Because much of what you call "excellent" is simply mediocrity that you like as opposed to mediocrity that others like.
You just don't have the standing to judge the taste of other people here.
The Sobering Effect of the Star Trek XI Trailer
- Thread starter Samuel T. Cogley
- Start date
Because much of what you call "excellent" is simply mediocrity that you like as opposed to mediocrity that others like.
You just don't have the standing to judge the taste of other people here.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Standing, huh? Something akin to breeding, perhaps? Oh, wait, this is 'standing' from your POV.
You really oughta be ashamed of yourself.
Nor do I. Nor, Dennis, do YOU. Nor does anyone else.
Superman
Fleet Captain
I didn't bring it up, Bailey. Your bosom buddy ST-1 or whatever the hell his name is brought it up.
So kindly f*** off...
\S/
Superman
Fleet Captain
Oh, Cary, Bailey does have the "standing" to judge us...he's Dennis Bailey, the guy who wrote a subpar TNG episode, also the guy who does some passable CG work on a fan-based Star Trek series.
Those are his "credentials." So he's in a place to judge the rest of us, as he so often does.
Of course, for you and me, we're "judging." For Bailey and his ilk, they'll not be accused of anything but "stating their opinions."
\S/
The asterisks really don't conceal a whole lot about that, do they?
Warning for flaming.
Just saw the trailer for Wolverine (part of one of those surveys at the mall; got two dollars for my time).
JJ's alleged Star Trek movie is in really deep trouble, because I don't see the ol' Canucklehead giving up the Number One slot at the box office without a major fight, and I don't think this turkey is up for it.
In other words, Wolverine looks damn good.
You think it will fail, because you WANT to see it fail, not based on some sort of factual basis. Since Star Trek is coming out the next week after Wolverine, does that mean Wolverine will fail, or vice versa? No. But you want Star Trek to fail, so you think it will.
Before I saw the trailer, I hoped this movie would be good but feared (and expected) it to suck. I posted the reasons for my misgivings at length.
I no longer feel that way.
Having seen the trailer, I now have no hope for this film at all. It looks like chimpanzee shit. As I've said before, this isn't the whipping of a dead horse we are seeing but the whipping of the maggots who have fed upon the carcass. But so what? It's only Star Trek.
I no longer feel that way.
Having seen the trailer, I now have no hope for this film at all. It looks like chimpanzee shit. As I've said before, this isn't the whipping of a dead horse we are seeing but the whipping of the maggots who have fed upon the carcass. But so what? It's only Star Trek.
Well then. Seems you've saved yourself around 10$. Not a bad thing in these uncertain economic times. (I trust, of course, you won't spend your hard earned money to sit through two hours of "chimpanzee shit" just to validate your opinion, right?)
Ahem. I rather liked "Tin Man". It was one of the better TNG episodes, in my egotistical opinion. Dennis gets me ticked off on two things ... his flippant approach to debate and his tendency to waste hair.
So, in summation: The trailer looks great. The movie looks fun. I will definitely see it. However, it doesn't feel like a Star Trek movie to me. It appears that my hopes and dreams -- unrealistic as they probably were -- may not be satisfied by this film, as was probably going to be the case no matter who made it. So I'll watch it and hopefully enjoy it. But like a proud father who hands a favorite toy to his child, I am all the more hopeful that whatever Abrams has done will keep the concept alive for future generations.
And maybe, just maybe, Abrams will prove me wrong, and I'll come running back here on May 9th to say how he nailed it. And how this is my Star Trek.
I know what you mean about the "sobering effect", Sam. I spent most of last weekend giggling like a schoolgirl but as time passes I'm taking a more considered approach. It was such an emotional high to watch the trailer, but I feel like I would have been excited to see any Star Trek on the big screen again. Watching TMP during the week made me feel a bit guilty.
To use another analogy:
It felt like I'd been blown for two minutes by someone other than my girlfriend. I quite enjoyed being blown, but it wasn't quite the same and I felt dirty when I went round her house afterwards.
And I didn't like the bridge either.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
It's ST-One.
And you could have just ignored me.
As for your comment about Dennis' 'passable CG-work'...
If you would ask around in the CG-/3D-community you would hear more than once that his models are first-rate pieces of art.
Most of us hobbyists can only hope to achieve his level of skill.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
It's ST-One.
And you could have just ignored me.
As for your comment about Dennis' 'passable CG-work'...
If you would ask around in the CG-/3D-community you would hear more than once that his models are first-rate pieces of art.
Most of us hobbyists can only hope to achieve his level of skill.
Keep 'aspiring' in his direction and I'm SURRRRE you'll get there. Just try to make sure you haven't lost all remaining sense of taste by the time you arrive.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Warning for honesty, y'mean?
ST-One
Vice Admiral
It's ST-One.
And you could have just ignored me.
As for your comment about Dennis' 'passable CG-work'...
If you would ask around in the CG-/3D-community you would hear more than once that his models are first-rate pieces of art.
Most of us hobbyists can only hope to achieve his level of skill.
Keep 'aspiring' in his direction and I'm SURRRRE you'll get there. Just try to make sure you haven't lost all remaining sense of taste by the time you arrive.
How... very asshole-ish of you.
I'm a little confused by this one.
This was profanity... sure. "Fuck off," however, isn't a personal insult, it's merely an epithet.
Saying "You're an asshole" would be flaming. Saying "go to hell" isn't. Saying "you're an idiot" would be flaming (even though it has no profanity). Saying "go jump in a lake" isnt.
Is the mere presence of profanity what makes for "flaming" according to TrekBBS standards?
I've been flamed by folks right here in this forum... and yes, even BY YOU... and nothing was done about it. Why? Because no profanity was involved in the flame?
A personally-targeted derogatory statement is a flame. It doesn't have to include profanity. Even a supposedly "Stealth" one (like your obnoxious "Hitler salute" one you gave me) is ABSOLUTELY AN EXAMPLE OF FLAMING. It was deeply offensive, and was intended to be, on your part.
Frankly, I did see flaming in this thread. Dennis flamed Superman... and Superman flamed Dennis. BOTH DESERVE WARNINGS FOR FLAMING. But "fuck off" doesn't meet any rational definition of flaming. The flaming was the personal attack, not the profanity.
Funny how you let Dennis's flame of Superman go unchallenged.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
It's ST-One.
And you could have just ignored me.
As for your comment about Dennis' 'passable CG-work'...
If you would ask around in the CG-/3D-community you would hear more than once that his models are first-rate pieces of art.
Most of us hobbyists can only hope to achieve his level of skill.
Keep 'aspiring' in his direction and I'm SURRRRE you'll get there. Just try to make sure you haven't lost all remaining sense of taste by the time you arrive.
How... very asshole-ish of you.
You forgot to put the **** in. Doesn't that mean you don't pass go and collect $200?
Ok guys lets cool off a bit shall we? We can all disagree without taking things personally.
I just want to clarify that my use of a New Coke analogy was not meant to equate Trek with a sugary pop drink. I just wanted to say that sometimes companies do try new and different things with well known and traditional icons. It just gets so much more dangerous with literary or cinematic properties since we all have such an emotional attachment to them. And I agree, quality is what is remembered not failure. That is why I am so open to the new film, if it works it will be a great boost to Trek. If it fails, everyone will laugh at Abrams for trying to monkey with greatness and people will look at back at TOS as the way it should always be. But I do praise Abrams for trying to bring new life into Trek.
oh yeah, what does a heated debate about decaying orbits have to do with the OP's point?
I just want to clarify that my use of a New Coke analogy was not meant to equate Trek with a sugary pop drink. I just wanted to say that sometimes companies do try new and different things with well known and traditional icons. It just gets so much more dangerous with literary or cinematic properties since we all have such an emotional attachment to them. And I agree, quality is what is remembered not failure. That is why I am so open to the new film, if it works it will be a great boost to Trek. If it fails, everyone will laugh at Abrams for trying to monkey with greatness and people will look at back at TOS as the way it should always be. But I do praise Abrams for trying to bring new life into Trek.
oh yeah, what does a heated debate about decaying orbits have to do with the OP's point?
It's not heated debate. It's friendly discussion. Conversations evolve and I'm enjoying this one.
Weren't people complaining that the only thing going on in this forum was trailer dissing, canon-lamenting and canon-lover baiting?
