RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,085
Posts: 5,398,696
Members: 24,735
Currently online: 514
Newest member: extremedalek

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

City on the Edge of Forever #3 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

TV Alert: Shatner TNG Documentary
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22


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 I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 23 2011, 04:51 AM   #331
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
horatio83 is another who needs to read Inside Star Trek. It counters alot of the spin GR produced over the years.
How do you know the writer of that book is not, as you describe it, 'spinning'?

Basically it's a matter of hearsay and who you choose to trust. I see no reason for Roddenberry to lie. He has every reason to keep the network execs on his side, and lying would not achieve this.


Herb Solow had nothing to gain from lying and was quite complimentary on Roddenberry's skills as a producer and he's not the first to say Roddenberry was a slimey fucker.

Just ask D.C. Fontana or David Gerrold what they think of Roddenberry...

Or Alexander Courage. Or Robert Justman.
__________________
"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
BillJ is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 04:55 AM   #332
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

horatio83 wrote: View Post
Trek Core means.
Doesn't mean these qualities are always good, it is e.g. unbearable to watch a movie like TMP.
Unbearable to people with short attention spans who need an explosion every 10 minutes to maintain interest.

Star trek, the motion picture is an amazing film with a fairly large following (see IMDB).

Just because those who liked this film do not chime in here, does not mean they don't exist.

And a lot of people hate st 2009. Again, look at reviews all over the internet, youtube videos and comments, to see that the number of people who hate this film is underreported.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 04:59 AM   #333
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Or ask the woman Roddenberry was married to at the time he was banging both Majel Barrett and Nichelle Nichols.

There was a hell of a lot of smoke around this guy...
__________________
"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
BillJ is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 04:59 AM   #334
MasuPu'a
Lieutenant
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
horatio83 wrote: View Post
Trek Core means.
Doesn't mean these qualities are always good, it is e.g. unbearable to watch a movie like TMP.
Unbearable to people with short attention spans who need an explosion every 10 minutes to maintain interest.
Says the person who thinks that Nemesis determines whether someone is a real Trek fan or not. That movie was nothing but explosions and pointless battles. Case in point; that ridiculous dune buggy chase scene.
MasuPu'a is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:00 AM   #335
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
horatio83 wrote: View Post
Trek Core means.
Doesn't mean these qualities are always good, it is e.g. unbearable to watch a movie like TMP.
Unbearable to people with short attention spans who need an explosion every 10 minutes to maintain interest.

Star trek, the motion picture is an amazing film with a fairly large following (see IMDB).

Just because those who liked this film do not chime in here, does not mean they don't exist.

And a lot of people hate st 2009. Again, look at reviews all over the internet, youtube videos and comments, to see that the number of people who hate this film is underreported.
And? But? So? Therefore? The fact that lots of people likes or dislikes a movie proves nothing. In fact, lots of people don't like all of the Trek movies or any of the series either. Following the assumption that the number of people who dislike something is proportional to whether or not it's any good, Star Trek, in its entirety, is a steam pile of crap.
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:01 AM   #336
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

I know of at least one person who frequents these boards that cites The Motion Picture and Star Trek 2009 as his two favorite Trek films.
__________________
"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
BillJ is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:01 AM   #337
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
KingDaniel wrote: View Post
However it came about, Trek's racial toerance message is a powerful one - and it's one that Star Trek '09 encapulates better than any Star Trek has before!
Complete and utter non-sense.

It makes Uhura look like a whore and minimizes sulu's role down to virtually nothing.

TNG, DS9 and VOY exemplified racial diversity a lot better.

It's one thing to like the movie for being a special effects extravaganza, but to be snow blinded into this misconception is just ridiculous.
Uhura was the third lead. More important than McCoy in that story. She had more to do that film than the entire run of TOS and Six movies. No other show or movie has has a black woman that important and prominent in the cast or story. Not sure why you would call her a "whore". She was shown to be a intelligent, forceful and highly competent officer. Let me guess, her being in a relationship Spock translates to "whore" in your worldview.

