J.J. Abrams' Star Trek Is A Sci-Fi Classic | Retrospective

[@Aiijuin]

Grew up on TOS with the ‘Shat’ and Nimoy since 1978. Massive fan ever since (TNG, DS9, VOY...) until the end of ENT. These reboots were (to me, at least) such a beautiful love letter to the fan base. I squee-ed when I saw Nimoy pass the torch to Zachary in 2009. I cried when he and Yelchin had passed away in 2015/2016. Pine and Quinto and co. really did an amazing job bringing their own unique takes on what had been our beloved original series characters. An altered timeline ensures that the TMP, WOK, etc... and all other continuity of the original Trek had remained untouched and unchanged for its original fans. It’s like we are delving down the rabbit hole of a “Mirror, Mirror” universe, where everything is twisted and different, yet still we recognize the faces. It’s a shame that there is so much flak this reboot series catches from so many, but I adore the new films and embrace them (and obsess over them) just like the old ones. In fact, the reboots have forced me to go back and rewatch the entire Trek series from TOS to ENT all over again. I hope the forth film gets a green-light. The only thing I found jarring was Quinto’s “Khaaaaaan!” Moment. (It took me out of the moment a lot and I cringe still on that scene). The only major continuity error that bugs me is that Kirk’s older brother was named ‘Sammy,’ not ‘Johnny.’ A timeline change would not have altered any event, like Samuel Kirk’s name, prior to James T. Kirk’s birth in 2233. Other than that, I’m so devoted to the reboot and I’m not ashamed to admit it. After all... some people like chocolate, others like vanilla, but we can still love both and have both at the same time. Right?

[@Aiijuin]

PS: Best repeat character of the series was John DeLancie’s “Q.” Fav character of DS9 was Armin Shimmerman’s Quark. Picard was my favorite captain, but Sisko was the most badass. I’m a massive RikerXTroi shipper of the bygone 90s....glad to see they were finally married, although Worf was still my favorite character of TNG (he’s like the Piccolo of DBZ to me). Robert Picardo’s Holo Doc was my favorite character of VOY, but of course I knew and loved him first as the ‘Johnny Cab’ in “Total Recall.” Trippiest episode ever made was TNG’s “The Mask” because Brent Spiner wearing masks and enacting a dozen different personalities while saying, “Masada is coming” in the single-handedly convoluted episode is something that I have never ever cared to revisit again since it aired 25+ years ago. ...

[@landline00]

@@Aiijuin I thought the consensus was that,"Enterprise" was the best Star Trek series?

[@irisremillard2]

I got into ToS because of this movie and I really love both of them for a lot of these reasons!

[@happyplace2225]

Same!!

[@AllTheRooks]

2:43 "This is undoubtedly Michael Giacchino's best work" 'The Incredibles' would like to have a word with you, young man

[@FullFatVideos]

A very close second!

[@sheevpalpatine2231]

@@FullFatVideos 2 years later, what about Jurassic world?

[@_somerandomguyontheinternet_]

Does anyone else feel a bit of Doctor Strange and Spider-Man: Homecoming in the Star Trek theme? Giacchino did all of them, so I suppose it makes sense, but every time I listen to it I feel like I’m experiencing Homecoming and Doctor Strange simultaneously. It’s weird…

[@SmileyySmiley]

The Batman has entered the chat

[@Hardrive2677]

Lost would also like to have a word with you

[@prettyaverage97]

I love, LOVE this movie. Both this and Into Darkness are some of my favourite movies ever, the characters are so well written, the acting is superb, the visuals and music are just fantastic... Beyond didn't live up to the previous ones, I think, but it's still a great third outing in a mindblowing trilogy through and through. Man, how I wish they would make a fourth one.

[@ojanymolinaii5566]

Beyond is great as well, it’s like a TOS episode

[@munromister777]

I do really enjoy this movie. Personally I enjoy Beyond more, but this one is still a really solid and enjoyable Trek movie. The cast all around in these movies is phenomenal.

[@Draliseth]

I saw this movie five times in theaters. It still holds the record for most theater viewings for me. The second one had it's issues, and I was glad for the character moments in the third film. Karl Urban as McCoy is the shining star of those films for me.

[@rashaadlewis]

One of the most amazing films I’ve ever seen. Absolutely LOVE the Abrams’s Star Trek

[@Elnont]

Though the reboot didn’t go in the way many people wanted, at least we got to see Karl Urban as Bones! What a blessing

[@minewarz]

Last time I saw this was probably 3 years ago. Since then I've watched the original series, the animated series, the next generation and I'm currently watching Deep Space Nine. When I finish all the series (on Netflix), I'll see this movie from a new perspective. Just gotta find a way to watch the original movies, though.

[@timobrenn]

MineWarz you might wanna skip through the dragnthat is enterprise season 2, it'll make your life easier.

[@fcawley2042]

honestly purists should be grateful. These movies got me into the TNG. Didn't have the amazing space battles and sound design i loved about Abrams but i appreciate it for the dialogue and characters

[@paulmcpherson4918]

Ok, spit it out; which milk seller sponsors you?

[@FullFatVideos]

We prefer the term 'dispenser'...

[@subraxas]

The chocolate 'Milka' has a purple-white cow as its mascot. :-)

[@kyuminnie137]

Just rewatched this movie. It’s simply amazing. Got me into Star Trek

[@FullFatVideos]

Me too!!!

[@tgovani]

Love the 2009 Star Trak theme. Hope they continue the series so badly

[@FullFatVideos]

me too!

[@tgovani]

Full Fat Videos I love your videos too!😉

[@LittleghOstGreen]

finally someone said it, I love this movie so much

[@Hanayuni]

Star Trek was the first BluRay movie I ever watched and it will forever hold a special place in my heart. I was blown away by the beauty of the cinematography and I really loved the score. The main theme is gorgeous. I had never watched any of the original films or tv shows but that experience was absolutely amazing. I did enjoy the sequels as well, but so far, nothing will top the 1st one.

[@arthurfortes8398]

I dont Care what people say. JJ Abrams saved Star Trek and with the movie resurrected the interest for Star Trek content.

[@Ladybug-no9sc]

I just watched all 3 movies back to back for the Labor day weekend. LOVED EVERY MINUTE

[@KaladinVegapunk]

I mean, all the characters were kind of exaggerated versions of one aspect of their character Kirk was never a hothead, or a womanizer, he was a solid captain who was laid back but could get serious. I don't care about changing it, I think pine did fine But quinto ive got no idea why he plays Spock sooo angrily, like what? It's like Yoda in last Jedi acting like silly fake Yoda from empire when he was testing Luke about his expectations, like that was the one scene they saw of him

[@aldrinmilespartosa1578]

Tbf spock is half human and vulcan

[@danielkubin3878]

if you watch TOS, Kirk was a womanizer...there is even a running joke during TOS movies, and other media regarding this thing. I think that some of that did this movie right, some of that not. This version of Spock is not great, but come on, for more than 20 years it was played by Nimoy, so every actor is going to be in disadvantage in this matter. And that he show more emotion...he is part of Vulcan, in TOS many time show that, even he try to kill twice Kirk during this Hippie episode and Pon far...so i could i guess i could forgive Quinto this? I dont say, that this movie did not have some problems, however Abrams show modern Star trek in good way, way better than we can see in Star trek Discovery or Star trek Picard.

[@zeux5583]

Its a reboot not a reshoot. They put a twist on things, they didnt write a new TOS episode. The Kelvin-Kirk is NOT IN ANY WAY the Prime Kirk, its a different Person that grew differently to the kirk from TOS. I think its sad that some people dont seem to get that.

[@9999AWC]

Am I the only one who prefers Spock's "KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN" over Kirk's?

[@lizardkingsliwinski4031]

Yes.

[@thetransponder7186]

Nope

[@Jaydotp]

My god I love J J Abrams

[@GeneralBulldog54]

I used to listen to Giacchino's every day during my morning/late night run. It's such an upbeat and inspiring tone that in context to the movie by playing against what's expected it becomes an asset similar to Abrams' lens flares giving this fantastic world a new sense of grounding. Despite its convention, as a reboot of the Trek series of movies. I always referred to the Kelvin Trek movies, as Treks XI-XIII. I think I've watched this and Beyond about a dozen times and still have as much fun with these I did the previous Trek movies of old. Thanks for the memory.

[@ByGraceThroughFaith777]

I love this trilogy, don't care what people say, it's fun all the way thru. That's what I like in movies: FUN

[@robbie_]

I think the score really makes this movie an epic, plus the movie has absolutely perfect pacing.

[@dotim67]

I love how Abrams rebooted Star Trek- it is still my favorite Star Trek movie!

[@AngusStewart01]

Underrated movie 🎥

[@freelookmode9837]

Agreed. Loved this movie so much

[@_somerandomguyontheinternet_]

The dude actually ended a Star Trek video with “May the Force be with you.” *cue Picard facepalm gif*

[@lonjohnson5161]

Well argued, however I disagree on so many points, but I will confine my comment to my key objection, the time travel element. With time travel, you are tied to the Prime universe and can't therefore CAN'T be a "hard reboot". If you wanted a hard reboot, Battlestar Galactica provides a good example. I'm not saying that I fully embraced Battlestar either, but it was easier for me to appreciate it for what it was, Ron Moore's vision of the concept. That's not to say I hated the soft reboot of Star Trek. The casting was nearly perfect, especially Karl Urban. It was quite a grand space opera spectacle. There were good character moments. In short, if I don't view it as "Star Trek" but a generic space opera, it's fine. It's like if you reach for a Coke, but instead you get root beer, that bubbly, cloying and happy drink; no matter how good it is, it isn't what you were promised. The name Star Trek is a promise and tying it to the Prime universe with time travel is a narrower promise, a promise that was not delivered.

[@rogermoore2661]

I lo e this movie so much I'm forcing my 11 yr old son as I type this to sit down and watch it with me because I was him to see the amazing visual effects in this movie

[@channabarca7359]

I used to theorise that the latest instalment of the Star Wars franchise, *Solo: A Star Wars Story* , took place in an alternate timeline from the events in the Skywalker saga. This was largely supported from how Han and Lando don’t exactly resemble their counterparts in the prime Skywalker saga timeline, physically. Especially how the resemblance of the Millennium Falcon to its prime counterpart is way too far off. If the events of the film had indeed taken place in an alternate timeline, it would make a lot of sense for why LucasFilm originally wanted it to kick off a young *Han Solo standalone trilogy* .

[@zacharyjochumsen9677]

Channa baccarat wel the menlum rfacokn besides the orginsk triogy is more used when the in solo thr fslcon is less worn becuse hdn hadent used it yet and was just getting started witn the ship

[@danielshottopics8187]

Thanks Milk Fat Videos it's great to meet a fellow New Star Trek Fan, So many butt hurt fanboys love to hate on JJ Trek because it's not talky talk and Cerebral but these people have to face the music that Star Trek is changed forever and in the end as much as they complain in the end they lose.

[@georgejones8481]

I always found quintos Spock too emotional. Stoic isn't a word I'd apply to quintos spock

[@Joe.Gibbons]

Great video - I'm not as keen on Abram-Trek as I am on TNG or DS9, but a lot of fantastic points made here. :) Have you guys got any more ST-based videos in the pipeline at all? Would be interested to hear what you make of 'PICARD'....!

[@JediKnight207]

I prefer this version than the previous movies, specially in the visual aspect.

[@willjd1170]

FUCKING THANK YOU!!! Been saying all this for years and no one listened to me

[@FullFatVideos]

My man!!!!

[@ashleydarkstone1949]

I liked this movie, and to some degree the sequels, but they all suffered from some horrible contrivances, poor direction, and bad writing. I look at Quinto's Spock and I see wasted potential. With better direction and writing, he could have done Spock more justice instead of coming off as a loquacious nerd, which is what the writers interpreted Spock as. In fact, TOS Spock conveyed much of his intelligence by being insightful but concise. If anything, they were writing Spock as Data, who would also be overly-wordy and then get cut-off for slight comedic effect. Despite all the wasted potential, there was still a lot to like about these movies.

[@ApophaticCartesian8]

Easily in my top 5 movies of all time.

[@leonsantana3646]

Also, infinity war and star trek ‘09 start with Chris Hemsworth & One of his charachter’s relatives, I do not think this changes much, but it’s just a funny coincidence

[@danielkubin3878]

I would say everyone has different option regarding what is or was is not a Scifi classic. Star trek 2009 is solid movie, but you should watch Star trek II from 1982, this movie is consider not only the best Star trek movie of all time, but also one of the best scifi movie of all time.

[@laurarayray7410]

I would love to see a Star Trek movie based on the Klingons. With it being so long between Star Trek beyond l believe if they could come up with a film with the Klingons would be the best of them all.

[@intheclear3492]

Classic it may be, it did send Trek down a dark path that I hope it gets out of soon

[@pollyb.4648]

This movie is absolutely perfect! This from a huge fan of the original, and all that followed, first-run on tv. I saw so much hope for the future then. It's more than sad that Roddenberry's vision of equality for all has been corrupted in my lifetime by stupid racism and xenophobia.

[@DoraG99]

lmfao my fave fandom trope is star wars/trek fans using quotes from the other fandom to rile up purists asdfghjkl XD

[@MovieMagic515]

Have you ever seen The Wrath of Khan and First Contact? Great films and the current Star Trek shows on currently are just brilliant!

[@TripleTSingt]

He comes from 150 years into the future, of course Neros mining ship can decimate a top-of-the-line research vessel. Kirk wins, as always, not through superior power, but through cunning.

[@CourtneyCoulson]

I adore this movie, I have seen it at least a dozen times and always have fun. It captures the spirit of Star Trek but revitalises it with the most beautiful visuals imaginable.

[@boobyjustin]

live long and prosper

[@nosedondeelmarsetermina]

Nice In Brudge reference

[@thomaskirkness-little5809]

I quite enjoyed the first of the new Star Trek movies. It can never replace the original series, but I still enjoyed it more than most of the TNG movies.

[@arthurbrucecrawford6896]

lol no, it's not. You're just a JJ Abrams fan. Now don't get me wrong, that is perfectly fine and he is actually good in his trade. That being said, we all have our limits though.

[@FullFatVideos]

Batman has no limits

[@flashgamerdeath9614]

Do another video on Star Trek

[@flashgamerdeath9614]

MonkeyZorr I’ve watched literally every episode of NG, DS9, Enterprise, Discovery and voyager and I’m not even an adult and I have to admit that these films are a worth tribute and is better than the original films

[@minisversion]

God, thank you. Someone said it!

[@SpedeVesku]

There's hardly any true science fiction in the rebooted Trek movies. They are just mindless action with one-dimensional characters.

[@thetransponder7186]

Just like the old movies and series.

[@viktorvladeriow2239]

im not sure if this is a opinion video or satire ...

[@peterterwilliger8190]

No one who had grown up watching the first star trek would think of this movie as a ' classic' You sir , don't know good sci - fi In this movie, only the acting was any good, because the story was shot.

