Star Trek Into Darkness

My biggest issue with DS9 was the new Dax in the last season- I understand the reality of actor contracts and actors are not slaves (apparently) and can't be forced to play the same characters they used to. But they should have just wrote Dax out rather than killing her off- or if they did have to kill her- don't bring in a replacement. Ezri was cute and all but we didn't need to waste a good chunk of the farewell season on character development someone who will be there just 1 season.

On the other hand, I quite enjoyed Vic Fountaine.

wyvicfon.jpg
 
An alternate timeline is nothing more than an alternate reality. Any Star Trek fan alternate universes exist:

You have the classic. "Mirror, Mirror" (ST:TOS 1967)
You have a number of DS9 episodes:
"Crossover"
"Through the Looking Glass"
"Shattered Mirror"
"Resurrection"
"The Emperor's New Cloak"
And you have two in Enterprise:
"In a Mirror, Darkly"
"In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II"

Episode writers have maintained that the mirror universe is specifically a parallel universe, where the patterns of events move in similar manners, but the intentions and characterizations are different, so the people of the mirror side will always remain (and always have been) skewed versions of their "normal" counterparts. However, according to the writers and producers of Star Trek: Enterprise in their panel discussion at the 2005 Grand Slam XIII, if they were to have agreed on financial compensation for a guest appearance for William Shatner during the fourth season of the series, there may have been an episode with a canonical explanation of the origins of the mirror universe as an alternate timeline.
 
I can't enjoy a movie if it doesn't make sense, no matter how big the story is. They got so many things wrong, despite being big. They crossed the line into science fantasy, not science fiction. And the fantasy itself was self-inconsistent.

And accepting that a reboot doesn't require the character development of a series does not excuse the new character elements that the new movie introduced. For example, why does Spock love Ohura in the reboot? The best I can tell is that it was a relationship based on sympathy that turned physical. How disappointing. And that relationship also rejects the past character development on which you are relying to excuse the present lack thereof. It's like, let's say you make a reboot movie about Ghandi where the time line was disrupted and now he is a sex maniac for no good reason. Genius, right?
What didn't make sense? I keep seeing folks say that. I don't ever really hear what it is that was the problem. (Just more talk of lens flares.)

I also don't get what was so weird about Spock and Uhura's relationship. Uhura flirted with him in the original series, at least a couple of times. Spock had several romantic interests during the course of the original series. What's so odd that in an alternate timeline, their paths would cross intimately? This hardly like Ghandi becoming a sex maniac. This is more like Ghandi eating a sandwich.
 
What's so odd that in an alternate timeline, their paths would cross intimately?

It's not odd. The intimate relationship is a valid choice, but it wasn't developed at all. My exact question was, "why does Spock love Ohura in the reboot?" What is their motivation? What is their interest? These are depth questions that should be addressed in the story but they are not.
 
My biggest issue with DS9 was the new Dax in the last season- I understand the reality of actor contracts and actors are not slaves (apparently) and can't be forced to play the same characters they used to. But they should have just wrote Dax out rather than killing her off- or if they did have to kill her- don't bring in a replacement. Ezri was cute and all but we didn't need to waste a good chunk of the farewell season on character development someone who will be there just 1 season.
Most likely it was because they had a few plot devices already scripted that required Dax to be in that role for the final season. I dimly remember the last season, but I do remember that Dax had a large role in bringing characters into the overall storyline.

He said the last good movie, not the last one made.

I have to agree, as much as I liked Nemesis, Insurrection was much better.

Does anyone else wish that they'd made a movie based on Voyager or is that just me?
I would have like it as an episode of TNG. As a major motion picture, and one we had been waiting for for quite some time, it fell decidedly flat. There was nothing wrong with the acting, directing or story, per se. But I never saw any reason why this particular story was selected above others for a 9th trek film.
 
What didn't make sense?

Ok, you get my full review of ST11:

1) There was strange attention paid to the fact that everything is different now. It was as if everyone knew what their lives would have been in the unaltered universe and they know they have been changed in contrast to that. It was necessary to relay the concept of the alternate universe to the audience, but the delivery was really awkward. It's like they couldn't think of a way to demonstrate the concept so they just came out and said it.

2) An emotional Spock with a girlfriend? That is totally inconsistent with the Spock character. It is as if the Spock from the alternate universe decided to side with his humanity unlike the original Spock. This is unfortunate because the Spock character was originally designed to provide a dispassionate and rational perspective. Now there is no such character. As a result the crew is very one dimensional.

3) While most of the Trek universe has made passing references to the rebelliousness of youth, this movie was nothing but, and for that reason it was awkward. The movie lacked the maturity that I have come to expect from Star Trek.

4) Not counting the abortion that was Nemesis, this is the first Trek movie to have no redeeming sociopolitical message. The best message I was able to extract from the movie is that we should all strive to serve something higher than ourselves. It was pretty generic. The movie also lacked the feelings of hope and wonder that underlie most Trek.

5) The villain was very one dimensional. Needed much more development.

6) Plot holes galore. There were so many unexplained things in the movie... which isn't necessarily a bad thing except that the unexplained things had inconsistencies and holes in themselves which begs an explanation.

7) Lots of bad plot devices that made no sense. It's like the writers had a bunch of cool scenes in mind which they patched together with very little effort.

8) There was no development for the Uhura / Spock relationship. As far as I could tell it was a relationship based on sympathy which turned physical. Pretty disappointing.

9) There were a lot of token alien races with no introduction or background which is unusual in Star Trek. It felt more like Star Wars in that sense.

10) Sarek would never openly admit his feelings. But even if you dismiss the history of his character, the open admission of love is completely at odds with his vulcan nature. And Sarek is 100% vulcan so he has no excuse.

Vulcans in this universe are portrayed as closet humans in a way which is unfortunate and lacking dimension.

11) You can't transport from Titan to Earth. Anyone who knows their trek knows that the maximum transport range is 40,000 kilometers. The distance between Titan and Earth is approximately 1.2 billion kilometers. Said plainly, you can't transport between planets because they are too far apart. You need to be in orbit.

Hardcore treks might recall the concept of subspace transporters which have much longer range, but that technology isn't even perfected in the TNG time frame. Nope, this can't be explained away within the established technology of the trek universe.

12) I am troubled by how Vulcans are represented in the latest movie. My two main gripes are with Spock and Sarek.

The Spock in this alternate universe is very emotional and he even has a girlfriend. It is as if this alternate Spock chose to side with his humanity unlike the original Spock. This is a valid choice considering he's half human, but it's an unfortunate choice because it takes away an import dimension from the crew of the Enterprise. Now there is no character to provide a dispassionate and logical perspective which is what the Spock character was originally designed for. For me this makes the crew very one dimensional. They are all varying degrees of human now... young impetuous humans at that.

The new Sarek was a complete departure. Sarek is one of the most logical and respected Vulcans in the Trek universe. And of course he is 100% Vulcan so he has no human side like Spock does. But in the movie we have Sarek admitting feelings of love for his wife. Sarek would never do this. But even if we ignore the history of his character in the first Trek universe, his admission of love flies in the face of his Vulcan heritage.

The Vulcans in this alternate universe are being portrayed as "closet humans." This isn't an invalid choice on the part of the writers, but it's a huge departure for the Trek universe and it takes away an important dimension of the universe in my opinion.

13) The crew in star trek 11 doesn't seem to have any real desire to go out into space. There is no sense of wonder and awe at exploring the unknowns of space which is an overarching theme that is constant throughout most of star trek (except DS9).

The only two characters who have any semblance of motivation are Kirk and Spock. Kirk is there out of a sense of duty and ego after having been goaded by Pike. Spock is also there out of ego after his little spat with the Vulcan science academy. I suppose ego is better than no reason at all.

14) Starfleet Academy has turned into a military institution. Cadets no longer apply to join the academy, they enlist. I don't know if anyone else noticed that. Drunk guy in a bar with no future (reboot Kirk), enlist in Starfleet. Boy genius Wesley Crusher, apply for the academy and get rejected the first time. Huge difference. Do not like.
 
Last edited:
It's not odd. The intimate relationship is a valid choice, but it wasn't developed at all. My exact question was, "why does Spock love Ohura in the reboot?" What is their motivation? What is their interest? These are depth questions that should be addressed in the story but they are not.
But that would have been bad storytelling to address every single new detail introduced in the first film. There were other bigger, more important story elements to address. That's a detail better left to future Star Treks, or Trek Encyclopedias. The explanation to their relationship had nothing to do with the main plot, and therefore does nothing to move the movie along. It's meant to add depth behind the overall story and something that can be addressed later. Leaving you with the question as to how they got together was the whole point of introducing that concept.
 
Don't want to dive into a religious-like war, but personally, I don't like the reboot, neither its concept nor its actual implementation, though the alternate timeline is probably the right method to deal with all this. Not saying it's bad, I just don't like it.

For me, ToS / TNG / DS9 and, to a lesser extent, Voyager (parts of it were pretty cool while others were just boring as hell) was what makes StarTrek. Lots of well developed, interesting characters and stories, especially in TNG (Picard = best Captain ever, period :) ).
 
