Sign In

Abrams is Destroying Star Trek like Lucas has Destroyed Star Wars

Author
Time

I've got my doubts too, ultimately I don't have much invested in Star Trek these days, I'm just curious to see what they manage to pull off with the [somewhat] stellar casting involved - Eric Bana = :)

I don't think this will ever sit comfortably with TOS, but How about this? - We wait until we've seen it first. yes it looks worlds apart from what we know, yes it will be strange with an all new cast playing established roles, but hey - we were willing to give Nemesis a fair go ;)

I think i'm one of the 5 or 6 people in the world [sic] that actually liked 'Enterprise' [yes even before they tacked 'star trek' onto the title screen].

 

 

 

Author
Time
Johnny Ringo said:

I think i'm one of the 5 or 6 people in the world [sic] that actually liked 'Enterprise' [yes even before they tacked 'star trek' onto the title screen].

 

 

I always thought that was funny how they left Star Trek out of the title, it was like they were trying to hide the fact that it was Star Trek because Star Trek had become uncool. Like they wanted to trick people who didn't like Star Trek into watching it. I can see non Star Trek fans flipping through channels, "Hey, a new sci-fi show, well as long as it isn't lame Star Trek, I'll give it a go... did I just see a Klingon??? That was a Klingon! They can't fool me, this IS Star Trek!" flips channel.

It was kind of funny, because most the time you want to use your popular brand name as a selling point, not hide it.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The ship does not look half bad except for the nacelles on the back.  What Fucktard designed those.

My Favorite enterprise is the movie enterprise first shown in the motion picture.

Here is a comparison image of the new cgi ship, the cgi version approximation of tos ship, and motion picture again a cgi image probably from The Legacy Game since it says A.

I would like to see the new warp effect before i judge the ship too much.  The slitscan Effect from TNG was lame to me versus the warp from the motion picture and treks II onward to VI.

 

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

That new Enterprise is a little too curvy for my taste, looks like something designed by BMW. Since it is a high tech military vessil, I like the straight lines and practicallity-over-style look. The motion picture Enterprise is the best looking to me too. This new one if going to take some getting used to, all those bulging curves makes it look like something you'd find on the shelf in an adult toy store. 

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

Am I the only one who's excited for this new movie?  And who actually really likes the new Enterprise design?

Remember, this is supposed to be a reboot, is it not?  Or am I mistaken on that?

a trolling bantha

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

The ship does not look half bad except for the nacelles on the back.  What Fucktard designed those.

My Favorite enterprise is the movie enterprise first shown in the motion picture.

Here is a comparison image of the new cgi ship, the cgi version approximation of tos ship, and motion picture again a cgi image probably from The Legacy Game since it says A.

I would like to see the new warp effect before i judge the ship too much.  The slitscan Effect from TNG was lame to me versus the warp from the motion picture and treks II onward to VI.

 

The middle shot is actually the original model CBS-Digital used for Star Trek: The Original Series: Remastered.  It was too finely detailed and took too long to render so the lighting was never right and the nacelle caps looked like peppermints.  And the bottom shot looks really nice to be from a game.  Maybe I should have picked up Legacy...

But back to the subject at hand.

The new E design threw me for a loop at first.  It doesn't fit in with the lineage of the original Enterprise since all of the ships pictured are supposed to be modified versions of the same ship.  But I think the angle of the picture is bad, and might make it look worse than it actually is.

I don't think Abrams is destroying Trek like Lucas destroyed Star Wars.  Lucas went through and changed his movies to fit his changing beliefs and then made prequels of questionable content.  However, no matter what Abrams says, this is going to be a reboot or alternate timeline, like Batman Begins or Casino Royale.  It doesn't HAVE to match with current continuity.  This is what Abrams feels Star Trek would be made as today if we had never seen it before.  It has ties to the current Trek universe in Nimoy and Bana's character, but the timeline they create is all new, and they may or may not continue to play in it.  If it fails, it could continue in the original universe.

''We felt we really need to get out there and educate people that this is a whole new franchise,'' says Paramount vice chairman Rob Moore. - EW.com

Threads like this are one of the reasons they moved the movie to next summer.  It's not a prequel that creates a bunch of plot holes.  It's a whole new deal.  I'm willing to give it a chance, and I think it will be enjoyable.

“005 is super hep” - dahmage

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress / Facebook / Twitter

005’s List of List & Comparisons

Author
Time

For me, Star Trek isn't that big of a deal. It's already riddled with holes and crap. If the movie is fun and recreates what I actually like about Star Trek (the non-epic, intelligent plots and discovery aspect) then I'll be happy.

Why does Kirk look like a girl though?

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Well there is a tie to the star wars prequels here.  As the new enterprise was designed by Ryan Church who was the conceptual artist on Episode II and III of the prequels.  His Production paintings were not really paintings because Unlike doug chiang and Ralph Mcquarrie they were all done on a computer.

Doug Chiang is a real visual artist Church could not come close to.  and Ralph's original works can never be topped.  Church's sketches are all digital have zero detail and are a joke.  they are more pre viz than real art.

Ralph was not able to do the prequels.  It would have been awesome to see what a sketch like his old ones would have been like of vader and Kenobi dueling over a crevasse of Lava. 

 

 

Plus the effects for the new trek are from the same ILM cgi crew who did the prequels.  and not that old school crew who did the oot with models and traditional effects.

 

If you are fine with the work they did on the prequels, the pirates of the caribbean trilogy, and transformers by bay among others you should enjoy it.  Me i like the old school stuff done by doug trumbell, John Dykstra, and the old ilm crew that took over on 2, 3, ,4, and 6.

Plus JJ met with Lucas and Spielberg for advice on this movie and not trek luminaries or even the roddenberry family.  Don't classic tos trekkies have a right to get upset that it seems abrams is more a star wars fan than a star trek fan.  Why is he not directing star wars then?

A star wars by JJ would be horrible but could not possibly be worse than the prequels or clone wars movie. 

People that saw the Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Transformers franchises raped are worried that is exactly what Abrams is going to do.

I guarantee next year i will hear "jj abrams raped my childhood"

Not even original since i have heard it also said "Daniel Craig ruined James Bond, and Barbara Brocolli raped our childhood"

I guess we should not be too upset over the raping of Indiana Jones though because the rape could have been worse had they done what they originally wanted to do.  Have M Night Rammalama-ding-dong direct and write the movie.

 

It gets even more Hilarious when you find out a contributing writer for trekmovie.com who used to write for Cinenascape Magazine formerly known as sci fi universe magazine, Mark Altman who directed and wrote the film free enterprise is the one who originally coined in 1997 "George Lucas raped our childhood"  by saying after going to a screening of star wars a new hope special edition "that was like seeing 2 hours of your childhood being raped".

And if you use his own words on JJ you get banned from trekmovie.com

They did not like also how i brought up Orci writing the bad script for Transformers that had bumblebee peeing on a guy, and optimus prime saying "my bad".

The enterprise looks like a BMW, the bridge like an ipod store by apple, and Kirk looks like a metro and too young for the part.  Looks like trek 90210, Jeez even smallville was not the bastardization of the superman franchise this movie is gonna be for trek.  Spocklar is not as bad as others say but the kirk guy is like a unknown at least the other dude was on a show called heroes that was popular and good 2 seasons ago,lol.

 

There are some things i do like.  The chick playing Uhura Zoe Zaldana is better looking than Nichelle ever was on the original movies like star trek V, ugh,  They got Bruce Greenfield "thomas vale of nowhereman" to play pike, i say that has win written all over it.  Eric Bana as a villain is another plus, just don't like the shinzon look to the character.  Looks like a cross between shinzon and his viceroy reman. 

Things that are epic fail.  The design of the enterpise.  the bridge interior design, the uniforms except for the mini skirts,lol.  No models being used or built all fake cgi and most of the cast look like straight out of the academy years.  Kirk was not given command straight out of the academy.  The ship was not brand new, it had tours under robert april and pike before kirk ever took the center seat.  The ship should look like the precursor to that seen on the original series except modern update.  Kirk served on the farragut long before he was captain of the enterprise.   This IS JJ Verse and is not canon despite what paramount studios want to sell us.   This movie takes even more rediculous "artistic license with canon" than Shatner's Academy novel did.  And at least for that novel while a farce when compared against existing canon it was entertaining.

 

JJ will have a lot of work just to keep me in my seat and entertained, MIII was a joke, so was cloverfield.

Why in hell was he given the reigns to the franchise.  He buried another paramount property and delivered a bomb with mi3 so surely he deserved to direct this.

I mean they could have just as well had Joss Whedon do this movie instead of JJ. Both tv directors and writers and producers who have a single film under their belt.  Except Serenity was a better movie than Mi3 and of course was sci fi, with vampires thrown in. Lol seriously i expected Sarah Michelle Gellar to get a cameo as Buffy.

I mean are they trying to get Lost fans, alias fans, fringe fans in the theater.  Maybe people who liked cloverfield, Maybe fans of Felicity.lol.  That was a JJ show too.

I mean if Allias was not wrapped up an Alias movie would have been cool i would have been sold on that with Jennifer Garner as Sydney Bristow, even a Lost movie.  But Star Trek wtf?

I don't see JJ and Star Trek as being even in the same sentence.

 

What trek needs is a tv show set way in the future after nemesis and dark and gritty with lots of wars and battles and the federation crumbling.  People do not buy the hopeful outlook of the original series anymore they say.  Why not just cop out and go all dark, it worked for galactica, batman, and james bond. 

They are going to do a dark take on Superman next,lol.  I hope they do the non canon Kingdom Come storyline. Or they could do they death of superman.

Seems like in a post 911 world all our heroes have to be anti heroes and all fiction needs to be realistcally dark. They did it with the prequels despite the bad kiddy stuff thrown in there, they also did it in star wars in the njo and legacy series of books.

All heroes need to be nihilistic assholes or they are morally grey and objectionable.  I mean just ask Lucas the hero of star wars is now an emo goth, power monger douchebag.   Hayden mannakin skystalker.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
ChainsawAsh said:

Am I the only one who's excited for this new movie?  And who actually really likes the new Enterprise design?

Remember, this is supposed to be a reboot, is it not?  Or am I mistaken on that?

 

No. I am actually really looking forward to it, despite my expressed misgivings. I had no interest of going to the theater to see the new Indiana Jones movie even though I am a long time IJ fan, I am a huge Star Wars fan, and I never even made it a point to see Attack of the Clones in the theater, but I fully intend to go see this within its opening week. I suppose that says something.I am also mind numbingly thrilled (okay, that's an exaggeration) that Simeon Pegg is playing Scotty.

That is probably the one thing that bugs me the most about this movie, this thing is a "sort-of" reboot, but in the past they have hesitated to actually call it a reboot. That is why they have Nimoy to play Spock and make this a time travel thing. I would have much rather this thing be a full out reboot, forgetting all that has happened up until now, instead of using time travel as a way to make it a sequel and a reboot at once. If they wanted Nimoy in the film, a cameo as Spock's dad or an older Vulcan teacher at the academy would have been cool. They could have included Shatner in the film in this manner as well.

Spock going back in time and thus altering history into the new franchise is just too much of a nerdy fanboy kind of explaination for everything being different.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
C3PX said:

I would have much rather this thing be a full out reboot, forgetting all that has happened up until now, instead of using time travel as a way to make it a sequel and a reboot at once. If they wanted Nimoy in the film, a cameo as Spock's dad or an older Vulcan teacher at the academy would have been cool.

Agreed. Star Trek could use a completely fresh start.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time

At least they're giving an explanation better than RETCON PUNCH!


That said, I'm not exactly excited by the new movie, but I do intend to see it in theatres unless it just gets a lot of negative publicity. I love a good Star Trek story, and good Trek has been extremely sparse since 1994.

4

Author
Time
C3PX said:
Johnny Ringo said:

I think i'm one of the 5 or 6 people in the world [sic] that actually liked 'Enterprise' [yes even before they tacked 'star trek' onto the title screen].

 

 

I always thought that was funny how they left Star Trek out of the title, it was like they were trying to hide the fact that it was Star Trek because Star Trek had become uncool. Like they wanted to trick people who didn't like Star Trek into watching it. I can see non Star Trek fans flipping through channels, "Hey, a new sci-fi show, well as long as it isn't lame Star Trek, I'll give it a go... did I just see a Klingon??? That was a Klingon! They can't fool me, this IS Star Trek!" flips channel.

It was kind of funny, because most the time you want to use your popular brand name as a selling point, not hide it.

I took it to be a case of "we're trying something different here so don't get upset when it doesn't feel like your beloved TNG". But then that's probably just me.

 

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Johnny Ringo said:

I took it to be a case of "we're trying something different here so don't get upset when it doesn't feel like your beloved TNG". But then that's probably just me.

 

Actually, that is not a bad explanation for it. I can imagine enraged fans in an alternative universe screaming at their TVs, "How dare you put the Star Trek name on this pile of crap." Meanwhile in our universe fans get upset because the title was dropped. We fans are a discontent bunch. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

and damn your spelling ;)

hmm, maybe those are early engine nacelles that were later replaced with more efficient ones circa TOS?

Interestingly the previous film was supposed to be 'for the fans' - looks as though this one is 'for the non fans'.

 

 

Author
Time
Johnny Ringo said:

and damn your spelling ;)

Oops, heheh, had my fs upside down t f.

 

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

Just picture if someone (who is a Star Trek fan and not a star wars fan) was making a reimagined/reboot of Star Wars.

All the characters are recast and only person from the OOT is Harrison Ford as The old Han Solo called Solo Prime. Shia LaBeouf is casted as the young Han Solo.

The Millennium Falcon is redesigned to be more aerodynamic and not so junky.

The Lightsabers are redesigned to be more real and now are real swords with an laser going around the blades' edges.

The X wings are redesigned to be more real and only have two wings, no s-foils.

C3 and R2 is redesigned to be more like real robots.

and so on....
-----------------
Shia LaBeouf as the new Han Solo:


The New Millennium Falcon:


The New C3PO:


The New R2-d2:

The new lightsabers:

The new X-Wings:

----------------

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

So i saw the trailer and i am not at all impressed.  there is a lot of noise and fury in the trailer and stupid teen movie cliches all over. 

It looks like that transformers movie by michael bay.  The dialogue sounds stupid like the transformers movie but hey same writers.

Stupid action movie with girls thrown in to get the 12-14 year old male crowd.

Lots of stupid dialogue and explosions may be okay for ID4 but this is star trek.  Star Trek is supposed to be cerebral thinking man's science fiction.  Space Opera/Space Fantasy is Star Wars.

This feels like a bad robot jj movie and not like a roddenberry trek.

If people wanted that Alias flavor they would watch Alias seriously why do it with star trek?

This movie follows the same Militarism that Roddenberry hated that Nicholas Meyer introduced to the series in wrath of Khan and Undicovered Country.  But does not have the same class. 

The trailer just leaves me feeling empty angry and betrayed just like i felt from star trek nemesis and when enterprise was cancelled.  Enterprise may have screwed with Canon but the series had the same spirit of tos.  Gene's son embraced the show as a spiritual sucessor to star trek. 

I hope JJ is happy he ruined star trek to make a fast buck and bring in another empty bubblegum blockbuster full of fake cgi.

I'm not paying 10 dollars to see another one of my favorites be raped and violated went through that fairly recently with Indiana Jones IV, been down that road with episode III in 2005.  Attack of the Clones in 2002 and phantom menace in 1999, and 1997 when greedo shot first in star wars special edition.

It might be a slighly fun waste of 2 hours  that adds nothing to treks 40 years plus legacy.

The ilm cgi effects are more fake looking than the models were for treks 1-6. 

I am not at all impressed its like episode III and Transformers style effects in star trek.

Another movie that is just to show off how great CGI supposedly is. 

Can they make a single film these days that is not a complete cgi wankfest?

The casting is a joke Chris Pine as Kirk awful choice.  Now that i finally see some dialogue from spocklar bad choice on using Zachary Quinto.

The Child actor for Kirk as  a little kid worse than Jake LLoyd  as Anakin in Phantom menace.  Seriously I laughed out loud when he said my name is james tiberious kirk.

I laughed even harder when i saw that dude from Harold and Kumar as Sulu.  and the rediculous way he delivered his dialogue like he was in Harold and Kumar 3 meet spock.

The way this movie is they could have just as easily cast Hayden as Kirk.  You got the same angst thing going on, retarded.

Hayden Christensen canadian like William Shatner.

Why did they not get somebody who knew what the hell they were doing, this is worse, far worse than anything Berman ever did. 

Manny Coto's work on Enterprise season 4 brought back the old trek. 

This new incarnation is an abomination.

How awful JJ put his own stamp on trek to the point it is no longer trek but generic sci fi fantasy garbage.

 

Oh yeah the angry emotional spock in the trailer played by Quinto could not be any further from the Character of tos, acting more like a romulan than a  logical Vulcan.

When were Spock and Jim Kirk ever at odds and at each others throats, they were the best of friends.

 

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

The way this movie is they could have just as easily cast Hayden as Kirk.  You got the same angst thing going on, retarded.

Hayden Christensen canadian like William Shatner.

Why did they not get somebody who knew what the hell they were doing, this is worse, far worse than anything Berman ever did.

Yeah, but the thing Abrams is trying to Destroy Star Trek and Hayden Christensen even with his bad acting is more true to the William Shatner/kirk mold.

Young William Shatner                          Hayden Christensen                              

I don't like Hayden Christensen, but he is a far better fit for a young James T. Kirk then Chris Pine. Hayden Christensen especially  fits the young bookworm professor Lieutenant Kirk that Gary Mitchell talks about in the episode Where No Man Has Gone Before.

________________________________________________________________

Chris Pine is a classic Californian spoiled poser brat and his type are a dime a Dozen here in California just like the Zoe Saldana type.

Chris Pine does not fit the the William Shatner mold or the James T. Kirk mold.

Chris Pine does fit.....

The Eddie Munsters mold.

________________________________________________

Like I said I don't like Hayden Christensen, but with a better director then Lucas (or Abrams) and with William Shatner aiding him, Hayden Christensen would more likely beat Chris Pine, Even if Chris Pine had the same (better director and William Shatner aiding him).

Hayden Christensen was no Anakin Skywalker just like Brandon Routh was no Superman.

Brandon Routh's Superman was emotionless like....like..... an Vulcan. 

Brandon Routh fits the Leonard Nimoy/Spock mold more so then the superman mold.

Brandon Routh's facial features also seem to match Leonard Nimoy facial features better then....

Zachary Quinto.

I know most people think Zachary Quinto looks like Leonard Nimoy, but the truth is he does not.

Zachary Quinto's facial features are not like Leonard Nimoy facial features.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Hayden Christensen as kirk and Brandon Routh as spock seems like a nightmare, but it could have been better than Abrams' casting. 

Abrams, himself was a bad choice to director. Hollywood has many good directors who are lifelong fans of star trek, but No They pick a bad b-director like Abrams who is not a star trek fan to director.

Abrams is turning Star Trek into some Dumb eye-Candy Action sci-fi b-movie.

it just shows that Abrams does not understands Star Trek.

Star Trek is NOT Star Wars.

Star Wars is Action and Star Trek is Drama.

Drama (not Action) is the key to good Star Trek.

Drama (not Action) is why TOS,TNG and The Wrath of Khan were good.

This is something Rick Berman and Brannon Braga never fully understooded, but Abrams (also Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman) seems not understand one little bit, nor seem to want to.

 

 

Author
Time

YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THIS IS A REBOOT OF THE ENTIRE SERIES.  IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT, BECAUSE THE LATEST STAR TREK HAD BECOME STALE IN THE EYES OF THE STUDIOS NOT NECESSARILY IN THE EYES OF THE FANS.  WHEN YOU DO A REBOOT YOU WASH AWAY ALL THAT CAME BEFORE.  IT'S A HARD THING FOR FANS TO DO, BUT THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.  NOBODY IS FORCING ANYONE TO GO SEE THE REBOOT.  THAT'S YOUR CHOICE ALONE.

