RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,892
Posts: 5,222,846
Members: 24,234
Currently online: 583
Newest member: evtclub

TrekToday headlines

De Lancie Joins Mind Puppets
By: T'Bonz on Apr 24

Cumberbatch One Of Time Magazine’s Most Influential
By: T'Bonz on Apr 24

Trek Actor Smithsonian Magazine Cover First
By: T'Bonz on Apr 24

Takei To Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

Yelchin In New Comedy
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

U.S. Rights For Pegg Comedy Secured
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

Shatner: Aging and Work
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

Kurtzman And Orci Go Solo
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Star Trek #32 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Voyager Bridge Via The Oculus Rift
By: T'Bonz on Apr 21


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.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
A+ 139 19.33%
A 157 21.84%
A- 98 13.63%
B+ 79 10.99%
B 58 8.07%
B- 27 3.76%
C+ 38 5.29%
C 37 5.15%
C- 23 3.20%
D+ 11 1.53%
D 13 1.81%
D- 6 0.83%
F 33 4.59%
Voters: 719. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 2 2013, 02:48 PM   #871
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

drumvan wrote: View Post
StarMan wrote: View Post
Yep. Link here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/f...ss-review.html

A bit hollow and snippy, in my view.

Oh, and since when is 3 stars out of 5 rotten?
most of the comments following the review are pretty negative too. not much love for stid in that paper's readership.
For what it's worth, I did a quick count of Collin's 3/5 movie reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Only 15 of about 175 3 star reviews were rotten. So about 93 percent of his 3/5 reviews were noted as "fresh."

Meh. Who cares? Any review that ends wondering where the "no man has gone before," spirit of Trek has gone doesn't get it, anyway. That damn monolog has become a curse.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 02:48 PM   #872
DarthTom
Fleet Admiral
 
DarthTom's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

The Walking Dead has continued that tradition however both the protagnist and the antagonist are played by British actors - and very well.

Andrew Lincoln plays Rick and of course David Morrisey plays The Governor. Both are brillaint in their roles.

Morrisey however was never, 'in the jar, ' per se.
DarthTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 03:15 PM   #873
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Won't be reading the Telegraphs review or else I will get too wound up I can tell from the snippets I have unfortunately read here that he doesn't 'get' Star Trek.
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 03:16 PM   #874
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

DarthTom wrote: View Post
indranee wrote: View Post
Uhh, your ignorance is showing. "IDIC" may be fictional, but the idea behind it is not. "Joto mot toto poth" is an old Hindu saying in Bengal (in India). It means essentially.... yes, IDIC.
From Memory Alpha
The invention of the IDIC by Gene Roddenberry caused friction between him and Leonard Nimoy, who saw it as a cheap ploy to sell replica merchandise to fans.
And who can forget this line from Space Balls:

Yogurt: Merchandising, merchandising, where the real money from the movie is made. Spaceballs-the T-shirt, Spaceballs-the Coloring Book, Spaceballs-the Lunch box, Spaceballs-the Breakfast Cereal, Spaceballs-the Flame Thrower.
That has nothing -- absolutely NOTHING -- to with my post, darthtom, and you know it.

Quit being a troll and contribute.
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 03:37 PM   #875
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

donners22 wrote: View Post
Must admit, this line made me laugh:

Together they have come up with a very clever sleight-of-hand: all of the narrative cracks are papered over with references to old Star Trek characters and episodes. 'Hang on a minute,' you find yourself thinking, 'that doesn’t make sen ... oh look, a Tribble.' The malevolent genius of this is best appreciated in a cinema filled with confirmed Star Trek fans, who will dutifully whoop and applaud a familiar alien while the film quietly pulls off another dubious plot manoeuvre under their noses.
narrative cracks and dubious plot manouevres, in a film written by O., K. & L.? IMPOSSIBLE!
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 03:46 PM   #876
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I wonder how long it'll take for people to latch on to that one review as the One True Review(TM) and say that everything else is a blatant lie or conspiracy by the government. Or something.
__________________
The self proclaimed Angry Mexican man of TNZ. You're welcome.
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 03:48 PM   #877
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

indranee wrote: View Post
Uhh, your ignorance is showing. "IDIC" may be fictional, but the idea behind it is not.
It's not about what is or isn't fictional. The problem is that I often see Trek fans treat it as if it's this law or ideal that Trek created and that it's some epitome of wisdom that should be followed just because it's espoused by the show, when in actuality the show has very little to say about it. It was just something tacked on as a merchandising tactic, not some grand idea that embodies what Star Trek is.

Instead, fans twist it to suit their own specific cases to make it say things like, "Everybody should appreciate that there are going to be different incarnations of Star Trek." If that's what fans are twisting IDIC to mean, that's bullshit. People are free to love Star Trek, hate it, or a mixture of both, and just because some half-baked toy marketing scheme says one thing, fans aren't beholden to that philosophy like it's some sort of dogma.

Go and look at the post I quoted and the usage of IDIC. "Practice IDIC." Practice? Really? I think you might want to reconsider before you start throwing terms around like idiotic or ignorant.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 04:14 PM   #878
DarthTom
Fleet Admiral
 
DarthTom's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

indranee wrote: View Post
That has nothing -- absolutely NOTHING -- to with my post, darthtom, and you know it.

Quit being a troll and contribute.
Come on man, get a sense of humor. If you take IDIC that seriously, a fictional religion from a fictional TV show, it's time to get some perspective IMO.
DarthTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 04:28 PM   #879
Mach5
Rear Admiral
 
Mach5's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

RAMA wrote: View Post
*klingons klingons klingons* Spoilers spoilers spoilers*

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Th_Mhdz1Hr...er+Klingon.jpg
Aaww hell no!

I expected the "re-imagining" to be a bit more radical than that. This guy could easily pass for a ST-VI, or even a TNG era Klingon.
__________________
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."
― Bertrand Russell
Mach5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 04:58 PM   #880
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

DarthTom wrote: View Post
indranee wrote: View Post
That has nothing -- absolutely NOTHING -- to with my post, darthtom, and you know it.

Quit being a troll and contribute.
Come on man, get a sense of humor. If you take IDIC that seriously, a fictional religion from a fictional TV show, it's time to get some perspective IMO.
I don't take IDIC seriously, I take stupidity and ignorance seriously.

Fine. I'll let it go. But stop calling me "man" when you know I'm not one.

*grabs sense of humor from top shelf and puts it back on*
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 04:58 PM   #881
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Mach5 wrote: View Post
RAMA wrote: View Post
*klingons klingons klingons* Spoilers spoilers spoilers*

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Th_Mhdz1Hr...er+Klingon.jpg
Aaww hell no!

I expected the "re-imagining" to be a bit more radical than that. This guy could easily pass for a ST-VI, or even a TNG era Klingon.
Since the look of Klingons, in general, is well established, they would be the same in the Alternate Reality as the Prime Reality.

After all, they certainly existed prior to 2233.04.

I like his approach.
OneBuckFilms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 05:01 PM   #882
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
indranee wrote: View Post
Uhh, your ignorance is showing. "IDIC" may be fictional, but the idea behind it is not.
It's not about what is or isn't fictional. The problem is that I often see Trek fans treat it as if it's this law or ideal that Trek created and that it's some epitome of wisdom that should be followed just because it's espoused by the show, when in actuality the show has very little to say about it. It was just something tacked on as a merchandising tactic, not some grand idea that embodies what Star Trek is.

Instead, fans twist it to suit their own specific cases to make it say things like, "Everybody should appreciate that there are going to be different incarnations of Star Trek." If that's what fans are twisting IDIC to mean, that's bullshit. People are free to love Star Trek, hate it, or a mixture of both, and just because some half-baked toy marketing scheme says one thing, fans aren't beholden to that philosophy like it's some sort of dogma.

Go and look at the post I quoted and the usage of IDIC. "Practice IDIC." Practice? Really? I think you might want to reconsider before you start throwing terms around like idiotic or ignorant.
I understand what you're saying but IMO it's a solid ideal to reach for. I really can't find fault with people who want to inculcate it into their lives.

And I called you ignorant because your post reeked of it. IDIC the term may be fictional but the idea behind it is not.
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 05:03 PM   #883
Mach5
Rear Admiral
 
Mach5's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Since the look of Klingons, in general, is well established, they would be the same in the Alternate Reality as the Prime Reality.
Same goes for the Romulans, yet Nero and his gang don't exactly look like those seen in TOS or TNG.
__________________
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."
― Bertrand Russell
Mach5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 05:19 PM   #884
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

indranee wrote: View Post
I understand what you're saying but IMO it's a solid ideal to reach for. I really can't find fault with people who want to inculcate it into their lives.
The problem is that people are incorporating something twisted and strange and not at all what you think it is. I've seen one other poster play the IDIC card, but basically when it pertains to when people disagree with what he likes, and then he turns around and speaks of what he dislikes. That really makes no sense to me. It would make more sense to me that instead of worshiping a TV show's dogma and using it as any kind of basis for philosophy that one should first start with the basics like not being a hypocrite. Any one who throws out any claims of IDIC is like the one who throws the first stone...

And I called you ignorant because your post reeked of it.
Perhaps you already had the scent on your nose. There was nothing ignorant about it.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2 2013, 05:28 PM   #885
marksound
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Planet Carcazed
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Here's an example of IDIC, as it should be, in action:

"Dude, whatever."
marksound is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
benedict cumberbatch, grading & discussion, jj abrams

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 09:31 AM.

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