). And.. I know I'm gotta get some sneers from this but I HATE HEROES! I FUCKING HATE IT. WHAT KIND OF WRITING.. WHAT??! but um.. Zachary Quintos. how you doin baby? With your... .. . logic. On a serious note though this was refreshing. The visuals were awesome but I loved it for the story. Haven't seen a good movie in a while and I had fun watching this, a great summer movie 🙂 And lastly, I understand that a lot of people are out there thirsty for a movie that excels the crap that's out there now and were hoping to see something a lil more from this movie, sucks that their expectations were not met but i'm sure there are plenty of other new and upcoming films that will come out to suffice your yearnings.

Yasmin on May 10, 2009


#196, just stop showing how pathetic you are. You've proved nothing and turned these comments into a personal pissing contests. I made a general assertion that folks need to stop spewing B.S. and you, in your infinite feelings of narcissism believed I was talking directly to you, your lordship. Please, stop embarrassing yourself. Finally, if you think ST3 was good, you've proved your retardedness. ST3 is a shadow of a story and was stretched out way too long and should have been another 10 mins added to ST2 (WOK) instead. ST1 was 2nd best after ST2 (WOK). Wow, you've read ST novels, including the CRAP books written by Shattner? I am so impressed by your ubermensch status. Keep coming after me you pathetic waste of life, it is a great use of both of our time, isn't it? I have ST novels too, big friggin' deal. OOooo, wait here, I need to go watch and re-watch some ST movies so I can begin to talk with you. But, I have you now! You apparently have not watched Enterprise nor Star Trek: The Animated series (both of which I own and have watched many times). I suppose you do not respect them, so they do not warrant your attention. Alas, how can you form an ubergedanke without exposure to all that is Trek, despite your person bias and prejudice. Anyway... Are you still reading this, are you that obsessed with yourself? ...I think you need some sleep. Bye now.

Ken on May 11, 2009


Okay, maybe now I should do it like this... #197: You said "People clearly are just going to films for the sole reason to be entertained and nothing more." + Imagine that, people want the entertainment industry to entertain them, not lecture or educate them. Who woulda thunk it. You said "But anyone who has seen previous Trek's can tell you that Star Trek is at it's best when it's commenting on society and current events in some way which this film doesn't do." + Really? You speak for all of us now? I've seen all Star Trek media and then some and I can point out many episodes that have nothing to do with what you claim Star Trek must have in a story or else it is not Star Trek, including the movies. You said "It's also at it's best when you feel that the characters are in genuine peril which this film never does." + Does a movie or episode of Star Trek always have to be a peak of exacting perfection based upon your judgement? When was the last time you really felt a main character in a Star Trek movie or episode was in "genuine peril"? Even when Spock died, he survived! Kirk? Well, actually, myself and mony others kept hoping he'd die in each new movie!!! LMAO Next brilliant thought from you... You said: "It's also at it's best when it's focused on it's characters and their developments rather than action and spectacle." + Wow, I thought this was a sort of origin movie. It showed pivotal points in the development of some main characters and gets berated by the likes of you because we dare see Spock's struggles and vulnerabilities (also known as character development). I don't need to say any more about this. LMFAO You said a bunch of stuff about how they ruined Star Trek and made a terrible movie so they can go to the bank and screw the fans. + Yeah, okay. They want to make money and show they can make money and that leads to more Trek. I agree the story was lacking and had problems, I loved the actors and their work most of all and look forward to something much better in future installments. But, BullDurham (original sheeple pseudonym there), can keep personally attacking me because I dare have a thought and felt the need to not throw the baby out with the bath water and to ask the uberfanbois to at least not say bulldurham-crap/inaccurate assertions when they make their comments. I too hope for adult movies for adults rather than making 90% of movies into kid safe or family movies, I like dark movies, black comedies and "oh crap the good guy didn't win" as the credits roll type of movies here and there. Here's to a better Star Trek future, but someone is always going be hate whatever they do. I am sorry, but the same crap was said by rabid nutjob fanbois when each TV series came out and it takes a decade to pass before those same fanbois then start to think "hey, I like it, it IS Star Trek". Same with some of the movies or some things done in some of the movies. Just grow up and think outside of your little boxed mind. 😉

Ken on May 11, 2009


P.S.: For those that I have seen debating Wolverine Vs Star Trek or saying jovially that Wolverine kicked Star Trek's butt opening weekend vs opening weekend. Star Trek has brought in almost as much in 3.5 days as Wolverine has in 10 days worldwide. 😉

Ken on May 11, 2009


FALCING GOOD! haha I am a die hard star wars fan and i believe this movie accomplished what the star wars prequels should have been or tried to be. i liked wolverine last week, but i think star trek was even better. FALC yeh!

Timo on May 11, 2009


This movie didn't really have the kind of thought-provoking hard science fiction theme that makes Trek unique from Star Wars and all the rest. I felt that Nero wasn't explained very well; we don't really get a good understanding of who he is. He seemed too alien and brooding, unlike Trek's greatest villain, Khan, who we not only understood, but could sympathize with his situation. I know that Nero's planet was destroyed and he lost his wife, but we don't really witness his anguish. I was sort of shocked by Scotty's dwarf side-kick also. That seemed contrived, and I half expected him to sound like Jar-Jar Binks. I hope he's quietly omitted in the sequel, with no reference or mention of him ever again on film. These quibbles aside (and they really are minor), this movie was a rollicking good time. I haven't had this much fun in a movie in a LONG time, to the point where I really forget about the world and get completely caught up in the adventure. Spielburg and Lucas at their very best could accomplish this, and that's how the over all experience felt for me. The cast was superb. The effects and new sets were fantastic. And although I complained a little about the plot, it was still a pretty clever way of rebooting the franchise and I think satisfying old and new fans. Abrams has deepened the canon, not destroyed it. I can now watch TOS episodes with a whole new perspective.

Scott on May 11, 2009


KEN or #'s 200 through 202 lol you seem to be spending as much time reading this as i do you MORON you continue to show you're STUPIDITY AGAIN and AGAIN you know nothing of trek and it shows. you are SIMPLE MINDED and like SIMPLE MINDED PLOTS !!!!!it is you who needs to get over yourself every TRUE trek fan knew exactly what i was talking about with star trek 2 and 3 and spock and bones BRAINWAVES being SCRAMBLED but you're IDIOTIC MORONIC SELF!!!!and star trek 3 did not suck! You are a SIMPLEMINDED FOOL! 3 was just way to complacated for you KEN!

BullDurham on May 11, 2009


and by the way KENNY GIRL you mad it PERSONAL with me when you said i was worng about things that can easily be CONFIRMED DUMMY!!He's not even smart enough to remember who made things personal and who didnt DUMB!!!!! SO DUMB!!!!!

BullDurham on May 11, 2009


"But anyone who has seen previous Trek's can tell you that Star Trek is at it's best when it's commenting on society and current events in some way which this film doesn't do." I guess you missed the clear reference to water boarding and torture when Nero did these kinds of things to Captain Pike. It was an obvious comment on current events. For all of you who missed this in elementary school, "it's" = it is. Why does this new universe bother fans so much? Do you think your old VHS copies are now erased? You do understand all of this is not real, right? This is like Galaxy Quest only the fans are the ones who seem to think the TV shows are historical documents. It is entertainment. Nobody took away Vulcan because it isn't real. To mourn Tuvok and the destruction of Vulcan is absurd. Why can't you folks just enjoy it instead of saying it destroys all that came before it and anyone who likes it is stupid. If you were so worried about it taking something away from YOU, you should not have seen it. Stay in the basement and keep watching the old stuff that satisfies you so much while practicing your Klingon language skills.

Missy on May 11, 2009


#201 and #205 or Ken and BullDurham. Damn this has turned into a full out war. I'm not really interested in getting in the middle of quarrels on whose the biggest Trek fan. I certainly never claimed to be one of the biggest fans. I only recognize the qualities that I personally think were the best from Star Trek. Certainly from the films. I think most people agree that the best films were the ones that took the narrative and the characters seriously. Like The Wrath Of Khan, Search For Spock, The Undiscovered Country, and First Contact. I only was pointing out in my post how deeply lacking the new Trek was in having the same qualities that made those ones so great. Ken the best films are those that find a way to entertain but at the same time find a clever way to insert some deeper meaning in there. The new film really failed to do that. Yeah it may be entertaining but films that prove to truly last the test of time are ones that make you think and that resonate. I went through film school with a focus in screenwriting and I gotta tell you that the screenplay had some very weak dialogue, character development, and narrative structure. Statistics are showing that younger audiences are making up most of the audiences attending the movies these days so studios are making these movies more for them. Also the industry has taken into account the economic crisis and are thinking that audiences are handling too much drama in their real lives that they can't handle any more in the theater. Back in the last depression they had Shirley Temple but now they need to dumb down all of their big properties. Audiences have just become less sophisticated and sadly don't appreciate good cinema now. They just want immediate satisfaction with out putting any thought into anything on screen. Now Ken I think you're being a bit of a hypocrite about yelling at BullDurham for continuing to write in to defend his view when you yourself are continuing to do it as well. I mean you came at me and attack with out any reason. I really don't care if you know more about Star Trek. I've certainly seen all of the series and movies but I'm not obsessive about it. Don't think I'd want to be. I speak more from knowledge of film and the cinema then I do for Star Trek. The new movie is a film after all and as a film it fell really short. #207 there are torture scenes in countless films through out cinema history and this one certainly did not speak much to current events. The little slug they dropped in Pikes mouth was a reminder of The Wrath Of Khan but beyond that there was nothing else in the torture scene that had a deeper meaning to it. I don't know how you got that. Also if that is the only moment in the entire film that you think you can find something symbolic then that's just sad. The main reason that I can't enjoy the film is not because of how it screws with Trek history. The biggest reason is just simply that it wasn't a very good film. As I've previously stated it was lacking some of the most important ingredients and was shallow, one dimensional, and generally poorly written and directed. I speak more from a fan of the cinema then I do as a Star Trek fan. Sure I like Star Trek and grew up on it but Star Trek isn't what made me want to get involved in the industry. I love films and I greatly respect films that manage to accomplish entertainment along with a great story, well developed characters, and some deeper dimensions that make it resonate. This one certainly didn't accomplish anything beyond entertainment for 13 year olds. Also Missy we are writing in a message board not an english essay. Who really cares if I use "it's" incorrectly.

filmguy on May 11, 2009


You are a screenwriter who doesn't care about its and it's and then and than? I suppose you are very successful, too.

