RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,164
Posts: 5,434,902
Members: 24,937
Currently online: 471
Newest member: bryanb2014

TrekToday headlines

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

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
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 December 20 2013, 02:11 AM   #1081
Mutoid
Fleet Captain
 
Mutoid's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View Mutoid's Twitter Profile
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Elf Spock wrote: View Post
When Kirk died I didn't even think he and Spock were friends. In TWOK and TOS there was no doubt. I think they could have made nuKirk and nuSpock friends from the beginning of STID and that would have explained the Khaaaannn scream. I'm just not convinced with the flip around and the destiny thing. I would have liked to though.
I think two things cemented that Kirk and Spock were friends in Star Trek Into Darkness: Kirk not allowing Spock to die on Nibiru and that Kirk wanted Spock reinstated as his first officer when asking for his command back (and Spock accepted). I think Spock felt the same way but simply didn't know how to show it.

I get what you're saying but to me it was overshadowed by Kirk's bitching to Uhura and his racist remarks towards Spock on the shuttle.
Maybe it would be better for me to have never seen TOS when making comparisons to STID. In TOS no matter how bad a mood Kirk was in or how Vulcan Spock was acting you never doubted their friendship or loyalty to another. Even if it was just the way Shatner and Nimoy looked at each other.


I think it would have had more dramatic impact if nuKirk and nuSpock had been seen say playing chess or eating lunch together after the Nibiru incident before Kirk finds out that Spock had put in an 'honest' report. That they had been shown as friends not merely a great team. I don't think that Abrams doe that though - have slow character establishing dialog.


All those talking about rip-offs. It was a homage. Its not like Abrams ran out of ideas. He or the writing team thought a twist on the TWOK theme was a clever idea. That the fans might like it. And for that he's castigated.
Mutoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 02:15 AM   #1082
BigSnake
Rear Admiral
 
BigSnake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Elf Spock wrote: View Post
He or the writing team thought a twist on the TWOK theme was a clever idea.
Yep. And it was in fact clever, rip-off or not. Unfortunately there's a difference between a clever idea and a good idea.
__________________
Weasels rip BigJake's flesh!
"I wanna read more" - Dennis "I . . . agree with everything you said" - SPCTRE "I blame Cracked" - J. Allen "Take me off" - The Stig
BigSnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 02:32 AM   #1083
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

I'd love to see the following films show the characters on a break enjoying themselves and their company as seen in the shows. Heck, our first introduction to Kirk and Spock in TOS was when they played 3D chess in the Rec Room!
MakeshiftPython is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 03:09 AM   #1084
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Elf Spock wrote: View Post
Its not like Abrams ran out of ideas.
You're right, doing Khan in his second film totally did not give the impression that Abrams was out of ideas.
__________________
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 December 20 2013, 04:27 AM   #1085
Creepy Critter
Admiral
 
Creepy Critter's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

BigKrampus wrote: View Post
Coach Comet wrote: View Post
I answered that question in the next two sentences
With an assertion that it is "simply wrong" for the term "rip-off" to be able to have the semantic function in the language that it very plainly has.
Here is the passage in question:

Something [...] that is clearly imitative of or based on something else.
The problem is that that covers anything at all that is imitative. For example, it would, if taken literally at face value, require us to categorize all cover versions of a song as rip-offs. That's simply wrong.
My assertion was that it is "simply wrong" to think of cover versions as rip-offs, something that would be required by my reading of the definition quoted there. Is my writing so awful that it's that hard to see that that's what I meant? Or, are you seriously arguing that cover versions are "very plainly" all rip-offs?!?
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Creepy Critter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 06:09 AM   #1086
Mutoid
Fleet Captain
 
Mutoid's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View Mutoid's Twitter Profile
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Elf Spock wrote: View Post
Its not like Abrams ran out of ideas.
You're right, doing Khan in his second film totally did not give the impression that Abrams was out of ideas.
Didn't they say they were originally just going to have the character be Harrison and then later changed it to Khan to link in with the reboot universe.

For all the similarities I see with original Khan and Harrison they could have just had him be a disgruntled Section 31 guy experimented on to have superstrength and regenerative blood and an atitude. They made him Khan for us (the fans) whether you like it or not.
Same with Scotty and Chekov. Totally different characters IMO. I just accept these things and move on.
Mutoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 06:13 AM   #1087
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

From what I understand, Harrison was just supposed to be a normal human, closer to Jason Bourne than a superman. In the end it would be Marcus who was the main villain rather than Harrison. Changing him to Khan, that dramatically altered the dynamic.
MakeshiftPython is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 08:14 AM   #1088
BigSnake
Rear Admiral
 
BigSnake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Coach Comet wrote: View Post
Is my writing so awful that it's that hard to see that that's what I meant?
No. Your thinking is so awful* that you meant it.

