Star Trek...2013...Yep, it's happening.

[daltysmilth]

In my opinion, they broke several rules (both in character development and in technical details).  This was merely one of them.  I already covered part of the character development problems I had with it, too.  Why are you trying to put words in my mouth?  This isn't just about one technical detail, it's about multiple problems that simply altering the timeline shouldn't have changed.  While I understand the need to suspend disbelief for a movie (yes, i realize that transporters do not actually exist), the movie should still follow the rules of the fictional world it takes place in, which were set by the TV series and movies that preceded it.

The point is, Star Trek breaks its own rules all the time.  In TNG, no one in the Federation except the El Aurians had heard of the Borg until Q sent the Enterprise to their sector of the galaxy.  Then subsequent series said that the Federation had encountered the Borg numerous times before that.  In Star Trek II, Kirk claims the Klingons don't take prisoners.  Then in Star Trek III, the Klingon commander executes his gunner for accidentally destroying the U.S.S. Grissom, saying that he wanted prisoners.  In Star Trek 6, Uhura, the communications officer, who presumably got that post because of her skill with languages, needs a Klingon-to-English dictionary.

[Smith Dr John Smith]

In my opinion, they broke several rules (both in character development and in technical details).  This was merely one of them.  I already covered part of the character development problems I had with it, too.  Why are you trying to put words in my mouth?  This isn't just about one technical detail, it's about multiple problems that simply altering the timeline shouldn't have changed.  While I understand the need to suspend disbelief for a movie (yes, i realize that transporters do not actually exist), the movie should still follow the rules of the fictional world it takes place in, which were set by the TV series and movies that preceded it.

The point is, Star Trek breaks its own rules all the time.  In TNG, no one in the Federation except the El Aurians had heard of the Borg until Q sent the Enterprise to their sector of the galaxy.  Then subsequent series said that the Federation had encountered the Borg numerous times before that.  In Star Trek II, Kirk claims the Klingons don't take prisoners.  Then in Star Trek III, the Klingon commander executes his gunner for accidentally destroying the U.S.S. Grissom, saying that he wanted prisoners.  In Star Trek 6, Uhura, the communications officer, who presumably got that post because of her skill with languages, needs a Klingon-to-English dictionary.

Yeah the fact is(and I say this as a life long Star Trek fan)how the tech works and character back story has always been whatever the writers want it to be on a week to week basis in Star Trek.  For some reason this movie is the only time some of the fan chose to notice it.  Again if the movie wasn't your cup of tea I am not sure what else to say other then just don't see the new one.  I hated the movie Sherlock Holmes but you don't see me complaining about the sequel in it's thread,I just avoid it and I am happy.

[Prince of Space 5049]

I know this is covered ground, but we need to remember how Spock behaved in the original pilot episode:

These characters have never been carved in stone.  They have always been ever changing and developing.

[Sideswipe]

You can't really use the pilot.  Pilots often have a lot of discrepancies.

[shodan]

and they're usually alcoholics.

[Prince of Space 5049]

Of course I can use pilots.  Characters are always at the mercy of the writers.  They are fictional characters.  Always open to interpretation.

[Smith Dr John Smith]

Of course I can use pilots.  Characters are always at the mercy of the writers.  They are fictional characters.  Always open to interpretation.

Also Spock showed emotion in a lot of the first season episodes.  If you look at them in filmed order it wasn't until around episode 7 or 8 that they started to nail him down.  Also as I point out pretty much everything changed at some point,even the main character's name and the time period the show took place in.  if you are saying that anything that doesn't line up with what was said in the past is badly written then there were only ever two well written episode of Star Trek,the Cage and Where no man has gone before. After those two episodes writers started changing things and nothing made sense.

[Russell]

I would like to add that for all the shit that Star Trek 2009 gets thrown at it(still quite surprising to me), nobody ever bothered to look at Voyager, Enterprise and the TNG movies, which were by and large, absolute shit. Yes, even Enterprise had a few decent episodes, but dammit nobody remembers how fucking retarded Insurrection, Nemesis and Generations were? I'll tell you why things had to be changed for the new movie, it's because of Enterprise. Yes, I in part blame Enterprise because how are you going to make an audience take a set that looks vastly technologically inferior to Enterprise seriously when the movie takes place close to a hundred years later?

In case I didn't explain my point adequately, all the dumbasses who accuse Star Trek 2009 of being a dumb action movie obviously forgot all about Nemesis, and insurrection, and hell, even First Contact(Assimilate this! That is because you have not been properly... stimulated yet, was it good for you too? Resistance... is futile!)

Changing things can be good because now things can go in directions we may not be able to imagine. That is exciting and interesting to me.

[Sideswipe]

Are you kidding.  Nemesis and Insurrection got tons of shit thrown at it.  Even though they probably have less plot holes and and aren't built around a string of improbable coincedences thatn 2009 had.

[Russell]

Are you kidding.  Nemesis and Insurrection got tons of shit thrown at it.  Even though they probably have less plot holes and and aren't built around a string of improbable coincedences thatn 2009 had.

I can live with improbable coincidences, especially since two is a coincidence, three times is a pattern. I am presuming the two coincidences You are referring to are 1) Kirk finding Spock on Vulcan's moon, which honestly isn't that much of a coincidence since a) both of them were headed to the same Federation outpost, and b) They were both in a cave, the most logical and obvious place a person would go for cover; and 2) Kirk being in the academy at the same time Nero captures Spock Prime. Also, Nemesis has received something of an re-evaluation lately from the Trek fan base. I am surprised at how many "fans" say "Nemesis good! Star Trek open bracket 2009 close bracket bad!" yet I have never heard people complain about Insurrection or Nemesis as much as they do about Star Trek '09 Sideswipe.

Also, as far as Nero goes... he has an excuse for his incompetence. He's a mining captain! He's not a Tactical genius like Shinzon, he is never purported to be one at all. I'm guessing Nero probably rode the short bus to Romulan academy every day. Now that might sound like a cop-out, but Nero being a great villain or not isn't the point of the story. Nero's just a psycho who got screwed over by circumstance. You know what else? We live in a world where idiots shove chainsaws down their pants in an attempt to steal them, don't even tell me that an inverse lack of logic doesn't apply to an Alien race... especially when said Alien's planet is destroyed.

[shodan]

Are you kidding.  Nemesis and Insurrection got tons of shit thrown at it.  Even though they probably have less plot holes and and aren't built around a string of improbable coincedences thatn 2009 had.

I can live with improbable coincidences, especially since two is a coincidence, three times is a pattern. I am presuming the two coincidences You are referring to are 1) Kirk finding Spock on Vulcan's moon, which honestly isn't that much of a coincidence since a) both of them were headed to the same Federation outpost, and b) They were both in a cave, the most logical and obvious place a person would go for cover; and 2) Kirk being in the academy at the same time Nero captures Spock Prime. Also, Nemesis has received something of an re-evaluation lately from the Trek fan base. I am surprised at how many "fans" say "Nemesis good! Star Trek open bracket 2009 close bracket bad!" yet I have never heard people complain about Insurrection or Nemesis as much as they do about Star Trek '09 Sideswipe.

Also, as far as Nero goes... he has an excuse for his incompetence. He's a mining captain! He's not a Tactical genius like Shinzon, he is never purported to be one at all. I'm guessing Nero probably rode the short bus to Romulan academy every day. Now that might sound like a cop-out, but Nero being a great villain or not isn't the point of the story. Nero's just a psycho who got screwed over by circumstance. You know what else? We live in a world where idiots shove chainsaws down their pants in an attempt to steal them, don't even tell me that an inverse lack of logic doesn't apply to an Alien race... especially when said Alien's planet is destroyed.

i never had a problem with the trek movies. even when data dies.... kind of... well he later gets brought back and eventually becomes captain of the enterprise after Picard becomes an ambassador to Vulcan.

[Russell]

i never had a problem with the trek movies. even when data dies.... kind of... well he later gets brought back and eventually becomes captain of the enterprise after Picard becomes an ambassador to Vulcan.

Yes, that's all in countdown, and yes I will admit that had they added plot elements and detail from that series, it would have tightened the movie up quite a bit... well, there's always the possibility of a director's cut.

In defense of Star Trek 09, I think the premise is just as important as story and execution, possibly more.

[ManUnderMask]

Hopefully the entire movie will be good, not just the scenes with the bridge crew.

[Prince of Space 5049]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  The only time I start picking apart a movie, is when I am frustrated by it and not enjoying it.  If I am having a good time watching a movie, I really don't care about plot points and inconsistencies.

When I watched Star Trek '09 I had a good time.  I know, take me out, whip me, spit apon me, nail me to a tree.  I'm sorry, I enjoyed the damn thing.  Much more than the other ST movies.  Lens flare and all.

[Smith Dr John Smith]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  The only time I start picking apart a movie, is when I am frustrated by it and not enjoying it.  If I am having a good time watching a movie, I really don't care about plot points and inconsistencies.

When I watched Star Trek '09 I had a good time.  I know, take me out, whip me, spit apon me, nail me to a tree.  I'm sorry, I enjoyed the damn thing.  Much more than the other ST movies.  Lens flare and all.

Well said.

It is number five on my list of favorite Star trek movies but I enjoyed it so I don't care if the transporter doesn't worked exactly the same as it has in the past.