RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,706
Posts: 5,214,000
Members: 24,207
Currently online: 906
Newest member: MaileDetty


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 August 29 2013, 12:32 AM   #16
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
trevanian's Avatar
 
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post
I think there is more real violence in TOS than in any of the movies. PLATO'S STEPCHILDREN is one of the hardest things in all of TREK for me to watch (...) The stuff with Spock doing the tap step around Kirk's head carries huge potential for destruction, and engages emotionally in a 'let me out of here' way.
You seriously think that THIS:



is more violent than THAT:



???
Read what I said again. That TOS had stuff that was more violent than any of the MOVIES.

But as far as that goes, I find emotional violence carries a lot more weight than pyrotechnics. In the third EXORCIST movie, until the (reshot) ending, there is almost no blood or gore at all, but there is a serious metaphysical horror in hearing certain atrocities being described. You don't need to see that a nurse has had her organs removed and the body cavity filled with rosary beads (that is the way somebody like Peter Hyams would do it though), it really is enough to hear it.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 12:36 AM   #17
Galileo7
Fleet Captain
 
Galileo7's Avatar
 
Location: U.S.A.
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Opus wrote: View Post
Love the new films.

I think in a few years' time, and with the release of the next SW films, we'll be talking about these films as 'The Good Old Days' of Trek.
Agree.
Galileo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31 2013, 11:26 PM   #18
austen_pierce
Commander
 
austen_pierce's Avatar
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Galileo7 wrote: View Post
Opus wrote: View Post
Love the new films.

I think in a few years' time, and with the release of the next SW films, we'll be talking about these films as 'The Good Old Days' of Trek.
Agree.
I think this begs the question of what Star Trek (and eventually Star Wars) will be without Abrams at the helm. Trek needed Abrams, but can another take up the franchise and continue the success he's brought?
austen_pierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 01:06 AM   #19
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

austen_pierce wrote: View Post
Galileo7 wrote: View Post
Opus wrote: View Post
Love the new films.

I think in a few years' time, and with the release of the next SW films, we'll be talking about these films as 'The Good Old Days' of Trek.
Agree.
I think this begs the question of what Star Trek (and eventually Star Wars) will be without Abrams at the helm. Trek needed Abrams, but can another take up the franchise and continue the success he's brought?
No, he is the only person in all time and space that could do that.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 02:45 PM   #20
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Let's just say that Jon Chu isn't the guy to do it.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 04:00 PM   #21
Konata Izumi
Commander
 
Konata Izumi's Avatar
 
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

The parts with glorified excess violence (& angriness) in Star Trek are a result of writers failing to come up with anything halfway decent, so they just go "conflict lol", and it almost works. I couldn't watch Voyager past the first 3 episodes, and The Undiscovered Country had become a bit aimless in the prison planet segment, and then they ended it with lots of shooting. Now it almost looks like Orci&Kurzman are going the Berman&Braga route, but they at least came up with some pretty original and good things in the 09 movie.
Konata Izumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 05:09 PM   #22
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Konata Izumi wrote: View Post
The parts with glorified excess violence (& angriness) in Star Trek are a result of writers failing to come up with anything halfway decent, so they just go "conflict lol", and it almost works. I couldn't watch Voyager past the first 3 episodes, and The Undiscovered Country had become a bit aimless in the prison planet segment, and then they ended it with lots of shooting. Now it almost looks like Orci&Kurzman are going the Berman&Braga route, but they at least came up with some pretty original and good things in the 09 movie.
The new films are exactly what you criticize, and intentionally so.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 09:34 PM   #23
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Trek couldn't succeed without -

Gene Roddenberry
Nick Meyer
Harve Bennett
The Original Series Cast
a starship
Rick Berman

... or something...
__________________
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 1 2013, 09:48 PM   #24
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Konata Izumi wrote: View Post
The parts with glorified excess violence (& angriness) in Star Trek...
I'm still wondering where these parts are at? Where there's violence and emotion there is usually a reason for that violence and emotion, much like TOS. You know, the one that these movies are actually based on.

Besides, I'd rather there be an excess of violence and emotion as opposed to everyone walking around like they're on twenty-milligrams of Xanax all the time.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 10:04 PM   #25
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
austen_pierce wrote: View Post
Galileo7 wrote: View Post

Agree.
I think this begs the question of what Star Trek (and eventually Star Wars) will be without Abrams at the helm. Trek needed Abrams, but can another take up the franchise and continue the success he's brought?
No, he is the only person in all time and space that could do that.
Trek didn't need Abrams, but it did need a breath of fresh air.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 11:42 PM   #26
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

BillJ wrote: View Post
Besides, I'd rather there be an excess of violence and emotion as opposed to everyone walking around like they're on twenty-milligrams of Xanax all the time.
makes you start to understand why Kirk and Spock thought there was something not quite right with all those utopianish societies they kept running into, doesn't it.
Hartzilla2007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 11:46 PM   #27
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Besides, I'd rather there be an excess of violence and emotion as opposed to everyone walking around like they're on twenty-milligrams of Xanax all the time.
makes you start to understand why Kirk and Spock thought there was something not quite right with all those utopianish societies they kept running into, doesn't it.
It is funny that TOS spent so much time fighting against utopian societies then TNG had the Federation as one.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2013, 07:22 AM   #28
Konata Izumi
Commander
 
Konata Izumi's Avatar
 
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

BillJ wrote: View Post
Konata Izumi wrote: View Post
The parts with glorified excess violence (& angriness) in Star Trek...
I'm still wondering where these parts are at? Where there's violence and emotion there is usually a reason for that violence and emotion, much like TOS.
Beyond the three dots you might find where these parts are, and an unfortunate creative reason for all this casual emoting.
BillJ wrote: View Post
Besides, I'd rather there be an excess of violence and emotion as opposed to everyone walking around like they're on twenty-milligrams of Xanax all the time.
It's the type that should usually be actively avoided though, so the Vulcans and later TNGs had a point, despite getting rid of a bit more than necessary.

As for TOS, they were defending themselves with kung-fu, or tragically out of their minds. Things were executed with elegant simplicity, and the show was able to stretch to calmer moments too. Within an episode, quality over quantity. McCoy was the most hostile of the protagonists, but he was the king of self-control compared to the Voyagers (did they ever calm down though? I heard something about episode 6 (or was it 3 already??), but surely they just aim the conflict somewhere else to keep the writing style the same?).

Last edited by Konata Izumi; September 2 2013 at 08:01 AM.
Konata Izumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 07:36 PM   #29
Konata Izumi
Commander
 
Konata Izumi's Avatar
 
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

Sorry for the passive aggression though.
I dislike impulsive aggression.
Konata Izumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 11:32 PM   #30
James
Guest
 
Re: Defending J.J. Abrams (rant) (Spoilers)

BruntFCA wrote: View Post
This board seems to be VERY pro Abrams from what I've read.

You are absolutely right on that one. They should change the name to JJTrekBBS. They are so pro Abrams it's not funny, to them the classic trek is old and obsolete. The classic version of Star Trek is superior to this new version in every way, the classic had life lessons and philosophy that could be applied to the real world plus it had a scientific system based on real astronomy.
  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 04:44 PM.

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