shame shame shame..i want a star trek after DS9 and VOY. not a second movie with the old crew!!!! maybe they should wait, if there will be a new series in 1 or 2 years. i hope so! but come on, plz no 2nd JJ-style movieeeee! i m a hardcore-trekkie and i diiiidnt like it with all the failures in the movie!!!

Totally agree, Celesto, but, you see, J.J. Abrams and his hack writers are incapable of doing anything truly original. Everything they do follows video game logic, as does "Lost". There's nothing intelligent they have to say or true about human nature. DS9 had plenty of that. Ira Behr was the last person involved with Trek to bring the franchise any brilliance. Paramount robbed the franchise of any potential integrity by handing it over to a hack like Abrams, as it did by giving Berman/Braga so much power.

Haha. It really frosts your butts that the new Start Trek movie was good, doesn't it? It's just shock to actually seeing something good in the Star Trek franchise. Go back and re-watch Nemesis a few times and you should feel better.

"Hard-core" fans of any franchise want SSDD (Same SH*T, Different Day). Newest ST grossed the most money of ANY Star Trek film; what does this mean? That it's bad? No. Simply put, it reaches out past the hardcore fans and creates new fans; and ANY franchise that wants to survive must change with the times.

If he's doing trek again, can we at least have a plot this time? Rather than the sparkly waste of time his first attempt was.

The new star trek was "pretty" but so unoriginal, like all the other "idiot" remakes- who needs another Superman or Fahrenheit 451 or War of the Worlds or Day the earth stood still? Special effectsmay be better now but good stories don't need big effects- and the truth is both War of the Worlds and Day the earth stood still were 1000% better in the black and white or early color original than the new ones.Tthe issue is today's tv and movies writers are not creative or capable of an original thought --thier minds and creative abilities are all retarded from all the videos games, pot and crappy schools- and universities(which are not creative)
there are hundreds/thousands of great sci-fi stories needing to be brought to life on the stage/screen not remaking great old classics. And I agree with the first comments Start Trek doesn't and shouldnt need to be the old crew I want new, new ships, new places, new times- let the dead lie - take us to where no man has gone before.

Wow, must be great to be "the man" in Holly-weird! You go, J.J.! More Fringe! More Trek! Hell, I'll even take that weird-ass Superman plot that you floated a couple years back!

How about 'adaptations' of some of the (better) ST:TOS novels?
I remember one by Greg Bear that was VERY good (don't recall title)

J/P=?

I liked the new Trek (and I say that as a fierce fan of all of the previous ST episodes from all the series) but really wish we could see a Deep Space 9 movie. It was such an excellent show and the ensemble cast worked together better than any since the original series, imho. Plus, the run ended with Sisko stuck in the Wormhole, and the Ferengis embracing "social(ist) reforms," so there is a lot of unfinished business to tackle. I fear that the actors will soon be too old to finish that business (or to want to put on the heavy alien makeup or starfleet uniforms again). What a shame it would be, if Paramount let the potential of the DS9 cast and storylines slip away.

I'll also be interested in seeing the alternate earth in Fringe next season. Is it just me, or do the effects used when Dunham saw through and passed through to "the other side" remind anyone of Charlie Jade? In this, is Fringe simply being imitative, or is there a real attempt to tip the cap to CJ?

Wow, some of you guys sound like angry old men sitting on the front porch complaining how things used to be better in "their" day. I'm guessing most of you guys are pretty old huh... Video games aren't creative..is that what you're trying to suggest? If so that has to be one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen on scifiwire, and this place is full of dumb posts. They're easily the most creative storytelling medium that exists today. Mass Effect, Fable 2, kotor 1,2, BG, BG2, Arcanum, Fallout 1,2,3, Bioshock, Cod4, Oblivion, Morrowind. If you can't see how those games are storytelling greats, then you must be viewing the world through old-man colored glasses. I'm not even touching on classic console greats like Final Fantasy Tactics, Mother 3, Final Fantasy 7, or Chrono Trigger. Wake up man, things change. Storytelling is one of those things. Try giving it a real chance instead of using the past to build up an obvious wall of self-superiority. Learn from the Borg and adapt =P

With all of that said, I do however agree that a movie or series that takes place after Nemesis would be interesting, I'd personally like to see what happens by the 25th century (when the new game takes place). It would be pretty great if a new Star Trek show was on the air and featured a whole new cast and took place after Nemesis. A show that really flexed the exploration muscles, and touched on a few of the loose ends from the previous series (DS9, Voyager) with guest stars..etc..while not making having watched those series important at all. It's been far too long to expect that of your audience and wouldn't pull in any new fans. A darker tone would definitely have to be a part of the show though. DS9 and Voyager had their darkness, don't get me wrong DS9 even had a character death. I would really prefer it if we could lose a real character at any time through the series, not just in one of the later seasons. People need character drama and risk to make a show work now, not just plot hooks loosely connected together like "monkeys in a barrel". Oh, how I love those crazy monkeys.

I do understand why the reboot was necessary and I totally agree with that decision. I also don't think it will work on television.

Fringe also rocks.

I am a 53 year old star trek fan and i am not an OLD MAN !!!
I happen to play video games and to listen to loud fast punk rock music.hell i still play rock music in 2 bands with albums out.for proof that i am not an old man couch potato go to www.bigmeathammer.com where you will see me and a lot of 320k free music.

anyways i was willing to forgive this guy for the 1st film.i didnot hate it but i didnot love it.i decided not to "fight" it and keep my little mouth shut.i am not a whiny type fan but i will tell you that if this director takes trek into the remake syndrome or for that fact in his case the alternate remake i will be gone from this franchise and will be glad i own all the older trek shows.
at this point why does he not use his brain and make us new adventures.

I never saw MI3--I really can't stand Tom Cruise. I didn't realize it was the best-reviewed of the films, though--guess I'll watch it over the summer to see if I really missed anything LOL

I'm good with Star Trek whatever--I just hope they don't decide to take the franchise on a 'clone wars' kind of path. I really think Lucas went overboard with that.

I think the Star Trek movie rocked. And I am a through and through Trek fan. I think some fans want the tech and special fx and the story comes second. I won't say the story couldn't have been better but, this is an intro movie so you have to expect this. If the next movie is the same way then I will start agreeing with the naysayers. JJ Abrams is a genius and his touch is exactly what Star Trek needed. There are others who could have pulled it off but, I think that like others have commented JJ brought a whole new fan base to the franchise.

I liked the new Star Trek. I'm 44 years old, loved all the incarnations of Trek and like this one. I would like to see the remake of only ONE of the original episodes. (As long as it is not "Spock's Brain".
Maybe "Doomsday Machine". That episode could easily lend itself to a film remake of it, since there's a lot of backstory that could be told that couldn't be told on TV.
Or "The Cage". This time, Kirk AND Pike could maybe meet up with the Talosians. Could wind up with an interesting premise.
It could be interesting seeing where Abrams goes with this next one. I liked most of the cast (except Anton Yelchin as Chekov.)
I would, though, like to see the end of the Uhura/Spock relationship. Even though Abrams or someone said it was hinted at in the original series, I don't have a clue what they are talking about. If he's talking about a crush on Spock, how about Nurse Chapel? She had a major crush on him!

I haven't looked at any critic aggregators, but I don't remember MI:3 being very well received critically at all.

As far as the alternate universe in Fringe goes, while NYC may have been spared, who knows exactly what the terrorist threat is in the alternate verse. Is it the same alternate universe that had Boston in flames and lockdown? If I remember correctly the terrorists there were the same group involved in The Pattern here but apparently spectacularly more successful in bringing society to its knees, at least in one city.

I am an original Trekkor, age 62.

Much of the previous comments are difficult to swallow. Nit-picking does not work well, especially when so much effort is directed at minutia.

IMO: DS9 was a poor RIP-OFF of BABYLON 5!

Voyager was handicapped by bad scripts.

Enterprise had HORRID music and was largely missed opportunity.

Berman was inconsistant. TNG survived fairly well, and some of the TNG movies were very good. I especially enjoyed FIRST CONTACT and NEMESIS.

The image of Romulans developed during the TNG years, especially in NEMESIS, was compelling. JJ's abortion of Romulans was most dissapointing. Bald and tattooed Romulans appear to be pathetic bikers in space.

I look forward to more with the new crew. For years I have hoped someone would re-boot the original series. Star Trek is part of our culture and the highest compliment paid is a new view of familiar material.

The following is a comment of mine cut-and-pasted from a separate _Star Trek_ article:

I liked the new ST movie well enough but I didn't like them messing up the time-line the way that they did and otherwise messing with canon. It ending with a very wet-behind-the-ears James T. Kirk being promoted to captain (O-6)--skipping ranks O-2 through 0-5, is truly beyond preposterous. There's a guy where I work who, like me, is retired-military and a _StarTrek_ fan. We were talking about it and I said "I don't care if you have an I.Q. of 185. To function at the O-6 level (or O-4 or O-5), whether its commanding a capital ship or a brigade with 3,000+ men, requires *years* of training & experience. You can't just 'read the manual' and do it." He readily agreed.

My idea for a trilogy to re-boot the franchise is more of a true prequel:

Movie One: Begins with Kirk & Spock graduating from star fleet academy as ensigns and being assigned to to the newly commissioned Enterprise, which is two or three warp-factors faster than anything that's preceded it, commanded by Cpt. Chrisopher Pike. New parts of the alpha-quadrant to be explored. Scotty was two years ahead of them at the academy and is a lieutenant j-g. (Uhura & Sulu are two years behind them and other than brief cameo appearances don't have a role). McCoy is just completing his residency and is assigned to the Enterprise (but doesn't start as CMO).

They all "boldly go where no man has gone before," encounter a new sentient race and have a rip-roaring adventure. Kirk & Spock perform "above and beyond the call" and are promoted & decorated. (Kirk, of course, has *wild* sex with one-or-more alien females with multiple heads, arms, legs--whatever).

Movie Two: Begins two or three years after the last one left off. Kirk & Spock where promoted during that period and are now lieutenant s-g's (O-3). Blah-blah-blah...alien sex..Sulu & Uhura assigned to the Enterprise...more alien sex..and at the end of the movie Kirk is promoted to O-4. Spock isn't promoted but this is because he wants his career to go the scientific route and not the "command" route.

Movie Three: Begins two or three years later. Kirk and Spock are now O-5 and O-4, respectively, with Kirk as first officer to Cpt. Pike; Spock is science officer. Blah-blah-blah...Kirk is captured by the space amazon women and is given the choice of breed with all 10,000 of them or the Enterprise gets destroyed...sundry rip-roaring adventures...the CMO dies and McCoy is made CMO...Cpt Pike has his famous accident saving the children, is maimed for life and Kirk & Spock are promoted to O-6 and O-5, respectively, with Kirk finally given command of the Enterprise, Spock first-officer (and science officer) and Scotty made chief engineer. At the very end they're briefed on their ground-breaking five-year mission "to seek out new life..."

Needs some fleshing-out, to include some sub-plots, but that's my $0.02.

As another OLD MAN and OLD MEN seem to be today’s target group to attack, what I would like to see is a new story with a new ship and crew set somewhere further into the future than anything previously. My hope would be a great movie to be followed with a new series using the same crew with signed agreements the entire crew would also be in the series.

Redoes are safer for studios so they will always want to bring the fan base of the original forward to the redoes and reduce the risk. The sad but true fact some attempts are better than others.

I know allot of attacks go out that nothing is original any more and writers are stupid or incapable of anything but using past ideas from someone else. My challenge to those of you that are so unhappy with everything being done, and you are better at imagining and writing new original stories, please do so and I will go watch your stories and support your attempts, but if you are not capable of doing better then give those that are trying a break!

I've been a Star Trek fan for many years and I don't understand how some people can say it's unoriginal. Sure the change the timeline theme has been worked to death, but they usually fix it by the end of the show. They never say, "Okay, here's a new reality, with infinite new possibilities"

I think Abrams is one of the most creative storytellers of our time and appreciate the cleverness and twisting of the usual way of telling SciFi stories.

The one thing I've gleaned from this thread: ex-military Trekkers really really dig dah Alien sex.

The new Trek movie was kinda like Marvel's Ultimates. "Let's try to redo all this classic stuff, and instead of being creative, let's just update things to how it might have been written now! Let's hire a hack writer that brainless fanboiz love and make lots of money spilling the same old tripe with more violence and sex in it than the original."

Did it make money? Yeah. Is it good? I'd have to say no on all counts. Is it successful? Depends on your definition of success. Bernard Madoff was successful, until everyone figured out he was just a hack...

What we need back in Star Trek again is EXPLORATION!!!

"....to EXPLORE strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before!!"

EXPLORATION! EXPLORATION!!

PLEASE!

happyjack wrote
~~Haha. It really frosts your butts that the new Start Trek movie was good, doesn't it?~~

It wasn't good. It made tons of money dure but good? No deffinitly not.

Put up or Shut up!!! If you guys can write anything Better by all means do it that being said I thought the new trek movie was pretty good a strong point you guys aren't seeing is that the actors didn't try to be William shatner, Defrost kelly, leanord nimoy...etc

Reading all of these, I just have one thought: Can we at least all agree that it is good to see Star Trek being discussed in the present tense again?!

I am in the group of old-timers that watched the original Star trek. I did like the movie it has possibilities to re-envision some of the first trek stories but I would also like to see stories about Federation Space. There is a wealth of potential.

It could even be where story arc is done with different characters for a year or two and then have the fans vote and showcase a series based on those characters.

The only real limit is our imagination.

Ok I can agree with that it is good that star trek is being discussed as a present tense subject

Ditto's C.R. My teenage daughters are paying attention to Enterprise and TNG for the first time and are looking for ToS dvd's, and are generally interested in the history of the series.
What more could anyone have asked for?

Reptilefan.
~~Put up or Shut up!!! If you guys can write anything Better by all means do it~~

Since i am not a professional script writer, nor am I likely to become one, I do not have to put up or shut up. As a Trek fan and paying movie goer however I have every right to say that I did not like this movie.

Wow, I am glad to see that I was not the only one that thought this new Star Trek was really lame...I went in and was pretty drawn in at first then...it just fell apart. Before I saw the movie, I saw a panel on TV where a host critiqued the movie because of camera flare and thought she was just being picky. Holy crap the WHOLE movie seemed to be shot with camera flares in mind. Of course the writing was pretty bad, actors were just ok and like 12yrs old. I would love to see another one about the origins of the TNG crew but not by Abrams...I was just so disappointed with this one...I honestly thought I was alone...I also agree with most other comments, having a plot in the movie will be a huge step in the right direction...

@OldLadySTfan once said "I don't understand how some people can say it's unoriginal."

I'll skip over how unoriginal it is for a science-fiction concept and go right to its Trek unoriginality.

ToS episode THE ALTERNATIVE FACTOR featured:

1. Time traveling dimension jumping madman villain.

2. Galactic threat to universe prime.

3. Two versions of the same character.

4. Enterprise only ship available to address and resolve crisis.

5. No time line "healed".

also the alternate time line parallel universe of ToS:MIRROR, MIRROR never had its time line "healed" across the 3 series in which it appeared.

@Son of a Maui Portagee

So what your saying is that ST09 has at the very least done "almost" as well as ST: The Motion Picutre.

And considering that had the highest attendance figures of any ST Movie that followed it means that ST09 has at least captured a lot of people who didn't watch any ST movies after the first.

I think we can all agree (whether we liked the movie or not) that the new movie has definitely reinvigorated the ST franchise. At least a little bit.

I'll give 1 euro and a ride to anyone WHO will make it stop!

This was a great action movie. As a Star Trek movie it completely bombed. Gene Rodenberry's vision was lost, it didn't even feel like a Star Trek movie. Ruining the timeline was a huge mistake, I found the storyline to be immature, it was like watching a bad teen movie. Star Trek deserves much better writing, especially since Star Trek is known for getting at the heart and soul of difficult issues.

This was a great action movie. As a Star Trek movie it completely bombed. Gene Rodenberry's vision was lost, it didn't even feel like a Star Trek movie. Ruining the timeline was a huge mistake, I found the storyline to be immature, it was like watching a bad teen movie. Star Trek deserves much better writing, especially since Star Trek is known for getting at the heart and soul of difficult issues.

JJ Abrams and his film crew have done their best to unbelievable "Star Trek" in a contemporary way to life. The story I found something personal to the weak side despite the visual aspect strelend for the eyes is because the technology of the Enterprise in a very impressive way has changed. However, the adaptation of technology and sets a little too radical because the Enterprise of the young Kirk and Spock technologically much canceled Vance agent than the sets of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine which is detrimental to the existing franchise that is now dated match. What sin is death and JJ Abrams-the-shelf significantly wrong with it is that the vision of Gene Roddenberry in this film a poor where little or no attention has been paid and that the film into a typical Hollywood action adventure film where Star Trek not really clear is recognizable.

Reptilefan.
~~Put up or Shut up!!! If you guys can write anything Better by all means do it~~

And how, would you suggest, we do that? I have plenty of good ideas, and would love to put them into a script. Show me a decision-maker, in Hollywood, who is willing to even read an unsolicited manuscript from a complete newcomer, let alone take a chance on him/her?

I'm sure there are already many people out there who poured 100's of hours, not to mention their souls, into labors of Trek love, only to have them thrown into the recycle bin, unread.

And I've never heard of Hollywood producers and directors making a point of trolling the fanfic sites looking for up and comers.

(And SciFi's captcha STILL sucks - and I will continue to say this until they FIX it!)

For those of you wishing for a DS9 movie...get real. I've been a fan of all things trek since TOS, but the pompous political meanderings of DS9 can put rust to sleep.

The new movie was great. My teenage kids loved it and they have hated all the old Trek.
Abrams has brought Trek back from the dead. Woo woo!

The new star trek is not what we knew and unfortunately they have taken a huge leap away from Gene Roddenberry's original view of the future
where everything is all happy clappy but I say kids leaving that theatre going wow I want to see that again. And I think it wasn't because of the visual effects it's because the you cared about the characters and they were interessting but they did go alot more for the action e.g sulu sword fight, spoke kicking kirks ass...etc

Please stop nitpicking and enjoy the most critically and commercially acclaimed Trek ever. Compulsive nitpicking is detrimental to the welfare of the franchise. Some of you really do need to get a life.

fine I can agree that the nitpicking is detrimental to the franchise,

The unrelenting negativity of some of these people is really getting tiresome.
Don't you people realize how absurdly fortunate we all are that Trek lives? We live in a true golden age of SciFi - why can't you bring yourselves to enjoy it? Would you rather go back to the time when the closest thing to SF being produced was Mork & Frakkin' Mindy? Abrams & his team gave us a phenomenal film, and there surely will be even better ones to come! The defining aspect of Trek is OPTIMISM! If you can't bring yourself to put your negativity aside, PLEASE DON'T WATCH!! Those of us who actually enjoy Trek would really appreciate not having to endure your parade pissing.

One unrelated point...
If you yearn for a return to an exploration theme, then you must have LOVED Voyager, as I did. Easily the best of the sequal series, Voyager was the only series after TOS that actually went out there where none have gone before. Moreover, the characters were richly developed and complex. It was also like TOS in that the scripts often touched on relevant social issues and human themes in ways that other, lesser shows never do.
Voyager is the Trek sequel that I miss the most. I wish they'd make a Voyager movie - lots of follow-up stories to be explored.
(...and who wouldn't want to see Seven of Nine again?!?!?)

The NextGen stuff was boring and old school and I loved it when it started, but they dropped the ball. If you want the future of Trek play the online game releasing soon, but this new version of the old series is a much needed course correction. Thank God Berman has been dumped to the side for Abrams' vision. Berman might as well have smothered Roddenberry to death with a pillow they way he slaughtered Trek.

