• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

BUT I'm a cheerleader!

urbandk

Commodore
Commodore
I think I read somewhere that someone wanted a well-thought out post from someone who liked this film, because evidently there are a lot of posts that are in favor of the movie but are only one-liners. I don't doubt it, but I could accuse those who dislike the movie of the same reactionary one-liners. And there are lots of thoughtful posts on both sides of the issue.

I know I and others have posted thoughtful positive critiques of the film, but now that I've seen it several times, I thought I'd contribute one more and offer this thread as a forum for thoughtful positive critiques of the film. This doesn't mean that I don't want any dissent, but I invite those who love the film, as I do, to focus on one thing that you loved about it.

Here's my opinion on why this is the best Star Trek film yet:

Star Trek, for the duration of its career has been defined as much by the actors who played the roles as by the characters themselves. Kirk has been synonymous with Shatner and Spock with Nimoy, to an extent that Nimoy felt compelled at times to distance himself from the role and to embrace the role. This movie is the first time that Spock has been fully realized on screen as a character per se.

The intersection of Nimoy and Quinto's Spocks was ingenious because it put the character in relief. The actual meeting was the culmination of the character's arc. One Spock on screen in two incarnations. The use of the character was visionary.

Inspired performances by Quinto and Nimoy made it possible, as did a strong script and characterization by Orci and Kurtzman.

This is one aspect of the film that I thought was especially effective, and I hope this has been an adequately thoughtful illustration of why I thought it worked.
 
Here's the thing: it's enough to like something without justifying it at length - and I really don't care why someone who doesn't like something doesn't like it (unless it's a rare situation where it's my responsbility to satisfy that someone, which this isn't).
 
Here's the thing: it's enough to like something without justifying it at length - and I really don't care why someone who doesn't like something doesn't like it (unless it's a rare situation where it's my responsbility to satisfy that someone, which this isn't).

true. it's enough to like it or dislike it without justifying yourself, but i think the movie withstands critiques, both positive and negative, precisely because it's such a provocative, well-done cinematic work.

if literary critics can do it, why not Star Trek fans!
 
I like it cuz:

-they cast it well
-they know what Star Trek is, and they went and did it

I could write a 5000 word essay but what's the point?
 
What I really like about it is it's TOS. It's more TOS than the films with the actual TOS cast!

Seriously, the films with Shatner, Nimoy et all, TMP to TUC, they aren't a whole lot like the series. They have their moments, sure, but they aren't TOS.

This was TOS on the big screen. As it should be!

I can see why TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT fans may not like it though, but them's the breaks.
 
I think I read somewhere that someone wanted a well-thought out post from someone who liked this film, because evidently there are a lot of posts that are in favor of the movie but are only one-liners. I don't doubt it, but I could accuse those who dislike the movie of the same reactionary one-liners. And there are lots of thoughtful posts on both sides of the issue.
touché ;) too bad the following posts of this thread supported my case.
Here's my opinion on why this is the best Star Trek film yet:

Star Trek, for the duration of its career has been defined as much by the actors who played the roles as by the characters themselves. Kirk has been synonymous with Shatner and Spock with Nimoy, to an extent that Nimoy felt compelled at times to distance himself from the role and to embrace the role. This movie is the first time that Spock has been fully realized on screen as a character per se.
Yes but are we judging the film purly as it stands on its own? Or by the iconic characters that they represent?
The intersection of Nimoy and Quinto's Spocks was ingenious because it put the character in relief. The actual meeting was the culmination of the character's arc. One Spock on screen in two incarnations. The use of the character was visionary.

Inspired performances by Quinto and Nimoy made it possible, as did a strong script and characterization by Orci and Kurtzman.

This is one aspect of the film that I thought was especially effective, and I hope this has been an adequately thoughtful illustration of why I thought it worked.
Yes that intersection did work for me too, although on a smaller level. But that goes back to my previous point. That scene worked because of the iconic figures of Nimoy spock, and the emotional attachment I felt for the old characters. It is a feel good passing the baton moment. But I'm forced to ask myself if spock meant nothing to me would that moment have worked? And if you judge this scene purely within the context of this film, didnt spock say that he and his younger self could never meet? Yes Yes before you jump down my throat about how he said that to kirk only to allow him to discover the friendship he could have with spock on his own.
That brings us to the whole plot of this movie how everything is ordined. Since the time line had be altered why must kirk be the captian of the enterprise, why must kirk and spock be friends? The interaction of nuspock and nukirk seem to be very contentious throughout the movie. Other than the fact that we expected kirk and spock sitting at the helm of the enterprise, kirk and spock being long lasting friends. I see no reason why spock would like kirk or vice versa.
 
This is my comprehensive review and my last word on what I thought of XI. I try to go into enough detail to make it clear I'm not some mindless basher fixated on canon or scientific accuracy or any of the other inane complaints that crop up with regards to the film. After today, I'm moving on to talking about something else. XI, I've spent two weeks discussing it and I think all that can be said has been said and both sides have articulated their positions.

When I first watched the film so much is going on that while I saw some problems I really didn't see the deficiencies in the film to the degree I did later because everything is moving so fast, maybe too fast. But once you see the film again or you sit back and try to make sense of all the stuff in the film and actually analyze the story the film really starts to have problems. Maybe the writers thought that with the whirlwind of events that occur in the film that you wouldn't catch on but I like to examine the story especially when it comes to these films or tv series that go out of their way to cover a lot of ground as it tends to be the preferred style these days.

I did love the exciting visual effects sequences--the Narada vs the Kelvin, Spock's ramming of the Narada with the ship from the future--, the epic visuals--Vulcan's destruction-- and inventive stunts like the atmospheric jump to the drill. I loved the updates on the TOS uniform. The colors were eye-popping especially with the white background of the new bridge. I didn't mind the cosmetic license the designers took with the Enterprise from either the interior or from the outside. The Enterprise was a beauty to behold as was the Narada. The only thing I might have liked was a better introduction to the ship allowing for more time to take it in. As it was it was rushed compared to the previous Trek introductions of the hero ships.

All the actors were well cast. In fact, the characters were the best thing about this film. That is why it was too bad they weren't given more attention.I thought Chekov, McCoy, Kirk, Spock and Amanda did an excellent job capturing the mannerisms and essence of their original counterparts. Uhura felt a little different but I liked that she had spunk and sass. I didn't particularly care for the Spock/Uhura romance. Granted we didn't see a great deal of it but it certainly didn't strike me as something I'd really care to see again--so in that regard it is pretty much on par with the other romances Trek attempted. Scotty was a little over-the-top for my tastes. Pegg was just so one-note.

One of my biggest problems was that the film tried to do too many things. This was mostly jumping from one action piece to the next with little time to absorb what happened. As a result, things such as Vulcan's destruction or Amanda's death just don't work. I really wanted to feel something but I simply didn't. For a death to carry any weight we needed more time with her and with the two of them in my opinion. We barely got to know Amanda or the Amanda/Spock relationship. It is ironic that the writers' main goal was to make this film accessble to non-fans yet I have a feeling that they were counting on our connection with Wyatt's Amanda to carry the death of Ryder's Amanda.

That might have worked out well enough for some but for me it didn't work that way. There is almost a chemistry that exists between viewers and the characters on screen. You can't just expect that the same characters played by different actors are going to automatically allow you to transfer the original bond to them. I liked these actors and characters but for me this wasn't like reconnecting with a bunch of old friends. Same goes for Vulcan. I think one way to have helped this aspect would have been to include a storyline that brought Kirk and Spock to Vulcan as part of an off-world Academy exercise and then they could work from this end to deal with Nero as he begins the attack.

Nero was a plot device. Yes, the Countdown comics explored in detail his character and his backstory. It also provided some nice touches such as explaining the significance of the teral'n and the markings on the Narada's crew. But at the end of the day it wasn't in the film and it really was problematic. I knew something was missing but only did I learn of how much until I heard of the prequel comic series and read some of the summaries. Were some of these tidbits absolutely necessary for the film? No, but I think it would have added something to it. Instead, the tattoos, the teral'n, his loss all operate in a vacuum with no context.

I didn't mind the time travel element. I'd be hypocritical if I complained about here since I enjoyed it quite a bit on ENT, Heroes, Lost. The problem was that if you are going to do something pretty bold as allow Trek history to be fundamentally altered permanently then you should have the antagonist be of the kind of worthy stature befitting such a shocking act. I simply didn't care for Nero.

I didn't find Nimoy's Spock's inclusion to have been as sentimental as one would think. It, like other things in this film, might have been handled better. Given that this in all liklihood will be the last time we ever see Old Spock I would have liked a more satisfying use of him other than as a plot device and a more satisfying sense of closure.

I must admit I've never been too crazy when writers simply drop some familiar Trek name or character into a story simply for the giddiness it generates within a fan. And as such, I found a great deal of the namedropping pointless and didn't really contribute much to the story. For an excellent example of incorporating Trek elements within a story that actually adds depth I'd point to "The Forge" from ENT's fourth season.

As an action film it works as a Trek film it has its issues so I'm torn. I'd probably give it 2.5 stars out of 4.

For the record, I didn't care if Vulcan has red, blue or green skies. I didn't care that the designers took some liberties. I didn't care that Delta Vega was near Vulcan. I didn't care that Spock shouldn't have been able to see the destruction of his homeworld. I didn't care about the plausibility of a blackhole eating supernova. I didn't care about the transwarp tranport. I didn't care that Kirk was promoted to Captain. I didn't mind Abrams rebooting the show. None of these were things in the film that bothered me in the least.

I don't hate the film. I don't dislike the film. I think it can be semi-entertaining on a certain level but I don't think it is a solid film let alone a great or excellent one. It certainly isn't better than TWoK, TVH, TUC, FC.
 
Last edited:
alright. i guess no one's going to write his doctoral dissertation on star trek. although i'm sure it's been done before.

i appreciate the responses, but i guess dennis said it best:

Here's the thing: it's enough to like something without justifying it at length - and I really don't care why someone who doesn't like something doesn't like it (unless it's a rare situation where it's my responsbility to satisfy that someone, which this isn't).

i wasn't trying to justify liking the movie because there's no need.

i just think this movie withstands scrutiny, and not only from those who dislike it or have major reservations about it.
 
i just think this movie withstands scrutiny, and not only from those who dislike it or have major reservations about it.
That assumption is yet to be proven. :vulcan:

o.k. i'm game. give me something you have a problem with, and if i'm around, i'll try to address it.

but i have no interest in tit for tat debates. i only want to show that from another point of view, any of your problems could be considered a strength.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top