[@thetransponder7186]

So basically just like the rest of the old star trek movies and series. Are you sure you know what good si-fi is, or do you just like fan service.

[@robertnewman978]

I don't know what's worse Star Trek fans or Star Wars fans. "Muh franchise is ruined and muh childhood is ruined." 😣

[@nighttray1489]

Robert Newman Star Wars. By far.

[@iiiiitsmagreta1240]

Based on the title, I came here hoping for some kind of new take or analysis of the movie, maybe one that could get me to reconsider my opinion of it. But this is just a bunch of opinions. (mind you, your defence of the movie, that it was a "bold new direction" and "took Trek to new places" and that sort of thing, sounds a lot like my defence of The Last Jedi. Makes me wonder how much my own opinions towards Star Wars and Star Trek colour my judgement of these respective movies)

[@FullFatVideos]

I don't think this is a bold new take or anything, I just wanted to give it some love. I loved The Last Jedi.

[@LayedBackJ]

One of my Favorite films of the decade

[@hellfish2309]

As per Kurtzman, that’s why I cringe at the thought of him helming the TV franchise, especially after the brilliant casting choice of Anson Mount as Captain Pike

[@logan33451]

Bloody In Bruges? I knew I subscribed for a reason

[@darrellbeam8053]

I agree with your statements here. Paramount really had a shot of success in making ST big again with this movie. Their mistake was Into Darkness. While I liked the movie, they went too far with core fan wanking that it turned everyone off. Had Beyond been the second movie, things would be different.

[@garyk3478]

It was the best Star Wars movie yet.

[@mrnobody.4069]

Wait a minute I just remembered something remember one of the Star Trek next generation movies when the Borg and the Enterprise went back in time to make Cochran's warp flight happen, if history been changed in the future from that point in time does that mean when the Enterprise NCC-1701-E goes back to the future does that mean it'll end up in the equivalent of its time in the Kelvin timeline because history has been changed, Picard's clone which I forgot the name of will still be raging on in his warship, and to modern Starfleet point of view Data Picard Worf and all the others would have been deceased or have disappeared, when in reality they would have ended up in the Kelvin timeline, I don't know the prime timeline has time police so they probably did some funny business in between to stop the Enterprise-E from ending up in the Kelvin timeline but why can't they just do the same for Spock and Nero, Dr Soong's life will also be different to if he ever gets around the building Androids and knowing how much more advanced Starfleet technology is in the Kelvin timeline, his first two prototype Androids may be a success and Lore B-4 and Data may not exist but they could because positronic brains would still be a new thing, now I'm wanting to see Kelvin Data and Lore, but when Jonathan Archer from the NX-01 Enterprise was transported to Enterprise J, how did he not end up in the Kelvin timeline to, I do want to see an alternate universe where the Enterprise NCC-1701-E meets up with it's Kelvin counterpart, and I have so many things running through my mind like the Kelvin version of the Borg they would actually stay mostly the same but can you imagine Kelvin enhanced Enterprise-D would decimate that poor cube!

[@peachlily22]

The first one and the 3rd one were great!

[@thetransponder7186]

I agree the second one was eh

[@bahayla]

No.

[@darkguardian1314]

But, it’s not Star Trek. It’s an action movie with Star Trek themes. By the way, I really hate the new Enterprise and the scaling.

[@FullFatVideos]

"Its an action movie with Star Trek themes" so every Star Trek movie then?

[@thetransponder7186]

You upset the new Enterprise is bigger, and a more realistic interpretation of what humans would actually build. Honestly the old enterprise was lame. No style in the nacelles, and suaser. The pylons had no character. And the next too. That's my take on the old ship.

[@CosmicDorns]

This movie was the first start trek thing i ever watched and i really hated it. It wasn't until many years later i watched Orville and heard it was similar to old school star trek that i gave it a chance. These modern star treks don't hold a flame next to the old ones. And that not nostalgia i saw the new ones first!

[@camerono.3183]

Subliminal Star-Lord????

[@willhamilton297]

All too true

[@levihankenson3801]

As man… you should have ended it with “I am and forever will be your friend.” Instead of the force XD

[@ciaranlane8676]

My third favourite Trek film, easily! (Behind Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home)

[@Garry_Combine]

No First Contact?

[@SeyMe2]

Good video but I have to disagree this is Mike's best soundtrack. Nothing comes close to Lost.

[@Garry_Combine]

Just no. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home and Star Trek: First Contact would all love to have a word with you good sir! Its not a masterpiece but i do enjoy it!

[@epm1012]

1:33 Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....... slow your roll there, my guy. DOFP is kind of just a more extreme variation on the comic arc. If anything, ST ‘09 borrowed from the comics.

[@FullFatVideos]

The original comic doesn't have anything to do with rebooting continuity- that aspect of the film is borrowed from Trek absolutely. In general the film doesn't have much to do with the comic anyway in my opinion. Thanks for watching

[@Netherfly]

I wouldn't call it a classic, but ST2009 was definitely a good movie. But, by far, its worst element was the script. So dumb! Definitely not an outlier for Orci and Kurzman, who have built their careers on awful scripts.

[@snowscorvids186]

First thing we said after seeing that movie was “instant classic”

[@RichardM-kv4uu]

Galaxy Quest is a better Star Trek than this is.

[@FullFatVideos]

We LOVE Galaxy Quest. It's such a great film.

[@General12th]

Galaxy Quest is also excellent.

[@photoklarno]

The five greatest Star Trek films, in no particular order: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan Galaxy Quest Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World Forbidden Planet Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home Star Trek ‘09 doesn’t fit the formula very well, excluding it from the list, but damn if it’s not a fun and nearly endlessly rewatchable movie

[@Eamonshort1]

Could not disagree more with your thesis statement but still a good video dude

[@joshuajouet]

As a massive life long Trek fan, I was sceptical before seeing new trek 2009, but enjoyed it immensely. I lovingly refer to the second one as 'Into Shitness' (crude but fair), and felt the third was something of a return to form, but not on a par with this. I don't think fans of the original show, or newcommers have too much to moan about with this movie....although Pine's head seems HUGE all the time.

[@parker6614]

I didn’t think the Star Trek into darkness was very good, however I thought that Star Trek beyond was great.

[@lizardkingsliwinski4031]

So when are we going to get into how much of a mess Into Darkness was?

[@FullFatVideos]

soon actually! we've had a video planned on the sequels for a while, just need to find a good slot for it!

[@lizardkingsliwinski4031]

@@FullFatVideos Good! You better make sure not to skip over the fact that they cast a white British guy as an Indian character.

[@lizardkingsliwinski4031]

@Rising Horizon Gaming Nice try but Khan was from the 1990's which is before the homogenized and unified human society depicted in the Trek universe. Also casting a Hispanic actor as an Indian character was the best one could do in 1960's American broadcasting and at least they dared to cast a person of colour and not put some white guy in brownface which would have been acceptable at the time. Perhaps casting a white British guy as an Indian character may be a little less tasteful than casting a Hispanic due to the past relationship of the British Empire and India. I do not care about deleted scenes and comics books that explain away the whitewashing. The reason why Khan is white and not Indian is that white actors are more bankable, Benedict Cumberbatch sells tickets.

[@lizardkingsliwinski4031]

@Rising Horizon Gaming It's Khan, not Kahn by the way. So are you implying that Indian actors aren't talented enough to play the Indian character? You're treating it as unreasonable of me to demand representation in a piece of media that is one that has always demanded fair representation and diversity. Sounds like you're one of those people who said we couldn't have a female Captain or an African American Commander/Captain in Star Trek Am I really being a racist for asking that an Indian character could perhaps be played by an Indian actor? Star Trek is known for its progressive steps and in the 1960's they at least were progressive enough to cast an actual person of colour but in 2014 we apparently couldn't handle that and could only accept a white British guy. You can flag the books all you want to but Star Trek Into Darkness does not care about what the books delve into as it doesn't even care enough about what the actual show delved into.

[@lizardkingsliwinski4031]

@Rising Horizon Gaming 'the bullshit concept of race' You do know we are talking about Star Trek, right? You can claim to source the books all you want but you know that these movies aren't going off those and those books are not canon and I can also find comics that have as an Indian character so what does that say?

[@Muzer0]

His best score?! You'd rather have a constantly-repeated "blerrrr, blerr blerr blerr blerrr" throughout the film than the brilliant subtlety of Inside Out? No, that was the thing that surprised me most about your review. I disagree with you strongly on this but I see where you're coming from. I like the visuals; they're very impressive, and I liked Quinto as Spock. But neither Kirk nor Nero worked for me at all in this film. Kirk was an absolute arsehole, and I just don't believe that Nero *as presented in the film* behaved in a believable manner.

[@FullFatVideos]

yes.

[@petar2744]

yes.

[@temporaneo617]

Imho this movie was fine. It wasn't nearly as awesome as you make it seem, but it still was enjoyable to watch

[@urbanhawk2886]

I would love it if it was but I'm not really sure Star Trek 2009 is a classic yet. To me it is and this reboot has introduced a new generation to the franchise. I do like the Orginal series, I grew up watching it along with other versions which I also enjoyed. But all these hard up Star Trek fans who don't like change need to remember not all the older movies were that great and if you don't want your franchise to disappear reboots need to be made. This introduces a new audience. Nothing last forever unless attention is brought to it and it's really selfish that people moan when new versions are made just because it's not the one they grew up with. I only wish that Into Darkness didn't get so much backlash. Yes I personally prefer Wrath of Khan but people who I spoke to and had not seen the older movies loved it and got them interested in Star Trek. That shows something and the fact that everyday movie goes enjoyed it. The other was that Beyond wasn't advertised that well which is a shame coz that is actually my favourite Star Trek movie. I'm again not alone coz people who did see it again loved it. The audience even clapped at the end. The new cast I think are fantastic and own their roles like the original crew do. They are faithful to the characters but at the same time bring a bit off their own personality to make it their own. They are all also so enjoyable to watch and have such a believable close bond with each other. I honestly really hope we do get Star Trek 4 in the next couple of years.

[@AaronGaleProductions]

Your videos are too good

[@FullFatVideos]

Thank you so much!

[@RichardM-kv4uu]

Nope.

[@JoanieDoeShadow]

"Please Sir," did you just assume your audience's gender? (just teasing, but you do have some female viewers.)

[@Garry_Combine]

You ruined the joke with 'but'. I think he already knows captain obvious...

[@frogredstar3864]

Good video. Abrams just understands character and construction; every scene builds to the next until you arrive at a satisfying conclusion. Even with Into Darkness, which I personally liked, your attention is kept onscreen because of the pacing and constructive editing/acting. I think what makes his films so attractive is the mystery box he's been proud to present; a scene starts, we get some information, some crucial information is left out, only to be answered, with some longer mysteries kept in the backdrop. This formula creates an intensely thrilling ride for the audience. One of my favorite directors. Can't wait to see how he concludes the Star wars trilogy, considering he's mostly made films in the early stages of a series.

[@BobaDavis]

It was entertaining, but this film did not age well.

[@GrimGalore]

No. It's. Not. Star Trek is a parody of what it once was.

[@DrewLSsix]

Marlin Rando. I promise you Gene would have loved 09.

[@PeregrineX7]

It is a full reboot in the sense that it cares little for the franchises' past history, but objectively looking at it as a completely separate entity for the rest of the franchise it is a damn good film.

[@getoutofmybrain2369]

Huh? JJ Trek, is not, Star Trek. Its sci fi movies showing pictures of things that look like Star Trek, if you did 3 hits of bad acid.

[@dietermill2271]

Except... Abrams is a hack! It wasn't Star trek! And only classic if you consider killing of the franchise to be classic!

[@timobrenn]

ajs1031 he's talking about his badly acted TOS star trek and the odd numbered movies

[@crysstoll1191]

Yep, hack mangle.

[@SC-mq1eh]

its a fun movie and well done - i dont get the fanboy hate, they claim trek is "cerebral" sci-fi - while ill agree a few of the episodes are truly "cerebral", what trek movies were? if they say TMP, thats a cop out, they say thats cerebral because its a slow drawn out movie, with a plot that was done plenty of times in the episodes - JJ did what the best trek movies did, have some fun and action like TWOK, STIV, STVI and 1st contact

[@FullFatVideos]

I completely agree!

[@julesbpitt]

If you can't tell the difference between TWOK, STIV, STVI, 1st contact and ST09, you can't be helped

[@j.p.9522]

No real Trek fan would consider the 2009 Star Trek a “classic.”

[@FullFatVideos]

I bet youre fun at parties

[@j.p.9522]

Full Fat Videos I bet you need alcohol to deaden others' awareness of your poor taste and tortured logic.

[@thetransponder7186]

@@j.p.9522 well then there aren't that many real trek fans then.

[@j.p.9522]

@@thetransponder7186 JJ Abrams’ Star Trek was the beginning of the bastardization of Star Trek for the masses. Look at what his studio has spawned since then.

[@thetransponder7186]

@@j.p.9522 and what because its different. Nothing in star trek has changed much other than the story line. Star trek The motion picture was Voyager felt sad and wanted to come home. Whrath of Khan was boring. It was about an old genetically engineered dude who was upset with kirk and wanted to kill him and destroy earth. Search for spock was legit oh no socks dead but his soul is here. Let's get his body back. The voyage home was we need whales back. And the rest of the kirk movies were pointless. As for the picard films. Generations. About a dude who was upset his family died in a situation that was near impossible to live from. So he wanted to selfishly take other people's families. Sounds like Nero in the new star trek right. First contact was about the fact the Borg said we should use time travel to take over earth and stop the federation from existing. And the rest of the picard movies were trash. Aside from star wars which he messed up. And dont try to sound smart. Bastardization. Like if. Intp darkness was like The Wratg of Khan. LAME. The 2009 was like Generation but way better. And beyond was new and fresh. It brought that explore and protect vibe. Although this is just an opinion. It has a whole lot more reason behind it. You on the other hand, are butthurt trek fanboy who could only find flaws in the new movies. To be honest the old kirk movies were just cheesy. The Picard movies were nice but nothing to fight over. Your kind are the ones that screwed this franchise into a comma it cant recover from. Your kind is the reason I cant get a fourth movie. Cause of your stupid opinions. All the movies are good. And if you still cant agree. The old movies were lame. You already read my explanation of the old movies and how similar they are. As for the series. TOS was exploration and contact. The Next Generation was about exploring ferengi Romulans and klingons with the occasional Q. Voyager was about, we got into a space battle and got flung was across the galaxy and we need to get home. Deep space 9 was legit running a space station. Enterprise had the most feeling in it. I can connect to it. But you wouldn't understand. You're butthurt. Non of those series had context it was all over the place. Enterprise had the most context to it. When it come down to it. I see them for what they are. You on the other hand are heavily nostalgic on the old series and movies although the new ones had just as much context. Get out cha hole m8.

[@EC2019]

Giacchino = ja-KEE-no (or thereabouts). Not JEE-uh-CHEE-no.

[@MikeRehfuss]

MTFBWY

[@Luke-db9fc]

No it is not.

[@rmsgrey]

My main issue with the reboot Star Trek is that it's the heir to a series which put a lot of thought into being grounded and realistic at the expense of Hollywood melodrama (for example, one spec script where, facing the imminent destruction of the Enterprise, Kirk grabs Yeoman Rand and kisses her, got corrected on the grounds that no naval captain would kiss a rating) and is heavily unrealistic in favour of melodrama. My suspension of disbelief failed at "supernova that threatened the galaxy", after which I noticed things like Vulcan showing a visible disc from the planet where Kirk happens to be stranded within a short distance of where Ambassador Spock is also stranded, which also happens to be within walking distance of a Star Fleet outpost where Scotty happens to be in exile. Where to start on that one? You don't get planets close enough to show sizable discs except for binary planets, which could be a cool setting, but would have all sorts of cool features that deserve to be explored. And the real kicker is that this timeline's Star Fleet, supposedly a credible military organisation, takes a cadet who's facing a court martial, and rather than giving him a medal and sending him out as a junior officer on an established crew so he can grow up a bit more, gives him command of the flagship, making him the de facto face of the Federation - at best because a parallel universe version of him with a very different childhood matured into possibly the greatest starship captain of all time. That's like giving Homer Simpson command of a nuclear submarine because you like his dinner conversation, except here you're supposed to take it seriously because this 20-something juvenile delinquent is obviously just as good as a 40-something seasoned officer who's worked his way up...

[@thetransponder7186]

Kirk did save planet earth so he does kind of deserve it. As for the science aspect. They are the same. In star trek the motion picture they got caught behind an asteroid at warp speed. Time travel exist in both universes. Voyager who got flung to the other side of the galaxy in a space battle. And that one episode of The Next Generation where they literally held hands and imagined them selves going back to the sol system because some random traveler who is magic used their want to explore to have the ship go super fast. It's not science it's some times magic that they make sound into science. Aside from warp speed the old star trek movies made magic seem like science by saying some real things like dilithium, and tachyon particles make us go this fast although in real life they dont even think tachyon particles exists. So it's nice but barely truly scientific. All the new movies are doing is following this trend that the old series set for them.

[@rmsgrey]

@@thetransponder7186 Save the planet and you get a medal. Captain's chairs are for people with a track record, not for people who did something right (or at least something that worked out okay) once. You don't get experience any other way than by actually having experiences - twenty-something Kirk who only decided to join Starfleet at all a few years ago doesn't have the experience that the youngest captain in Starfleets history (Kirk-prime) had a couple of decades after joining Starfleet. As for the science, part of it is that science has progressed - half a century ago, tachyons were respectable scientific speculation - even thirty years ago, when TNG was airing, there was serious discussion of whether or not neutrinos were tachyons. By 2011, however, when the calculated speed of neutrinos was faster than c, the paper reporting it wasn't "neutrinos travel faster than light" but "we can't figure out what went wrong here, can anyone else?" Also, the original series specifically was a lot more concerned with getting things right than the TNG era (which was more interested in making "Star Trek" than in making science fiction - and introduced the practice of writing scripts where there were gaps left just notated "[tech]" where a later team would come along and fill in something techy to fit the needs of the story). So, yes, the Kelvinverse movies are following precedent by being less science fiction than the TNG-era shows which were less science fiction than TOS. On the other hand, by continuing the trend, the Kelvinverse sets a new extreme bound for illogic and displayed ignorance of science. Try a simple experiment: get hold of a globe (or open up Google Maps) and put your finger on a random spot. Then try again a few more times until you manage to hit land rather than open water. Then calculate how long it would take to walk from there to, say, the White House. Then consider that Kirk was dropped off within a day's walk of both Spock and Scotty...

[@thetransponder7186]

@@rmsgrey so basically what you said there is that TNG and TOS were scientific. What a load of crap. You know as well as I that Star trek runs off of magic. Aside from warp star trek runs off this stuff. The JJ verse had that same science in it. It just wasn't out of the world it was actually more down to earth than the prime verse stuff. Checkoff explained how they could use Saturn's moons to hide from Nero. He also explained to kirk how going to warp with the damaged core can destroy the ship. Sulu also explained to kirk how they need to reach terminal velocity to allow the flight stabilizers to generate lift since old starships weren't meant for planet based operations. The science in jj star trek was far more down to earth than old ones. The old ones had magical diseases, villains with actual magic powers. Hint hint Q. They both don't adhere to science. All they have is bs unscientific explanations. Also how they used crap like tachyon radiation to fix everything is just cheap. So there is no actual science for both of them. You just like unrealistic nonscientific explanations. Which the old one had. This one does not. The reboot series is more scientific than the old one in actuality. So the reboots but more thought Into practical science and not space magic. The old series might as well been in star wars. Sorry to say it but the old series was just nonscientific garbage. The new ones are also like that but to a far less extent. In conclusion star trek was just good with spinning the names around. But legitimately it was never an actual scientific franchise. Go watch The Expance for realistic si-fi. Also how kirk got command. IDK but saving the world is pretty important. It proved that he could run a starship efficiently and effectively. They like those types of people since they're good captain material. Hence why they gave him command. The original kirk never had that chance. So the new one does deserve it. Training cant even put you through that. Also have you ever though that mabey escape pods will try to give you the best chance of survival by going as close as they can to a star fleet out post. It's only automated to try and ensure the best chances of survival for you ya know. In conclusion dont try and use that bs all the JJ haters use. It being unscientific and the storyline being bad. The old prime universe star trek was pretty lame, unscientific, and also had a pretty bad storyline. Just like how you see the JJ verse. Dont @ me with those articles on neutrinos and tachyon going faster than light. You know that just helped me prove my point, cause they still didn't observe faster than light travel.