Missy on May 11, 2009


Wow you really got me there Missy. Because I don't obsess over whether or not I put an apostrophe in meaningless message board then that must mean that I'm uneducated and an unsuccessful. Screenwriting is a very long and careful process filled with many drafts and last any where from months to years. That I take seriously. A message board where immature people feel compelled to attack and insult people who don't agree with them I could care less about. Do you have any idea how pathetic you make yourself look making a personal attack like that? Grow up.

filmguy on May 11, 2009


Overall it was a fantastic movie. I just realized some of the "flaws" from reading some of the comments, but did it overpower my enjoyment of the film? Hell no. LOL at all of you who are too technical and emo about the smallest details.

hoohah on May 11, 2009


For non-Trekkers the movie will be awesome, but for Trekkies, I think it'll stink really, really bad! For Trekkies, the overall plot is both unconvincing and totally irrational. No self respecting Romulan would ever sit idle for 25 years, whether for revenge or otherwise, while in possession of technology that's from an advanced future over a century away. It's more likely they would use it usurp the Romulan Empire and the rest of the quadrant as well, while all the Federation could do is wait to be conquered next. Too campy, from Kirks ridiculous fat hands to wtf was that little side-kick thing for Scottie, an ugly gray Pikachu? Not to mention Scottie's trip through the aquatic hamster tubes, all of this didn't feel very Trek like at all, instead maybe tubes filled with Tribbles would have been more convincing. I honestly believe it’s an alternate timeline because the script writer lacked the ability to do the proper research necessary to stay true to the original timeline and make it work. I'm sorry; I simply cannot and will not buy into anyone erasing a 42 year old franchise to merely reinvent the wheel when they admittedly totally lack the credentials to do the job with any merit. Thanks Paramount for a flashy film full of 3D splendor and fast action but otherwise still a load of ill contrived and inconsistent crap. I mean clearly, Abrams is no fan of the franchise nor has he ever been. So why then did he ever get the job? Trek isn’t about some new director throwing in iconic cameo shots from their previous movies or TV shows, so wtf is Abrams allowed to get away with his crap? I hope Paramount suffers, really bad, from this blunder.

Gary on May 11, 2009


Actually Science, Real Science theory has just about proven the existence to parallel universes or alternate realities that vents may unfold differently than what you decided, that does not change who you are its just a different choice or different circumstance. So come on maybe not all of the same events can occur in this new Trek timeline, most could still happen exactly the same. And s far as Vulcan goes who cares those stuck up pricks got what they deserved. Really I don’t see a whole lot of difference between this Kirk and the Kirk we already Knew, and this Spock is a more emotional than the old one, but they had the old one there saying that he was always like that but never showed it, almost like he envied the new Spock. All I can say is you guys who say that this defies the old stuff, grow up! I didn’t want to watch the old stuff I wanted something new & more like TOS I’m glad I got what I wanted.

Justin Case on May 11, 2009



Justin Case on May 11, 2009


At #212 Thank u!!! Finally someone else found the absolute weakspot in this ridiculous movie. Every intellegent and logical thinking Person would see that Neros quest for vengence is absolutely pathetic. again: What he wants to do: -He wants to make Spock (The only guy who actually tried to help Romulus) suffer by destroying his homeplanet in return. He acts as if Spock did it on porpus which is not only stupid but absolutly not the reaction aynone would have not even a Romulan. What he or any other Person could or would have done instead: -Tell the Romulans to prepare for the Supernova and take precautions so it doesnt happen (basicly get the red matter earlier with the help of Spock maybe and rescue Romulus) Future saved!!! -Takes this huge and far supirior Ship and bring it to romulus -Give them all the Technology and Knowledge of the next 150 years -Make the Romulan empire the strongest empire in the galaxy -conquer the rest There u go. Say this is not the truth and u are exactly the Idiot Paramount was puting their money on. btw so far noone of the pro guys has even dared to talk about this fact. It shows that they have no answer to that question becuz they are too ignorant to aggnolage it. ill rest my case...for now

Calibretto on May 11, 2009


Calibretto.. You seem like someone i could actually have an inteligent conversation with you are correct and this is no place for personal attacks i can say in my defense he made it personal several comments ago when he attacked mine and several other peoples VALID points i cant stand someone like that who doesnt have the brain power to make logical arguments so they resort to name calling..if you go back to the beggining of mine and kens dispute youll notice he called a bunch of us stupid so of course im gonna defend!!!you are so right about so many flaws in this movie i was only pointing out the OBVIOUS ones destroying vulcan and spocks mom ect... but there were so many many more!!! KEN PLEASE GROW UP!!!

BullDurham on May 11, 2009


I loved everything about the film. But the one thing I just do not get is casting Typer Perry in any role in this film. He's so associated with Madea that that's all you think of when he's up there. They would've been better off casting an unknown, really.

Richard Bates on May 11, 2009


Fantastic movie! ! ! !

Jeremy on May 12, 2009


I like the new Star Trek Movie. It was very interesting but there were a couple of things that did make sense 1. Why would someone wreck a perfectly good car by driving it of a cliff? Did we really need this scene 2. Starships are not built on the ground. They are built in orbital shipyards, Uptopia Planitia anyone? 3. Admiral Archers dog!!!!!!!!! When Scottie said he beamed Adm Archers dog into space how would that be possible? Admiral Archer lived over 100yrs before the time of Kirk so how could he beam his dog into space? Let alone meet him? 4. Transporters lock onto your communicator signal to beam you up so moving around wouldn't interfere too much

Jamin Green-Dollison on May 12, 2009


Didn't think it sucked, but didn't think it was great either. I just don't understand why every critic in America is going nuts over this movie! "Star Trek" has certainly been one of the most anticipated movies of the year, and for many reasons. On one hand you have the true fans. For some it's the original series, others the continuing adventures of the original crew of the Enterprise from TOS through the movies, and still others, the complete run of the franchise encompassing "The Next Generation", "Deep Space Nine", "Voyager", and "Enterprise". On the other hand you have people who are perhaps coming to the table for the very fist time. Maybe they watched some episodes from any one of the television series, movies, or even were just aware of the concept of "Star Trek" but never felt the urge to get into it. It might have been because it was before their time or they found it to be too slow or talky. I want to take on this reboot using these two vastly different viewpoints. I say this because I came to this movie as a "Star Trek" fan (not a 'Trekkie', which I consider the extreme fan) and as a passionate moviegoer. In other words, I watched this movie unfold by also being able to disconnect my fan expectations and view J.J. Abrams story and vision as solely one of this summers anticipated blockbusters. Which is kind of the way I went into the first "Transformers" when it came out. I was never a fan of the toys or animated series, but I found the movie to be filled with cool action and amazing scenes of giant robots kicking the shit out of each other...and that's exactly what I wanted from that movie. Considering the fact that Michael Bay has never had dimensional characters or great story in any of his movies, I knew I'd get exactly what I set out to enjoy: action, action, action! However, with the new "Star Trek" I was finding it very hard to enjoy the movie on either level; both fan and moviegoer. As a backup to how the film would be perceived minus the true fan aspect, my girlfriend has never been a "Trek" fan and was mainly seeing this with me on the sole merit of being one of this summer's big movies we wanted to see. So she was clear of the baggage that some people might say I brought too much of with me into the theater. Keep in mind that there are SPOILERS AHEAD. First and foremost I have to say "Star Trek" was way too fast and furious for me to really care about any of the characters. The constantly moving camera work was WAY overdone and became a real annoyance throughout. FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, LOCK THE CAMERA DOWN ONCE IN A WHILE! Even shakiness during some serious scenes seemed inappropriate. I'm reading a book...quick dolly in on me! I'm about to go to the bathroom....drop zoom onto my face! I'm sitting here thinking about my dog....push the camera in and spin around me landing on my face and then shooting away to my girlfriend about to make eggs!!! STOP IT!!! The whole concept of this being in an alternate reality was clever at times, but I think that was one of the things that took me out of caring about the characters. These just didn't feel like the same people who would become the iconic crew. Even though in a way they were. The time travel aspect was definitely fascinating though. A lot of the sets were just out-of-control tricked out! My thoughts about the bridge in photos months before the actually movie came out remained the same for me as I watched it in motion. Too bright, way too detailed, and at times, very indefinable. Speaking from the "Trek" fans point of view, I didn't like that there is a large 16x9 window at the front of the bridge. It's always been a view screen! Even with a zillion graphics flitting across it, it's still a view screen. I flat out thought engineering was a joke! What, are we in A BREWERY?! Give me a break! Concrete and valves? Did we just run out of time and shoot in the basement of the studio? But wait, there's a computer terminal where Scotty works. Oh, I see the high tech future now. I'd like to order the Enterprise Lager or the Unemotional Spock Stout please! That comment came from my girlfriend at the end of the movie, BTW. Casting... Chris Pine did a better job than being a little wooden, as some of the reviews I've read state. Thought he carried the lead nicely, and I appreciated brief nods here and there to Shatner's original when he said "Bones" near the end. I didn't think he was amazing though. Speaking of "Bones", the nickname is common among ship's doctors in the Navy and has been for decades. THAT's why he's called "Bones". Why they had to come up with a reason for Kirk calling McCoy that is kind of pointless. The whole Kobayashi Maru test scene with Kirk was way over the top. Fan's view point: Kirk should have been a little cocky for sure, but more intent on appearing to masterfully beat the simulation instead of swinging around in his chair, eating an apple, and being so blatantly unconcerned with the outcome. How does he get a personal commendation for original thinking out of this, as he states in "Wrath Of Khan"? Here, Starfleet wanted to boot his ass out! To anyone with half a brain he seemed like he was blatantly cheating and even a five-year-old kid would have nailed him right away. Just seemed dumb the way they portrayed it. Zachary Quinto does a very good job of taking over the role of Spock. I don't think anyone else could have played him so in tune, not only with the character's iconic persona, but in his resemblance and connection to Leonard Nimoy. Simon Pegg was definitely funny and I kind of wanted to see more of him. Anton Yelchin's Chekov was a little over the top with his accent but it didn't bother me that much. Perhaps the best performance of the movie goes to Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy. He really nails DeForest Kelley in so many ways AND makes it his own without over tweaking. He was probably the most enjoyable element I found in the entire movie. One thing I was pretty annoyed with was how the original "Star Trek" phrases and nods were really just tacked on in just about every scene. Spock saying 'fascinating' and McCoy grunting 'you green blooded hobgoblin' just came across as lip service to the fans. Kind of like 'here's your little treat to chew on, happy now?'. The green academy girl Kirk beds was a similar 'here ya go, Trek nerds' scene. Even Leonard Nimoy saying 'I have been and always shall be your friend' seemed like one of the biggest rotten carrots thrown out to the fans, and it was delivered like an empty promise that this was really "Star Trek". Nothing against Nimoy. That had my head shaking, but didn't compare to the space sky diving scene! GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!!! So when are we going to burn up in the atmosphere?! I was shaking my head so much I was waiting for it to come off my shoulders and roll onto the theater floor! That completely topped my reaction to the alien spacecraft rising up in "Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Title Is Too Long And Out Of Control"! Spock and Uhura having a 'thing' really did nothing for me or the story. Maybe to add more to Spock's emotional side? I was annoyed at it from a fan's point of view, and found it kind of flat from the general moviegoer's seat. The first ten or twelve minutes of the film that everyone is saying 'grabbed them by the throat and never let go' was good, but didn't have me at the edge of my seat, heart pounding with anticipation. I'd probably have to say the one clip I thought was well done was when an explosion rocks one of the decks and a crewmember is blown out into space. As you follow that person outside the hull, all sound is removed and we ONLY SEE the battle. That was an effective moment. There's no sound in space, but of course if we didn't have sound out there in the movies, these space actions and battles wouldn't be as potent. When Kirk's mother and father start talking about what they're going to name they're newborn, it kind of seems like the clock ticking off the last ten seconds before the Kelvin hits Nero's ship stops. Oh wait, did I leave the gas on? Hold off on to that impact thing for a moment. The effects in general were very well done, and at times eye popping. When the Enterprise comes out of warp at Vulcan, the way it traverses the debris field of wrecked or destroyed ships is awesome. Although initially when the Enterprise, as well as the rest of the fleet go into warp it's too loud and too annoyingly abrupt. In general it seems like whenever they do something like this in a movie it always has to top what's come the point of being ridiculously blown out. This could have been done better. But then again it's what young audiences want in movies today. Big! Loud! Slam! Crash!...Hey man, is that Dolby Digital?! WELL TURN IT UP, MAN! Used effectively it's amazing. Used just for the sake of the 'pow', it's nothing but noise. But this is just a side note from my review. The story was pretty basic, although very rushed. Like I said at the beginning, you're never given time to connect with anyone. Even Eric Bana seemed more like a Next Generation movie villain (that's not a compliment) than anything even remotely touching Ricardo Montalban's Khan, still the best of the best. I say this because so many people are comparing Nero with Khan. Sorry, didn't see it at all. I just didn't feel threatened by him. But for what Bana was given, I think he did a good job with it. BTW, was his ship big enough? Six billion people die when Vulcan is destroyed. I think we should have felt that much, much more than anyone in the film certainly did. This is part of the emotional resonance that was missing from the entire film; BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, EXPLOSION, EXPLOSION, EXPLOSION, FIRE EVERYTHING!!!....Can I have a little heart and soul with my rock and roll please?! The new design of the Enterprise is probably cool for someone coming into this fresh. I had some issues with it, especially the overly pregnant engines. This is a minor thing, I know, when it comes to the overall film. In fact more faithful Trekkies will probably decry a lot of things in this movie on a pickiune scale. I respect that, but didn't feel as many abrasions when it came to canon. But they did step over the line quite a bit here and there in my book. My girlfriend, whose not a Trek fan but is a HUGE movie and sci-fi fan, found the movie to be O.K. but nothing overly special. She agreed that emotion was lost on the abundance of blown out action. She was a true gauge for me outside of those I've read reviews from previously. If you're a twenty-something and you've never seen "Star Trek" you're probably going to think this movie is the second coming. Good for you, glad you enjoyed it so much and can't wait for the sequel. For me this was just a one-off that didn't really connect to the established universe of the franchise. But then again I really lost interest in the movies when they moved on to the Next Generation cast. Another observation by my girlfriend (and I agreed with her): did it seem like the ending was lifted from the original "Star Wars"? The Throne Room scene? Kirk gets a medal, everyone applauds...he should have winked at Spock. Then they all turn around and Chewbacca growls because he helped and didn't even get a medal! And even before that, Nero's humongous ship destroys entire planets. the Death Star maybe? That J.J. Abrams...he's such a "Star Wars" fan. As a Trek fan I was really expecting this movie to be fantastic. When I first heard about this project I thought to myself what an incredible fine line the filmmakers are going to have to tread to get this movie right, to follow what is canon. Kind of like Zack Snyder when making "Watchmen", and I thought he did an incredible job with that! Plus, I'm a fan of the graphic novel. Key elements when making a new movie from a revered book, property, comic, etc.; respect for the material while turning it up a notch and giving people something new. Zack Snyder, Sam Raimi, Bryan Singer have been these directors. J.J. Abrams could have gone to the next level, brought a really exciting "Star Trek" story WITH emotion and WITHOUT insane amounts of pimp-outed action, sets, characters, and it could have worked nicely. Turning it up to 11 or 12 would have been great. He turned it up to 30! I think my eyes and ears are bleeding now, thank you. As a movie I wanted to see from purely a movie fan's perspective, and I too am a HUGE movie fan, "Star Trek" seemed kind of average, relying on a lot of elements we've seen before and to no greater use here. Like I said, it wasn't bad, it was just kind of...there. As a "Star Trek" movie, and the level of character depth, story, and emotion, this doesn't hold a candle to "The Wrath Of Khan"...period. Reboots are tricky things. So far, the only reboot that worked (and worked incredibly!) was "Batman Begins", which of course was followed by "The Dark Knight" and that was amazing! Those films are still hard to follow. I wish I could say "Star Trek" did.

Editboy on May 13, 2009


This movie was sick. I'd watch it again and again.

that guy on May 13, 2009


I'm an Old Skool Trekkie, watched the original show with my mom when I was a kid, and this was fantastic! It kept all the things I LOVE about Star Trek and added all the things I LOVE about the movie technology we have now, bent them into something familiar but new at the same time, AND managed to keep the old canon untouched. This wasn't a re-imagining like the Bond series now. This is a Whole New World of Star Trek, with alternate stories but the same familiar faces. I LOVED it. Great Job. Don't...mess with Captain...Kirk.

RStewie on May 13, 2009


Finally watched Star Trek on Tuesday night and with all the positive reviews on this movie I had some high expectations. At the end of it, I wasn't totally disappointed but I wasn't jumping out of my chair saying it was brilliant either. I enjoyed the characters but considering that Spock and Uhura were never really known to be romancing I found this be out of place and changing the dynamics of the friendships and relationships that were formed in past movies and series. The second thing that got me was that the time line and chain of events for Nero destroying Vulcan has now left the Shatner/Nemoy versions of Star Trek inconsistent with this version; which is disappointing. For example Spock's mother is in episode 4 talking to her son on the planet Vulcan, however how could she be talking to her son if she is dead? I can appreciate new ideas being implemented to give it a different feel, but this has changed it in too many ways. If I didn't know the history of past Star Trek movies then I would regard this as excellent in its own right. But I do know the history of Star Trek and the inconsistency is a BIG minus for me. I'd be interested to hear other people's opinion on this view.

