Star Trek Into Darkness, in theaters May 17, 2013

[Penguin]

troy and Riker were playing out a holodeck simulation depicting trips death and the last mission of the Enterprise NX-1 not that they traveled back in time.

Yes, I know. I never said they time travelled anywhere. The line of reasoning is that if the events of Star Trek: First Contact created a divergent timeline, and the series Enterprise occurs in that divergence (which must be the case as that crew encounters the Borg remains from ST:FC), then the Troi and Riker that we see using that holodeck program are likely from the future of the Enterprise timeline, and not of the original timeline that we saw in TNG. Ergo, they are not the same people.

Edited February 29, 2012 by Penguin

[Max Jenius]

I hope this one has more weight than the original had. I do love the warp effect JJ used. I like the ships taking off like a shot!

[Keith]

If you're going to play the divergent reality game, then ST is in it's 100th divegent reality by now with all the crazy time travel exploits. Besides which, you know damn well there's only one divergent reality in ST, and in it everybody has goatee's!

Why would one sihp traveling back in time result in uniform/starship design changes? Who knows, maybe a major player involved in the constitution class design was aboard the Kelvin. More likely, the Klingon's went super agro when Nero attacked them, resulting in more hostile encounters with everybody. And as you know from watching ST:TNG, timelines where starfleet fights more results in uniform changes (Yesturday's Enterprise). More Klingon encounters would result in a need for more firepower & a different allocation of resources. Re-arming the existing fleet of ships would be a higher priority (putting off the design of the Constitution class), and a later design would result in a different design (which is where you have the new movie Consittution class).

There ya go, nice & simply explained.

who cares about her face man when she is bent over a barrel, shes hot from the neck down

Because eventually it still results in the realization that you just slept with female Don Knotts.

[pfunk]

Because eventually it still results in the realization that you just slept with female Don Knotts.

I can live with that,, if Don Knotts had a body like that

On a side note, I think the ship design is pretty good and the lines are classic

[the white drew carey]

I don't know, the bulk of the fleet did have its ass handed to it in the last one.

Not true. The ship's that got their asses handed to them were the one's stationed at Earth who could sortie to Vulcan in time. They even comment how a majority of the fleet is on patrol and can't get to Vulcan in time.

[Keith]

Not true. The ship's that got their asses handed to them were the one's stationed at Earth who could sortie to Vulcan in time. They even comment how a majority of the fleet is on patrol and can't get to Vulcan in time.

Yeah, but those were all the shiny new ships. The ones out on patrol were the older already commissioned ships.

[Einherjar]

Starfleet and the United Federation of Planets is hopfully pretty big still to make up the losses.

I can live with that,, if Don Knotts had a body like that

One word - shapeshifter

[Dynaman]

Yeah, but those were all the shiny new ships. The ones out on patrol were the older already commissioned ships.

All 12 of them (or so?) Starfleet should have hundreds of vessels out there. Then again this has always been a problem with ST, Earth is always left undefended (apparently Vulcan too). The only movie to get this right was ST V, at least there they didn't say the Enterprise was the only ship available - they needed Kirk. (other then that, ST V was a total disaster of course - Anyone remember the ad for it that said "they need to put seatbelts in the theater for ST V" which my friend turned into "they need to put balls and chains in the theater for ST V")

[Keith]

I never got the impression in the original ST, or movies that Starflight was a "hundreds of ships" kind of operation personally.

[Dynaman]

I never got the impression in the original ST, or movies that Starflight was a "hundreds of ships" kind of operation personally.

Bad writing - it is impossible to hold of the Klingons and the Romulans with less then that. Who thinks the Klingons would have less then hundreds?

[Keith]

Bad writing - it is impossible to hold of the Klingons and the Romulans with less then that. Who thinks the Klingons would have less then hundreds?

I still don't see where you're getting "hundreds" from. Considering the Klingons & the Romulaans were just as hostile with each other, in addition to the many other alien races out there, it's not like there was much risk of them attacking at the same time. I can easily see all parties having a 40-50 ships each, raising the importance for alliances & treaties.

[Penguin]

All that we know for certain in the original series era is that there were about 12 Constitution-class heavy cruisers. Beyond that, nothing's ever been canonically published about any other classes or the size of Star Fleet.

[miles316]

Given that the United states has at times managed to maintain a navy of up to six hundred ship a single planet maintaining a fleet of a hundred ships is not a monumental achievement with man power. The federation at the time of the original series was several dozen member planet assuming half of them as advanced as earth or Vulcan than maintaining a fleet of up to a thousand ships would not break the combined economy of the federation.

Though a large fleet was made entirely of Rebut-Constitution class ships that might stress the economy of the federation, but since a fleet is not made entirely of carriers but a mixture of cruisers, destroyers, frigates and few carriers the eleven, or so constitution class starships during the original series might have made up the bulk of the federation expeditionary force meant to defend the lesser members of the federation who might not have the ability to deploy a large fleet like earth of Vulcan might be able to or they police the federations boarders.

On DS9 betazed was conquered by the dominion so its not out of the possibilities of random convergence that the movement or the bulk of the starfleet might have been on the other side of the federation dealing a emergency. Nemo might have had information on federation events going back decades detailing catastrophes that might have required the use of the bulk of the federations larges starships.

events that might not have been altered by the changes in the time line allowing him to carry out his assault with a high chance of success.

[David Hingtgen]

The registry numbers of TNG and later were clearly considered and assigned to give a "sense" of the size of the fleet. I don't remember who/what actually said this, but it's not coincidence there's a pattern/grouping of the numbers.

Yes, there's a few big gaps and jumps, but I think these were generally acknowledged as mistakes and it'd be too hard to try to retcon screen-seen reg numbers etc.

The sheer size of the fleets seen on-screen in the Dominion War implies hundreds of ships at the front lines, as we can see dozens at a time from a single task force involved in a single moment of battle. Presumably hundreds more out in deep space exploring the frontier/peacekeeping.

[Ghost Train]

The good old "how big is Starfleet" debate ...

Like David said, it's not really until the Dominion War's epic fleet battles that we have come close to answering that question at least for the 24th century. I am inclined to say that by that time the fleet could have very well been in the thousands.

However during Wolf 359, when a fleet of 40 Federation ships gets owned by a single Borg Cube, you get the impression that it was a BIG loss and if I recall it would take Starfleet about a year to recover, suggesting that from the writer's perspective, Starfleet was probably much smaller with numbers in the hundreds rather than in the thousands. This of course, is a rather cold view of analyzing it, as the loss of so many crew and officers, and 40 good ships is a devastating loss regardless of the fleet's total size.

But TOS era fleet... I get the impression that it was small, the Federation itself was also smaller at that time so less real estate to defend.

[Chewie]

Isn't it mentioned somewhere that until Wolf 359 the Federation wasn't super worried about having a large "militarized" force?

I could be wrong, but even without it being said, it's a pretty plausible reason for them to start pumping out ships at a much larger rate.

All of that said, you have to realize that Nero's ship was the most advanced ship in the galaxy in the 24th century. He laid would have laid waste to any number of ships set upon him in the 23rd.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Chewie

[Dynaman]

Isn't it mentioned somewhere that until Wolf 359 the Federation wasn't super worried about having a large "militarized" force?

More mumbo jumbo from the ST franchise though, it is also clearly noted that StarFleet is the most powerful fleet in known space. It can't get that way with only 12 Constitution class ships. I take the FASA view of starfleet myself - they said there were initially 12 Constitution class ships and then roughly 50 were built in total. It is not Cannon, but it makes a heck of a lot more sense then the cannon does (especially since quite a few of the Constitution class ships get whacked on screen)

[Graham]

Didn't really like the 2009 movie. Thought that it was a bit silly that a Romulan mining vessel could so easily destroy Federation Warships, even if it was from 129 years in the future, it was still just a frackin' mining vessel.

Graham

[Kelsain]

But it was a big, scary, pointy mining vessel! I thought I read somewhere that they stole some Borg weapons before traveling through time. I'm sure someone else knows more about that...

(null)

[Ghost Train]

Didn't really like the 2009 movie. Thought that it was a bit silly that a Romulan mining vessel could so easily destroy Federation Warships, even if it was from 129 years in the future, it was still just a frackin' mining vessel.

Graham

According to the prequel comics (canonicity not established), the Narada was outfitted with Borg technology after the Hobus star went nova.

[Keith]

The whole point of it being a mining ship was so that it could plausably be abused to destroy planets. The benefit of it bieng from 129 years in the future is that it has later era shields, phasers, torpedo's, etc. That in itself makes it plausable, at least as plausable as time traveling stories go.

[Chewie]

According to Memory Alpha there was a bunch of information on the bluray about those upgrades. One of the writers says that the reason the technology of the Federation is better is because of reversed engineered scans of the Narada taken from the Kelvin.

"The scans the Kelvin took of the Narada's 24th century technology (that went with the survivors on the shuttles) were used by 23rd century Starfleet to reverse engineer the more "advanced" technology seen in the alternate timeline, according to a post by Star Trek screenwriter Roberto Orci on Ain't It Cool News. Director J.J. Abrams also said in an interview with MTV that readings from the Narada "inspired ideas and technology that wouldn't have advanced otherwise."

