The ultimate, all-important question for Star Trek movie.

[BeBMan]

Warp five was possible in ST Enterprise, so before TOS.

[Dr Strangelove]

Warp five was possible in ST Enterprise, so before TOS.

ST Enterprise violated the TOS timeline in a number of other ways too.

[DinoDoc]

In TOS the Enterprise could not make Warp 9.

They could do it but to paraphrase Scotty they'd risk the ship flying apart from under them.

The maximum warp speed recorded for this class by itself was warp 14.1, achieved by the Enterprise due to sabotage to the vessel's warp drive system. While the ship itself was not structured to take that speed for any length of time, the Enterprise was able to maintain that velocity for nearly 15 minutes. (TOS: "That Which Survives")

[MOBIUS]

Jesus ****ing Christ Mobius you are a moron. It would have taken 2 seconds to Google Iowa stone quarries and yet you'd rather make an ass of yourself (again):

http://www.magicyellow.com/category/Quarries/-State_IA.html

http://quarriesandbeyond.org/states/ia/iowa.html

Wow – and there I was thinking all the simpletons had already left for We **** Civ – but apparently not…

If you had taken 2 seconds to actually read my posts rather than make an ass of yourself (again) you would note:

1) I have never said “there are no quarries in Iowa”, which you are trying to imply with your simplistic and retarded argument – that is just a totally dumb supposition evidently brought on by your lack of comprehension skills…

2) I have said that you won’t find that type of quarry (I said it looks like a granite quarry) in that type of landscape (flat) in Iowa – but because you basically can’t read – you have totally ignored those points.

Basically to have any chance of proving me wrong, you have to find a quarry in Iowa on a flat landscape that produces a hard rock, like granite for example.

Clue: You will note most of the quarries in Iowa produce sedimentary rock – the quarry used in Star Trek bears the hallmarks of an igneous rock quarry…

Suggestion: Find out which quarry was used in the movie – you could really make me look stupid if you find out it’s:

1) In Iowa

2) Not granite, but a sedimentary rock after all

3) Is surrounded by flat countryside

Because THAT is the essence of my argument as to why that scene in ST is so ****ing dumb – not whether there are any quarries anywhere in Iowa, or whatever your stupid argument is…

I can’t believe I am actually trying to help you prove me wrong - but it does seem like it's your only chance now - because you are utterly incapable of doing it on your own…

If you STILL fail then you, Drake and Mr Fun have serious egg on your collective faces...

[onodera]

I also went to see it with my girlfriend, neither of us having seen any episodes of the series, and we both enjoyed it. I had to go to Wikipedia to find out what the plot was (), but I have absorbed some ST knowledge from the pop culture to know there should be Picard, who can facepalm, and Data, who is a robot. Why weren't they in the movie? Also, I totally didn't recognise Simon Pegg.

[Guynemer]

NERDS

[Dr Strangelove]

Yah! Be more specific!!!!!!

[Tuberski]

Wow – and there I was thinking all the simpletons had already left for We **** Civ – but apparently not…

If you had taken 2 seconds to actually read my posts rather than make an ass of yourself (again) you would note:

1) I have never said “there are no quarries in Iowa�, which you are trying to imply with your simplistic and retarded argument – that is just a totally dumb supposition evidently brought on by your lack of comprehension skills…

2) I have said that you won’t find that type of quarry (I said it looks like a granite quarry) in that type of landscape (flat) in Iowa – but because you basically can’t read – you have totally ignored those points.

Basically to have any chance of proving me wrong, you have to find a quarry in Iowa on a flat landscape that produces a hard rock, like granite for example.

Clue: You will note most of the quarries in Iowa produce sedimentary rock – the quarry used in Star Trek bears the hallmarks of an igneous rock quarry…

Suggestion: Find out which quarry was used in the movie – you could really make me look stupid if you find out it’s:

1) In Iowa

2) Not granite, but a sedimentary rock after all

3) Is surrounded by flat countryside

Because THAT is the essence of my argument as to why that scene in ST is so ****ing dumb – not whether there are any quarries anywhere in Iowa, or whatever your stupid argument is…

I can’t believe I am actually trying to help you prove me wrong - but it does seem like it's your only chance now - because you are utterly incapable of doing it on your own…

If you STILL fail then you, Drake and Mr Fun have serious egg on your collective faces...

It's a fiction movie set in the future.

Just because there may, or may not, be a granite quarry in Iowa right now, doesn't mean there won't be one in the future.

Maybe they dug up all the sedimentary rock and found granite underneath.

Hell, it's Iowa, seems likely they'd dig hole just for something to do.

ACK!

[MOBIUS]

See! There you go! A plausible (sort of) explanation of how they could get a granite quarry on a flat landscape in Iowa - in the future...

I'll accept that, Tubes...

[MrFun]

Hell, it's Iowa, seems likely they'd dig hole just for something to do.

ACK!

Excuse me?

[Straybow]

There is a granite quarry in Granite, Lyon County, Iowa. Now shut your piehole!

[DinoDoc]

Holy ****! Are you people still feeding the lame, sheep raping Welshman's ego?

[Alinestra Covelia]

I watched it. A big thumbs up

They did a good job of making it a sit-back-enjoy type of flick. The plot wasn't actually nearly as bad as most, and they had good dialogue all round. The casting was especially good, with the sole exception of Bones, who had the voice and attitude down pat but seemed like he was a bit too... well... BIG to become the scrawny doc we've seen before. Young Spock especially is very well acted.

The parallel-universe concept seems a little unnecessary, but it's actually a stroke of franchising brilliance because it "resets" the universe plotwise, allowing a completely separate set of spinoffs to emerge with the new crew which won't jar too badly with the established canon.

A good movie.

George ****ing Lucas could take a page out of this book about how to make prequels.

[Drake Tungsten]

Holy ****! Are you people still feeding the lame, sheep raping Welshman's ego?

No ****.

[rah]

I watched it. A big thumbs up

They did a good job of making it a sit-back-enjoy type of flick. The plot wasn't actually nearly as bad as most, and they had good dialogue all round. The casting was especially good, with the sole exception of Bones, who had the voice and attitude down pat but seemed like he was a bit too... well... BIG to become the scrawny doc we've seen before. Young Spock especially is very well acted.

The parallel-universe concept seems a little unnecessary, but it's actually a stroke of franchising brilliance because it "resets" the universe plotwise, allowing a completely separate set of spinoffs to emerge with the new crew which won't jar too badly with the established canon.

A good movie.

George ****ing Lucas could take a page out of this book about how to make prequels.

In general I agree. My expectations were a touch lower based on the comments here. Thanks Mobby.
The plot, as expected was lacking but not as bad as I expected. My only differece was I liked bones.
I really like scottie. I also liked the adversarial relationship between spook and kirk.