[Spoilers] Seriously flawed plotline

[Gepard]

^Which reminds me, it is perhaps not surprising that Trek XI already has an entry on the "They Changed It Now It Sucks" page of TVTropes.org. Kinda puts our arguments in their places to see them next to entries like:

On a similar note, certain fansites had some ongoing - and utterly hilarious - flame wars about whether The Dark Knight was going to suck... based on the fact that the Joker's appearance is from make-up rather than being "permawhite" due to falling into a vat of chemicals.

 

[CommanderTrip]

People are too quick to judge. They see something that doesn't immediately placate them, and rather than ignore it, they tear it a new poop chute.

Overall, we have been given a dozen or so photos, a 1 minute and 40 seconds teaser, and a 2nd, 2 minute general sampler trailer. Putting that into context, we have seen a total of (at most) 4 minutes of footage, and if the movie is, say, 2 hours long, that means we have seen about 3% of the total film. 3%. So for someone to say this movie will totally suck/kick ass is making their assumption based on what is essentially a hiccup.

For anyone who has made it their secondary goal in life to bash this film, when you see a sandwich on a table, and you take a bite out of it and its absolutely horrible, do you keep eating the sandwich to see if its really as bad as you thought?

No, you throw that shit away because you don't want to get food poisoning.

and I'm spent.


P.S. I would have to say... Hmm, it's not THAT big of a deal.

 

[btflash]

For anyone who has made it their secondary goal in life to bash this film, when you see a sandwich on a table, and you take a bite out of it and its absolutely horrible, do you keep eating the sandwich to see if its really as bad as you thought?

No, you throw that shit away because you don't want to get food poisoning.

and I'm spent.


P.S. I would have to say... Hmm, it's not THAT big of a deal.

soooooo.... using your analogy many here could say that the trailer we have seen was indeed a "bite" that was horrible and judge the film accordingly. correct?

 

[CommanderTrip]

^^^ If you can eat 3% of a sandwich and be able to judge the rest of the sandwich based on that (3% of a footlong sub is about 1/3rd of an inch. That would be a piece of sandwich this big:

(....)

give or take a period or so.

So, if you can judge a movie (or a sandwich) on what is essentially a crumb, that's your prerogative. But the point I'm trying to get across is that excessively bashing a movie you think you won't like because of a blip of footage is getting old. It happened with the Dark Knight, it's going to happen with Star Trek too. I'm not saying that everyone either has to say something positive or keep their mouth shut. That's absurd, and oftentimes criticism helps improve the situation. But some of the naysayers really need to "bring it down a notch." Some fans who are so devoted to these fairytale ideas and canon to the point where they expect a 2009 big budget movie to be exactly what they envision, and even the smallest of deviations is an abomination against nature. I know my fortune cookie analogies won't reform fanboy (and girl, this is an equal opportunity board) attitudes towards criticizing every detail of something unlikable to them, but the point is still the same.

 

[The Wormhole]

^Which reminds me, it is perhaps not surprising that Trek XI already has an entry on the "They Changed It Now It Sucks" page of TVTropes.org. Kinda puts our arguments in their places to see them next to entries like:

On a similar note, certain fansites had some ongoing - and utterly hilarious - flame wars about whether The Dark Knight was going to suck... based on the fact that the Joker's appearance is from make-up rather than being "permawhite" due to falling into a vat of chemicals.

I remember some of those complaints. Specifcally, that the Joker's apeparance being due to make-up was a disservice to the comic book origins and showed a lack of understanding the complexities of the Joker's character.

You know, there are times when saying "raped my childhood" is easier.

 

[Gepard]

You know, there are times when saying "raped my childhood" is easier.

Guess it's a good thing they didn't put a 0 before the Joker's name, huh?

 

[trekkerguy]

It made him a more complex and interesting character.

Someone who would do those things to themselves on purpose is much
more freightening and intriguing than someone who... fell into toxins. Woooo

 

[Bacl]

Hmmm..I just hope that they understand the character of James Kirk and did not create a young Bill Shatner.

But seriously, we can't critique the film until we have seen the film...

 

[trekkerguy]

Hmmm..I just hope that they understand the character of James Kirk and did not create a young Bill Shatner.

But seriously, we can't critique the film until we have seen the film...

Chris Pine himself said at first he was watching all of TOS and such and
that he stopped because he wanted to make sure he did not end up
trying to act like Shatner, but played the character his own way.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Hmmm..I just hope that they understand the character of James Kirk

Supposedly the novel "Best Destiny" was inspirational. Did you like rebellious Jimmy Kirk in that? The same Jimmy who eventually settled down and became the textbook-on-legs Gary Mitchell remembers.

 

[Jerikka Dawn]

Actually... we had "the way things were" back in the 1960s and 1970s, and that was still accepted without debate through most of the 1980s. Then, it got twisted up with a few "redefinitions" in TNG (by Roddenberry, of course, who was more likely to change canon than anyone else in Trek history as far as I can tell!), and then we ended up with a new "TNG-era-canon" which paid lip-service to the original but otherwise ignored it.

THAT is what got "stagnant." And it wasn't due to "canon," it was due to FORMULA. It was due to every episode, without variation, having an "A-story" and a "B-story." Every episode, regardless of series, having the same sound effects and music... having the same WRITING STYLE...

It became predictable. The best-regarded episodes, its not coincidence, are the ones that were unpredictable... that surprised the audience and shook things up.

I would like to add my support to the contention that regardless of canon, the franchise ended up stagnant because, essentially, every episode was exactly the same, predictable, and cookie-cutter, but I will say that Deep Space Nine is somewhat of an exception.

(...) The best-regarded episodes, its not coincidence, are the ones that were unpredictable... that surprised the audience and shook things up.

But those episodes didn't have to deviate from "canon" in order to do so. They were allowed to change things going forward, but not to redefine things which were already established. "The Best of Both Worlds" didn't have the Vulcans as the villains, after all... though I can easily imagine how, in a "reimagined" Trek universe, that would make for some exciting storytelling. Can't you?

You are correct in that you don't have to deviate from "canon" in order to tell good stories in the Trek Universe. The problem, however, is that someone can write a perfectly well put together, brilliant piece of story-telling in the Trek universe, yet hardline fundamentalist Canonites will describe it as destroying the foundations of the Trek universe and describe it as bad and lazy writing if, during the story, Kirk goes to his quarters and tells the turbolift "Deck 7" instead of "Deck 5" as if that has anything at all to do with the story.

This movie is breaking formula... and that's WONDERFUL. But it also seems to be breaking canon... which isn't. The canon isn't what forces formula on the production... formula is forced on a production by laziness and complacency. Rejection of canon isn't forced on a production by the desire to break formula... it's forced on a production by the desire to "put my own imprint on things." In other words, by egotism. It's really not hard to take any potential storyline (including every significant element of the script of this film) into a 100%-canon-compliant situation, and instead of having a less-exciting movie, actually end up with a MORE exciting one.

Yet, the Canonistas will still complain that the angle of the warp nacelle pylons is wrong and, therefore, is an indication that the writer is "crapping all over canon" and that the movie sucks.

It doesn't matter how good the story is, canon-compliant or not. Canon freaks will complain that Kirk in this movie doesn't have the dramatic pauses that Shatner worked into his dialog. I guarantee it; don't worry about it.

 

[Jerikka Dawn]

(...)they can reboot and all of the die hard fans can keep TOS in a different timeline. It's not like it never happened

That's part of the problem. For some reason, those die hard fans believe that they exist in that timeline as if this movie erases the TV SERIES "Star Trek" from existence.

Is there any other explanation as to why, when the 1990s rolled around, every fan chronology was updated and the Eugenics Wars, all of a sudden, were fought in secret without anyone knowing? No, there isn't. Those fans were trying to justify why our real life 6 o'clock news wasn't abuzz about the Eugenics wars and genetic Supermen like Khan taking over.

 

[dillon3001]

Hmmm..I just hope that they understand the character of James Kirk and did not create a young Bill Shatner.

But seriously, we can't critique the film until we have seen the film...

Chris Pine himself said at first he was watching all of TOS and such and
that he stopped because he wanted to make sure he did not end up
trying to act like Shatner, but played the character his own way.

Which is excellent. How well of a job Pine/Quinto/Urban play Kirk/Spock/McCoy is just as important, probably IMO moreso, than 99% of the things that are complained about (no disrespect intended).

If i can walk out of the theater fully convinced that I just saw Kirk and Spock and McCoy on a new, exciting adventure, then to me the movie was well worth the price of admission.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

From what we now know, Kirk is a cadet when he sneaks onboard the Enterprise. Then, when Pike goes off-ship to deal with an emergency, Spock is placed in command and Pike makes Kirk the First Officer under Spock. This is despite the fact that Scotty, McCoy, Uhura, Sulu and a hundred other officers are onboard. An insubordinant and almost criminal cadet is promoted to First Officer ... and then, having been goaded by future Spock, Kirk provokes young Spock into losing his emotional cool, at which point he assumes command of the Enterprise, once again without hundreds of other officers objecting to this jump in the chain of command.

If this were some generic sci-fi movie shown on a Sunday afternoon on the Sci-Fi Channel, I could ignore that incredibly poorly thought out and illogical (yes, I'm opening up space for Spock jokes) plot and then make fun of it on here the next day ... but this is Star Trek! Forgetting that the characters and ship already have a well-defined history that's being rewritten, it's supposed to be, well, you know, good. And not totally illogical and unbelievable.

Yes, I'll still be first in line to see the movie, yes, I'm still a Star Trek fan, but come on, couldn't they have done better than this to reboot the franchise? Poor poor poor writing.

Not for nothing... this is one of the dopiest, fan-boy posts in the history of this board and I've been here for nine flippin' years.

You have no talent, you've never written a script, you haven't seen this script and you haven't seen the movie. You're trying to piece the plot together based on the miniscule bits of information that has been released and you sound like a retard. I'm sure TPTB are really concerned with your review.

How about waiting for May 8th to bash the flippin' thing. Until then, how about you just try shutting the fuck up with how bad it is. Seriously, all of you, it's beyond ridiculous. You pre-release bashers are the reason why I hate Trek fans and why Creation won't get any more of my money.

-Shawn

 

[Lee]

Let's see the movie first before we comment on the plot, m'kay?

Since the moviemakers have deliberately released plot details in order to stir up interest in the film, I think it's fair to comment on them.

 

[cooleddie74]

Let's see the movie first before we comment on the plot, m'kay?

Since the moviemakers have deliberately released plot details in order to stir up interest in the film, I think it's fair to comment on them.

Exactly. Don't want cybernerds pissing and bitching about the movie? Don't spill details this early.

 

[M'Sharak]

From what we now know
<snip>
Poor poor poor writing.

Not for nothing... this is one of the dopiest, fan-boy posts in the history of this board and I've been here for nine flippin' years.

You have no talent, you've never written a script, you haven't seen this script and you haven't seen the movie. You're trying to piece the plot together based on the miniscule bits of information that has been released and you sound like a retard. I'm sure TPTB are really concerned with your review.

How about waiting for May 8th to bash the flippin' thing. Until then, how about you just try shutting the fuck up with how bad it is. Seriously, all of you, it's beyond ridiculous. You pre-release bashers are the reason why I hate Trek fans and why Creation won't get any more of my money.

-Shawn

I'll admit I'm not the biggest fan either of posts that start with "from what we now know" or "from what I've been told" and proceed to make great leaps to conclusions not entirely supported by the same material we've all seen, but even so, don't you think that was a bit harsh? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even one which may turn out to be incorrect, and it's not necessary to get so personal in criticizing what they've written.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

From what we now know
<snip>
Poor poor poor writing.

Not for nothing... this is one of the dopiest, fan-boy posts in the history of this board and I've been here for nine flippin' years.

You have no talent, you've never written a script, you haven't seen this script and you haven't seen the movie. You're trying to piece the plot together based on the miniscule bits of information that has been released and you sound like a retard. I'm sure TPTB are really concerned with your review.

How about waiting for May 8th to bash the flippin' thing. Until then, how about you just try shutting the fuck up with how bad it is. Seriously, all of you, it's beyond ridiculous. You pre-release bashers are the reason why I hate Trek fans and why Creation won't get any more of my money.

-Shawn

I'll admit I'm not the biggest fan either of posts that start with "from what we now know" or "from what I've been told" and proceed to make great leaps to conclusions not entirely supported by the same material we've all seen, but even so, don't you think that was a bit harsh?

Nope. I don't. These moronic posts have been going on far too long and the indictment is specfic to idiots who are stating as fact what they no nothing about. These aren't 'leaps to conclusion.' These statements are bogus opinions based on facts that they've made up.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,

I disagree with the contention and generic cliché that everyone is entitled to their opinion because as this board shows on a daily basis, about 10% of the posters are absolute morons and should be called out for it. This platitude is as worn-out and tired and as 'the customer is always right' (No, the customer is quite often an absolutley unreasonable and irrational asshole and should be treated as such.).

However, let's just say that we go along with this 'everyone is entitled to their opinion' sentiment. By the same token, whatever dopey opinion you post, you should expect scrutiny for it.

So if these dopey posts continue (which they no doubt will), they will continue to be scrutinized accordingly.

even one which may turn out to be incorrect, and it's not necessary to get so personal in criticizing what they've written.

It's not about whether they're right or wrong about the quality of the film. It's about expressing an opinion based on non-existent facts (and stating facts about plot-holes that they have no idea whether they exist or not). Let me put this another way: I think NEM is not only the worst Trek film ever, I think it may be one of the worst films ever right behind Battlefield Earth. From what I have seen about 15% - 20% actually think that this floating turd of a film is actually good. I may disagree with them, but I don't criticize their opinion because they have their reasons based on the actual film that they've seen.

Even in the end if it turns out that Trek XI is crap, it doesn't make the bashers right or able to say, "See, I told you so!" because it's idiotic to express such adamant opinions five months before a film is released when you don't have the facts.

-Shawn

 

[PKTrekGirl]

Not for nothing... this is one of the dopiest, fan-boy posts in the history of this board and I've been here for nine flippin' years.

You have no talent, you've never written a script, you haven't seen this script and you haven't seen the movie. You're trying to piece the plot together based on the miniscule bits of information that has been released and you sound like a retard. I'm sure TPTB are really concerned with your review.

How about waiting for May 8th to bash the flippin' thing. Until then, how about you just try shutting the fuck up with how bad it is. Seriously, all of you, it's beyond ridiculous. You pre-release bashers are the reason why I hate Trek fans and why Creation won't get any more of my money.

-Shawn

I'll admit I'm not the biggest fan either of posts that start with "from what we now know" or "from what I've been told" and proceed to make great leaps to conclusions not entirely supported by the same material we've all seen, but even so, don't you think that was a bit harsh?

Nope. I don't. These moronic posts have been going on far too long and the indictment is specfic to idiots who are stating as fact what they no nothing about. These aren't 'leaps to conclusion.' These statements are bogus opinions based on facts that they've made up.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,

I disagree with the contention and generic cliché that everyone is entitled to their opinion because as this board shows on a daily basis, about 10% of the posters are absolute morons and should be called out for it. This platitude is as worn-out and tired and as 'the customer is always right' (No, the customer is quite often an absolutley unreasonable and irrational asshole and should be treated as such.).

However, let's just say that we go along with this 'everyone is entitled to their opinion' sentiment. By the same token, whatever dopey opinion you post, you should expect scrutiny for it.

So if these dopey posts continue (which they no doubt will), they will continue to be scrutinized accordingly.

even one which may turn out to be incorrect, and it's not necessary to get so personal in criticizing what they've written.

It's not about whether they're right or wrong about the quality of the film. It's about expressing an opinion based on non-existent facts (and stating facts about plot-holes that they have no idea whether they exist or not). Let me put this another way: I think NEM is not only the worst Trek film ever, I think it may be one of the worst films ever right behind Battlefield Earth. From what I have seen about 15% - 20% actually think that this floating turd of a film is actually good. I may disagree with them, but I don't criticize their opinion because they have their reasons based on the actual film that they've seen.

Even in the end if it turns out that Trek XI is crap, it doesn't make the bashers right or able to say, "See, I told you so!" because it's idiotic to express such adamant opinions five months before a film is released when you don't have the facts.

-Shawn

CaptainHawk1,

Yes...people should expect their posts to be scrutinized - especially in a forum such as this. And if you have issues with an individual's post, address the issues - not your opinion of the poster or your opinion of his mental acumen.

Referring to posters or their posts as 'dopey' or 'idiotic' or 'moronic' or anything like that will NOT fly. Everyone around here IS entitled to their own opinion...that is sorta the entire POINT of a DISCUSSION board. No one ever said that only carefully reasoned opinions were allowed. In fact, all opinions are allowed - reasoned or otherwise. And if an opinion is not carefully reasoned, it is open for scrutiny - BUT in a REASONABLE fashion.

The thing is that, last I checked, no one died and made you the final arbiter of what is 'idiotic' or 'moronic' or 'dopey'. So that dog don't hunt.

Therefore, let's knock off the use of those sorts of remarks, like, immediately.

You want to debate the validity of the post in a calm and reasonable manner? Knock yourself out. But seeking to escalate an argument just because you have an issue with a post is nonproductive and will not be tolerated.

If you have a beef with that, shoot me a PM and we can discuss it further.

 

[xortex]

Not for nothing... this is one of the dopiest, fan-boy posts in the history of this board and I've been here for nine flippin' years.

You have no talent, you've never written a script, you haven't seen this script and you haven't seen the movie. You're trying to piece the plot together based on the miniscule bits of information that has been released and you sound like a retard. I'm sure TPTB are really concerned with your review.

How about waiting for May 8th to bash the flippin' thing. Until then, how about you just try shutting the fuck up with how bad it is. Seriously, all of you, it's beyond ridiculous. You pre-release bashers are the reason why I hate Trek fans and why Creation won't get any more of my money.

-Shawn

I'll admit I'm not the biggest fan either of posts that start with "from what we now know" or "from what I've been told" and proceed to make great leaps to conclusions not entirely supported by the same material we've all seen, but even so, don't you think that was a bit harsh?

Nope. I don't. These moronic posts have been going on far too long and the indictment is specfic to idiots who are stating as fact what they no nothing about. These aren't 'leaps to conclusion.' These statements are bogus opinions based on facts that they've made up.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,

I disagree with the contention and generic cliché that everyone is entitled to their opinion because as this board shows on a daily basis, about 10% of the posters are absolute morons and should be called out for it. This platitude is as worn-out and tired and as 'the customer is always right' (No, the customer is quite often an absolutley unreasonable and irrational asshole and should be treated as such.).

However, let's just say that we go along with this 'everyone is entitled to their opinion' sentiment. By the same token, whatever dopey opinion you post, you should expect scrutiny for it.

So if these dopey posts continue (which they no doubt will), they will continue to be scrutinized accordingly.

even one which may turn out to be incorrect, and it's not necessary to get so personal in criticizing what they've written.

It's not about whether they're right or wrong about the quality of the film. It's about expressing an opinion based on non-existent facts (and stating facts about plot-holes that they have no idea whether they exist or not). Let me put this another way: I think NEM is not only the worst Trek film ever, I think it may be one of the worst films ever right behind Battlefield Earth. From what I have seen about 15% - 20% actually think that this floating turd of a film is actually good. I may disagree with them, but I don't criticize their opinion because they have their reasons based on the actual film that they've seen.

Even in the end if it turns out that Trek XI is crap, it doesn't make the bashers right or able to say, "See, I told you so!" because it's idiotic to express such adamant opinions five months before a film is released when you don't have the facts.

-Shawn

I liked Battlefield Earth.