It's not Spock - worrying?!?!?!

[CaptainHawk1]

^^^ And the point being is...THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT and that's O FUCKIN K TOO.

But that's not the point. The point is that people who don't like it without having seen it lose all credibility with any opinion they post on it.

Feel free to take a dump on it after you've (the general you, not you specifically, Cakes) seen it but until then we'll continue to point and laugh.

 

[Flake]

Some folk will have said the same about Roger Moore.... and <insert recasted character here> and.. and...

 

[M'Sharak]

^^^ And the point being is...THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT and that's O FUCKIN K TOO.

Granted, but when those people keep saying that they don't like it, over and over, throwing it in the faces of others or making a challenge of it, it begins to wear and it has a way of derailing the discussion so that it's more about the person who doesn't like it, rather than being about the original topic of discussion. Being ALL-CAPS SHOUTY WITH IT doesn't really help much, either.

 

[Cheapjack]

Exactly. It doesn't matter who made the comments. You're implying that because you heard two dillweeds dismissing the new film because the young Spock isn't played by Nimoy that you're some kind of visionary when it comes to how the film should have been marketed.

Is there any need to be so rude? I'm just saying I listen to what my ears feed to my brain. As to working for Paramount, I was being sarcastic. I think a lot of people here have that idea that they are that knowledgable.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

Exactly. It doesn't matter who made the comments. You're implying that because you heard two dillweeds dismissing the new film because the young Spock isn't played by Nimoy that you're some kind of visionary when it comes to how the film should have been marketed.

Is there any need to be so rude? I'm just saying I listen to what my ears feed to my brain. As to working for Paramount, I was being sarcastic. I think a lot of people here have that idea that they are that knowledgable.

It's not rude, it's just responding to what you suggested about your brilliant foresight.

Your anecdotal evidence of a sample of two is not evidence of your predictions and your suggesting that it is.

As far as being knowledgeable about the marketing of the film, you're the only one claiming to be knowledgeable. I'm suggesting that the experts know what they are doing and telling you why they are doing it based on their statements on the approach to the film.

Don't take it so personally. My comments were ball-busting and sarcastic in nature but they weren't meant to offend you. If they did, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

 

[Cakes488]

^^^ And the point being is...THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT and that's O FUCKIN K TOO.

Granted, but when those people keep saying that they don't like it, over and over, throwing it in the faces of others or making a challenge of it, it begins to wear and it has a way of derailing the discussion so that it's more about the person who doesn't like it, rather than being about the original topic of discussion. Being ALL-CAPS SHOUTY WITH IT doesn't really help much, either.

This thread is about 2 chaps saying it's not the same etc....so if that comment is not appropriate here ...well then where? I'm also playing the role of devils advocate because I started out hating the idea of the movie but as I've continued to have dialogue with people etc...I've come around to almost full fledged acceptance...


I had to get all shouty.....I guess you would of been in a complete tizzy had I done bold too! Which by the way it's the first time I've use caps ...but ...after you repeat something 3 times...yeah caps gets turned on...yeah they do.

^^^ And the point being is...THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT and that's O FUCKIN K TOO.

But that's not the point. The point is that people who don't like it without having seen it lose all credibility with any opinion they post on it.

Feel free to take a dump on it after you've (the general you, not you specifically, Cakes) seen it but until then we'll continue to point and laugh.

Well if that's the point you're trying to make why not just say it? That's certainly not the point you were driving home in prior posts. I agree with your point and nobody can fully judge until they see the movie....a lot of these old timers or die hards ...whateva you wanna call em will have no interest in the movie at all and that's ok too...and since this is america they can still offer opinions......you can dismiss it as not being credible...but people still got rights here -- or do they??

 

[Tulin]

They did as of January 20th!

Before that everything was a little murkier.

 

[indranee]

They did as of January 20th!

Before that everything was a little murkier.

HELL YES.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

^^^ And the point being is...THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT and that's O FUCKIN K TOO.

But that's not the point. The point is that people who don't like it without having seen it lose all credibility with any opinion they post on it.

Feel free to take a dump on it after you've (the general you, not you specifically, Cakes) seen it but until then we'll continue to point and laugh.

Well if that's the point you're trying to make why not just say it? That's certainly not the point you were driving home in prior posts. I agree with your point and nobody can fully judge until they see the movie....a lot of these old timers or die hards ...whateva you wanna call em will have no interest in the movie at all and that's ok too...and since this is america they can still offer opinions......you can dismiss it as not being credible...but people still got rights here -- or do they??

There was no reason to make that point until the thread went off on the tangent you sent it on. As you just pointed out, the OP was about the observation of two people commenting on a magazine cover. So when the issue came up, I commented accordingly. You have to right to spout off whatever opinion that you like in open forum, but like I said, expect scrutiny.

They did as of January 20th!

Before that everything was a little murkier.

They did as of January 20th!

Before that everything was a little murkier.

HELL YES.

I'm curious as to what rights you think were suppressed before January 20 that have been magically unsuppressed since then.

 

[RobertScorpio]

We'll know for sure in 3 months time, or less.

Sure, we'll see.
But even in the event of failure, I highly, highly doubt it will be because Leonard Nimoy was not the focus of the ad campaign.

agreed...this movie will either live by attracting young kids, or die by the inability to do so. That is why SYLAR is in the promos...

Rob

 

[Cakes488]

But that's not the point. The point is that people who don't like it without having seen it lose all credibility with any opinion they post on it.

Feel free to take a dump on it after you've (the general you, not you specifically, Cakes) seen it but until then we'll continue to point and laugh.

Well if that's the point you're trying to make why not just say it? That's certainly not the point you were driving home in prior posts. I agree with your point and nobody can fully judge until they see the movie....a lot of these old timers or die hards ...whateva you wanna call em will have no interest in the movie at all and that's ok too...and since this is america they can still offer opinions......you can dismiss it as not being credible...but people still got rights here -- or do they??

There was no reason to make that point until the thread went off on the tangent you sent it on. As you just pointed out, the OP was about the observation of two people commenting on a magazine cover. So when the issue came up, I commented accordingly. You have to right to spout off whatever opinion that you like in open forum, but like I said, expect scrutiny.

You say..."There was no reason to make that point until the thread...." well that point is the point of the thread and then in turn I can say that I see no reason for YOU to make that point....which would be pretty pointless....get my point?

 

[CaptainHawk1]

Well if that's the point you're trying to make why not just say it? That's certainly not the point you were driving home in prior posts. I agree with your point and nobody can fully judge until they see the movie....a lot of these old timers or die hards ...whateva you wanna call em will have no interest in the movie at all and that's ok too...and since this is america they can still offer opinions......you can dismiss it as not being credible...but people still got rights here -- or do they??

There was no reason to make that point until the thread went off on the tangent you sent it on. As you just pointed out, the OP was about the observation of two people commenting on a magazine cover. So when the issue came up, I commented accordingly. You have to right to spout off whatever opinion that you like in open forum, but like I said, expect scrutiny.


You say..."There was no reason to make that point until the thread...." well that point is the point of the thread and then in turn I can say that I see no reason for YOU to make that point....which would be pretty pointless....get my point?

No... you're not making a lot of sense.

Well if that's the point you're trying to make why not just say it? That's certainly not the point you were driving home in prior posts.

Again, to clarify, there was no reason for me to make the comment you referred to in this quote until you made the point about people just not accepting it no matter what. Despite what you think, that wasn't the point of the thread.

 

[Cakes488]

^^ Oh good I'm glad you're seeing that I'm not making sense since it's not supposed to...brilliant !

The OP said one dude didn't like it...the OP said maybe we should used old spock in ad's... and my comment about some people are never going to like it is appropriate....meaning you can't please everybody...so no matter who's in it, what ad's are run etc..........somebody somewhere ain't gonna like it...and that's OK..so to satisfy your "what this thread is about" complaint...then NO they shouldn't of used old Spock in ads just to reach out to older folks -- that's not the audience they're going for.....at all. OK ya happy now? I know I ammmmmmmmm!

 

[M'Sharak]

They did as of January 20th!

Before that everything was a little murkier.

They did as of January 20th!

Before that everything was a little murkier.

HELL YES.

I'm curious as to what rights you think were suppressed before January 20 that have been magically unsuppressed since then.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lf59bCpHy...g/G2obAVTj1pA/s400/ZombiesAheadAP_304x337.jpg

Wrong. Fucking. Forum. All of you.

Take the politics to TNZ and keep them there; they are not wanted here. This forum is for talking about the movie. I'd rather not have to point this out again.

 

[Tulin]

Does somebody need a hug?