Pine failed on a lot of these, but he was still good as a younger Kirk. Good list.

SPOILERS FOR THE NEW MOVIE

The movie was pretty awesome, although I left the theater thinking they had purposely erased 40 years of Star Trek narrative (well, aside from Enterprise), which was really not cool. It felt like Star Trek had just died, and the only refugee was Old Spock. Some commentators are saying that the couple mentions of "alternate timeline" in the film (which I barely recall being said) make it clear that the new movie timeline is separate from the original and that the original universe is still out there. I certainly hope so, otherwise it's a pretty arrogant move from Abrams. One of the writers, Roberto Orci, said it was meant to be a second timeline, but it could have been a bit more clear in the film. Because now we have another thing for nerds to fight about for years. :-P

#3 cracked me the heck up. Never thouhgt about it that way before. In the Futurama episode "Where No Fan Has Gone Before" I think Kirk covers this whole list, except he has to rip his own shirt. Funny.

6. Trim those caterpillars you call eyebrows

7. Stop giving off that Abercrombie & Fitch shirtless greeter vibe.

He also needs to double karate chop someone on the shoulders. Its Kirk's signature move.

Or maybe he can fashion a cannon or a rudimentary lathe out of something while trapped on an unknown planet's surface.

let the old trek vs. new trek flame wars begin.

you should look at io9. they're already passing out the pissed off banter over nothing. good stuff, good stuff.

Kevin - it's supposed to be an alternate universe... so, no, technically the last 40 years haven't been erased. And my guess is the followup films will probably lead into the normal ST canon anyway with a few minor changes.

I saw the movie as well. It was amazing. I thought it was fast, funny, cool, and well written/directed, which in my mind vindicates the fact that these were the same writers for Transformers and puts the blame squarely on Michael Bay, the way I like it. It wasn't particularly philosophical or cerebral, but I don't much care. This established a baseline, they can explore that concept in later films.

The only thing I thought was weak was Nero's character, although in the prequel comic he's well explained. The film leaves him pretty ambiguous. His ship is fucking HUGE though, and damn nice and scary (got Borg modifications!).

Kevin: Normal people just call it a reboot.

And he does quite a lot of these things too, so fear not. Chris Pine has the smirk, gets into fist fights, sleeps with hot women, and has the cocky bastard way of talking (although he doesn't imitate Shatner per se).

He doesn't quite lose it in the film, although he comes close.

Spoilers or whatever:

Who the fuck said that everything that came before is now gone? The mere existence of Original Spock in the film makes it clear that the previous Trek universe still exists, that it did happen, that it must have happened, it just is DIFFERENT than the new movie.

They clearly point out that they are in an alternate timeline in the movie itself. Is the main Trek universe in-question because there's the Mirror Universe? No, of course not. Also, from Spock's comments to Spock (:-p), the 'rules' of alternate realities or of a potential multiverse are laid bare. No paradoxes, no timelines or stories being wiped out. From what I could tell, it all 'happened' and still exists.

Mind you, this is coming from somebody not really that emotionally invested in Trek at all, just a fan of the film and an avid multiverse lover.

"Reboot" has become the annoying buzzword (and trend, in some cases) of the decade.

Although in Trek's case, they made a smart move by connecting it into the original story. So it is a reboot, but not completely.

actually hate to burst your bubble, but that ain't Uhura he's tappin' a quick hint without making it too much of a spoiler, she, she's green!

SPOILERS

Most previous Star Trek stories that dealt with changing the past have affected the one timeline. Of course, Trek has never been very consistent with its approach to time travel. I think you could say based on what was in the new film that the original timneline is still out there, and Old Spock is just stranded in the new one. But there was something in the film, and I'm not sure what (would have to see it again), that made it alternatively seem like the old timeline was gone (with Old Spock the only one who remembers it) and that this is now uncharted territory. If the film had offered more clarity on the issue, there wouldn't be so many arguments about it on message boards. (Go look at IMDB and you'll see what I mean.) Personally, I'm all for it just being an alternate timeline to the original.

Well, if Orci says it's an alternate timeline, and so does the logical basis of the film, then... tomato, tomahto.

Actually, Uhura did go green.

This debate is going to be even worse that the Original vs Reboot for Battlestar Galactica that was all the rage five years ago...

Just a related thought...