ezza72 on May 13, 2009


The thing that bugs me the most is they went out of their way to dis William Shatner because they said, "the continuity of the story said that Kirk is dead by this time in the future." Then they proceeded to rape the entire "continuity" argument hard and long by altering the entire time line as far back as Jim Kirk's birth. So they have no excuse. Overall, the story to me was a big * yawn * Oh jeez...not another time travel trick. That's a plot point that is so overused it isn't even interesting anymore. Now in this film it is even gratuitously used to the point of being an excuse for changing everything that Trek lovers have known as the very cornerstones of the whole Trek Universe. The South Park spoof on Lucas and Spielberg raping Indiana Jones is a good illustration of how I feel about this film. Abrams has raped the Starship Enterprise. I can't believe I just sat there and did nothing. I'm a life-long Trek fan. I even liked "Enterprise" and thought it was a very well done series. But Abrams has totally ruined Star Trek for me. I can't watch it anymore. He ruined the Enterprise. The warp engines look like something out of an "Adam & Eve" catalog. The engine room looked like the boiler room out of the Titanic. What's with all the water pipes, valves and tanks on a super-advanced matter/anti-matter reactor powered starship? The sickbay was absolutely ridiculous. Looks like they used an old set from ER and blasted everything brilliant white. The bridge was the worst of all. Looks like the Apple computer store at the mall. I half expected to see Uhura with an iPod hanging from her utility belt. And I agree with an earlier post. The little "fling" she had with Spock was a total insult to both of their characters. Spock would never allow such an emotional attachment. The original series established Uhura as technically savvy professional, successful woman. Now she's just a sleezy bimbo who likes a Vulcan hooked on Viagra? The acting was good. The casting was excellent. The story was lackluster at best and the movie was a total failure on technical details. Sure. Call me a "trekkie" with my feelings hurt. Call me a geek who takes Star Trek too seriously. However, I believe I represent a large portion of the opening weekend audience. Mr. Abrams: You just pissed off a large section of the established fan-base that you had handed to you on a silver platter. There were lots of eyes on you this weekend watching to see if you got the technical details right. I'm not saying they had to be an exact duplicate of the 1966 visuals. But you took way too much "poetic license" with details that many of the fans hold sacrosanct. My advice: Don't make any more sequels. No more "prequels." No more "origin" stories. I'm sick of them. Just let Star Trek die in peace.

rocky_the_dog on May 13, 2009


I liked the movie and had fun watching it. But as a Trek fan, I'm pissed. Look, I understand that Abrams had to make this thing his "own", but if he really, truly wanted it to be different and to change things up, then why cling to the original characters? Yeah, I'll tell you why, because those characters *matter*. So, he can't just go f*cking with the established canon. If he had to have things different, then create new characters that connect to people, which I doubt he could. The filmakers had these characters handed to them and they just completely screwed them. For that, JJ, et al, you can rot in hell. Other than that, it was fun, fluffy sci-fi.

oaklandrosie on May 14, 2009


As much as I did really enjoy this movie, this Star Wars vs. Star Trek mashup on CollegeHumor really sums up my overall opinion: (I'm not trying to advertise for CH, it really DOES sum it up lol)

Tyler Hayes on May 14, 2009


Great link #226. Really nailed it on the head. That alone deserves one star to be removed form Star Trek.

filmguy on May 14, 2009


Im glad to see some REAL trek fans coming forward with some of the same things i've been saying all along. It is such a shame to as an earlier post stated jj had a built in audience for this and he really let die hard trek fans down someone said earlier that he raped star trek..I could'nt agree more..Such a shame

BullDurham on May 14, 2009


P.S. Loved the video #226 very well done!!!

BullDurham on May 14, 2009


I know for me, personally, my favorite part was how Kurtzman and Orci lifted every major story element from Wrath of Khan, Nemesis, and First Contact and the plot as a whole from Star Wars. I can't wait for the sequel! I hope they call it Star Trek Troopers II! Or maybe Star Trek: The Klingons Strike Back. OR maybe they'll take it even farther back and make Star Trek Episode I: The Phantom Klingon

Sasha Glupyton on May 15, 2009


Hey #220, the critics are going nuts cuz they're a bunch of weenies who get perks from big companies like paramount for saying what they are told to say. The boss comes in and says I want you to write this review and I want it to say only good things, or mostly good things, cuz we want to get some kind of kick back and we won't if you tell the whole truth, so just stretch it a little, or a lot. #230 you are right. the whole movie was plagarized from beginning to the end

Santiago on May 15, 2009


It sucked. It was total garbage. Shaky camera work and no plot. No holding to what made Trek great for over 40 years. No holding to the characters. It was like watching a parody of Trek. Interesting, though, how the few people that liked it are so vicious in their attacks on the many, many true Trek fans that saw the huge, gaping flaws in this bomb. We aren't attacking you, just your precious stinker of a film; why attack us?

Justin on May 15, 2009


Someone must be paying off the critics. What I keep seeing hailed as a "fresh" "envigorating" "reboot" is not a reboot at all, so much as a weak regurgitation of numerous things we've seen before. I posted a review of my own on my blog -- -- but will add a few remarks here too. This film retains only the most superficial aspects of Star Trek, and mixes in some blatantly plagiarized devices from Star Wars. I'm serious -- we have a Storm Trooper prototype who chases adolescent Kirk, a bar full of aliens in Iowa that looks almost exactly like the one on Tattooine, a contrived scene on Hoth where a cloaked old man chases away a fearsome creature, and Future Spock flies what seems to be a ship stolen from the Gungans -- did someone steal a CD full of drawings from Attack of the Clones? Despite all the hype about Abrams and the writers wanting to preserve a link to the fans, this film fails to do so. Are fans supposed to swoon simply because they include a few throw-away inside jokes and a tribble? Everything that has ever mattered to Star Trek and made it different from other brands -- namely, the vision for a better future, the not-quite-pure-fantasy science, the fact that there is always a lesson to be learned -- has been jettisoned from the latest film like a doomed Enterprise's warp core. Instead we have shaky cameras and lots of explosions. This shows what Abrams really thinks about modern audiences: they can't be bothered with anything of substance. They are too dumb for that, and instead go to the movies merely to be anesthetized. I'm sure this film will make plenty of money in the short term. Abrams' name alone ensures that. But in the end he bastardizes both franchises with this film. Incidentally - there are Facebook groups forming for those who hated this film. You disgruntled folks are not alone. Search for us!

Joe M on May 15, 2009


It was ok. Thats it. Abrams did not make it awesome, it already was. I did not like the lens flares or the shaky camera stuff. Why would Spock have a love interest, what happen to T'Pring or Nurse Chapel? And I know it is science fiction but Star Trek has always been based on science fact so what is with the flying thru a black hole crap. They knew in the 1960's that a black hole has a solid mass in the center, there would be no flying thru. They must be confussed with wormholes. This movie has a lot of problems and Star Trek was already a great thing or it would not have survived 40 years.

rick locke on May 18, 2009


Looking at all the people singing this movie's praises fills me with despair. I watched ten minutes and that was all I could take. It's pure nonsense. I am so very tired to explosion movies, of overdramatized silliness, and the overemphasis on youth. I'd love to make a science fiction movie where there are no action scenes and all of the characters are over 40. Something that explores the reality of space travel and upholds the spirit of the Apollo days. Best space movie ever? No. That distinction still belongs to 2001: A Space Odyssey. I know a lot of people will laugh at that statement. "What? That old movie where nothing blows up? That depicts space travel the way it really happens and deals with important social issues instead of delivering a mindless, juvenile diversion? Where the characters are all over 21? Who would want to watch that? I mean, you actually have to think!" I grew up watching the original Star Trek. Star Trek is not a bunch of things blowing up. Everyone wants to leave the old Star Trek behind and do something new. Well, I'm fine with that. Just don't call the new thing Star Trek.

JRS on May 20, 2009


Well, the impossible has happened. As of now, Star Trek SUCKS!. Abrams, the Star Trek I knew is dead, and what remains is the grossest mutilation I could imagine. How could you turn a group of highly trained professionals into a gang of whiney kids just out of school? Cadet to Captain in one movie? That is not a Captain, much less Captain Kirk. He worked his way into his position with daring and HARD WORK! This one has nothing but luck and Uncle Chris! And a crew that would follow the annointed wunderkind? What are they thinking? Abrams, you don't get it. I hope you enjoy the cash. You've destroyed something beautiful to get it. Trek is Dead. Bury it and be done.

Fan since '66 on May 20, 2009


Wow...we sure are a spoiled group of movie viewers in these times. If something isn't made exactly how we want it, then the movie sucks and is a "mutilation" or a piece of CGI-infested trash. Sometimes it sounds like some people want a big-budget movie made EXACTLY to their tastes and specifications or else the filmmakers should be put out of business (yes, a harsh assessment, but I've definitely read some harsh reviews and statements from other viewers). Yes, many movies make it a point to make us think about various concepts, like our social conceptions or theoretical possibilities we might achieve. Then there are also movies that simply entertain. These are two ends of a spectrum with a lot of middle-ground in between them. I think that Star Trek is geared a little bit more towards the entertainment side of the spectrum, and I think there's nothing wrong with that. Star Trek deals with fantastic things, and I love that we have the kind of technology that can show them better today compared to 30-40 years ago. Also, even when people think that this movie is nothing about flashy explosions and young people whining on a ship, you have to remember that YES, this crew is just getting out of the academy. They're a young crew and I would actually have thought it would be weird to see them acting like they had the experience/control/wisdom of their characters in the later years. Why can't it be about that? Why can't this movie be about how the Enterprise crew comes together in the beginning? I think that topic is very much worth its own movie. I think Abrams did a very good job of introducing the characters and showing how their lives start to come together on the Enterprise. But I also don't want to say that this film is without its faults. There were some things that I did grimace at (Scotty's sidekick character, for example). But overall, there we just too many things about this film that I loved more than disliked. The visuals were breath-taking. I thought all the main characters were perfectly brought to life by the actors. Especially Chris Pine as James Kirk. I also thought this movie showed how important friendship and trust can be, especially in the face of adversity. I apologize for writing such a long post. I consider myself a huge Trek fan, and I wanted to voice my opinion that I loved this Star Trek, while still loving all past embodiments of Star Trek as well.

