Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 Abrams-verse issues
04-07-2010, 04:40 AM
Okay, so I just want it known that I officially had problems witht he Abrams Star Trek Universe. Originally, my problems were with engineering (I don't like my starships looking like wastewater treatment plants). As time has gone by and I have re-watched it and cogitated on it, I realized that there are bigger problems with this movie in the context of Star Trek Canon. I know I am just going to get the standard response of "Well they fixed that witht he alternate timeline" . But I posit that this is not an alternate timeline creted when Nero went back in time, but an entire different universe that developed along different lines. There are cluse to this right from the very beginning.
1. The U.S.S. Kelvin ( built before Nero came back) was to big. Pike mentions that Sam Kirk saved 800 people in ten minutes. The original series Enterprise was the largest canon ship in the originakl universe with about 420 crew and no families. The secondary hull was seen to primarily be a carrier hull (evidence the long tunnel trip that Mrs. Kirk took when leaving the shuttlebay). perhaps in this universe, Earth responded to the Xindi attack by creating bigger ships?
2. Kirks older brother was named George int eh orignal series, and Johnny in the Abrams - verse. And he was a red-head
3. Starfleet Academy is in the wrong place.
4. Kelvin identifies the crew as Romulan, despite the fact that Romulans are not identified until Kirk's Enterprise as being Vulcan-like.

Please let me know if I have posited wrong. I like this movie, but the explanation that I have seen all over the boards that the universe changed with Nero is wrong.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
04-07-2010, 05:24 AM
Like the theory...However I posit that Abrams is just a stupid putz who couldn't get the details right.

Though seriously yours reads better...


Addendum:I have no real opinion of the movie....I read the book and I liked that...cause I could imagine them being the proper actors.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
04-07-2010, 05:28 AM
i think the issues are minor.


The movie was amazing, and considering how much canon there is, its understandible that some things be changed, or possible overlooked. the movie is designed to entertain, and i believe it excels at that.
Pointing out the flaws completely misses the point and message of the movie.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
04-07-2010, 05:40 AM
As a movie...it was passable.

As Trek...it was...well....HORRIBLE

Issues...regardless if they are minor or major.....are still issues...

Abrams looked at Canon and said "Fork you!" and promptly crapped on it and flushed it down the toilet.

My personal issues with the movie:

The Enterprise

She was once a graceful lady, who's lines captured my imagination.
Abrams turned her into a disgusting piece of trash that should be melted down into scrap.

Spock

Spock, even in his younger days, may have not been in complete control, was still a very calm person very much in control of his rabid base vulcan emotions.
While Zachary Quinto looks the part of a Vulcan...he portrayed the character WAY too aggressive, and very unvulcan-like.

Scotty

Was a dedicated, highly intelligent and dedicated engineer who took his work VERY seriously.
While I love Simon Pegg, he portrayed Scotty as an inept drunk who stumbled his way around in life.

I have many more complaints with Trek 09....but I don't want a huge wall of text no one will read anyway.

Mostly casting, story, and acting issues.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
04-07-2010, 05:45 AM
One thing that really bothered me was how warp speed changed so much from Enterprise to alt-reality Trek. I get the excuse that some of the advanced technology came from scans the Kelvin made of Nero's ship, but why does warp speed look like hyperspace in this alternate reality?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
04-07-2010, 05:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_Leod
One thing that really bothered me was how warp speed changed so much from Enterprise to alt-reality Trek. I get the excuse that some of the advanced technology came from scans the Kelvin made of Nero's ship, but why does warp speed look like hyperspace in this alternate reality?
Why? Simple.

JJ thought it looked cooler.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
04-07-2010, 05:49 AM
I look at it like this...
Abram's Star Trek was made to pump enthusiasm into the younger generation. I enjoyed the movie, and am a huge Trek fan. But I am not going to nitpick over it. I have read too many Trek books that don't follow canon to really get bugged about it.

Its like when A Knight's Tale came out, it got slammed for not being true to the late middle ages. So what. It was a fun movie, and that is what it was made to be. Something to enjoy, not sit around with a clipboard and pencil going down a checklist of what it should be.

Anyway, my 2 energy creds on the matter. Enjoy it, and enjoy life.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
04-07-2010, 05:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekar_Corvus
i think the issues are minor.


The movie was amazing, and considering how much canon there is, its understandible that some things be changed, or possible overlooked. the movie is designed to entertain, and i believe it excels at that.
Pointing out the flaws completely misses the point and message of the movie.
I respectfully disagree. I believe when you are dealing with a stroyline like Star Trek and you re-boot it but "pay respect" to the original by including our Spock, then you have to pay respect to those canon issues. I di not miss the point of the picture at all. I loved the movie for what it was, People complain endlessly about other films that are all flash and no respect to orignal source material, and here you have a chance to honor that, and you take the easy way out by claiming "Alternate time line".
Let me add one more thing. My principal complaint is not with the minor things, it is with the claim that the Abrams universe is just our universe with one change, and it's not.
Sural Argonus, while I respect your opinion, I think you may have taken the critique a bit far. It's bathroom allusions that degrade conversations that could be constructive to something else entirely.

I think my principal criticism with that movie is the first thing I thought when I walked out of the theater. There will never be another TV series based on this timeline.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
04-07-2010, 05:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MycroftHolmes View Post
Sural Argonus, while I respect your opinion, I think you may have taken the critique a bit far. It's bathroom allusions that degrade conversations that could be constructive to something else entirely.
Sorry if that offended you...but that's exactly how I feel Abrams treated a 44 year old Franchise

---

Edit:

Regardless...My opinion is still my opinion. I was not overly impressed with the movie in any respect.

JJ uses too much lens flare, the plot was not new or fresh (but that's common in Hollywood for the past couple decades), It was badly acted, badly written. Special Effects were ok...but ILM always does a fairly good job.

I am very critical of ANY movie...not just Trek.

I saw a couple redeeming points of the movie: Orion chicks are always a good thing.

It was very...actiony...However I still just wasn't impressed. and it had nothing to do with my Canon problems with the movie.

I watched it once...and really have no desire to watch it again....Tho I have to admit...I'd watch it before Star Trek V......
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
04-07-2010, 05:53 AM
I loved it as a film and loved it even more for feeling so marvellously like Star Trek again. After years of having the same degrading, uninspired formula for Trek rammed down our throats by the same few people who have been strangling the life out of it, someone made me give a damn again.

That film was how to update Trek with modern styles and expectations while still letting it feel like Trek. I am so very, very glad that its massive popularity means we can finally leave the expectations of those butthurt Trekkies, that had to be pandered to for the viewing figures and dragged down any real improvement to the franchise, far behind.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:54 PM.