Therin of Andor wrote:
How is that a bad thing? Even I spent numerous moments during my first viewing trying to decide if Harrison was going to help Kirk, hinder Kirk or pretend to help him.
I didn't say it was! I fact, I hoped my last paragraph of that post reflected that I occasionally have to remind myself of that fact. I guess I was making "meta" commentary on the whole "you could not clearly see what I saw, what are you blind?!" faction that has graced comment sections on places like Slashfilm, Trekmovie, Deadline and the like. And that applies to some who enjoyed or disliked the last movie.
I'm happy to say that doesn't seem to happen here, at least not without moderators who keep it civil.
An example of such civility that comes to mind easily, Therin, are some of the conversations between yourself and Christopher on the Literature board where two people who obviously have a lot of knowledge and Trek can have a discussion debating the finer points without it blowing up! I don't mind "colorful metaphors" themselves in bulletin board discussions, but get a kick about people who can at least back up their claims with how they perceive the evidence before us.
In fact, that type of conflict is what TNG worked very well in, it's entertaining to watch, and we remind ourselves that there are more than one way to be "right", and maybe we all have it a little "wrong". Though not at the forefront of STiD, the questions raised regarding the legality and/or the morality of the characters' actions in the film (drone strikes, killing without a trial, buildup of military in the name of protection, pro-active and reactive philosophies to those who would harm us) are nonetheless there. Within the torrent of non-stop action, those concepts were addressed, and that can make for a good film, especially a Trek film...