Bjorno on May 31, 2009


I agree with 237. I really liked it.

moif on Jun 1, 2009


Loud and clear, I enjoyed Stark Trek (2009) and give it it's fair credit. If some people did thier homework (which you ought to about reboots and movies your interested in) Star Trek came out in 1966 on TV. And Star Wars (1977) the movie came out before any Star Trek movie, in which both share many atttributes but remian radically different. I am a fan of Star Wars but I won't deny the skill put into this movie. I give it 8.2/10, good playout but language hurt more then helped. Now for anyone calling this movie a pile of CG crap or anything to degrate it, eat your own words and complain to the makers not us. I am not a fan but I won't smack what I can't take, and neither should anyone.

Arcanus on Jun 1, 2009


As someone who is probably more of a Trekkie than not, I LOVED IT! I was not expecting to at all, but it won me over. My dad was raving about how bad it was going to be, but he too got a kick out of it. Now, it does not match the more thought-provoking episodes of the series, but remember they had to take time to introduce the characters to non-fans. Sop many reboots are bad, that I like to compare it to "Batman Begins" which is one of the few others that was able to pull it off effectively. That film had a terrific beginning and horrid ending. But the final payoff (a absolutely amazing sequel) was totally worth it. And I'm hoping Trek can do the same. Go JJ!

Aabye on Jun 1, 2009


not a fan of the series, but loved the movie. The story made no sense but it didn't matter. Regardless of whether it followed the series or not it was just a flat out solid action flick.

Gene on Jun 2, 2009


I love Star Trek – always have and always will HOWEVER - This new film is not Star Trek, or at best it is a non - canon film. I have seen it twice and I am still devastated by it. The events that negated so much of Trek Lore or continuity. Firstly, anyone who loves the series would know that Gene Roddenberry would not have approved of Vulcan being destroyed. Vulcan is the soul of the Star Trek universe. This new timeline (if it is accepted) negates 40 years of continuity. The attacks on Rick Berman are a joke. He worked with Gene on the development of the TGN and Gene knew of the plans for Deep Space 9. Let alone hours of fantastic television. Who could forget the emotion of ‘The Visitor’. He led a team that gave us hours of the best Trek. If in doubt watch again Generations and First Contact. Secondly, this new film has so many links to Star Wars I am surprised that George Lucas hasn't sued: Young Kirk / Anakin in car / pod racer. Bar scenes - New Hope Snow attacks - Hoth monster / Kirk monster. Spock / Yoda links Battle scenes - Return Jedi. etc I just hope that people who love Star Trek can retake the franchise and bring it back to watch Gene imagined. Not just a film that rips of star wars. In terms of the timeline. There is only one true timeline in Star Trek. It has been manipulated on many occasions, but always corrected, in accordance with the temporal accords etc. Some ‘fans’ are confusing the mirror universe which is different. If we accept this new film as canon it DOES wipe out everything we know. Why do that? Why destroy things that are loved by many for no reason? For example see these examples from In 2344, the USS Enterprise-C responded to a distress call from a Klingon outpost on Narendra III, which was under attack by Romulan forces. In the "real" timeline the Enterprise saved the outpost and strengthened relations between the Federation and the Klingons. However, during the battle with the Romulans a Temporal rift opened and the Enterprise, badly damaged and disoriented, traveled to 2366, in the presence of its successor, the USS Enterprise-D. Because the Enterprise-C was not there to save the outpost it was destroyed and the Klingons declared war on the Federation. For the next 22 years, the two powers engaged in a bitter war that cost 40 billion lives and left the Federation on the brink of defeat. In this timeline, Tasha Yar was still alive and serving as tactical officer aboard the Enterprise-D in 2366. Guinan began to feel the change in time as "not right". She advised Captain Picard of the changes and eventually convinced him to send the Enterprise-C back through the rift. Yar discovered through Guinan that she died in the other timeline and felt that she could help aboard the Enterprise-C rather than where she felt she didn't belong. The Klingons attacked the two ships as the Enterprise-C flew toward the rift, while the Enterprise-D defended her. The Enterprise-D was likely destroyed by the Klingons, but the Enterprise-C made it through the rift and restored the timeline, erasing the war from history. (TNG: "Yesterday's Enterprise") However, during the battle with the Romulans, the Enterprise-C was forced to surrender and prisoners, including the alternate Yar, were taken. Yar had a child with a Romulan and was later executed. The child, Sela, became a commander in the Romulan military and encountered the Enterprise-D several times. (TNG: "The Mind's Eye", "Redemption", "Redemption II", "Unification I", "Unification II") In Enterprise we see something happen that is similar to that of Vulcan. The effect of a Delphic Expanse anomaly leaves Archer unable to form any new long-term memories. Twelve years later, he wakes up one morning and is stunned to learn the outcome of the Human-Xindi conflict, including the loss of Earth, and the near-annihilation of the Human race. Jonathan Archer wakes in his quarters in the midst of battle. He rushes to the bridge only to see Earth destroyed by the Xindi superweapon. The story restores the timeline. Together Trek fans can have the Best of both Worlds – a new trek for new fans and keep the faith we all those fans that kept the dream alive – the timeline can be restored. Live Long and Prosper Anthony O'Leary SAVE STAR TREK PETITION

Anthony O'Leary on Jun 2, 2009


My whole family went to see this Star Trek movie. I am impresed with the sets they created for this next generation. Everything appered well-thought out. And nothing looked unfinnished. The Cast seemed to mostly work together well. There are a few "sticky" points. I didn't like Spock having a girlfriend, that was too weird for words. I did like Spock being just a "bit" more human. His reactions to events was spock-on. The scenes with his Mom were done quite nicly. Kirk, asabit of a bad boy was 100% right on target. What would he inherit from his Grandpa Kirk? Roaring genes and a strongdesire to fly spaceship.

Vickie on Jun 2, 2009


I don't see how this movie doesn't destroy the old canon. If we pay attention closely.... *** SPOILER *** we know the reason "old" Spock is in this supposed mirror universe is because he allowed Romulus be destroyed in the original timeline. Well, according to TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Nemesis, that certainly didn't happen. Abrams' film is an excellent sci-fi movie (with some significant plot holes), but at its heart is simply is not Star Trek. Non-canon and never will be as far as I'm concerned.

KIF on Jun 3, 2009


Over all, the movie was very entertaining, but felt like watching Star Wars. This movie has no resemblance of Star Trek, but small hints of it. And for god sake, will someone please tell JJ Abrams that those needless lens flares do not enhance the movie! Geez, it was frigg'n annoying! Also, that "THING" he calls the Enterprise isn't worthy to carry on the name. It's too UGLY! That's right, I said it! UGLY as hell! How can anyone look at that thing and honestly have the nerve to consider that the Enterprise. I'd take 5 Enterprise "D" models before looking at this new piece of crap design. Those frigg'n huge Dill-Does Warp Nacelles are too big, to close together, and look awkward. And the secondary hull look like the back end of a ducks a$$! Nearly every angle of this design was retarded looking. No wonder why JJ Abrams had the editor's only show 2 to 5 second scenes. They must have known that this design was going to result in back-lash. Other than that, the movie was OK. Joe

Joe on Jun 5, 2009


"It sucked." "It ruins the CANON." "It's not Star Trek." "The critics are being bought." "The CG sucked." "I wanted something different." "The ship is ugly." "J.J. Abrams is a(n) (insert expletive here). Blah blah blah...what a bunch of whiny-ass babies... I think I will go see it at least once a day until it leaves just so I can help boost the overall sales, and increase the chance of a WHOLE FUCKING SLEW of sequels.... Seriously, go get your security blankets and nightlights, get a drink of wawa, and get your fucking asses to bed. Gene Roddenberry would have loved this movie.

Stan "The Man" Franklin on Jun 6, 2009


I can pretty much promise you that Gene Roddenberry would have been offended by this film. He did not think of Star Trek as a commercial, conventional, Star Wars wannabe. Have you ever seen his original pilot for the show The Cage? It was actually a very cerebral and risky story to tell for a scifi show. Of course the networks hated it because they wanted more of an action based show. Roddenberry reluctantly did another pilot that had more action. Still though he tried to put some themes and messages in there with the action. When time came to do the first film he was given a lot of creative control on the story. Obviously the first motion picture wasn't exactly a very commercial film. So for the next film, Roddenberry's creative control was very limited. I'm with most fans that The Wrath Of Khan is the best Trek film, but Roddenberry supposedly didn't even care for that one a great deal. He didn't like how action oriented it had become. So I can assure you if he thought that The Wrath Of Khan went too far he would certainly have been blown away by the new film and not in a good way. They twisted his vision into a shallow, one dimensional, action flick. He would have been extremely offended with how Abrams seemed to be honoring George Lucas's Star Wars more than Roddenberry's Star Trek. What they did to Vulcan would have made Roddenberry want to knock Abrams out.

filmguy on Jun 6, 2009


"This movie was Great", "What a bunch of whiny-ass-babies", as posted by "Stan-the-man", as if he's a man anyways. Go watch it over, and over, and over, until you're blue in the face idiot! Name a movie, or franchise that jerks like you contributed to 43 years of success A-Hole! Are people not entitled to their opinions? Are Trek fans supposed to just roll over, and thank the gods that JJ Abrams gave us a movie some (or most) of us don't like? Let me guess! You're one of those butt-heads that asks for a double cheeseburger, but doesn't complain when you get a single? You're one of those anal sphincter's that asks for a medium-rare steak, but doesn't complain when yours is cooked well done? Hopefully, your low-life education can understand the metaphor's I've just provided you. Hope it helps, but if not, let it sink in a little, then perhaps your brain cells will respond. We Trek Fans love our Trek as it was for 43 years. Those who think we're spoiled because we nearly get what we order can go screw themselves, or hang out at their local strip about spoiled. Main-Stream mover lovers have been getting what they like for decades, yet their interests begin to drop when idiotic mindless comedy like Scary Movie isn't there to comfort their private parts. Look at what jerks like you did to Matrix! That was a fantastic movie filled with violence, action, and adventure. It even had nudity, yet the ratings didn't do too well because the main-stream lovers of movies wanted something more. The only reason why this new movie did well at the beginning was because of all the MTV hype it received, excellent (and expensive) marketing, and the negative publicity stunts against Trek fans (This is you're fathers Trek, etc.) used to stir up Trek fan anger and main-stream conspiracy interests to see the movie that would supposedly piss all over Trek fans. In short, the lover-of-movies loved the idea of Trek fans not getting their way. Well, you idiots got your movie, so now lets see how long you can ride this bull. But knowing jerks like this, it'll be another temporary fad until the next "high" interests you. Then your god, JJ Abrams, will have to find another movie to ruin! Joe

Joe on Jun 6, 2009


Good movie. Haters, shut up.

