Star Trek: What a Ridiculous Load of Crap

Massive spoilers below.

EDIT: added more notes at the bottom.

Imagine if you will that there's a magic red goop, and that a single drop of this goop—one drop!—can create a black hole. Now imagine that a whole man-sized container of the stuff (which one needs, for some reason, because a few drops just won't do the job) smashes in the middle of a starship. Now imagine that for some reason that ship is still around with a giant black hole forming all around it and you can have a nice conversation with the captain of that and then decide for some reason you need to shoot him with your phasers and photon torpedoes because the black hole hasn't completely destroyed them already.

Okay, now imagine that you sky dive from space into the atmosphere of a planet. There is no sense of burning up on reentry or even any sort of heat. Then you land on a giant laser drill in the stratosphere. This drill is hanging off of a ship in space and is drilling a hole in the planet, but there's no sense at all of the ship maintaining geosynchronous orbit; indeed the drill seems to be moving around quite a lot and yet is still drilling this big hole. Oh yeah, and the reason you need a big hole? Because you want to put a drop of red black hole goo in the center of the planet to destroy it because for some reason creating a black hole anywhere in the general vicinity of the planet isn't good enough. (Why do they bother even using the term "black hole" if they have no desire to have anything to do with what a black hole is or does?) But okay, so then you land on your space drill. You whip off your helmets and have no trouble at all breathing up in the stratosphere. Then for some reason the drill is manned, and the bad guys come out and you all have a big kung fu fight up on the top, complete with flips and acrobatics. On a platform in the open air in the stratosphere. And nobody just blows right off.

I don't think I've ever in my life seen an ostensible Science Fiction movie with such complete contempt for science. Space Balls had better science. Godzilla had better science (all of them).

And that's not the only kind of logical problems going on, even putting aside the various complications involved with people coming back from the future and completely changing history (and we could go on for pages about those sorts of problems in the movie, which make Back to the Future look like a doctoral thesis on string theory)[EDIT: See below]. No just basic stuff. Like for some reason you kill one bad guy and they make you captain of the premiere ship in the fleet, along with a crew of your closest buddies even though almost all of them are straight out of the academy. Because that makes perfect sense.

What the movie does get right: the cast is spot on, and there's lots of space battles and fistfights and even some monsters and stuff that blows up real good, all the kind of things you'd expect from a special effects blockbuster. And there are lots (and lots and lots) of winks and nods to the various series and the other movies in the franchise which are all amusing in their way and will certainly please the hard core trekkie contingent. But somewhere in all that, Star Trek loses its soul, its sense of the possibility of the future, everything that Gene Roddenbury put into it that made it interesting and different and new. Indeed, if there is any movie this is in the tradition of, it's not the previous Trek films but rather Superman Returns, another movie that replaced its heart with a lot of winks and nods and knowing references and a bit of special effects flash.

I've talked in the past on this site about my mixed feelings with the Star Trek franchise in general, how I think its crap but glorious crap and I've seen nearly every episode and every movie. There was always something addictive about Star Trek, about the layers of melodrama over a solid foundation of golden age Science Fiction possibility. And this film may have a Kirk and a Spock and a Bones and the USS Enterprise, but I'm sorry, Star Trek it is not.

EDIT: Thinking about it, the time travel problems in this movie aren't as egregious as I previously thought, especially when compared to the plot problems, which get worse and worse the more I think about them. Consider this: you're a Romulan mining captain (whose mining ship looks for some reason like a giant evil octopus). Your planet, Romulus, is about to be destroyed by its sun going super nova. For some reason the best solution to this problem is to shoot red goop into the sun and turn it into a black hole which for some reason won't just destroy your planet anyway. Okay. Then the sun goes super nova early, you get pulled into the black hole that is finally made, and then instead of being totally crushed beyond recognition you're sent back in time. (Of course, Star Trek has had people traveling through black holes to another dimension (but not through time) in the Animated Series, but still, let's be clear that in this movie, the black holes behave not remotely like black holes.) Now, assuming you've resigned yourself to changing history, you can either:

  1. Go to earlier-time-period Romulus, give them your future tech so they become a super advanced civilization, and much more importantly tell them exactly when the sun is going to go super nova so they can be prepared. OR
  2. Dedicate your life to wrecking vengeance and genocide on the people who tried to help you in the first place, and somehow get the entire crew of your ship to go along with this plan.

If you picked number 2, then congratulations, you're JJ Abrams.

This movie makes no goddamn sense.


Totally agree

Just saw this tonight, was excited like a schoolboy all day and could barely concentrate on my work.
Tried to convince myself it was all okay untill Nimoy's big reveal. I almost cried when he drops the "supernova threatening to destroy the galaxy" bombshell, that and the contrived chance meeting of three integral characters, all within WALKING distance of each other on the same PLANET, makes me think JJ has literally zero concept of scale. The entire story (if you can call it that) is as empirically valid as creationism, which is such a shame given the fantastic talent on show throughout the film. I think I might take a backwards run around my town a few times (thus naturally back in time) and strangle JJ with his own umbillical cord.
I know Star Trek was never scientifically accurate, (it invented fictional tech for that purpose and thus gave us something to aspire to, being half the point, but i digress...), what it didn't do is postulate that planets are actually made of cheese and that space is really filled with oxygen.
Will someone please explain to me why the auteur of the pointless puddle of putrid puss that was, and indeed is (still! For god's sake! (and yes, I believe there could well be a god, though this evil would seems to suggest otherwise)), Lost, actually convinced anyone that Mr Abrams could do anything other than dissappoint you and I, extending...that...inevitable...diss...appointment...for...a...ludicrously...hitherto...unseen...length...of...time.

Hey you! Yeah you, you know who you are. Do you think you're ever going to get back all that time you wasted sitting in front of you're TV waiting for them to make some kind of sense of Lost? Nope, that's right, because the point is the waiting, that's his genius. Clever huh? Well guess what... We're never getting back the star trek we knew and loved either, the idiots just took that from us too.

apologies for the erratic nature of this post, I am currently equal parts upset and angry.

Yeah sad but true

Old Spock would know about time travel. He should be able to go back in time once more and stop the destruction of Vulcan.

Nero could have sent a message to his younger future self warning of the supernova and his wife's death.

Scotty sitting on the north pole on a planet near Vulcan being punished because he lost somebody's Beagle? Why would a Federation outpost on a Class M planet be located at what looks like the south pole? How would he ever have been on the original Enterprise?

3 main characters landing within walking distance? Give me a break.

The transporter and communication jammer is not on the advanced ship, but on the hole digger? Lame excuse for the paragliding adventure.

All the original "aliens" such as Orion slave girl types discovered well into TOS are already in Starfleet? This kind of undoes the TOS timeline before even changing it with the time travel.

The whole movie while entertaining feels more like Fast and Furious in Space the day after.

You are my hero!

You are my hero!

I'm a lifelong avid fan and I

I'm a lifelong avid fan and I couldn't agree with you more. I was incredibly disappointed by this "load of crap." I have couple corrections for you from reading the four comics that were released to introduce this movie's storyline. The Romulan ship wasn't their original mining ship, it was the Empire's top-secret weapon that the miners stole after Romulus's destruction. The star that went nova wasn't that of Romulus, it was some other nearby star that threatened the entire galaxy by going supernova! (OMG!!!!!!!)

This movie had little substance. Uhura and Spock?! Where did that come from? What happened to Kirk's mom after his birth? The whole crew of the Enterprise getting together despite a radically changed timeline? Old Spock smiling (Vulcan was just destroyed!!!!). Too many plot holes to care about this movie...

Star Trek

I totally agree,
JJ Abrams has stolen Star Trek!!!!
Now he can make 10 more movies and do what ever he wants, without any regard for the original series timeline.
I was hoping for so much more in the way of repect to the original series.
I felt like I went to Disneyland and Micky was a cat, and Donald was a fish, and I was the only one that noticed.
And the people that did notice were saying, it's ok just have a good time, it'll be fine.
And it WASN'T FINE! It was lame!
The soul of Star Trek was gone. No emotion, no depth, just no Star Trek.

Thanks for the vent, after that movie I needed it.


Star Trek is a disappointment

JJ Abrams knew coming in that he could release a bunch of B.S. and people would react just the way you said they did: "Just go along with it and have FUN..." "Independence Day" had a lot of this same kind of lazy screenplay creation (a ship with enough power to destroy a city needs a mothership to power it's shields???) but "Star Dregs" makes that film look like an Isaac Asimov novel.


It's honestly a reilief to hear someone express the reservations I've had since my own viewing of Star Trek The Fast and Furious Generation. Maybe it's just me getting pedantic with age (or possibly becoming a better writer myself!), however, I feel too many franchises with promise have been thrown away on lazy, supposedly crowd-pleasing writing, e.g. the Star Wars prequels, Indiana Jones, Doctor Who, and now Star Trek.

I mean, how the hell did the line about a supernova threatening the whole galaxy actually survive a brain-storming session; even if it was a threat, the destructive phenomenon (which surely can't just be the enlarged star itself, because that wouldn't have enough energy to engulf the galaxy) would be spreading at light speed, giving the galaxy inhabitants plenty of time to react, unless of course it was some crazy tachyon emissiony star explosiony thing... That, however, brings me to another point: how did the supernova 'suddenly' engulf Romulus. The older Spock lives in a time of Warp factor 9, so let's say Romulus is about the same distance from its sun as the Earth is, i.e. in the inhabitable zone, then Spock would have had at least ten minutes warning even after the star exploded, and as far as my memory serves me, Romulus and Vulkan weren't too far away from each other.

Along with the main plot being scientifically bonkers, you have secondary elements being equally insane such as Scotty and Kirk beaming to the Enterprise from how far away? The Enterprise had been in warp for a bit, so it surely would have been even further away than even a TNG transporter could have reached, unless of course they had the technology of that civilisation in the delta quadrant from an episode of Voyager... However, you don't need to pick on the science, even the character motivation suffices for a rant. For instance, Nero's motivation just wasn't solid enough to make his waiting 25 years for Spock in any way plausible.

