I just read a review that was spoiler filled and extravagantly boisterous in both praise and damnation...

I won't link to it and I won't copy it because all the spoilers are unfair...

Go see the movie if you want and just don't expect Hamlet or MacBeth or Godot or My Fair Lady...

Apparently the alternate timeline is close to the original timeline.

Just don't expect whales or Nichelle Nichols dancing naked.

Its Star Trek, Kirk and Spock, and you expected Hamlet? Look take it for what it is a Trek movie not the worst one made and better then most.

River

I like Star Trek. I wasn't expecting War and Peace, Lawrence of Arabia, Lord of the Rings, or an Oscar contender. I was looking for a movie with the look and feel of Star Trek, one with a plausible story - granting the possibility of Star Trek science, warp drives and all - a good summer action flick, and for me, this movie delivered. As River said, it's a Star Trek movie, and I agree that it's better than many I've seen.

I like that it used some plot lines from old Star Trek episodes. Maybe this was "The Wrath of Khan," but if it was, it was a modern, updated version of it. So what? They do remakes of movies all the time. Sometimes, the new one is better; sometimes it isn't. I went to this movie to be entertained and because I like Star Trek. I was entertained, and in no way, did I feel betrayed. I wasn't in love with the old Wrath of Khan, so if they stole from it, I don't give a shit.

While some people that refuse to see the movie, feel they've somehow been cheated, I was entertained. I might even go see it again.

I'm not a movie critic. I don't watch them to take them apart, to try to find something I don't like. It gets me out of the house, and I like the whole, big screen, 3d, popcorn, movie experience. I experience it; I don't dissect it. Either I like it or I don't. If I don't like it, I might walk out in the middle of it. For this one, I stayed in my seat, even though I really needed to pee. That's one sign of a good movie for me.

I have to agree with Slammr. For me it was an entertaining movie. I enjoyed spotting some of the tweaked bits from old Star Trek stories, it sort of linked it to the old Trek, but allowed it to be it's own style. I too may go and see it again.

Slammr (imported) wrote: Sat May 18, 2013 11:43 pm I like Star Trek. I wasn't expecting War and Peace, Lawrence of Arabia, Lord of the Rings, or an Oscar contender. I was looking for a movie with the look and feel of Star Trek, one with a plausible story - granting the possibility of Star Trek science, warp drives and all - a good summer action flick, and for me, this movie delivered. As River said, it's a Star Trek movie, and I agree that it's better than many I've seen.

I like that it used some plot lines from old Star Trek episodes. Maybe this was "The Wrath of Khan," but if it was, it was a modern, updated version of it. So what? They do remakes of movies all the time. Sometimes, the new one is better; sometimes it isn't. I went to this movie to be entertained and because I like Star Trek. I was entertained, and in no way, did I feel betrayed. I wasn't in love with the old Wrath of Khan, so if they stole from it, I don't give a shit.

While some people that refuse to see the movie, feel they've somehow been cheated, I was entertained. I might even go see it again.

I'm not a movie critic. I don't watch them to take them apart, to try to find something I don't like. It gets me out of the house, and I like the whole, big screen, 3d, popcorn, movie experience. I experience it; I don't dissect it. Either I like it or I don't. If I don't like it, I might walk out in the middle of it. For this one, I stayed in my seat, even though I really needed to pee. That's one sign of a good movie for me.

I hear that, first stop when the movie ended was the loo, it had to much action to leave in the middle. Yes I could go to see this one again it was fun.

I don't go to a movie to be see that some great work was put to the screen to tell the story that has never before been told or what ever, I go to a movie to be entertained, if your reason is other then that, you should stay home and read a book and don't read fiction you will only be disappointed.

River

Where do I even start?

I just can't.

This is one area where Slammr and I seem to be polar opposites. I DO go to a movie with high expectations, and in 47 years (a number that oddly pops up all the time in TREK), I can count on one hand the number of them that I have enjoyed.

I confess. I "borrowed" the movie from about 20k other people, and thank you someone pretty good with a camcorder.

I had ZERO expectations of this movie, and it did not fail to deliver.

It delivered NOTHING.

Of all past Trekdom, "Wrath of Khan" is my personal favorite. I can only utter two words about this debacle:

FUCKING BLASPHEMY!.

Bring me the severed genitals of JJ Abrams on a silver platter.

NOW.

But how do you really feel?

I guess Slammr and I feel the same about this movie, we both enjoyed it because we expected nothing except some good one liners and some good graphics, we got both.

But if you don't like trek movies why did you watch it?

I liked it well enough to go see it again and I will buy a copy when it comes out, I don't want some hand held camera version of it.

Look, Its a STAR TREK movie, need I say more?

River

I gather you didn't like it.

(Sorry, couldn't resist being a smart ass but you brought back memories of a concert)

Andre Previn (composer, conductor)

once related a story that while rehearsing the musically thrilling "ALPINE SYMPHONY" by Richard Strauss, that he wanted more from the orchestra and launched into a passionate speech about the emotional dynamics of one of the passage. This went on for several minutes UNTIL one of the woodwinds (his buddy) raised a hand and stopped him. Previn, in the midst of an emotional high, asked why and the wind player merely asked "So you want us to play louder" and that's what the orchestra did.

PS, I came back to add -- I know what you are talking about in the plot even though I haven't seen the movie. It's so much of a spoiler that I don't want to say anymore but I agree. That particular scene was blasphemy.

Come on now, nothing is sacred with Star Trek movies, nothing.

Maybe thats why I liked it and some of you don't, I only went to enjoy what ever they produced, I did not try to over think it after all its is just a star trek movie with Kirk and crew its not like they started over with new people, they are starting over with the old cast, and you expected?

River

I was expecting them, in 2009, to reboot the franchise with better special effects, new actors, and a fresh look at the canon that we never saw in the original series or the original motion pictures.

Instead, Abrams took the entire Universe and turned it on its ear, even going so far as to move planets around. (Vulcan is not visible to the naked eye from Delta Vega) But that wasn't enough for him - apparently Nero's arrival to alter the Timeline even changed things that happened BEFORE his arrival, and these alterations somehow went backwards into the past.

Khan and his cohorts were launched into space aboard the Botany Bay in 1996. Conveniently enough, Section 31 from the canon Deep Space Nine series was poking around in that area, apparently before 2233 and Nero's arrival with the Narada to change history. So some other ship found the Botany Bay and captured Khan? OK...

Hell, Nero even altered Klingon culture somehow, right down to their appearance!

But wait, Kirk was born in Iowa, ON EARTH...so what were his parents doing on the USS Kelvin when Nero arrived? And this unsolved mystery of the destruction of the Kelvin altered the whole timeline of construction of starships? What about Captain Robert April and his tour with the brand new USS Enterprise 1701? How did this mystery so radically alter Spock's birth/childhood and later career?

I could go on about this all day long, but I won't.

The movie sucked, the first one sucked, Abrams sucks...