'In the Star Trek prequel comic book miniseries Star Trek: Countdown, the Narada's advanced weaponry and appearance are explained as being the result of the ship being retrofitted with salvaged and reverse-engineered Borg technology. The Tal Shiar in the 24th century had been experimenting with Borg technology, and Nero's ship was the experimental vessel used. The Borg nanoprobes allowed the ship to grow and repair itself, and also take on a much larger and more menacing appearance. This information also appeared on the Blu-ray release of the film in the supplement section "Starships."

Edited March 7, 2012 by Chewie

[Kelsain]

See, told ya someone else would know more!

(null)

[Dynaman]

"The scans the Kelvin took of the Narada's 24th century technology (that went with the survivors on the shuttles) were used by 23rd century Starfleet to reverse engineer the more "advanced" technology seen in the alternate timeline, according to a post by Star Trek screenwriter Roberto Orci on Ain't It Cool News. Director J.J. Abrams also said in an interview with MTV that readings from the Narada "inspired ideas and technology that wouldn't have advanced otherwise."

That makes the fact that ONLY Kirk realizes the threat even more lame. Here the Feds got all that great technology from the ship and NOBODY seems to remember how it appeared...

(I like the movie a lot, but I still have to call it as I see it, and that is just lazy writing)

[Penguin]

According to Memory Alpha there was a bunch of information on the bluray about those upgrades the one of the writers says that the reason the technology of the Federation is better is because of reversed engineered scans of the Narada taken from the Kelvin.

"The scans the Kelvin took of the Narada's 24th century technology (that went with the survivors on the shuttles) were used by 23rd century Starfleet to reverse engineer the more "advanced" technology seen in the alternate timeline, according to a post by Star Trek screenwriter Roberto Orci on Ain't It Cool News. Director J.J. Abrams also said in an interview with MTV that readings from the Narada "inspired ideas and technology that wouldn't have advanced otherwise."

'In the Star Trek prequel comic book miniseries Star Trek: Countdown, the Narada's advanced weaponry and appearance are explained as being the result of the ship being retrofitted with salvaged and reverse-engineered Borg technology. The Tal Shiar in the 24th century had been experimenting with Borg technology, and Nero's ship was the experimental vessel used. The Borg nanoprobes allowed the ship to grow and repair itself, and also take on a much larger and more menacing appearance. This information also appeared on the Blu-ray release of the film in the supplement section "Starships."

Interesting, and it would explain a lot. Guess I'll have to review those special features.

Of course, now it bugs me that the movie itself doesn't mention anything like this. Pike could've had a quick line when talking about the new flagship, maybe to Kirk, to note that it was inspired by the ship that destroyed the Kelvin... how his father's sacrifice also led to Starfleet advancing its technology, yadda, yadda. Suppose that if they did, like Dynaman said, it would call out even more how a single event that changed the course of Starfleet only 20-odd years ago seems to have drifted out of conscious memory. I have to concur with ya... the writing definitely seems lazy in some places. Guess they only expect science fiction fans to think about these things, and of course it would be completely unrealistic to cater to science fiction fans even a little in a Star Trek movie.

Do we need another sub-genre here? If some consider a film like Star Wars to be science fantasy instead of science fiction, is the new Star Trek... I dunno... science action? An action film that just happens to take place in the future, but with less and less attention to the science aspect?

Edited March 6, 2012 by Penguin

[Dynaman]

is the new Star Trek... I dunno... science action? An action film that just happens to take place in the future, but with less and less attention to the science aspect?

It is "Wagon Train to the Stars", in many ways the new movie brings it back to that premise. Nothing wrong with that, but a little consistancy helps even when writing space cowboys.

[anime52k8]

Do we need another sub-genre here? If some consider a film like Star Wars to be science fantasy instead of science fiction, is the new Star Trek... I dunno... science action? An action film that just happens to take place in the future, but with less and less attention to the science aspect?

It's because Made up techno-babel is boring and stupid. It's the cancer that's been killing Star Trek for the last two decades.

[Keith]

To be fair, do you really think information like "we borrowed advanced technology from a mystery ship" would really trickle down from top brass? They probably figured the Kelvin took out out (since it disappeared), or someone else got a hold of it. All the more reason to quietly beef up the fleet.

[renegadeleader1]

Didn't really like the 2009 movie. Thought that it was a bit silly that a Romulan mining vessel could so easily destroy Federation Warships, even if it was from 129 years in the future, it was still just a frackin' mining vessel.

Graham

Don't think 129 years makes a difference? Take one merchant marine convoy ship from WWII that had at the most one five inch gun , and through it up against a Napoleonic era ship of the line. That wooden sail ship has a snowballs chance in hell of sinking the convoy ship with cannon balls that would bounce of the steel hull while the merchies five inch gun sinks it one shot.

[Penguin]

It's because Made up techno-babel is boring and stupid. It's the cancer that's been killing Star Trek for the last two decades.

Little argument there, but techno babble isn't the solution either. As Dynaman wrote, it's more about consistency and thinking about what you've written from more than just the perspective of "excuse for 2 hours of special effects", especially considering a core audience that will ask nagging nerdly questions.

To be fair, do you really think information like "we borrowed advanced technology from a mystery ship" would really trickle down from top brass? They probably figured the Kelvin took out out (since it disappeared), or someone else got a hold of it. All the more reason to quietly beef up the fleet.

A valid point. It comes back again to writers who have created a situation that does not hold up to scrutiny unless you chase down expository information outside the movie itself.

I suppose a response would be "why scrutinize it, it's just a movie", which would be ignoring the nature of science fiction fans (who do consider things like time travel seriously) and basically admitting that Star Trek is no longer science fiction. It's not even wagon train anymore, unless the sequel brings back the exploration aspects a little (which I hope it tries to). Without that, it's just another action movie.

[sketchley]

Do we need another sub-genre here? If some consider a film like Star Wars to be science fantasy instead of science fiction, is the new Star Trek... I dunno... science action? An action film that just happens to take place in the future, but with less and less attention to the science aspect?

I always considered Star Wars sci-fi (basically an action movie that takes place in the future) more than anything else. Though, science fantasy fits the bill.

From what I've heard about the latest ST movie (waiting for it to appear on TV), it's more of the same sci fi... action dreck set in the future.

Now, if the story was on par with say "Gattaca" or "Solaris", I'd be all over it. But, you know what, haven't heard much about the latest ST movie's story other than the few negative comments here. Heck, the last ST movie that had a science fiction bone in it was "Insurrection", and that one pales compared to the concept in "Generations" which pales in comparison to the ones in "The Voyage Home" and "The Undiscovered Country".

[Dynaman]

To be fair, do you really think information like "we borrowed advanced technology from a mystery ship" would really trickle down from top brass?

Yes. Keeping it secret would be impossible while at the same time incorporating the technology in Star Fleet. This is not supposed to be "Men in Black". That said, the idea that Star Fleet used the tech from the future is just handwavium to explain why the Enterprise looks so different. What it really boils down to is JJ wanted it to look different and everything else is window dressing.

[EDIT] I forgot - why keep the nature of the tech hidden while freely letting it known that a big mystery vessel from the future kicked the crud out of the Kelvin (remember that Pike did a thesis on it, that would be something he did as a cadet of junior officer)

Edited March 7, 2012 by Dynaman

[Ghost Train]

Excerpt from Pike's thesis:

"OMG LOL and then AGGROOOO by LV99 FLYING Octopus SHIP from Teh FUTURE LMAO... they like fire this MISSILE THINGY that Gave us EVASION-99 debuff and then WTF he invite the ceptain ROBAO to a private CONVO, and then he drops from VENT... WTF, then he LIKE Starts 2 attack again lol, but KIRK992 goes LEEEEEEEROY and rams teh ship, and we all get loots."

Edited March 7, 2012 by Ghost Train

[anime52k8]

But, you know what, haven't heard much about the latest ST movie's story other than the few negative comments here.

The few negative comments here are only representative of the extreme hardcore nerd demographic. Amoungst Critics and general audiances, the reaction to the newest ST movie has been overwelmingly positive. Fun fact, it has the highest score/aproval rating of any film in the franchise on both Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes.

[Penguin]

The few negative comments here are only representative of the extreme hardcore nerd demographic. Amoungst Critics and general audiances, the reaction to the newest ST movie has been overwelmingly positive. Fun fact, it has the highest score/aproval rating of any film in the franchise on both Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes.

In addition, Avatar and Titanic have overwhelmingly positive reviews and are two of the highest grossing films of all time, despite entirely predictable plots and flocks of 1- and 2-dimensional characters. The North American public has done a terrific job of informing Hollywood that story and character are no where near as important as flashy trailers.

Actually, if you look back through the thread, most people (myself included) have said we enjoyed it. That doesn't mean it's without fault, and it's more entertaining to discuss those than issue a litany of glowing praise.

To Sketchley's question, the new Star Trek film had a fairly straightforward action plot. Fun, but not a lot of surprises there. Many have commented that while it was a fun film, it lacked the sort of story substance that Star Trek aspired to. To me, the real win was the characterizations. I thought the cast reflected the original characters while putting something of their own stamp on them as well. Chris Pine as Kirk was fun. Zachary Quinto was a terrific Spock, and Karl Urban's McCoy was darn near perfect. As for the secondary crew - Sulu, Chekov, Uhura, and Scotty - they were all taken in new directions by the cast, but entirely entertaining. On the technical side, the special effects were well done, although some have commented on excessive use of lens flare. Cinematography, sound design, art direction, all top notch.