Ten Reasons Why Star Trek XI ain't Trek

3 min read

Deviation Actions

archangel72367's avatar
Published:
307 Views
I know I will probably get flamed for this, but its only words...right?  Here are the ten reasons I believe that Star Trek XI, although it is a good movie, it is not good Star Trek.  

1) I dont care how good an officer is, ain't NO cadet in any military, (or pseudo military) that would make captain in less than a week.  Even in TNG "Conspiracy" 28 was pushing it a bit.  Even if one were given a field promotion to captian there would be a reduction in rank after whatever crises precipitated it.

2) Any Trek geek knows that the Enterprise was built in the Starfleet Shipyards in San Francisco.  Even if it was pre-fabbed in Iowa, (strange coincidence that is where Kirk lives Hmmmmm...) It would not be completely built there.  Just doesn't make any sense.  Never mind the difficulty of launching that big of a ship from planetside.

3)  Does the alterations in the timeline include the abolition of every Vulcans "7 year itch."  The eradication of Ponn Farr.  Or has Spocks decision to follow a human path include setting his ancient biological needs aside.  While I agree that the bent timeline is clever, one can only bend it so far before it breaks.

4)  Whats up with the sound effects for the phasers?  Listen really closely next time you view the film.  The phasers sound like a toy (which is really clever marketing for when the toys come out.  How realistic they will sound, eh?

5)  Away teams didn't exist until TNG era.  Oh wait, altered timeline again...drats.

6)  The technology, while looking cool, is utterly useless.  Just what the hell was in those tanks when Uhura was monitering comm systems?  Also if you're going to be flying around in a tin can in the vacuum of space, the last thing you are going to want is sharp protruding handrails.  (Although I will admit that having a window with a holographic view projected onto it for the main viewer is pretty snazzy)

7)  Are there any more good storylines out there that DON'T include time travel.  ST IV, ST VII, ST VIII, AND ST XI.  ENOUGH ALREADY.  With all of this time travel Kirk and crew were probably responsible for the Big Bang and Ragnerok and Armageddon.

8)  How could one nova destroy an entire galaxy?  Or is Old Spock now really old and losing his verbal control just a bit.

9) Computers in the altered 23rd century can't decipher a Russian accent?

10)  Ten I'm going to leave blank.  I know that there was something that you felt just wasn't right about this film.  (Even if you liked it,  which i did.) what was it (or are they)?  I just thought it was pretty weak Star Trek.
© 2009 - 2024 archangel72367
Comments15
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
celticarchie's avatar
Okay, my 10 gripes about ST 2009 are mainly technical and I could go on for an entire book, which someday I may have to do. So I'm just answering/adding to your gripes here.

1) To be fair everyone was becoming captain in that movie. Right from the start it was you're the captain Mr. Kirk. Now you're the captain Mr. Spock. Now you're the captain Mr. Janitor! Basically the writer just didn't understand the difference between being a "captain" as in the rank, and being placed in "command" of something (i.e. Ship) while the actual captain is indisposed. They also seemed confused by the tradition that when someone is place in command, they are referred by the title "captain" regardless of their rank, it still doesn't make them a captain.

2) Anyone who thinks that a ship the shape and structure of the Enterprise can be built on a planets surface in full Earth gravity, is quite frankly, beyond stupid! Just try building some of the old model kits and you'll see keeping those nacelle perky and level is no mean feat.

3) I don't know what to say...the whole thing was BS from the start.

4) I was having a seizure so I could pay much attention to the sound effects. (So glad it wasn't in 3D!)

5) Away teams, landing parties, boarding teams...who gives a frak! I've just been introduced to the same character three times (which I'm already supposed to know because he's a frekking archetype!!!) That was the beauty of the original series (hell, all the Trek series) is that because of the archetypal nature of the character you didn't need twenty minutes of pointless introduction.

6) Technology!!!! Transporters that can pluck you from out of the sky when your travelling at X metres per second toward the ground, but have trouble to do the same when your foot slips out from beneath you after...(get this)...after the transporter beam has started to dematerialise you...hmmmm?
A ship from the future that can first of all survive a trip through a blackhole...oookay, maybe Paramount shouldn't have invested in Dick & Jane in Space as a guidebook for the writers. Not only is this ship capable of destoying at least two fleets of starships, both off-screen, one in the future and one in the "alternate" past that we see the result of. And yet it has trouble fighting a piddling little scoutship from something like 150 years in the past, it's also supposed to be captured by Klingons who have no intrest in reverse engineering it whatsoever, but instead conveniently park it so that 20 years down the line the crew can board it as use it on an intergalatic killing spree.
We also have the all new schizophrenic Enterprise that has an ipod bridge and a brewery for an engine room...and the Kelvin which had walls made of concrete block construction...come on, we're supposed to believe we are in space...

7) Hey! It's Time Trek...what did you think you were watching?

8) Red matter...ketchup.......You can just see the headlines now. Director JJ Abrams and his writing staff savaged by a feral Trekkie. Judge clears feral Trekkie of all charges after reviewing the evidence and having an epileptic fit...neat trick as the judge was not prone to epilepsy.

9) Stereotypical and comical Russian accent!

10) I miss Star Trek Enterprise and Wesley Crusher, and I forgive George Lucas for Jar Jar Binks. :banned: