RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,218
Posts: 5,437,870
Members: 24,955
Currently online: 498
Newest member: r.ballman

TrekToday headlines

Cumberbatch In Wax
By: T'Bonz on Oct 24

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


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 September 24 2013, 02:53 AM   #16
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

BillJ wrote: View Post
How many movie writers and directors consult the audience before making a film?
A film series has never, ever gone in a different direction by changing the things that pissed off a lot of people?
__________________
Thank you very much for your concern, sir, but he does not need your religion, he has science and socialism and birthdays.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 02:56 AM   #17
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Set Harth wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
How many movie writers and directors consult the audience before making a film?
A film series has never, ever gone in a different direction by changing the things that pissed off a lot of people?
Define "a lot of people"?

Star Trek 2009 was nearly universally praised by both Trekkies and general audiences alike. Why would they listen to a few people who have a severe case of butthurt?
__________________
"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 September 24 2013, 02:57 AM   #18
bullethead
Fleet Captain
 
bullethead's Avatar
 
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

22 Stars wrote: View Post
Trek 09 rekindled it for me too, but STID quashed it for me. A 9/11 conspiracy movie, over 10 years after 9/11 felt forced and self serving for the writer (Orci). Also, regurgitating, multiple lines of dialogue, and entire scenes from TWOK didn't help.

Made the second half of the film more like a parody, than a tribute.
I too was pumped after ST09 (which had its flaws), but cooled a lot on Abrams Trek after STID. I didn't see/mind the 9/11 conspiracy stuff, because the initial setup had so much promise - a Starfleet officer goes rogue and starts waging a terrorism campaign against Starfleet. What was great about that was that there were plenty of interesting reasons for that happen - hell, the Prime Directive alone is a pretty good one. But then they made it about Khan and militarism being bad, combined it with a story that made you ask why people were (not) doing things too often for its own good, and basically ended on a reset button.

It's really hard to stay enthusiastic about something that drops the ball so hard when it couldn't afford to.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Set Harth wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
How many movie writers and directors consult the audience before making a film?
A film series has never, ever gone in a different direction by changing the things that pissed off a lot of people?
Define "a lot of people"?

Star Trek 2009 was nearly universally praised by both Trekkies and general audiences alike. Why would they listen to a few people who have a severe case of butthurt?
IIRC, stuff like the whole "Kirk is not ready for the captain's chair" thing was a response to criticisms from a majority of viewers and possibly reviewers too.
__________________
A business man and engineer discuss how to launch a communications satellite in the 1960s:
Biz Dev Guy: Your communications satellite has to be the size, shape, and weight of a hydrogen bomb.
bullethead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:11 AM   #19
Anji
Rear Admiral
 
Anji's Avatar
 
Location: Assisting in the birth of baby Horta on Janus VI
View Anji's Twitter Profile
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Ah, hem. The "butthurt" chiming in here.

I think it's pretty safe to say that we're not pissed just disappointed.

Was there really a reason to pull those characters from TWOK?

Abrams didn't seem like he wanted to continue to grow the franchise, but merely take advantage of its successful moments and capitalize on it for his own benefit.

Disappointing.

Glad he went over to Star Wars.
__________________
"You may be wrong, but you may be right." - Billy Joel
Anji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:17 AM   #20
HaplessCrewman
Commander
 
HaplessCrewman's Avatar
 
Location: Office of Scientific Intelligence
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

BillJ wrote: View Post
Set Harth wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
How many movie writers and directors consult the audience before making a film?
A film series has never, ever gone in a different direction by changing the things that pissed off a lot of people?
Define "a lot of people"?

Star Trek 2009 was nearly universally praised by both Trekkies and general audiences alike. Why would they listen to a few people who have a severe case of butthurt?
Yes, 2009 Trek was universally praised by fans and the general audience. Into Darkness was also of a kind. Why the disconnect with this film? It's more similar in tone and approach to 2009 Trek than not.

Where is the dissatisfaction coming from? Or is the dissatisfaction from the so-called vocal minority? Must be more than that.

Fans should not be placated to. The creators are too beholden to a minority of fans - which sometimes results in hurt feelings from both sides. Creators should create and not try to second-guess what the "fans" want. Maintain professional distance!
__________________
Better than he was before. Better...stronger...faster.
HaplessCrewman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:23 AM   #21
Dead Possum
An Ex-Awesome Possum
 
Dead Possum's Avatar
 
Location: Your Nightmares
View Dead Possum's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Dead Possum Send a message via AIM to Dead Possum
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Anji wrote: View Post
Ah, hem. The "butthurt" chiming in here.

I think it's pretty safe to say that we're not pissed just disappointed.

Was there really a reason to pull those characters from TWOK?
Because they make these movies for a wide audience and the characters are the best known to most people. Also for the most part it worked rather well. I don't think they needed to fully redo the ending to TWOK. But watching it with people who aren't really fans or even aware of most of Trek, it works. Especially with Kirk's "death scene". It showed that Kirk has finally grown up, he's willing to die to save his crew without hesitation. Also Spock's reaction was important character development, he's over his obsession with death completely and has figured out that Kirk really is his friend.

It could have been handled differently, but it works especially with people who haven't seen TWOK a million times. Their reaction to Spock screaming Khan isn't laughter, but saying that Spock's pissed and about to kick some genetically engineered ass.
__________________
"We're not rotting, we're fermenting!"
Dead Possum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:26 AM   #22
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

HaplessCrewman wrote: View Post
Where is the dissatisfaction coming from? Or is the dissatisfaction from the so-called vocal minority? Must be more than that.
I'm not convinced it isn't just a vocal minority. How many different polls and websites do we need to link to showing that many, many more people enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness than didn't? The poll in this forum shows 56% of those who voted rated the film an 'A-' or better. Rotten Tomatoes shows that 241,000 plus people have rated the film an average of 4.3/5.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star...into_darkness/

It was the #1 home video release last week.

So where exactly are these hordes of unhappy people?
__________________
"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 September 24 2013, 03:31 AM   #23
Dead Possum
An Ex-Awesome Possum
 
Dead Possum's Avatar
 
Location: Your Nightmares
View Dead Possum's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Dead Possum Send a message via AIM to Dead Possum
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

All are in this forum, well them and their sockpuppet accounts.
__________________
"We're not rotting, we're fermenting!"
Dead Possum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:36 AM   #24
Geoff Peterson
Fleet Admiral
 
Geoff Peterson's Avatar
 
Location: 20 feet from an outlet
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Anji wrote: View Post
Ah, hem. The "butthurt" chiming in here.

I think it's pretty safe to say that we're not pissed just disappointed.

Was there really a reason to pull those characters from TWOK?

Abrams didn't seem like he wanted to continue to grow the franchise, but merely take advantage of its successful moments and capitalize on it for his own benefit.

Disappointing.

Glad he went over to Star Wars.
Nah, there were people who were pissed.

Was there a reason to bring in characters from Space Seed to STII? Or the Borg into FC? Oh yeah, people know who they are.

He's a professional and since the movie has increased Star Trek's profile overseas, he has grown the franchise.

He's still with Star Trek.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Geoff Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:41 AM   #25
HaplessCrewman
Commander
 
HaplessCrewman's Avatar
 
Location: Office of Scientific Intelligence
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

BillJ wrote: View Post
HaplessCrewman wrote: View Post
Where is the dissatisfaction coming from? Or is the dissatisfaction from the so-called vocal minority? Must be more than that.
I'm not convinced it isn't just a vocal minority. How many different polls and websites do we need to link to showing that many, many more people enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness than didn't? The poll in this forum shows 56% of those who voted rated the film an 'A-' or better. Rotten Tomatoes shows that 241,000 plus people have rated the film an average of 4.3/5.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star...into_darkness/

It was the #1 home video release last week.

So where exactly are these hordes of unhappy people?
Yeah, everyone loves this movie and no one is unhappy.

It got 72% on Metacritic.
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/star-trek-into-darkness

So there's no problem here. Move along.
__________________
Better than he was before. Better...stronger...faster.
HaplessCrewman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 03:44 AM   #26
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

HaplessCrewman wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
HaplessCrewman wrote: View Post
Where is the dissatisfaction coming from? Or is the dissatisfaction from the so-called vocal minority? Must be more than that.
I'm not convinced it isn't just a vocal minority. How many different polls and websites do we need to link to showing that many, many more people enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness than didn't? The poll in this forum shows 56% of those who voted rated the film an 'A-' or better. Rotten Tomatoes shows that 241,000 plus people have rated the film an average of 4.3/5.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star...into_darkness/

It was the #1 home video release last week.

So where exactly are these hordes of unhappy people?
Yeah, everyone loves this movie and no one is unhappy.

It got 72% on Metacritic.
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/star-trek-into-darkness

So there's no problem here. Move along.
Actually that's the critic rating you're referencing...

1,038 users averaged out to a 7.9 rating. Which is close to the 4.3/5 given on Rotten Tomatoes. Of course, 241,000 people is a slightly larger sample size than 1,038.

So my question still stands: where are these hordes of people who hate the movie?
__________________
"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 September 24 2013, 04:20 AM   #27
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Anji wrote: View Post
Ah, hem. The "butthurt" chiming in here.

I think it's pretty safe to say that we're not pissed just disappointed.
Wouldn't "disappointed" be a point somewhere nearer the middle of a hypothetical pleased/displeased scale and "butthurt" a good deal closer to the "pissed" end of the scale? (As far as that goes, do we really need to use the term "butthurt" in here? Surely, there's something better and less disparaging.)

Awesome Possum wrote: View Post
All are in this forum, well them and their sockpuppet accounts.
Remember that this thread not in TNZ, and that any discussion of sockpuppets ought properly be via the Notify button or PM. Just sayin'.
__________________
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 September 24 2013, 05:09 AM   #28
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

BillJ wrote: View Post
I posted what I said above and EW still hasn't put it in their comments section.
I posted and linked Interstat. That hasn't gone up either.

Yeah, unbiased.
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 05:12 AM   #29
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

Awesome Possum wrote: View Post
All are in this forum, well them and their sockpuppet accounts.
Exactly. All three of them.
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 05:13 AM   #30
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: State of Trek according to Entertainment Weekly

I recall then-editor of Pocket Books, Marco Palmieri, once saying that he'd much rather that each new "Star Trek" tie-n novel polarize the readership, than to merely pitch for the middle ground and reach it comfortably. Imagine: every Trek novel predictably uncontroversial, and neither loved nor hated. Meh.
__________________
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
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 10:30 AM.

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