JJ is taking all of the fun bits out of Star Trek,
What the moralizing (which is back in Into Darkness) and impotently sitting at a briefing table just discussing thing?
Or is it the mountain of meaningless minutia concerning what fictional events fictionally happened and a bunch of technobabble that only really obsessive tech geeks would even care about?
I recalled someone mentioning an article that he wanted all the Old Trek erased, but never read it myself. I might google to find it later...
Yeah and I also mentioned it was debunked and that said article ran on one site and only one site and had no confirmation from either CBS or Bad Robot.
Plus the fact that the article is also incorrect about the lack of tie-in material to NuTrek since it has a few tie-in novels novels, comics, and a video game so about a tv series and a theme park short of what JJ Abrams allegedly wanted.
Round and round it goes and where it stops nobody knows. Why do we keep rehashing this?
JJ Abrams is not the Devil anymore than Gene Roddenbury was any kind of a Saint.
Star Trek has seen many a blunder long before JJ Abrams entered the picture, Roddenbury himself made his own share of mistakes that almost buried the franchise and you may post as many links as you like about Abram's marketing woes but it won't take too much digging to find examples of the amount maneuvering that Roddenbury made to get his piece of the Star Trek Pie. Make no mistake about it, both men were only doing this to make money.
Vilify Abrams, yet again, if you must, but before his arrival the franchise was virtually dead, the last 2 movies and last series from the old hands had near about sealed its fate to that of a historical footnote.
As a science fiction fan I enjoyed Abram's take on Star Trek, I had issues with it like the lens flare and the location shooting which I abhorred, but not so that I did not enjoy the films. If I were to compare Star Trek 2009 with Star Trek the Motion Picture, Star Trek 2009 wins without reservation. That said I would be saddened if the films spell the doom of stories to be told in the original universe.
For Star Wars, I'm more worried about what Disney does to Star Wars than anything that Abram's does to it. I'd be just as worried about a Disney rendition of Batman, or the Terminator, or the Matrix, all venues that have themes that are far too dark for a Disney production.
If Star Wars becomes Disneyfied we won't be able to put the entire blame on Abrams.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
No sir, you did, and I'll use some of your own words to explain it:
THE ANGRY FANS are
...taking all of the fun bits out of Star Trek, acts like an arrogant pig, openly used Trek as a stepping stone
...FOR THEIR OWN personal pulpit on what should and should not be deemed as "Trek", and who is and is not a "true fan".
to Star Wars, treated Trek like an inferior product, and attempted to get all previous canon permabanned from stores and the airwaves because he wanted HIS Trek to be the only Trek. Nobody else managed that unique combination of supercilious snottiness and blatant, open disregard for the fans. Nobody.
Trek was DEAD in the water. a combination of Nemesis and Enterprise turned it into Titanic on a course for the iceberg <--- THAT being people's interest in the franchise. There's a reason we had ZERO trek between 2005 - 2008. There's a reason Enterprise got cancelled.
It's because the PRODUCT at that point was TRIBBLE.
Like it or not, Star Trek is a PRODUCT, and if people lose interest in the PRODUCT, then the suits pull the plug on funding, meaning PRODUCTion stops...which it did. Abrams pretty much did the impossible which was to raise the Titanic.
JJ Abrams is a whiny, arrogant, annoying poser with no directing skills whatsoever. I loathe every fiber of his being.
Wow, you seriously need some counseling, dude. It's not like he murdered your family or or wrote your phone number in a public restroom. Get over it.
I'd be just as worried about a Disney rendition of Batman, or the Terminator, or the Matrix, all venues that have themes that are far too dark for a Disney production.
If Star Wars becomes Disneyfied we won't be able to put the entire blame on Abrams.
Then again, Disney can be really screwy when they want to be.
*pointedly refuses to respond to JJ fanboy trolls, point out their lack of logic, or otherwise pay them any attention at all*
Right. My final thoughts on this thread, because I have better things to do (mammoth fanfiction project that I'm going to do one of these days, term paper in my paleo class that I need to actually write because I got distracted by my research for it, et cetera).
JJ took a product with a large, devoted fan base that had no big-money projects going, and tried to (a) monopolize it for himself, (b) twist it to fit his particular vision, and (c) replace the elements that made it popular in the first place with bland action-movie tropes in order to make his ego pieces more appealing to the wider market. He is a textbook egomaniac and narcissist, an arrogant jerk, and a condescending poser of no directorial skill whatsoever. His movies treat the audience like complete and utter morons, as opposed to classic Star Trek, which makes the audience think. His ego pieces also contain a large number of plot holes and glaring casting errors, as well as lens flares that make them literally unwatchable for many people.
In short, JJ sucks, and I can't stand him. His movies are at best poor excuses for science-fiction, let alone Star Trek.
Done. I'll never change that opinion, and nothing you fanboys say can convince me otherwise.
I do enjoy the tired cliche' comebacks employed by people who can't support their arguments with facts. Everyone that gets involved with the franchise tries to monetize it and put his own creative spin on the endeavor and in doing so has to employ whatever means he or she will deem necessary to make it appealing to as wide an audience as possible.
Star Trek was no produced to appeal to a few extreme dogmatic Trek Nerds, it was made to make the studio money, welcome to the real grownup world.
Your personal opinion of JJ Abrams character, which is all that it is, an opinion, does not alter the fact that he successfully performed the role for which he was contracted, he took a dead product and turned it into a blockbuster and in so doing revived interest in the franchise as a whole.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
And they all say variations of as the Wrap reported as its the only news site running this story.
See here is the thing when a news site runs a story its probably a load of TRIBBLE if other news sites don't also start running this story without mentioning that its from another site later followed by a confirmation of its accuracy.
And this article that is being treated as gospel by the Abrams bashers also has this little tid bit
Paramount declined to comment for this article and a spokesperson for Bad Robot
did not respond to a request to comment.
So seeing as they aren't getting anything from Bad Robot and Paramount I tend to be skeptical of the Wrap's unnamed source for this alleged attempt. Especially since no other news site has run this story.
ST 2009 was a big fat slap to the face of Trek. It is a shallow, juvenile, nonsensical movie that is an insult to Star Trek. Into Darkness had Khan, Cumberbatch and Klingons (disfigured) so it was a lot better. Still suffers from the problems in #1.
And wtf is with the lense flares? I guess this is what happens when you have "celebrity" director. Now he is off to TRIBBLE up SW! GG JJ GG :rolleyes:
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
JJ wasn't the first to use "lens flares" and he's not the only one doing it ... Joss Whedon disliked the "clinical" and 'sterile" nature of modern digital filmography and wanted to try and create a more 'realistic" and "organic" feel to his productions. Go and watch episodes of Firefly, and you'll see lens flares, out of focus zooms, actors not in shot, camera motion wobbles, all in an attempt to "de-sterilize' the action ...
To be sure, I think JW did a way better job than JJ, who did go a little to far, and if they had Joss as the Director/Producer, I think he'd do a good job, but we are stuck with JJ, because he's the current earner, and there is no denying that ST2009 and STID made money for Paramount. So please get over the lens flare thing ...
As far as JJ 'ruining' Star Trek ... I get tired of people throwing this around and screaming the word 'canon' ... I do not think this word means what you think it means ...
"Canon" is simply whatever the IP owners say it is, if Kirk is now more of a James Dean, rather than a James Bond, then so be it ... If Kirk dies instead of Spock, and Spock is more "human" than Vulcan, then so be it ... If you can now transport over Intra-Solar System distances (so why then do we even need starships?) then so be it ... Does it agree with what has been portrayed in earlier episodes? Of course not. Does it annoy us that things we thought were true, have now been made false? Perhaps ... But it's now "canon" so ... Deal with it!
If JJ decides that Yoda is actually Twi'lek, Chewbacca is an Ewok and that Padme didn't actually die giving birth to Luke and Leia but is alive and well and has been living in a monastery back on Naboo, and if Disney (the new owners of the IP) agree with him, then guess what? That's now the new "canon"
I'm not fond at all of J.J.Trek, but to be fair, you don't necessarily have to be a fan of Star Trek to make good movies for the IP.
Nicholas Meyer is one, and he was the writer/director for the best of the TOS crews' movies. He was also the driving force in Wrath of Khan and the revision of how it all looked. He was brought onboard to save Star Trek after The Motion Picture came out with its varied problems. He did a pretty good job, I think, esp. for someone that wasn't a fan of the IP to begin with.
If I learned one thing from this forum in three years is when a JJ trek thread pops up, it's better to eat popcorn and read than to voice an opinion.
It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.:D
Isn't though, sometimes I think that's the only reason why people keep flogging this poor dead horse, just to sit back and enjoy the spectacle that follows.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
Even as someone who likes Final Frontier, I have to agree.
And, Abrams not being a Trek fan isn't exactly news. I honestly like the new Trek films. They're good films. They're not as good as, say, TWOK, but that's setting a high bar.
JJ Trek is actually pretty good if you give it a chance and stop thinking of it as a Star Trek film series. It's a reimagining, so you have to expect them to change it up for a modern audience. JJTrek has bought in a lot of new Trek fans - many of whom do prefer the older Treks compared to the post-reboot films.
That is all.
That's what they are and that is where hollywood is right now. Depending on your view it is a hard time to be a James Bond fan too right now. It will be up to future audiences to judge.
I can cite several examples of how TNG made fun of its audience and of course the writers also gave Wil Wheaton a hard time. The writers assumed that the audience were geeky males who knew little about women. JJ tried to nerd proof his films. Almost no canon aliens and the only aliens appear in background shots and are unnamed. Thus there is no geek lore. Then the ships designs and appearance break canon. Finally no novels so thereisno background lore. The movies are meant to be light entertainment and nothing to get all worked up about.
A TIME TO SEARCH: ENTER MY FOUNDRY MISSION at the RISA SYSTEM Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
yeah that was a bit odd, also how are they able to call new Vulcan, but unable to call for Starfleet back up at that point? Surely Marcus can't exert full control over starfleet, somebody could have come to help surely?
I was ok with that point. Who was gonna believe their story? Marcus had more credibility.
A TIME TO SEARCH: ENTER MY FOUNDRY MISSION at the RISA SYSTEM Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
You know I find all the talk about the guys behind the JJ films not being trek fans when either deliberately through coincidence they made references to scraped stuff from rough drafts of episodes and movies. I mean this is stuff that probably only the uberest of the uber fans would even know about.
Things like the Starfleet Arrowhead was originally supposed to be used for all of Starfleet instead of just the Enterprise crew.
Or how similar John Harrison is to an alias Khan was going to use in a draft of Space Seed when he was a Norwegian ubermesh.
How about Carol Marcus using Wallace as her last name to hide her identity being interesting seeing as an early draft of The Wrath of Khan was going to use Janet Wallace from the Deadly Years as Kirk's old flame in the film.
Things like the Starfleet Arrowhead was originally supposed to be used for all of Starfleet instead of just the Enterprise crew.
I'm not sure how you mean that - as something said by someone who was trying to prove their ubernerdiness? Because in TOS, they started off using a unique insignia for each ship - Enterprise had a lopsided arrowhead, the Constellation used a sort of double-loop affair, Exeter had a vertical strip of gold mesh - but sources disagree on whether that was intentional on Roddenberry's part, or if it was a design decision by William Theiss. What is known is that by TMP, the Enterprise insignia was in use by all of Starfleet; Roddenberry's novelization claimed that it was in honor of Kirk's ship, but his novelization includes quite a lot of other questionable storytelling choices, so...
It seems likely to me that nobody really thought about it that hard in the series, as Trek was unique at the time in that it was a sci-fi series that wasn't an "anthology" - that is, each story centered around the same characters, in what was supposed to be the same universe. There was absolutely no care taken to ensure continuity, of course, because that was utterly unheard of at the time. When the movie came around, it seems probable that the arrowhead was used because that was what everyone thought of as "the Star Trek symbol", and so it has stayed in all incarnations since - well, except ENT, but I still contend that ENT is a prequel to the Abramsverse, not the Prime.
I'm not sure how you mean that - as something said by someone who was trying to prove their ubernerdiness? Because in TOS, they started off using a unique insignia for each ship - Enterprise had a lopsided arrowhead, the Constellation used a sort of double-loop affair, Exeter had a vertical strip of gold mesh - but sources disagree on whether that was intentional on Roddenberry's part, or if it was a design decision by William Theiss. What is known is that by TMP, the Enterprise insignia was in use by all of Starfleet; Roddenberry's novelization claimed that it was in honor of Kirk's ship, but his novelization includes quite a lot of other questionable storytelling choices, so...
If you really want to get super-duper-uber-nerdy, Gene Roddenberry didn't actually write the TMP novelization; it was ghost written by Alan Dean Foster who did that sort of thing quite often.
If you really want to get super-duper-uber-nerdy, Gene Roddenberry didn't actually write the TMP novelization; it was ghost written by Alan Dean Foster who did that sort of thing quite often.
Really? Foster's usually a much better author than that. I mean, it wasn't as bad as, say, Hubbard's Battlefield Earth, but it was no Icerigger.
*pointedly refuses to respond to JJ fanboy trolls, point out their lack of logic, or otherwise pay them any attention at all*
Ah, name calling - the last resort of the desperate who have nothing substantial to offer.
In short, JJ sucks, and I can't stand him. His movies are at best poor excuses for science-fiction, let alone Star Trek.
Wait, so people who were entertained by his movies have a lack of logic, but your personal hatred towards this guy you don't even know, and who never did anything to you is TOTALLY logical. Got it. FYI - Star Trek is not about hard science (re: all the sound effects in space, and all the human-looking "aliens"). It may contain elements of it, but ultimately, uses it as a means to an end to tell a story, and will certainly bend it over and have its way with it to fit the script when it deems necessary. If you want real, true a sci-fi, go watch 2001...over and over again.
I'll never change that opinion, and nothing you fanboys say can convince me otherwise.
Don't care? You changing your opinion is irrelevant.
Furthermore - and I can only speak for myself - I was never trying to change your opinion, but I will certainly point out the major and obvious flaws in the so-called "logic" that the "Abrams is the devil" people such as yourself use to critique his movies.
The last TNG movie was not well received.
Enterprise got cancelled.
^ Contemplate those 2 facts the next time you're eating your popcorn on the couch watching:
Spock's Brain
Way to Eden
Turnabout Intruder
Justice
Angel One
Shades of Grey
The Game
Night Terrors
Time's Arrow (part's 1 and 2 - this was a cliffhanger, really?)
Masks
Sub Rosa
Move Along Home
The Muse
Let He Who Is Without Sin...
Time's Orphan
The Thaw
Endgame
7 of 9 in needlessly tight outfits
And Janeway and Paris having a litter of Salamander pups in Threshhold.
Hey, putting Jeri Ryan in tight catsuits is totally logical!!
And a lot of folks would add the anvil-riffic "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" to that list of episodes. Personally, I'd nominate the one with Lazarus whose title I can't recall just now, simply because of the writer's ludicrous interpretation of what "antimatter" is, and how it interacts with normal matter...
Hey, putting Jeri Ryan in tight catsuits is totally logical!!
And a lot of folks would add the anvil-riffic "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" to that list of episodes. Personally, I'd nominate the one with Lazarus whose title I can't recall just now, simply because of the writer's ludicrous interpretation of what "antimatter" is, and how it interacts with normal matter...
I think Lazarus and the alternative factor were the TOS version of "Threshhold".... I mean really.... the plot was that if Lazarus and that interdimensional/temporal ship (yes it traveled backwards in time too) weren't fixed, that both the regular universe and antimatter universe would cease to exist... lol wut?
I think Lazarus and the alternative factor were the TOS version of "Threshhold".... I mean really.... the plot was that if Lazarus and that interdimensional/temporal ship (yes it traveled backwards in time too) weren't fixed, that both the regular universe and antimatter universe would cease to exist... lol wut?
Apparently out of all the various methods of interdimensional and temporal travel, Lazarus chose the most dangerous one. I'd hate to see his equations.
Apparently out of all the various methods of interdimensional and temporal travel, Lazarus chose the most dangerous one. I'd hate to see his equations.
Well the premise was totally screwball. The idea is that there is an antimatter counterpart to everything in our universe, and at some point in the future a human named Lazarus would get a tiny ship that can not only go backwards in time but travel between the two universes. It's claimed that the corridor connecting the two is somehow important to the stability of the two universes and stuff.... but they never explain how Lazarus's plan to kill his alternate self would result in the destruction of both universes. Just that it would. Then Kirk blows up Lazarus's ship/s and the two Lazaruses are trapped outside the universe. Crisis averted!.... not that it made sense....
Comments
2. That doesn't erase/excuse JJ's directorial shenanigans over the years...
What the moralizing (which is back in Into Darkness) and impotently sitting at a briefing table just discussing thing?
Or is it the mountain of meaningless minutia concerning what fictional events fictionally happened and a bunch of technobabble that only really obsessive tech geeks would even care about?
Yeah and I also mentioned it was debunked and that said article ran on one site and only one site and had no confirmation from either CBS or Bad Robot.
Plus the fact that the article is also incorrect about the lack of tie-in material to NuTrek since it has a few tie-in novels novels, comics, and a video game so about a tv series and a theme park short of what JJ Abrams allegedly wanted.
http://www.blastr.com/2013-5-16/apparently-jj-abrams-tried-shut-down-all-star-trek-tos-merch
Apparently, J.J. Abrams tried to shut down all Star Trek: TOS merch
http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/how-web-star-trek-rights-killed-jj-abrams-grand-ambitions-91766
How the Battle Over ?Star Trek? Rights Killed J.J. Abrams? Grand Ambitions
http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33380012/jj-abrams-battled-over-merchandising
JJ Abrams battled over merchandising?
http://trekweb.com/articles/2013/06/13/Star-Trek-Marketing-Issues-May-Have-Influenced-Director-JJ-Abrams-Star-Wars-Directing-Decision.shtml
Star Trek Marketing Issues May Have Influenced Director J.J. Abrams' Star Wars Directing Decision
http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2013/05/17/so-why-didnt-the-star-trek-reboot-include-all-things-trek/
So Why Didn?t the ?Star Trek? Reboot Include All Things Trek?
...well there are 5 sites...
JJ Abrams is not the Devil anymore than Gene Roddenbury was any kind of a Saint.
Star Trek has seen many a blunder long before JJ Abrams entered the picture, Roddenbury himself made his own share of mistakes that almost buried the franchise and you may post as many links as you like about Abram's marketing woes but it won't take too much digging to find examples of the amount maneuvering that Roddenbury made to get his piece of the Star Trek Pie. Make no mistake about it, both men were only doing this to make money.
Vilify Abrams, yet again, if you must, but before his arrival the franchise was virtually dead, the last 2 movies and last series from the old hands had near about sealed its fate to that of a historical footnote.
As a science fiction fan I enjoyed Abram's take on Star Trek, I had issues with it like the lens flare and the location shooting which I abhorred, but not so that I did not enjoy the films. If I were to compare Star Trek 2009 with Star Trek the Motion Picture, Star Trek 2009 wins without reservation. That said I would be saddened if the films spell the doom of stories to be told in the original universe.
For Star Wars, I'm more worried about what Disney does to Star Wars than anything that Abram's does to it. I'd be just as worried about a Disney rendition of Batman, or the Terminator, or the Matrix, all venues that have themes that are far too dark for a Disney production.
If Star Wars becomes Disneyfied we won't be able to put the entire blame on Abrams.
THE ANGRY FANS are ...FOR THEIR OWN personal pulpit on what should and should not be deemed as "Trek", and who is and is not a "true fan".
Trek was DEAD in the water. a combination of Nemesis and Enterprise turned it into Titanic on a course for the iceberg <--- THAT being people's interest in the franchise. There's a reason we had ZERO trek between 2005 - 2008. There's a reason Enterprise got cancelled.
It's because the PRODUCT at that point was TRIBBLE.
Like it or not, Star Trek is a PRODUCT, and if people lose interest in the PRODUCT, then the suits pull the plug on funding, meaning PRODUCTion stops...which it did. Abrams pretty much did the impossible which was to raise the Titanic.
Wow, you seriously need some counseling, dude. It's not like he murdered your family or or wrote your phone number in a public restroom. Get over it.
:rolleyes:
Then again, Disney can be really screwy when they want to be.
Right. My final thoughts on this thread, because I have better things to do (mammoth fanfiction project that I'm going to do one of these days, term paper in my paleo class that I need to actually write because I got distracted by my research for it, et cetera).
JJ took a product with a large, devoted fan base that had no big-money projects going, and tried to (a) monopolize it for himself, (b) twist it to fit his particular vision, and (c) replace the elements that made it popular in the first place with bland action-movie tropes in order to make his ego pieces more appealing to the wider market. He is a textbook egomaniac and narcissist, an arrogant jerk, and a condescending poser of no directorial skill whatsoever. His movies treat the audience like complete and utter morons, as opposed to classic Star Trek, which makes the audience think. His ego pieces also contain a large number of plot holes and glaring casting errors, as well as lens flares that make them literally unwatchable for many people.
In short, JJ sucks, and I can't stand him. His movies are at best poor excuses for science-fiction, let alone Star Trek.
Done. I'll never change that opinion, and nothing you fanboys say can convince me otherwise.
My character Tsin'xing
Star Trek was no produced to appeal to a few extreme dogmatic Trek Nerds, it was made to make the studio money, welcome to the real grownup world.
Your personal opinion of JJ Abrams character, which is all that it is, an opinion, does not alter the fact that he successfully performed the role for which he was contracted, he took a dead product and turned it into a blockbuster and in so doing revived interest in the franchise as a whole.
And they all say variations of as the Wrap reported as its the only news site running this story.
See here is the thing when a news site runs a story its probably a load of TRIBBLE if other news sites don't also start running this story without mentioning that its from another site later followed by a confirmation of its accuracy.
And this article that is being treated as gospel by the Abrams bashers also has this little tid bit
So seeing as they aren't getting anything from Bad Robot and Paramount I tend to be skeptical of the Wrap's unnamed source for this alleged attempt. Especially since no other news site has run this story.
And wtf is with the lense flares? I guess this is what happens when you have "celebrity" director. Now he is off to TRIBBLE up SW! GG JJ GG :rolleyes:
- Judge Aaron Satie
To be sure, I think JW did a way better job than JJ, who did go a little to far, and if they had Joss as the Director/Producer, I think he'd do a good job, but we are stuck with JJ, because he's the current earner, and there is no denying that ST2009 and STID made money for Paramount. So please get over the lens flare thing ...
As far as JJ 'ruining' Star Trek ... I get tired of people throwing this around and screaming the word 'canon' ... I do not think this word means what you think it means ...
"Canon" is simply whatever the IP owners say it is, if Kirk is now more of a James Dean, rather than a James Bond, then so be it ... If Kirk dies instead of Spock, and Spock is more "human" than Vulcan, then so be it ... If you can now transport over Intra-Solar System distances (so why then do we even need starships?) then so be it ... Does it agree with what has been portrayed in earlier episodes? Of course not. Does it annoy us that things we thought were true, have now been made false? Perhaps ... But it's now "canon" so ... Deal with it!
If JJ decides that Yoda is actually Twi'lek, Chewbacca is an Ewok and that Padme didn't actually die giving birth to Luke and Leia but is alive and well and has been living in a monastery back on Naboo, and if Disney (the new owners of the IP) agree with him, then guess what? That's now the new "canon"
Nicholas Meyer is one, and he was the writer/director for the best of the TOS crews' movies. He was also the driving force in Wrath of Khan and the revision of how it all looked. He was brought onboard to save Star Trek after The Motion Picture came out with its varied problems. He did a pretty good job, I think, esp. for someone that wasn't a fan of the IP to begin with.
It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.:D
After reading some of the rabid hate, you'd think Abrams ran over their pets or something....
That's what they are and that is where hollywood is right now. Depending on your view it is a hard time to be a James Bond fan too right now. It will be up to future audiences to judge.
I can cite several examples of how TNG made fun of its audience and of course the writers also gave Wil Wheaton a hard time. The writers assumed that the audience were geeky males who knew little about women. JJ tried to nerd proof his films. Almost no canon aliens and the only aliens appear in background shots and are unnamed. Thus there is no geek lore. Then the ships designs and appearance break canon. Finally no novels so thereisno background lore. The movies are meant to be light entertainment and nothing to get all worked up about.
Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
I was ok with that point. Who was gonna believe their story? Marcus had more credibility.
Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
Things like the Starfleet Arrowhead was originally supposed to be used for all of Starfleet instead of just the Enterprise crew.
Or how similar John Harrison is to an alias Khan was going to use in a draft of Space Seed when he was a Norwegian ubermesh.
How about Carol Marcus using Wallace as her last name to hide her identity being interesting seeing as an early draft of The Wrath of Khan was going to use Janet Wallace from the Deadly Years as Kirk's old flame in the film.
It seems likely to me that nobody really thought about it that hard in the series, as Trek was unique at the time in that it was a sci-fi series that wasn't an "anthology" - that is, each story centered around the same characters, in what was supposed to be the same universe. There was absolutely no care taken to ensure continuity, of course, because that was utterly unheard of at the time. When the movie came around, it seems probable that the arrowhead was used because that was what everyone thought of as "the Star Trek symbol", and so it has stayed in all incarnations since - well, except ENT, but I still contend that ENT is a prequel to the Abramsverse, not the Prime.
If you really want to get super-duper-uber-nerdy, Gene Roddenberry didn't actually write the TMP novelization; it was ghost written by Alan Dean Foster who did that sort of thing quite often.
The French edition let the secret slip; his name is on it rather than Gene's.
Wait, so people who were entertained by his movies have a lack of logic, but your personal hatred towards this guy you don't even know, and who never did anything to you is TOTALLY logical. Got it. FYI - Star Trek is not about hard science (re: all the sound effects in space, and all the human-looking "aliens"). It may contain elements of it, but ultimately, uses it as a means to an end to tell a story, and will certainly bend it over and have its way with it to fit the script when it deems necessary. If you want real, true a sci-fi, go watch 2001...over and over again.
Don't care? You changing your opinion is irrelevant.
Furthermore - and I can only speak for myself - I was never trying to change your opinion, but I will certainly point out the major and obvious flaws in the so-called "logic" that the "Abrams is the devil" people such as yourself use to critique his movies.
The last TNG movie was not well received.
Enterprise got cancelled.
^ Contemplate those 2 facts the next time you're eating your popcorn on the couch watching:
Spock's Brain
Way to Eden
Turnabout Intruder
Justice
Angel One
Shades of Grey
The Game
Night Terrors
Time's Arrow (part's 1 and 2 - this was a cliffhanger, really?)
Masks
Sub Rosa
Move Along Home
The Muse
Let He Who Is Without Sin...
Time's Orphan
The Thaw
Endgame
7 of 9 in needlessly tight outfits
And Janeway and Paris having a litter of Salamander pups in Threshhold.
Enjoy!
And a lot of folks would add the anvil-riffic "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" to that list of episodes. Personally, I'd nominate the one with Lazarus whose title I can't recall just now, simply because of the writer's ludicrous interpretation of what "antimatter" is, and how it interacts with normal matter...
My character Tsin'xing
Apparently out of all the various methods of interdimensional and temporal travel, Lazarus chose the most dangerous one. I'd hate to see his equations.
My character Tsin'xing