The Big Bad Star Trek XI Thread

[King Mark 3,631]

Also ,John Williams complete scores are not on the same plane of existence as other composer's .They have an inherent quality that makes EVERY SECOND of unreleased music a lifelong quest to obtain. That is just the way it is

[Datameister 2,044]

yes but if this was a Star wars prequel we wouldn't hear the end of it

Really? Huh...can't remember the last time I went on a big diatribe about...anything related to Star Wars on this site, really. Care to back up this claim with some evidence? EDIT: Unless you were referring to the music stuff, not the physics stuff.

[Ollie 1,059]

Actually the only thing I can truly remeber being complained about was Midichlorans.

Otherwise the science of Star Wars has been left alone.

[Datameister 2,044]

Yup. It certainly has its flaws...most sci-fi does...but you can usually get away with it by having a good story to tell and some awesome visuals, and that's okay. Unfortunately, by many people's assessment, the Star Wars prequels only offer one of those at best.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Also, regarding the black hole discussion...ANYTHING can escape a black hole. It just needs to have enough force applied to it, and it needs to be outside the event horizon. Once you pass the event horizon, you'd have to travel faster than the speed of light to escape. But that's possible in the Star Trek universe, so even that's not an issue. As long as the spaghettification isn't too intense, that is. (Yes, that's the technical term for it.)

Correct.

[Datameister 2,044]

Wait...Koray, you can actually be reasonable when it comes to space-time anomalies?

(He and I have had lengthy debates about time travel in the current Lost thread, for those who don't know what I'm talking about.)

[Ollie 1,059]

I think this Trek film has kinda shot your Lost time travel theories to hell.....

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Well we're not talking about time travel. I didn't understand it in Star Trek.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Also, on the physics issues...a far bigger problem was when

they're transported to the Enterprise right before they hit the ground. They were falling at a speed that would have killed them. But instead of either being killed by the impact with the transporter room floor or brought to a halt by the the transporter beam itself, they just fell hard enough for it to hurt.

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. But I'm not losing any sleep over it.

Yes, that briefly annoyed me, too. But it doesn't seem much worse than Spock catching Kirk at the beginning of FF.

I think this Trek film has kinda shot your Lost time travel theories to hell.....

Also what I thought. We'll see if the same logic applies to Losŧ after all.

[Datameister 2,044]

I think this Trek film has kinda shot your Lost time travel theories to hell.....

Nope...just proved how illogical it would be if the universe did not actually follow the Novikov self-consistency principle! =) I have a feeling (it's called optimism...) that Abrams' Lost crew will not do the same thing, but I'll keep watching and enjoying the show even if they pull the same stupid approach.

[Quintus 5,399]

Just got back from seeing it, it's 23:35 here and I'm tired. I thought it was excellent. One or two miss-steps (the pointless giant monster) couldn't spoil the sheer amount of fun, with fine performances from pretty much everyone concerned, the guy who played Kirk was especially superb. The opener was a smashing old fashioned setup, although this part in particular felt closer to Star Wars than Star Trek, which was fine and actually very welcome. In all, I appreciate how accessible and far less turgid Abram's has made the reboot, it truly felt like an old fashioned sci-fi blockbuster, though feeling utterly fresh for it and not merely just another entry to tired Star Trek canon. I'd heard nothing of the music till tonight during the movie and I thought it was very good, the new main theme being nicely memorable, indeed my favourite statement of it is heard on the horns right at the beginning of the movie - I loved the melody instantly, which is extremely rare indeed. Incidentally, my uncle came with us to see it and he's something of a Trekkie, needless to say he was disappointed. He did not like the inclusion of the original Spock (Nimoy) at all, he felt the idea to have him was a bad one, spoiling the movie somewhat. Something I strongly disagree with, because I thought it was a great plot device and a wonderful performance from the old pro.

All in all, I buzzed off it, this Star Trek movie. I could get used to this. *****

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Could someone further explain the time travel in Star Trek?

I recall it being explained but I was also confused. The opening battle between Nero and the U.S.S. Kelvin ended and Nero flew through the black hole and was waiting for 25 years after that?

The whole alternate timeline confused me, because if there is an alternate timeline, there should in fact be two timelines and thus only one of each person in each timeline.

[Datameister 2,044]

I must admit, the main theme appealed to me immediately, as well. The ostinatos and those scurrying strings were somewhat less enjoyable for me...but if history repeats itself, I'm sure I'll be loving those, too, before too long.

I did feel like the score overall trod rather dangerously close to MV territory in some ways, but you know what? I liked it. I really did. If Giacchino doesn't musically evolve at all over the next decade or so (cf. Hans Zimmer), I'll probably get tired of his work, but for now, I'm definitely digging it, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I'm really looking forward to this particular package arriving at my place.

EDIT: Koray, I'm not totally positive about all the specifics - I had a bit of trouble following some of it, too, though I'm sure I'll get it next time. But as a general principle, you can certainly have two of the same person in one alternate timeline. All you need is a time machine that can cross to other timelines, which is what time machines in Back to the Future and Star Trek and so forth apparently excel at. They NEVER end up in the same timeline!

So old Spock starts out in the original timeline. Then he travels through the black hole (after Nero) and ends up in an alternate past. There's already a young Spock in this alternate past, which means there are two of him, and NO Spock whatsoever in the timeline that old Spock came from.

[Quintus 5,399]

I can't quite remember the exact moment, but does anybody remember hearing the high sustained strings section early on during a an epic space shot of a ship/s manoeuvring during a battle? It reminded me of pure JW.

[Datameister 2,044]

I think I remember something like that. Didn't make me think of JW, but I certainly enjoyed it.

OH! That reminds me. I loved the interior shot when the Kelvin was hit and the camera followed a casualty being sucked out into space, leading to most of the music and sound effects stopping once the camera was "outside." It was dramatic and it hinted nicely at the fact that there really wouldn't be sound in space.

[Ollie 1,059]

Nero came thru the black hole and encountered the Kelvin, not knowing at first they went back 129 years. But what was a matter of minutes in their timeline was 25 years in the past for the Black Hole to send Spock thru.

So by attacking the Kelvin he altered the timeline and created a new alternate one. Meaning the timeline from the original Star Trek was left untouched and a new one was started but yet ends up with Kirk taking command of the Enterprise much quicker than he did in the old Trek universe.

[Datameister 2,044]

So by attacking the Kelvin he altered the timeline and created a new alternate one. Meaning the timeline from the original Star Trek was left untouched and a new one was started but yet ends up with Kirk taking command of the Enterprise much quicker than he did in the old Trek universe.

I have no way of proving that this is how the creators of the film saw it...but I do want to say that in real life, you wouldn't create a new timeline. You'd knowingly or unknowingly jump into an alternate one that "already" existed, in which events progressed differently than in the one you're used to. You still wouldn't be changing anything. You'd just be doing exactly what happened in that alternate timeline.

[John Crichton 4]

I'm going to get technical here...

Nowadays sci-fi stories are very much following the quantum mechanics theory of the universe. That is, there are an infinate number of alternate realities and a new one is created every time a "decision" is made (Not sure where the line is supposed to be drawn there. I mean, do I create an alternate universe when I decide to put jelly instead of butter on my toast?). This is why Spock, young Spock, said that an "alternate universe" had been created by Nero's interference in the time line. In an older story, it would simply have been "time is being/has been rewritten" and old Spock may have faded away as part of a defunct time line.

Personally I think this was a stroke of genius, allowing the filmmakers to do some very different and quite extreme things, as all who have seen the movie will know about.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

OH! That reminds me. I loved the interior shot when the Kelvin was hit and the camera followed a casualty being sucked out into space, leading to most of the music and sound effects stopping once the camera was "outside." It was dramatic and it hinted nicely at the fact that there really wouldn't be sound in space.

Agreed. There was another moment where a transition to outer space resulted in a strong reduction in sound effects.

(Not sure where the line is supposed to be drawn there. I mean, do I create an alternate universe when I decide to put jelly instead of butter on my toast?).

You have to look at it from a quantum level. Even just the "decision" to think about what to put on your toast should result in thousands (rather, billions and billions) new timelines.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I loved the interior shot when the Kelvin was hit and the camera followed a casualty being sucked out into space, leading to most of the music and sound effects stopping once the camera was "outside." It was dramatic and it hinted nicely at the fact that there really wouldn't be sound in space.

Oh man, I LOVED that. Like Charlie said, there was another instance where it did the same thing.

[King Mark 3,631]

so if I put jelly on my toast Zimmer might end up scoring Tintin?

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

[Datameister 2,044]

Nowadays sci-fi stories are very much following the quantum mechanics theory of the universe. That is, there are an infinate number of alternate realities and a new one is created every time a "decision" is made (Not sure where the line is supposed to be drawn there. I mean, do I create an alternate universe when I decide to put jelly instead of butter on my toast?).

Firstly, that part of "science" goes so far into the unobservable and unmeasurable that it's not even funny. Secondly, you still wouldn't be creating a new timeline. Each timeline would exist parallel to all the other infinite number of timelines, going from the very beginning to the very end. In each one where you existed, you'd be conscious only of that timeline unless you traveled between them. If I put jelly on my toast, that means I'm in the timeline in which I put jelly on my toast, but that other timeline in which I chose butter wouldn't be created when I made the decision...it just would have "already" existed.

[Ollie 1,059]

By having older Spock appear and throw in the fact he was helping the Romulans (which means he eventually succeeded what he began in the 2 part NG episode. ) I'm guessing the original timeline events were acknowledged as existing.

So either there is an alternate timeline as Spock suggested or we have BTTF logic wich means if old Spock were to go back to his time he would find Vulcan destroyed and a completely different set of events occuring.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Firstly, that part of "science" goes so far into the unobservable and unmeasurable that it's not even funny. Secondly, you still wouldn't be creating a new timeline. Each timeline would exist parallel to all the other infinite number of timelines, going from the very beginning to the very end. In each one where you existed, you'd be conscious only of that timeline unless you traveled between them. If I put jelly on my toast, that means I'm in the timeline in which I put jelly on my toast, but that other timeline in which I chose butter wouldn't be created when I made the decision...it just would have "already" existed.

Of course, at Circle Time, there's a certain amount of leakage.

[Datameister 2,044]

So either there is an alternate timeline as Spock suggested or we have BTTF logic wich means if old Spock were to go back to his time he would find Vulcan destroyed and a completely different set of events occuring.

No BTTF logic involved, and that we can know for sure - if Vulcan were destroyed in old Spock's timeline, too, old Spock would have no memory of the planet continuing exist.

[John Crichton 4]

By having older Spock appear and throw in the fact he was helping the Romulans (which means he eventually succeeded what he began in the 2 part NG episode. )

Yes, if you read the Countdown comic (which apparently only I did), Spock eventually succeeds in bringing some change to Romulus and at the time, 15 or so years after Nemesis, he is a legal resident of Romulus, the ambassador from Vulcan, and an influential voice with the Romulan Senate.

Also, Picard is the Federation ambassador to Vulcan, a resurrected Data is captain of the Enterprise E, Worf has gone back to the Klingon Empire where he's a general, and Geordi has left Starfleet to design his own ships, one of which is the Jellyfish (Spock's ship in the movie).

[Datameister 2,044]

Geordi has left Starfleet to design his own ships, one of which is the Jellyfish (Spock's ship in the movie).

Which, I'd like to add, is an awesome design. Entirely pointless to have the parts spin like that, most likely, but it just looks so darn cool!

[Koray Savas 2,251]

After I saw the film I wanted to put something related to the score in my Facebook status, so I was like "Oh I know." I proceeded to type "Koray Savas is enterprising young men." Then I stopped and realized how gay that sounded.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

one of my biggest problems with the story is that fact that what Nero was doing to Spock and Kirks planets was still going to happen to his. The stupid fool did nothing that would save Romulus.

[Taikomochi 1,136]

He figured that destroying the federation planets would stop it from happening to Romulus because he blamed the federation. I thought that seemed rather obvious.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

He figured that destroying the federation planets would stop it from happening to Romulus because he blamed the federation. I thought that seemed rather obvious.

no, because changing the political makeup of space doesn't stop the star from going supernova.

Like I said this movie is easy to nitpick

Where is the Vulcan defense force?

Where is the earth defense force?

why does Nero's right ear appear pointed in one scene but not necessarily the next.

Obviously the point is damaged but there must be a deleted scene of his injury. I suspect the movie novelization which comes out tuesday might explain it.

Why is there cement and I beams on the enterprise?

[Taikomochi 1,136]

Well, obviously Nero wasn't that smart that he thought into it THAT deeply. He definitely talked about how much better Romulus would be without the Federation.

He can't be the smartest guy if he somehow managed to lose to a 150-year-old ship with his borg reverse engineered ship.

[Wojo 2,453]

I haven't seen the movie yet, and reading all of these spoilers makes me very, very uneasy about this whole alternate universe concept. It almost makes me feel like this movie is a totally worthless venture, because it's not the "real" Kirk or "real" Spock that I'd be paying to go see.

There was one Voyager episode where the ship and the crew were replaced with perfect copies from that evil strange matter planet, and they didn't figure it out until the middle of the episode when the started to decay, and they needed to return to their home planet in the Delta Quadrant. But they launched a distress beacon and completely fizzled into bits of matter by the time the "real" Voyager answered the call and arrived. And the two-parter "Year of Hell," I believe those two hours of story were an alternate universe that were wiped clean and never happened by the story's conclusion. This movie makes me feel like I'm watching these other-world copies of my favorite characters, not the real McCoy, and I'm not sure how I feel about that.

On the other hand, half of the episode "Yesterday's Enterprise" involves an alternate universe twist on my favorite characters, and the events of that episode are quite canonical, in that they restore the timeline and give rise to the character of Sela.

The fact that so many non Trekkers like it tells me it can't be as good as people say it is. It must be dumbed down Star Trek for the masses. Damn Paramount for screwing with Star Trek.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

Where is the Vulcan defense force?

Where is the earth defense force?

Welcome to Star Trek. Population? The Enterprise.

I haven't seen the movie yet, and reading all of these spoilers makes me very, very uneasy about this whole alternate universe concept. It almost makes me feel like this movie is a totally worthless venture, because it's not the "real" Kirk or "real" Spock that I'd be paying to go see.

There was one Voyager episode where the ship and the crew were replaced with perfect copies from that evil strange matter planet, and they didn't figure it out until the middle of the episode when the started to decay, and they needed to return to their home planet in the Delta Quadrant. But they launched a distress beacon and completely fizzled into bits of matter by the time the "real" Voyager answered the call and arrived. And the two-parter "Year of Hell," I believe those two hours of story were an alternate universe that were wiped clean and never happened by the story's conclusion. This movie makes me feel like I'm watching these other-world copies of my favorite characters, not the real McCoy, and I'm not sure how I feel about that.

On the other hand, half of the episode "Yesterday's Enterprise" involves an alternate universe twist on my favorite characters, and the events of that episode are quite canonical, in that they restore the timeline and give rise to the character of Sela.

The fact that so many non Trekkers like it tells me it can't be as good as people say it is. It must be dumbed down Star Trek for the masses. Damn Paramount for screwing with Star Trek.

Just watch the film, and then feel uneasy, please.

[Datameister 2,044]

It's not dumbed down. Perhaps not as intensely cerebral as some parts of the franchise, but I would definitely reserve judgment until after you've seen it.

I can understand your uneasiness about the alternate timeline thing, though. I'm still not sure how I feel about it. It's probably best if you just think of it as a reboot and try not to approach it with any preconceptions about what "should" be happening. And then you get surprised by all the lovely references to TOS and several of the other films, and the degree to which many of the actors capture the heart of the characters they're playing!

[Jeshopk 8]

I haven't seen the movie yet, and reading all of these spoilers makes me very, very uneasy about this whole alternate universe concept. It almost makes me feel like this movie is a totally worthless venture, because it's not the "real" Kirk or "real" Spock that I'd be paying to go see.

There was one Voyager episode where the ship and the crew were replaced with perfect copies from that evil strange matter planet, and they didn't figure it out until the middle of the episode when the started to decay, and they needed to return to their home planet in the Delta Quadrant. But they launched a distress beacon and completely fizzled into bits of matter by the time the "real" Voyager answered the call and arrived. And the two-parter "Year of Hell," I believe those two hours of story were an alternate universe that were wiped clean and never happened by the story's conclusion. This movie makes me feel like I'm watching these other-world copies of my favorite characters, not the real McCoy, and I'm not sure how I feel about that.

On the other hand, half of the episode "Yesterday's Enterprise" involves an alternate universe twist on my favorite characters, and the events of that episode are quite canonical, in that they restore the timeline and give rise to the character of Sela.

The fact that so many non Trekkers like it tells me it can't be as good as people say it is. It must be dumbed down Star Trek for the masses. Damn Paramount for screwing with Star Trek.

My main interest in Trek has been the original series and the movies with the original cast. Given that the real Spock (Nimoy) is in this one, it is very unconvincing to try to think of these other actors as the same characters when they are really trying to sell it that way. A straight reboot would have been more convincing because that is how it is treated. Everything is far too different to be explained by a slight change in the universe. I think the novelty factor is a big issue here, as well as people celebrating that they can finally like something which seemed exclusive. The cool kids took Star Trek from the nerds just because "everything old is new again" and it wasn't enough just to make fun of it on VH1.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Overthinking it, aren't we?

[Charlie Brigden 7]

one of my biggest problems with the story is that fact that what Nero was doing to Spock and Kirks planets was still going to happen to his. The stupid fool did nothing that would save Romulus.

I thought that was the point though. He wanted Spock specifically to go through what he had been through with Romulus, but wanted this timeline's Romulus, which has not been destroyed, to rule over the Federation. So while he can't save his Romulus, he can still work with the new one.

[Delorean90 42]

I just saw it, and dang, that was a fun movie! There was so much to like, and as someone else experienced, this is gonna be kind of a stream-of-consciousness review.

Overall, I liked it a lot. The cast was just excellent, truly excellent. It was so great to see these people tapping into the characters without being caricatures.

I have mixed feelings about the score, but I will say that as rapidly as the theme was growing on me before, it's really getting up there. I think over time I'm really going to count it up there with the Trek themes--different, perhaps, but it's got a lot of potential, some of which was tapped here. Does anyone else really enjoy the orchestrational touch of the pianos in the buildup to the main theme? I like it.

As for the body of the score, I'm definitely gonna give it some time (I really had to control myself to keep from trying to analyze the score this first time), but while it didn't seem to have that instant classic quality, it was good, and certainly head and shoulders above a lot of the RCP regurgitation flung at many summer blockbusters today. Certainly several leaps in the right direction.

I agree with Mark, I loved the shot of the Enterprise emerging from warp by Saturn. One of my favorite moments was when the Enterprise comes in to

save Spock from the red matter torpedos

. It was just an excellent moment, and I thought the main theme really shined here. In fact, the whole climax was solid.

Did anyone else love the fact that Kirk was

munching on an apple

in the excellent Kobayashi Maru scene? I just loved that wink to TWOK.

I could've done without the scene in Uhura's quarters at the academy, as that's really the biggest thing keeping it from being a pretty much family-oriented affair in line with the majority of the other films (a couple of intense moments aside). Felt kinda like a cheap ploy to have some trailer shots to get the fourteen-year-old boys that would've seen the movie anyway.

My main gripe, though, was the camerawork. On the whole, I thought the cinematography was pretty dang good, but the shaky cam, quick zooms, and overall frenetic nature of a lot of the shots kinda just slapped me upside the head with, "This is New Trek, dude--DEAL WIT' IT!" I would've appreciated something a bit more restrained, and letting us savor the shots. That's not to say there weren't some very good shots and stuff, but I just think that a lot of the jittery camerawork just wasn't really appropriate for this. Yeah, it's newer. Yeah, it's updated. But I think there's a balance that could be strike visually. I expected the lens flare comments to be overblown, but they weren't. Not a make or break thing overall, but I wouldn't cry if there were less of them the next time around.

My only real regret leading up to this is that I wish I had surfed the Trek threads here and on FSM less, as I was spoiled on the

destruction of Vulcan

! I kinda feel like I missed a big shock, but it was still enough that once you think, "Oh, well, I guess it's not SO bad, I mean he's getting 'em off, right?",

Amanda dies

. I just can't help but feel like I missed a small part of the experience. Even with that spoilage, though, I had a tremendous time, and there were still many things to discover. By the end of the movie (and times throughout of course, but not necessarily to this extent), I was just grinning ear-to-ear as

the crew went through their checklist and Kirk finally gave the order to "Take us out."

I'm sure I'll have more to comment on, but these are just some initial thoughts on my first viewing posting here at 2:45 in the morning. I am definitely planning to see it again, though. Looking forward to it.

[Datameister 2,044]

I know what you mean about the zooms and quick edits. The shaky cam usually didn't bother me, but sometimes the warp-speed cutting made it difficult to follow the action. This film certainly isn't the worst offender in that regard, nor is it anything new, but there were a few scenes in which I was rather distracted by how hard it was keep track of what I was looking at. (I DID think the lens flares were fine, though.)

I also agree about the scene with Uhura and her roommate. It was perhaps a bit gratuitous. It more or less makes sense, considering Kirk's character, but I could have done without that scene. Actually, it might have been nice to do away with Kirk's interest in Uhura altogether, because it really does take up a fair amount of time in the early parts of the film, and I felt like more time was needed for Kirk's relationship with Bones and, to a lesser degree, Spock. I suspect that'll figure more prominently in the next film, and that's probably how it should be. It wouldn't work if they were totally chummy from the get-go.

Again, I'm really looking forward to the next one. I feel like there's a lot they could do, as long as they don't lose sight of the characters. They are the element that makes or breaks Star Trek for me - and they've done both on many occasions, depending on which part of the franchise we're talking about. I really felt some attachment to these interpretations of these characters, but we need more time with them. They need more time to develop and grow.

[crocodile 8,017]

I've seen it. And liked it. It's a good thing they decided to make this thing all about characters. That's what saves it from being ridiculous. Which, in fact, it still is. But it doesn't matter. This more personal story of Spock and Kirk makes the movie engaging enough. Still, it more seems like a teaser for the next one.

One thing bothers me: How did young Spock know that the arrival of Nero actually changed anything in the timeline? How would he know that? That was somewhat... illogical.

It's probably the first example when a film from a series is a sequel, prequel and a complete reboot at the same time. And it works. The audience liked it and there are way fewer ST fans here. I'm not one of them.

There is still nothing special about the music. Half of the time I couldn't even hear it. The sound effects were so loud. Thanks again, Ben Burtt.

