RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,348
Posts: 5,502,552
Members: 25,120
Currently online: 615
Newest member: Gaytrekgeek

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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+ 144 19.20%
A 161 21.47%
A- 101 13.47%
B+ 83 11.07%
B 59 7.87%
B- 27 3.60%
C+ 40 5.33%
C 38 5.07%
C- 25 3.33%
D+ 11 1.47%
D 13 1.73%
D- 10 1.33%
F 38 5.07%
Voters: 750. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 19 2013, 02:07 AM   #3001
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
But those are fictional phenomena. A Super Nova is a known quantity.
So why can't the Hobus phenomenon be another fictional phenomenon that acts like a supernova in some respects but turns out not to be like all other supernovae?

I'm not seeing the problem here.

Did you really need a line in the film that says, "Captain, it acts like a supernova in some respects but it is not a true supernova"?
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:07 AM   #3002
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post

The Immunity Syndrome had a space amoeba that had to be traveling at warp in order to eat multiple star systems over a few days. Obsession has a cloud that traveled at warp...
I've got to admit that I always hated that so much that in Tin Man I made a deliberate attempt to retcon it by having Data say "As no known natural phenomenon can travel at warp velocity, there are but two possibilities..."

Yeah, I introduced a continuity error into canon on purpose.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:07 AM   #3003
Lapis Exilis
Rear Admiral
 
Lapis Exilis's Avatar
 
Location: Underground
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post

thus Nature vs. Nurture might make an interesting fan debate but it in no way affects what happens in STiD.
So it can only be true Star Trek if the characters realise something and not the audience?
Please reread my post - I said quite clearly that STiD is definitely Star Trek. But it is Star Trek lacking anything cerebral. It's a perfectly fine story with perfectly good character motivations, but one of the things that tends to characterize the high water marks of Star Trek are the characters making decisions based on philosophical concerns. That, to me, is the defining difference between the universe of Star Trek and today's world - not that there's no poverty or war and everyone's happily living in Paradise, but that the characters engage with and are motivated by a higher order set of concerns, not simply personal and selfish ones like we regular mortals.


And one of the biggest criticisms about the story of ST:TMP is that it should have been Kirk or Spock making guest-star Decker's climactic sacrifice to save the Earth from V'ger.
OK - but thats an entirely different issue than what I was talking about. TMP has the characters making decisions because of their engagement with philosophical concerns. Abrams' Trek doesn't.

Abrams' Trek is fun, entertaining and looks good - but it's not in the same ballpark. I think one review said it best when it dubbed the film "a Star Trek flavored action movie".
Well, I hate action movies, but I love JJ Abrams' "Star Trek" movies.

What's so terrible about "Star Trek flavored action movies"?
Nothing, really. Except that it's part of a grand trend of skinning the symbols of various long running cultural tales and grafting them onto the same generic framework. Now we've got the Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes movies which are just Sherlock flavored action movies, and Star Trek flavored action movies -but they're all just Hollywood action movies in the end. That's disappointing to me because part of what I've admired about the Trek franchise is its ability to do new things while keeping a unique identity. I believe Ubik said upthread - by making Star Trek flavored action movies, Abrams is playing it safe, working within a formula. It's an entertaining formula, but it doesn't take any risks or do anything that surprises. Maybe it's a consequence of my age, but I've now seen so many this or that flavored action movies that I find action movies boring.

They create new fans of the ongoing franchise, just as ST IV (a "Star Trek flavored" comedic movie) did. CBS already reported that the 2009 film caused huge spikes in sales of all "Star Trek" DVD boxed sets: all of the movies and all of the TV series, as new fans explored what had come before.
Creating new Star Trek fans may be one of their concerns, but it's not one of mine. I'd vote for seeing the franchise take a risk and possibly fail, rather than retread ground we've seen a hundred times.
__________________
Don't try to win over the haters; you're not the jackass whisperer. - Scott Straten
Lapis Exilis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:08 AM   #3004
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

teacake wrote: View Post
Who is "we"? There are plenty of people who watched the OT when it came out and loved the prequels. If ROTJ came out today people would think it was godawful.
We are those of us who felt let down by the prequels. I never claimed everyone who saw the originals disliked the prequels. And there were things I liked. But over all, they just didn't earn the same love.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:10 AM   #3005
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Lapis Exilis wrote: View Post
But it is Star Trek lacking anything cerebral.
Sigh.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:13 AM   #3006
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
Lapis Exilis wrote: View Post
But it is Star Trek lacking anything cerebral.
Sigh.
If there was nothing to think about I wouldn't have posted 125 times in this thread.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:16 AM   #3007
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

teacake wrote: View Post
Who is "we"? There are plenty of people who watched the OT when it came out and loved the prequels. If ROTJ came out today people would think it was godawful.
People have ALWAYS though JEDI was godawful, because it was and is.