Whatever, at least I know this is a dvd I won't be buying. I just wonder how long this phase of simplistic writing in so-called scifi will continue. Taking the success of this film into account, however, I think we can expect the next batch of films to have an equally sloppy plot that wouldn't even suffice for a session on TNG's holo deck. I just hope the younger viewers find other material to challenge their minds and don't take JJ Abrams ignorance of science as the norm.

This load of crap had me wishing for a black hole in the theater

I watched the original series in prime time as a high school student. Gene Roddenberry's artistic creation, vision of technology and world view shaped my life for the better. JJ Abrams is nothing more than a corporate shill, whose "mainstreaming" ineptitude has ruined the franchise for those of us who "brung it to the dance."

In the new Star Trek universe, we are treated to little more than severe plot holes, poorly covered up with massive amounts of cheap CG "action" sequences, interspersed with inane dialog and macho posturing. It is much cheaper to produce hours of pointless explosions than to actually write meaningful dialog that develops both plot and characters, so that's the way Mr. Sellout (JJ Abrams) takes us.

WTF gives with a punk "Romulan?" That puke-gangsta-wannabe wouldn't make a pimple on a TOS Romulan's butt! Where'd they get the inspiration for that loser? Some kid jackin' hubcaps in the Wal-Mart parking lot? And the Romulan vessel!? It looks like a TV knife infomercial gone berserk. And the CG "monsters" on Delta Vega? LOL! They couldn't have been worse if they were some fat winos in rubber suits. In fact I would have welcomed Godzilla over that crap. Sheer garbage, and an insult to the audience's intelligence.

Not to mention that not one single CG scene did anything to advance the plot or develop a character -- no, they were merely several minutes of "filler", cheaply generated by computer, with no artful concept or purpose except to expand the run time without having to pay anybody to WRITE DIALOG!

Maybe this is what today's 20-somethings relate to. Unless a movie is non-stop, over-the-top, video-game excess, they lose interest. Maybe they should go out and practice face-plants until they are comatose, and then us geezers can live in peace!

If JJ Abrams were to direct Shakespeare, we'd have Hamlet shootin' hoops with Romeo, while his dad, Lord Macbeth was pimpin' Juliet to Caesar and King Richard. And Banquo's ghost would have purple tentacles, 7 mouths, and be rocket propelled by "Brown Matter" while time-traveling through 16 dimensions on Midsummer's Eve... with a 5-minute CG explosion in every scene... -- It makes no less sense than what he did to Trek!

I won't even go into all the continuity errors, with the lame Deus ex Machina time-travel-alternate-reality gimmick which even Brian Griffin would call a "giant middle finger" to the audience.

It seems that this whole production was merely vaguely based on characters and story lines of the original series. Maybe even based only on the opening title sequence. And only slightly, at that. And then crassly sold-out to the highest bidder. Throughout the movie, I had to keep asking myself, "Did the writers even see one episode of the original series?"

There were only a few people at the showing I was at, and I'll bet there will be even fewer in the future. Congratulations, studio morons. By ineptly trying to milk this cash cow one more time, you've killed it.

Gene Roddenberry is spinning in his grave.

It’s not just a matter of

It’s not just a matter of safety for the bridge. It’s not a nit to pick and it’s really not a great realization of technology to have a big window with an overlay. With all due respect to you. This isn’t a shuttle craft. That big window is pretty useless. The enterprise is a big ship, even in its actual TOS proportions. The cool thing about the view screen is that it’s driven by visual sensors. You can see things from far away, very clearly, as if you were watching it on TV. A big window not only brings down the overall structural integrity of the bridge module, but you can’t see shit from that tiny window, from a small room, on a big ship, in between the stars in deep space. It’s blacker than a starless, country night. It’s pitch black and there isn’t a light on any ship that could produce enough lumens to light the void.

Then you meet a ship in deep space. It’s half a million kilometers away from you. You can’t see that shit from your window. That ship has to be within striking distance to see with the naked eye. A window is fine for space planes, shuttles and other small ships while they travel at light speed.

Totally agree

I. Really. Wanted. To. Like. This. Movie.

I went and saw it last Friday. I was getting more and more annoyed watching it... Especially the whole "why the h*ll do they need to drill in the planet to drop some red stuff in it when you can drop it on the sun bathing Vulcans on a beach instead" thingie.

I've have all the movies, all the series, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT... and now they made this? Okay, Nemesis was a horrible movie too. But I never thought JJ Abrams would destroy the whole Star Trek franchise. I actually like Lost... and Fringe.

You made me realize something I had tried to avoid accepting: This movie is horrible. Almost pure crap. Only thing I did like was the characters, the chemistry. But, yeah, these random events that made the crew complete, made Kirk captain, made a bunch of n00bs save the earth... just horrible.


all the other stuff about

all the other stuff about motion picture and star trek 3 as well as other stuff about vulcan ceases to exist because this reboot supposedly creates another time line and what you are seeing is events that occur before the motion picture, this is their early life.

