RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,698
Posts: 5,431,292
Members: 24,830
Currently online: 445
Newest member: honeybadger


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 14 2009, 05:13 PM   #46
DiSiLLUSiON
Commodore
 
DiSiLLUSiON's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Re: It's not Star Trek.

RandyS wrote: View Post
I dunno.....I saw the movie yesterday (and loved it, by the way), and I clearly saw the words "Star Trek" appear onscreen.

So it must be.
Yes, but you must understand; those fans who believe this isn't Star Trek have a very good reason too: They didn't saw it. They closed their eyes, by random chance, at exactly the moment the title came on screen. Just as when any badge, uniforms, ships and characters came on screen. It's not as if they didn't want to see them.
DiSiLLUSiON is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:14 PM   #47
iguana_tonante
Admiral
 
iguana_tonante's Avatar
 
Location: Italy, EU
Re: It's not Star Trek.

The Stig wrote: View Post
Where are all these cadets coming from?
From Iowa.

stonester1 wrote: View Post
THIS...IS...STAR...TREK!!!
Now we need a King Leonidas photoshop.
__________________
Scientist. Gentleman. Teacher. Fighter. Lover. Father.
iguana_tonante is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:14 PM   #48
Flamegrape
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: It's not Star Trek.

Is this a Star Trek forum? Or is this /b/? Judging from all the vicious responses to the OP, I can't tell.
Flamegrape is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:16 PM   #49
el_flesh
Ensign
 
Location: Canada
Re: It's not Star Trek.

there was "Star Trek" pasted on a feminist story I read years ago, sanctioned by Paramount to be published, and it sure wasn't "Star Trek".

As for the 'cows' concept - that would be people who want nothing but action sequences strung together, who don't give a whit about the science part, who want nothing but a formula attached to a script and nothing original in it, who don't want to think when they go to a movie (or watch TV), who go around claiming McDonald's is better than any 5 star restaurant...y'all understand what I mean???
Kids haven't finished school, they don't have a critical eye developed yet. You can't fault them for this.
Adults, on the other hand, who went to the movie only because it was action action action, and only liked it because of that, and who only want to see that because that's what's hot nowadays...come on! Have a little thoughts of your own inside your head! Don't just take whatever Hollywood shoves down your gullet and claim it's delicious!

These are the people who go around insulting Star Trek, making jokes like "they'll insert all the 3 hours from the cutting room floor for classic Trekkies to slow the movie down"...well if you don't like Star Trek as it was before this movie, go see Star Wars, Robocop, Terminator or AvP instead. Now there's nothing left of classic Trek to be made anymore.

It's all been homogenized to the same formula. Because Paramount cares for nothing more than a quick $.

Now I'm telling you guys. Call it what you want. Let Paramount call it what they want . IT ISN'T STAR TREK. I know what is and isn't for me, and this is NOT Star Trek. You think it is, fine. Think what the hell you want. You're NOT changing my mind. Period. Go chew your cud.
el_flesh is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:24 PM   #50
CommanderRaytas
Rear Admiral
 
CommanderRaytas's Avatar
 
Location: Dr Insano's goggles
Re: It's not Star Trek.

In best Romulan tradition I'll have to add...

...IT'S REEEEAAAAAL!

*ahem*
__________________
Joseph Smith...MAGICAL AIDS FROG!The Book of Mormon (Trey Parker & Matt Stone)
It was a nice day ... AND THEN EVIL CAME!
The Collected Works of Stephen King, condensed version
CommanderRaytas is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:26 PM   #51
DiSiLLUSiON
Commodore
 
DiSiLLUSiON's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Re: It's not Star Trek.

el_flesh wrote: View Post
As for the 'cows' concept - that would be people who want nothing but action sequences strung together, who don't give a whit about the science part, who want nothing but a formula attached to a script and nothing original in it, who don't want to think when they go to a movie (or watch TV), who go around claiming McDonald's is better than any 5 star restaurant...
All right, but then your premise is wrong. You said this movie was made for "cows" (for financial reasons), but by your definition of "cows", this movie wasn't made for them at all. If it was, it would have failed utterly, since "cows" don't like the drama, intriguing storytelling and moral themes like Star Trek has.
DiSiLLUSiON is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:26 PM   #52
Mach5
Rear Admiral
 
Mach5's Avatar
 
Re: It's not Star Trek.

  • Federation? - CHECK
  • Vulcan? - CHECK
  • Kirk?- CHECK
  • Spock? - CHECK
  • USS Enterprise NCC 1701? - CHECK
  • Star Fleet? - CHECK
  • San Francisco - CHECK
  • Romulans - CHECK
  • Kobayashi Maru test - CHECK
  • Green Orion Woman - CHECK
  • 47 - CHECK
  • "I'm a doctor, damn' it, not a..."- CHECK
  • stardates - CHECK
  • "Live Long & Prosper" - CHECK
  • phasers - CHECK
  • photons - CHECK
  • warp - CHECK
  • beaming - CHECK
  • Admiral Archer - CHECK...
  • STAR TREK? - CHECK!
Mach5 is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:29 PM   #53
Jackson_Roykirk
Commodore
 
Jackson_Roykirk's Avatar
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Re: It's not Star Trek.

el_flesh wrote: View Post
...well if you don't like Star Trek as it was before this movie, go see Star Wars, Robocop, Terminator or AvP instead...
But what about me? I liked this movie AND many of the Star Trek movies before this movie (TWOK, TUC, FC, TVH, and even TSfS)...

...so what should I go see? Please advise.



(by the way -- The original Star Wars and the first Robocop were very good).
__________________

...With shoes that cut, and eyes that burn like cigarettes
With fingernails that shine like justice and a voice that is dark like tinted glass...

Last edited by Jackson_Roykirk; May 14 2009 at 05:39 PM.
Jackson_Roykirk is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:37 PM   #54
Brainsucker
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: It's not Star Trek.

Well, it is STAR TREK. but maybe it is not the Star Trek that El Flesh like. So... my sugestion is rather than saying that this "Star Trek" is not your "Star Trek" then why not do this:

1. Buy a Handy cam
2. Buy Star Trek costumes
3. Buy the old Enterprise toy
4. Bring your friends and ask them to impersonate Klingons and Romulans
5. Make the script yourself
6. And then make your adorable 'Star Trek' by yourself.

I'm sure you will love it more than the Paramount Star Trek, because the Paramount Star Trek is not yours, but your own Star Trek is yours.

Sorry for Trolling, but it is the best sugestion for people who don't like Abram Star Trek. If they don't like it, just make it themselves. I'm sure the Abram's Star Trek haters can make a decent low budject movie for themselves to enjoy
Brainsucker is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:40 PM   #55
RobertScorpio
Pariah
 
Location: San Diego
Re: It's not Star Trek.

Dennis wrote: View Post
You're wrong.

This ain't Star Trek...

BTW, you have to come up with a more original, thoughtful and intelligent post than your opener here before you get to call us "senseless cows." You're not leading from strength.
So true....to say it isn't TREK and then spew that kind of nonsense is utterly revealing. Oh well..one less person in line next time. Which means there will be 585 in line instead of 586...whoopdy dooo..

Rob
RobertScorpio is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 05:46 PM   #56
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: It's not Star Trek.

el_flesh wrote: View Post
Sorry, but it's NOT Star Trek.

<snip>

If that brings them $$$$ from the senseless cows that eat anything you put in front of them.......well....
Mmm-hm.

Well, since we're not likely to get a better response than this one right here:

urbandk wrote: View Post
I think it's Star Trek. I've been chewing my cud for a while on this one, and even though I'm rather bull headed, I think it's udderly silly to decide that this isn't Star Trek but the previous movies, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT were. Later Kirk was a total heifer. He had as much in common with TOS Kirk as a longhorn with a milk cow. Whether the stories are in one imaginary timeline or another doesn't make a cow paddie of difference. I know some fans are seeing red, but sometimes it's time to put a worn out story arc to pasture. It had gotten too cheesy. This new film is the creme de la creme of Star Trek. It's a prime ribeye of a story. It's the original cowboys in outer space. And that's no bull.
... I think we'll call this one done.

iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
The Stig wrote: View Post
Where are all these cadets coming from?
From Iowa.

stonester1 wrote: View Post
THIS...IS...STAR...TREK!!!
Now we need a King Leonidas photoshop.


Oh... wait-

Squiggyfm wrote:


Now what am I going to do with this?
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline  
Old May 14 2009, 06:25 PM   #57
RAnthony
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Texas
View RAnthony's Twitter Profile
Star Trek, 1966-2009, R.I.P. (!Spoilers!)

From Rant(hony)-ings: Star Trek, 1966-2009, R.I.P.

For the record, I should have stuck to my guns. But I didn't. I caught J.J. Abrams' Star Trek (from here on out to be known as Abramstrek, for brevity's sake) a few days back. By the time it was over, I knew that the universe had changed.

Abrams said he was creating a film that was entertaining, and true to his word, it is. From the initial scenes of the massive Romulan ship appearing and spawning an alternate timeline (this is not a spoiler, this happens two minutes into the film. Spoilers ahead though, be warned) when it engages in a fierce battle with a clearly more archaic Federation vessel, to the final scenes with a triumphant Captain James T. Kirk at the helm of his (way too shiny) Enterprise, this blockbuster is most definitely entertaining.

It's just not Star Trek.

A good portion of the audience applauded at the end of the film. The group I went with all enjoyed it (ages 10, 18 and 55. Definitely the target audience) I even found myself enjoying it. But just as the re-launch of Lost in Space (the film I was most reminded of viewing this one) redefined (in a good way, in my opinion) what Lost in Space was about, Abramstrek has redefined what Star Trek is about, and something significant has been lost in translation.

It isn't a problem with the cast, they all performed admirably. It isn't a problem with the dialog, a good portion of which seemed to be lifted word for word from previous episodes and movies. I think the problem is that Star Trek has always been more than just entertainment to me (no matter how many times I repeated the mantra "it's just entertainment, don't take it seriously") and to see it "dumbed down" to the level of blockbuster entertainment (a process started several films ago) leaves me feeling a bit hollow.

I find myself at a loss now. Unlike many fans, I'm not insulted by the content of the film. I just can't grasp what it is that the vast majority of the fans and viewing public see in the film. It's first weekend returns exceeded all other Star Trek films to date, even adjusted for inflation.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979): $11,926,421 (opening weekend)/ $82,258,456 (cume)
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982): $14,347,221 / $78,737,310
Star Trek III: The Search For Spock (1984): $16,673,229 / $76,389,860
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986): $16,881,888 / $109,713,132
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989): $17,375,648 / $52,210,049
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991): $18,162,837 / $74,888,996
Star Trek: Generations (1994): $23,116,394 / $75,671,125
Star Trek: First Contact (1996): $30,716,131 / $92,027,888
Star Trek: Insurrection (1998): $22,052,836 / $70,187,658
Star Trek: Nemesis (2002): $18,513,305 / $43,126,129

Adjusted for inflation:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979): $34,668,706 (opening weekend)/ $239,115,674 (cume)
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982): $35,038,451 / $192,290,437
Star Trek III: The Search For Spock (1984): $35,629,102 / $163,237,856
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986): $32,671,686 / $212,328,919
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989): $31,267,457 / $93,951,918
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991): $30,976,050 / $127,720,425
Star Trek: Generations (1994): $39,707,107 / $129,980,545
Star Trek: First Contact (1996): $49,896,339 / $149,493,266
Star Trek: Insurrection (1998): $33,761,058 / $107,451,468
Star Trek: Nemesis (2002): $22,918,195 / $53,387,173
(numbers compiled by Daniel Garris)
(From Boxoffice: The History of 'Trek')

I've read dozens of posts in support of the film on Trekbbs. Fans are dragging their friends out to watch it; in much the same fashion as if the average American needs to be convinced to chew bubblegum. Abramstrek is bubblegum. I don't see the point in promoting bubblegum; people will chew it anyway.

No, I don't like the film. If you really want to know why read through...

!Spoiler Alert!

Paramount finally gets it's way and removes those pesky Vulcans that are so hard to understand and write for (logic, what's that?) by having Vulcan destroyed by an artificially generated black hole (the explanation for which would be technobabble, had they only attempted to explain it) thus insuring that the only Vulcan they will have to write parts for in the future is the half-Vulcan Mr. Spock, who seems to have a lot more trouble restraining emotion in this universe.

Uhura in essence sleeps her way onto the bridge of the Enterprise by having a relationship with Mr. Spock, who is not only one of her professors, but also a superior officer. The moral issues of this arrangement are never questioned, leading me to wonder if we haven't somehow stumbled into the Mirror, Mirror universe (Sylar, is that you?) where that type of behavior is run of the mill.

James T. Kirk becomes captain of the Enterprise largely influenced by the career of his father. In this alternate timeline, the now fatherless Kirk (dad being killed in the opening sequence of the film. The com conversation between the two parents, as George Kirk is about to be killed, being one of the silliest parts of the film) still becomes captain of the Enterprise; proving the modern belief that fathers are irrelevant in the scheme of things, and can be disposed of with no ill effects for any required plot device.

Then there's the running gag of Bones McCoy infecting the recently reprimanded Kirk with a mock disease in order to smuggle him on the Enterprise. This leads to a subsequent series of injections in order to cure him of humorous side effects. Or the transwarp beaming accident that leaves the recently found Scotty floating in engine coolant until conveniently rescued by Kirk through an inexplicably placed access hatch in the coolant tube. both situations so clearly contrived as to almost be cringe-level uncomfortable for me.

I could go on, but I won't.

!End Spoiler Alert!

I can't help but wonder what Leonard Nimoy (whom I will hold blameless) saw in this film to recommend his tacit approval and his venerable image to it. Spock prime stands in sharp contrast to the new cast, carrying with him into history a mantle of respect this revisioined Star Trek will never achieve. Because unlike Star Trek and it's 42 years of history, Abramstrek is just entertainment.

With this film, Paramount can pat itself on the back for finally successfully milking this franchise the way it wanted to when the property was acquired with Desilu Productions. Like so many entertainment properties (Lost in Space, the Brady Bunch, Bewitched, the Flintstones, etc.) before it, sucked dry of nostalgia dollars, Star Trek can be safely shelved in long term storage, probably never to be heard from again.

If there is any mercy in this Mirror, Mirror universe, it won't be. Rest In Peace Star Trek. Say hi to Gene for me.
__________________
RAnt(hony)-ings
RAnthony is offline  
Old June 19 2009, 07:31 AM   #58
Nowhere Man
Commodore
 
Location: Nowhere Land
Re: What's the Big Lesson in STXI?

Cakes488 wrote: View Post
Squiggyfm wrote: View Post
Oh and what about the white half??? Just like Obama that is completely ignored!!!!
the white half gave the bail out's and the black half is giving health care and regulation so that the black half won't get exploited again
Nowhere Man is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.