Karol

[Quintus 5,399]

Those debating the time travel logic of the new movie would be wise to try not to think about it too much, since the unravelling of the premise will merely serve to undo the movie into nothing more than a series of black hole sized plot holes, as is the case with pretty much all sci-fi. Suspension of belief got me through this damn good movie and gleefully so. The plot and time travel make perfect sense, depending on which way you look at it.

After sleeping on the movie, I'm even more impressed by it. It's one of the best blockbusters I've seen in a long time, simply brilliant. I can't wait for part II.

[sandman609 0]

Also, on the physics issues...a far bigger problem was when

they're transported to the Enterprise right before they hit the ground. They were falling at a speed that would have killed them. But instead of either being killed by the impact with the transporter room floor or brought to a halt by the the transporter beam itself, they just fell hard enough for it to hurt.

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. But I'm not losing any sleep over it.

I'm not entirely sure this is that big of a problem. If that were the case, wouldn't the transporting from a ship in warp result in everyone smearing on the far wall as soon as they materialized?

Perhaps it was just the fact that they were not in a standing position that caused the hard landing on the Enterprise, and not the fact that they were supposedly still carrying the momentum of the fall through the transporter

. Just a thought.

edit: Sorry... just realized that that should still be spoilerized I guess.

[crocodile 8,017]

Those debating the time travel logic of the new movie would be wise to not try to think about it too much, since the unravelling of the premise will merely serve to undo the movie into nothing more than a series of black hole sized plot holes, as is the case with pretty much all sci-fi.

That's what I'm talking about. I watched it with my friends who never liked anything about ST. But they were engaged in the story. And that's all because Abrams and the rest made a very good decision to make it character-driven. It worked already (and still works) on Lost and it works wonderfully here.

Karol

[Ollie 1,059]

All Sci-Fi films have technical and sience issues, the good ones have a solid story and interesting characters that make you forget about them.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I could've done without the scene in Uhura's quarters at the academy, as that's really the biggest thing keeping it from being a pretty much family-oriented affair in line with the majority of the other films (a couple of intense moments aside). Felt kinda like a cheap ploy to have some trailer shots to get the fourteen-year-old boys that would've seen the movie anyway.

I don't know anything about Star Trek, but isn't Kirk like the James Bond of the universe? I saw it as part of his character.

[Jay 37,367]

After I saw the film I wanted to put something related to the score in my Facebook status, so I was like "Oh I know." I proceeded to type "Koray Savas is enterprising young men." Then I stopped and realized how gay that sounded.

Maybe you don't love Snatch after all....

[Datameister 2,044]

Those debating the time travel logic of the new movie would be wise to not try to think about it too much, since the unravelling of the premise will merely serve to undo the movie into nothing more than a series of black hole sized plot holes, as is the case with pretty much all sci-fi.

And those who are less interested in the time travel logic would be wise not to tell others how best to experience the film. I can thoroughly enjoy something while picking apart its flaws or lack thereof. Trust me, I'm not going to suddenly stop liking the film if I realize there's a problem in its time travel logic - I expect that from most time-travel-related stuff.

[Wojo 2,453]

Shouldn't time travel be impossible from the standpoint that you can't create or destroy matter without unleashing a tremendous amount of energy? If you travel back in time and create a situation where you and your younger self co-exist, you have created matter in that universe, and destroyed it in the previous one. Never mind the paradox caused by encountering your younger self, a la Back to the Future, Part II with two Docs on the street corner, two Jennifers fainting, or two Deloreans at all (since it stays in the tunnel from 1885 to 1955).

I realize that Star Trek already has the creation and destruction of matter by way of its transporters and replicators, and E=mc^2 would provide the energy needed to create the rift in the space-time continuum in the first place.

So any discussion of how possible or impossible time travel in Star Trek is purely academic at best, since it's flawed right out of the starting gate. I'm looking forward to sitting back, covering my hand in popcorn butter, and enjoying this movie.