"I agree with you Celesto, " yea you would. Abrams is a hack and nothing original even comes out of his butt. Every seems to think that original ideas are so easy to come by. Try writing a movie or a book and I bet half of the ideas you come up with have already been done. Well if you're tired of Hollywood feeding you crap movie after crap movie then why don't you write your "original idea " down and do something with it.

All I see is a bunch of guys with opinions. I have watched Trek and all its variations since I was 5. I loved this movie and really would love to see it on TV. Take for what it is...NEW.

Whatsahack:
Back off on the hate a little, whydontcha? I've been a fan of J.J.Abrams for a while (although admittedly, not devoted). I haven't been a fan of all his work, but I've watched LOST obsessively since the beginning (Tell me again why that isn't original?) and Fringe has entertained me with it's complex & mysterious backstory since the pilot.

Not to mention I'm in love with Peter Bishop. But that's another story.

Anyway, I agree that his version of the movie failed where Roddenberry's vision is concerned. But as several people have said before, I was just insanely glad to see anything Star Trek at all. It was still the same story we've always known, just in a different light. (And since it was in an alternate universe...I guess we can give him that.)

But remember that Abrams WASN'T LOOKING TO REPLICATE RODDENBERRY. As much as you could see that he admired the original concept of the show and its facets, you could also tell that he wanted to leave his mark. And as much as people bitch about it, wouldn't you want to do the same, if they were your ideas?

So stop whining about how he ruined Star Trek. He wasn't trying to bring back the original series. The modern twist on it was PURPOSEFUL, and was pretty much the POINT of making a Star Trek movie at all this many years after the original series.

It's worth repeating: I'm happy to see anything Star Trek at all, and I loved the movie.

Side note: Voyager was by far the best sequel series.

Thank you Rainyskies! I'm glad there are other lovers of Voyager out there!
Although I liked all of the sequel series, none of the others touched me like Voyager.
I came to care about those characters so deeply that they practically became a part of my family for seven years.
I miss them terribly.

I've said this before and I'll kjeep on saying it. This movie was a piece of garbage. JJ Abrams is NOT the toast of Hollywood. There are a number of fine TOS novels that could have been adapted into the movie. Instead wew were offered this crap. They should have stuck with the original world instead of ruining the "timeline". They could have revealed how the original crew met, how they came to serve on Enterprise. They could have fought a major threat that would have started to build Kirk's reputation. But they didn't. Spock and Kirk did NOT attend the academy at the same time. In terms of Earth years, Spock is more than twice Kirk's age, even though they look the same. There was nothing wrong with ANY of the other series. Enterprise TNG, DS9, and VOY were all fine, well written. Any of those would have made a fine basis for a new movie. If they keep going in this "new" direction, the franchise will never recover.

"I think to limit ourselves to only new adventures would be a mistake. But I also think we want to take advantage of this moment and figure out what's the most exciting version for the new audience as well."

So in other words, no comment.

The "fans" out there, particularly the Niners, bashing the new movie and really any incarnation of Trek that isn't a continuation of what came before (which in case you failed to notice was a flop after about 1996 or so) sound oddly reminiscent of the TOS fans who bashed TNG when it first came out, simply because it wasn't "their" Star Trek. You want a long, boring Star Trek movie that's all left-wing philosophical ruminations and no action or fun whatsoever? Go back and watch TMP; the future of Trek is headed in another direction.

BTW, considering how the series ended, you'd have to spend an entire movie just bringing the DS9 crew back together if you wanted to make a spinoff movie of that. DS9 had its moments but I overall it was my least favorite of all the Trek series. And it is certainly the most ill-suited for a film. I could see the Voyager crew coming together much more easily for a film than the DS9 crew—not that that's likely to happen either.

There is an 8 year gap between Nemesis (2379) and the point where Spock travels back in time, effectively terminating the Trek Alpha timeline (2387). That's a perfect time frame in which to set a new series, one which could tie up all the loose ends from the previous 4 shows and allow the timeline to start fresh with this new film. That is the direction I think they should go: a series set in the late 24th Century, while movies continue in the mid-23rd Century (Beta timeline). I have plenty of ideas for such a series (as do a million other people I'm sure), but none of them matter until they decide to actually go that direction, which I think will not be for some time. Trek overload was one of the big mistakes of the '90s—let the new movies have some time on the screen by themselves, and we can talk about a new series maybe some time around 2015.

In regards to exploration: despite Kirk and Picard's monologues, Trek has never actually done much of that. The only series in which the crew spent any significant amount of time exploring just for the sake of exploring were Voyager and Enterprise. In all other series, most episodes were centered around rescue missions, diplomacy, or warfare. Even on TOS, their encounters with alien races came usually as a result of the Enterprise being attacked or Kirk/Spock being kidnapped for some reason. As far as the movies go, the only one that was driven by a desire to "explore new worlds" was Star Trek V: The Final Frontier—which everybody (except me) acknowledges is the worst installment in the entire series. So be careful what you wish for. And no, no novels adapted to films either; most of them, quite frankly, suck and/or are unfilmable.

Seriously people. Get a life. Star Trek is entertainment. If you weren't entertained by this movie you need help. Get out of your parents basements and wake up. This movie brought some great memorable moments and the movie had a plot and it was a good one.

You are all so stuck in watching the original Star Trek crap! (DS9, VOY, & Enterprise) That none of you can see good entertainment if it walked up and bit you. Thats why Paramount decided to cancel Enterprise. The falling of Trek was dissapearing. The show didn't have the same punch it once did and even all you hard core fans complained and stop watching it. So if there is anyone to blame. Blame yourselves. The Executive Producer of Star Trek Rick Berman ruined Star Trek. Plain and simple. If Gene Roddenberry was still alive the same would be said for Star Trek.

Thank you JJ for bringing back some life to Star Trek. The so called real Star Strek fans need to do like there mom's always say. If you cant say anything nice. Then dont say it. :)

~~Get out of your parents basements and wake up.~~

I am SO damn tired of hearing this worn out old insult. If you can't come up with something original then keep your insults to yourself.

Some observations,

Last time I checked this was still a relatively free country. I have every right to comment 'Negatively' on how I feel about this movie. If you liked it? More power to you, I din't, I do not consider it a Star Trek movie. More like a Trek wanna be.

Abrams has said he is more of a Star Wars fan and it shows, the two writers Orci and Kurtzman i think was the other one? Have said they have been BIG Trek fans for years, well that doesn't show through in this movie.

I don't see how they can write something like this and still say they actually like Trek. Someone who likes Trek would not have destroyed Vulcan. They should stick with transformers.

I will not buy the DVD and I will not see the sequal if Abrams and his two writers are involved.

SciFiWire, Your captcha system sucks!

Son of a Maui Portagee: We've tried to be nice, but you persist in reposting comments that we've deleted. Please stop it.

@binagran,

First let me reiterate what I once said, "Even if we don't attempt to compensate for the IMAX inflation, the worldwide gross, the only metric for Paramount to detect new fans, which was the whole point of the $150 million dollars they spent extra in worldwide marketing, falls short."

Numerically there is only evidence that ST09's "success" was based on selling to the same pool of worldwide ToS fans, within a margin of error of + or - 10%, that launched the film franchise, likewise seeking a respite from a dearth of Trek, in 1979. There are no indications at this time of any significant number of new fans.

I'd say that ST09 is within the error cloud of number of core fans "stimulated" in '79 so that both films are equivalent in that respect right now. I also contend that even if ST09 manages to exceed STTMP's numbers it will still be in the cloud and thus two figures reflect essentially the same core group.

However, in the intervening years since the film franchise's 1979 launch that core has gone from being ST's only fans to being a subset of ST fans that grew to include TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT series, and published Trek aficionados. Also, the people putting ST09 together were willing to risk shrinking the core movie going group in order to "grow" a new larger fan base. The adjusted for inflation worldwide grosses do not show statistically significant loss or gain between the 1979 and 2009 groups.

In public everyone at Paramount's wearing their "we're all one happy fleet" faces while being every bit as disappointed that the ST09 isn't tracking ANGELS & DEMONS numbers, as it was 30 years ago that STTMP didn't STAR WARS.

SCI FI Wire

My apologies,

It seemed like propagation/captcha
problems on my end. I will desist.

Is there a style guide to give me some clue how to make them appropriate?

Couldn't you leave some sort of placeholder so that a commenter would know that a moderated delete had indeed taken place rather than leave it up to the commenter to guess?

Here's the commenting policy: http://scifiwire.com/2009/01/a-note-about-sci-fi-wires-commenting-policy.php

Beyond that, comments must be on point, no profanity, no flames, no ALL CAP messages, no pointless slagging, no personal attacks.

If you have a question about anything, write us: editor@scifiwire.com

I believe the final irony will be 10 or 15 years down the road, when those who are currently panning this movie will be nostalgic for the good old Star Trek work from the early 2000s. They'll use this movie as a great example of how Star Trek used to be great and how the current Trek movies of 2020 are just hack. Talk about same old, same old.

(Let's just hope they'll still be making Trek movies then ....)

Kargg,

I think the whole reason for the new universe centers on the 2005 Paramount/CBS split with CBS owning Trek. That doesn't give Paramount much motivation to green light anything that might result in more royalties having to go to CBS. It's not impossible - just highly unlikely.

@ Keeper 53
You're being absurd. They DID reveal how the original crew met. They DID fight a major threat. This was an alternate universe--here, Spock and Kirk attended the academy at the same time. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

@ Son
"The adjusted for inflation worldwide grosses do not show statistically significant loss or gain between the 1979 and 2009 groups."

So then why do they "fall short," as you say? It seems to me that they sufficiently met expectations, which means they always have room to grow if they can pull it off.

rainyskies,

The "falling short" is noted only because the hype-machine wants exceeding the gross to be perceived as some metric of "best ever".

I think the truth is both pictures are considered successes by the fans because the nature of amortizing the costs of marketing in the industry for each forced the studio to make a sequel. ST09 and STMP both failed to meet Paramount's expectations in one key area and that is they expected both to keep up with the leaders of the pack. And while ST09 shows Paramount still has what it takes to exploit the film franchise's founding core group, it has also failed to deliver on those sought after increased numbers of new film fans.

For me, an old fan who enjoyed the picture as a B-movie and not so much as Trek, the encouraging thing is CBS owns STAR TREK and is making obscene amounts of profit in merchandising. The odds are very good that a new TV series will launch and won't have anything to do with Paramount or its version.

Star Trek sucked. Has nothing to do with the changes, it was just poorly written. Spock: "May I ask you a query?" 8th grade English.

I think it was clear with Voyager, DS9, and Enterprise that the series was not doing well. Each getting worse than the previous. I think JJ breathed the only hope there could be for the series to reach new heights. Granted ST did have its flaws I found it much better overall than most of the other ST films as of late. It certainly gathered a new audience to the franchise. For those "Trekies" who hate this just go watch the old films and enjoy them. You'll never be happy witt the new without a open mind... Thanks JJ for a great film and for sticking to what you guys think is right.

@Drew wrote:"It certainly gathered a new audience to the franchise."

Prove it Outside of anecdotal evidence and marketing hype, there is absolutely no numerical evidence of new or increased attendance between the ToS fans that launched the film franchise with ST:TMP, and this film given a modest conversion error of 10 percent.

Show me the bodies.

@thisnamekills: For bringing up Arcanum, you win everything, forever.

"Star Trek is entertainment"... Well, it's a bit more than that.. It's more like a novel trilogy. If you work your trilogy with various writers, who have no previous interest in the topic, who don't coordinate with each other, and where the time lines and the plot lines of your book keep crashing, well then your trilogy is going to fail.. Same goes for a TV series like Star Trek.

Without a doubt the 2 worse things that ever happened to the Trek franchise was Berman and Braga..louis

I'd consider myself a trekkie, I grew up with all the original shows, thought initially that J.J. Abrams was a risky thing to do, he could have messed it all up, but no, he's done the series real justice and brought it into the 21st century. Who cares about "the old Star Trek" it's been and gone, let's enjoy the new time line and a whole new set of adventures with a whole new cast, and let a whole new generation grow up with these new sequels.
"MAY IT LIVE LONG AND PROSPER"