1) There was strange attention paid to the fact that everything is different now. It was as if everyone knew what their lives would have been in the unaltered universe and they know they have been changed in contrast to that. It was necessary to relay the concept of the alternate universe to the audience, but the delivery was really awkward. It's like they couldn't think of a way to demonstrate the concept so they just came out and said it.

3) While most of the Trek universe has made passing references to the rebelliousness of youth, this movie was nothing but, and for that reason it was awkward. The movie lacked the maturity that I have come to expect from Star Trek.
5) The villain was very one dimensional. Needed much more development.
Vulcans in this universe are portrayed as closet humans in a way which is unfortunate and lacking dimension.
I'm not really sure what you mean by these statement, so I'll leave them at that.

2) An emotional Spock with a girlfriend? That is totally inconsistent with the Spock character. It is as if the Spock from the alternate universe decided to side with his humanity unlike the original Spock. This is unfortunate because the Spock character was originally designed to provide a dispassionate and rational perspective. Now there is no such character. As a result the crew is very one dimensional.
8) There was no development for the Uhura / Spock relationship. As far as I could tell it was a relationship based on sympathy which turned physical. Pretty disappointing.
Spock's character struggled with emotion, and gave in to emotion repeatedly through the course of the original series and the movies. And again, Spock did have a couple of romantic interests. He nearly beat McCoy to death over one. It's not outside established character for him to have a girlfriend, especially since we've established that Vulcan's marry Humans. Well, how do you think we get there?


4) Not counting the abortion that was Nemesis, this is the first Trek movie to have no redeeming sociopolitical message. The best message I was able to extract from the movie is that we should all strive to serve something higher than ourselves. It was pretty generic. The movie also lacked the feelings of hope and wonder that underlie most Trek.
What sociopolitical message did Star Trek's 1, 2, 3, 5, Generations and First Contact have? What sense of hope and wonder did any of them have? 2-4 were some of the most distressing times of that crew's life.




6) Plot holes galore. There were so many unexplained things in the movie... which isn't necessarily a bad thing except that the unexplained things had inconsistencies and holes in themselves which begs an explanation.

7) Lots of bad plot devices that made no sense. It's like the writers had a bunch of cool scenes in mind which they patched together with very little effort.
9) There were a lot of token alien races with no introduction or background which is unusual in Star Trek. It felt more like Star Wars in that sense.
Still not sure what you're referring to.

10) Sarek would never openly admit his feelings. But even if you dismiss the history of his character, the open admission of love is completely at odds with his vulcan nature. And Sarek is 100% vulcan so he has no excuse.
12) I am troubled by how Vulcans are represented in the latest movie. My two main gripes are with Spock and Sarek.
The Spock in this alternate universe is very emotional and he even has a girlfriend. It is as if this alternate Spock chose to side with his humanity unlike the original Spock. This is a valid choice considering he's half human, but it's an unfortunate choice because it takes away an import dimension from the crew of the Enterprise. Now there is no character to provide a dispassionate and logical perspective which is what the Spock character was originally designed for. For me this makes the crew very one dimensional. They are all varying degrees of human now... young impetuous humans at that.

The new Sarek was a complete departure. Sarek is one of the most logical and respected Vulcans in the Trek universe. And of course he is 100% Vulcan so he has no human side like Spock does. But in the movie we have Sarek admitting feelings of love for his wife. Sarek would never do this. But even if we ignore the history of his character in the first Trek universe, his admission of love flies in the face of his Vulcan heritage.

The Vulcans in this alternate universe are being portrayed as "closet humans." This isn't an invalid choice on the part of the writers, but it's a huge departure for the Trek universe and it takes away an important dimension of the universe in my opinion.
Vulcan's frequently like to remind Star Trek characters that they have emotion, they simply suppress it. It was established that Sarek loved Amanda, Perrin and Spock in The Next Generation. And Perrin already knew that. Not out of character for a private family conversation.


11) You can't transport from Titan to Earth. Anyone who knows their trek knows that the maximum transport range is 40,000 kilometers. The distance between Titan and Earth is approximately 1.2 billion kilometers. Said plainly, you can't transport between planets because they are too far apart. You need to be in orbit.

Hardcore treks might recall the concept of subspace transporters which have much longer range, but that technology isn't even perfected in the TNG time frame. Nope, this can't be explained away within the established technology of the trek universe.
I'm still trying to figure out which scene this is.



13) The crew in star trek 11 doesn't seem to have any real desire to go out into space. There is no sense of wonder and awe at exploring the unknowns of space which is an overarching theme that is constant throughout most of star trek (except DS9).
You mean, besides joining Starfleet?

Spock is also there out of ego after his little spat with the Vulcan science academy. I suppose ego is better than no reason at all.
Also established cannon, as well.
 
Top Bottom