View Single Post
Old January 11 2013, 10:54 PM   #279
The Wormhole
The Wormhole's Avatar
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
It sounds like it's your endless complaining about things that are inconsequential to whether or not there's a good story and your arbitrary rules for what counts or not (that amazingly always support your argument) that are the problem then, not everyone else.
That's me alright

I'm curious, what is your basis for insinuating that it's the same people who complained about ships going underwater during Berman and Braga's tenure that are now giving JJ Abrams a pass on the same? I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but when I saw the ships underwater back then I thought it was a cool change of pace from the usual ships flying through space routine, and I feel the same way here. The technical issues never seemed bothersome to me, given all the other fantastical things the ships are capable of.
To be completely accurate, the original post I quoted was this:

ssosmcin wrote: View Post
You know, if the Enterprise was shown underwater in the pre-Abrams universe, with just a "who cares it looks cool" response, the uproar would be deafening, probably even from the people who are now shrugging it off.
To which I felt obligated to correct and state specifically that if Berman and Braga had done this "the uproar would have been deafening," as a means of mocking Trek fandom's irrational hatred of Berman and Braga which still lives strong to some degree today. After all, Berman and Braga use the term "Klingon Warbird" and I see some people using that as evidence that they are unfit to write Trek. Abrams uses the exact same term and no one cares.

As for the actual issue of starships underwater, from the technical point of view I couldn't care, as long as there's a story reason for it, I'm fine. Mind you, in the case of the Xindi ships, how they came to discover it's submersible abilities was some pretty weak logic. The conversation basically went like this.

"Let's take this ship underwater."
"Can it go underwater?"
"Nobody told us it couldn't."

So provided STID provides a logical story reason for the Enterprise going underwater I'll accept it.

You can't be serious. Are you putting on an act or something? Your excuses are ridiculous.
My angry/irrational fanboy routine usually is an act, but this particular example has an element of truth to it. I was discussing Berman and Braga, and someone cites ann example to argue against me from something Braga had nothing to do with, which to me seemed similar to Trek Fandom's other nagging habit to claim both Berman and Braga were responsible for everything that went on in post Roddenberry, pre Abrams Trek, when in fact Braga had authority over very little of it. For the record, Braga was only responsible for Generations, First Contact, seasons 5 and 6 of Voyager, and the first three seasons of Enterprise. That's it.
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote