RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,926
Posts: 5,478,729
Members: 25,054
Currently online: 399
Newest member: DRayTrekkie

TrekToday headlines

Trek Shirt And Hoodie
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

A Klingon Christmas Carol’s Last Season
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

Attack Wing Wave 10 Expansion Pack
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24


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 August 25 2013, 11:35 PM   #4666
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

PKerr wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Not trying to convince you of anything. Pointing out that they had uniform hats. It's fun trivia, and fact.
OK, but they did away with various things from the un-aired pilot, that was obviously one of them as we never saw it again.

I'm just pointing out that I'm being sent links to a picture of a hat on a table, It's not going to change my opinion that I suddenly like it.
We did see it: Menagerie has footage with the hat in it. And the cage is less "unaired" and more "delayed". It was first shown on TV in '88 and has been in and out of the syndication run since then, and was included in the remastered run.

Anyways: The STID dress uniforms strike me more as a retro-future look based on someone trying to take a modern day Marine dress uniform and sci-fi it up. See a lot of Forbidden planet (majority of it FP), The Cage, anime and Marine dress uniform style rolled up in the look.
__________________
- SeerSGB -

Last edited by SeerSGB; August 26 2013 at 12:45 AM.
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 12:30 AM   #4667
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Kruezerman wrote: View Post
I can't really take you seriously with that avatar. Just saying.
Congtratulations: you got sucked in by a political troll image nearly two years old, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the thread topic or forum.

Given your acknowledgement of it in the manner quoted above, he then feels he's justified in responding thus:

PKerr wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
I can't really take you seriously with that avatar. Just saying.
Pot meet kettle..Just saying...
Which amounts to "Nyah, same to you!"

(Great, we're really operating on a high level now, aren't we?)

And also leaves things open for a third party to chime in, not entirely unpredictably:

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
I can't really take you seriously with that avatar. Just saying.
I think he has the best avatar on the forum .
Neat, but that's completely off-topic, and it's out of place in this forum.

To reiterate: NO politics in this forum unless it's relevant to the topic, please. PKerr, maybe it's time you got an av image that's a little more current.

All of you guys ought to have known better, so knock it off now. (Take it to PM at the very least, but keep it out of here.)

And Nazis, too? Swell.
__________________
The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but
that the lightning ain't distributed right.
— Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 05:23 AM   #4668
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Not trying to convince you of anything. Pointing out that they had uniform hats. It's fun trivia, and fact.
Pretty sure Pike had an old TV in his quarters too. But that doesn't legitimize the VIC 20 that Kirk has in his home in TWOK.

If you're trying to justify hats in Starfleet, just go to the goofy things in TSFS ... they look just as bad as the ID ones, though they don't give off the STARSHIP TROOPERS vibe that I get from most of 09 and ID ('enlisting guarantees ... a free replicator, i guess.')
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 07:16 AM   #4669
suarezguy
Commodore
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
suarezguy wrote: View Post
He seemed overly cavalier about his decision compared to how others regarded the Prime Directive and it didn't make sense that Spock wouldn't have objected, let alone to the point of playing the major role, and then not try to defend the decision later.
You think Spock would happily a planet full of innocents die?
That seemed the way that not only Pike but almost all of the other leaders felt; Spock having such esteem for the PD in not being observed but not caution against a mission that would greatly risk them being observed seemed illogical.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Spock didn't think Kirk would cover up the mission.
Then he should have tried more to defend the mission to the brass; you don't have to spell everything out but it seemed too much like he really did a back-stabbing and/or naively didn't anticipate how anyone else would react.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
There's a difference between reusing a story and thematic idea and blatantly trying to remake much of a story; I thought Enterprise "Terra Nova" and Nemesis were much too close to past works and thus some of my least favorite (although "Friendship One" was very recent and bad to begin with).

As for the Eve in underwear scene, it seemed pointless but worse because I didn't like Kirk ignoring her telling him to turn around; the original Kirk would never do that but it seemed, unfortunately, like only a small stretch for Abrams version.
Take a look at the nasty red marks Shatner's Grabby Kirk left on Reyna's arms in "Requiem for Muthuselah" - Pine's Kirk would never do something like that.
Saw the episode, don't remember the scene, hope it wasn't so jerky.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post


Did you find it believable that Uhura would love Spock but be so unaccepting, almost not even understanding, about his reserved, logical nature
She was bothered by his willingness to put himself in danger and his post-Vulcan lack of communication, not his Vulcan nature. As was explained on the ride to Kronos.
I myself didn't get why he would put himself in danger but, once he was in it, the reasons for his reserve were clear.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
or that Spock wouldn't alert Kirk about Carol's identity earlier (or that he would contact his alternate self from the bridge)?
Yes and yes.
Both seemed reckless to me.

BillJ wrote: View Post
suarezguy wrote: View Post
The dialogue of the protagonists was mediocre, the action boring and the plotting very convoluted and unbelieaveable.
You pretty much just described every Trek film in a nutshell.
TWoK and TUC had some contrivances; what was contrived about FC, and how were any of the three convoluted?

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Maybe Simon Pegg is just annoyed that these people will never shut up about how much they hate the movie not matter how much time passes
The film and reactions are some three months old, not a long time passage, and some people (myself included) watched it later than opening day. And thinking it's worse than the other films or even giving it an F isn't crass ire.

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
as well as the fact that they will just randomly bring said hatred up in conversations that have nothing to do with said movie
That would be inappropriate and annoying while criticizing it in conversations about films, let alone sci-fi or blockbusters, would be neither.
__________________
"Let us punish the guilty! Let us reward the innocent."

Last edited by suarezguy; August 26 2013 at 07:59 AM.
suarezguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 09:34 AM   #4670
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I love it every time someone says stuff like "You think STD is bad? Well, every Trek has been bad."

It's like "If you don't like my favorite Trek, you shouldn't enjoy your favorite Trek!!!"

Last edited by JarodRussell; August 26 2013 at 09:45 AM.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 09:40 AM   #4671
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]

PKerr wrote: View Post
I't funny how a few people are trying to convince me of the whole hat thing that was a flash on the screen of an original un-aired pilot that no one in the show ever actually wore.
I know I can't convince you of anything. I just thought others might be interested in a trivia factoid. I, myself, was thrilled to recognize its inspiration.
__________________
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 August 26 2013, 11:18 AM   #4672
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I love it every time someone says stuff like "You think STD is bad? Well, every Trek has been bad."

It's like "If you don't like my favorite Trek, you shouldn't enjoy your favorite Trek!!!"
It isn't that. It's more like you can't hold the newer part of the franchise to a higher standard than you do the older parts--and vice versa. If you're willing to let one slide, then you should let the other slide. Not saying you have to enjoy both or nothing, just be fair about being critical.
__________________
- SeerSGB -

Last edited by SeerSGB; August 26 2013 at 11:29 AM.
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 01:38 PM   #4673
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I love it every time someone says stuff like "You think STD is bad? Well, every Trek has been bad."

It's like "If you don't like my favorite Trek, you shouldn't enjoy your favorite Trek!!!"
It isn't that. It's more like you can't hold the newer part of the franchise to a higher standard than you do the older parts--and vice versa. If you're willing to let one slide, then you should let the other slide. Not saying you have to enjoy both or nothing, just be fair about being critical.
Why not? Standards change, as we're talking taste here.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 03:58 PM   #4674
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I love it every time someone says stuff like "You think STD is bad? Well, every Trek has been bad."

It's like "If you don't like my favorite Trek, you shouldn't enjoy your favorite Trek!!!"
It isn't that. It's more like you can't hold the newer part of the franchise to a higher standard than you do the older parts--and vice versa. If you're willing to let one slide, then you should let the other slide. Not saying you have to enjoy both or nothing, just be fair about being critical.
Why not? Standards change, as we're talking taste here.
Again, simple fairness. You can't bust JJ Abrams nuts over some of the sillier things he's done with the reboots and let Gene Roddenberry, Berman, Braga, all have a pass for equally silly/same things.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 04:05 PM   #4675
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

SeerSGB wrote: View Post

Again, simple fairness. You can't bust JJ Abrams nuts over some of the sillier things he's done with the reboots and let Gene Roddenberry, Berman, Braga, all have a pass for equally silly/same things.
Simple fairness doesn't come into play when one has an ax to grind.

Star Trek has always played fast-and-loose with the laws of physics. If you hate this movie because of that then there's no way possible you can like the rest of Trek.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 06:10 PM   #4676
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post

It isn't that. It's more like you can't hold the newer part of the franchise to a higher standard than you do the older parts--and vice versa. If you're willing to let one slide, then you should let the other slide. Not saying you have to enjoy both or nothing, just be fair about being critical.
Why not? Standards change, as we're talking taste here.
Again, simple fairness. You can't bust JJ Abrams nuts over some of the sillier things he's done with the reboots and let Gene Roddenberry, Berman, Braga, all have a pass for equally silly/same things.
Of course you can. Since when is taste fair? If you don't like the overall film, of course you find flaws in it. Sole nitpicks are never the reason people don't like a film, they are only symptoms picked as examples in discussions.


Discussions here usually go this way:

Person 1: I fucking loved it.
Person 2: Yeah, it was great.
Person 3: I want babies with it.
Person 4: Meh, I didn't like it.
Person 1: Why?
Person 2: Why?!
Person 3: WHY?!?!
Person 4: Yeah, you know, because of this and that and those and these.
And the shitstorm begins where Person 4 has to defend his opinion down to the tiniest detail against those other people. And eventually Person 4 gets bullied into argument corners and then labelled as butthurt or extremely nerdy, who "can't enjoy something for what it is", or who is on a hate quest against the director/cast/writer.

It also goes the other way round when the majority dislikes a film and someone comes in saying he liked it.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 06:21 PM   #4677
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Why not? Standards change, as we're talking taste here.
Again, simple fairness. You can't bust JJ Abrams nuts over some of the sillier things he's done with the reboots and let Gene Roddenberry, Berman, Braga, all have a pass for equally silly/same things.
Of course you can. Since when is taste fair? If you don't like the overall film, of course you find flaws in it. Sole nitpicks are never the reason people don't like a film, they are only symptoms picked as examples in discussions.


Discussions here usually go this way:

Person 1: I fucking loved it.
Person 2: Yeah, it was great.
Person 3: I want babies with it.
Person 4: Meh, I didn't like it.
Person 1: Why?
Person 2: Why?!
Person 3: WHY?!?!
Person 4: Yeah, you know, because of this and that and those and these.
And the shitstorm begins where Person 4 has to defend his opinion down to the tiniest detail against those other people. And eventually Person 4 gets bullied into argument corners and then labelled as butthurt or extremely nerdy, who "can't enjoy something for what it is", or who is on a hate quest against the director/cast/writer.

It also goes the other way round when the majority dislikes a film and someone comes in saying he liked it.
There's a difference between "Well I didn't like the story/cast /SFX" and

"It's stupid case of XYZ! TOS would have never done XYZ!"

"Well TOS did do XYZ"

"Uh well that was TOS, that's different,"

"How?"

"Cause TOS was sci-fi!"

If the story or the cast didn't appeal to you, fine. If you think it's a rehash or an all flash no substance movie, fine. But don't bust on them when they do the same bullshit we laud the other series for. Just cause the bullshit is from a different supplier doesn't make it any less bullshit.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 07:12 PM   #4678
AUbricklogic
Ensign
 
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post

Again, simple fairness. You can't bust JJ Abrams nuts over some of the sillier things he's done with the reboots and let Gene Roddenberry, Berman, Braga, all have a pass for equally silly/same things.
Of course you can. Since when is taste fair? If you don't like the overall film, of course you find flaws in it. Sole nitpicks are never the reason people don't like a film, they are only symptoms picked as examples in discussions.


Discussions here usually go this way:

Person 1: I fucking loved it.
Person 2: Yeah, it was great.
Person 3: I want babies with it.
Person 4: Meh, I didn't like it.
Person 1: Why?
Person 2: Why?!
Person 3: WHY?!?!
Person 4: Yeah, you know, because of this and that and those and these.
And the shitstorm begins where Person 4 has to defend his opinion down to the tiniest detail against those other people. And eventually Person 4 gets bullied into argument corners and then labelled as butthurt or extremely nerdy, who "can't enjoy something for what it is", or who is on a hate quest against the director/cast/writer.

It also goes the other way round when the majority dislikes a film and someone comes in saying he liked it.
There's a difference between "Well I didn't like the story/cast /SFX" and

"It's stupid case of XYZ! TOS would have never done XYZ!"

"Well TOS did do XYZ"

"Uh well that was TOS, that's different,"

"How?"

"Cause TOS was sci-fi!"

If the story or the cast didn't appeal to you, fine. If you think it's a rehash or an all flash no substance movie, fine. But don't bust on them when they do the same bullshit we laud the other series for. Just cause the bullshit is from a different supplier doesn't make it any less bullshit.
Honestly you're both describing the extremist corner of both views. There are a handful who exist there, but its a very small percentage.

One thing I think we can agree on is that extremists with radical bias of anything is usually detrimental to any discussion.
AUbricklogic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 07:14 PM   #4679
PKerr
Rear Admiral
 
PKerr's Avatar
 
Location: Tampa Fl
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Why not? Standards change, as we're talking taste here.
Again, simple fairness. You can't bust JJ Abrams nuts over some of the sillier things he's done with the reboots and let Gene Roddenberry, Berman, Braga, all have a pass for equally silly/same things.
Of course you can. Since when is taste fair? If you don't like the overall film, of course you find flaws in it. Sole nitpicks are never the reason people don't like a film, they are only symptoms picked as examples in discussions.


Discussions here usually go this way:

Person 1: I fucking loved it.
Person 2: Yeah, it was great.
Person 3: I want babies with it.
Person 4: Meh, I didn't like it.
Person 1: Why?
Person 2: Why?!
Person 3: WHY?!?!
Person 4: Yeah, you know, because of this and that and those and these.
And the shitstorm begins where Person 4 has to defend his opinion down to the tiniest detail against those other people. And eventually Person 4 gets bullied into argument corners and then labelled as butthurt or extremely nerdy, who "can't enjoy something for what it is", or who is on a hate quest against the director/cast/writer.

It also goes the other way round when the majority dislikes a film and someone comes in saying he liked it.
Slow clap, well said sir, well said.
PKerr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 07:31 PM   #4680
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Discussions here usually go this way:

Person 1: I fucking loved it.
Person 2: Yeah, it was great.
Person 3: I want babies with it.
Person 4: Meh, I didn't like it.
Person 1: Why?
Person 2: Why?!
Person 3: WHY?!?!
Person 4: Yeah, you know, because of this and that and those and these.
And the shitstorm begins where Person 4 has to defend his opinion down to the tiniest detail against those other people. And eventually Person 4 gets bullied into argument corners and then labelled as butthurt or extremely nerdy, who "can't enjoy something for what it is", or who is on a hate quest against the director/cast/writer.
DalekJim 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 02:51 AM.

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