RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,577
Posts: 5,514,693
Members: 25,154
Currently online: 533
Newest member: MC1367

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


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, 05:21 AM   #346
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

snowman1701 wrote: View Post
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.
Then why make the movie? It's really REALLY stupid.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:22 AM   #347
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

[QUOTE=BillJ;5471065]
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

*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.
The difference between past trek and imposter trek is that past trek worked with science, I.E relativity (which, contrary to your belief, is still the most applicable version of how time travel may be possible) not against science, as bob orci and company seek to do.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:22 AM   #348
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
snowman1701 wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post

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
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.
Then why make the movie? It's really REALLY stupid.
For the same reason that Roddenberry made Trek, to make money.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is online now  
Old December 23 2011, 05:23 AM   #349
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Then why make the movie? It's really REALLY stupid.
To get a new generation of people interested in Star Trek by going back to its roots yet allowing it to take its own path. And guess what: it worked!

It's really not that complicated.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:24 AM   #350
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
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.
If you missed it, then perhaps you're the one with ADD and are easily distracted by explosions.

Bitchy and menstrual? That's how you interpret Uhura's character in the film? Okay. Not to keen on women with a mind of their own I guess.

Kirk is a directionless boy at the start of the film. By film's end he had found his direction and purpose. Yes, he's still a cocky SOB at times, but that part of who Kirk is (thanks to Shatner's take more than what GR put on the page)

Spock suffers great loss not only a parent but an entire world.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:28 AM   #351
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post

Based on what you've written in this thread, you have no clue what you're talking about either. So it all evens out.
The difference between past trek and imposter trek is that past trek worked with science, I.E relativity (which, contrary to your belief, is still the most applicable version of how time travel may be possible) not against science, as bob orci and company seek to do.
Past trek gave lip service to science, dropped in a few real terms, made up some that sounded real and ignored what inferred with the plot. Current trek is doing the same.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:28 AM   #352
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
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
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.
Then why make the movie? It's really REALLY stupid.
I think you missed my point..... entirely...... but just so we're clear on what I think you're trying to say now... because you don't care for these characters, they shouldn't have made the movie. Ok, I'm sold. Why did it ever take me so long to see the light?
__________________
"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, 05:29 AM   #353
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....

Other than shooting down the wild assertions of trek_futurist, this thread had little entertainment value.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is online now  
Old December 23 2011, 05:30 AM   #354
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

BillJ wrote: View Post
Other than shooting down the wild assertions of trek_futurist, this thread had little entertainment value.
I'm impressed at how long it's gone on without actually accomplishing anything.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:30 AM   #355
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Then why make the movie? It's really REALLY stupid.
To get a new generation of people interested in Star Trek by going back to its roots yet allowing it to take its own path. And guess what: it worked!

It's really not that complicated.
It's roots were not

1-Unscientific stupidity with no explanation (I.E red matter)

2-Characters that it is pointless to care anything about because they are idiots with developmental disorders.

3-Nothing but explosions and arrogant characterizations

4-Product placement that is so overt it's shameless

The point is, if the writers wanted to start over with a completely alternate dimensional set of variables that doesn't mean a damned thing either way in relation to the prime universe or whether or not one should care if imposter kirk gets eaten by a snow monster or not, why not just write a completely new film with your own characters that have nothing to do with the star trek universe?

Because they wanted to milk the name some more. And because they are not as talented as some of you are led to believe. Their writing sucks.

And for your information most of the people I know who are my age or younger, even teenagers, who are star trek fans are not turned onto star trek by this 2009 travesty. They are turned onto it by having an internet connection and netflix and watching TOS and TNG.

Stop insulting the intelligence of the young. It's unbecoming. And it's what JJ and bob orci did with this garbage movie.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:35 AM   #356
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Santa Kang wrote: View Post

Bitchy and menstrual? That's how you interpret Uhura's character in the film? Okay. Not to keen on women with a mind of their own I guess.
Let's see. Doctor Crusher, jadzia dax, Captain janeway, tasha yar, command kira. All of these women are far better portrayals of respectful womanhood than imposter uhuru.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:36 AM   #357
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

[QUOTE]
trek_futurist wrote: View Post

It's roots were not

1-Unscientific stupidity with no explanation (I.E red matter)
All incarnations of Trek have these, why single out ST09?

2-Characters that it is pointless to care anything about because they are idiots with developmental disorders.
Meaning what exactly? That they are flawed?

3-Nothing but explosions and arrogant characterizations
Might wanna get that ADD checked out. Might want the doc to check for blackouts too.

4-Product placement that is so overt it's shameless
Seriously?
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:38 AM   #358
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post

It's roots were not

1-Unscientific stupidity with no explanation (I.E red matter)

2-Characters that it is pointless to care anything about because they are idiots with developmental disorders.

3-Nothing but explosions and arrogant characterizations

4-Product placement that is so overt it's shameless
Again, all of these things are your opinion. I know lots of people, young and old, Trekkies and non-Trekkies, that loved the hell out of this movie.

Yes, Red Matter is a silly plot device. But who cares? The movie isn't about Red Matter. The movie is about these characters coming together and realizing that they make an awesome team

The point is, if the writers wanted to start over with a completely alternate dimensional set of variables that doesn't mean a damned thing either way in relation to the prime universe or whether or not one should care if imposter kirk gets eaten by a snow monster or not, why not just write a completely new film with your own characters that have nothing to do with the star trek universe?

Because they wanted to milk the name some more. And because they are not as talented as some of you are led to believe. Their writing sucks.

And for your information most of the people I know who are my age or younger, even teenagers, who are star trek fans are not turned onto star trek by this 2009 travesty. They are turned onto it by having an internet connection and/or netflix and watching TOS and TNG.

Stop insulting the intelligence of the young. It's unbecoming. And it's what JJ and bob orci did with this garbage movie.
Yes, they absolutely wanted to milk the name. And why did they go this route? Because DS9, Voyager, and ENT were becoming increasing less popular among Star Trek fans. Creating a new series with new characters would not have been the right thing to do.

The writers aren't as talented as we are led to believe? What does that even mean? I love the way you assert your opinion as if it is scientific fact.

Lots of people loved this movie. Lots of people didn't. Neither group is anymore right than the other. It's fucking entertainment. It's all subjective.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:39 AM   #359
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote:
Santa Kang wrote: View Post

Bitchy and menstrual? That's how you interpret Uhura's character in the film? Okay. Not to keen on women with a mind of their own I guess.
Let's see. Doctor Crusher, jadzia dax, Captain janeway, tasha yar, command kira. All of these women are far better portrayals of respectful womanhood than imposter uhuru.
Not seeing a difference between them and Uhura. All have had moments similar to Uhura's in this film.
__________________
Nerys Myk

Last edited by Santa Kang; December 23 2011 at 05:41 AM. Reason: fixing someone's quote tags
Santa Kang is offline  
Old December 23 2011, 05:40 AM   #360
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....

The Genesis device is also a silly plot device...
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is online now  
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 09:21 PM.

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