Star Trek Sequel - Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have very limited knowledge of Trek lore, especially when it comes to Kirk and Co as the only Trek show I ever watched was New Generation and that was literally years ago, but nothing in the new ST confused me or had me questioning anything that happened so I dont know why it that effect on others. It is a great film IMO, 1 of only 2 Trek films I have ever liked, the other being First Contact.
 
I don't know, they could have done a quick montage. Show World War III, first contact with the Vulcans, the inauguration of the Federation. Could have made for a cool opening. But perhaps that would be better suited for a new TV show.

Still some exposition would have been nice. It is a reboot after all.

Even in the shows they don't talk much about WWIII. In the novels you have more info about it and the Eugenic War.
If you want to learn stuff pre Federation have a look at ST: Enterprise.
 
The first movie definitely could have used more back story for Nero. But I think it was pretty clear that all of his tech was more advanced because it was from in the future. It was explained well enough how Nero was able to destroy a planet. The fact that you didn't really know what he was doing for all that time hurt the story though.
 
I'm kinda suspecting it is. Three Hispanic actors isn't a coincidence, it's a pattern. Which is ironic considering Khan was originally supposed to be played by an Indian actor.

I could handle it being Khan...as long as he's not the ONLY villain. If he's working with the Klingon's then I am all good.
 
The first movie definitely could have used more back story for Nero. But I think it was pretty clear that all of his tech was more advanced because it was from in the future. It was explained well enough how Nero was able to destroy a planet. The fact that you didn't really know what he was doing for all that time hurt the story though.

I thought they pretty much implied that he was just keeping to himself the entire time...occassionally they would be found (by Klingons for instance) and he destroyed them...but we were given a good impression that they were just hanging back away from civilization and waiting for Spock to arrive.
 
Yeah he was just waiting. He had one thing on his mind and one thing only and that was revenge. Old Spock made that pretty clear. Plus he was captured by the Klingons even though that part was deleted.
 
Have the Federation battle the Klingons or Cardassians for the lost location of some forgotten power or weapon that lies in an unexplored part of the galaxy where territory between the two is still in dispute and the innocent inhabitants of each are being caught up in the occupation. Something to be a parable of US imperialism that Star Fleet is using some sort of planet claimed for study to instead harbor resources to have some sort of technical or strategic advantage over the which ever Empire. This violates the sovereignty of whatever planet doesn't want to be part of either.
 
Last edited:
The first movie definitely could have used more back story for Nero. But I think it was pretty clear that all of his tech was more advanced because it was from in the future. It was explained well enough how Nero was able to destroy a planet. The fact that you didn't really know what he was doing for all that time hurt the story though.

While I did wish they kept Nero being captured by the Klingons deleted scenes, they did mention that he was hiding in Klingon terroritory in the final film.

Also, I'm thinking that because Nero is alien he can wait that long due to his will and patience. To us it was a log time, to him it's not.
 
I didn't get a very patient vibe from Nero. Though even the Klingon prison story has a big hole in it. The Narada can take on... an entire Federation fleet, plus Vulcan's defenses, but it can't take on a few Klingon ships?

This movie is decent as long as you don't think too much about it.
 
I didn't get a very patient vibe from Nero. Though even the Klingon prison story has a big hole in it. The Narada can take on... an entire Federation fleet, plus Vulcan's defenses, but it can't take on a few Klingon ships?

This movie is decent as long as you don't think too much about it.

That might be why it was cut from the movie, that it made less sense than Nero waiting 20-plus years for old Spock to appear. And yes, if it wasn't in the movie, it didn't "happen," and I'm sticking to that.

Also not making sense is the conceit that the Narada would be captured by the Klingons, but conveniently left in the orbit of the prison planet so the Romulans could easily steal it back. Again, none of this was in any existing cut of the movie, so it didn't happen.
 
Well, its one of those things where it's a plot hole but you can kinda accept it. Again, while Nero is impatient, he is alien. So he CAN wait for that long if he doesn't have a choice. If he was human, I wouldn't buy him waiting for that long and not go insane/or age badly.
 
Well, its one of those things where it's a plot hole but you can kinda accept it. Again, while Nero is impatient, he is alien. So he CAN wait for that long if he doesn't have a choice. If he was human, I wouldn't buy him waiting for that long and not go insane/or age badly.

Also, I always reasoned that the warp drive was damaged in their battle Kelvin. Without warp drive, it would take you forever to get anywhere in space, so you might as well hang around and wait for the second ship to come through.
 
The prison scene gave the impression Nero was content to stay there for the duration, which is kind of cool. Like he just puts everything on hold until he can get his revenge. It doesn't make sense that his ship would be waiting close by though.
 
The time travel story felt poorly planned out (the 20 year absence) and tacked on at times (destroying Earth just for the hell of it). They could have easily replaced it with something else. Half the story was about Spock, which would have been unchanged, up until his mother's death. They just needed Kirk's dad to die somehow, and have some threat.

I am guessing they were worried fans would complain if it had no connection to the past movies.
 
I'm glad that this reboot is an alternate universe. While there are got issues with the plot, the movie was so epic and fun that most people didn't care. It made Star Trek special again..
 
I will never like the idea of Star Trek taking place in an alternate universe to justify the existence of a reboot. But so long as I can enjoy it, no more time travel stories for at least another film or those having to do with parallel dimensions! If Kirk can come back younger, why Can't Piccard and Riker?
 
The first movie definitely could have used more back story for Nero. But I think it was pretty clear that all of his tech was more advanced because it was from in the future. It was explained well enough how Nero was able to destroy a planet. The fact that you didn't really know what he was doing for all that time hurt the story though.

Check out the prequel comics, Star Trek: Countdown and Star Trek: Nero, they provide the back story for Nero and his motivations. Even though the story ideas for both prequel comics were by Orci and Kurtzman, the film contradicts some of the stuff mentioned in the comics.
 
Now that I think of why not a plot that actually takes place during one of the many wars between the Federation and another species? The peaceful crew of the Enterprise going a mission where they have to kill scores of innocence on a planet in the name of defense has never been explored before.
 
Its been awhile since I saw the last Star Trek movie, but IIRC:

Liked:

- That the birth of Kirk was the beginning of Star Trek.

= I felt everybody captured the spirits of their characters from the original series. Karl Urban was born to play Dr. McCoy!

- Kirk being with the green alien chick.

- Finally seeing the legendary Kobayashi Maru.

- The design of the Enterprise.

- The space battles were incredible.

- Bruce Greenwood is awesome.

- The Star Trek theme.

Disliked:

- Kirk getting busted by Spock on cheating on the test. I loved the fact he got away with it in the original timeline.

- Vulcan getting destroyed.

- Sulu not getting enough screen time.

- Spock and Uhura hooking up was odd. I couldn't imagine Leonard Nimoy doing that with Nichelle Nichols.

- I love Leonard Nimoy, but I wish he wasn't in this since his cameo was just an obvious ploy to draw tickets. The movie didn't need him plus I hated how he was cool with just staying in the past. He should be trying to find a way to get back to his timeline!

- Nero sucked as a villain. Even Shinzon was a better foe.

The only ones that don't look that close to the originals are Cho and Pegg IMO.

I'd add Yelchin to that.

There were a couple of times in Trek, that he tried to do Shatners Kirk.

I'm glad he didn't do that the whole film. It would have turned into a comedy. If Pine stays away from impersonating Kirk, then all will be fine.

I was fine with him channelling Shatner in small doses. Just be thankful he...didn't...talk...like...this!
 
Its been awhile since I saw the last Star Trek movie, but IIRC:

Liked:

- That the birth of Kirk was the beginning of Star Trek.

= I felt everybody captured the spirits of their characters from the original series. Karl Urban was born to play Dr. McCoy!

- Kirk being with the green alien chick.

- Finally seeing the legendary Kobayashi Maru.

- The design of the Enterprise.

- The space battles were incredible.

- Bruce Greenwood is awesome.

- The Star Trek theme.

Disliked:

- Kirk getting busted by Spock on cheating on the test. I loved the fact he got away with it in the original timeline.

- Vulcan getting destroyed.

- Sulu not getting enough screen time.

- Spock and Uhura hooking up was odd. I couldn't imagine Leonard Nimoy doing that with Nichelle Nichols.

- I love Leonard Nimoy, but I wish he wasn't in this since his cameo was just an obvious ploy to draw tickets. The movie didn't need him plus I hated how he was cool with just staying in the past. He should be trying to find a way to get back to his timeline!

- Nero sucked as a villain. Even Shinzon was a better foe.



I'd add Yelchin to that.



I was fine with him channelling Shatner in small doses. Just be thankful he...didn't...talk...like...this!




He almost did in the first scene on the bridge I think and it had me nervous.
 
I could handle it being Khan...as long as he's not the ONLY villain. If he's working with the Klingon's then I am all good.

I'm betting on that's what is going to happen. I can see Peter Weller making a good Klingon.
 
"The movie never explains how humanity was unified, or how Starfleet came into existence. Granted, most Trek fans know the background, but it would be nice to explain that in a reboot."

I really don't think that was necessary. My wife who is not a trekkie understood merely from pop culture that Star Trek is about a possible future where mankind finally got their crap together and now explores to stars. Learning how humanity was unified in not important as it is to see how we can continue to evolve and take our place in the Universal scheme of things.
 
I could handle it being Khan...as long as he's not the ONLY villain. If he's working with the Klingon's then I am all good.

The Klingons have been so overused in Star Trek that the thought of them as the villians leaves my feeling "MEH". I would rather see the Borg.
 
Have the Federation battle the Klingons or Cardassians for the lost location of some forgotten power or weapon that lies in an unexplored part of the galaxy where territory between the two is still in dispute...

The Neutral Zone. The background of many classic episodes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"