I didn’t say movies should be trite and cloned, I just think reboots are necessary in long running series (like batman) so that a brand new audience can feel part of the origin of a series. When I see Star Trek movies on TV or the show, I just change the channel because I feel like I’m not allowed into that universe, like I missed the boat. I just think this series needs a major face lift and that may include breaking cannon for the sake of a great movie.

Abrams is extremely overrated. 1 pointless television series, one creature feature (stilted by a studio’s desire to make up for Godzilla tanking six years ago) and a bad Tom Cruise vehicle. How the hell has he proved himself to you? You’ve only been allowed to be up after 11 for a few years now.

But yes, the little things do eventually add up… CaseIn Point Spider-Man 3.

Anyway, We’re not talking about Star Trek on televison. This is about a Star Trek FILM.

@ Greg:

Okay, so things need to be made even more trite and cloned before you feel comfortable enjoying them? What you think its good when movies slash and hack themselves to pieces to pull in the widest audience possible? Rhetorical question. sure you don’t but why go to the movies for a new experience right? if you want one of those you’ll

This movie is going to blow goat balls. and its not because Star Trek doesn’t have anything to offer. The movies ALWAYS contained compelling grounds for the usual sci-fi motifs… my argument is this..

If a work has its basis in satisfying our desire for the pursuit of the unknown why repackage, reinvent, recapitulate, re-hash RE-RE ANYTHING?

Shouldn’t the series go where no man has gone befor-blahblahblah money money money, buy what Hollywood sells you and be f*cking happy because Paramount really needs the money right now.

trekkies should be freakin ecstatic that a talent like jj abrams is onboard instead of bitchin about their precious canon: nobody gives a $#!+. as most nerds have learned by now, organic webshooters, a tall wolverine, a weird lookin batmobile and flames on optimus prime are not the end of the world…the filmmaker’s think this stuff thru and if they have a modicum of talent they produce a great motion picture as a a result

How about the epic flaw of having the USS Enterprise already painted on the saucer section as its being built!?!?!

Its a slap in the face to the Star Trek Community and I for one will be boycotting this film. I’m still trying to work Jesus and the abortion issue into my protest, so any more plot tips would be appreciated so we can have the signs painted and ready for opening day. Thank you for all your help Peter.

I think respecting canon isn’t as important as bring Star Trek to general populace. Personally, I don’t care about the history of Star Trek or anything thats happened up until now and I think this is how most people outside the fanbase feel. What would be the point of a new movie if it didn’t reinvent anything, if it didn’t change the game plan? And Hollywood is a buisness, not a charity to appease a very small group who wish to see no changes made. This movie should be accessible to the masses.

He is not reinventing Star Trek. If that were the case he would have chosen to take the series into uncharted territory… IE.. The actual FUTURE (events happening after Next Generation) instead of this prequel bullshit. So, No. He can’t do “whatever he wants”. What makes Star Trek different from Joe-schmo Batman, Superman and Pyramid of Mars-candy is that you can’t just shake the etch-a-sketch and ignore everything, all the work, that has been done before, mostly. There is a canon of craft to this fictional universe that deserves his respect. Especially if he’s going to tinker with the very characters that launched our interest in the first place…

I think YOU need to refresh YOUR sense of perspective. Why whore out the Trek?

I’m glad they corrected the flaw of the Enterprise being constructed on Earth. I can understand some parts ebing assembled on Earth and being shipped into Space, but not the entire ship.