[@rmsgrey]

@@thetransponder7186 Try rereading my comment. TOS was science fiction; TNG began the move away from science fiction. Psychic abilities were, if not serious science, at least the subject of serious research in the 1960s. The Q, while not on a sound scientific basis, are at least unexplained (much like "red matter" which, just at a glance, violates conservation of energy in a big way), unlike the threat of a galaxy-devouring supernova, which offers a nonsense statement of what's happening. Or there's the apparent proximity of Delta Vega (where Kirk was marooned) and Vulcan (which Spock watched be destroyed from Delta Vega). Something with enough mass to have a surface gravity around earth-normal close enough to another planet for it to show a visible disk is going to have some very visible, and very cool, effects on the other planet, but, no, JJ just wanted Spock to be able to watch it happen and wanted him to be within the same city (if there were a city there) as Kirk's escape pod landing site, and Scotty's station in exile and didn't bother to try to think about the consequences, nor come up with a plausible reason why it might happen that way. Yes, there's no sound effects when the camera goes out into space in the opening fight. Getting the science right occasionally makes it even more glaring when they don't even try to apply any sort of logic to the script.

[@thetransponder7186]

@@rmsgrey and what about the voyage home. They legit warped around the sun for time travel. Wrath of khan where they launched the genesis device. Although everything was there to make the planet. What you're saying is that that little bomb had the gravitational pull of a planet. Does that sound scientific to you. Or what about the episode in season one of TOS where they picked up a child that could think of you and you'd dissapear. Not really scientific. So yes the red matter breaks the conservation of mass. But the genesis bomb also makes no sense since it has the gravitational pull of a planet yet the characters were walking around it normally. It must pull in all that dust and gas somehow. As for your thing with physics being a legit concern. Dont make excuses for the TOS to be very scientific. Physics. Really. The TOS introduced all the dumb stuff like timetravel and superpowered enemies. As for your issue with how close the planet was when it imploded. Why did the genesis planet only last like 2 weeks. It was made of rock just like any other planet. Yet they came up with the bs explanation of its sped up for all organisms on the planet as well. Yet somehow kirks son and the Vulcan lady and the crew didn't age faster on the planet but spock did. And when they took spock off the planet he just stopped rapidly aging. Again no explanation just bs plot armor. So saying that the only thing JJ got right was there is no noise in the vaccum of space is a lie. All he did was follow the garbage TOS and the rest put into it. Why is it when JJ uses the same star trek magic you guys get upset but when Roddenberry does it you guys shut up. Again star trek was never really that scientific. As for the galaxy threatening supernova. Explain how the Voyager space probe made a planet with no hands. Just accepted it the JJ verse is just as scientific as TOS. They are both lacking of real science with the TOS needing more real science. So deal with the fact they both run off of magic as well. The TOS especially. Stop giving Roddenberry an easy way out by conveniently forgetting or ignoring his scientific inaccuracies. That's one thing with you JJ haters. Never wanting to critique the old series and find out its flaws. So stop being illogical and ignorant. Sorry you aren't ignorant or illogical. You just have a soft spot for the TOS, and Roddenberry. I understand. But don't go out slandering the JJ films. The Roddenberry series and films are just as unscientific as these films. They both run off of magic. You and I both know that. I just want you to stop suppressing that fact.

[@762rk95tp]

Jar Jar Abrams treks are trash. Movies that shit on everything original Star Trek stands for. Star Trek has nothing to do with X-Men, or any other caped superhero movie. There is nothing subtle about it, Jar Jar Treks are lobotomy of Star Trek. Only good things in Jar Jar Treks are following: 1. Score. 2. Casting. 3. Uniforms. Jar Jar Abrams removed thought provoking content from Star Trek.

[@TreeRockCreations]

This movie is trash. Who paid you to make this video? There are no character arcs in this movie...it is just an empty Mystery Box. LOL

[@FullFatVideos]

NO ONE'S PAYING US SCREAMSSSSSSSSS

[@TreeRockCreations]

Ah....a sense of humor. Nice.

[@MusikCassette]

so you are talking bullshit for no reason.

[@FullFatVideos]

Top 10 crazy anime theories: I like the movie?

[@MusikCassette]

well than clearly you will burn in hell.