12 thoughts on “J. J. Abrams’ Kobayashi Maru”

  1. Why do I need to see it? Seems like it’s not Star Trek, but Anti-Trek. It may be an entertaining blockbuster, but the point of Trek wasn’t blockbusters. Not saying I don’t like kabooms and big effects and hot wimminz, cause I do… and I appreciate the actors doing the best they can to create young versions of the characters we all cherish.

    My big complaint is with the writer/director – why did a reboot need to happen? There are plenty of stories that could have been told without a reboot. A time travel plot? Really? Hasn’t that been done in Trek ENOUGH? And… “red matter”? I’m just repeating what I have seen on the ‘net, but the reboot really really bothers me.

    At this time, I’m boycotting the movie. And I can be angry, cause I know I can be angry. I have reasons, and they’re mine. 🙂 I also reserve the right to change my opinion though. My inner child may be angry, but it’s also not crazy stubborn. 😉

    Reply

  2. This movie was awesome! I particularly like the Kobayashi Maru simulation. Long time trek fans will notice the significance of Kirk biting the apple as well.

    Whoever wants to boycott the movie is free to do so. I am free to say that Abrams has done what has not been done since the Wrath of Khan or possibly even TOS: make Star Trek appeal to more than just a group of diehards.

    Reply

  3. Glad to get your perspective, Shawn. Based solely on the trailers shown on TV I would not watch this movie, because they make it look like it will be all fist fights and explosions.

    Strange, years ago I looked forward to the day when special effects would be able to make a scifi movie look “real.” Now that it can be done I don’t find it all that compelling. I would rather see a good story, and much prefer, say, a William Powell comedy from the 1930’s to a bunch of computer-generated exploding planets. We watch a ST-TOS episode every week on a local TV channel and don’t mind the now crude looking sets at all!

    And speaking of “hot wimminz,” I have two words: Myrna Loy (as in the 1930’s William Powell movies). (And that’s without a miniskirt and “kicky” boots.)

    😉

    Reply

  5. Bill: sincerely meaning no disrespect, but unless you were one of the few who liked Nemesis and Enterprise, the reasons for a reboot were pretty self-evident. I’m not an Abrams partsian–I’ve never watched a full episode of Lost and I hated Alias, tho’ I loved Cloverfield–but I have to give him credit: he’s somehow managed to capture the original show’s aesthetic with a nifty kind of neo-retro thing. It isn’t the aesthetic of TNG or even Voyager–more like the original ’67 Enterprise mated with a 1st-gen iMac and kinda dug it. Meanwhile, the type-II phasers look like type-II phasers and the communicators look like communicators, and all sorts of things just feel right.

    Now, it isn’t Trek in science-fiction mode. The “red matter” is nonsense and there’s all sorts of stuff that doesn’t work. If you’re one of the fans who thought Trek-science was alright, you’re likely to be disappointed. If you’re someone like me who thought “Balance Of Terror” was a cracking good episode even with that whole silly business of Spock making a racket that the Romulans can detect on the other side of an interstellar void, there’s a good chance you’ll love the new movie. Personally, I thought various Trek writers were all that good at coming up with good science and good drama (TMP is probably the most scientifically rigorous entry in the entire franchise, movie and TV–as one would expect from a movie that featured Asimov amongst its technical consultants–and it’s a godawful dreary pastel bore).

    It’s not a perfect movie. There are some plot holes and some character arcs that might have been filled in, and a few things that are just silly. But it’s a lot of fun and it manages a neat trick of being original and faithful to TOS at the same time. The consensus in the group I went with was that in Trek-movie terms, it fell in quite nicely behind Wrath Of Khan and The Undiscovered Country in a best-of list (The Voyage Home is fun and easily in a top five, but honestly, it’s just not that good a movie; sorry, someone has to say it).

    I hope you’ll give it a chance, but obviously it’s your decision to make.

    Reply

  6. Correction:

    I never thought Trek writers were all that good at coming up with good science and good drama….

    That may or may not have been obvious from the context, but I still typed the exact opposite of what I meant. Sorry!

    Reply

Leave a Comment