Slap in the face.

[mickj]

The more and more I think about Star Trek, the more and more I get irritated by the sheer madness of it all. Spoilers ahead, you have been warned.

First off, so I don't sound like I absolutely hated the movie, let's get some positives out of the way:

• The casting was incredibly well done. Everyone nailed their part spot on.
• Action sequences fun to watch.
• As a whole it was a good movie.
• Soundtrack was pretty good.
• Acknowledging Christopher Pike
• No mention of Jonathan Archer (at least I don't recall any)
• Various neat little references to previous Star Trek movies and the original series (My favorite was the nod to Undiscovered country with the "A Lie?" conversation between the Spocks

Ok that's out of the way, now for the airing of the grievances:

• No Klingons
• When did the Grand Canyon move to Iowa?
• Does every bad guy have to have a sinister looking black spider like ship? It could have looked at least a little Romlan.
• While the soundtrack was good, it sounded like I was hearing the same song throughout the entire movie.
• Time travel? Again? Seriously? And then using that as an excuse to throw away centuries worth of beloved lore. And not only that to have it explicity spelled out to us in the movie itself by Spock. And on top of it all, not only do they deduce very quickly that Nero is from the future, they immediately accept it.
• Even for a time travel plot, what happened bordered on utter bat-shit insanity. There are 2 Spocks! Both aware of each others existence. Yeah.
• Nero was fucking lame for a villian. He really provided no purpose than to purpose other than to provide the excuse to "reboot" the series. Even "God" from Star Trek V made a better main villain.
• The one thing that did bother me about new Spock is that the whole "omg he's human he can't control his emotions". Nimoy's Spock showed emotion, but never to the point of acting like a maniac. Perhaps it's not a big deal, but this kind of bothers me.
• Does every major player (Spock, Kirk, Nero) in the movie have to have their life scarred by some sort of horrible personal tragedy?
• Some TOS cliches felt a little forced and awkward (McCoy's "I'm a doctor" lines are a prime example)
• I'm beginning to think only Walter Koening can pull off the Nuclear Wessels joke. Not to mention it was really irritating to see it drawn off to Family Guy levels by having Yelchin saying "Wulcan" for almost a full minute.

Now on to the "reboot", and my issues with it. I understand that they wanted a different direction for this and future Star Trek films. I understand that they didn't want to be heavily be bound to the restrictions of following the original lore 100%. But did they have to do in such a lame and retarded way, and in such a way that totally invalidated the events of every single movie that came before it. Spock and Uhura having a romance, that is something that is reasonably acceptable. Vulcan being destroyed and Spock's mom dead (she's in Star Trek 3 and 4, and they travel to Vulcan several times through the movies and TNG) is definitely not. And then not to mention that there are 2 Spocks in this new timeline they created. What kind of clusterfuck is that? And speaking of alternate timelines, if they continue down this road and make more movies based on this timeline (and it appears that they want to head down this road), that means people are going to get really fucking confused. It's just really maddening to see all the previous Star Trek movies to essentially being thrown in the garbage. And can you really come up with a lamer way to rationalize the "reboot". Bah.

Well enough of that. What's done is done. But I don't have to like it.