RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,837
Posts: 5,327,268
Members: 24,551
Currently online: 526
Newest member: Mycroft

TrekToday headlines

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

New Trek Home Fashions
By: T'Bonz on Jul 4

Star Trek Pop-Ups Book Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3


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 June 18 2013, 04:28 PM   #106
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Now for Stargate. I really think thought that the series (not the movie) was a bit too silly for me. Maybe its just too sophisticated and I didn't realise.
It's not. Not at all. But it's still measurably deeper than TOS.
No.

The Stargate TV shows are mediocre, cheesy and disposable fun with no sophistication or ambition whatever
Precisely.

Which sort of goes to my overall point. TOS remains a superior product, not because it was particularly deep (it wasn't) because it was really really good. The cheese factor in the original Star Trek is breathtakingly apparent, but we forgive the old series because
1) It's still somehow a lot of fun to watch and
2) What do you expect? It's 1968.

Despite what may people have claimed, depth and the pretense of intellect does NOT make for good science fiction. Sci-fi isn't about science and technology as much as it is about the people using it. That is, incidentally, one of the reasons why Steampunk is so popular: it's science fiction the strips the bells and whistles and lens flare and distills it down to the man at the wheel (on some level, this was also part of the appeal of Firefly and space westerns in general).
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 06:22 PM   #107
The Keeper
Commodore
 
The Keeper's Avatar
 
Location: Where reality ends and illusion begins
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

RE: CommishSleer

I may have it wrong but I thought these characters being different from their prime counterparts was kind'a the point?

It's unfortunate enough, imo, that prime universe events are being... reused, (albeit in a fresh way) but if the characters were also being retread in the same rubber as before then there would be absolutely no reason to watch NuTrek... except maybe for the updated effects.

Last edited by The Keeper; June 18 2013 at 07:13 PM. Reason: clarify to whom I was responding
The Keeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 07:57 PM   #108
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
But [Stargate is] still measurably deeper than TOS.
No.

The Stargate TV shows are mediocre, cheesy and disposable fun with no sophistication or ambition whatever
Precisely.
Now this is funny.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 06:17 AM.

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