# Star Trek -- the "I saw it" thread \*\*SPOILERS\*\* **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 7, 2009, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640 "2009-05-07T08:13:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/221 "2009-05-11T21:38:32Z")
> [@RikWriter](#): > > FUCK yes! 😃 > [@Star Fleet recruitment manual reboot version](#): > > **Female Recruits** > Requirements: > > 1. Legs that go on for days. > … We’d like to help, but it’s in the manual. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/222 "2009-05-11T21:41:37Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > Did they really have to bring back the fucking miniskirts? :mad: Pure sexism. All the women (who are all young & pretty) get to show off their legs to the delight the male officers. I thought we were so post-feminist now miniskirts are empowering. 🙂 > [@](#): > > I did like the show of Kirk in his briefs, but they could just as easily have had him naked and kept the PG-13 rating. I was actually taken a bit by surprise by those briefs. Was that a special effect? > [@](#): > > It’s bad enough that Kirk went directly from cadet to captain of a starship, but Chekov was already an ensign _at 17_; this is worse than Wesley. Nah, if you’re going to be on the crew of Enterprise, you have to be beyond best of the best, and we know Starfleet will bend all sorts of rules and conventions for a crew like that. > [@](#): > > It would’ve been nice if they at least gave Sulu a throwaway line about a boyfriend. Too obvious. In my head, it’s Chekov. What a little cutie-pie (I can say that, the actor’s 20). ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/223 "2009-05-11T22:09:52Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Ha! > > HAHA! > > Hilarious! 😛 > > I would like to see your reasoning sometime. Since I have time now… First, I believe Kirk’s brother Sam is older. Since he does not apparently exist in this timeline, and the point of divergence is the nearly simultaneous death of Kirk Senior and birth of the Jim we see on screen, that has to be explained. Second, it’s clear in the movie that George & Mrs. Kirk have not yet decided on a name; they do so on the spot. Mama Kirk proposes a name which her husband shoots down; she accepts his suggestion because, hey, the dude’s about to die. There’s no time to argue, and she loves him; she’s not going to deny him his last wish…exactly You know that she doesn’t QUITE do what he asks; he specifically says “No, let’s not call h im ‘Tiberius,’ after my dad, that’s a stupid name, let’s call him Jim,” and she names him “James Tiberius.” So it’s reasonable to think that the two of them had different naming philosophies, and things might have gone differently in other circumstances. In the original timeline, the child wasn’t born under fire with his father about to die; they were together, and she might well have felt freer to impose her will more. Hell, Mrs. Rhymer would like to name a child after me if we ever have one, and I am opposed because I HATE both my first and middle names (I use a diminuative of my last name as my given name). I’m thinking in Mama Kirk’s family it was a tradition to name the firstborn son after the father; it certainly is in mine. She insisted in the original chronology, just as she gave the captain we know from the 60s a more formal name than his father might have liked. Lastly, Spock meets the younger Kirk. He’s only been in the past for a few days; he’s not altogether certain of the year. He meets a young man named James T. Kirk. In the original timeline, he didn’t meet Kirk until the latter was in his late 20s or early 30s. Maybe George and Jim from the original reality looked very much unlike. That’s not unheard of; my baby sister looks enough like my oldest sister that people who look at photos of them sometimes get them confused. The two mind-meld, true, but Spock is sharing information, not taking it. And even if he did take a peek through the mind of the cadet he just met (and I doubt he did; why should he?), all he’ll learn is that this person thinks of himself as “James Tiberius Kirk” and so forth. If Spock ever took the time to research he might learn better, but he has committed the un-Sherlockian sin of thinking he knows the answer and thus not looking at the evidence. 2009!Kirk is the counterpart of George Kirk. ---
**Author:** ![Jester](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jester/32/8223_2.png) [@Jester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jester)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/224 "2009-05-11T22:28:34Z")
I loved it. Loved it loved it loved it. There are some serious plot/logic problems, of course, but there’s a great article on CHUD today by a guy who had a similar reaction to mine, and seems to come to a fairly solid conclusion about why it works. The bottom line? Charm. (Would also explain why **Skald** would’ve hated it so much, if he didn’t like Kirk.) [http://chud.com/articles/articles/19369/1/THE-DEVIN039S-ADVOCATE-WHY-STAR-TREK-WORKS-DESPITE-ITSELF/Page1.html](http://chud.com/articles/articles/19369/1/THE-DEVIN039S-ADVOCATE-WHY-STAR-TREK-WORKS-DESPITE-ITSELF/Page1.html) Forgive me if somebody else posted it upthread; I’ve been skimming but I don’t think I saw it. Personally, I got past the biggest plot hole (the instant promotions/assignments of Kirk et al) pretty easily, while watching the film. Kind of a running fanwank: I just assumed that Kirk strongly requested they all be stationed with him on Enterprise. He’d just saved Earth, even if he did just graduate, so Starfleet might have been feeling a bit indebted to him, and I just figured he was able to pull some strings (with Spock backing him). Perhaps at the time, Starfleet figured that they’d just faced down the biggest threat they had ever, or would ever face, so why not give the kid what he wants and send him and his crew out on some podunk five-year exploratory mission in the Galactic Sticks. 😉 This was especially how I got past Scottie being assigned crew chief; Kirk owed him one for not spreading him thin across the galaxy on the trans-warp jump, so I picture him getting on board, becoming captain and then pointing at Scottie and saying “You there! You’re great. You are also chief engineer now. Go put on a uniform and see what you can do.” The fanwank doesn’t particularly hold up on further scrutiny, but it was exactly feasible enough to get me through the movie without feeling like anything was wrong, and that was all it needed to do. (As the CHUD article states: it’s charming enough to hold together.) ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/225 "2009-05-11T22:43:10Z")
The Vulcans never bothered to set up off-world colonies despite having intersteller travel for 2,000+ years? :dubious: Very strange since Enterprise made reference to several of them and it’s the only TV series that remains canon in this alternate timeline. Was it just me or did the computer not sound like Majel? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/226 "2009-05-11T22:53:04Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > Was it just me or did the computer not sound like Majel? 😕 Majel Barrett is credited as a computer voice, but the voice did sometimes sound suspiciously like Sigourney Weaver. ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2009, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/227 "2009-05-11T23:57:42Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > The Vulcans never bothered to set up off-world colonies despite having intersteller travel for 2,000+ years? There were 10,000 Vulcans offplanet…that suggests outposts, if not perhaps a small colony. Still, the Vulcans were not an expansion-minded people. They focussed more on discovery and research. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/228 "2009-05-12T00:24:42Z")
> [@RikWriter](#): > > Still, the Vulcans were not an expansion-minded people. This seven year pon farr thing can’t be good for making extra folks to become colonists. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/229 "2009-05-12T00:31:48Z")
> [@RikWriter](#): > > There were 10,000 Vulcans offplanet…that suggests outposts, if not perhaps a small colony. Still, the Vulcans were not an expansion-minded people. They focussed more on discovery and research. No, it’s just another departure from previous continuity–this time, Enterprise rather than the ‘60s series. Bakula’s show made it clear that their were many Vulcan colonies; we saw a few. The Vulcans’ war with the Andorians only makes sense if there are Vulcan settlements other than those on Vulcan, Romulus, and Remus. I’d probably still hate the movie, as most of my contempt springs from the despicable protagonist, but I wish they had simply gone the Battlestar Galactica–i.e., entirely ignoring the original series in terms of the internal continuity. In fact, I could like it if they’d gone further. Why not, for instance, have Spock take over for Pike as we see, and have Kirk be an officer under his command–not necessarily even the first officer? You could have a comment made that they don’t allow COs & XOs to go on away missions; Kirk is the second officer and chief of security, whose job requires that he generally lead away missions, and he’s chomping at the bit? Or Pike could remain in place, and Kirk & Spock are first and second officer respectively (and closer in age). At the end of the movie Kirk is thinking he’s going to get his own command, only to be told by Pike, “Kid, you’re 22 years old. You’re utterly brilliant in terms of tactics, but you don’t know jack about strategy, diplomacy, or administration; you have a ton to learn.” But instead they went out of their way to recreate the hieracrchy from the original series, just making Kirk, Spock & Uhura 10 years younger, and Chekov & Sulu 5 years younger. ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/230 "2009-05-12T00:46:44Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > No, it’s just another departure from previous continuity :rolleyes: Yeah, yeah, whatever. Dude, we get it…you hate the fucking movie. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/231 "2009-05-12T01:01:45Z")
> [@RikWriter](#): > > :rolleyes: > > Yeah, yeah, whatever. Dude, we get it…you hate the fucking movie. Honestly, Rik, I did not intend the statement you quoted to be hateful, or even a criticism of the movie. I should have been clearer; I was defending continuity changes as valid artistic choices. I don’t mind departures from previous continuity. They’re perfectly valid artistic choices for a reboot, particularly given the greater budget available now. If I’ve not said so already, I think destroying Vulcan is actualy a good idea, as it forces them to take the story in an entirely new way and deliberately makes certain episodes impossible to do again. “Amok Time” won’t be happening here; neither will “Journey To Babel.” The seat belts on the shuttle craft are also a continuity change, and an improvement. I liked the slightly grungy look of the exterior of the shuttlecraft, and the abandonment of the magic disintegrating phaser pistols, and I loved the interaction between Zoe Saldana and the young man who played Spock; I thought they had genuine chemistry, especially the scene in the turbolift. That was good movie-making; it was a genuine surprise that nonetheless made perfect sense in light of what had already been seen on screen and made the viewer realize, “Oh, that earlier scene that I thought I understood was about something else entirely.” ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/232 "2009-05-12T01:16:40Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > deliberately makes certain episodes impossible to do again. “Amok Time” won’t be happening here; neither will “Journey To Babel.” Every cloud… Rikwriter: Is one of the authors your cousin or something? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/233 "2009-05-12T01:45:16Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > …But instead they went out of their way to recreate the hieracrchy from the original series, just making Kirk, Spock & Uhura 10 years younger, and Chekov & Sulu 5 years younger. To be fair Roddenberry kinda did something similar in the films. Except for Sulu who eventually got his own ship they were all doing the same jobs they did in TOS despite multiple promotions. Hell by the last film the Enterprise had _3_ captains (Captain Kirk, Captain Spock, & Captain Scott). ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/234 "2009-05-12T02:50:01Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > Hell by the last film the Enterprise had _3_ captains (Captain Kirk, Captain Spock, & Captain Scott). And if the DC Star Trek comics are to be believed, a Captain McCoy as well. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/235 "2009-05-12T02:51:29Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Majel Barrett is credited as a computer voice, but the voice did sometimes sound suspiciously like Sigourney Weaver. I think that Sigourney was just repeating whatever the computer said. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/236 "2009-05-12T03:11:37Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Majel Barrett is credited as a computer voice, but the voice did sometimes sound suspiciously like Sigourney Weaver. I din’t notice, dammit. From the wikipedia article: Less than 10 days before her death, on December 9, 2008, Roddenberry Productions announced that she would be providing the voice of the ship’s computer once again, this time for the 2009 motion picture relaunch of Star Trek. Sean Rossall, a Roddenberry family spokesman, stated that she had already completed the voiceover work, approximately December 4, 2008. ---
**Author:** ![QuanSu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/c37758/32.png) [@QuanSu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuanSu)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/237 "2009-05-12T04:02:47Z")
Just come in to add that in addition to all the points above, I especially hated the sound effect for Spock’s ship: right out of Star War. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/238 "2009-05-12T04:07:20Z")
Well, I enjoyed it immensely. I’m not a huge Star Trek geek, but I am indeed a geek, and I thought it was charmingly in the spirit of the original. The performances were true to the characters without devolving into self-parody. Of _course_ the plot was dumb - what, Starfleet has no reserves? Can you imagine the war that would require all the service academies to send their cadets off to the trenches within the hour? Sorry, not just _send them off to the trenches_ but _send them off to be running the trenches with minimal supervision_? That’s the nature of the beast. Frankly, I have watched enough Star Trek to be inured to a certain amount of handwaving and Idiot Setup. We thought it was a hoot, and it made us want to watch TOS anew - don’t tell me that isn’t the show the people who worked on it would have made, given worlds enough and time? ---
**Author:** ![Surbey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@Surbey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Surbey)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/239 "2009-05-12T04:12:03Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > So Kirk and Sulu were skydiving along with a nearly anonymous chief engineer known only as “Olson.” Oh, and Olson is wearing a red outfit. > > Is there anyone who did NOT see what was coming? As soon as they suited up and said his name was Olson, all of my friends turned toward each other and laughed “RED SHIRT!” It was great watching him die, made me very happy. I loved this film. Loved it alot. I was a fan of TOS and ST:TNG but more casual than anything. My dad and I would watch them and laugh at how cheesy they were. All of my friends are included in this camp and we loved it. Sure there were plot holes, sure there were technical impossibilities, sure alot of stuff didn’t make sense but it didn’t matter to me. I thought the acting was fine (LOVED Bones), I understood the motivation for the characters even if it was obvious or superficial at points, the action sequences were great (even though you shouldn’t have action sequences in a Star Trek movie!) and I tolerated the fact that Nero was an idiot. It was a good movie that I will certainly purchase. I hope we can all agree that it was better than Wolverine… ---
**Author:** ![teemingONE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b4bc9f/32.png) [@teemingONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/teemingONE)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2009, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640/240 "2009-05-12T05:07:33Z")
As a long time Star Trek fan I must say that the force is really with this movie! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-the-i-saw-it-thread-spoilers/495640.md?page=13)