2 reasons. 1. It needs

2 reasons.

1. It needs something to explode the red matter or ignite.
2. It needs to engulf the planet the best spot in the centre to get rid of the people as fast as possible before they can evacuate.

JJ Abrams/ Star Trek Movie are Crap

Couldn't agree more with all you guys. Another classic from my childhood has been trashed. George Lucas and JJ are having drinks right now swapping ideas about artistic bankruptcy.

Did Old Spock watch Vulcan be destroyed from the surface of that class M ice planet? So since Mars is just a dot to the naked eye, wouldn't that make that class M ice planet REALLY close to Vulcan?

What about the Spock/Uhura tryst? Does it make sense dropping a romance bomb like that in the movie when you're only going to spend 3 minutes on it?

JJ used to write for Lost, so the plot discontinuity experience is easy to see.

Fire JJ Abrams!!

Make it go away

I remember my excitement when I heard that there would be a new Star Trek movie... and my utter depression and pessimism when I heard Abrams would be in charge of it.

Abrams has never disappointed me in that respect.

With some effort, I am willing to look past the complete disregard of science. I have participated in only very few heated discussions about the black-hole-time-travel thing, and the red matter, and the ninja battles in the Vulcan stratosphere. But when I do look past those things, all I see is a poorly written and poorly directed movie. The story is one of the laziest I've seen in a while, for the reasons already mentioned above (the Kirk/Spock/Scotty meetup, Nero's bizarre plan, Kirk receiving command, etc.). The visual part is what I've come to expect from Abrams: wobbly cameras, lens flares, quick shots, and just overall chaos and flash.

The message of Star Trek is, in a few words, hope for the future. In this one movie, Abrams has presented his own, very different vision: shallow, uninteresting storytelling, one-dimensional characters, dumbed-down moral issues ("kill the other guy" pretty much sums it up), pretty explosions, sword fights, imploding planets. And as a treat for the Trekkies: forced, almost painful references to the original series.

This movie is an obvious set-up for a whole new series of movies where Abrams will be allowed to do anything he wants; the entire timeline has been altered, and there is no canon to adhere to. Fans of the movie are praising this as a smart move to "reboot" the franchise, but in my opinion it is just more of his disrespect for Star Trek and its fans. Abrams never liked Star Trek, and that's why he didn't make a Star Trek movie. Why on earth he was given the job, I haven't a clue.

As a footnote: who else was gobsmacked when six billion Vulcans died, and everyone just sort of shrugged it off as some sort of occupational hazard? Six billion people just died! A mere ten thousand are left! It takes a hack like Abrams to have one of the greatest genocides in fiction (or reality, for that matter) ever take place, and then just pick up the story and end on a high note.

I am currently rewatching TOS, in an attempt to unsee what has been seen.

What really annoys me are the

What really annoys me are the reviewers like those shills at Rotten Tomatoes who say if you dislike the film then you're some kind of psychotic fanboy retard. This kind of approach to presenting an opinion (and when you say you like something you are expressing an OPINION) is just hedging your bets and trying to head off any kind of negative response, whether well thought out or not.

That said, I enjoyed the original series growing up and Star Trek 2 and 6; aside from that I haven't really liked the off-shoots or other movies, so I doubt this qualifies me as a fanboy. The pile of afterbirth I was subjected to that is JJ Abrams Star Trek (not to be confused with Roddenberry's Star Trek) has got to be one of the most damaged and outright atrocious re-imaginings I've ever seen. It's clear that JJ's plan all along has been to erase the old so he can avoid having to pay lip service to series continuity or even to the basic behaviors of characters like Spock and Uhura, who even without a life-altering event like Kirk's are STILL somehow behaving contrary to the personalities already established for them. The older Spock had difficulty violating Federation mandate; the early Spock would never have fraternized with a fellow officer, period. Inconsistencies like this outside of the 'new' continuity (because certain events in the movie do not happen as a result of the Kelvin's destruction) just make me wonder why he even bothered to CREATE a new continuity at all? It's obvious he has no interest in the old trek, and he flagrantly disregards character histories even outside of Kirk. Scotty in particular is a stand out, and his reference to Archer was ludicrous. Archer was Captain 150 -- that's one-hundred fifty -- YEARS before Kirk commands the Enterprise. Both he and his dog would be long dead. If you're going to ignore the continuity affecting the rest of the film, JJ, then don't even bother with the whole singularity nonsense at all. Just pop on screen at the opening credits and tell me that you can't give a flying hog's ass about the old series and wanted to do your own thing. I can respect that. What I can't respect is a half-assed, limburger-packed plot that makes sure your pulse is constantly in the red to keep viewers from noticing all the massive flaws until after they've been allowed to calm down.

