DanikaK2 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I saw this movie and think it was no less impressive than Avatar - great acting, directing, magnificent visual effects. Chris Pine, Winona Ryder, Eric Bana and Jennifer Morrison did a brilliant job!!!

Apockiller (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Long time Trekkie. I am even playing the new On line game. This movie rocked!! they took Trek to a whole new level

BW022 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Insulting people doesn't address their point.I've seen this movie a hundred times. Smart-ass hero mouths off, elder takes him on, cheesy onliners, and endless explosions. The plot makes no sense, scenes are put in for slapsick or action which don't advance the plot, the characters are cliche, the motivations are meaningless, and the characters do not develop.Why does Nero wait 25 years to destroy Vulcan? Why doesn't his crew use the ship/red matter to save Romulus?

mamakunem (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

if they can fit everything into a star trek movie doesn't mean they should.... its not a good idea at all, but obviously you cant see past your trekkie ego so ill leave you be to carry on this lame debate without me.take care :)

mamakunem (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

because if they tried to put everything into the movie it would suck! why can't you understand that???? i see this is going to go on forever.... you are the drone, i choose to analyze a film in a broader perspective, looking at other aspects which i just stated for you... and i never said it i liked the movie based on nothing! pay attention... you choose to be trapped in your frame of mind where the perfect star trek movie consist of jamming 50 years of info into one lame movie...

mummra4ever (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I'd only be a drone if I just liked anything with the star trek name on it and had no standards. Like for example I don't like Voyager and Enterprise because they were just crap series. Why couldn't they put everything about trek in a film? Nick meyer seemed have to no problem doing that when he wrote wrath of khan and neither did chris nolan when he had the core characteristic of batman developed in batman begins.

mamakunem (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

and what was that? you can't put your finger on it because there is nothing wrong with it.... you just feel the strong urge to complain about something because you're oblivious to the other factors that should taken into consideration when making a great movie (great acting, great story, great effects, great editing, lense flares effects, the epic magnitude of the whole thing)

mamakunem (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

you obviously are a star trek drone just like the rest of them as far as I'm concerned... thank you for respecting my opinion but frankly, you just cannot fit everything that was in the TV show into a 2 hour movie, like the moral conflicts of the secondary characters but trekkies just dont understand that simple concept...

mummra4ever (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I wasn't trying to make it sound like everyone disagrees with you just trying to say that you have your opinion and they have theirs that's all. Of course nero's actions to try to destroy earth weren't justified. Earth, starfleet, the federation or spock weren't responsible for Romulus being destroyed. So there's no question here of who's in the wrong. I wanted to like this movie but it just didn't have what I like about trek.

mamakunem (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

haha. you make it seem like everyone disagrees with me, not everyone thinks the movie wasn't up to par with what a star trek film should be...what r u talking about??... There were Moral Conflicts, social commentary and exploration of the human condition (spock not being able to save his mother, Not knowing how to express his emotions, being out of place in society because of who he is, Kirk living up to his fathers name and being a savior, was nero's intentions to destroy earth justified)