RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,848
Posts: 5,474,243
Members: 25,041
Currently online: 483
Newest member: mariax

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Trek Business Card Cases
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

February IDW Publishing Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

Retro Review: The Siege of AR-558
By: Michelle on Nov 15

Trevco Full Bleed Uniform T-Shirts
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14


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...
Excellent 706 62.70%
Above Average 213 18.92%
Average 84 7.46%
Below Average 46 4.09%
Poor 77 6.84%
Voters: 1126. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 14 2009, 10:15 PM   #1756
J. Allen
Going Nowhere Fast
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: Ohio *sigh*
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

erastus25 wrote: View Post
That is my hope as well. I'm crossing my fingers that this movie lacked legit substance because they needed to focus almost entirely on assembling the cast and coming up with an excuse to redo the timeline. BUT, I'm not holding my breather, considering that none of the writers have a stellar track record with writing meaningful stories.
I believe that Orci & Kurtzman aren't the only ones next time around.

Borgminister wrote: View Post
Right... The table is set, and beautifully. Time for the main course... in a mere 2 years...
But I is hungries now!


J.
__________________
-----------------------
💗 Visit Brony Kingdom 💗
-----------------------
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 10:16 PM   #1757
erastus25
Commodore
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

indranee wrote: View Post
really?! that's excellent.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...goryid=13&cs=1

Hopefully he can help fix some things!
__________________
"Ford!" he said, "there's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk to us about this script for Hamlet they've worked out."
erastus25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 10:18 PM   #1758
indranee
Vice Admiral
 
indranee's Avatar
 
Location: Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Scraggs wrote: View Post
cheers indranee
you know you look green on your pic is that supposed to be like that? are you one of those foxy green alien chicks? if so i'm mighty pleased to meet you
well, I'm a denizen of nuVulcan so...

or, at least, I was

erastus25 -- thanks for the link!
indranee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:14 PM   #1759
Squiggy
Rampant Sexist
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Roberto wrote: View Post
The Plot and some of the FX weren't very good, the half-assed matte painting of the Enterprise that Kirk was looking at while sitting on his motorcycle was very poor.
Matte painting?
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:17 PM   #1760
RAnthony
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Texas
View RAnthony's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Ovation wrote: View Post
Here's what I have a "problem with". Self-styled arbiters of what constitutes "real" (fill-in-the-blank--in this case "Trek"). Make a qualifying statement, why don't you.
I qualified, precisely, what I found non-trek about the film in the round-filed thread I started. I'd be glad to defend, at length, my opinions on the subject in a thread titled Star Trek, 1966-2009, R.I.P. which is what I intended to do when I started that thread.

But I've been told the sandbox isn't large enough for grownup discussions, consequently bellyaching on this thread is all I got.

BTW, I have personally attacked nobody at this point. Check the posts and they will speak for themselves. OTOH, every response to my posts, with the notable exception of erastus25, has been a personal attack (combined with coarse language) against me. Strange how accusations of incivility are generally leveled by those who are the least civil.

All I'm waiting for now is a review by the owners/moderators of this site, to which I have already complained. Either this site welcomes free and open discussion, or it doesn't, and I won't be here any longer.

Feel free to hold your breath, I won't be.

-RAnthony
__________________
RAnt(hony)-ings
RAnthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:23 PM   #1761
jamestyler
Commodore
 
jamestyler's Avatar
 
Location: jamestyler
View jamestyler's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to jamestyler
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

RAnthony wrote: View Post
I qualified, precisely, what I found non-trek about the film in the round-filed thread I started. I'd be glad to defend, at length, my opinions on the subject in a thread titled Star Trek, 1966-2009, R.I.P. which is what I intended to do when I started that thread.
After reading the whole thing... I couldn't help but notice the opening which makes it sound like you didn't like the film because it was entertaining.

I think thats what my problem is with a few poster on this board. The attitude of "Oh my GOD! It's entertaining, how dare they!" as if nothing that came before it was, y'know... good.
__________________
+ The Picard Maneuver | Serious stuff. Sexy spandex.
jamestyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:32 PM   #1762
RAnthony
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Texas
View RAnthony's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

jamestyler wrote: View Post
After reading the whole thing... I couldn't help but notice the opening which makes it sound like you didn't like the film because it was entertaining.
That's the argument, eh?

For the record, I've found every Trek film entertaining on some level. It's one reason I've been a Trek fan for 42 years. Entertainment isn't that hard to come by.

But... It's not the be all and end all measurement for what makes something 'good trek' or even star trek at all.

So, no, that isn't the crux of my argument.

-RAnthony
__________________
RAnt(hony)-ings
RAnthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:34 PM   #1763
J. Allen
Going Nowhere Fast
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: Ohio *sigh*
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

RAnthony wrote: View Post
jamestyler wrote: View Post
After reading the whole thing... I couldn't help but notice the opening which makes it sound like you didn't like the film because it was entertaining.
That's the argument, eh?

For the record, I've found every Trek film entertaining on some level. It's one reason I've been a Trek fan for 42 years. Entertainment isn't that hard to come by.

But... It's not the be all and end all measurement for what makes something 'good trek' or even star trek at all.

So, no, that isn't the crux of my argument.

-RAnthony
Star Trek is many things to many people, but for Paramount, above all, it must be entertaining, and it must bring a profit. In that, this movie has succeeded. In all else, that is up to each person.

J.
__________________
-----------------------
💗 Visit Brony Kingdom 💗
-----------------------
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:39 PM   #1764
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

RAnthony wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
Here's what I have a "problem with". Self-styled arbiters of what constitutes "real" (fill-in-the-blank--in this case "Trek"). Make a qualifying statement, why don't you.
I qualified, precisely, what I found non-trek about the film in the round-filed thread I started. I'd be glad to defend, at length, my opinions on the subject in a thread titled Star Trek, 1966-2009, R.I.P. which is what I intended to do when I started that thread.

But I've been told the sandbox isn't large enough for grownup discussions, consequently bellyaching on this thread is all I got.

BTW, I have personally attacked nobody at this point. Check the posts and they will speak for themselves. OTOH, every response to my posts, with the notable exception of erastus25, has been a personal attack (combined with coarse language) against me. Strange how accusations of incivility are generally leveled by those who are the least civil.

All I'm waiting for now is a review by the owners/moderators of this site, to which I have already complained. Either this site welcomes free and open discussion, or it doesn't, and I won't be here any longer.

Feel free to hold your breath, I won't be.

-RAnthony
From your own link:
Fans are dragging their friends out to watch it; in much the same fashion as if the average American needs to be convinced to chew bubblegum. Abramstrek is bubblegum. I don't see the point in promoting bubblegum; people will chew it anyway.
No, nothing insulting there. Not at all. You're merely masking your insults in less scathing vocabulary than some others.

And you did not qualify the statement "It's just not Star Trek". You asserted it and listed why it isn't. That is NOT a qualified statement. A qualified statement would be, "I don't think it follows in the tradition of..." or "to me, it lacks significant qualities about Star Trek that I find indispensable for it to be good Star Trek..." or something like that.

You do NOT get to define "Star Trek" for anyone else. You simply don't.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:46 PM   #1765
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

RAnthony, I think you're missing the point that some people are trying to make. You weren't shut down for making any sort of radical post. You were seemingly shut down because you felt you needed your own personal review/ discussion thread. You're not the first thread to be shut down for that, and probably won't be the last. There's only 3 moderators running this place, and they already have to keep an eye on a billion threads that have been started since last Thursday. Imagine how much harder their work is going to have to be if they are forced to leave open every additional review thread that comes up, particularly ones that get people worked up. Just chill, go with the flow, and let the mods do their thing.
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:51 PM   #1766
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Squiggyfm wrote: View Post
Roberto wrote: View Post
The Plot and some of the FX weren't very good, the half-assed matte painting of the Enterprise that Kirk was looking at while sitting on his motorcycle was very poor.
Matte painting?
Digital matte painting, but likely a matte painting nonetheless, combining 3D and 2D elements. They still use those these days.

