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

[M'Sharak]

Why has the thread title changed for some posts? Was it explained earlier and I missed it?

That would be my doing. I amended the title a bit to make it more generally applicable than "Reason why I am not happy" was.

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 . ...

Again I agree with you, however it is not like I went into every thread in this section to slate abrams and all his movies, it was confined to this thread .

A thread specifically about why a 4th film would not be the wish of some.And yes I expect peoiple to debate and most have but some in here take any criticism as very personal.

I am not oner of these people that cries, gets personally offended, rubs to mods etc if someone says something I dont like, I not only like debate, I relish it, You seems to grasp this, howqever some have this insecure mentality where they expect anyone who disagrees with an abrams movie should not be allowed to state it, that is the issue I object to.

No one has said that you can't post an opinion critical of the movies—people do that all the time here—but I'm sure you'd agree that your initial offering in this thread could too easily be read as the words of someone not interested in debate. It was a bash, it was pretty crude, and it was more hyperbole than it was a critique of specific aspects of the films. We eventually got around to discussing topics of more substance a bit later, but a more graceful entrance into the conversation certainly wouldn't have hurt anything.

 

[gazomg]

Why has the thread title changed for some posts? Was it explained earlier and I missed it?

That would be my doing. I amended the title a bit to make it more generally applicable than "Reason why I am not happy" was.

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 . ...

Again I agree with you, however it is not like I went into every thread in this section to slate abrams and all his movies, it was confined to this thread .

A thread specifically about why a 4th film would not be the wish of some.And yes I expect peoiple to debate and most have but some in here take any criticism as very personal.

I am not oner of these people that cries, gets personally offended, rubs to mods etc if someone says something I dont like, I not only like debate, I relish it, You seems to grasp this, howqever some have this insecure mentality where they expect anyone who disagrees with an abrams movie should not be allowed to state it, that is the issue I object to.

No one has said that you can't post an opinion critical of the movies—people do that all the time here—but I'm sure you'd agree that your initial offering in this thread could too easily be read as the words of someone not interested in debate. It was a bash, it was pretty crude, and it was more hyperbole than it was a critique of specific aspects of the films. We eventually got around to discussing topics of more substance a bit later, but a more graceful entrance into the conversation certainly wouldn't have hurt anything.

I did not hide my dissatisfaction with the movies, and if I think they are shit I will say they are shit as I am entitled to not only think but state it

Why should I have to deliver a more graceful entrance ???
Will it offend others if my opi nion is to honest ??
My opinion is what it is and I wont alter it to make it more acceptable to others.

So insecure are some, that even the thread titled has been changed,., so that "reasons to be happy " has been included.How shallow is that.


I know plenty love the movies, and glad they do, in fact I wish I was one of them, but I am not.
I can name plenty good things about them and plenty bad things, but the original thread title was why you are NOT happy to see a 4th movie,

 

[Trekkin]

You're right: this new thread title in no way reflects the threads content, and is obviously all about being 'PC'.

That's why I vote it be retitled 'Star Trek Not-IV:
The Voyage to the Jelly-Eating Vampires on the Planet of the Apes

(Did I miss something we covered? I couldn't work out how to include the bit about old action figures.)

I wonder if they'll make the movies a bit more serialised, now that they're reasonably confident that they'll have a few more? Trek's movies have always been pretty standalone (in the sense that nearly all of them could have served as the movie franchises ending), but these days franchises seem to nearly always include sequel bait.

 

[Greg Cox]

Do not tell Greg Cox to get away from his computer. In fact, he should spend even more time at his computer, because he is one of the people who writes a lot of the better Star Trek novels, and there can never be enough of those.

Thanks!

Although it probably depends on which computer. Yesterday, I was literally rolling back and forth between this discussion (on one computer) and proofreading my next TREK novel (on another computer). Thank goodness for desk chairs with wheels.

So, yes, I was taking time out from working on Trek to argue about Trek.

Make of that what you will.

 

[Trekkin]

Ever had a moment where you get sick of it and want to cleanse the creative pallet of all things Trek related? In a 'too much of a good thing' kind-of way?

 

[drt]

Greg writes other stuff, I put a nickel in his pocket by picking up the Godzilla novelization a while back.

 

[Greg Cox]

Ever had a moment where you get sick of it and want to cleanse the creative pallet of all things Trek related? In a 'too much of a good thing' kind-of way?

I'm never "sick of" Trek, but I do like to mix things up and work on a variety of projects and genres, just to keep things interesting.

Which is why, on top of Trek, I've also written Godzilla, Superman, Leverage, Warehouse 13, Underworld, Xena, etc. And edit a wide variety of books for Tor as well, including plenty of Weird Westerns these days.

I've written science fiction, horror, murder mysteries, spy thrillers, and even one historical romance. Just earlier this week, I was finishing up a "mummy" story for an upcoming horror anthology.

So, yes, my palate is never bored . . .

 

[Timewalker]

Do not tell Greg Cox to get away from his computer. In fact, he should spend even more time at his computer, because he is one of the people who writes a lot of the better Star Trek novels, and there can never be enough of those.

Thanks!

Although it probably depends on which computer. Yesterday, I was literally rolling back and forth between this discussion (on one computer) and proofreading my next TREK novel (on another computer). Thank goodness for desk chairs with wheels.

So, yes, I was taking time out from working on Trek to argue about Trek.

Make of that what you will.

Proofreading is good. Is it for the novel coming out in November, or is it a different one?

 

[Greg Cox]

Do not tell Greg Cox to get away from his computer. In fact, he should spend even more time at his computer, because he is one of the people who writes a lot of the better Star Trek novels, and there can never be enough of those.

Thanks!

Although it probably depends on which computer. Yesterday, I was literally rolling back and forth between this discussion (on one computer) and proofreading my next TREK novel (on another computer). Thank goodness for desk chairs with wheels.

So, yes, I was taking time out from working on Trek to argue about Trek.

Make of that what you will.

Proofreading is good. Is it for the novel coming out in November, or is it a different one?

It's for the November book. I'm going over the first-pass page proofs, which is basically my last chance to look the text over before it goes to press. Got through about 200 pages yesterday. Hoping to finish up today . . ..

Funniest typo so far: "space hip" instead of "space ship."

 

[Trekkin]

Agreed, proofreading is a very good thing.

It stops you writing 'palate' as 'pallet'.

And thanks for the answer Greg.

 

[Greg Cox]

Agreed, proofreading is a very good thing.

It stops you writing 'palate' as 'pallet'.

And thanks for the answer Greg.

No problem. Thanks for asking.

And, drt, thanks for picking up the GODZILLA book. So that's where that nickel came from!

 

[BillJ]

Funniest typo so far: "space hip" instead of "space ship."

Spoiler code, Greg!

No I know there's a space ship in it!

 

[Greg Cox]

Funniest typo so far: "space hip" instead of "space ship."

Spoiler code, Greg!

No I know there's a space ship in it!

More spoilers: Spock is half-human! There was a captain before Kirk!

 

[BillJ]

Funniest typo so far: "space hip" instead of "space ship."

Spoiler code, Greg!

No I know there's a space ship in it!

More spoilers: Spock is half-human! There was a captain before Kirk!

 

[JWPlatt]

...proofreading my next TREK novel...

Isn't that part of the editor's job? I can imagine authors in an endless cycle of changes and proofing, like Peter Jackson in the editing room where it's never really done.

 

[Greg Cox]

...proofreading my next TREK novel...

Isn't that part of the editor's job? I can imagine authors in an endless cycle of changes and proofing, like Peter Jackson in the editing room where it's never really done.

The more eyes the better. In theory, every finished manuscript. goes by several pairs of eyes: the editor, the copyeditor, the proofreader, AND, ideally, the author.

And, of course, in the case of STAR TREK, the ms. is read and reviewed by CBS as well.

In general, the author gets to review the book at least twice before publication: after the ms. has been copyedited, to inspect any changes and answer any queries, and after the book has been "typeset" to use an archaic phrase, so you can review the actual page proofs.

I confess: by the time a book finally sees print, I never want to look at it again!

 

[Tim Walker]

J.J. demonstrated that Trek can persevere. Perhaps only a well established franchise can do so, unless it resembles Star Wars, or Guardians of the Galaxy.

 

[M'Sharak]

'Star Trek Not-IV: The Voyage to the Jelly-Eating Vampires on the...

You're right: this new thread title in no way reflects the threads content, and is obviously all about being 'PC'.
That's why I vote it be retitled 'Star Trek Not-IV:
The Voyage to the Jelly-Eating Vampires on the Planet of the Apes

(Did I miss something we covered? I couldn't work out how to include the bit about old action figures.)

Even as it stands, I'm pretty sure it runs over the character limit for subject lines.

 

[danielcw]

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

"Beyond" on its own may be a meh title, but I think "Star Trek Beyond" is a great title.
Maybe they should extend it to "Star Trek Beyond something-cool-related-to-the-plot"

I bailed out on the thread when someone suggested, as far as I could tell in earnest, that it was important to watch ``Where No One Has Gone Before'' so that it would be understandable why this Wesley kid was at the helm.

Why do people act like you have to have seen all previous episodes to understand the most recent one?
Almost no series is like that.

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.

I don't know much about the 5th movie and the TV-series.
The classic movies and the new movies can't be in the same continuity just based on the fact that all the big things in classic movies appeared to have happened in the 20th century.

But I am not sure, that the old movies are a pure time-loop. We don't know how the future was initially created.

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

I heard about the animated series, but had forgotten about. probably because it never aired over here in Germany, as far as I know.

Related to this, I've been reading about all the new characters that are going to be introduced into the Marvel movies, and wondering if this will be what pops the superhero bubble. I know some fans think its cool when a couple of dozen characters are piled up in one epic story, but for outsiders it becomes just "a bunch of silly-looking people fighting for some reason".

So far the most successful movies have been the two big team-up movies: Avengers 1 & 2. The X-Men movie franchise has been an ensemble all the time, and it survived 15 years.

 

[Nerys Myk]

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.

And it's not "petty and juvenile" to disparage the fans who come here to say they don't like the movies? Neither the thread title nor even the forum title itself say that only pro-nuTrek opinions are allowed here.

Where in my comments did I say or even imply that only pro-nuTrek opinions are allowed here?Where did I say it was okay to disparage people who don't like the new films? I guess you missed my follow up post:

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

Its really about presentation and purpose. You'll note I said "a forum" and "fans" rather than STXI+. This was a deliberate choice because it applies to all franchises, properties and fandoms. Maybe I'm just too "hippie" but I think we can discuss and disagree without being disparaging.

While this thread has drifted this was the original post:

TWO reason why. STAR WARS and the COMIC BOOK MARKET.

I have a bad feeing that star trek will get swallowed up by star wars. star wars has 3 huge films coming out which are sequels to the original trilogy and they have spin off films as well.

I just wished trek will have gone back to tv instead of getting more films with this cast. in fact some people even said JJ Abrams announcing he was directing star wars over shadowed and hurt the momentum of star trek into darkness because in press conference for the film everyone were asking him about star wars not star trek.


with star wars coming back in a huge way and the never ending comic book film madness all bringing in billions and billions at the box office I think star trek will just get swallowed up in the midst of all this juggernauts comic films and star wars.

star trek should have gone back to tv instead. where the best stories are told, I think it has a better chance growing in popularity in tv than in films.

Mostly it was about a fear that Star Trek can not compete against Star Wars and comic book movies. And the idea that the "safer waters" of TV would be better.

It goes off track with this post which has nothing to do with the OP.