RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,705
Posts: 5,431,772
Members: 24,834
Currently online: 451
Newest member: kamkaran


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 19 2009, 12:20 AM   #16
AnyStar
Captain
 
AnyStar's Avatar
 
Location: Orbiting Planet Plastic
Send a message via Yahoo to AnyStar
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

i know i'll get bashed for saying this but idc. i agree with everything the blogger said.
__________________
Dear Internets...
AnyStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 12:42 AM   #17
The Comedian
Captain
 
The Comedian's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

BriGuy wrote: View Post

A massive starship being built on the ground?

A civilization which can control gravity and which can turn matter to energy, squirt it thousands of miles, and turn it back into matter, can build a starship anywhere they damn well please.

This is the FUTURE...and yeah, by that time, they can also dig big honking holes in Iowa that are not there now.
__________________
The American Dream? You're looking at it.
The Comedian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 12:51 AM   #18
BriGuy
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

The Comedian wrote: View Post
BriGuy wrote: View Post

A massive starship being built on the ground?

A civilization which can control gravity and which can turn matter to energy, squirt it thousands of miles, and turn it back into matter, can build a starship anywhere they damn well please.

This is the FUTURE...and yeah, by that time, they can also dig big honking holes in Iowa that are not there now.
Maybe they should have kept with long-standing Trek tradition and build it in a cave, then.

Any time a Trek episode goes underground I have to work to keep my eyes from rolling.

Technology or not, it just makes more sense for a space vessel to be built in space. I'm sure they'd have the technology to enable that as well. The only reason I can see for why it's on the ground is so Kirk can roll up and stare at it from his motorcycle - another coincidence.

Maybe the canyon was a crater from WW3.
BriGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 12:58 AM   #19
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
 
Location: ANS Yamato, Sector 5, Sol System
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

Came across this picture on the site itself, endemic of the thinking of this blogger:



Which makes me wonder if this blogger can even write a script to save his life.
Dusty Ayres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 01:06 AM   #20
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
Which makes me wonder if this blogger can even write a script to save his life.
Why would that matter either way?
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 01:07 AM   #21
AnyStar
Captain
 
AnyStar's Avatar
 
Location: Orbiting Planet Plastic
Send a message via Yahoo to AnyStar
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

if its a craft that has nothing built in to ever even land on a planet, why would they build it there? how will it take off?

i can certainly understand components being manufactured on earth, then ferried to orbit for assembly, but to build the whole thing on ground is only usefull for over-ambitious camera shots...
__________________
Dear Internets...
AnyStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 01:11 AM   #22
Starbreaker
Fleet Admiral
 
Starbreaker's Avatar
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
View Starbreaker's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

Well, he's certainly not saying anything people haven't said before. Let them go back to their awful fan-fiction about Captain Rodeo and the Discovery in the 28th century.
__________________
Currently Reading: The Abominable by Dan Simmons
Starbreaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 03:57 AM   #23
Tomalak
Vice Admiral
 
Tomalak's Avatar
 
Location: Liverpool
View Tomalak's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

BriGuy wrote: View Post
From engineering to bridge via turbolift in 1.5 seconds. (I know, speed of plot)
It's a turbolift.
__________________
She bought her first new car and you hit her with a drunk driver. What, is that supposed to be funny?
Tomalak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 04:34 AM   #24
Aragorn
Admiral
 
Aragorn's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

BriGuy wrote: View Post
Maybe it's this "love it or we'll call you names" mentality that is silencing discussion.
There's a middle ground between that and the Captain Robert April, The Wormhole, MattJC, xortex types. You just probably won't find it on here.

Shazam! wrote: View Post
Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
Which makes me wonder if this blogger can even write a script to save his life.
Why would that matter either way?
The flaw with this line of thinking is that if you can't say anything bad about something you aren't a part of or can do yourself, by that same standard you can't say anything good about it either.
Aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 06:38 AM   #25
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

BriGuy wrote: View Post
A glass window on the bridge.
Transparent aluminum, of course. Really, though, having an actual window on the front of the bridge seems rather handy if the viewscreen goes out. If anything, it's an improvement.

I can't really defend the engineering 'set,' though. It served its purpose in the movie, but the (prohibitively expensive, apparently) concept art for what was originally proposed for engineering was much better.

The blogger in the OP is really off the hinge, though. Abrams' movie had some legitimate flaws, but claiming that it did everything it could to change the characters from the ones the geeks knew and loved is a stretch. I'm about as big a geek as they come, and I had serious reservations before seeing the movie, but I could certainly recognize the characters that I've loved for two decades.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 07:11 AM   #26
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

Aragorn wrote: View Post
BriGuy wrote: View Post
Maybe it's this "love it or we'll call you names" mentality that is silencing discussion.
There's a middle ground between that and the Captain Robert April, The Wormhole, MattJC, xortex types.
Damn it, Aragorn, I've asked you not to do that, and more than once. Cut it out.

Aragorn wrote: View Post
You just probably won't find it on here.
Wrong - there's plenty of middle ground, and plenty of room for people to be critical of the movie or of aspects of it; just look around the forum. Perceived flaws and shortcomings are being pointed out and discussed all the time, and mostly in a perfectly civil and even friendly manner.



As for the blog entry cited in the OP, the main thing I notice about it is that there's nothing it has to say which hasn't already been said dozens of times over; much of the content could have been written even before the movie came out, and some of it isn't about this movie at all (why is he talking about First Contact or Generations, for crying out loud?) It's unfocused, his conclusions aren't all that solid, and as a review, it relies far too much on by-the-numbers sloganeering and one-size-fits-all put-downs. ("Something right out of a Sci-Fi Channel original movie" - yeah, there's an original and scathing critique.) Finally, the date-stamp is telling. Why did he wait until four months after the movie went into general release to post this? Could it be he realized that there just wasn't anything very special about the review?
__________________
"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."

Last edited by M'Sharak; December 19 2009 at 07:36 AM. Reason: typos
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 07:30 AM   #27
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
 
Location: ANS Yamato, Sector 5, Sol System
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

Shazam! wrote: View Post
Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
Which makes me wonder if this blogger can even write a script to save his life.
Why would that matter either way?
Because most of these so-called 'fans' think that they can. But instead of shutting up and just doing so, they vent their spleens online everyplace they can-possibly because they know and fear that if they did write one and submit it, it might be rejected (even though they did everything they were supposed to do in order to submit it.)

Thus, articles like this, all of which bring to mind the old saying 'Those who can, do, and those who can't, review'. Or in this case, bitch like babies needing their bottles. As one poster put it, they hate success, and they are also resentful because it wasn't their success, but somebody else's.
Dusty Ayres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 12:14 PM   #28
Devon
Fleet Captain
 
Devon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

BriGuy wrote: View Post
Technology or not, it just makes more sense for a space vessel to be built in space.
It also makes sense not to have your command center the most obvious and easiest target on the ship either, but C'est le vie.

The only reason I can see for why it's on the ground is so Kirk can roll up and stare at it from his motorcycle - another coincidence.
How is this a "coincidence?"
Devon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 12:16 PM   #29
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

BriGuy wrote: View Post

Maybe the canyon was a crater from WW3.
Or, ya know, a quarry. We have those in the midwest NOW.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2009, 12:19 PM   #30
Devon
Fleet Captain
 
Devon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK: REBOOTED FOR THE WRONG REASONS

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
BriGuy wrote: View Post

Maybe the canyon was a crater from WW3.
Or, ya know, a quarry. We have those in the midwest NOW.
I live within 10 miles of one here in Indiana. The High School I attended was within a couple of miles of it. Whenever they blasted through it you could feel a rumble within a few miles that feel like tremors or small earth quakes. Certainly the structure inside the quarry as seen in the film is obviously man made, and just looked just like those of quarries.
Devon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
bloggers, fandom, star trek (2009 film)

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 01:28 PM.

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