If this movie had been renamed JJ's Star Adventure I would have enjoyed it as a mindless action drama; that it's named Star Trek seems an afterthought by writers who couldn't get some other sci-fi yarn approved, so they hurriedly wrote-in some Star Trek characters and got a green light. Seriously, nothing about the film aside from the uniforms felt like Star Trek, and is that a good thing? Is that what fans really wanted, a movie with really strange (almost to the point of being obnoxious) action music and cgi scenes laden with explosions but without any of the moral and ethical issues that made fans fall in love with Star Trek in the first place? How far must we water down and reduce story in media before there simply isn't any at all, because JJ's Star Trek comes about as close to incoherence as you can get.

It is Rubbish

It is one of the worst films of any genre I've ever seen and I include Ernie goes to Prison in that. It was not Star Trek. It was retarded. It made no sense on any level or in any frame of reference. Everything was crap, the plot, the set, the dialogue, the characterisation, the camera work, the science. I think they had a good laugh about how much money they'd make. It has a guaranteed fan base. As a Star Trek fan I was almost in physical pain watching this car crash of a film. It was like the old creepy Willa-Wonka crossed with Spaceballs on a screen rotating at 30000000mph with clowns screaming in your face for 2 hours. What a waste. Think of the film they could have made. But all releases are like that the past few years and its getting worse. It was the first time I'd been to the cinema in 6 months since I swore never again after......some shit film I can't even remember, and I won't be back anytime soon.

YEP! This movie sucked all

YEP! This movie sucked all right! I commend you all in standing together on this. Paramount and CBS are trying to use the Media to tarnish the Trek fans.

Long live Trek! J-Trek can go to HE11!


Like most I watched this

Like most I watched this expecting a Star Trek Movie but what did we get? Bitter disappointment. A poor badly thought out story, Dizzying directing and characters who are supposed to be familiar yet literally are nothing like what they once were. It really is a take everything you thought you knew about Star Trek and through it away. The movie prides itself on that concept too. It's a shame I really wanted to like this film but all I felt when watching this is this really isn't Star Trek, it doesn't have its soul and optimistic vision that made Star Trek what it is.

The whole "reboot" concept and changing history as to allow the events in the movie to unfold without clashing with any Star Trek history was an insult to every Star Trek fan out there. The plot when looked at made no sense either. A bitter Romulan who lost his family and planet gets 25 years to change history for the better but decides no, lets not do that ,lets go on a murderous rampage in the name of vengeance hunting down the very man who tried to save his home planet. Why not visit Spock in the past and tell him his calculations are a bit off...

The concept that the future is different because events of the past are different is fine but the way its done is devious. It allows the director to pick and choose the element of the back story he wants to include and dismiss everything else. There are just some ridiculous elements to this film with a ship full of cadets being tasked with an important mission ending with the destruction of a planet and the death of billions and then being rewarded by Kirk ending up promoted to Captain from a Cadet? Hardly a successful outing is it. That's just one of its many problems.

I really didn't enjoy this film at all it didn't sit right all the way through and I was quiet thankful when it finally ended. Having been a Star Trek fan for years and having seen all the spin off shows .What annoys me most is the film prides itself on having no continuity to any previous Star Trek and invents things as it goes in all areas be it character, technology and story that outright devalues the previous series and knowledge of Star Trek.

It really is a reinvention of Star Trek for a new generation and an up yours to anyone who enjoyed the old. . I am reminded by people who liked the new film who barely know what Star Trek is that this film breathes new life into a dying franchise and looking at the box office numbers it certainly is a success and will no doubt spawn more films.

What Timeline?

Someone explain to me how Nero managed to change the timeline enough that Chekov was a cadet at the same time as Kirk and Sulu? In TOS, Chekov wasn't even in the first Season. He comes in as an Ensign (a rank typically held for 6 months to a year), at a time when Kirk and Spock have risen up the ranks in a swift, but believable time period. Kirk should be at least 10-15 years older than Chekov, and 5-10 years older than Sulu. Somehow, they are now all the same age?

Also, when Kirk demonstrates that Spock in too emotionally involved to make rational decisions, no one points out that Nero killed Kirk's father. Might not Kirk have some judgment issues in dealing with the Villian that deprived him of a father? How does everyone know so much about Romulans in this timeline?

While the script was a load of crap, how could anyone believe that Kirk would be promoted from Cadet to Captain of Starfleet's flagship? Whatever happened to a medal, and a bump to LtJG? Maybe a choice of assignments? Instead they promote him to O-6, with absolutely no worries that he might not understand what it takes to command a starship day-to-day. Is this a nod to the Obama loving Millenials, who believe that experience is unnecessary? JJ Abrahams now has a Abercrombie and Fitch/Gen Y crew for the Enterprise, with no adult supervision to provide a dose of common sense or reason. The sequel should be called Star Trek II - Frat Party. The only person who should really love this movie is George Lucas, because, by comparison, his Star Wars prequel trilogy, now seems less awful.

Chekov is 17, Sulu is 22, and

Chekov is 17, Sulu is 22, and Kirk is 27. This fits with your minimum required ages for the 3 characters.

