Have to agree, not much urge to rewatch the new movies other than the Kahn one, unless they're on TV and nothing else on. They aren't bad Sci fi movies, just not great. Kind of dull. I still think the Enterprise should be a main character like in the shows and older movies, but in the JJ movies it might as well be a taxi cab. It just takes them here and there, instantly, and gets the crap shot out of it. It wasn't their home, and the crew never felt like they were close knit.
I've softened my opinion of the crew casting, I was pretty harsh before. LOL I now blame the writing rather than casting.

Without being political here, the crew felt more like how I would imagine a moderately over-armed college students working for Peace Corps over the summer than a well-trained crew successfully piloting a starship for months at a time. Obligatory romantic subplots aside, I never really believed they cared much for each other, or really even liked each other.

Can someone explain the timeline of the new Trek movies?

Assuming time passes in the JJ Trek universe at the same rate as in the real world

2009 - Enterprise crew is comprised of a bunch of fresh cadets, one of whom (Kirk) is given command
2013 - Kirk is still in command of Enterprise but he gets demoted then he saves humanity etc.
2016 - Kirk is still a Captain but he has "applied for" the position of Vice Admiral of a space colony

So in the space of 7 years Kirk goes from cadet to being offered the rank of Vice Admiral?

Yeah, that has always bugged me. Again, showing the complete lack of any respect for how real people or organization actually function in many of these movies, and perhaps a manifestation of the Hollywood obsession with the supposed wisdom and ability of innocent youth superior to that of those who have been "warped" by actual life experience.

Of course, you saw the same sort of "teen prodigy" nonsense with Abram's other space blockbuster, Force Awakens, with a girl going from orphan scavenger to Jedi Master equivalent in about 72 hrs assisted only by 5 minute self help talk from a short barkeep and the obligatory Jedi/British accent.

Well, until the late 19th century it wasn't unheard of for officers to be given high rank based on social standing or the family name rather than working their way up through the ranks. Does anyone really want to hear about the years Kirk would have had to spend getting his ticket punched in staff job after staff job before being given ONE command in the next larger class of vessel?

It's what you see in tons of movies.

Han Solo went from a disreputable smugler to General in notime. Lando Calrissian the same.

Well I don't think rebels have the luxury of sending people to OCS or military academies, command & staff college, etc LOL. It's basically "can you do the job of an officer, i. e., command troops? You can? Good, you're a general." Plus, Han Solo had been in the Imperial Navy before being discharged for disobeying an order to kill a prisoner named Chewbacca (or something like that.) So he did have at least a junior officer's education.

Ran across this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Star_Trek

According to this the first "alternate timeline" movie was set in 2258-2259 and the last movie was set in 2263.

So Kirk goes from rebellious cadet who joins Starfleet on a dare to Vice Admiral candidate in 5 years.

I would loved to have seen a true origin trilogy for Star Trek, showing Kirk adventures as a young officer, fwhy/how he stays on staship service, how he met Spock, etc. My favorite book (and movie) in the Hornblower series has always been Lieutenant Hornblower where we see Hornblower having to save those appointed above him, while still maintaining the chain of command (or at least the appearance of it). I would have liked to see something along those lines with Kirk.

Also, it should be pointed out, the tension between starship and "shore" service, and Kirk's preference for the latter, does make an important plot point in several episodes and original cast movies.




Those examples do not beg credulity nearly as much, for three reasons:

(1) Both are men with years of experience fighting, smuggling, piloting, leading, etc. Calrissian is shown governing a sizable colony and, though not revealed on screen, Solo is supposed to have been a junior officer in the Imperial Navy. New timeline Kirk has zero experience outside of fighting and drinking, prior to his abbreviated training at Starfleet Academy.

(2) There is a presumable gap of at least three years between the time both Solo and Calrissian are introduced, and the time they are mentioned having formal rank within the Rebellion military. They do not just show and get handed the keys to the Rebellion, unlike Kirk, who for some reason can be trusted to run something bigger and more complex than a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, and beyond that, even promoted to Vice Admiral, despite the fact he has never finished college.

(3) The Rebellion in Star Wars are, of course, a revolutionary force with a very small staff and logistical "tail." Obviously, they do not have the formal training courses, and presumably their pool of officer and even flag officer candidates is quite limited, so they would promote the best available. Star Fleet is an established space/military organization. They have plenty of people waiting in the wings to command; the idea they would or would need to promote a cadet to command the fleet flagship just does not make any sense within the universe the movie(s) established.

Even Star Trek VI which had General Chang and the other Klingons? If you think that one is dull then you must think ST: The Motion Picture is the equivalent of taking a bottle of valium.

In general.
I like TMP a lot but it has to do with seeing it in the theater and the grand return of Star Trek. The idea of the vastness of the ship sent back and the idea of a machine culture appeals to my imagination. I like the serious treatment of the movie and Kirk being a little underhanded to get the Enterprise back. We also got the new Klingon look and more of the Enterprise not seen in the show. It wasn't seemingly made of cardboard boxes either. It's a good movie although it's missing the battle scenes we all love. As a ST fan at the time, the movie was full of new and exciting things you wouldn't see as a fan now, after multiple shows and movies. Then, the only previous ST was a low budget show.
ST 6 is possibly is the best of the movies, including 2 and First Contact. It's close. 2 has the space battles we'd like in them all, and a strong tie to the show.
4 was funny and quotable, but time travel, no Enterprise and a strange unexplainable conflict blow it.

So that's 3-4 movies out of how many?