Does the new Trek movie series preclude there being a new TV series? If this movie does well enough, I imagine Paramount might start thinking about it. Because as good as the new movies are, we'll only be getting about two new hours of their adventures every two or three years. If a new TV series is started, would it be set in the new TOS era? Or would Paramount want to avoid stepping on Abrams' toes? I think the *ahem* logical step would be to create a show that follows all the previous Trek series. That way, they can do whatever they want and not affect what's happening in the movies. I'm hoping for a new show set several years after TNG era, so it'd be both a reinvention and continuation like TNG was.

the movie is only the first one so pine can no way have time to do the whole list and talk like shatner is the one thing that will not happend for it would come off as a imatation of shatners voice. besides there is always sequals for that stuff

Kevin, who the hell cares? The original TV episodes, movies, books, comics, and what not didn't all get erased. They didn't use a giant space cannon to destroy every Star Trek media that didn't conform to the new timeline. You can still watch them. They can still set stories in that timeline. They haven't been erased from existence.

This just means that going forward, the new stories will mostly be set in the new timeline. And face it, the old timeline was pretty well covered already.

Making a TV series would be interesting, but... nah. I'd rather they do a miniseries or something.

*NO SPOILERS* I also saw the movie last night and I have to say... I think I need to see it a couple more times to form a definite opinion. I really tried to go into it neutral so I wouldn't have any expectations and could see it as objectively as possible. First impressions, I liked it. Yes, there were a few elements of the storyline that bothered me and that are still bothering me but that is why I am going to see it a few more times. I think they did a good job of capturing the feel of Star Trek... you could tell everyone did their homework and I appreciated that. They threw in a bunch of nods to the fans, again, very appreciative and I think the movie will also appeal to non-fans, not just as an action-sex-blowing shit up type thing but overall, it was a good story. I did hope for more of Nero, I think he could have had more screen time because he was so cool and crazed and his ship was.... OMG insane. I thought the characters were fleshed out very well and for the most part, the actors nailed it.

I think for many Star Trek fans, purists and otherwise, we tend to personalize the universe of Star Trek and the characters. I know I definitely do. So whenever a change is made to canon or to what we all assumed had happened in the past, it can be a shock. So maybe if we can get past that a little or even accept that the timeline, the characters and the story is fluid, then these changes will be easier to take. That is what I am trying to do.

Overall, I think the movie was a success and I think it will drum up interest for more Star Trek in the future and maybe even for the existing incarnations. As a lifeling Trekkie, if you are hesitant about seeing it, I say go for it, I don't think you will be disappointed.

Errr...I promise I wasn't trying to write a review here!

Kris, have to disagree with you there. I think a lot of people would like to see the Trek story after TNG/VOY/DS9 continue. There's a long narrative there that can still be built upon, and could be done well with good writers.

And that would be in addition to the story being told in the new movies. You could set a TV series in the future of the new timeline or even in its present, but that stands to place limits on what the films in the new timeline could do, which I don't think Abrams or Paramount will allow.

Of course, a new TV series could be set further in the future and just leave its past ambiguous.

I think the funny thing here (in terms of what is being said in this thread) is that this "rebooting" (or pick whatever trendy word you want) is no different from what is already expected out of DC and Marvel universes. Old isn't gone, just somewhere else.

If this is "Star Trek: Infinite Crisis", I guess so be it.

Pine came very close to completing this list. He certainly tried to sleep with every woman he saw. He did a great deal of smirking. He got in fights. He sort of lost it. However, he did not mimic the Shatner delivery. He did better than I expected.

They only repeated each other about a dozen times stating, "this is an alternate time line," and, "yes, things are different for us," and, "alternate events." I think they were pretty clear about this not being or canceling our most common Trek time/universe.

This was a decent fun ride. So why was Transformers so god-awful?

I like the new timeline. I'm really not interested in seeing them try to fix all the messes B&B made in the later TV series while trying to move forward, and so this new reality takes care of that by going back BEFORE B&B's worst changes and just starts us out with the Enterprise crew we know and love... Albeit slightly changed.

And Pine *does* do most of that list... He does affect Shatner's speech pattern a VERY little bit, once he takes over as Captain. He draws it out a bit between "Mister..." and the name of the officer. It's slight, but it's there.

The things that I noticed were changed in this timeline, though:

* Orions have already been met, and the women aren't slaves. They seem to be a Federation member species, and can join Starfleet.

* No Andorians in Starfleet. I didn't see a single blue face in the crowd. Strange, considering they were one of the four founding species.

* Phasers fire bolts, not beams.

* Transporters require the target to be relatively still... That kills a huge cop-out they've always had; Catching a running target is not as easy now.

* Cardassians are known to the Federation awful early now. They're mentioned in a scene in Iowa.

* Klingons are already established as an enemy, as are Romulans.

@ ZeroCorpse I agree with your list, but you should check out the Memory Alpha page for Orions:

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Orion

I was wondering where all the Andorians were though, and the Cardassia thing was pretty strange too.

"He also needs to double karate chop someone on the shoulders. Its Kirk's signature move."

...The Flying Kick is what he reportedly *really* needs to bone up on.

I enjoyed the shit out of this movie. It was alot of fun.

My only issue with the film is how often Kirk gets his ass handed to him. He's been in the federation for 3 years and he still gets his ass kicked.

The guy is tough, he can take a punch, but man he gets laid out more often than a prostitute

#3 totally opened my eyes. I used to make fun of how Capt. Janeway in Voyager has only 2 facial expressions... the one where she furrows her brow with worry and looks up and to the right, and the smirk when she's trying to be clever.

I wonder how many hours of Shatner she watched before filming.

Just got back from seeing the film and I really enjoyed it. Everyone involved had obviously done the research needed and characters were nailed. As for the list Chris Pine does everything except for lose his temper, and he does a pretty good Kirk.

SPOILERS

Although I did leave the theater confused as to where exactly old Star Trek now stands. Clearly it is an alternate timeline which has already been mentioned and that old Spock is now in the past to help rebuild the Vulcan race after the planet got destroyed. So I am really hoping old Trek won't be rendered non-cannon, episodes like The Best of Both Worlds and The Inner Light are too precious.

Did anyone note the mention of an Admiral Archer too? Seems he survives well into the 23rd century if it's the same Archer from Enterprise.

I also noted that it seems to tie up something from old Trek too If my Trek timeline serves me right Kirk entered the Academy in 2250, so this film takes place in 2253, Old Spock mentioned Romulus was destroyed 127 years into the future, which my my guess takes place in 2380, about a year after the events of Star Trek Nemesis. I am only putting this down as when I noted that I almost thought they had induced a major plot hole. Seems the producers did take care.

PS: I made a mistake, it's 129 years in the future, not 127. My bad

I saw the movie today and from someone who has loved 'Trek since he was a child and grew up on syndicated TOS, I loved it. It was funny, action packed, full of pathos, and had an interesting bad guy, something the Next Generation movies lacked. I did not think any of the Next Gen. baddies were interesting at all; Soran was a whiny turd who could not handle reality, the Borg Queen screwed up an interesting villain in giving it a single face (why bother getting a Locutus when you already have a queen?), Ruafo was a joke and Shizon was pathetic.

But Nero. Eric Bana chewed him some good scenery and I fully understood his rage.

I do not want to see any new post Voyager 'Trek because I felt they had exhausted the franchise by that point. The Romulans, Klingons, Cardassians, Dominion and Borg were no longer interesting. The technology had become so magical any problem that could not be fixed by it seemed implausible. 'Trek had become dull.

i haven't been excited to see a movie in the theater since the Dark Knight. feels good.

Anton WHO?! Dude, if I don't know who that is and I know Kirk, you're putting him there for your own reasons.

SPOILERS!

Lots of talk about the alternate timeline and confusion about it which seems a bit odd to me cause it was explained in the film very clearly that it is an alternate timeline. OLD Spock tells young kirk that in his timeline kirk knew his father...which obviously he doesn't in the new timeline.

varrior

The movie was well directed but it wasn't well written at all
the movie was as shallow as it can get with no depth what so ever. There was no growth in the character's development at all. The whole movie has been simplified to the outer most extent in order to reach the largest interest from the population as possible which totally cripples star trek and makes this movie look like star trek's slow witted brother with a mild case of tourettes

The movie very clearly states that Nero ambushed Spock's ship, opened up a wormhole and both ships got sucked in, sending them both to the past. Without giving away any of the movie, Nero's ship enters first into the past and alters the past, thereby creating an alternate timeline. Spock's ship enters second, and takes "merely seconds" to enter the wormhole. But the observational duality of wormhole travel in ST universe makes old Spock's arrival into the alternate reality 25 years after Nero enters. There is no mention of deleting any of the original ST timeline, ONLY the creating of an alternate timeline. That's all.

It is not that hard, I don't even like ST. I just paid attention to the movie and didn't drool myself over the CG.

Notimpressed, I failed to see where the "shallow" part comes in. The writers did a great job fleshing out Spock's past and his conflicts, Kirk's directionless life before he met Pike, Nero's motivation, etc.

Nero's plan made a helluva lot more sense than, say, Shizon's moronic plan to destroy Earth when Earth had absolutely nothing to do with his creation or torment. Nero's motivation had far more pathos than Soran's whiny ass desire to flee into a fantasy world which was little better than a holodeck simulation.

And I thought Nimoy was used to good effect. I was afraid that his presence would ruin things for the new cast, but I liked him. I fail to see how shoe-horning Shatner into this film could have made it any better. The dude should quit his bitching; he took his money, let Berman kill Kirk. Get over it, Bill.

Ahahah, that's insanely funny :D!

No mention of his extra abs fat, à la Zap from Futurama?

It cracks me up to see this metrosexual-looking dude playing Kirk when compared to Shatner's suave, manly Kirk.

I know that I will get flamed for this, but whatever

I think that maybe someone needs to look at the fact that maybe this was made to try make Star Trek cool again and continue on the franchise. There are no where near as many young Trek fans as there use to be since there are no new tv shows on anymore.

My mother is a Trekkie and I have been tortured with it my whole life. I have a teenager who thinks that Star Trek is the dorkiest thing ever. However, now that less cheesy actors are in the parts, the teenager is interested in going and seeing it. I will take both of them, grudgingly, to admire the pretty man captain and pray that I will not gag at any point in time.

I am possibly the only geek on the planet that hates Trek, but it is possible that a new take on it could a make new fan. No new fans will kill the franchise eventually. Updating it with new actors and special effects is a good thing, otherwise it looks like a 1960's comedy and 1990's crap tv to a generation that is this technical. When teenagers think that the chest communicator in the 90's tv show looks like a bad piece of retro 90's jewelry possibly worn by New Kids On The Block, it may time to update something.

Originally I just went to gawk at Chris Pine the whole time, but he ended up doing a hell of a job and the movie overall was pretty amazing :)

Chris Pine wrote Shatner a letter asking for his blessing-- and Shatner gave it to him.

And ZeroCorpse-- I totally agree with you on being disappointed with not seeing any Andorians.

One thing I loved about the movie that no one has mentioned yet were the scenes set in Iowa. Giant spaceships looming out of the prairie are mainstays of classic science fiction-Bradbury, Heinlein, Asimov and the like. It was great to see it on film.

He needs to fight a Gorn. He'll never fully be Kirk until he trades blows with a Gorn.

Okay, I'm not ashamed to say that I LOVED the new movie!

A reinvention is what the franchise needed. Yes, the original series will always hold a special place in my heart... But as long as they're making new movies as spectacular and entertaining as this one, I'm along for the ride!

And I really don't have any complaints about the casting. Especially Zach Quinto's Spock and Karl Urban's Bones - they were spot on.

http://startrekonline.com/timeline/2387

If anybody's still interested in the alternate timeline talk, over at the site for the upcoming video game, they've been filling in the blanks after Nemesis. They've even managed to tie it into the prequel comic and the new movie. Basically, everybody in the original timeline thinks Spock is dead, but the timeline is clearly still continuing.

To Kevin

Dude you need start taking the ADD meds again. Me and my friends were laughing about how obvious it was when Uhura practically turned straight to the camera and said 'AL - TER -NATE TIMELINE!!!'

I want to know why the romulons looked so different?

I haven't seen the the movie yet. I agree with all 5, but if he only does the"elbows squeezed together, palms up, begging tone" to overemphasize his dramatic appeal for logic or understanding from the "alien in power/robot/Federation superior" I will be satisfied.

I think Ricardo Montalban (Khan) was the best "Shatnerian Style" actor on Star Trek (besides Shatner of course).

Any other actors worthy of the description "Shatnerian" that you can think of?

The Romulans may have looked different because JJ did not want to go the funny forehead route that has been done to death with 'Trek aliens. Instead he probably wanted Romulans to look more like Vulcans.

As for the tattoos, that could have simply been a sub cultural thing; with all the Romulans being miners that could have just been what Romulan miners do.

Oh! There's the reason my "Kirk: To His Mistress" vid just jumped a couple thousand views! Thanks for posting it!
Not surprisingly, as a Kirk fan, I didn't love the new movie, though I seem to be in the minority. I knew it wouldn't be classic Trek, but I was hoping for something more along the lines of the Bourne movies instead of a rehash of a summer-movie special effects I've seen a hundred times in Star Wars/video games, etc.
But I am glad if it gives people a reason to keep on loving Star Trek and introduces it to new fans.
Live long and Prosper!

Am I the only one who recognised Chris Pine's impression of Shatner in one word right at the end when he is coming off the turbolift? I laughed my ass off when he uttered "Bones!" (shortly followed by "buckle up" in his own voice) in what was a fairly spot on imitation of Shatner. That was all I needed.

Sunnyvale: I definitely noticed it, and although most people didn't seem to catch it, enough people in my theater laughed that I knew I wasn’t imagining it.

I loved the movie. I was really impressed with how well the actors did with playing their characters.
I loved how Abrams made his own version of Star Trek by simply creating an alternate timeline.
It gives Star Trek a fresh face and it's attracted new fans, like myself, who immediately watched The Original Series when the movie trailers came out.