Sulu's role was pretty much what is always is. He drives the ship Plus, he got a nice fight scene with the Romulans.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now  
Old December 23 2011, 05:02 AM   #338
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

snowman1701 wrote: View Post
Did you read the excerpt you posted at all? Or better yet, did you understand what you posted? T
Read my follow up comments on it to see that I understood it better than you, apparently.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:04 AM   #339
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Trek_futurist has lost me. He idolizes Roddenberry, yet calls Uhura in the new film a whore. Talk about a double standard.
__________________
"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
BillJ is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:06 AM   #340
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Santa Kang wrote: View Post
Uhura was the third lead.
I keep forgetting that hollywoods idea of 'lead' for women is them acting all bitchy and menstrual while being swooning with affection for some guy. So in that sense you are right.

But seriously, what am I missing here? I don't see any depth at all in these characters. You people have to be making this stuff up, there is nothing involved in these characters, nothing developmentally viable (kirk is the same at the end of the film as in the beginning). Nothing to make me care whether they live or die.

Another thing is, if these are alternate dimension versions of all the main characters who exist in their own time line, separate from the real prime universe characters, why care about them at all? What's at stake? What's the point? It's really stupid.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:12 AM   #341
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
Uhura was the third lead.
I keep forgetting that hollywoods idea of 'lead' for women is them acting all bitchy and menstrual while being swooning with affection for some guy. So in that sense you are right.

But seriously, what am I missing here? I don't see any depth at all in these characters. You people have to be making this stuff up, there is nothing involved in these characters, nothing developmentally viable (kirk is the same at the end of the film as in the beginning). Nothing to make me care whether they live or die.

Another thing is, if these are alternate dimension versions of all the main characters who exist in their own time line, separate from the real prime universe characters, why care about them at all? What's at stake? What's the point? It's really stupid.
Whether I agree with how they used time travel or not, the way they presented it is the most accurate based on current scientific theories. A lack of scientific accuracy is one of the things you say you hate about the new film.

Your stances are very much in contradiction to the information we have about the film in particular and Star Trek in general.
__________________
"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
BillJ is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:14 AM   #342
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

MasuPu'a wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
horatio83 wrote: View Post
Trek Core means.
Doesn't mean these qualities are always good, it is e.g. unbearable to watch a movie like TMP.
Unbearable to people with short attention spans who need an explosion every 10 minutes to maintain interest.
Says the person who thinks that Nemesis determines whether someone is a real Trek fan or not. That movie was nothing but explosions and pointless battles. Case in point; that ridiculous dune buggy chase scene.
In reality the film was about 25 minutes of action, the rest was exposition, character development and plot movement.

Star trek 2009 on the other hand, was the complete opposite. It seems to me that 'character scenes' if we can call this pitiable attempt at acting, character scenes, were gap fillers between the films real motivation, action, explosions and retarded humor that wasn't funny at all.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:16 AM   #343
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

[QUOTE=BillJ;5471032]
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
[
Whether I agree with how they used time travel or not, the way they presented it is the most accurate based on current scientific theories.
*laughs hysterically*

It sounds like you are parroting mister bob orci. Who, I am confident to say, doesn't know what he is talking about in this regard.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:18 AM   #344
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
snowman1701 wrote: View Post
Did you read the excerpt you posted at all? Or better yet, did you understand what you posted? T
Read my follow up comments on it to see that I understood it better than you, apparently.
The writers of Star Trek made some shit up to make their ships fly. A physicist came along 30 years later and makes up some other shit on how he pretends it would work. You're giving them way more credit than there is to be had.
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
Uhura was the third lead.
Another thing is, if these are alternate dimension versions of all the main characters who exist in their own time line, separate from the real prime universe characters, why care about them at all? What's at stake? What's the point? It's really stupid.
Which brings up an excellent question. If these are alternate dimension versions of all the main characters who exist in their own time line, seperate from the prime universe characters, why care about them acting differently at all? What's at stake? What's the point of getting your knickers in a twist about it? It's really stupid.
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:18 AM   #345
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

[QUOTE=trek_futurist;5471053]
BillJ wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
[
Whether I agree with how they used time travel or not, the way they presented it is the most accurate based on current scientific theories.
*laughs hysterically*

It sounds like you are parroting mister bob orci. Who, I am confident to say, doesn't know what he is talking about in this regard.
Based on what you've written in this thread, you have no clue what you're talking about either. So it all evens out.
__________________
"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
BillJ is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
nemesis, philosophy, science, 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 01:07 AM.

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