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide

Author
Time

^ Exactly, they can' have it both ways! This would be like the Brosnan James Bond training the Craig James Bond as the new James Bond, and explaining that there have been many agents with the name James Bond. That is not a reboot, that would be a crazy and unnecessarily stupid way of explaination why the character is played by another actor, the time period of the story is different, and the technology is different.  

Just saw the trailer, I am now slightly less looking forward to this than before. It really does feel like Smallville's answer to Star Trek. Quinto looks good as Spock in stills images, but seeing him act as Spock is unfortunate. He seems just like Sylar with a bad haircut. I suppose in J.J.'s continuity, Vulcan are not quite as emotionless as in the old continuity.

Also, aren't Vulcans suppose to age much slower, being as they have much longer lifespans? Wouldn't make sense for Kirk and Spock to look around the same age now, and to continue to look around the same age later. Kirk should technically be aging much faster, but yet Spock looks older than him in TOS.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

After seeing the trailer... I think this movie will be a failure among TOSians. . . Not sure about mainstream wise but, I've only seen a few Trek episodes. Even I know it's a big frakkup to have Spock go all Midevil on Kirk. Hell, I remember an episode that implied that Spock loved Kirk as much as 1960's Trek could. I think it's called Naked ... something I don't know it's on CBS's YT channel. Spock said something like "When I think of my feelings for you. I feel embarrased." Why the hell have Spock do the beat down on Kirk!?!?

This is a movie I'll only watch if it's on TV or rent it....

Edit:

Here it is.

 Also, I know in that episode Spock hits Kirk but, it's only once... Not like in the Trek trailer where he's choking Kirk.... That and, Spocks inhibitions are gone from some virus in that episode. . . So, I guess that Spock gets brainwashed or, something in the Trek film...

http://urlcut.com/scool

http://twister111.tumblr.com
Previous Signature preservation link

Author
Time
 (Edited)
twister111 said:

I've only seen a few Trek episodes. Even I know it's a big frakkup to have Spock go all Midevil on Kirk. Hell, I remember an episode that implied that Spock loved Kirk as much as 1960's Trek could...

...Also, I know in that episode Spock hits Kirk but, it's only once... Not like in the Trek trailer where he's choking Kirk.... That and, Spocks inhibitions are gone from some virus in that episode. . . So, I guess that Spock gets brainwashed or, something in the Trek film...

http://urlcut.com/scool

Bit of trivia, Jay's avatar of Sulu is from that exact episode of TOS twister linked to. That was the very first episode of TOS I ever saw in my entire life, and believe it or not, I thought it was freakin awesome.

Twister, it doesn't have anything to do with brainwashing, the new movie takes place before TOS, I think what they are going for in the new movie is a twist where Kirk and Spock didn't get along when they first met. I am guessing after they go through the hardships that are the films main plot, there will be a touching moment where we will realize they have developed a deep respect for one another, which will be the beginning of a life long friendship...

Also that scene from the Naked Time that implies Spock loved Kirk as much as 1960s TV would allow, is not what you seem to think it is. Vulcans, are a highly evolved race who have evolved beyond the need to show emotion. Spock's dad is a Vulcan, but his mother is a human. That is why he is talking about having had to suppress his emotions all his life, never having told his mother he loved her, and being ashamed whenever he thinks of his friendship with Kirk. He wasn't ashamed because he had some kind of supressed romantic feelings for Kirk that he was admitting to under the influence of the virus, he had a normal strong kind of brotherly friendship many of us guys have with our closest friends. He admitted to having felt ashamed of those feelings, because his Vulcan upbringing told him he was not suppose to have those feelings at all.

Spock going medieval on Kirk wasn't a frakkup because Spock would never do that to Kirk, but because as a good overly logical little Vulcan, Spock would not loose his temper and smack anyone. Vulcans are suppose to be beyond that. Maybe the movie will try to focus on how Spock has to struggle with his human side. Which again would be contrary to not only continuity, but also to the spirit of the character,  since Spock has often expressed his confusion and difficulty in understanding humans and their emotions and why they do the things they do.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape