Comments on: Between Dimensions: Star Trek is Ours (An Intergenerational Rant)

By: Alexandre

Alexandre — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:27:42 +0000

I simply dont get it that to renew a series they had to blown up Vulcan, or to create a romance between Spock and Uhura.
I am not a fundamentalist, but i have watched the movies and series and know more or less whats a go and whats a “no-no”.
In the Star trek i learnt to love, the Crew, with the help of Older Spock, would have figured out a way to come back in time, stop Nero before the destroys Vulcan, and then let their lifes come back no normal. Instead of Kirks father dying, I would have killed Pike and instead of Spock+Uhura probably Kirk+Uhura as we know they did kissed in the tv series.
Well, the movie was full of action and absent of a more deeper story (as many modern films are), was cool to look and I am sure its appealing to the new generations with all the reckless actions (the car scene to me was a totally waste of tape, a trailler scene perhaps), it was NOT Star Trek and i felt bad for paying to watch it.

By: Jenny

Jenny — Fri, 15 May 2009 18:56:43 +0000

I loved this Star Trek. Chris Pine did so well as Captain Kirk, getting his ass kicked in style so many times! Ah that took me back . Spock and Uhura was odd! I did not expect that. I really wonder if this is going to be a different reality than that of the old generation – a way not to step on too many toes if they change the timeline? Perhaps! I think the casting was really good, and Simon Pegg did a very amusing but clearly very intelligent Scottie. The fake Russian accent was awful! but it definitely reminded me of the old Chekhov. Very nicely done!

By: bavant

bavant — Thu, 14 May 2009 02:50:13 +0000

I grew up with Star Trek, thought the movies and spin offs where good additions. At the end of this Star Trek, I almost stood up and clapped.
Very well done, with a few minor flaws(Black holes absorb all energy, thats why they are called black holes) the branching from the star trek i knew to this one was well done. Also sets up characters to act differently, since they are now on a differnt timeline from the originals.

WELL DONE!

By: Molly Anderson

Molly Anderson — Thu, 14 May 2009 00:38:16 +0000

I liked the new movie, and I am a die hard trekkie for The Original Series. It seemed like the time continuum has been disrupted though. Does this mean that The Original Series will not be the same? I thought the “romance” between Spock and Uhura was a little too weird. Nurse Chapel will be heartbroken.

By: TheAllKnowingGod

TheAllKnowingGod — Wed, 13 May 2009 22:03:32 +0000

People like this Star Trek movie because it is an action movie. But Star Trek is not or never has been an action series. I hate it when people come in and try to change a series to what it never was. If you never liked Star Trek why would you care if it was dying or what it was about? The people who loved Star Trek because of what it was will be very disappointed with this film. The people who didn’t like Star Trek will love it but should feel guilty because they have taken Star Trek away from those who loved it.

By: 1138

1138 — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:38:27 +0000

I wish people would not present the Star Trek past as a “Barrier” for enjoying this movie. It seems to be some sort of accepted fact that if you were a Trekkie or Tekker you wouldn’t like this movie because you were clinging to notions long held dear and forever unchangeable.

Let me dispel these assumptions. I am a Trekkie or Trekker, perhaps not a diehard for I cannot quote the stardates for any episode, but I do hold the TOS series and characters close to my heart. Shatner, Nimoy, Doohan, Takei, Kelly and the rest of the cast will always be associated with their Trek creations. But that does not deter me from accepting others in these roles. Living through reboots such as Batman, Bond and BSG and seeing them done so well that the door for reboots is not only acceptable but welcome. I love seeing reinvention, especially when it’s better than the original.

Which leads me to say this Trek was really really bad. And not because it was bad Trek, but that it was just a bad movie.

With characters that varied widely in their motivations, production design that was horrible, to storytelling and dialogue seemingly written with blindfolds on, this movie left a lot to be desired. It was a poor man’s Michael Bay and I do not like Michael Bay.

So let’s dispel notions of past Trek. The past didn’t make me not like this movie, the movie itself did.

By: Carey

Carey — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:06:12 +0000

I grew up with the original, really came to like Next Gen but, couldn’t get into the others…suffered thru the disappointment of ST the Movie like everyone else before Wrath probably saved the franchise.

This one is the best one yet! Absent is the moralizing and overt social preachiness that was meant to inspire but too often just got in its own way. Preserved is just enough philosophizing to reveal the nature of the characters and what they would become. This is easily a first rate stand alone action film for the uninitiated (or should I say uninfected) but the tie in with original characters is brilliantly done…understated and with a subtlty of humor and sophistication I think Roddenberry would have admired. Sure they take a couple of liberties that don’t match original story backgrounds and invented a couple key charactersâ€™ relationship, but I can live with it. I predict this will start the whole thing over again for this generation and their progeny. More movies for sure, but a new TV series?…perhaps. This film feels like a gift from the “originalâ€™sâ€ generation to this one to enjoy, absorb and perpetuate. Now they get to see what all the fuss was about, why the characters became iconic, and why it would become arguably one of the most influential TV series in our history, certainly on pop culture. Who knows, like baseball fans who pass down the love of the national pastime to the next generation, perhaps this Star Trek film will do help do likewise in its own right.

The torch is passed, live long and prosper.

By: LOUIS

LOUIS — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:00:46 +0000

Like everyone else I loved this movie. It lifted Star Trek out of it’s rotting sinkhole of nostalgia.

By: Ian

Ian — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:32:14 +0000

I think this is a good review. People may differ in opinions about specifics (hell movies are subjective to many degrees) but if you didn’t read past the first paragraph then you probably shouldn’t post a comment.

By: Lancelot

Lancelot — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:05:31 +0000

IMO,
Gene Roddenberry would be rolling over in his grave if he were to have seen this film 9Considering He is in space maybe in his space capsule.
Although it uses the characters of Star Trek, it is by far from being a Star Trek Movie, or even TV series.
Yes it shows the development of each of the crew, but then I think it also goes against some of the history of the series as well.

I was very disappointed!!

Save your money, or give it to some homeless person you’ll feel much better then walking out of the theater after viewing this film.

By: Rick

Rick — Wed, 13 May 2009 18:35:39 +0000

Yes indeed, star trek was saved by your baby boomebers and immortalized. You got to realize though that star trek was about to die. i mean who honestly watches enterprize. they are not trying to steal the thunder from the original but re-vamp it for todays audience. but star trek does not belong to any one generation but all who wish to enjoy, and love and live in the amazing world of star trek. This was a great movie and will probably bring star trek back once again. so get over yourself.

By: DUTCHESS

DUTCHESS — Wed, 13 May 2009 17:55:00 +0000

I think it’s great that they have found new,younger actors to carry on Gene Roddenberrys legacy of “STAR TREK” As much as we love Spock & Kirk they are getting too mature to handle the rough action scenes…