Reasons to be happy / not happy about a 4th film.

[M'Sharak]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I don't remember what this conversation is even about, lol.

Allow me.


Basically 2 groups, those that either dont want a 4th movie, or care little or none for this alternate rubbish

And the second group is those that are upset with the first group for daring to have an opinion

What the conversation isn't about is Star Trek fans—or at least it shouldn't be—so if we could all steer things back toward the realm of "reasons to be happy or unhappy about the possibility of a fourth nuTrek film," that would be grand.

 

[danielcw]

It was more about the even-numbered films being good than the odd numbers being bad (glass half full). And it started long, long before anyone heard of Simon Pegg. Nemesis was a fluke. Maybe there was a too-even-to-fail hubris?

If we believe that there was some rhythm in the quality of Star Trek movies, then Nemesis had something big going against it:
It was a fifth movie. I fear Star Trek XV

Back then Insurrection actually got pretty good reviews, so it went against the odd/even rhythm.

Well yes, it did get rid of a lot of baggage, and I'd say that was a good thing.

It went back to the basics -- selling the characters, clean and simple, unfettered by having to bear in mind what happened in "episode seventeen of the fifth season of a series," and "episode twenty of the third season of another series," or "episode two of the last season of yet another series." And who the hell knows what's being contradicted or retconned, even if one's being careful.

This Trek is like watching TOS for the first time, again. True terra incognita for the first time since 1966.

It would say, that Star Trek is a thing, that can be enjoyed in almost any order.
In my mind that is a strength, and we should not try to hide it, but embrace it, as should the marketing.

It wasn't JAMES BOND 3: GOLDFINGER. It was just GOLDFINGER.

In Germany all James Bond films are actually known as "James Bond 007: Goldfinger" and so forth. Not sure about Skyfall. I believe the first movie was once called "James Bond hunts Dr. No".

Is it true that they form a connected continuity somehow, like Trek and NuTrek ?

As far as I know there is no connection.
So there are 3 separate movie continuities:
- The 5 classic movies (& TV series) [EDIT: see remarks below about TV series]
- The Tim Burton / Mark Wahlberg movie
- The new movies starting with "Rise of"

 

[Greg Cox]

Is it true that they form a connected continuity somehow, like Trek and NuTrek ?

As far as I know there is no connection.
So there are 3 separate movie continuities:
- The 5 classic movies (& TV series)
- The Tim Burton / Mark Wahlberg movie
- The new movies starting with "Rise of"

And it's debatable whether the TV show really fits into the continuity of the original movies.

As for the new movies, they've thrown in a few "Easter Egg" type references to the previous movies, but those are more homages than actual continuity links.

Certainly, there's no real way to reconcile the two continuities, in that their explanations for how the Apes evolved and took over the world are completely different.

In the old movies, Caesar was the result of time-travel. In the new movies, Caesar is the result of medical experimentation. Those are two completely different origin stories.

 

[Mudd]

Correct

There are ten star trek movies, and then these things

The first ten movies were just practice.

correct

practice was good but when it came to the crunch it choked when it mattered

 

[Phantom]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

The general lack of any sense of humor among the pro abrams fans is very disappointing, it is almost like any negative comments are taken as personal and deadly serious.

Way I see it people can moan and dislike things i like and i wont get negative, defensive etc, afterall the thing is once you enjoy the product why care if others dont like it.
And secondly if we all agreed on everything it would make for a poorer forum.

After six years, it has become a tiresome reality however. I wish more folks had a sense of humor about these things. But when you look around the interwebs, you see many of these folks are deadly serious (some of the Facebook stuff would blow your mind). I wish Trek was as all-inclusive as many of its fans claim it to be.

It isn't just Trek. Nothing seems to have room for either humor or general co-existence. Either you're for A or against it. Either you agree on everything and are a friend, or you disagree (even if it's just one thing) and are an enemy to be crushed and driven out.

It's the polarized world we live in now.

As far as I know there is no connection.

So there are 3 separate movie continuities:
- The 5 classic movies (& TV series)
- The Tim Burton / Mark Wahlberg movie
- The new movies starting with "Rise of"

Did you know there are actually TWO TV serieses? One LA (that everyone knows) and one animated (that many people don't know).

http://www.amazon.com/Return-Planet-Apes-Complete-Animated/dp/B000E991A2

 

[JWPlatt]

Old hat. Stars are only relevant for their latest credit. It's now the Simon Pegg era. I suggest him with a red background, maybe with a nice big "FU".

