[karajorma]

I wouldn't disagree with that. The movie did have massive plot holes. The comic closes those. My statement was aimed at Trashman's assertions that it didn't close them even though he hasn't actually read the comic.

A more reasonable comment would simply be to have said what you did. That you don't care if the comic solves the problems, the movie should have be able to stand alone.

[Snail]

I think everybody knew this would happen. The hardcore fans would be all upset while the people who were actually there to watch the movie wouldn't mind these background things.

[TrashMan]

I wouldn't disagree with that. The movie did have massive plot holes. The comic closes those. My statement was aimed at Trashman's assertions that it didn't close them even though he hasn't actually read the comic.

And who told you that? Please, save your baseless accusations for yourself.
I had it a few weeks ago, skimmed trough it and it was crap. It just opens more plot holes.

I think everybody knew this would happen. The hardcore fans would be all upset while the people who were actually there to watch the movie wouldn't mind these background things.

LOL. You're calling me a harcore trekkie fan?

But people in the movie and the comic don't behave any more moronically than in any other part of Star Trek. That's not where the problems lie.

Alas, they do behave more moronic. A lot more moronic. romulans and vulcans and starfleet alike.

[Snail]

[karajorma]

I wouldn't disagree with that. The movie did have massive plot holes. The comic closes those. My statement was aimed at Trashman's assertions that it didn't close them even though he hasn't actually read the comic.

And who told you that? Please, save your baseless accusations for yourself.
I had it a few weeks ago, skimmed trough it and it was crap. It just opens more plot holes.

Congratulations on proving me wrong on the whole didn't read it thing.

You complain about plot holes and are proved wrong about all of them. You might not like the explanation but they are consistent with the universe. Lazy, crappy explanations, yes. But that doesn't make them a plot hole in the comic and movie taken as a whole, no matter how often you assert that it is.

[General Battuta]

Trashman, if you're just going to selectively ignore the points you're proven wrong on while responding to the open points with the conversational equivalent of 'NO U', like so:

But people in the movie and the comic don't behave any more moronically than in any other part of Star Trek. That's not where the problems lie.

Alas, they do behave more moronic. A lot more moronic.

Then you're not really worth having a conversation with.

Especially when you're acting this way towards people who are repeatedly agreeing with you.

[TrashMan]

Congratulations on proving me wrong on the whole didn't read it thing.

You complain about plot holes and are proved wrong about all of them. You might not like the explanation but they are consistent with the universe. Lazy, crappy explanations, yes. But that doesn't make them a plot hole in the comic and movie taken as a whole, no matter how often you assert that it is.

I'm not proven wrong on anything yet.

Any explanation that just raises more question is not good. If you "close" one plot hole, but create another in the process, you're not doing it right. That's my point. The comic brings as much new problems as it "solves". But granted, this thread is about the movie, not the comic.

Especially when you're acting this way towards people who are repeatedly agreeing with you.

But we didn't agree on the "acting moronic" part.
B.t.w - acting what way?

[General Battuta]

You're being judgmental, argumentative, and stubborn about a comic you've NEVER EVEN READ.

Which makes you look like a nutcase.

[Mefustae]

What's with railing on Trashman all of a sudden?

You're being judgmental, argumentative, and stubborn about a comic you've NEVER EVEN READ.

Which makes you look like a nutcase.

Did you even read what he posted?

And who told you that? Please, save your baseless accusations for yourself.
I had it a few weeks ago, skimmed trough it and it was crap. It just opens more plot holes.

 Anyway, I bet 90% of the people here haven't read the comic, and we're all commenting on it. There's a nice summary on the wiki, so what's the problem? For crying out loud, it's an argument on an internet forum, how can we not be judgmental, argumentative and stubborn?

And Kara, a lot of the plot holes in the movie are left wide open when you take the comic into consideration. Yes, to a degree they are lightly patched by the information in the comic, but it's like trying to patch up a gunshot wound by staring it down.

[karajorma]

Did you even read what he posted?

He said he'd skimmed it rather than reading it. The fact that he hadn't read it is obvious from the fact that he asks questions about its content earlier on in this thread.

And Kara, a lot of the plot holes in the movie are left wide open when you take the comic into consideration.

And I've not said there aren't.

Trashman is trying to claim that many of the plot holes he pointed out in the movie are STILL plot holes once the comic takes them into account. And that's simply not true. The comic does plug many of them.

For instance the supernova that threatens the universe is a plot hole in the movie. The comic says that the reason is due to the star swallowing up a large quantity of decalithium. It's not a hole any more. It's still rather lazy writing and it was practically unforgivable to leave it as it was in the movie but it's not a plot hole once you take the comic into account. We know that trilithium can destroy stars so there's no in-universe reason to believe that decalithium isn't even more dangerous.

There are plot holes that can't be solved that way (Spock being in exactly the right place to meet Kirk for instance) but to claim that comic is creating more plot holes is just silly. And even more silly is to do that when you either haven't read it or are so full of crazy that you have and yet can't remember basic plot points in it.

All in all the Star Trek movie has plenty of things you can kick it over. There's no need for people to be inventing new ones that simply aren't true.

[General Battuta]

Exactly. I really didn't like the way the movie was written, and I think it should be criticized harshly. But we should criticize it for the right reasons rather than attacking a strawman.

[karajorma]

For one thing, attacking it over a strawman allows those involved to simply write off the complaints as coming from rabid Trek fans who are simply making stuff up to be angry over.

[TrashMan]

Did you even read what he posted?

To be fair I did skim trough the comic rather quickly, looking for some answers. Got rather irritated and I switched to the MAss Effect novel with several pages left to go. I never fully finished it, but I did read enough.

You're being judgmental, argumentative, and stubborn about a comic you've NEVER EVEN READ.
Which makes you look like a nutcase.

Erm.. I did read it. As for the rest - I'm pretty much doing the same as everyone else.

He said he'd skimmed it rather than reading it. The fact that he hadn't read it is obvious from the fact that he asks questions about its content earlier on in this thread.

I did read it, but most of it vented. It made no sense when it was completley fresh either.
I was also expanding my train of thought into the hypothetical, hence the science station & borg tech thing - I was trying to prove the point that the whole idea was stupid and doesn't work well even if you change some things. But granted, I really couldn't recall when Neros' ship it got the overhaul.
Doesn't really matter in the long run.

[General Battuta]

Yeah, it doesn't matter too much. Let's move on.

[TESLA]

I liked it.
Thought it was very refreshing!
Yes, there were problems, but it was funny, interesting, a white nuckle gem ride of of film.
Face it, could have been a lot worse!!!
Could have ended up like 'The Hulk' (the first one)
Or worse
Superman Returns

[Liberator]

My two cents on the plot-holes:

This plot was no stupider than the various Voyager eps where the whole damn universe comes crashing down cause Harry carried the 3 or the pulsephasicisomaticfooddispensingapocoliptico mk. 29 didn't work right.

The only ridiculous thing is that Paramount let this movie out as cut.

Is it is good movie?  Yes.  Is it a good Star Trek movie?  Not really.

Did it do what it was supposed to?  Yes.  It brought a beloved universe of story telling back into the mainstream after it had fallen to the wayside as something that only existed for "fans".

Nitpicky stuff:
Plot holes aside, The Enterprise grew on me.  I was not a fan of the design initially, but she grew on me.  The casting is near perfect, but they shouldn't have made Scotty the comedic relief.  Paul McGillion would have made a much better Scotty than the ridiculous hack they had doing it.

[Lt.Cannonfodder]

the ridiculous hack they had doing it.

You are calling Simon Pegg a ridiculous hack? 

[Liberator]

Yes, yes I am.  Pegg's performance as Scotty was like saying Cloverfield was filmmaking at it's best.  I'm sure he's a funny man, but Scotty is funny by circumstance, not by cracking one-liners.  He's funny cause he mutters in Gaelic when Kirk asks the impossible and he delivers it.  I have no doubt they cast Pegg after watching the Scotty and the Mac scene from ST4.

[General Battuta]

Pegg really seemed like he was fighting for the screen.

[Angelus]

Now that i've seen the movie i can say that it has more plotholes then the Milkyway stars, but so does every previous Star Trek movie.

The acting was quite nice ( Kirk was Kirk, Spock was Emo-Spock, McCoy was AWSOME McCoy, Scotty was a stand-up comedian pretenting to be Scotty, Chekov was Chekov, Sulu was Sulu... ), the the effects cool ( although i couldn't see much of them because of the camera movements ).

Like in every Star Trek movie the villain was a boring character who has a lot of potential ( except for Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan and maybe the scientist from Generations ), but was sacrificed so that the Enterprise crew gets more screentime.

The story was typical Star Trek stuff, what's different this time is that the universe stays borked ( Vulcan destroyed a.s.o. ). The story was told fast paced, which is ususally good, but due to the plotholes it stumbles like a drunk on a cobbled street.

The camera movement sucks ass...bigtime, a suggestion to the director of the next movie:
if you strap the camera on the back of a monkey that's suffering from a motorical disfunction, then for fraks sake, don't give the monkey speed or other stimulating dope.


All in all one of the better Star Trek movies, i enjoyed it...kinda. 
Maybe, because i'm not a big Star Trekfan although i've seen all movies and quite a few TOS and TNG episodes.