It's just that the prequels suck worse, except maybe 5 minutes or so of SITH.

Still hasn't been a decent SW movie since EMPIRE IMO. Gary Kurtz is what brought balance to the Lucas, and w/o him it has been a lesser thing.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:17 AM   #3008
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

This movie is so explicitly political and anti-current American military policy that, having seen it twice now, I'm shocked that Paramount gave the go-ahead on the script. It's more daring in that respect than anything Star Trek has presented in nearly forty-five years.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:18 AM   #3009
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

teacake wrote: View Post
Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
Lapis Exilis wrote: View Post
But it is Star Trek lacking anything cerebral.
Sigh.
If there was nothing to think about I wouldn't have posted 125 times in this thread.

Plenty are posting about missed opportunities in the film, so there's apparently a lot to think about; it just is not about what the filmmakers did, but failed to do.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:19 AM   #3010
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
This movie is so explicitly political and anti-current American military policy that, having seen it twice now, I'm shocked that Paramount gave the go-ahead on the script. It's more daring in that respect than anything Star Trek has presented in nearly forty-five years.
I posted earlier that Alcatraz must be the stand in for GITMO.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:20 AM   #3011
Cookies and Cake
Admiral
 
Location: North America
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Lapis Exilis wrote: View Post
Please reread my post - I said quite clearly that STiD is definitely Star Trek. But it is Star Trek lacking anything cerebral. It's a perfectly fine story with perfectly good character motivations, but one of the things that tends to characterize the high water marks of Star Trek are the characters making decisions based on philosophical concerns. That, to me, is the defining difference between the universe of Star Trek and today's world - not that there's no poverty or war and everyone's happily living in Paradise, but that the characters engage with and are motivated by a higher order set of concerns, not simply personal and selfish ones like we regular mortals.
Kirk refusing to follow orders to stand off and fire torpedoes at Harrison, because he believed that Harrison deserved a trial, was precisely him "making decisions based on philosophical concerns", as well as him engaging with and being "motivated by a higher order set of concerns, not simply personal and selfish ones like we regular mortals."
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Cookies and Cake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:22 AM   #3012
Joel_Kirk
Rear Admiral
 
Joel_Kirk's Avatar
 
Location: Chillin' on Ligon II...
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

trevanian wrote: View Post
Still hasn't been a decent SW movie since EMPIRE IMO. Gary Kurtz is what brought balance to the Lucas, and w/o him it has been a lesser thing.
This.
__________________
#BlackLivesMatter/#CrimingWhileWhite/#icantbreathe
Joel_Kirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:26 AM   #3013
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
This movie is so explicitly political and anti-current American military policy that, having seen it twice now, I'm shocked that Paramount gave the go-ahead on the script. It's more daring in that respect than anything Star Trek has presented in nearly forty-five years.


I've wanted to post about some of that but I don't want to get embroiled in the shitstorm that will ensue.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:27 AM   #3014
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
This movie is so explicitly political and anti-current American military policy that, having seen it twice now, I'm shocked that Paramount gave the go-ahead on the script. It's more daring in that respect than anything Star Trek has presented in nearly forty-five years.
I posted earlier that Alcatraz must be the stand in for GITMO.
If SF-as-allegory is even a fraction as potent now as it was apparently for Serling and others decades back, then they'd've been better off going much further, rather than just paying lip service to present concerns over US excesses and failings, which is a safe and trendy thing to do, especially for international markets that already think of us in this way.

A really serious and massive false flag op like flying a starship into a downtown crash in order to generate support for attacking somebody not actually responsible for the incident would have really knocked the stars off the UFP banner (and it probably would have fallen more in lines with what I've read from Orci on occasion in terms of his own views.)
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19 2013, 02:37 AM   #3015
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

trevanian, reading this forum for years I don't think as a non-american that is even remotely "safe and trendy" to pay lip service or discuss these matters.

I think Section 31 could provide a lot of opportunities to write bravely about government. I also think I don't care if Star Trek ever bothers to ramp it up to that because I don't watch Star Trek to think about US politics.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   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 12:52 AM.

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