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

All this stuff about long vs short titles and no one mentions "In the Pale Moonlight".

As great an episode as that was I think it might not have had the same memorableness if it was just called "Moonlight". I guess a balance of succinct and florid titles keeps us interested and makes them stand out.

"Beyond" is utterly meh, but whatever. I'm thoroughly looking fwd to it.

 

[gazomg]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I don't remember what this conversation is even about, lol.

Allow me.


Basically 2 groups, those that either dont want a 4th movie, or care little or none for this alternate rubbish

And the second group is those that are upset with the first group for daring to have an opinion

On the other hand, let's be honest here. Are you really that surprised that some fans see phrases like "alternate rubbish" as fighting words?

On a STAR TREK message board? In the "Movies X+" forum?

If you swung by, say, the Voyager forum and dismissed the entire series as "rubbish," I suspect you would provoke a similar response!

I do not know you, and you may be one of the nicest people on here but if you think "alternate rubbish " are fighting words then you seriously need to get out in the real world and away from your computer.

Why would anyone be so insecure and feel threatened by what a stranger on the net thinks of these alternate movies ?

I accept your point in lambasting something just for the sake of it, but this thread is not about the love for these movies but a persons reason why he is not happy with the idea of a 4th movie....the clue is in the title.

I gave my reasons as to why I am not happy at the thought of a 4th one, and this seems to upset most of .the pro abrams fan, everything else has been a continuation of this , with what I thought was a bit of humor., alas apparently not.

 

[gazomg]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Allow me.


Basically 2 groups, those that either dont want a 4th movie, or care little or none for this alternate rubbish

And the second group is those that are upset with the first group for daring to have an opinion

On the other hand, let's be honest here. Are you really that surprised that some fans see phrases like "alternate rubbish" as fighting words?

On a STAR TREK message board? In the "Movies X+" forum?

If you swung by, say, the Voyager forum and dismissed the entire series as "rubbish," I suspect you would provoke a similar response!

Exactly. Going to a forum with the purpose of disparaging the subject of that forum and its fans is petty and juvenile. Calling it "humor" doubly so.

Wrong , this thread is about why someone is not happy to see a 4th movie, again the clue is in the title.

Or do you expect everyone to simply have a love in.
The original poster gave his reasons, and so can others, and you claiming it is disparaging just cos our opinion does not match yours is narrowminded

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I accept your point in lambasting something just for the sake of it, but this thread is not about the love for these movies but a persons reason why he is not happy with the idea of a 4th movie....the clue is in the title.

Fair enough. Then again, this is a discussion board and, as you said, nothing is more boring than a thread where everyone agrees with everybody. Including the Original Poster.

If you post that you don't want a fourth movie, you have to expect that people are going want to debate the topic. That's half the fun. It's nothing personal.

Heck, if I post that root beer is better than lime soda, I expect a vigorous debate on the subject. And if I refer to lime soda as "disgusting green swill" . . . well, I kinda figure people are going to challenge me on it.

Where it gets personal, as the moderator cautioned us, is when people start accusing others of having the wrong opinions for the wrong reasons.

As opposed to just debating the pros and cons of numbering sequels or whatever . ...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

There is more drama and humanity in that than perfect heroes looking down their noses and tisk tisking at the primitives.

In other words, 'the first season of ST:TNG'.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

On the other hand, let's be honest here. Are you really that surprised that some fans see phrases like "alternate rubbish" as fighting words?

On a STAR TREK message board? In the "Movies X+" forum?

If you swung by, say, the Voyager forum and dismissed the entire series as "rubbish," I suspect you would provoke a similar response!

Exactly. Going to a forum with the purpose of disparaging the subject of that forum and its fans is petty and juvenile. Calling it "humor" doubly so.

Wrong , this thread is about why someone is not happy to see a 4th movie, again the clue is in the title.

Or do you expect everyone to simply have a love in.
The original poster gave his reasons, and so can others, and you claiming C just cos our opinion does not match yours is narrowminded

I prefer opinions with substance. "Shit", "crap" and "rubbish" have no substance. Nor do phrases like "true Trek" or "proper canon". I've had many discussions here with people who didn't like the film and they were able to intelligently and thoughtfully articulate their arguments. Some of them were even quite convincing and even enlightening. I might not agree with them, but I can respect them because of the way they were presented. So, the whole " it is disparaging just cos our opinion does not match yours is narrowminded" narrative just doesn't track.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I've had many discussions here with people who didn't like the film and they were able to intelligently and thoughtfully articulate their arguments. Some of them were even quite convincing and even enlightening. I might not agree with them, but I can respect them because of the way they were presented.

Exactly. One can certainly have an engaging debate on, say, reboots, pro or con? Or just how important "canon" is in the grand scheme of things. Or how other franchises have dealt with similar issues.

Those are all good, meaty topics to dig into, which is probably why I keep getting sucked into these threads.

 

[Phantom]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

There is more drama and humanity in that than perfect heroes looking down their noses and tisk tisking at the primitives.

In other words, 'the first season of ST:TNG'.

Pretty much all of TNG. They were still doing it as late as S7 in "Preemptive Strike".

 

[Franklin]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

The first ten movies were just practice.

Droll. Very droll.

Exactly. Going to a forum with the purpose of disparaging the subject of that forum and its fans is petty and juvenile. Calling it "humor" doubly so.

Wrong , this thread is about why someone is not happy to see a 4th movie, again the clue is in the title.

Or do you expect everyone to simply have a love in.
The original poster gave his reasons, and so can others, and you claiming C just cos our opinion does not match yours is narrowminded

I prefer opinions with substance. "Shit", "crap" and "rubbish" have no substance. Nor do phrases like "true Trek" or "proper canon". I've had many discussions here with people who didn't like the film and they were able to intelligently and thoughtfully articulate their arguments. Some of them were even quite convincing and even enlightening. I might not agree with them, but I can respect them because of the way they were presented. So, the whole " it is disparaging just cos our opinion does not match yours is narrowminded" narrative just doesn't track.

My wife HATES Trek. In all forms. She thinks it's cheesy, sometimes juvenile, and too male-centric. Oddly enough, she liked ST09 and STID pretty well (she's a good sport and has accompanied me to every Trek movie since we've been married). She's right on a lot of those counts at least some of the time, and she's had other valid criticisms. That's the way it goes. She ain't gonna change my mind, criticisms in mind, and I ain't gonna change hers.

By the way, other short titles that say little:

-- A Tale of Two Cities (how broad can you get?)
-- Crime and Punishment (true detective? courtroom drama?)
-- War and Peace (would've been better off with Tolstoy's original choice of title, War, What Is It Good For? )
-- The Brothers Karamazov (what? do they have a lemonade stand? I mean, can a title say less?)
-- Metamorphosis (wasn't that a "Star Trek" episode?)
-- Huckleberry Finn (at least ST09 wasn't called Captain Kirk)
-- The Odyssey (even more vague than Star Trek Beyond)

All I know about titles came from a professor I had in a short stories class I took as an elective as an undergrad. He said the title should be the last thing you come up with after you write a story, it should reference your theme or story in a broad way, and it shouldn't reveal too much. The writers on this board may or may not agree with that. But I still remember it after thirty years.

 

[JWPlatt]

I like Jello. But it's totally ruined when it's made as a fruit suspension. I can't comprehend how anyone could like such an abomination. Apparently, some people do.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

All I know about titles came from a professor I had in a short stories class I took as an elective as an undergrad. He said the title should be the last thing you come up with after you write a story, it should reference your theme or story in a broad way, and it shouldn't reveal too much. The writers on this board may or may not agree with that. But I still remember it after thirty years.

Depends. Sometime the perfect title presents itself immediately; sometimes it's a struggle. And sometimes you think you have the perfect title and your editor or your publisher disagrees.

And sometimes they're right. (Okay, usually they're right.)

Putting on my editor's hat for a moment, I am perfectly comfortable with telling an author "Love the book! Now about that title . ..."

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

-- A Tale of Two Cities (how broad can you get?)

Just simply Tale would be way, way, way broader. A Tale of Two Cities is really quite a memorable title that triggers immediate association with the work.

 

[Trekkin]

So if I reply 'I hate Jello in all its forms', does that mean I'm being over-sensitive and intolerant of others opinions? Or does that mean I'm just offering up my own? I'd vote that most of what is going on here is the latter.

Although I wouldn't really say I hate Jello...I'd say that I hate fucking jelly. What is with the 'o' America? Genuine question - was 'jelly' assigned to something else?

It helps Dickens case that in his time, there were a few less of what we'd call 'cities.'

 

[JWPlatt]

Although I wouldn't really say I hate Jello...I'd say that I hate fucking jelly. What is with the 'o' America? Genuine question - was 'jelly' assigned to something else?

Jelly is Jello in an alternate reality. And you know how some people feel about that.

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090505095948AAOWnTf