(* Taking "awful" with a grain of salt, there. I don't really think it's a big deal in the greater scheme, I'm just bemused at how much time and energy you're expending in what looks to me like an unnecessary and futile cause.)

Or, are you seriously arguing that cover versions are "very plainly" all rip-offs?
I'm seriously arguing that, dependent on context, the term could technically be applied to any cover version or borrowing, since that is in fact its semantic function and your apparent horror at this prospect is vastly overblown and unwarranted. Yes.

(Also, which is obviously the cause of all this: yes, it's applicable to Abramstrek's "mirroring" of the Wrath of Khan death scene... even more directly than it's applicable, and it is, to Original Series Trek's "Balance of Terror" and The Enemy Below. And that's okay. The other terms you like better are applicable too, depending on preference. It doesn't change anything fundamental.)
__________________
Weasels rip BigJake's flesh!
"I wanna read more" - Dennis "I . . . agree with everything you said" - SPCTRE "I blame Cracked" - J. Allen "Take me off" - The Stig

Last edited by BigSnake; December 20 2013 at 08:48 AM.
BigSnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 11:04 AM   #1089
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Elf Spock wrote: View Post
Its not like Abrams ran out of ideas.
You're right, doing Khan in his second film totally did not give the impression that Abrams was out of ideas.
I have to agree with that, at least.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 11:59 AM   #1090
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

They say in the commentary that were thinking of ending the '09 movie on a shot of the Botany Bay floating in space. That says to me that it wasn't a lack of ideas that led to Khan, but a plan all along to use TOS' most famous villain in the second movie.

Again, Khan is a character, not a story. Him being brought back is no different to Moriarty in various Sherlock Holmes adaptations. Joaquin Phoenix may be Lex Luthor in the Man of Steel sequel - is that due to a lack of ideas or simply them using the Superman mythology?
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 12:13 PM   #1091
Creepy Critter
Admiral
 
Creepy Critter's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

BigKrampus wrote: View Post
Coach Comet wrote: View Post
Is my writing so awful that it's that hard to see that that's what I meant?
No. Your thinking is so awful* that you meant it.

(* Taking "awful" with a grain of salt, there. I don't really think it's a big deal in the greater scheme, I'm just bemused at how much time and energy you're expending in what looks to me like an unnecessary and futile cause.)

Or, are you seriously arguing that cover versions are "very plainly" all rip-offs?
I'm seriously arguing that, dependent on context, the term could technically be applied to any cover version or borrowing, since that is in fact its semantic function and your apparent horror at this prospect is vastly overblown and unwarranted. Yes.

(Also, which is obviously the cause of all this: yes, it's applicable to Abramstrek's "mirroring" of the Wrath of Khan death scene... even more directly than it's applicable, and it is, to Original Series Trek's "Balance of Terror" and The Enemy Below. And that's okay. The other terms you like better are applicable too, depending on preference. It doesn't change anything fundamental.)
That's bullshit, full stop. It's liking saying dog, when you mean cat.

Jimi Hendrix's version of "All Along the Watchtower" is not a rip-off of Bob Dylan's original. Full stop. The same goes for Dwight Yoakam's cover of "Suspicious Minds," as a second example.

People have been singing other people's songs for time immemorial. It's a very natural thing to do. Recording covers is specifically allowed under US copyright law (apologies to UFO, yes, I'm going back to that well, for this), and when terms can be negotiated, so is release and sale.

It's an abuse, a misuse, as well as a disuse of language to call all covers rip-offs.

Singing someone else's song crosses the line into rip-off territory when it occurs in conjunction with theft or some other form of infringement. But that's not what cover versions are; cover versions occur in the light of day, when it is specifically known who wrote the original and who is performing the imitation, and so that it is an imitation. That was the whole point of the example.

Am I horrified that you would disagree with me? Not on your life. Do I disagree with your assertion about the semantic function of the term rip-off? Absolutely.

---

By the way, I'm curious regarding what my level of horror about the use of the term rip-off has to do with how the term could technically be applied? If one has nothing to do with the other, then why did you offer my level of horror as a reason for how the term could technically be applied?
__________________
CorporalCaptain

Last edited by Creepy Critter; December 20 2013 at 12:53 PM.
Creepy Critter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 03:32 PM   #1092
BigSnake
Rear Admiral
 
BigSnake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Coach Comet wrote: View Post
That's bullshit, full stop. It's liking saying dog, when you mean cat.
Uh, no, it really isn't. Sorry, but I think you're probably going to have to make your peace with that. Yes, technically the term could be applied to Jimi singing Dylan, Ariana Grande doing Santa Baby, et cetera. It is not a question of legality and bringing that up is always completely and utterly bogus, it not being the main point at all, so you should stop doing that.

Of course, context matters. The term will have better traction where borrowing is particularly unimaginative, or is unacknowledged, or is lame or otherwise somehow problematic. On those grounds people are less likely to use it about Jimi singing Dylan than they would be with another work. (STiD's "homage" to TWOK's death scene is obviously a more tempting target not because it is copyright infringement but because many people find it lame and lazy. You can argue that it is not so, but you cannot make their opinion invalid... which perhaps is really what you need to make your peace with, since it looks to be the objective fueling this whole bizarre tangent.)

The thing about semantics is that there is no science or law to this. It all depends on register, delivery and context. Believing that you can objectively rule out the term as applied to this or that work is bullshit, full stop. Believing that the term must connote illegal theft is bullshit, full stop. It could in extreme cases denote something like copyright infringement. That in no way means it must. Semantics and language do not work that way.
__________________
Weasels rip BigJake's flesh!
"I wanna read more" - Dennis "I . . . agree with everything you said" - SPCTRE "I blame Cracked" - J. Allen "Take me off" - The Stig

Last edited by BigSnake; December 20 2013 at 03:45 PM.
BigSnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 04:27 PM   #1093
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Again, Khan is a character, not a story. Him being brought back is no different to Moriarty in various Sherlock Holmes adaptations. Joaquin Phoenix may be Lex Luthor in the Man of Steel sequel - is that due to a lack of ideas or simply them using the Superman mythology?
I don't think Khan is comparable to these recurring villains. He was a one-off who just happened to get a movie. He's not the Joker.

Now if it were Mudd, then that would be different because he was that type of villain. A movie with Mudd would be boring though, and using him as a character isn't the same as using Khan.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 05:17 PM   #1094
Creepy Critter
Admiral
 
Creepy Critter's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

BigKrampus wrote: View Post
Coach Comet wrote: View Post
That's bullshit, full stop. It's liking saying dog, when you mean cat.
Uh, no, it really isn't. Sorry, but I think you're probably going to have to make your peace with that. Yes, technically the term could be applied to Jimi singing Dylan, Ariana Grande doing Santa Baby, et cetera. It is not a question of legality and bringing that up is always completely and utterly bogus, it not being the main point at all, so you should stop doing that.

Of course, context matters. The term will have better traction where borrowing is particularly unimaginative, or is unacknowledged, or is lame or otherwise somehow problematic. On those grounds people are less likely to use it about Jimi singing Dylan than they would be with another work. (STiD's "homage" to TWOK's death scene is obviously a more tempting target not because it is copyright infringement but because many people find it lame and lazy. You can argue that it is not so, but you cannot make their opinion invalid... which perhaps is really what you need to make your peace with, since it looks to be the objective fueling this whole bizarre tangent.)

The thing about semantics is that there is no science or law to this. It all depends on register, delivery and context. Believing that you can objectively rule out the term as applied to this or that work is bullshit, full stop. Believing that the term must connote illegal theft is bullshit, full stop. It could in extreme cases denote something like copyright infringement. That in no way means it must. Semantics and language do not work that way.
No.

About the only thing I really need to make peace with here is the fact that people disagree with what I'm saying, but that was never going to be too hard.

What makes what you're saying all the more preposterous is that you are attempting to tell me how semantics work, while at the same time insisting that "there is no law or science to this". That's really something that you can't have both ways.

I never said that rip-offs must entail illegal activity, either. That's simply the obvious extreme to go to find examples of when the term does apply, and in the particular case of the STID scene, I think it is relevant, precisely because the lifting is within the family, so to speak. It should be completely clear that I was not insisting that rip-offs entail illegal activity, since I called films from The Asylum rip-offs, while implicitly giving them a pass when it comes to the law (in not harping on how they should be shut down, for instance).

No answer to the question I asked of you?
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Creepy Critter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 08:23 PM   #1095
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Music covers do not steal, cheat, or swindle; they do no exploit; and they are not inferior copies or imitations.

They are not rip-offs.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg 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 01:15 AM.

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