What's keeping me out of the theatre....

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Wow, I must have totally missed the rule stating that I'm only allowed to post in threads where I agree with the idea expressed in the thread title/original post.

And yet that is precisely the dominant attitude over in the Trek XI forum, where "naysayers" were surrounded and torn apart like a caterpillar surrounded by army ants.

Yeah, if you can't stand being vociferously disagreed with by the majority it's best to stay away from the heat.

I mean, jeez - having one's opinion attacked on the Internet leaves scars!

 

[bismarck_1892]

Wow, I must have totally missed the rule stating that I'm only allowed to post in threads where I agree with the idea expressed in the thread title/original post.

And yet that is precisely the dominant attitude over in the Trek XI forum, where "naysayers" were surrounded and torn apart like a caterpillar surrounded by army ants.

Yeah, if you can't stand being vociferously disagreed with by the majority it's best to stay away from the heat.

I mean, jeez - having one's opinion attacked on the Internet leaves scars!

Only when those doing the attacking are rude and nasty. Instead of talking about the movie they turn to personal attacks and try to prevent you from speaking your mind.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Only when those doing the attacking are rude and nasty. Instead of talking about the movie they turn to personal attacks and try to prevent you from speaking your mind.

No, the moderator just merged your thread into the general review thread.

There's more than enough insult and rudeness coming from the movie's detractors on this board. Posters of no demonstrably remarkable intelligence or independence themselves nonetheless seem to particularly like to call folks who enjoy the film "sheep."

 

[Mallory]

Let's try and stay on topic here folks.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Wow, I must have totally missed the rule stating that I'm only allowed to post in threads where I agree with the idea expressed in the thread title/original post.

And yet that is precisely the dominant attitude over in the Trek XI forum, where "naysayers" were surrounded and torn apart like a caterpillar surrounded by army ants.

Yeah, if you can't stand being vociferously disagreed with by the majority it's best to stay away from the heat.

I mean, jeez - having one's opinion attacked on the Internet leaves scars!

Come now, Dennis, surely a man of your towering intellect knows I was decrying the hypocrisy of the quoted post, not the sad and silly hostilty of the film's thin-skinned cheering section.

But I digress. As I've said, I liked the movie--it was real blast. I liked it even better the second time. But I sympathize with those who fell in love with TOS for the reasons Warped9 (and me as well) did. This movie had little in common with the show that at its best (25 or 30 of its 79 episodes, I'd say) presented SF so well and so rigorously (relative to the tv standards of the time) that it could stand shoulder to shoulder with the better dramas of its eras. That is, little beyond fannish incidentals like the sound effects and the fact that Admiral Komack sits on Kirk's review board. Instead, it was much more similar in tone to the old BSG or Buck Rogers in the Twenty-Fifth Century--and even then, I doubt either of those shows would ask us to swallow such rank stupidities as a cadet being granted command of the fleet's newest and finest cruiser upon graduation, or a planet established as so remote* the automated ore ships only show up once every two decades being several orders of magnitude closer to Vulcan than we are to Mars. Star Trek may as well be set in the Gold Key universe, for all it has in common with the show this forum is dedicated to.

But so what? It's only space opera. My date liked it. My beloved brother (who, unlike George Samuel Kirk, has yet to mysteriously disappear from my personal canon) liked it and I liked it. So I guess I'm on your side.

Wanna hug on it?

*I mean, come on, if you're gonna name-drop a planet at least name-drop a planet that makes sense. Andoria would have worked just fine (well, maybe not that fine but better than Delta Vega, at least), as your beloved ENT has established and then we could have seen a wiggly antennaed space smurf for the added fangasm. Christ, we already know it's an ice planet!

 

[bismarck_1892]

Only when those doing the attacking are rude and nasty. Instead of talking about the movie they turn to personal attacks and try to prevent you from speaking your mind.

No, the moderator just merged your thread into the general review thread.

There's more than enough insult and rudeness coming from the movie's detractors on this board. Posters of no demonstrably remarkable intelligence or independence themselves nonetheless seem to particularly like to call folks who enjoy the film "sheep."

Well, there seemed to be a lot of "I loved the movie" threads while the "I didn't" seemed to be getting merged or closed.

In any case, I have not insulted anyone, and always ask for the same curtesy.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Only when those doing the attacking are rude and nasty. Instead of talking about the movie they turn to personal attacks and try to prevent you from speaking your mind.

No, the moderator just merged your thread into the general review thread.

There's more than enough insult and rudeness coming from the movie's detractors on this board. Posters of no demonstrably remarkable intelligence or independence themselves nonetheless seem to particularly like to call folks who enjoy the film "sheep."

Well, there seemed to be a lot of "I loved the movie" threads while the "I didn't" seemed to be getting merged or closed.

No, there are not a whole lot of separate "this is what I thought of the movie" threads in that forum. They're generally merged into the review topic unless they have a more specific topic. You're asking for special treatment.

 

[Parka Nick Ti]

A bigoted crew member wanting Romulan ass?

Stiles, "Balance of Terror" (TOS)[/QUOTE]

You are absolutely right. I had forgotten that. I think I was focusing too much on the premise that in the Star Trek universe prejudice was a thing of the past.

 

[KimMH]

$10 a pop. evidently my family expects me to contribute to the mortgage and untilities and car loan and gorceries . . .

 

[MANT!]

At the end of the day, you are why I don't want to see this movie. You and guys like you who are so emotionally invested in a piece a fiction that they feel free to treat real people like utter shit over it.

What other movies are you refusing to see this summer?

What movies did you refuse to see last year?

The world must know, and I don't care if it takes another 13 pages to find out.

Joe, so interested

AMEN !!


We Reach Brother...

 

[Gary7]

The thread is entitled "What's keeping me out of the theater..."

If someone is refusing to see the new movie on the grounds that it "violated" established Star Trek history, or that one is in disagreement with the fanbase they've witnessed on TrekBBS who say this is the best Star Trek movie ever, I think it's a weak excuse.

I haven't seen it yet, because I don't like huge crowds and the average ill behaved 15-20 crowd that would dominate on opening weekend. I'm perfectly content to wait a week or two and then get a good seat at my time of choosing. And I will see it... despite the fact that I was irked to learn of the "canon violations". It looks entertaining enough to warrant tossing over $10, to see it on a huge screen.

But y'know... I'm not so much ready to judge the movie for how badly it mucked up the established Star Trek time line. I want to see an action adventure movie that is thought provoking, features excellent acting, and keeps reasonable plausibility in mind. I'm hearing that this isn't the case... Not that it's Abrams' fault, but that it's the byproduct of an industry that makes tons of money dumping out mindless eye candy, because the average movie goer tends to be less discriminating. Remember... Nemesis was the worst grossing Star Trek movie of all time, but still cleared overhead with just box office sales worldwide (which means the investors made their money back and then a little extra). It looks like nuStarTrek will pay off the budget this weekend.

It reminds me of the Internet start-up company era of the late 1990's. VC's would throw millions at a bunch of companies... they didn't really care if a few tanked, as long as just one hit the big time, because the payoff would be like winning the lottery--paying back the whole investment fund many times over.

If only people were more discriminating. But I guess that also depends on the strength of will. Can you wait to see a movie in rental form, or must you see it in the theater?

 

[bismarck_1892]

No, the moderator just merged your thread into the general review thread.

There's more than enough insult and rudeness coming from the movie's detractors on this board. Posters of no demonstrably remarkable intelligence or independence themselves nonetheless seem to particularly like to call folks who enjoy the film "sheep."

Well, there seemed to be a lot of "I loved the movie" threads while the "I didn't" seemed to be getting merged or closed.

No, there are not a whole lot of separate "this is what I thought of the movie" threads in that forum. They're generally merged into the review topic unless they have a more specific topic. You're asking for special treatment.

I so disagree. All one has to do is look around and read them. What you are saying is simply not true.

 

[Alex1939]

I want to see an action adventure movie that is thought provoking, features excellent acting, and keeps reasonable plausibility in mind.

1/3 aint too bad.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I want to see an action adventure movie that is thought provoking, features excellent acting, and keeps reasonable plausibility in mind.

1/3 aint too bad.

Oddly enough, in this case, it ain't.

 

[Alex1939]

I want to see an action adventure movie that is thought provoking, features excellent acting, and keeps reasonable plausibility in mind.

1/3 aint too bad.

Oddly enough, in this case, it ain't.

Oddly enough, I agree.

I really did like it. Not my favorite, but I enjoyed it. Still can't believe how happy everyone was with McCoy and Scotty though. But to each their own.

 

[MANT!]

Star Trek..Plausable?..not really according to the science we see today(..but if someone does cook up an unobtainium FTL drive, I'll stand corrected)..the thing I was looking for in this film was "A Good Movie" which it is...and yes, it's mostly entertainment..but heck, that's what I pay 10 bucks for...If I want "Thought Provoking" I guess I'll head for Sin Nombre .. but I really want to be entertained..and this film delivered in spades..

 

[Warped9]

Is that $9.75 Canadian or American?

Canadian. I did say $9.75 in Canada.

My impression from those I know who've just seen the film is that it's full of energy and fun yet fun in the way the original Star Wars trilogy was fun.

Having read spoilers and all else I know about the film even with a fair reboot I'm bummed by some of the things they've changed, and not just the Enterprise (although that is a biggy).Things they've changed that I feel unnecessary.

I do like the uniform colours although I question the detailing. And although the female outfits are more rational in length I'm not that keen on the closed neck. I know, picky. I'm more concerned with more major elemental changes.

(REMOVING SPOILER - T'BONZ)

 

[Kirk1980]

Culling all the information which has been at everyone's disposal, skeptics and enthusiasts alike, I have to say nothing's keeping me OUT of the theater but rather nothing is tugging me by the collar INTO the theater.

I haven't been impressed by the shows Abrams has created. I didn't like Orci and Kurtzman's writing in Transformers. The ship, taken as a standalone entity, isn't hugely appealing. The sets don't sit right with me from a functional level.

Will I go watch? Yeah, eventually, I will, no doubt. There's just nothing which makes me think...man, I'm going to be proud to be a Star Trek fan after I see this movie! I try to hold Trek to a little higher standard than I do a kids' property like Transformers.

 

[ST-One]

[snip]

Way to be an asshole to reveal such an important part of the movie without spoiler-tags.

 

[trevanian]

Wow, I must have totally missed the rule stating that I'm only allowed to post in threads where I agree with the idea expressed in the thread title/original post.

And yet that is precisely the dominant attitude over in the Trek XI forum, where "naysayers" were surrounded and torn apart like a caterpillar surrounded by army ants.

I read this a lot, but I actually never experienced that. I spend a lot of time in the Trek XI forum and believe me, in the past I have often voiced concerns about this new movie myself (hell, even now, after having actually seen it, I have many problems with it; and I won't shy away from posting about them). But there wasn't one single time where I was surrounded and torn apart. So, I don't think it has anything to do with having another opinion. I'm thinking it has something to do with the attitude in which one voices this opinion.

It also has to do with the history of the dissenting posters, and the history of their vocal majority opposition. Plus it has to do with warnings being handed out in what seems to be a strongly unbalanced fashion, along with thread closures seeming to hinge on which side got the last unwarned jab in before the 'clang.'

Apparently (and I only got some notion of this via outside communications) some of it may even have to do with personal habits and inclinations of posters, who are then presupposing dissimilar inclinations among those with dissenting views. There was something like this at WaldenBooks in the west coast region during the 80s and into the 90s, where if you were of a certain social group (or chummy with those of a certain social group), you got promoted locally over better-qualified workers, who would be hounded and/or transferred (exiled) to a pseudo-promotion in some relatively backwater state far away.

So at least some of this is not content-related so much as a matter of just being like cliques, virtual or otherwise. And with a certain amount of values probably as suspect in netspace as any other kind.