Into Darkness is a vile joke of a movie. How many of you didn't cringe and feel anger at the 'spock' character shouting Khan ? JJ Abrams is taking the TRIBBLE out of Star Trek fans and the studio is letting him.
Can't wait for him to work his gold turning to TRIBBLE powers on Star Wars and CBS/Paramount/Whoever can get someone that isn't an TRIBBLE to do the next Star Trek film, someone that actually cares about the franchise and history.
The reboots are great SCI FI MOVIES, they are NOT GREAT TREK, get it right people. Change the ships name, change starfleet, change the characters names and the uniforms, and you have a great ****ing scifi movie, but these will never be trek to me.
the funny thing is I heard this many times when TNG came out
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Why would you not know? Start with radar, advancement in computers, and development of the jet plane during WW II. Breaking of the sound barrier afterward. None of that is exclusively used for military purposes.
There are a few I've heard of... Tampons originally designed as emergency field dressings, cynoacrylate originally intended to make weapons sights, but adopted as an emergency suture during the Vietnam war, and a projected laser keyboard developed by the Isreali military, but other than that, I didn't really know many...
The reboots are great SCI FI MOVIES, they are NOT GREAT TREK, get it right people. Change the ships name, change starfleet, change the characters names and the uniforms, and you have a great ****ing scifi movie, but these will never be trek to me.
So, are you really trying to say - "A great 'Trek' film ISN'T a good science fiction film? I ask because honestly, before the JJ Star Trek reboot; the only really financially successful Star Trek films were 'ST:TMP'; 'STII:TWoK' and 'STIV:TVH' - and for the TNG era, the one moderate success was 'ST:FC'.
Also, as a Star Trek fan who's been watching Star Trek first run since 1969 - I also have to disagree with your assessment the STiD was not a 'good' Star Trek film as it DID capture the characters, of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy to a tee; and in fact did do a very good job of recapturing the the elements of TOS (You know, the original 'Star Trek' "vision" - without which; NONE of the 'touchy/feely/always right/rarely fight' aspects of the TNG era woul;d exist.
In short, it IS a good 'Star Trek' film (it really is) -- but it's NOT a good TNG style Star trek film, but that's okay as it's not representative of the TNG era and isn't trying to be.:D
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
actually all of those things were developed first for military purposes and then applied to non military things.
Actually, I do know that, thanks. The whole point was there have been scientific discoveries/advancements which were developed by the military (or warfare), as opposed to the notion of the eeevil military commandeering discoveries made by innocent scientists.
The reboots are great SCI FI MOVIES, they are NOT GREAT TREK, get it right people.
No, YOU get it right - your opinion is not going to be shared by others. Don't tell me how I should or should not feel about a movie.
Change the ships name, change starfleet, change the characters names and the uniforms, and you have a great ****ing scifi movie, but these will never be trek to me.
Exactly - TO YOU. You are perfectly entitled to feel that way and I can't say you are wrong in any way, but don't presume to impose your feelings on me or anyone else. You have no say so with regards to my opinion and how I feel.
Into Darkness is a vile joke of a movie. How many of you didn't cringe and feel anger at the 'spock' character shouting Khan ?
I didn't. I enjoyed the movie immensely and can't wait to get it. The only thing "cringe-worthy" is when fans try to impose THEIR feelings on others. I disliked much of Voyager, most of Enterprise, Generations and Insurrection and I utterly despise Nemesis. That gives me no right to impose my personal feelings on people who do like them. They are entitled to that.
When they start criticizing things based on similar problems or mistakes in past Trek shows is when it's no hold barred. You can argue for or against merits of a movie or show, i.e. facts that do or do not make for a good production. Personal feelings (Example: "That's not Trek" or "You're not a true fan because ...") are totally irrelevant aspects and have no place in a discussion.
JJ Abrams is taking the TRIBBLE out of Star Trek fans and the studio is letting him.
LOL - did you miss Star Trek V and all the TNG movies? Spare me this drama...
Nemesis and Insurrection are far better than JJ rubbish. In fact I prefer them to First Contact which was rubbish after the time travel gimmick thing.
Considering how much they turn the TNG characters and history on its head, I really don't see how they are better in any way. At least NuTrek has the benefit of being in an alternate reality. The TNG movies have no excuse...
Into Darkness is a vile joke of a movie. How many of you didn't cringe and feel anger at the 'spock' character shouting Khan ? JJ Abrams is taking the TRIBBLE out of Star Trek fans and the studio is letting him.
Can't wait for him to work his gold turning to TRIBBLE powers on Star Wars and CBS/Paramount/Whoever can get someone that isn't an TRIBBLE to do the next Star Trek film, someone that actually cares about the franchise and history.
Wow. Ok, I get you didn't like Into Darkness.
1) I didn't cringe at all when Spock shouted "Khan". Why would I? It was Spock expressing anger at Khan for causing the death of a person he has finally learned to call a "friend" after all the conflict the two have endured.
Purists seem to be under some false illusion that this Spock is like Nimoy's Spock. In case you didn't notice, JJ has made Trek a little grittier and sexier which to me is fine. I'm also guessing that since this Spock has been shown to be a hot-head since he was a kid(fighting the kids on Vulcan, being a smart TRIBBLE to the Science Council) this isn't out of his character at all. Plus he probably hasn't gone through the rite of Kolinar either(and since he's with Uhura he may not). After all Nimoy's Spock did that during the lay over between the 5 year mission and ST:TMP to completely purge his human emotions.
2) As for getting someone who isn't an "TRIBBLE" to direct the next Trek, submit your resume. I can only assume that you are qualified to direct the next film or even the next Star Wars film, because you have said JJ is just so bad. I assume you know what he is doing wrong. Oh that's right, it's not that you know what he's doing wrong, it's what you think is wrong. Your opinion on JJ may be shared by others, but it isn't shared by everybody. And I'm will to bet that Paramount definitely doesn't share your opinion after watching the profits roll in from the two JJ Treks.
I enjoy JJ Trek. In enjoye ST:ID. In fact, I'll go on record and say I thought it was better than the first. Of course I'm a huge Khan fan, and it gave me my Khan fix. My kids enjoy JJ Trek. In fact it has gotten my son and littlest daughter interested in watching the old shows on Netflix(even Enterprise) and the old movies. Then there is my brother-in-law who is not a fan of the original Treks. Not his thing. But he has immensely enjoyed both JJ Treks, and like me, liked ST:ID more.
I equate people like you to the same people who pissed and moaned about the new Battlestar Galactica. "Oh my god, Starbucks a girl. Apollo isn't Apollo's name, its just a call sign, Adama's hispanic, Tigh isn't black, Cylons are human looking, the Galactica retracts the launch pods for hyper-jump, etc. etc. etc". It's all an opinion, and as they say: opinions are like a rear part of the human anatomy, everybody has one.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."-Commander William Adama
I just saw this now that its released on Xbox video.
Ya I'm not sure how it was voted anywhere near the bottom. You cannot just dismiss the concept of the new movies to serve some motive. If you like the originals better, that's fine but they are telling a new story and I take it for what it is.
Comparing this storyline with the old one directly as if they are somehow supposed to align is silly. The characters have been through different events and therefore will be different in the end.
Spock lost his planet before Enterprise even started its 5 year mission. Nothing before is going to be how it is in this universe. I for one, would like to see how it pans out.
ps: Calling time travel a gimmick and calling oneself a true trek fan is a bit of an oxymoron
Lets not forget Spock didn't just loose his planet, he lost his mother at the same time. He no longer has Amanda to help guide him in dealing with his human emotions. At the start of ID, he's showing signs of survivor's guilt in the Volcano. He's clearly still hurting, but being Vulcan, represses it. When he shouts Khan, it's because it's all built up and he can't take it anymore. He's just lost someone he has spent a year becoming good friends with, someone who he clearly considers a capable captain, if a bit unorthadox at times, and someone he considers a friend.
Yes, it was a blatant homage. Yes, it made sense if you think about it. No, I did not cringe, I grinned like a loon during the saying goodbye part, wondering if they would have him scream it or not. It added to the thrill of the scene. And then I let out a tiny cheer in my head cos they did do it. It was all of Spock's repressed emotions, emotions that he had not truly mastered yet (and just look at Spock in The Cage, he clearly hasn't mastered his emotions this early in his life for all those purists), bubbling up. What happened was basically the straw that broke the camel's back, as proven by how crazed he went after Khan.
Honestly, I enjoy JJ trek. Sure, they have their flaws, and the last one I would only rank lower middle of the pack, but Into Darkness is in my top 5 trek films. It felt like Trek, the action, the sense of adventure and comraderie between the crew, the fun of watching it, the tale of revenge and misuse of power. And I look forward to owning it on DVD.
*******************************************
A Romulan Strike Team, Missing Farmers and an ancient base on a Klingon Border world. But what connects them? Find out in my First Foundary mission: 'The Jeroan Farmer Escapade'
"Star Trek Into Darkness" grossed just under half a billion dollars worldwide and currently holds a 87 percent Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Yet during a "Star Trek" fan convention in Las Vegas earlier this month, attendees ranked "Star Trek Into Darkness" as the worst of the Star Trek movies. (As someone who owns "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" on DVD, I promise it is far from the worst "Star Trek" movie.)"
-Huffpost
like or love JJ....the movie kicked azz.
_______________________
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
"Star Trek: Enterprise", "Star Trek: Nemesis", and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" solidify why the franchise needs to be put on hiatus.
"Star Trek: Enterprise" recycled too many story elements from across the entire franchise.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Next Generation" elements.
"Star Trek: Into Darkness" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Original Series", "Star Trek: The Next Generation", and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" elements.
"Star Trek" needs to go into a twenty to thirty year hiatus, so that a very new visionary can create "Star Trek: The Third Generation". Its time for the franchise to gracefully age on the shelf.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" created the same sins.
"Star Trek: Enterprise" recycled too many story elements from across the entire franchise.
That's just one aspect. It had several OTHER and more important problems:
Boring cast of characters.
Weak main character.
Retconning.
Not expanding or using established Trek races from TOS, or when done is with less than entertaining results.
Dedicating an entire season to the Xindi, a group that never existed prior to the series.
Controversial design of the Enterprise.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Next Generation" elements.
Again, that's just a single element you're focusing on. You're ignoring:
The weak story.
Romulans being portrayed COMPLETELY out of character.
Remans being some retcon slave race.
Remans being oogly-boogly for the sake of being scary aliens.
Dune buggy chase.
Villain is unfocused and not imposing.
Troi mind-r4pe scene
Worf on the Enterprise for no reason.
Another Soong-droid
Data's "death" being moot with "B4" hanging around.
"Star Trek: Into Darkness" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Original Series", "Star Trek: The Next Generation", and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" elements.
And was successful at it. The same cannot be said of your first 2 examples which killed interest in Star Trek, so I have no idea why you would even lump STID in with them. No really, let's have a second take on it:
One is amazingly successful.
The other 2 are failures.
^^^ Again, why is STID lumped in with them?
"Star Trek" needs to go into a twenty to thirty year hiatus, so that a very new visionary can create "Star Trek: The Third Generation". Its time for the franchise to gracefully age on the shelf.
How about "don't watch it?" I want more, so I certainly don't agree with your proposal in the least.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" created the same sins.
...Purists seem to be under some false illusion that this Spock is like Nimoy's Spock....
not related to your post at all, I just wanted to point something I noticed that this statement made me remember:
.
I watched Quinto's Spock and I also just got done re-watching Spock on the original series via netfix.
Zackary did very very well in emulating the original Spock, he even got Nimoy's 'walk' very close ( it hit me hard when Nimoy was walking out of the doorway on an episode and I thought to myself "oh my gawd, they even walk the same too !!" ).
The new movies did a very good homage to the original series actors in this aspect ... there were many moments in the two recent movies where I physically laughed aloud because I caught on to their very well played ( and well thought out and practiced ) homages.
Pine got 'Shatner Kirks' mannerisms down good too I thought.
ok...back to the thread.,
_______________________
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
"Star Trek: Enterprise", "Star Trek: Nemesis", and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" solidify why the franchise needs to be put on hiatus.
"Star Trek: Enterprise" recycled too many story elements from across the entire franchise.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Next Generation" elements.
"Star Trek: Into Darkness" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Original Series", "Star Trek: The Next Generation", and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" elements.
"Star Trek" needs to go into a twenty to thirty year hiatus, so that a very new visionary can create "Star Trek: The Third Generation". Its time for the franchise to gracefully age on the shelf.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" created the same sins.
Truthfully.... many of your complaints are things I LIKED about those. Seriously.... making a prequel that doesn't revisit anything is an idiotic idea, and while some new stuff is good, you NEED to have races that have been seen before. I'd have absolutely loved seeing first contact with the Rigelians for example.
Seeing the Kriosians pop up was absolutely AWESOME!!!! It's the sort of thing they should have done more often instead of devoting an entire season to the Time War. But that being said I loved the Suliban.... I was bummed to see Silik die.
I personally enjoyed the new Trek movies. The first movie changed up some original canon information, but with the introduction of the Narada, changes were to be expected.
As someone with pretty extensive knowledge of Trek lore, I have only a few nitpicks with JJ Trek, and they aren't worth putting here in this debate.
As far as the story of Intro Darkness being a retread, I have to disagree pretty vehemently. The core story of a Starfleet Admiral creating a dreadnought to unify the galaxy with a military campaign has never seen the light of day on screen. It's adapted from a Diane Duane novel from the mid-1980s called "Dreadnought!" that does the concept a lot of justice by eliminating the Mary Sue characters from the story and wrapping new Trek lore introduced since then to fill in the gaps.
As a fan of the novels, I've often wondered why so many writers of Trek movies and shows to date have bypassed the work these authors put into their creations, many of which are bestsellers in their own right, and here Abrams does just that with Into Darkness, and still people whine.
Its the ultimate no-win scenario, trying to take an old favorite and age it in a new direction. You invariably have purists who can't let go of the past, who will hate it no matter how well done it is.
Me, I take this new Trek on its own merits, and side by side with the originals, it holds it own, and the returns on the investment speak to its success. The original cast has pretty universally given the new Trek their blessing, Nimoy even coming out of retirement to participate in it, so to me, it's Trek.
We, as fans, have to accept that the stories we've read in the past are not sacred texts (As a reader of the books, I can tell you that First Contact broke my heart because of how dramatically it changed the long accepted story of both Cochrane's first flight and first contact with Vulcan) and each new iteration is going to invariably change something we hold dear.
From Nicholas Meyer, director of Star Treks II and VI: "Catholic Mass has a text, but various composers have set these words to very different music. When you listen to various versions, they don't sound the same at all. All these Star Trek movies, including J.J.'s, is the result of different composers putting different music to the same basic thing."
If you didn't like the tune this time around, chances are there will be another composer at some point who takes over and maybe you will like their take.
And also: "Just repeat to yourself it's just a show, I should really just relax."
not related to your post at all, I just wanted to point something I noticed that this statement made me remember:
.
I watched Quinto's Spock and I also just got done re-watching Spock on the original series via netfix.
Zackary did very very well in emulating the original Spock, he even got Nimoy's 'walk' very close ( it hit me hard when Nimoy was walking out of the doorway on an episode and I thought to myself "oh my gawd, they even walk the same too !!" ).
The new movies did a very good homage to the original series actors in this aspect ... there were many moments in the two recent movies where I physically laughed aloud because I caught on to their very well played ( and well thought out and practiced ) homages.
Pine got 'Shatner Kirks' mannerisms down good too I thought.
ok...back to the thread.,
Yes, that was probably poor phrasing on my part or at least I should have expanded on it. What I meant "not Nimoy's Spock" is due to the events of the Narada coming through and wreaking havoc with the timeline, Quinto Spock's actions, experiences are now turned on end compared to Nimoy's Spock. So he'll have these emotional outbursts and other things that we would never have seen with Nimoy's Spock. I'll also add to your post that Karl Urban does a damn good McCoy as well. I remember in the first movie thinking I was looking at a young Deforrest Kelley. All the new characters actually do good jobs with their characters. Only one that I think may be a little over the top is Checkov. His russian accent seems more forced that Koenig's.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."-Commander William Adama
Only one that I think may be a little over the top is Checkov. His russian accent seems more forced that Koenig's.
heh... you made me wonder more about him as an actor, so I looked him up .... lol...it seems Anton Yelchin is a Russian-american immigrant born in Leningrad heh.
_______________________
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Preeeeeeetty sure ST Final Frontier was the worst film ever :P. Scotty/Uhura love? directed by william shatner? if the producers allowed shatner to go through the original script, kirk would have turned into a "god" and fought the other god being. smh ego
Comments
Can't wait for him to work his gold turning to TRIBBLE powers on Star Wars and CBS/Paramount/Whoever can get someone that isn't an TRIBBLE to do the next Star Trek film, someone that actually cares about the franchise and history.
the funny thing is I heard this many times when TNG came out
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
So, are you really trying to say - "A great 'Trek' film ISN'T a good science fiction film? I ask because honestly, before the JJ Star Trek reboot; the only really financially successful Star Trek films were 'ST:TMP'; 'STII:TWoK' and 'STIV:TVH' - and for the TNG era, the one moderate success was 'ST:FC'.
Also, as a Star Trek fan who's been watching Star Trek first run since 1969 - I also have to disagree with your assessment the STiD was not a 'good' Star Trek film as it DID capture the characters, of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy to a tee; and in fact did do a very good job of recapturing the the elements of TOS (You know, the original 'Star Trek' "vision" - without which; NONE of the 'touchy/feely/always right/rarely fight' aspects of the TNG era woul;d exist.
In short, it IS a good 'Star Trek' film (it really is) -- but it's NOT a good TNG style Star trek film, but that's okay as it's not representative of the TNG era and isn't trying to be.:D
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
:rolleyes:
Exactly - TO YOU. You are perfectly entitled to feel that way and I can't say you are wrong in any way, but don't presume to impose your feelings on me or anyone else. You have no say so with regards to my opinion and how I feel.
:rolleyes:
When they start criticizing things based on similar problems or mistakes in past Trek shows is when it's no hold barred. You can argue for or against merits of a movie or show, i.e. facts that do or do not make for a good production. Personal feelings (Example: "That's not Trek" or "You're not a true fan because ...") are totally irrelevant aspects and have no place in a discussion.
LOL - did you miss Star Trek V and all the TNG movies? Spare me this drama...
____________
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Wow. Ok, I get you didn't like Into Darkness.
1) I didn't cringe at all when Spock shouted "Khan". Why would I? It was Spock expressing anger at Khan for causing the death of a person he has finally learned to call a "friend" after all the conflict the two have endured.
Purists seem to be under some false illusion that this Spock is like Nimoy's Spock. In case you didn't notice, JJ has made Trek a little grittier and sexier which to me is fine. I'm also guessing that since this Spock has been shown to be a hot-head since he was a kid(fighting the kids on Vulcan, being a smart TRIBBLE to the Science Council) this isn't out of his character at all. Plus he probably hasn't gone through the rite of Kolinar either(and since he's with Uhura he may not). After all Nimoy's Spock did that during the lay over between the 5 year mission and ST:TMP to completely purge his human emotions.
2) As for getting someone who isn't an "TRIBBLE" to direct the next Trek, submit your resume. I can only assume that you are qualified to direct the next film or even the next Star Wars film, because you have said JJ is just so bad. I assume you know what he is doing wrong. Oh that's right, it's not that you know what he's doing wrong, it's what you think is wrong. Your opinion on JJ may be shared by others, but it isn't shared by everybody. And I'm will to bet that Paramount definitely doesn't share your opinion after watching the profits roll in from the two JJ Treks.
I enjoy JJ Trek. In enjoye ST:ID. In fact, I'll go on record and say I thought it was better than the first. Of course I'm a huge Khan fan, and it gave me my Khan fix. My kids enjoy JJ Trek. In fact it has gotten my son and littlest daughter interested in watching the old shows on Netflix(even Enterprise) and the old movies. Then there is my brother-in-law who is not a fan of the original Treks. Not his thing. But he has immensely enjoyed both JJ Treks, and like me, liked ST:ID more.
I equate people like you to the same people who pissed and moaned about the new Battlestar Galactica. "Oh my god, Starbucks a girl. Apollo isn't Apollo's name, its just a call sign, Adama's hispanic, Tigh isn't black, Cylons are human looking, the Galactica retracts the launch pods for hyper-jump, etc. etc. etc". It's all an opinion, and as they say: opinions are like a rear part of the human anatomy, everybody has one.
Ya I'm not sure how it was voted anywhere near the bottom. You cannot just dismiss the concept of the new movies to serve some motive. If you like the originals better, that's fine but they are telling a new story and I take it for what it is.
Comparing this storyline with the old one directly as if they are somehow supposed to align is silly. The characters have been through different events and therefore will be different in the end.
Spock lost his planet before Enterprise even started its 5 year mission. Nothing before is going to be how it is in this universe. I for one, would like to see how it pans out.
ps: Calling time travel a gimmick and calling oneself a true trek fan is a bit of an oxymoron
Yes, it was a blatant homage. Yes, it made sense if you think about it. No, I did not cringe, I grinned like a loon during the saying goodbye part, wondering if they would have him scream it or not. It added to the thrill of the scene. And then I let out a tiny cheer in my head cos they did do it. It was all of Spock's repressed emotions, emotions that he had not truly mastered yet (and just look at Spock in The Cage, he clearly hasn't mastered his emotions this early in his life for all those purists), bubbling up. What happened was basically the straw that broke the camel's back, as proven by how crazed he went after Khan.
Honestly, I enjoy JJ trek. Sure, they have their flaws, and the last one I would only rank lower middle of the pack, but Into Darkness is in my top 5 trek films. It felt like Trek, the action, the sense of adventure and comraderie between the crew, the fun of watching it, the tale of revenge and misuse of power. And I look forward to owning it on DVD.
A Romulan Strike Team, Missing Farmers and an ancient base on a Klingon Border world. But what connects them? Find out in my First Foundary mission: 'The Jeroan Farmer Escapade'
-Huffpost
like or love JJ....the movie kicked azz.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
"Star Trek: Enterprise" recycled too many story elements from across the entire franchise.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Next Generation" elements.
"Star Trek: Into Darkness" recycled and cannibalized too many "Star Trek: The Original Series", "Star Trek: The Next Generation", and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" elements.
"Star Trek" needs to go into a twenty to thirty year hiatus, so that a very new visionary can create "Star Trek: The Third Generation". Its time for the franchise to gracefully age on the shelf.
"Star Trek: Nemesis" and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" created the same sins.
Boring cast of characters.
Weak main character.
Retconning.
Not expanding or using established Trek races from TOS, or when done is with less than entertaining results.
Dedicating an entire season to the Xindi, a group that never existed prior to the series.
Controversial design of the Enterprise.
Again, that's just a single element you're focusing on. You're ignoring:
The weak story.
Romulans being portrayed COMPLETELY out of character.
Remans being some retcon slave race.
Remans being oogly-boogly for the sake of being scary aliens.
Dune buggy chase.
Villain is unfocused and not imposing.
Troi mind-r4pe scene
Worf on the Enterprise for no reason.
Another Soong-droid
Data's "death" being moot with "B4" hanging around.
And was successful at it. The same cannot be said of your first 2 examples which killed interest in Star Trek, so I have no idea why you would even lump STID in with them. No really, let's have a second take on it:
One is amazingly successful.
The other 2 are failures.
^^^ Again, why is STID lumped in with them?
How about "don't watch it?" I want more, so I certainly don't agree with your proposal in the least.
Drama much?
not related to your post at all, I just wanted to point something I noticed that this statement made me remember:
.
I watched Quinto's Spock and I also just got done re-watching Spock on the original series via netfix.
Zackary did very very well in emulating the original Spock, he even got Nimoy's 'walk' very close ( it hit me hard when Nimoy was walking out of the doorway on an episode and I thought to myself "oh my gawd, they even walk the same too !!" ).
The new movies did a very good homage to the original series actors in this aspect ... there were many moments in the two recent movies where I physically laughed aloud because I caught on to their very well played ( and well thought out and practiced ) homages.
Pine got 'Shatner Kirks' mannerisms down good too I thought.
ok...back to the thread.,
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Seeing the Kriosians pop up was absolutely AWESOME!!!! It's the sort of thing they should have done more often instead of devoting an entire season to the Time War. But that being said I loved the Suliban.... I was bummed to see Silik die.
My character Tsin'xing
As someone with pretty extensive knowledge of Trek lore, I have only a few nitpicks with JJ Trek, and they aren't worth putting here in this debate.
As far as the story of Intro Darkness being a retread, I have to disagree pretty vehemently. The core story of a Starfleet Admiral creating a dreadnought to unify the galaxy with a military campaign has never seen the light of day on screen. It's adapted from a Diane Duane novel from the mid-1980s called "Dreadnought!" that does the concept a lot of justice by eliminating the Mary Sue characters from the story and wrapping new Trek lore introduced since then to fill in the gaps.
As a fan of the novels, I've often wondered why so many writers of Trek movies and shows to date have bypassed the work these authors put into their creations, many of which are bestsellers in their own right, and here Abrams does just that with Into Darkness, and still people whine.
Its the ultimate no-win scenario, trying to take an old favorite and age it in a new direction. You invariably have purists who can't let go of the past, who will hate it no matter how well done it is.
Me, I take this new Trek on its own merits, and side by side with the originals, it holds it own, and the returns on the investment speak to its success. The original cast has pretty universally given the new Trek their blessing, Nimoy even coming out of retirement to participate in it, so to me, it's Trek.
We, as fans, have to accept that the stories we've read in the past are not sacred texts (As a reader of the books, I can tell you that First Contact broke my heart because of how dramatically it changed the long accepted story of both Cochrane's first flight and first contact with Vulcan) and each new iteration is going to invariably change something we hold dear.
In the words of Bill Shatner, GET OVER IT!
If you didn't like the tune this time around, chances are there will be another composer at some point who takes over and maybe you will like their take.
And also: "Just repeat to yourself it's just a show, I should really just relax."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B22Uy7SBe4
I will just leave these here to explain WHY new trek is TRIBBLE
Thanks
Even that other JJ thread has the link on the very first post......oh look .... 'YOU' started that other thread ...how novel.
but they 'are' funny and rather well done .... if you understand the difference between satire and reality.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Not getting enough attention in the thread you made with these, ey? Here's a list of classic Trek for you:
Spock's Brain
The Way to Eden
Turnabout Intruder
Star Trek V
Generations
Insurrection
Nemesis
Sub Rosa
Shades of Gray
Enjoy yourself.
:cool:
Yes, that was probably poor phrasing on my part or at least I should have expanded on it. What I meant "not Nimoy's Spock" is due to the events of the Narada coming through and wreaking havoc with the timeline, Quinto Spock's actions, experiences are now turned on end compared to Nimoy's Spock. So he'll have these emotional outbursts and other things that we would never have seen with Nimoy's Spock. I'll also add to your post that Karl Urban does a damn good McCoy as well. I remember in the first movie thinking I was looking at a young Deforrest Kelley. All the new characters actually do good jobs with their characters. Only one that I think may be a little over the top is Checkov. His russian accent seems more forced that Koenig's.
not at all, it just sparked something in my head that I thought I'd share. that's why I said it wasn't related to your post at all
heh... you made me wonder more about him as an actor, so I looked him up .... lol...it seems Anton Yelchin is a Russian-american immigrant born in Leningrad
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Chillax. No Ego. No Drama.
Like my alien? Watch THE VIDEO
Need custom graphics for you or your fleet? Click HERE
Lol i actually laughed at the video you posted just as much as your list
Why
Because that is trek and even though yes some of them are boring and not the best lol
THEY ARE ORIGINAL not trying to be something they are not or worst recycled story's
LIKE ERM I DUNNO KHAN MAYBE
All trek is awesome.
new trek just has better grafix and scripting overall than most old trek.
sorry, but its true.
Lake1771 has spoken.
all other arguments are invalid.