View Single Post
Old April 3 2013, 12:15 AM   #128
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
From the conception of the STXI setting to the execution of a story so fast paced that it never leaves a moment to consider a thing that is going on, it's a blur. And once the thing slows down enough to come into focus, or people get tired of the ride, they'll realize there's no "there" there.
I think this is more a product of having way too many things to accomplish in a two-hour format. I was (and still am) critical of them trying to cram too many elements into the first film though they may have worked under the "band-aid" assumption and figured it was better to do everything that needed to be done introduction wise in the first film.

Though I do have high-hopes that Into Darkness slows things down a touch and allows us to enjoy the ride more.

Like I've said before, never have I thought Star Trek 2009 was a perfect movie but I thought it was better than pretty much every TNG film outing and The Voyage Home/The Final Frontier. As a very casual Star Wars fan, I never really got a Wars vibe from the film. Yes they share common elements but lots of movies do and I think some allowed Abrams comment about making Trek more like Wars to color their judgement.

But at the end of the day, I have no problems with folks who dislike this film or any other element of the franchise. Where my problem comes is the petty name calling and throwing temper tantrums that some act like is a God-given right.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote