RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,413
Posts: 5,506,313
Members: 25,129
Currently online: 492
Newest member: krishna

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

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


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 May 27 2013, 04:25 PM   #31
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

sonak wrote: View Post
I don't like blatant double standards and unfairness in reviews. I also tend to roll my eyes at the now cliched "Star Trek used to be so cerebral and look what Abrams did to it!" TWOK and FC were both very much straight-forward action sci-fi movies, just like the last two movies from Abrams have been.
By admitting that Khan wasn't 'all that' in TWOK either, I don't see where the double standard is.

You are allowed to compare movies within the same genre and find one better than the other.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 06:15 PM   #32
Anticitizen
Fleet Captain
 
Anticitizen's Avatar
 
Location: Black Mesa Research Facility
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

rafterman1701 wrote: View Post
And they went on for forty five minutes because there was stuff to talk about. We're going to be on this forum for months or years talking about the movie, so why get on them for how long they talked?
Bravo.

The reason why it was so long is because it was an in-depth discussion. It's not your typical spoiler-free movie review - they go over their impressions from all elements of the film, in a non-scripted casual way. I enjoy watching their discussions, and I more or less agree with their opinions on this one.

sonak wrote: View Post
I also tend to roll my eyes at the now cliched "Star Trek used to be so cerebral and look what Abrams did to it!" TWOK and FC were both very much straight-forward action sci-fi movies, just like the last two movies from Abrams have been.
TWOK was at least coherent. My favorite part of this review was when the one guy was asked to describe the plot in detail, and the other two guys can't help but start snickering at the ridiculousness of it. If he had been summarizing The Wrath of Khan they wouldn't be laughing, because TWOK isn't mindless gibberish - despite whether you feel that it was 'cerebral' or not, it at least has a taut, believable storyline.
__________________
The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes.
Anticitizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 06:44 PM   #33
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
rafterman1701 wrote: View Post
And they went on for forty five minutes because there was stuff to talk about. We're going to be on this forum for months or years talking about the movie, so why get on them for how long they talked?
Bravo.

The reason why it was so long is because it was an in-depth discussion. It's not your typical spoiler-free movie review - they go over their impressions from all elements of the film, in a non-scripted casual way. I enjoy watching their discussions, and I more or less agree with their opinions on this one.

sonak wrote: View Post
I also tend to roll my eyes at the now cliched "Star Trek used to be so cerebral and look what Abrams did to it!" TWOK and FC were both very much straight-forward action sci-fi movies, just like the last two movies from Abrams have been.
TWOK was at least coherent. My favorite part of this review was when the one guy was asked to describe the plot in detail, and the other two guys can't help but start snickering at the ridiculousness of it. If he had been summarizing The Wrath of Khan they wouldn't be laughing, because TWOK isn't mindless gibberish - despite whether you feel that it was 'cerebral' or not, it at least has a taut, believable storyline.

yeah, except that part of the review was clearly exaggerated for comedic effect to make the movie sound dumb. You can do that with anything, including TWOK. Here, I'll give it a shot:


-So there's this planet that exploded, but it knocked ANOTHER planet into the EXACT orbit of the exploded planet. No one found out about this, and no one on the USS Reliant noticed from their charts that a whole planet was missing.
-And then these scientists have come up with this magical tech that creates functioning ecosystems from nothing at all.
-And there's this madman who can stick bugs in guys' ears and brainwash them somehow, and Kirk has an old flame and a son he didn't know about, and Khan wants revenge on Kirk even though he tried to kill Kirk, and Kirk mercifully let him go, and had nothing to do with the other planet exploding...


you can make any Trek film's plot sound kind of silly if you try. They could have done the same thing with Iron Man 3, which they both really liked.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 06:55 PM   #34
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post

TWOK was at least coherent. My favorite part of this review was when the one guy was asked to describe the plot in detail, and the other two guys can't help but start snickering at the ridiculousness of it.
They simply know the audience they're playing too. Many of the people likely watching those reviews are people who simply can't let go of the Prime timeline.

It's like a conservative politician speaking to a religious crowd. They know all the notes to hit to fire the crowd up.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 07:36 PM   #35
Anticitizen
Fleet Captain
 
Anticitizen's Avatar
 
Location: Black Mesa Research Facility
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

sonak wrote: View Post
yeah, except that part of the review was clearly exaggerated for comedic effect to make the movie sound dumb. You can do that with anything, including TWOK. Here, I'll give it a shot:


-So there's this planet that exploded, but it knocked ANOTHER planet into the EXACT orbit of the exploded planet. No one found out about this, and no one on the USS Reliant noticed from their charts that a whole planet was missing.
-And then these scientists have come up with this magical tech that creates functioning ecosystems from nothing at all.
-And there's this madman who can stick bugs in guys' ears and brainwash them somehow, and Kirk has an old flame and a son he didn't know about, and Khan wants revenge on Kirk even though he tried to kill Kirk, and Kirk mercifully let him go, and had nothing to do with the other planet exploding...
All you're doing there is making fun of the elements by rephrasing them in a silly way, not the plot. For instance, the 'magical tech' and 'the bugs which brainwash somehow' are explained well enough (in technobabble terms) that they're a non-issue in a sci-fi film. STID's very plot is what's ridiculous, not just the elements. It's a wacky, convoluted mess.

BillJ wrote: View Post
They simply know the audience they're playing too. Many of the people likely watching those reviews are people who simply can't let go of the Prime timeline.
The reviewer that had the best criticisms of the film, IMO, was Jay, the only one of the three who wasn't a Trekkie - he gave his opinions on the film as a film, not a Star Trek film. Why do you think they're playing to an audience at all? You think they're lying about how they felt about the movie?

Do you honestly believe STID to be so far above criticism that anyone who says they didn't like must be dishonest and obviously lying? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
__________________
The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes.
Anticitizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 07:41 PM   #36
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post

Do you honestly believe STID to be so far above criticism that anyone who says they didn't like must be dishonest and obviously lying? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
No movie is above criticism and I have went over my perceived short-comings of the film in other posts.

But when they're saying this:

Anticitizen wrote:
My favorite part of this review was when the one guy was asked to describe the plot in detail, and the other two guys can't help but start snickering at the ridiculousness of it.
Shows me they're playing to an audience because you can snicker at the ridiculousness of plot details of many, many movies, sci-fi in particular. Seriously, protomatter?
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 07:47 PM   #37
Yuletide Caroler
Rear Admiral
 
Yuletide Caroler's Avatar
 
Location: A ship of Ancient Mariner's festive imagination.
View Yuletide Caroler's Twitter Profile
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
TWOK was at least coherent. My favorite part of this review was when the one guy was asked to describe the plot in detail, and the other two guys can't help but start snickering at the ridiculousness of it. If he had been summarizing The Wrath of Khan they wouldn't be laughing, because TWOK isn't mindless gibberish - despite whether you feel that it was 'cerebral' or not, it at least has a taut, believable storyline.
I think this is disingenuous. Describe the plot for any motion picture, in detail, and it's going to sound a bit silly out of context. Just for kicks and giggles, try it with Inception. Or Avengers. Or even TWOK (seriously, trying working in the whole mind-control-space-slug component of the plot into your description without it sounding ridiculous; sure, it's explained in-film ... but so is STID's magic blood).

There are legitimate criticisms to be made of STID, but framing them in order to poke fun is done purely for the entertainment value, and not for any objective reasons. Put simply, they place a higher value on the style of their reviews than the substance. That's all fine and dandy, nothing wrong with that in and of itself. But it shouldn't be mistaken for the kind of quality reviews we got from, say, Ebert.
__________________
Yuletide Caroler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 07:57 PM   #38
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
[...Silly shit...] are explained well enough (in technobabble terms) that they're a non-issue in a sci-fi film. STID's very plot is what's ridiculous, not just the elements. It's a wacky, convoluted mess.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I actually have to agree with sonak on this one.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:07 PM   #39
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

So we're saying that you're not allowed to find fault in STID because other films are silly too?

Last edited by Shazam!; May 27 2013 at 09:19 PM.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:19 PM   #40
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Shazam! wrote: View Post
But they aren't reviewing those movies : /

Or are you saying that you're not allowed to find fault in STID because other films are silly too?
Boiling a film down to its plot points and laughing at it tells me nothing of its quality (but it tells me plenty about the quality of the "review"). So trying to use that portion of the "review" as proof of the poor quality of Star Trek Into Darkness isn't going to work.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:27 PM   #41
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
Boiling a film down to its plot points and laughing at it tells me nothing of its quality (but it tells me plenty about the quality of the "review"). So trying to use that portion of the "review" as proof of the poor quality of Star Trek Into Darkness isn't going to work.
Yes, but you have to feel that the plot is silly enough for you to warrant breaking it down in such a manner.

You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:32 PM   #42
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Shazam! wrote: View Post
You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /
I think if you spend forty-five minutes reviewing a movie, you enjoyed it on some level. Just like I don't believe the folks who constantly post how much they hate Abrams Trek really hate it.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:38 PM   #43
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
yeah, except that part of the review was clearly exaggerated for comedic effect to make the movie sound dumb. You can do that with anything, including TWOK. Here, I'll give it a shot:


-So there's this planet that exploded, but it knocked ANOTHER planet into the EXACT orbit of the exploded planet. No one found out about this, and no one on the USS Reliant noticed from their charts that a whole planet was missing.
-And then these scientists have come up with this magical tech that creates functioning ecosystems from nothing at all.
-And there's this madman who can stick bugs in guys' ears and brainwash them somehow, and Kirk has an old flame and a son he didn't know about, and Khan wants revenge on Kirk even though he tried to kill Kirk, and Kirk mercifully let him go, and had nothing to do with the other planet exploding...
All you're doing there is making fun of the elements by rephrasing them in a silly way, not the plot. For instance, the 'magical tech' and 'the bugs which brainwash somehow' are explained well enough (in technobabble terms) that they're a non-issue in a sci-fi film. STID's very plot is what's ridiculous, not just the elements. It's a wacky, convoluted mess.

BillJ wrote: View Post
They simply know the audience they're playing too. Many of the people likely watching those reviews are people who simply can't let go of the Prime timeline.
The reviewer that had the best criticisms of the film, IMO, was Jay, the only one of the three who wasn't a Trekkie - he gave his opinions on the film as a film, not a Star Trek film. Why do you think they're playing to an audience at all? You think they're lying about how they felt about the movie?

Do you honestly believe STID to be so far above criticism that anyone who says they didn't like must be dishonest and obviously lying? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
Shazam! wrote: View Post
So we're saying that you're not allowed to find fault in STID because other films are silly too?

criticizing a film for silly elements of the plot is fine, but doing so in a deliberately exaggerated way for comedic effect and then pretending that you're making a serious criticism of the film is pretty dumb. I liked STID a lot, but I certainly don't think it's above criticism.

My favorite film of the original series is TVH and my favorite film of the TNG series is STFC, and I certainly would admit that they have silly plot elements, but I wouldn't do some segment of a review where I pretended to be summarizing the plot, but was actually just being goofy and ridiculous to make it seem incoherent, and then use THAT to show that the plot actually WAS incoherent. (I think that was a run-on.)


STID had some problems(not too many, though), but an incoherent plot wasn't one of them. It moved quickly, but it wasn't hard to follow.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:41 PM   #44
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
Shazam! wrote: View Post
You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /
I think if you spend forty-five minutes reviewing a movie, you enjoyed it on some level. Just like I don't believe the folks who constantly post how much they hate Abrams Trek really hate it.
well remember that these guys are internet reviewers who have a business model as well. They want to make their reviews a certain length to get traffic. RLM's SW prequel reviews were very long, but I don't think Stoklasa actually liked them that much.


What I don't get though is how he could have liked STXI better than STID. Too me, STID is a big improvement, and if you already liked the first one, then he should have liked the second.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 09:49 PM   #45
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

sonak wrote: View Post
criticizing a film for silly elements of the plot is fine, but doing so in a deliberately exaggerated way for comedic effect and then pretending that you're making a serious criticism of the film is pretty dumb
How else should they do it? The interwebs is already choc-full of wordy reviews and analysis.

At the end of the day they're still going to think the plot was silly regardless of how they present their views.
Shazam! 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 05:14 AM.

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