Morgan Messersmith on Jun 6, 2009


Finaly got around to watching this last night. I done my best to stay away from as much of the hype as I could, before seeing it. I have to say I was a bit dissapointed. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it as a movie. However, as a Star Trek movie it did let me down somewhat. It was good to see the characters revamped. I thought all concerened put in very good performances, with Simon Pegg being the exception (it's the accent). I like Simon Pegg, he's a great actor. But why can't they get a Scot, to play Scotty ?. As a Scot myself, there is nothing worse than hearing someone trying to do a Scottish accent. Especialy when it is in such a high profile movie. If they don't get it right, then they just sound silly. I feel this is the case with Simon. The fact that he is married to a Scot, makes this even worse. The story line was interesting to begin with, but it started to fall flat as it went on. I really don't like it when time lines are used. It's a cop out, and if people don't like what they see .then they can always address this with another change in the time line. I have to mention those damn lens flares !!!!. They were a complete waste of time, annoying and actually ruined most of the scenes in my own opinion. Absolutely no need for them, they brought nothing to the feel of the movie at all. I enjoyed all the little nods to the original series, especially the Spock love interest twist. Apart from those flares, I thought the big CGI sequences were very well done, better than a lot of recent movies. Just to show how divided people are on this movie. I went with three others to watch it. Two loved it, one absolutely hated it, and I was a bit dissapointed. Maybe further viewings will change my mind on it, I don't know. I have watched Star Trek since it first showed here in the UK, when I was a boy. Some would say I'm a bit of a geek when it comes to it. I'm not really, it's just something I like. I understand that Abrams has tried to reshape it. I like the fact that all bets are off now with future story lines, anything can happen now (just stick to it). I just feel the Abrams used a machete, rather than a scalpel to achieve this. I understand why die hard fans are up in arms about the movie. However, it does have evolve and grow for a new generation of fans. One of my nieces hates the original, and subsequent series. She loved the movie however, and is now a fan. She is now revisiting the tv series, and old movies. Now that can't be a bad thing, can it ?. We do live in the 21st century after all. It's not the late 60's anymore. Fans should just accept it for what it is, because we won't get what we want, it's impossible.

Marty on Jun 7, 2009


Joe... Your response serves to perfectly illustrate my original post. Whiny.... Ass.... Baby.... 🙂

Stan "The Man" Franklin on Jun 7, 2009


Stan "The Douche" Franklin, you must be one of those pussies that has no real back bone in the real world so you go online to talk sh*t. Calling yourself "The Man" further supports that you're over compesating for something. Anything that you say in response to this will only illustrate my post. Get a life.

filmguy on Jun 7, 2009


filmguy...what insight! Of course I'm a "pussy" with no real "backbone." That's why I post with my name and not some jerkoff handle like "filmguy." Still, I don't mind the insults. I dish 'em and I can take 'em. At least you didn't call me "unsophisticated." And I would be happy to illuminate your post for you! Go back and read what you have written in this's oh so easy to get online and hide behind a jerkoff handle while you pull apart someone else's work and criticize those who enjoy it. What a sad, pathetic little man you are. You slam me for talking shit to you and the other haters when talking shit is exactly what you have been doing here. I just got tired of listening to your pissing and moaning and decided to recognize you for what you are...a whiny ass baby. By the way...since your such an expert on Roddenberry, maybe you should check out his son's video blog... And I quote... "My father would be really proud." I think the man's son is a tad bit more qualified to speak on the issue than you are. Ass.

Stan "The Man" Franklin on Jun 8, 2009


Stan "The Chode" Franklin, thanks for proving my point. I thought it was impossible to look any more like a jack ass but you managed. Why do I get the feeling that you a fifteen year old loser that spends all day bouncing on message boards calling people whiny babies for having half a brain. Maybe when you get to be a grown up some day you will understand. Yeah your a real big man adding "The Man" in your name. People that do crap like that have an inferiority complex. I've tried to stay neutral and out of other quarrels on here. I even told others that I didn't want to get involved. People are allowed to hate this movie. How much of a loser do you have to be to monitor this message board every day just to find a reason to talk sh*t on people here? The difference between you and me is that I made a general observation and you made personal attacks on people. What I said was not personal to any one person. And all my pissing and moaning? I only posted a couple of times on here. I gave my opinion, which is what this whole page is for in the first place. I think it's hilarious that the only defense you have is to try to use things that I called you in my post to strike me back with. That's the like if I called you stupid and then you came back with no you're the one that's stupid. I feel sorry for you. You must not have many friends. Grow up. I'm not even going to give you enough respect to debate Roddenberry with you. I never had an interest in debating with you. I don't care if Roddenberry would have liked this crappy flick or not. I only wanted to get you to shut your whiny ass mouth. Stop picking on people just because you live in your momma's basement, can't get laid, and have no friends. Again if you write back with more sh*t talk yet again you will only further illustrate my point even farther. Try to actually back down with the insults and try to have a civil debate with someone and prove me wrong. By the way you are extremely unsophisticated.

filmguy on Jun 9, 2009


What??? Kirk is best friends with Spock because future Spock told him that he should be? Bones can only express 1 emotion? Humanity's ideals are ideal in the Federation, but people on earth still act like retards they were 200years ago? In today's world it doesn't matter how much you love something if your money is not what's keeping it alive. J.J Abrahms took what was favourite brain food for lots of people because it's name rang familiar, changed it's flavour so everyone can eat it, so he can sell more of it. Kudos for doing something clever, brave and new isn't a thing anybody goes for these days. Making piles of money is. No one can argue against a pile of money, if you got it, you're king. Bullshit, you're just a greedy, self centered asshole. So if you could all stop your whining how bad this movie was because you made the world what it is by being polite and not setting something right last time some dumbass said something real stupid in the office, at home, holiday, bar, pub etc. Dumbing down of humanity starts when smart people are too polite to confront stupidity. I just hope movie makers will realise that future movies will be much like what Simpsons were, lots of pretty colours for dumbasses to be dumbfound, and an actuall plausible storyline beneath it all so ones with some remaining brains actually bother going to cinema rather than downloading.

Me, Myself & I on Jun 9, 2009


Being maybe the last person that is going to write something here, I will do a list with the most significant aspects of the film: 1. Don't like that much the Spock/Uhura thing... In the transporter scene, y'know, when Kirk is already captain, it almost seems that Spock is grabing her... uh... rear end. Spock shouldn't (EVER) be a ladies man!!! haha 2. Loved the flares!! It gives the whole thing an extraterrestrial quality somehow. 3. We deserved more Scotty/Pegg! 4. Everyone (literally everyone) is perfect in their role! 5. The Shatner attitude by the end from Chris Pine was great! 6. The CGI. Wow. 7. Wictor Wictor... haha 8. The Enterprise is the only one who can break that damn drill?? The Earth doesn't have any defenses?? Come on! A cop? The navy? Nothing? 9. A complete new alternate reality starting from here. The possibilities are endless. It's difficult though, to say: "eh, forget everything you knew during the last 40 years, we will start again" Bold move, but I guess that is the proper way to maintain this franchise another 40 years. 10. Leonard Nimoy. Awesome. And, that's pretty much it. I want to have it in bluray. Loved the whole thing...

Leiner on Jun 11, 2009


Why didn't they just do a total reboot? Go Batman Begins style and just retell the story with out any connections to the past series. That way they're not screwing with canon and they have that fresh start they wanted. But of no, Abrams decided that he wanted to piss all over Star Trek history by writing over it. The whole time travel idea is so old hat and cliche. There really was nothing original in this film which is ironic because so many people seems to think that it is. Maybe its just mostly the younger people who haven't seen the dozens of films that Star Trek ripped off.

filmguy on Jun 11, 2009


***Spoiler Alert *** I've seen that comment over and over, and I just don't get it. Exactly how did this movie mess with "the canon" of Star Trek. From the moment the Narada destroyed the Kelvin, everything in this timeline was irrevocably altered from "the canon." This movie sets up a whole new sequence of that, conceivably, could be explored (again) for years to come... Kirk is Captain at 25, not 34...Pike is still wheelchair-bound, but able to communicate with more than just a beep and flashing light...we learn that at least in this alternate timeline, Checkov was indeed there from the start (inappropriate accent and all)...and it doesn't take two series and six movies to learn that Sarek married Amanda because he loved her, not because it was the "logical thing to do." Looking at it from a certain perspective, this "Star Trek" is a sequel, a prequel and a reboot all rolled into one. It takes the old characters, old ships and old stories out of their mothballs, shines 'em up, and adds some new color. I mean, hell...Leonard Nimoy saw something good here, otherwise he wouldn't have done it. Somehow I don't think he did it for money...he's turned down other Trek projects before... Jakenstein

