Star Trek Roman Numeral: The Doo-Dad To Do Some Thing Or The Other

I think what disappoints me is that after all the effort of starting a new timeline and freeing the series to go in any number of directions, we're just getting another "Revenge" plotline with a single villain character. I don't care if it's Khan or Gary Mitchell or Garth of Izar or any of that speculative bullshit, I kinda had hoped the second one would maybe have some aliens and actual space exploration and, you know...Star Trek kinda stuff. Not a second remake of Nemesis.

Star Trek Into Blackness

@Stan: You must have known that the lure to remake Khan, the most popular and best regarded of all the original Trek movies, would be too great for them to resist. I sorta wanted some Klingon stuff or some grand revelation plotline, but you know what? This new series never pretended it wasn't a summer pop flick and never really cared about being a real serious sci-fi drama.

"Star Trek: Into Darkness" does not contain a semicolon in the same way this sentence does not end with a question mark.

Oh, I wasn't expecting a serious sci-fi drama, just something that slightly eschewed the boring tropes that every based-on-a-comic/tv show/whatever movie seems to be slipping into lately. I mean, Star Trek as a universe is pretty fertile, even if all you want to make is a fast moving action movie. I mean, can't they encounter hostile aliens or something along those lines? Or at least multiple villains? Something like that? So, it just seems unimaginative given the wealth of background universe they have to work with.

"Trek" derives from Afrikaans and originally meant "to travel by ox wagon." Where the fuck are the oxen on this? NEXT!

Spinal Tap Into America

> I kinda had hoped the second one would maybe have some aliens and actual space exploration and, you know...Star Trek kinda stuff.

I agree. I plan to skip this movie. I'm tired of them trotting out a new single villain with a doomsday device and a bad, bad plan that will hurt many people that are good, and who is sort of kind of like Nero/Khan/Shinzon .

I have all of Tos/Tng/Ds9 on the media server and that typically is enough to satisfy that craving. I don't need another dumb action movie. I want more of the good stuff.

Make that two. I only caught about 1/3 of the first movie on TV the other weekend, but I was more thoroughly engaged than I had been in any other Star Trek movie. I had skipped it until that viewing because all the nerd rage gave me the impression I wasn't missing anything. Now I am just hoping to find time to find a DVD and sit down for the rest of it.

Star Trek is one of those sacred pop culture properties that will never live up to the imaginary bar the Internet sets. That bar is then raised even further into the heavens out of some weird, bitter fueled spite that someone would dare to try.

JJ Abrams' Star Trek is a lot like the Fallout games.

Fallout is set in an alternate universe that's basically a future envisioned by 50's-60's issues of Popular Mechanics with nukes dropped on it.

Abrams' Trek is Star Trek with it's feet still in the 1960s, but with modern special effects. If you go in with that in mind, it's okay. If not... then damn, JJ's Star Trek is a big disappointment and a missed opportunity. That is, he could've made the future/Federation one that you might believe would come out of our modern age. Instead, we got go-go boots, starships being built on the ground, and about as much attention paid to some actual science fiction as was done in The 5th Element. Not to mention the story had gaping plot holes (most notably, the "thunderstorm in space," since the first one was caused by the Romulan ship time-traveling, not just showing up somewhere).

If that's your thing, great, but some of us wanted a little something more.

I think the real problem is that it doesn't fit everyone's preconception of what *their* Star Trek reboot, that is in their head, would look like. Also because we are so use to, what, 2-3 overall art directions in blockbuster sci-fi movies -- that something that injects a slightly different visual approach seems jarring. The first reaction most of the population has to something different, at least from my experience, tends to be negative.

Obviously I am in the circle that finds the 60's elements clever and refreshing -- the group that doesn't understand how this art direction decision is not the "more" you claim to want.

Cumberstar: Batchtrek

I blame Christopher Nolan, I'm pretty sure him and Hans Zimmer got that started with Inception. And now all action movies must have it.

Deep Space Nine.

The even numbered (original) movies were decent to very good (don't listen to anyone who can't admit the 4th was the best one).

Season 3 and on of The Next Generation had some good stuff in it. Patrick Stewart almost carries the whole thing by himself.

also the first half of First Contact where the Borg were really creepy before they ruined them with the stupid fucking Borg Queen, turning one of the scariest races in sci-fi into just another Matrix/anime villain cliche.

My preferences are the original series in completion, even the terrible episodes are fun to watch, three or four episodes of the Next Generation (Best of Both Worlds I and II and anything with Q in it), one episode of DS9 (In the Pale Moonlight), two episodes of Enterprise (In A Mirror Darkly I and II) and every two part Voyager that isn't about the Borg (for some reason they all just seemed to love to do those stories more and some of it actually qualifies as science fiction). Star Trek I, II, III, IV, VI, Star Trek the Star Trek are the movies I like. For fan series I recommend Hidden Frontier and Odyssey.

Having now passed on my Trekgenes, I shall spin a chrysalis about myself and devour my own brain. I will then wait and starve to death so birds can devour my carcass and spread my larva in their droppings.