The original Trek timeline (with DS9, Voyager, TNG, and further novelized adventures) still exists, and still has stories going. It's also where the Star Trek MMORPG will be set.

The new Star Trek movie is a reboot in an alternate timeline.

It was a *decent* action movie. Not Star Trek in the least. Star Trek is about idea's, and character development. The bond between a captain and his crew, ship, ect. This movie was about action, explosions, and "Lets get people in the seats with more fire, and less plot!"

Butchered Star Trek Cannon, plain and simple. Why in gods name, are the Romulans all Bald, and tatoo'd? Never before have we seen a Romulan with above average strength, yet, ta-da, they appear in this movie. In TOS, the Federation didnt even knoww what Romulans looked like until the "Balance of Terror" let alone there were three distinct dialects of their language. Sulu, was not the helmsmen when he first came to the Enterprise, he was a physicist. I dont know about you, but I ALWAYS take a sword with me on EVA missions. Not a fencing degen, mind, no no, dont be silly.

What the hell was with the plot? "A super nova threatens the galazy...." Uh...huh. That makes perfect sense. Any particular reason why Romulus got wiped out? They never mention which star goves nova. Then, when the writers realized that they had fucked up the cannon, they used a cliche "It's ok, its a different universe.....kinda" stunt. Bullshit. Then, when Kirk is first on the Enterpirse....Pike makes him First Officer. Someone who was just at an inquiery for misconduct....gets an awfully nice promotion at the drop of a hat. Not likely. Red Matter, something we've never heard of before, yet can seemingly create blackholes, seems like an idea developed when the writers were grasping at straws desperatly.

What are the odds, that Kirk and Ambassador Spock would both end up on the same planet with Scotty?

Oh, and the ending blows as well. They give comand of Starfleet's flagship, to a twenty five year old, ...sure,...

I have more, but Im sick of ranting. Action scenes were well though out, exciting, and the graphics were outstanding. Acting, was....decent. Humor felt tacky to me.

I refer back to the Onion story I linked a couple pages ago.

Sure, but if i were an engineer on a boringly limited ship, i'd step on an opportunity to demonstrate innovative solutions brought forward by such suggestions, too.

Will get wiped out, you mean.

 

 

oh god, grow up people, in case you forgot:

 

Usage note:
In addition to its original and continuing senses of “merry, lively” and “bright or showy,” gay has had various senses dealing with sexual conduct since the 17th century. A gay woman was a prostitute, a gay man a womanizer, a gay house a brothel. This sexual world included homosexuals too, and gay as an adjective meaning “homosexual” goes back at least to the early 1900s. After World War II, as social attitudes toward sexuality began to change, gay was applied openly by homosexuals to themselves, first as an adjective and later as a noun. Today, the noun often designates only a male homosexual: gays and lesbians. The word has ceased to be slang and is not used disparagingly. Homosexual as a noun is sometimes used only in reference to a male.

 

So as you can see, it has more than ONE meaning. I can use it how I want.
Would you have preferred the word "queer?"

It has more than one meaning, but so does "negro". The point is, the use of "gay" as a perjoritive is homophobic and just a little creepy.

There's no reason to get so damned defensive. Seriously, look at what I said in the first place - and compare that to your massive overreaction to it. Don't be so oversensitive - you're looking way too much into what I said.

That said, don't play games - you know exactly what gay means. Don't try to use the dictionary to obfuscate.

but i play devil's advocate to devil's advocate. sorry. it's my nature. good job calling me out, though.

Kirk, I might add, was 34 when he took command of the Enterprise. There are so many continuity errors, and, yes, whacky coincidences, in this movie, it was actually hard to watch. I liked it as a stand-alone action movie, but it had nothing to do with the Trek universe I know and love.

But...oh, yeah; it's different now. Bullshite.

This is no continuity error. As soon as Nero's ship traveled back in time, the Star Trek timeline as we know it was changed. Subsequently, Kirk's father was killed, which altered the personality of him, causing him not to enlist in Starfleet right away, cheated his way on to the enterprise, encountered Nero this way and had to assume command of the Enterprise. Due to his actions, he was officially promoeted to Captain and assigned to the Enterprise.

--Minor race

That's not what I'm saying; they had "phase weapons" in "Enterprise", which took place 150 years before Kirk's time, but lasers in "The Cage", which took place only a few years before. That bugs me. As to the Romulans, you're correct. I doff my cap.

They really do need to hire some Trek canon inspectors on these shows and movies, to ensure continuity.

Spooky:

I understand all that, but see, as a lifelong Trek fan....to me, it's an error.

Kirk's father was indeed killed, but when Kirk was in his early teens. He knew his father. Kirk also had an older brother (born before the change in the timeline), George Samuel, called "Sam". Also, the first Enterprise captain was Robert April (again, before the chnage in the timeline), not Pike. So many more things I could pick on.

I reiterate that I liked this as a movie, but it's not part of the Trek history I know and love, and I think there are many, many people out there who agree.

I'm a life long Trek fan too and to me it's not an error . How can you say that, even though you understand that the timeline is completely different? How can you insist on old canon, that is no longer valid due to the timeline interference?

 

Yes, but all that does not matter anymore.

 

Robert April's role as the first captain of the Enterprise is debatable. He is only mentioned in the animated series. Paramount and Gene Roddenberry simply decided not to consider the animated series for Star Trek continuity. That being said, it would be more of an error, if the movie actually mentioned Robert April as the first captain.

 

Sure, but just because it's not part of the Trek history that I too know and love, doesn't mean that I can't acknowledge this film as a Star Trek movie. It simply introduced a new timeline, a new beginning, and can bring exciting stuff again.

No one is saying, that you should forget the old Star Trek.

Stray too far away from this thread topic once more and i'll have to ask for moderators either to give a much more complex Report button or to lock it for everyone else... which constitutes your last warning.

Rightwinger,

Star Trek 11 is NOT meant to fit fanbase cannon (although they tried very or too hard to respect anyone's wishes as it pertains to context) or completely rewrite a TeeVee show pseudo-truth four decades old. But if you want to talk about comparing William Shatner with Chris Pine on how their currently defined character age can make a difference no matter when the "stories" take place from this film on, you're invited to do so.

You may be afraid of change or consider continuity important, some don't - i'd even risk an estimate; 95%+ of the actual true number of attendance tickets.