View Single Post
Old September 23 2013, 02:16 PM   #17
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

WhateverMan wrote: View Post
The characters are all hyper charged for the sake of stereotyping.
They're simply younger versions of the characters we saw in TOS. How dare they actually show people who will grow and change. I know I'm the same exact person I was ten years ago. How about you?

Uhura is promoted to the third main character, a change I will never forgive.
How dare they upgrade her from "Hailing frequencies open" and "Captain, I'm scared".

Her character is terrible and completely out of sync with her original counterpart and the Spock-Uhura relationship is boring and bereft of all chemistry.
Go watch early TOS and you'll see exactly where the idea comes from.

Poor Bones has been demoted to nothing.
I'm not for shoe-horning characters into the spotlight just because I like the character. The last two movies haven't needed McCoy to be front and center so he hasn't been.

All this aside, Into Darkness was a new level of awful. All it did was rip off from all other Star Trek films into a convoluted stupid mess. The laziness of the writing, the stupidity of the story (super blood that brings people back from the dead??????????) and the endless references (rip offs) were just cheap and unnecessary. Why not make a very good original story with interesting developments which makes the audience think? The reason is obvious, because these films are made to only make money. There is no real interest in making a good movie with an interesting story, just something safe that will make money. Which is why they used all the cheapest tricks to draw in all the Star Trek nerds to see it. I was one of them.
You do know that both TOS and TNG had episodes that brought folks back from the dead? TNG has an episode where Crusher brought three people back who had been dead for three-hundred years.

I'm sure you believe that Roddenberry and Berman were making Trek for free from the goodness of their hearts and that Paramount gave all profits to the Little Sisters of the Poor?

What non-sense. Star Trek has always had money as its driving purpose. Studios don't invest tens to hundreds of millions of dollars into a product just for the hell of it.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill

Last edited by BillJ; September 23 2013 at 05:14 PM.
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote