_____________________________________________________________________________

I saw Star Trek XI three times, each with a treasured friend who was once a producer for CNN. We both enjoyed the film immensely. He watched it with a producer's eye, and we both watched from the perspective of having been previously in the military. Furthermore, we were also fans of TOS, TNG, etc., and I used to attend lots of conventions in my area.

First, I'm not going to address whether J.J. Abrams had the right idea or not, because that is just my opinion, and opinions are like belly buttons; everyone has one, and they don't do a thing except hold up body jewelry.

However, this conversation about the shipboard love affair between Spock and Uhura with Uhura leaving her post is really unnecessary. In the first place, Spock was not secure in his Vulcan heritage. Even his father said that the choice to choose Earth or Vulcan as his heritage was his and his alone to make. Spock wanted to go through and finish Kolinahr to follow his Vulcan heritage, but was unable to finish in both timelilnes. And since in this timeline, Vulcan was destroyed, there would be no PonFarr or Kuno t' Karifii to use to bind his sexual union with someone, this allowed for a love with Uhura.

Now, about Uhura leaving her station, it happens in real life that way, too! In fact, she wasn't gone for long, just long enough to give Spock what he needed after seeing that his planet was destroyed -- kind and loving support. I worked in a personnel office in the Army. If my first husband had come to me and said that his whole family just perished in a plane accident, I would have gotten permission from my OIC and spent some time with him to show my love and support. Then, I would have come back and finished my work for the day. Shit happens, and people in the military are no different from people anywhere else. They react just the same. It might not have been wise for her to leave her station, but if her station was quiet at the time, no harm would have been done.

PrincessJM
08/04/2009

Riped the heart right out of Gen Roddenberry's chest and threw it on the pigsty floor. Nothing "Star Trek" about it, except some names we recognize. 'Love Boat' meets 'Alias' at a radio show with a schizophrenic editor and a Director of Photography that ran completely on inter vinous caffeine. "Oo-oo, can I play with "Star Trek" next; it's nice and shiny and made all that money for all you guys." "Here have a leg of Roddenberry were cutting up what's left to give to everyone else. He wont mind we're honoring his memory." Wink wink. "Well, that's what we told them to print anyway."

LIOTB
06/07/2009

Well, all the energy & humor were great, but.... in retrospect, new flick really does seem like an almost spoof of the Trek Universe that built the Legend. Sure, new fans will climb on board now, but... the obliteration of core values does seem, to me at least, too heavy a cost for andrenalin packed entertainment. Hopefully, some of the new fans will take the time to educate themselves about what TREK really is ~ new movie does not make that clear, but sure... at least JJ, cast & crew tried hard. It probably would have helped immensely if Abrams, at least, had been a fan to begin with. Failing that basic requirement, the spoof result cannot be too large a surprise.

KIM/LA. ~ Westside
06/02/2009

The film was excellent as a stand alone science fiction film. I doubt Gene Roddenberry would have approved of the casual discarding of the Startrek history, which was so ccarefully adhered to in the original stories. The Enterprise TV series ingnored the building blocks of the StarTrek.legacy and as a consequence failed. Nice to see the inside of the A.B brewer again.

bec
05/31/2009

There were more things wrong with the film than were right. Mike Verta has some superb insights. For general audiences, this is a thrill ride, but for Trekkies (not Trekkers), it's a major let-down.

David Spalding
05/29/2009

Well, I finally gave in to the pressure of needing to see the movie. The only way that I could enjoy the movie was to buy into the "alternate timeline" that they clobbered you with every 5 minutes. Gotta admit, I really go to watch starships fly. In this, the movie was wonderful.

Characterization was very good. McCoy was perfect! I found myself thinking that DeForest Kelley had returned to us! I awaited anxiously every line that he spoke. The other characters were good as well. That being said, after the initial glow was over, it seemed more like Star Trek "lite" or even a parody of the original at times. The story was too divergent even for an alternate timeline. I realize that it's hard to meld new ideas of the future with older ones, but... Why do Phasers have only 2 settings and spit instead of fire beams? Even the tri-microscope weapons of the original Pike timeline had more settings! Why only a tricorder in an escape pod? Shouldn't there be a phaser in the survival kit as well? Doesn't this shiny new Enterprise have a brig? And don't even get me started about the Enterprise being a stick shift. What? No automatic transmission?

Too many changes...no father, no brother George to die by the "sunny side up eggs" of "The Immunity Syndrome". Uhura abandoning post (twice!) for some cuddle time with a willing Spock. No original Robert T. April as first Captain, no Pike in charge with a female "No. 1". Additionally, Pike never made Admiral, he was burned by radiation while still a Starship Fleet Captain. Regarding the planet Vulcan: Are they going to have to change the seal of the Federation (not to mention that the seal they used was from the Movies and not the orginal series) The three prominent stars were to stand for Earth, Vulcan, and Andor. Guess they'll have to use correction tape on the seal.

Also, why does a warp breach close off a black hole when the crash of a starship into the mining ship only cause it to roll away? Also, how does Enterprise manage to either get away by moving faster than the blast radius on impulse or survive with Deflectors when the shields apparently can't even move debris out of the way?

Curtis Takahashi
05/16/2009

This is too much to swallow for me right now. For a guy who got started out in the movies, then moved on to love TNG and DS9... the erasing of the 24th century story line and starting over with a completely different TOS is too much for me right now.

I'll give it some thought, but I don't know if I'll support a sequel of this timeline right now. maybe if there was a gesture of continuing the old storyline, but that may not be possible now.

Scoob
05/16/2009

Good job. I really went to see if he screwed up the Star Trek legend. I was a little concerned when I saw Capt. Pike. I thought they needed someone younger. And Uhura and Spock---you could have knocked me over with a feather. But since he was still resolving his emotions, I bought it. He's young enough for the relationship to be transitory as he comes to grip with the Vulcan philosophy.

A. Gilmore
05/16/2009

I loved it and hated it all at the same time. As an action/adventure flick, it is awesome! As a Star Trek movie, it's ok. As a complete reboot of the franchise....boooo!!!!

The only thing that excuses the horrible massacre of canon, is the fact that it is clearly pointed out a number of times that we are watching an 'alternate' timeline. Given that, I can swallow it and actually like it. But make no mistake....Star Trek as we have known it, is gone. Like Borg, we must adapt.

Trekspace Kim
05/14/2009

I saw the movie last Thursday. Well, it didn't stink. I just didn't like it. I don't understand how JJ Abrams can decide to make a movie for movie fans with Star Trek.

Oh, and hey- lets skip the fact that the Star Trek has a history, much of which he completely ignored. What, did he not do his homework? Is he so arrogant that he can just change Star Trek to suit himself? I'm glad that the movie will open the world of Star Trek to a whole new generation of fans. I just hope these new fans don't go by JJ Abrams idea of what he thinks Star Trek is or should be. I think Gene Roddenberry already did that. Me- a life long fan will write this movie off as an alternate universe and pray that JJ Abrams doesn't make another one-ever.

Diana Romero
05/13/2009

Great movie. The visuals were the best ever. The acting cast was the best. I loved seeing Lenard Nemoy in the movie. What a show. Can we see it continue?? I want more, like good chocolate!! Need I say more!! Star Trek will always be around....this is not the end.

Viki Stout
05/13/2009

I have to say I walked in this film wanting to hate it. The reason why was because over the past months JJ Abrams in the press has attacked Star Trek, the Trekkers, the Trekies, and all the films and series. After seeing the film I now know this was a ploy to get people mad to bring in the fans with phasers on kill.

Once I got in to see the film (I will admit here I snuck in because I didn't want to pay Abrams a cent for his damned film) I was blown away. This film while blowing "cannon" , which is what The Great Bird of the Galaxy did himself with the creation of Star Trek still retains those things that made Star Trek great. It was a well concieved morality tale and a light of hope in what had been a fading light in the world of the Federation. Now we have new but familiar territory to explore. I only hope that those who are brave enough will Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.

William Pattison
05/13/2009

I've been a Star Trek fan from day one in 1966, and I have to say that I was pleased with the movie that JJ Abrams created. To me, a Trek Fan is a "Trek Fan", in any incarnation, we love Trek! I love all of it's forms because it's still TREK! The new timeline allows for new adventures and character interactions. It will still have the connection with the old timeline and the characters really haven't changed. I found that the new cast members studied their characters amazingly well, just watch Kirks responses to McCoys hypospray. Yes, it's a brave new Trek World. Don't hate it, embrace it. I'm sure Gene would. Peace and Long Life!

Roger Ouellette
05/13/2009

Romulans - Cardassians - what? Oh, I see. Let's just re-write history any way we want, throw in a good helping of Lucas special effects and slap the name 'Star Trek' on it. the fans will eat it up.

NOT FOR A MINUTE !

The Federation didn't even know about Romulans or Cardassians then ! Do they really expect me to believe this timeline? I don't know what ship that was, but it sure wasn't the first NCC 1701!

You ruined it, Abrams ! Let Jonathan Frakes do the next one and straighten out this mess !

Darrell
05/13/2009

This new Star Trek movie I found to be a complete departure from the Original Series and does not even fit with the Original at all. I was ashamed of it! Tell me how you can have an early Enterprise with touch-panel controls? That didn't happen until The Next Generation series! The story line of this movie is extremely inconsistent, out of place, confusing as hell to people who grew up with the Original series and followed every movie and all the subsequent series. Vulcan was never destroyed in the Original series nor any of the movies. Spock did attend Vulcan Science Academy, and was subsequently accepted into Starfleet. That's how he became Science Officer, duh! This is mis-use of creative license. I really don't think Roddenberry would be pleased at all. It is just not right! In order for anything 'Star Trek' to work it must be true to the Original history. This movie is clearly a capitalization on Star Trek theme without regard for the history created by Roddenberry's Original creation. You cannot just re-write the Original history, add a bunch of glitzy CGI and slap the name 'Star Trek' on it. I am not happy with this movie at all! The only enjoyment I got out of it was the special effects. I would have hoped for a true Star Trek XI, picking up where Nemesis left off.

Darrell
05/13/2009

Well, I find it hard to leave all of that "history" behind... and yet, when I was an eight year old boy William Shatner was a hero who always did the right thing even if it was the wrong way. I think that young people need that and this film gave them that.. In about 20 years there could be a new ST:TNG when these eight year olds have the need for a less violent reality for their children . Star Trek ,as Hornblower in space will always have a place in this world and it will always have the flexablity to adjust to what people of the time want or need. Hey, anyone else want a real Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers movie?

osmia
05/13/2009

Star Trek was surprisingly fun. I agree with the above comment that the new Kirk & Spock should have tried to restore the timeline and save Vulcan.......But hey, that might be the sequel's job....It was awesome seeing Leonard again as Mr. Spock, but why couldn't they have fit Bill in???? We'll, maybe he'll show up in the next one........I loved seeing our ship "Out There" again.....The new Dr. McCoy was my favorite (besides The Orion Slave Cadet & Cadet Uhura).......Woo Hoo !!!!!!! JUst wished Engineering didn't look like an old warehouse.......Chris Doohan's appearance was awesome next to Simon P. !!!!!!!!

I also Loved the dedication to The Roddenberry's!!!!!!!!! and what a soundtrack!!!!!!!!!!

See You All In Vegas.......... Frankieeeeeeeeee...OUT

Frankie Fontana
05/12/2009

Had to say I loved it! I was a little unsure at first with the idea of it being a prequel, but the actors were fantastic (kudos to Zachary Quinto who is quite possibly the kindest most modest person I've ever met!). The story itself was brilliant and the special effects were spectacular! Well done, it's time to boldly go into a brand new Star Trek era!!

Alex Martinuik
05/12/2009

I grew up with TOS - I would race home after school to watch it. I loved the "reboot." Loved it. I do not mind alternate time lines (remember the Terran Empire episodes?). It will not diminish my love for all the original canon. And so did my wife -she wanted to see it again immediately!

Plus - as we seen from the Terran Empire episodes, you can have an alternate time line and keep the original. There is nothing preventing future shows/movies working with the original time line.

David Merchant
05/12/2009

I was skeptical from the start. I don't know how he did it, but JJ pulled it off. He made a great Star Trek movie...and, simply, a great movie. It's been a LONG time since I wanted to leave a theater and get right back in line to see it again - maybe since I was a kid at the matinee - but I got that feeling back with this movie. Sure, there are parts that I wished didn't happen, but nothing's perfect.

Terran Moon
05/12/2009

JJ has taught us, through Lost, that time lines continue. The original time line will go on upon it's own course. The new movie creates it's own time line - altered from the original. ** I have been having to recommend to a lot of people, who loved the movie, but have questions, to get the Prequel "comic books" and find out more. ** You know, you could infuse the original time line with some fresh blood and dilithium and get new movies there too. IMO ** Personally, I loved it. Saw it twice for free - gee, I felt so guilty about that that I had to force myself to go pay to see it 2 more times. LOL My friends and family, both fans and non-fans were equally excited and enjoyed the movie and were planning to tell their co-workers and friends they had to go see it. YEAH!!! New converts, love it!

Sunset D.
05/12/2009

As an Action film, it's great, as a Star Trek film it's mediocre. What I mean by that is the lack of substance, intelligence and plot for the most part. I wish they'd done without a couple of "Crisis's" and possibly traded them for some character development or depth...

Huston Huddleston
05/12/2009

This is a great movie as it stands. It is also a good Trek movie for old and new fans alike. The problems, however, show J.J. Abrams short comings as a helmsman.

With all the stories referred to, but never filmed, in the Star Trek Cannon, Abrams could have gone his own way within the Star Trek Universe, and not gutted it. The cast is first rate with Karl Urban topping the list as the best McCoy you could possible want. His place as friend and conscience needed to be developed better however.

The only big problem with the movie, and one that shows Abrams as a whiz kid but not a seasoned talent, is the tendency to give the children the big toys. What Star Fleet would give command of the new ship of the line to a newly graduated cadet? Is this Star Trek meets Spy Kids? It would have been OK to graduate the class and then have them get some time under their belts before giving them the keys to the car. Even a battlefield promotion to Lieutenant would have added legitimacy to this "action" movie.

The ship was too new even for the altered time line. I know we have better and bigger budgets today, but we know what the ship should have looked like and Abrams should have at least had only one view screen. The lights and plastic were fun, but this was suppose to be the past and not the next-next generation. The technology could have been better molded into the established bridge. The "engine room," was just the opposite and left me wondering if they were running out of money and went to Roger Corman for advice.

Abrams has a good cast and the first Trek movie is often not the best. Now it is time to make the good Star Trek movie. He has a new universe and he needs to show us why it was necessary and what he can do with his young cast, new ship, and "fresh" ideas.

Richard
05/12/2009

In the beginning there was trepidation . . . When it was first announced that there would be a new Star Trek film I got that feeling in the pit of my stomach which made me ill. Now there would be a new film, going back to the days of our most beloved characters who started this whole phenomenon?!? NO! Please NO! You cannot re-invent the foundations of Trek! (I was also very worried about a script penned by the jerks behind Transformers. YUCK!)

On a whim I went to a Thursday night screening of the newest Trek film. I was one of maybe 20 people in the theater seeing the film, which was a blessing. The film began but there was no swelling of that old familiar theme, no hint at what had come before, no wink, no nudge, just an immediate jump into the action on board a starship. Within moments I was in tears and I knew in as instant that all those fears and low expectations were whole heartedly unfounded. My heart swelled with pride at seeing something, so dear to my nerd being, come back in a blaze of glory (with phasers, and torpedoes and that Vulcan neck pinch).

The re-boot of Trek is amazing. The cast is different and yet perfect, they slip seamlessly into the roles of those well loved characters and not only do they honor the originals who made them but, they also make them their own. Spock is somewhat more emotional but it doesn’t seem out of place at all in this film, this Spock is as endearing to us as the original. The banter between Kirk, McCoy and Spock is not immediate but does appear in short bursts. Some of the classic character lines seep into the dialogue and you cannot help but giggle. My little geek heart thrilled to the story. My mind screamed FINALLY! Trek is Back!

lakutreker
05/12/2009

THIS MOVIE HAD A LOT OF ACTION IN IT. AS THE DIRECTOR SAID, HE WASN'T MAKING A MOVIE FOR STAR TREK FANS, HE WAS MAKING A MOVIE FOR MOVIE FANS. WELL THAT IS WHAT HE DID. BUT HE SEEMS TO FORGET THAT WITH OUT THE STAR TREK FANS, THERE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ANY MORE TV SHOWS OR MOVIE. WHO EVER WROTE THIS STORY SHOULD BE FIRED, AND NEVER ALLOWED TO WRITE AGAIN. THIS MOVIE THROUGH ENTERTAINTING, HAS THROWN AWAY THE LAST 43 YEARS OF A GREAT SCIENCE FICTION LEGACY.

BILLY D WRIGHT
05/12/2009

I saw the new movie twice this weekend. Some, including myself, were fans of the franchise while others weren't. However, everyone thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I've been a lifelong Star Trek fan from the debut of the original series onward and have enjoyed them all to one degree or another. One thing I am not is a fanatic and I find the use of religious terms like "canon" to be ridiculous when used to describe a fictional entertainment experience. I don't concern myself too much with violating "canon" and messing with established timelines. As the Shat once said, "Get a life!" In my opinion Star Trek had become hidebound in its lack of creativity as well as being pretty stale after fourty years of not daring to try anything new. Often when we become slaves to a process creativity dies and Star Trek was a prime example of that. This new movie is exactly what it needed to kick it in the pants and reinvigorate it. J.J. Abrams' irreverant approach is just the medicine to keep Trek going and introduce it to a new and wider audience. The movie takes the franchise in a new direction while also paying tribute to what has gone before. We will always have our old and much loved Star Trek but we now have newer opportunities for creativity and longevity. Thank you J.J. Abrams.

Patrick Kelly
05/12/2009

This movie was definitely the best for many reasons. First, the series needed a kick in the pants and JJ Abrams did a masterful job with the change of the time line. Now this series can go anywhere and do anything and have no need to worry about not sticking with a past storyline or some kind of history. I thought Nimoy did a wonderful job and was in the movie a lot more than I thought he was going to be. Chris was great as Kirk. I'm sure Shater is proud, or he should be. Zachery was great as well. He'll make a fine Spock. I thought all the characters were a great match to the originals. Sure they'll had their own spark to the characters, but htat is what will make this a great series. There is at least two more to come and I hope there is many more than that. Fine Job! Find job indeed.

Bret Jeffrey
05/12/2009

Characters, yes; Story, yes; Giggly cinemetography, no. I had to close my eyes several times to keep from getting vitigo. Why not a good story with good characters.

Joe De Polo
05/12/2009

Move was excellent overall. Yes, the Star Trek cannon needed a reboot, since there were too many inconsistancies in it. People have been complaining about the Spock/Uhuru love affair, but it was logical. It needed to be done. As for Nero's ship, what was a mining ship doing with that kind of firepower. Sure it had 120 years technology edge on the Kelin... but it was stated that it was a mining ship. If I had a battle between a 2009 oil platform and a 1890's ship of the line or cruiser. I'd place my money on the 1890's vintage ship. Also, the interior of the Enterprise had too much interior space. You just don't waste that much space on a ship.... Maybe a Cruise liner, but not an exploration/combat ship of the line. I also could have done without the scene where they beamed Scotty into the water pipe. That scene just didn't make sense. The movie would have been far better off without it. Other than those two flaws, the movie was spot on. I would grouse about not turning over the Flagship of your fleet over to a bunch of raw cadets, but they almost needed to. It would have been much more believable to have them running a small destroyer class ship and save the Enterprise for the next movie, but they sort of needed to bring in the Enterprise.

Barry Kirk
05/12/2009

I thought the movie was a decent sci-fi movie, but as a LONG TIME fan, I was not happy with the new 'timeline' and am wondering why the new Jim Kirk didn't restore the original timeline. I also wonder why Spock would hide instead of trying to restore the timeline himself, that was way 'out of character' for him. But since the series Enterprise seems to come from a timeline that was altered and not repaired, I can see why the new Jim Kirk would be only interested in getting command of the Enterprise. Sorry, I'm not thrilled with the movie. I thought they would be able to do a better, more consistant job. Now it looks to me like J.J. is not really trying to 'bring back' Star Trek, it loks like he is trying to steal it and make it his own.

AdmClontz
05/12/2009

I'm waiting to see it ,myself have not yet but from the trailers it looks awesome , live long and prosper and may we all boldly go where none have gone before .

Richard Kallao
05/11/2009