You got it! It's the same

You got it! It's the same thing. They stole our art, they stole our music they stole our Star Trek and stole our country. While a movie may not have any effect on our lives, the good old US of A does and we have to take it back.

Hey, keep politics out of this

I voted for Obama and still am happy with what he's managed to accomplish, and I *hated* the new Star Trek movie. Obama is intelligent and considerate - he obviously has experience THINKING - while some other presidents who will remain unnamed did not.

When you start doing the same "A=B, B=C, therefore A=C" arguments that J.J probably used to support his stupid plot, you're not sounding any more bright than he is - and you just lose credibility.

Imagine if they'd done this to Star Wars!


I was more than willing to give it 'artistic license', even to consider it a totally seperate film from all the others, but even taking it purely on its own merits, it is totally stupid.

You cannot just stick the brand "Star Trek" on something (indeed anything) purely to make money. As a film in its own right, there was nothing wrong with it. But it was not just "any old film" - I don't just waste my money going to see "any old film". I went to see it purely because it was called "Star Trek" and for no other reason.

I have spent great fortunes on the previous movies and TV episodes on real DVDs, the games, the books etc etc. But that is something I now desperately regret doing. I wish I could return all of them and pirate them all instead - because THIS is what they have done with my money. I have lost all faith in the brand and will buy nothing that I can't get for free in future.

If they'd remade/recreated a Star Wars film but completely changed the plot, changed all the characters (not just the actors but the actual characters), changed all the lines, indeed changed the entire film so it was a romantic comedy and in no way to do (in any way) with the Star Wars storyline, and nothing to do with what George Lucas created -- then there'd be a riot.

As a lifelong fan I feel raped.

Changed History

I believe they changed history as well. Along with everyone elses examples, there was Spock's mother. If this was to be a prequile of sorts, then we did see his mother in at least one of the original movies and several episodes of the original series. Now they kill her off? BS. Nothing turns me off of a movie more than monkeying around with history, even if it is their own. Trek fans are not stupid.

the romulans had no choice about which time they travelled to.

That's it. Your newly-added notes with options 1 and 2 do not apply. The romulans were chucked through a black hole into this one specific moment in time: the birth of Kirk. They weren't caught in the hole browsing through various eras until finally deciding on this one. They were just tossed into it.
Ditto Spock. He was dumped 25 years later than they. No choice in the matter.

Yeah, dude, I was talking

Yeah, dude, I was talking about what they did AFTER they were dumped into the past. Read it again.


You all seem to be operating under the premise that Star Trek is science fiction. If you think about it, you'll realize it's fantasy. I enjoyed it as an escapist fantasy adventure movie, and it makes about as much scientific sense as anything else Star Trek...

It was a fun movie. My only real disappointment with it is that everyone is obsessed with rebooting franchises instead of coming out with new things. I'm still waiting for a fucking decent space movie that looks like it's plot was developed after Gibson's and Sterling's stories and novels, or hell, even spurious speculation based on current technology. Instead it's all 50s and 60s space opera fan fiction.

Why is space filled with World War 2 heroes? Where are the fucking post-humans?!?!?

I agree about your assessment of the science--BUTT...

...y'know, I don't really give a flying crap that the science was completely flukey.

While the movie was going on, I admit I was caught up in the excitement and the fun of it all--and yeah, it was fun. Being a long-time sci-fi/speculative fiction/whatever-you-want-to-call-it fan, I've dealt a lot with varied old twists like time travel, first contact, etc., and whenever people have called to the fore the screwball interpretation of physics and scientific holes in a movie or book or comic book, I've just said to myself...using my 'plot-hole vision' skill, yeah, well technology fixed that.

There's basic physics and then there's technology that has gotten us through. Can't cross the ocean, it's too far. Man can't fly. Microbes are tiny things that kill you. My hearing is bad, speak up. The car will never replace the horse.

Now add to this: black hole matter can't be contained and will remain neutral in effect until placed within a planetary mass. Spacesuits can't be strong enough or weighted with enough dense matter to withstand entry into atmospheric space or withstand buffeting winds. Captains of first-tier Federation starships cannot be 23 years old.

Oh, all this pithy ripping into, say, a sci-fi movie is all a lot of fun and it's certainly fun to complain about a movie--hell, my wife (who is much more intelligent than me) loves to find fault or plot/character/story inconsistencies in movies all the time and consequently is greatly disappointed in films...constantly.

This is the burden of intellectualism, at times. Sometimes you just have to get off the high-minded intellectual bend, give up on the self mind-fucking, and get stupid and enjoy what you get. Isn't there some evidence that the more intelligent a person is on whatever scale is used (IQ or the inability to enjoy a goddamned movie for the insistence on applying logic to them) are much less happy and socially adjusted than those less-so endowed.

Well said Eric, this film was

Well said Eric, this film was just made to make money, so it was aimed at the mass market audience (namely 15-20 year olds, that aren't particularly bright).

Shame that to make money these days you have to dumb-down your product. =S

Dumbed Down Star Trek

I just started watching this movie, and currently halfway through. Yeah I know it's been out a year, but when it came out, I didn't really feel like watching it, so I waited for the DVD to come my local library (no way I'm spending any money in this shit).

