I get that it doesn't destroy the original, I just think it's weak to go that route, rather than being truly original

Which is your opinion, but I wish some of the more... stubborn-minded would get that through their heads

Having an opinion about ST2009 is perfectly fine, but regarding the film as a poison simply because it exists... that's just really stupid, imo.

That all fine, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my "general point", which was that the writers of Trek disregard realism whenever they want. "Q" was just one example to show that it is hardly exclusive to JJ's movies. So while you may not like JJ-Trek, that has nothing to do with my point.

You mean like how TNG wasnt "truly original", and just piggybacked on the existing Star Trek brand name? Or how DS9 wasnt "truly original", and just piggybacked on the existing Star Trek brand name? Or how Voyager wasnt "truly original" and just piggybacked on the existing Star Trek brand name? Yep, thats right. Nothing after TOS was "truly orignal", as they were all just piggybacking on the existing Star Trek brand name.

Pretty much any complaint(besides lens flairs) that is leveled against the JJ movies can also be leveled against the previous Trek series. They also disregarded realism(see "Q") and also were not "truly original" beyond TOS. None of that means you have to change your mind about not liking the movie, it just means that if you have a problem with one but not the other then you have a double standard.

I agree entirely. My beef's not with the film per se, but JJ, and the fact that a hack like him is allowed screen time

Many people feel the same way about Brannon Braga

I believe you mean "He Who Shall Not Be Named".

Yes, but again, it's one thing to disregard realism for a scenario/creature etc, and something else to suddenly expect people to believe that a militery (ish) organisation who are punishing a cadet for cheating on a crucial exam, would ignore the chain of command, and just say "Oh here you go, have a starship..." Maybe overlook the cheating, but to give him a full commission, that really was just pushing suspension of disbelief too far for the sake of a movie

A fair point with regards riding on the coattails of the name, but a crucial difference, is that TNG, DS-9 and Voyager (even Enterprise) weren't ever intended to be re-workings of TOS, but extensions of that universe.

Your suspension of disbelief? Maybe. But that doesnt mean it pushes too far for everyones. Likewise, some may say that having Wesley the ensign wonder boy repeatedly saving the senior crew/ship is pushing their suspension of disbelief too far, but that doesnt mean it pushes yours too far. Everyone's suspension of disbelief is different, so there is no universal meter to go by when criticizing a movie or show.


And the story of the movie is that this is not a "reworking", but a parallel timeline, not unlike the Mirror Universe. Same people, but different events and outcomes, while existing simultaneously alongside the existing Trek universe.

Myself included

I guess that's true

I don't know why, but to me, that somehow makes it even worse. I'd've had more respect for JJ if he'd just said "I've got an idea for a sci-fi movie..." and did that as something totally independant, rather than having to use the Trek legacy as an easy way of gain viewers. I wonder what Laurentian Phenomenon will be featured next...