And the blackpoint on the digital parts of that image is messed up. All the "pure" blacks where no detail is visible are actually a very, very dark grey. That's why it looks like it's a billboard or back-projection screen behind Kirk. (With all the great tools effects artists have, it escapes me why mismatching the black levels in FX plates is a frequently seen problem.)
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2009, 11:52 PM   #1767
jamestyler
Commodore
 
jamestyler's Avatar
 
Location: jamestyler
View jamestyler's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to jamestyler
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

RAnthony wrote: View Post
jamestyler wrote: View Post
After reading the whole thing... I couldn't help but notice the opening which makes it sound like you didn't like the film because it was entertaining.
That's the argument, eh?

For the record, I've found every Trek film entertaining on some level. It's one reason I've been a Trek fan for 42 years. Entertainment isn't that hard to come by.

But... It's not the be all and end all measurement for what makes something 'good trek' or even star trek at all.

So, no, that isn't the crux of my argument.

-RAnthony
I've said in this thread alone more than once the film isn't for anyone, even gave a nod of respect to one or two posters for their opinion. But your view does say it's entertaining but thats wrong because they've taken out something you find key to the old Trek and made it hollow.

I'm not saying this to cause an argument or bash you - I don't care whether you like the film or not, I'm not the type to impose my taste on anyone, it's just... if ST is something more than entertainment to you - explaining that and how the film failed to represent that feeling would make your opinion clearer to me, and perhaps others.
__________________
+ The Picard Maneuver | Serious stuff. Sexy spandex.
jamestyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2009, 12:32 AM   #1768
RAnthony
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Texas
View RAnthony's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Ovation wrote: View Post
No, nothing insulting there. Not at all. You're merely masking your insults in less scathing vocabulary than some others
I can't control what any individual finds insulting. As your argument states, I can only define what I find insulting. An ad hominem attack, a personal attack, is something that can clearly be defined.

The use of the word you, as in "You do NOT get to define "Star Trek" for anyone else. You simply don't. " can be construed as a personal attack, because it is addressed to me personally. Just FYI.

If you want to self identify as someone promoting the use of bubblegum, that is outside of my abilities to control.

The objections to my quantification are duly noted. They are in error, but noted. I listed, in the spoiler section, my objections which are a qualification as to why abramstrek is not trek.

-RAnthony
__________________
RAnt(hony)-ings
RAnthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2009, 12:35 AM   #1769
RAnthony
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Texas
View RAnthony's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

jamestyler wrote: View Post
if ST is something more than entertainment to you - explaining that and how the film failed to represent that feeling would make your opinion clearer to me, and perhaps others.
...and if I had been given a place to have that discussion, I would have done so...

-RAnthony
__________________
RAnt(hony)-ings
RAnthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2009, 12:44 AM   #1770
RAnthony
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Texas
View RAnthony's Twitter Profile
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

J. Allen wrote: View Post
Star Trek is many things to many people, but for Paramount, above all, it must be entertaining, and it must bring a profit. In that, this movie has succeeded.
I think it goes without saying that Paramount thinks this is the best Trek ever created, including being better than the first one. After all, it has made them more money in a very short time than most of the other films or series have ever made.

But as my arguments about the relative success of Serenity adequately point out, there's more to success than strict financials might reveal.

...and I don't really care about anyone's opinion but my own (especially not Paramount's) other than the discussion points that might be revealed in them.

It is, after all, about understanding.

-RAnthony
__________________
RAnt(hony)-ings
RAnthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
grading & discussion, parallel star trek, vulcan

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 06:36 AM.

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