Looks like JJ "Retard" Abrams decided to dumb down Star Trek a lot to make it more "accessible" to the masses (ehem: the mass of movie going people who don't care about good plots but just want to see explosions and boobies and stuff). I also saw a "making of" clip of this thing where JJ and friends say that "Star Trek can learn something from Star Wars" and that he wanted to make it a bit more star wars like. Well...little did I know the moron meant it literally! I mean Kirk running alone in an ice planet chased by a monstrous beast, then ending up in a cave? Hello? That is a total rip-off of one of the scenes in Star Wars. But unlike George Lucas who knows how to weave an epic tale even using dumbed down science or no science at all (remember the lasers that recoil in Star Wars), JJ just makes it DUMB period.

The dumbest thing of all is the central thing that put the whole story in motion. The reason why the elder Spock and Nero are back in time: The "supernova that threatens to destroy the Galaxy". Now I know supernovas are powerful...but they are LOCAL events. They may be capable of destroying the entire star system where they originate, and perhaps affecting and harming nearby star systems (around 50 lightyear diameter)...but the entire Galaxy? Hello?! A single supernova threatening to destroy the entire Milky Way (which is 100,000 light years across?) That's the stupidest thing ever. Ok well maybe not as stupid as turning a supernova to a massive blackhole in order to SAVE a planet? Uh...what were they thinking?

The only good thing about this movie is the appearance of the original Spock. Good to see ol' Nimoy again before he retires. Well the young Spock got the part nailed that's good. The other good thing about this movie is "StarFleet academy" is really the library at my alma mater (Cal State Northridge), so I got a kick out of seeing the ol' Oviatt Library building being turned into Starfleet Academy and digitally relocated to San Francisco. hahaha.

I hope that if they do a sequel, that Paramount would have the brains to hire a better director. Coz JJ Abrams sucks.

Know I'm a little late here...

... but you guys really need to remember the MST3K mantra. And while I have great fun picking apart plot points or bad science, I don't let it ruin an entire movie for me. Repeat after me: It's just a show (movie), I should just relax.

Hooray for the New Hollywood

Haha - and you thought YOU were late to the party?
Actually, I'm commenting here about a YEAR after this movie came out - finally having decided to view it on my own, online, even after everyone I knew told me it "Was Awful". I decided to watch it for myself - and yup, it's pretty awful if you're even a REMOTE fan of the franchise, or the type of person who hates plot-holes big enough to drive a Mac truck through...
On the other hand, if you're not a "trekkie" and just want to put your brain on hold and watch explosions and action and flashy lights and a scene with girls in their underwear, you've come to the right place. If you can forgive or forget everything that's wrong with this film, you'll probably be entertained.

I won't get into all the many things that this film completely missed the mark on...and the extreme bad science, they're all over the internet by now and easy to find... the way the story writers Orci and Kurtzman painted themselves into a corner so badly, that they needed to release a Graphic Novel later in order to answer a ton of these nagging questions about things that just made no sense in the film... pretty bad execution of a series "Reboot" - a clever way of saying, "We're just going to poop all over your childhood, everything Gene Roddenberry did, and years and years of effort in building a continuity in the Star Trek Universe - and instead just do whatever the Hell we want to with it".
Gee. Thanks.
Good job there, J.J. Abrams and Paramount. Really appreciate the effort.

Here's the Problem I have with "New Hollywood" - It's Lazy.
Rather than take the time and REALLY write a compelling screenplay, layered in complexity and having to tackle both the issues of the Star Trek canon and maybe some sound science thrown in there, they instead opt out of everything with a "Reboot" and play fast and loose with the whole show.
"Hey - it's a new parallel time line... deal with it. If we screwed up somewhere, we'll just make something up later".
Which is a shame, as even though Star Trek is science fiction, they have probably gone through more effort than any other franchise in trying to explain their future technology with actual scientific plausability - from transporter "Heisenberg compensators", to full detailed technical manuals of starship designs. NASA even has a number of engineers and astrophysics scientists who'll readily say that they are fans, and that the series inspired them with an interest in space exploration and what humanity's role in the cosmos could be.

Given the level of special effects used throughout the movie, it's just basic sloppiness that so much is wrong with the unfolding events. It's painfully obvious that the screenwriters and director were more concerned with building a "Fast and the Furious"-style thrill-ride, and they weren't going to let something like continuity or common sense or a well documented series canon stand in their way. Instead, they rebuilt it with a silly and completely unbelievable story about time-travel and revenge, and filled a script with so many glaring inconsistencies and convenient plot-devices as to suspend any sense of logic.
About the only accolades I can give this film, are most of the actor's performances for the crew... Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy in particular was dead-on. I say "Most" because Chekov and Scotty were insufferably bad, and Zoe Saldana was an absolute horrid choice for Uhura... never mind the lame attempt at artificially injecting a rivalry between Kirk and Spock with a love interest between Spock and Uhura.
The scene where a crewman is blown out into space, and the shot that reflects that sound does not carry in a vacuum, is the only moment in the film where I said "Well, at least THAT makes sense".


