the movie made it very clear they were going down the alternate timeline route rather than overwriting history, the original trek universe still exists.

(this is also made clear in the countdown comic where the original universe continued to exist after spock and nero went back in time)

Therefore, you didn't pay attention.

Moreover, it's also been thoroughly picked over several times in this thread alone.

And was thoroughly explained in Back to the Future II.

Except in Back To The Future II, there was no retaining of the original universe, stealing the book and giving it to Biff completely eradicated the original timeline didn't it?

No, it just created an alternate timeline, it merely eradicated getting back to the original timeline.

Which, then, makes the original timeline inaccessible and ultimately useless - destroyed, if you will. I understand Oni's point, and it makes sense, though he worded it very stupidfully and with much dumbness.

Saw it last night, I'm not a trek fan at all, but I consider it a quality movie. Pegg was genius, and I thought the guy playing Spock from Heroes (cant remember his name, too lazy to google.) was pretty good as well.

Zachary Quinto

hes a badass.

that. and it wasn't worded stupidly at all. Sorry I didn't use MLA format and 50 rarely used adjectives, in a 3 page essay on time travel.

No, it's only inaccessible from an in universe point of view, and then only from the point of view of Old Spock since he's the only one from that timeline left. From the point of view of us, the viewer, the only difference is that the old timeline can't have Old Spock in it anymore, however given that TNG+ era Trek seems to do just fine without TOS era characters hanging around all the time it shouldn't make any real difference.

I suppose you could theoretically throw another black/wormhole transit plot device in there somewhere to bridge them again if you really wanted to.

I saw it last night with my girlfriend. She absolutely LOATHES most sci-fi movies. It's kind of weird though, because her favorite genre is fantasy based (LOTR is her favorite series). Anyways, she also doesn't like Star Trek, but she actually said she liked this movie a lot.

I love both Star Wars and Star Trek. TNG is my favorite television show of all time, and I watch at least one episode a day (I'm actually serious about that statement). I don't care. I could never get into any of the other series at all, DS9 didn't do enough to hold my interests into the second season (I know most people say the Dominion War towards the end of the series is the best part) so I stopped watching and never got back into it. Voyager was OK at times and BAD at others, so I didn't watch it consistently. TOS was way before my time and I've never bothered to watch it on TV that much, however when I have seen it I did enjoy it for what it was worth. Enterprise was a piece of ****.

I don't really critique movies too much, I just go and watch them. Unless the movie is specifically supposed to make you think, do I ever start to analyze it. If it is any kind of film, I go for the entertainment and just gauge from there. This movie entertained the hell out of me.

I didn't feel that the lens flares were overused, I actually liked it a lot. In fact it brought me into the film even more, made me feel like I was a crew member standing on deck. The lights reflecting back into the camera while on the bridge, the battles in space, the crazy and swooping camera movements, dutch angles all over the place, the abrupt silence when someone is sucked out into the vacuum . The special effects are some of the best that you have ever seen, everything looks so real. The film is extremely colorful and bright, it's an eyegasm for sure.

I loved the actors, the characters were well developed (albeit I wish Scotty was in the film a little more) but other than that everyone felt in place in their respective roles.

As for the arguing about the time travel jumbo, I love the idea. To me, there is no way you could have made a prequel any more interesting. Look at it this way.. In any prequel that's going to be told, we already know what's going to happen. We don't know the back story, and while it may be interesting to know it and find out the little intricacies of each character's past, we know that no matter what happens they will survive. There is no way you can up the stakes for any characters. Look at The Dark Knight, everyone was at risk. When you watched the movie you didn't know who could be killed and who would survive, anybody was at risk. With Star Wars, you know who lives and who doesn't. Thus the stakes can never be raised. In this film, the stakes are dramatically raised. People that are supposed to be alive are no longer, the (arguably) most pivotal planet in the Star Trek universe is completely destroyed and its people virtually extinct, The past lives and circumstances of everything has changed: Kirks father no longer living to see his son captain, Sarek revealing emotions early in his life to Spock and Spock thus having to deal with it sooner, and the old Spock now being stuck in this timeline with no other left in the original Star Trek timeline. Things in both universes are affected now. But with this one, J.J Abrams has upped the stakes and created a universe where now, anything is possible. Circumstances have changed dramatically, and anybody is at risk. Save this post from me, because I guarantee 3 years from now when we are watching Star Trek 2, or whatever they call it, you will see another major character (my guess is an enterprise crew member, a main one) getting killed off. Because now, anything can happen to anyone.

A sequel to this movie couldn't come soon enough.

I saw this movie today (in a premium session in a Dendy cinema, sate chicken + movie in a reclining chair = very good experiance), and I have to say it is definately one of the best movies I have seen in a long while. ( though, judging from the trailers I saw before the film, terminator and transformers are also looking to be great films as well)

I personaly think it was good that they did the retcon instory rather than just restarting it. I also like how they ended it with the TOS theme in the credits.

I also think that the battle scenes were some of the greatest that I have seen in star trek.

Pfft, go faster than warp 10 around the sun with newer weapons and arrive just in time for Nero's ship to appear. Destroy it.

Oh look everything is back!



I saw it last night and I thought it was great. I'm not someone that sits in films and complains about the direction [usually], lens flare or how believable Star Trek plots are.

Yeah, it's always hilarious when people complain about plot devices they think are impossible or silly when the rest of the movie is just as improbable, or in this case "believable". People are complaining about the time-travel bit and blah blah, but they forget to remember a lot of other stuff is unrealistic too like, say, entire planets being destroyed by a drill, going faster than light in a spaceship, transportation of human beings across hundreds of miles, etc.

It's like the people that watch Superman and then say something like "OMG How did he do that, that's impossible!!!, now this movie is just silly", ignorantly forgetting the fact that the flying, x-ray vision, super speed, etc are all just as unrealistic.

Yea, I give the unrealistic movies a pass. But I love to ***** and moan about the movies that are in "our" universe and have crazy superhuman feats accomplished. The last movie I watched that I can think of is The Transporter were he jumps his car off a ramp and picks off the bomb. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!?! I would have believed a faerie coming out and whisking it away more than that.

Yeah, that's a little more logical though than watching Star Trek and believing they can transport, warp, and do all those fancy things yet as soon as they time-travel "WELL THATS NOT POSSIBLE **** THIS MOVIE". Kinda silly. Actually, the people like that are really dumb.

It's totally different when a guy is just supposed to be a kick *** martial artist and suddenly does a pure Superman move out of nowhere, I agree.

In the Star Trek universe, simple transporter accident will give you access to alternate universes. I bet Old Spock could return anytime he wants.

^ except it wasn't an alternate universe, it was just back in time. Two different things, which brings it back to the whole timeline being ****ed. If it was an alternate universe thing it probably would'nt be as big of a deal because its like "oh, okay, the other parallel is still the star trek we know and love from way back when". Instead, everything is all screwed up in the same universe, due to an altered timeline.

No, I'm pretty sure people are complaining about the time travel bit because it's a drooling moronic attempt to excuse themselves from the franchise reboot if people didn't like it. It's not because it's "unrealistic", it's because it's a stupid bad idea from the deepest, darkest pit of stupid bad ideas. The movie is a perfectly-crafted rendition of a plot that's terrible on the order of Rick Berman.

Read my post about the whole thing for my entire take on that issue. After reading it I think you'll understand what I mean, when I ask you : How else could they have done a reboot that wouldn't have stood among the standard prequel formula, where we know what is going to ultimately happen regardless of the back story?

They also needed to bring in more viewers since the last movies failed so miserably at the box office, entertaining to trekkies or not. It's obvious this formula has worked thus far.

I didn't see what was so wrong about Insurrection.

I liked Insurrection, didn't like Nemesis.

Yeah but my point was there is a plot device for everything, maybe the next movie will center around restoring Vulcan. Beings like Trelane, The Q, or Douwd could simply will it into existence. Just because everything wasnt restored to perfect harmony after 1 movie doesnt seem like a reason to be upset.

I enjoyed all the Star Trek movies up to Nemesis. I found every one of them but that enjoyable. When I spoke to Levar Burton he said it was a piece of **** and the TNG cast wanted to do another movie bigger and better send off but it was such a piece of **** the faith in putting a large amount of money into another ST project so soon was gone.

I don't think you quite understand what it means to reboot a franchise. Marvel and DC both have pretty good luck periodically rebooting (including the notion of parallel universes) without having to muddy up the waters with dead-end cameos and time travel pseudo-explanations. It was not necessary, and only the most brainless Star Trek fan-zombie could possibly think they needed to justify making the movie the way they did.

For a couple more examples of 'dark' reboots that do not make the story awful because of pointless over-justification, see Casino Royale and Punisher MAX.

and you seem to underestimate the amount of fan-wank that star trek fans can produce. (or realy, any fan for that matter).

Yeah..**** Nemesis..almost ruined TNG for me

Marvel and DC don't have to put up with Trekkies... I'm pretty sure there are ST nerds who would protest outside the studio offices shouting in Klingonese if they could get enough fellow Trekkie neckbeards to agree to crawl out of their parent's basements and show up.

Yeah, but Trekkies are the problem with Star Trek so who cares? They make up a minuscule percentage of the population but their incessant demands for adherence to Star Trek dogma saddles the profit-minded filmmakers with decades of the worst writing ever committed to paper.

Eventually, Jon`C will say that Star Trek writing causes cancer and drinks on the blood of newborns.

Well there's something going on here. How do you reconcile the extreme disparity in quality between Nemesis and John Logan's other writing efforts, which include Gladiator and The Last Samurai? John Logan is an exceptionally talented screenwriter, yet his Star Trek film is bogged down with awkward dialogue, fan service and so much combat that it's easy to forget that Star Trek is about an ensemble cast rather than a gigantic spaceship.

Personally I think it's because John Logan is a Star Trek fan. He wrote Nemesis to include exactly what he and other Star Trek fans wanted in a movie, which automatically meant it would be an unmitigated cinematic disaster. I think it says a lot when the commercial equivalent of a Star Trek fan film is what finally got Rick Berman fired.

tl;dr Nemesis was fanfiction, with a vaguely Hollywood budget.

I'm not sure I know any Star Trek fans who liked Nemesis. I didn't anyway, and it was one of the few Star Trek movies that I as a Star Trek nerd got some nerd rage over. I'm not sure how it's supposed to appeal to Star Trek fans. But I also agree with Vornskr about the new Star Trek movie.

Anyway, we get it - there's been bad writing in Star Trek. You don't need to make the same post over and over.

Apparently I do need to continue making the same post over and over, since you still don't understand my point. What I am saying is that Trekkies make Star Trek bad, and that the worst aspect of the latest film (the overarching plot) was deliberately made bad so Star Trek fans would have something to completely ignore the contents of forum posts about.

I liked nemesis as a film, though I am not a major star trek fan (not enough to ***** about overall continuity)

No really, your point was made, and anyone who isn't getting it by now isn't going to get it with you saying the same thing in more posts. At least crack out your characteristic over-analysis of a topic and feign having a reason for a new post instead of the equivalent "nuh-uh!" if you can't help yourself.

Hey, where's the design doc?

No, a certain percentage of Trekkies make these horrific scripts happen.

Though most of the blame comes from they excessive use of Data....