Jakenstein on Jun 13, 2009


Joe… Your response serves to perfectly illustrate my original post. Whiny…. Ass…. Baby…. Absurd! Your arguments were against those who didn't like the movie, thus you called them "" Unfortunately, my "whine" was more towards a you. I gave you a real-life illustration to assist you in comprehending my point, but apparently, it flew over your feeble little mind. Lay off the drugs for a while, and give your brain a chance to generate fresh cells because it's apparently lacking. The point was simple. Those who complain about a dish served, do so because it wasn't prepared how they ordered. If I order a medium-rare steak, that's what I expect to get. This version of Star Trek is not what the fans ordered, so some (or most) of us dislike it. We understand the need for change, but a lot of the changes made were not necessary. Besides, it won't be up to us if this new movie succeeds. This J-Trek film can only survive if pesky degenerates such as yourselves will continue supporting Paramount, and JJ Abrams. However, considering very few movie franchises are supported by the so called "main-stream" lovers of movies, I doubt their contributions will enable another 40 years of Star Trek. To put it easier for you to understand, fans such as yourselves will kill it because you were never there to appreciate Star Trek; you merely enjoyed the flashy scenes, large explosions, and computer generated graphics. Trek fans didn't cause Star Trek to decay. The fault is with Paramount, who never offered big budgets to former Trek producers. There are other reasons, but it would be pointless to explain to a child. Hey Stan, I think your mother's calling you. Dinner's ready. So go eat a Hot-Pocket and don't forget to do your chores...if you even have any. And judging by the content of your posts, I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that you spend most of your time in mommy's basement. Joe

Joseph on Jun 13, 2009


THIS FILM IS EXCITING! THE CGI IS AWESOME! THE ACTION WAS FANTASTIC! THE ACTORS WERE AWESOME! The attributes listed above appear to be the most important qualities of certain fans of movies. But is this enough to equate to 43 years of previous Trek success? No, it is not. As I've stated before, there are other movies which already possess the attributes listed above, but Star Trek survived for 43 years without much of what's admire about this new movie. CGI? Graphics were never that good in previous Star Trek productions, but for the most part, it didn't matter. Gene used Star Trek to tell real-life stories applicable to his generation. Even though TOS stories were part of a fictional universe, they had a huge impact on society. From life lessons, to inspiration in creating new technologies, all of these lessons impacted society much more than most know. Lt. Uhura was played by an attractive young black woman. Star Trek portrayed a society where sex and color were considered equal. In the 60's, women were considered house keepers, and black women were not given a place of recognition. When Nichelle thought of quiting, Dr. Martin Luther King begged her not to quit, as her simple Science Fiction role played a huge part on the real society. Apart from real life lessons, many became inspired through Star Trek to partake in technological advances in medicine, communication, transportation, and everyday living. When ever someone uses a cell phone, they are using technology inspired by a Trek fan. When ever a patient undergoes surgery not as brutal as it was decades, and/or centuries ago, they can thank the Doctor who was probably inspired by Star Trek. When we walk the any street in our beloved Country, and see marriages of different races (be it white, black, Asian), chances are, they were inspired by Star Trek, even if indirectly. Thus, the stories and life lessons is what enabled Star Trek to succeed 43 years of untouched competition. ACTION? There's nothing wrong with a few episodes containing action. After all, Gene was trying to create an action-adventure western. So I too applaud the action in this movie. However, if that's all fans are looking for, then you might be disappointed if, or when, JJ Abrams and Paramount decides to produce intellectual Trek films. And considering the only positive attributes of J-Trek I'm reading involve Action, Thrill Rides, etc., it's a safe and logical conclusion that those who crave movies like such will eventually fall away from Star Trek. For it's impossible to make 40 more years of nothing but action/adventure, especially when there are plenty of other movies already possessing it, yet have no long-term success. Star Wars came close, but it's production was limited, and its stories remained true, for the most part anyways. ACTORS? Most did OK, but they were not perfect. I was pleased so I will not state anything more, or less than what's already been stated. EXCITING? As stated, excitement is a good thing, but Star Trek fans in the past, have nearly always been excited by Star Trek films. I was excited when I heard that JJ Abrams was going to produce a new Star Trek film. But when I saw how much he was changing, I grew more and more disappointed. So, for the first time in my life, I've come to dislike JJ Abrams movie because it doesn't represent the majority of Trek tradition. JJ's and Paramounts goal was to appeal to the main-stream MTV crowd, using CGI luster, cheap action, and flashy lights to attract them. And it worked. Thus, the story wasn't important to them, which would explain the weak story, with a weak villain, and no actual point other than watching two sides blast each other with torpedo's and lasers. It's as one poster stated, watching this movie was like watching little kids play with space toys, pretending to blow each other. YEA! GREAT MOVIE to inspire our children to buy guns, shoot people, and blow stuff up! We see that happening more and more with our gang driven youths! Whether people in our society acknowledge it or not, movies and video games do have an impact on children. Some are wise and mature enough to understand that games and movies are merely entertainment. However, some children enact what they learned through movies, and/or games, to the point of accidentally (or purposely) inuring another child, or even an adult. YouTube and MySpace are filled with video's of young kids enacting their movie fantasies, be it gang fights, and/or fights between women. Thus, even violent forms of entertainment can have an impact on our Society's youth. In conclusion, this Star Trek film offered the wild youth of our society a chance to embellish themselves with violence, flashy explosions, and young girls being sucked out into space. The youth in our society have become so obsessed with death and destruction, and thus have nothing to offer for the future of our Country. Star Trek may not be a Utopia, but it did have its entertaining purposes, which was to inspire all of us to become better than what we are, in education, hospitality, creativity, and more. For 43 years Star Trek has impacted our society to become the strongest nation in the world. However, because of the decay in our American youth, as is evident by a weaker work force, and lower education, our society no longer has positive inspirations. And Star Trek was a franchise that offered a better hope for mankind.....unfortunately, not anymore. The demolition team has come to town and money is all they want....even if it warps the brains of our modern youth. Joe

Joseph on Jun 13, 2009


To those still saying Star Trek did not mess with the "old canon" let me remind you again -- Romulus was destroyed in the timeline that "old" Spock came from. The timeline of TOS, TNG, DS9, etc. So it's definitely re-written the history of the old Treks as wel.

KIF on Jun 15, 2009


Yes, but that happens in a time period after DS9. so none of the TV shows were retconned.

Ghoyle1 on Jan 10, 2011


Jankenstein: Finally someone gets it! --------- It's okay that its rewritten it now!, because as pointed out, it is kind of a sequel. We're just follow "different" characters, so to speak. It explained all this stuff that happened in the time line we know. Nimoy's Spock was sent back in time along with this Narada. The Narada's doings altered things. If the movie followed Spock Prime the whole time, NO ONE would be complaining that it frakked things up. (Neither would I but I had no complaints in the first place because I understood what JJ did.) It didn't frak anything up! So Romulus was destroyed. And? Just because the other shows or movies (or books maybe) didn't cover anything like that means JJ screwed the canon? That's like him making a movie after Nemesis, which he kind of did while at the same time making a movie before TOS. Wrap your heads around that. =] What's wrong with him having some creative control? Sure, it wasn't as... "smart" as the original stuff, but people don't care about that anymore, sadly. That really would be the movies only downfall, aside from a plot hole or two. But every movie has those. ---------- Joe: Star Trek is so not the reason America is the "strongest nation on Earth." lol

Lauren on Jun 16, 2009


IT SUCKED. Abrams is an idiot and the movie is an abomination. Did anyone notice they DESTROYED VULCAN!?!? WTF. No Amok Time, no Tuvok, no Federation, really. They are basing giving a giant F-U to the future of Trek. Stupid movie, bad plot, so-so actors, lame villains, the list goes on. Why didn't "Mr. LOST" come up with a NEW FRACKING idea instead of trying to mess with the way things were? He must be an idiot.

PaulPaz on Jun 18, 2009


Oh... and Star Trek III: can never happen now. So when Spock dies in ST II - he's gone. No 4, 5, or 6 either. Which ALSO means he couldn't be alive to screw up Romulus. oops. idiotic.

PaulPaz on Jun 18, 2009


Paul, honey. There's no C in FRAK.

Lauren on Jun 18, 2009


Lauren wrote, "Star Trek is so not the reason America is the "Strongest nation on earth." lol" That is correct Lauren, at least directly. My point was that Star Trek influenced many scientists and doctors to bring us much closer to Star Trek, or Star War, or Back to the Future, etc. Star Trek was a very influential franchise that inspired the greatest astronauts who've achieved great things. It was America that set first footing on the moon. Talk to nearly every member affiliated with NASA, and chances are, they are fans of Star Trek. It's not the Stark Trek episodes, or the movies that inspired us to becoming stronger; it was the simple dream of living, working, and abiding in space. Star Trek played a key aspect of our past American achievements. Unfortunately, the American dream of bringing us closer to the space age is declining, with budget cuts due to declining interest and demands by the populace to invest more in social programs. Granted Star Trek isn't a direct link to American achievement, but in some ways it was. The cell phone to the communicator. The Phasers which led to our greatest Aircraft production. We now have an aircraft that can fire a lazer roughly 250 miles in 5 seconds, destroying an aircraft without warning. There is no defense against it, yet the Democratically controlled congress is considering cutting the defense budget in order to invest more in Environmental regulations, profits, and social programs. I'm not saying those things are not important, but it's clear that NASA programs might be taking a back seat; the same for defense modernizations, which are needed. In short, our technology is what contributed to America's achievements, and those achievements were made possible by those who were probably inspired by Star Trek, or other Sci. Fi films. Now days, sadly, the only inspiration I'm seeing from American's youth is violence, blood, and war. JJ Abrams and Paramount knew that to maximize profits, they would have to alter Star Trek and take it to a level today's youth could relate to....violence, flashy lights, explosions, CGI, and other pointless attributes within a movie. Now-a-days, no thought is required to make a film; only flashy bright lights, a few fists traded, and a little bikini line...not that TOS didn't have its fair share of sexual promotion....which I myself admit to liking. :o) But, that wasn't the entire focus. It's just sad that Uhura wasn't given a better roll in the movie other than Spocks lover, and discovery of a Romulan communication. The original Uhura was much better, as was spock, Kirk, Sulu, McCoy, Scotty, and all the other TOS characters. This new stream of Trek characters didn't quite match the legendary Star Trek characteristics. Joe

Joseph on Jun 18, 2009


Overrated. Soulless. Contrived. In fact, it's Star Trek: Nemesis all over again. If you loved this, then go see that. Nimoy gave Roddenberry's blessing? Nimoy is no Roddenberry, and now Roddenberry is turning in his grave. Zero Enterprise treatment. The Enterprise, historically a large part of the franchise, is now a mere unappealing bit player. Pine said he prepared by throwing Shatner's work under the bus, and it showed. Anybody could have played Kirk in this. At least Karl Urban's McCoy salvaged this film for me. Unfortunately, they aren't getting REAL sci-fi writers next time either. So what's next? A Borg Transformers crossover?