...I agree that the science is junk, but that's not what bothered me. Your point about the "soul" of Star Trek is what's the issue, the fact that they took everything that the originals stood for - reason over emotion, science over irrationality, logic over prejudice, exploration, non-interference, mediation - and just chucked them out in favor of juvenile nonsense that's the exact opposite, and essentially stretched the skin of Star Trek over something entirely different.

Lets put aside the

Lets put aside the abomination of a movie (i agree with most of the things posted here)
and instead focus on the wya paramount decide to market the movie

"weve had maybe 40 years of milking these sucker for mercahndise ,videos ,dvds, ratings and so on
what can we do next?"

"Ive an idea sir,how about we market the film for non trekkers and leak to the media that those sad pathetic types will hate the movie
thus ensuring the non freak audeince and more money to buy coke "

"Great idea whats your name again kid?"

"oh sir just call me JJ"

Compelled to chime in

First, I agree that J.J. Trek is crap, but must admit to finding much of post-TOS Trek to be somewhat crappy. Thing is, even with the low budget/poor special effects TOS was real science fiction(if you READ the good stuff---as in not ST, SW, SG-1, etc. spin-off media---you may know what I mean), not hard SF, but REAL SF nevertheless---it explored ideas. I found each successive spin-off series to present less and less exploration of ideas. Like another commentor, I liked TOS, film 2, and film 6 to lesser extent(Search for Spock, I think, marred by the absence of Kirstie Alley). I guess I'm just giving fair warning that I'm not (much of?) a Trekker and that my problem with the film rests in the utter contempt its producers---meant here in the broad sense of the word---have for their viewers' intelligence.

It's been suggested in some coments that dumbed-down movie-making is somehow an appeal to young moviegoers, as if young moviegoers did not insure the success of the Matrix(only the first!), Blair Witch Project(come on, not one explosion, and not unintelligent if you take it for what it is), Inception(which I didn't much like), the new Batman films(very intelligent movies---Dark Knight should have won best picture for its subtextual depth). Fights and explosions could very well appeal to young viewers, but action is not prohibitive of sensible story-telling, so I don't think that's the reason movies like J.J. Trek proliferate. I think we may have our logic backwards. It's not a question of movie-makers intentionally dumbing down the movies to appeal to the most lucrative demographic, it's that too many movie-makers are DUMB.

JAWS, SW, and Raiders of the Lost Ark changed the movie industry(with smart movies by the way); the blockbuster became a way to make lots of money. That led, I think, to more decisions being made by untalented financiers with little respect for viewers and little appreciation for the art at the heart of story-telling. How would the average financial backer know in what project to invest their money? Is it possible they would be swayed by the best pitches rather than the best projects? Would they prefer to finance a director/producer who comes to them with an idea they must assess on its creative merits or would they rather finance J.J. Abrams, who can tell them how he plans to milk a market? (In fact, the effective marketing of movie crap is probably the source of my supposition---these guys are better at selling a product than making it.)

We should consider a culture shift in the movie industry as the underlying source of the mindless, hype-driven drivel that too often makes it to the big screen. Perhaps too many decisions ARE being made by the creatively unqualified, not just in green-lighting of projects, but in the production of the films themselves. Depending on where the money and personnel are coming from, we might even wonder about the attitudes of filmmakers(writers, directors, producers) towards the viewing public, which would, at least, explain the disrespect and contempt for moviegoers' intelligence demonstrated in films like J.J. Trek. Maybe movies aren't being made brainless to appeal to "dumb kids", but because too many in the industry think of the public as dumb, or maybe just worthless; kids---and everybody else---are dumb to shrug their shoulders and take whatever someone shovels to them as entertainment.

Still angry

It's seven years later and I'm still angry. I have watched some of JJ's other projects and had mixed feelings. I never got sucked into Lost! That's what this film reminds me of. It's some kind of bad dream. I hope that eventually producers will abandon this timeline and make a realistic Sequel in the original Star Trek universe. As I write this Star Trek: Beyond is scheduled for release. I will eventually watch it because I watch Science Fiction movies. I won't pay a dime for it. I wont go to the library and check it out. I'll wait until it is on commercial TV just like I did for 2009 and Into Darkness!
The Alternate Reality is not worth my money nor is it worth yours. If fans of the franchise would quit buying tickets maybe we could encourage the studio to drop this timeline!

black holes

You say... "For some reason the best solution to this problem is to shoot red goop into the sun and turn it into a black hole which for some reason won't just destroy your planet anyway."

Nothwithstanding you are generally correct in the utter foolishness of the science, I feel it my duty to point out to you that if for example our Sun was instantly replaced with a black hole of the same mass then it would not suddenly destroy the Earth. Apart from it getting cold and dark on Earth, there would be no effect with regards to the Earth being sucked into said black hole, it would continue to orbit as usual, as would Mercury for that matter.