Star Trek (2009)

Post Reply New Topic

Not that impressed. They played loose and fast with the Star Trek universe = Bad idea.

I liked it

As Enterprise demonstrated, though, the Star Trek universe was too bound by (occasionally contradictory) canon - really, Abrams' movie was the only way out, by rewriting the history so they didn't have to worry so much about making sure it was all identical. Now, both Starfleet and the Klingon Empire are weaker than they were, but the Romulans are going to have their own hassles trying to figure out why a ship broadcasting Romulan ID frequencies attacked the other major powers with weapons far beyond anything anyone else had ever seen, so the storytelling possibilities have widened enormously.

The relationship between Spock and Uhura is even kind of reflected in canon - check out how she looked at him in the first season, especially in one episode where Spock was playing his lyre on the Rec Deck and Uhura was singing. (The bit about her first name, and her reluctance to reveal it, was a kind of canon inside joke - during the run of the series, Lt. Uhura never got a first name; the name "Nyota" was given her by one of the novelists years later, and it stuck.)

My Suspenders of Disbelief(tm) got a real workout, however, as the movie concluded. First off, the event horizon of a black hole is the point at which the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light - but the Enterprise was capable of velocities so much in excess of poor sluggard Light as to be ridiculous. Half a second at Warp 3, and they'd be hundreds of thousands of kilometers away, safely away from the hole. (Now, there may be some reason why warp drive can't be engaged that close to a singularity - and if so, it could have been revealed to us in two lines. "Scotty, take us to warp!" "Och, laddie, I do that this close to a singularity, an' we'll be smeared across half the quadrant!") There were at least half a dozen other problems with that scene - tidal stresses would have shredded the ship long before gravitational shear had a chance, for instance - but that one in particular stands out for me.

Secondly, as pointed out, sure, Cadet Kirk saved the day, and showed that he can command under stressful circumstances - the appropriate reward for which might well be medals, forgiveness of his little stunt in the Kobayashi Maru test, and even early graduation from the Academy and appointment as an Ensign, or possibly even a Lieutenant, aboard a ship somewhere. But jumping straight from Cadet to Captain, and given command of one of the newest, most powerful ships in Starfleet's inventory? Really?? I mean, up until Pike appointed Cadet Kirk as Spock's first officer as Pike left the ship, even Chekhov outranked him - Pavel had at least graduated the Academy, while Kirk was an upperclassman. So the lowest-ranking non-enlisted person on the ship was suddenly its Captain - permanently. I know the basic reason for this was so that they could put Kirk in the captain's chair by the end of the movie to set up the next one, but were they really so short on time that they couldn't even give us a montage of the boy working his way rapidly through the officer ranks?

@DeaconBlues: so, did you like the movie?

The actor that played young Dr. McCoy nailed the character dead on right. That was worth the price of the ticket. Also Simon Pegg did young Scotty very well.

ruveyn

@ruveyn: agreed

DeaconBlues--regarding the "black hole," I am personally of the theory that what red matter creates isn't a black hole at all, but something more along the lines of a rip in subspace. The reason for this conclusion is that the whole idea of red matter--at least, the one that Spock had--was to keep a supernova from threatening the galaxy.

A normal supernova CANNOT do that.

However, at least in the Trekiverse, I think that perhaps a supernova sitting on a subspace rift or other major area of instability could potentially have the effect of throwing a match into a gas tank...much more of an explosion than one would ordinarily see. The red matter may have extradimensional properties as well--basically, the opposite of the rift that the Hobus supernova blew open.

So my thought is that the red matter, and the type of rift it creates, really is not a black hole in the sense that science defines it.

On your other point--I personally still think there was NO reason Kirk should've been a captain. The only mitigating factor I see (though it is still not enough) is that apparently Starfleet had concurrent losses at Vulcan and the Laurentian System. This isn't the incredibly powerful UFP of TNG...this is the Federation even before the 5-year mission, and it's not a superpower.

If the writers are smart, they'll show the desperation the Federation is driven to by its losses.

_________________
Official diagnosis: ADHD, synesthesia. Aspie quiz result (unofficial test): Like Frodo--I'm a halfling? 110/200 NT, 109/200 Aspie.

@sosayweall: i like the movie

I enjoyed the movie for what it was, however, I wish they would have progressed further into the timeline perhaps with new characters rather than doing a reboot of Star Trek. As a Trek fan, I almost wish they had started Trek over completely if this is the route they want to go, rather than try to keep it, at least at the beginning, in the same universe. We already know that in the 29th century, the Federation has timeships that they use to keep the timeline from being altered. Seems the destruction of Vulcan would be something they'd want to stop.

@Baatar: this is the thing that actually got me into star trek as one of my many interests

However, as with the Mirror Universe that spawned the Terran Empire, this timeline's Timefleet comes from a universe where Vulcan was destroyed back in the 23rd century. That's the timeline they'll fight to protect. The kicker about Timefleet as a whole is that they can only police a given timeline so long as none of the changes so far are big enough to knock them out. (That was also why Timefleet didn't interfere when Archer was drawn forward to the 31st century on Enterprise - the changes made by removing Archer from his proper place/time were so great that Timefleet never had a chance to come into existence.)

In the words of the two Chiefs O'Brien, "I hate temporal mechanics."

(That's not entirely true - I like playing with alternities - but when I try to tell other people about them, I run up against the problem that English doesn't have the tenses needed.)

Oh, btw, bat - yes, I liked the movie. The plot holes were glaring, but the actors handled it well enough that I could overlook them. (Well, I am still wondering how they got back to Earth without a warp core, but other than that...)

I was highly disappointed. Nero looks nothing like Romulan, I felt his behavior wasn't too Romulan either. I'm not a big fan of the whole parallel universe dealio either. I also noticed quite a few behavioral flaws in the majority of the characters which I told my mom and she agreed on every one.

@Pistonhead: i respect your opinion

@auntblabby: I liked the ending

I liked Spock and McCoy okay, BUT this movie suffered from the same problem as most modern movies--It was all sizzle and no steak.

Is provoking a few thoughts in between the 'splosions too much to ask these days?