Wesley on Jun 23, 2009


Hi Good Movie for action lovers. I am not a true lover of this series though I appreciate this movie. I hope that it will live up to its expectation.

l-carnitine on Sep 9, 2009


Im sorry, JJ but did you really expect us to believe that The Enterprise's 23rd century voice responding computer would be unable to understand a Russian accent?!?!?!? GET A FREEKING CLUE!!! It's a 23rd century compurter built at the Utopia Panitia Yard on the Planet Mars. a Planet that has been colonized by humans. A race that comes from a planet called Earth (you may have heard of it.) And on Earth there is a country called Russia. And in Russia the Humans speak Russian with (thats right) a Russian accent. But the computer had no problem (not that it should have) with understanding Spock's Vulcan accent. Did you also really expect us to believe that Hikaru Sulu (even though he's fresh out of the academy) would forget to release the "parking brake" (by the way it's not called a parking break) prior to launch. HELLO!!!! HE'S THE HELMSMAN OF THE FLEET'S FLAG SHIP!!! I also have a very difficult time excepting the idea that the death of George Kirk would be such a focal point in time that Checkov, Sulu, Uhura, and McCoy, would all enter the acadamy at the same damn time and that with the ecception of McCoy they are all roughly the same age. And perhapse you may want to look into the history of earning rank in the military. There is no way in the firey deapths of hell that a man fresh out of the acadamy would be automaticaly promoted from Ensign to Captain. Jim Kirk skiped over Liutenent Junior Grade, Liutenent, Liutenent Comander, and Comander. thats 4 ranks. 4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN!!!!!!!! Also, Spock being the logical person he is would never have an affair with a subordinate much less his student. Doesn't that violate some sort of ethics code? And it wouldn't have mattered if Uhura had gone to the Federation president himself. She would never have succesfully demanded and assignment to the Enterprise. She would have taken her assigned post or resigned the commission she just spent four years earning. Again study up on your military protocols idiot!!! And finaly we come to young Jim Kirk. How many kids that age in our 21st century listen to music from 200 years ago? What the hell was running through your brain that told you "Duh!! Lets have young Jimmy be a Lincoln Park Fan. We all know you are not a Trek fan and thats fine. Alot of people aren't. But I beg you please stop bastardizing this great franchise. Don't turn it into Star Wars. George Lucas dosen't need your help. Hes doing fine with out you!!!

Zachary R. on Dec 8, 2009


The opening sequence by far the best part of the movie. After that throw it away. It is trying a new plot due to no ability in the writting staff for a remake or simply a new crew and time frame. Why change the universe. Answer they aren't trekkies making the movie. That is what the problem was and JJ Abrams should have never been allowed to destroy another movie series like Mission Impossible 3! Everyone whom likes it is not a true star trek fan and if you think the creator would have watched this and approved you would all be wrong. The characters he made were more true and genuine. They had none of that in this movie. What the hell did they do to Spock. Could you cast that any worse seriously. Best cast member in it was Mccoy. That is what I believe and will not buy this pathetic attempt to a star trek film. I rather watch the orginal boring motion picture.

Michael on Dec 12, 2009


"Will you people who sing the praises of this movie use the brains you were born with. In what shape, size, or form did this movie hold true to the Star Trek genre. Here is a main point anyone who is familiar with Classic Trek realizes that only James Tiberius Kirk and Leonard McCoy knew each other before Kirk took command of the Enterprise. Captain Kirk had at least 10 yrs. on Uhura and Sulu and 13 yrs. on Chekov."

Craig on Dec 28, 2009


I am definitely a non-Trekkie who loved it 🙂 Everyone have talked so much about Star Trek, but until now I havent really cared about, but decided to go and watch the movie - it was an awesome experience I tell you, I might as well be a Trekkie soon 🙂 David Sims

Energy on Feb 12, 2010


I loved the movie so much, it was like the best movie I have ever seen. Star Trek is the best, I am a huge fan and I have the DVD that I have watched like 10 or more times, I know thats ceazy but I just love it! John

Fuel on Feb 15, 2010


I keep asking myself, Why didn’t Abrams hire Mike Okuda to check his continuity? Or anybody for that matter, that was actually familiar with the canon. It was a big budget movie and they couldn’t hire a consultant to tighten up the plot for the trekies. I think behind the scenes Abrams and the other higher up folks at Paramount had a good laugh at the trekies, by not bothering to deal with the continuity errors. I just don’t undertsand how all this happened, especially in an age when directors release “special directors cut” editions with all the nerdy stuff (like Watchmen for example). Trekies didn’t even get that bone thrown to them. However with all this, I was thinking that we should just consider the Abrams Star Trek the “Mirror Universe” told as revisionist history. Once the Abrams version is no longer “Hot Stuff” hopefully a writer knowledgeable about “canon” can come along and upend the whole story and say, "well, that was the Mirror Universe and nobody told you so at the time". BTY, I was influenced to this idea on another board. My point is, we should just accept this universe to be the mirror universe of the Terran Empire. It makes all the continuity issues more tolerable: 1) This would explain why the USS Relativity doesn’t show up to fix the timeline. Because it’s the mirror universe and the future Federation doesn’t care about what happens in the Mirror Universe timeline. 2) This would explain why there is no George Samuel Kirk. The Mirror Kirk may not have had a brother in the Mirror Universe, so he is essentially George, but is named Jim due to the destruction of the USS Kelvin and early death of his father Lt Kirk. It also explains why he is such a trouble maker without conscience, unlike the original Captain Kirk. Mirror Kirks background was never discussed, so to a certain degree anything goes. 3) This would also explain why Uhura and Spock have a relationship. This Mirror Spock doesn’t care about his bond with T’pring and with the destruction of Vulcan she dies anyway. Not the best explanation in the world, but its better than just outright ignoring the Amok Time episode. 4) Why does Pike not get court martialed for doing such a poor job defending the planet Vulcan and directing the Federation fleet? Because he is an officer of the Terran Empire, not the Federation. To some degree the Terran Empire doesn’t care otherwise, whether Vulcan survives or not. Since the Romulan Empire is independent in the Mirror Universe, the issue of defeating a new powerful Romulan Ship is a more pressing matter than saving Vulcan. 5) It would also explain why the USS Kelvin looks so weird. The design of the Kelvin that we see in the Abrams film could have been influenced by the appearance of the more advanced Constitution class USS Defiant, which appeared in Tholian space during the time of Captain Archer from the Terran Empire, not the Federation. This could explain the earlier diversion of the timeline that precedes Nero and Narada and makes everything so radically different (i.e. technology differences, earlier ecounters with the Cardassians and the existance of nokia) I think it will be cake for writers to retcon this version of Star Trek in the future. If the Tholians could open a gateway into an alternate future universe, then the Red stuff that Spock was using could do the same effect into the past. In fact this timeline could be an attempt by the Terran Slave resistance to keep the Terran Empire from losing power to the Alliance with the assistance by maniputating the time line in the Mirror Universe behind the scenes.

boohoo on Apr 8, 2010


Here we are years later, and the movie still sucked! *Laughs* I know they're planning another movie, but trust won't amount to anything. The thrill ride is gone, and the glory of Star Trek has been stolen by a team of fake writers. I wonder what movie JJ Abram will ruin next. We see how screwed up LOST got. Joe

Joe on May 30, 2010


Your assessment of the piece of crap called the Star Trek reboot is as bad as the movie itself was. It most certainly did NOT breathe new life into the Star Trek franchise, as far as I am concerned it nearly killed it. If there's going to be another piece of garbage like the last one put out then Star Trek is going to lose all credibility. Someone needs to take Abrams out and put him out of his misery so he can never sully the name of Star Trek again. If Roddenberry's ashes weren't floating in space, he'd be turning in his grave.

Anonymous on Jan 10, 2011


Two words: TOTAL SHIT

Someone on Aug 8, 2011


Umm, why oh why is it necessary to completely dumb down what once was intelligent entertainment so that the under 35 club can understand it. We  are asked to believe that some wild trainee can just sit in the captains chair and claim it for himself. I don't think so, the entire LOST style alternative reality idea really really sucks and shows a total lack of imagination. The fan fiction films are far better that this horses ass of a movie. Gene is probably spinning in his grave at warp 9!  

Grgsct on Sep 20, 2011

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram