How would we be reacting if this movie flopped?

[Overgeeked]

Alas its one of my failings, but in my defence english isnt my first langunage.
But your point is well taken.

Then I apologize sir, that was presumptuous and rude.

May be its possible to get to point in your life where the pleasure of an evening watching a fun entertaining film with your spouse and adult & teen offspring (and everybody enjoyed) more than makes up for any plot holes.

Could I see the plot holes - of course - I'm not an idiot. Did it affect my enjoyment? No. Was it a ripping yarn? Yes.

That's the thing, I love ripping yarns (I wish more people would use the word yarn in this context). I'm a big pulp head (addicted to pulp fiction from the 20s-40s (especially the SF stuff). I love Tarzan of the Apes, Journey to the Center of the Earth, all those kinds of books, all the Mummy films, anything pulpy and action-adventure I eat 'em up. This was a great action-adventure film, I was just expecting something more like the Star Trek I remembered. Specifically the tiny moral nugget found in some episodes and other movies, and a better written script. Unfortunately, I found neither.

There's a skill that modern viewers seem to lack that I have honed throughout my life... it's called "suspension of disbelief." It's the ability to give yourself to a story and let it happen, to absorb without judging, to go along for the ride. The film didn't need to be perfect, it needed to entertain, excite and enthrall me... and it did so in spades.

It was... fun.

I hate to tell you that modern viewer have suspension of disbelief in spades. Myself in particular. I have particularly bizarre taste in film. I've loved many of the Trek flicks, even some others hate. But there is a certain point at which, when reached, that suspension breaks. This film simply went way to far in all those contrivances, coincidences, and plot holes.

I'm probably just a bit older than you, Dale. It's a sad commentary on education today, I guess, when something so basic and yet so necesaary for the enjoyment of fiction (willing suspension of disbelief), has to be spelled out like you just did.

A few things that are even more important are critical reasoning, communication skills, logic (how to use it as well as how to avoid fallacies). The apparent lack of same is also telling of some people's education.

 

[Trilliam]

Like in my previous post if you cant express why you like something, then your like for that said thing is shallow, and would not stand up to reasoning.

As I said earlier, I have been enjoying Trek since 1969. I buy the novels regularly and we own all dvd sets. How much more of a fan can one person be?

But we are talking about a movie - not a treatise on World Peace or the cure for cancer. I do not need to analyse why the film appeals to me as a long time fan, or why my 16yo non-Trek fan daughter enjoyed it either. It's enough for me to know both she and I had a good time watching it together. At my age, I find that I have less and less patience for others who insist that unless I can articulate exactly why I feel the way I do, I'm shallow or don't understand, or am thick.

 

[Dale]

Well I think your judgementalism and overanalytical nature, Overgeeked, are robbing you of a lot of potential enjoyment.

This was an origin story. It was about the birth of friendships, about budding loyalty, about bravery in the face of overwhelming odds. It was about pragmatic action versus stringent rule-following. It was about derring-freakin'-do. The genesis and birth of future legends. That it wasn't a fable with a moral doesn't matter to me. It was thrilling and funny and charmed the socks off of me.

Now that all the pieces are in place and the future is wide open, I wouldn't mind a story with a bit more gravitas next time... but if the next film lacks that dimension and is, yet, as entertaining as this one, I'll consider it another win and my money well spent.

 

[Tentacle]

Like in my previous post if you cant express why you like something, then your like for that said thing is shallow, and would not stand up to reasoning.

As I said earlier, I have been enjoying Trek since 1969. I buy the novels regularly and we own all dvd sets. How much more of a fan can one person be?

But we are talking about a movie - not a treatise on World Peace or the cure for cancer. I do not need to analyse why the film appeals to me as a long time fan, or why my 16yo non-Trek fan daughter enjoyed it either.

Well that just goes back to my point of people liking this movie out of a general warm and fuzzy feeling.

While people who dislike the movie, dislike it on an intellectual basis.

 

[Dale]

Like in my previous post if you cant express why you like something, then your like for that said thing is shallow, and would not stand up to reasoning.

As I said earlier, I have been enjoying Trek since 1969. I buy the novels regularly and we own all dvd sets. How much more of a fan can one person be?

But we are talking about a movie - not a treatise on World Peace or the cure for cancer. I do not need to analyse why the film appeals to me as a long time fan, or why my 16yo non-Trek fan daughter enjoyed it either.

Well that just goes back to my point of people liking this movie out of a general warm and fuzzy feeling.

While people who dislike the movie, dislike it on an intellectual basis.

Or are being overly pedantic and robbing themselves of a good time because they're joyless armchair critcs...

Do you understand that you just called us vapid?

 

[Trilliam]

May be its possible to get to point in your life where the pleasure of an evening watching a fun entertaining film with your spouse and adult & teen offspring (and everybody enjoyed) more than makes up for any plot holes.

Could I see the plot holes - of course - I'm not an idiot. Did it affect my enjoyment? No. Was it a ripping yarn? Yes.

That's the thing, I love ripping yarns (I wish more people would use the word yarn in this context). I'm a big pulp head (addicted to pulp fiction from the 20s-40s (especially the SF stuff). I love Tarzan of the Apes, Journey to the Center of the Earth, all those kinds of books, all the Mummy films, anything pulpy and action-adventure I eat 'em up. This was a great action-adventure film, I was just expecting something more like the Star Trek I remembered. Specifically the tiny moral nugget found in some episodes and other movies, and a better written script. Unfortunately, I found neither.

See, now I saw this film as an outgrowth/extension/grown up versions of the "Biggles" type stories, "Boys Own" and "Girls Own" annuals, "Nancy Drew" and "The Famous Five" type. Oh lordy, I'm getting old.

 

[Feofilakt]

As I said earlier, I have been enjoying Trek since 1969. I buy the novels regularly and we own all dvd sets. How much more of a fan can one person be?

But we are talking about a movie - not a treatise on World Peace or the cure for cancer. I do not need to analyse why the film appeals to me as a long time fan, or why my 16yo non-Trek fan daughter enjoyed it either.

Well that just goes back to my point of people liking this movie out of a general warm and fuzzy feeling.

While people who dislike the movie, dislike it on an intellectual basis.

Or are being overly pedantic and robbing themselves of a good time because they're joyless armchair critcs...

Do you understand that you just called us vapid?

Well, the enjoyment of the film does appear to have more of an emotional basis rather than a rational one, so I have to agree with Tentacles there.

 

[Overgeeked]

At my age, I find that I have less and less patience for others who insist that unless I can articulate exactly why I feel the way I do, I'm shallow or don't understand, or am thick.

So I take it you hear that a lot. Good to know.

It would have taken less time to say why you like the film than typing your last few posts combined.

There are two options:
One can't articulate why.
One chooses not to.

If the former, then there is certainly an issue of understanding, capacity, or ability.
If the latter, then why come to a forum of generally hyper-articulate Trek geeks. This is a place for discussion and conversation. "I like it... 'cause." Won't suffice.

One's ability to respond is telling of one's mind.

If you just liked the 'splosions, fine, say so. If you're intrigued by the inter-play between the main characters and their environment, go for it. Just don't waste bits going on and on about how you don't have time to 'splain when you so clearly do. You presence here suggests a desire for discussion, yet you're essentially refusing to engage in said discussion. That makes sense.

 

[Trilliam]

Like in my previous post if you cant express why you like something, then your like for that said thing is shallow, and would not stand up to reasoning.

As I said earlier, I have been enjoying Trek since 1969. I buy the novels regularly and we own all dvd sets. How much more of a fan can one person be?

But we are talking about a movie - not a treatise on World Peace or the cure for cancer. I do not need to analyse why the film appeals to me as a long time fan, or why my 16yo non-Trek fan daughter enjoyed it either.

Well that just goes back to my point of people liking this movie out of a general warm and fuzzy feeling.

While people who dislike the movie, dislike it on an intellectual basis.

That just makes you sound pretentious.
Oh gosh, I must be stupid then - I'd better withdraw from the Grad Dip I'm currently doing.

 

[Dale]

At my age, I find that I have less and less patience for others who insist that unless I can articulate exactly why I feel the way I do, I'm shallow or don't understand, or am thick.

So I take it you hear that a lot. Good to know.

It would have taken less time to say why you like the film than typing your last few posts combined.

There are two options:
One can't articulate why.
One chooses not to.

If the former, then there is certainly an issue of understanding, capacity, or ability.
If the latter, then why come to a forum of generally hyper-articulate Trek geeks. This is a place for discussion and conversation. "I like it... 'cause." Won't suffice.

One's ability to respond is telling of one's mind.

If you just liked the 'splosions, fine, say so. If you're intrigued by the inter-play between the main characters and their environment, go for it. Just don't waste bits going on and on about how you don't have time to 'splain when you so clearly do. You presence here suggests a desire for discussion, yet you're essentially refusing to engage in said discussion. That makes sense.

What's your favorite ice cream flavor? Why is it superior to other flavors?

 

[Feofilakt]

At my age, I find that I have less and less patience for others who insist that unless I can articulate exactly why I feel the way I do, I'm shallow or don't understand, or am thick.

So I take it you hear that a lot. Good to know.

It would have taken less time to say why you like the film than typing your last few posts combined.

There are two options:
One can't articulate why.
One chooses not to.

If the former, then there is certainly an issue of understanding, capacity, or ability.
If the latter, then why come to a forum of generally hyper-articulate Trek geeks. This is a place for discussion and conversation. "I like it... 'cause." Won't suffice.

One's ability to respond is telling of one's mind.

If you just liked the 'splosions, fine, say so. If you're intrigued by the inter-play between the main characters and their environment, go for it. Just don't waste bits going on and on about how you don't have time to 'splain when you so clearly do. You presence here suggests a desire for discussion, yet you're essentially refusing to engage in said discussion. That makes sense.

Do you like chocolate? Why?

One can articulate why they like chocolate, ranging from the particular taste, the smell, the mouthfeel, even the emotional elevation they receive from eating it. It is also possible to describe chocolates in relation to both other chocolates and other foods.

So yeah, you can describe a subjective experience and relate it to other experiences. What is your point?

 

[Tentacle]

This was an origin story. It was about the birth of friendships, about budding loyalty, about bravery in the face of overwhelming odds. It was about pragmatic action versus stringent rule-following. It was about derring-freakin'-do.

That's the best pro take I have heard so far.
But sadly its based on a rosy lens.

This was an origin story.

sure enough

It was about the birth of friendships

well we did see spock becoming kirk's first officer.
But that is done very thinly, I fail to see why spock would like kirk other than the fact that it was ordained.

about budding loyalty

loyalty between nu-spock and nu-kirk? or old-spock and nu-kirk?
or is it between nu-kirk and pike?

about bravery in the face of overwhelming odds

I'll give you that.

It was about pragmatic action versus stringent rule-following. It was about derring-freakin'-do.

well I guess this is why the movie worked for you. The whole rebel without a cause thing is very appealing and liberating.

 

[Dale]

I'm done.

 

[Feofilakt]

I'm done.

Concession accepted.

 

[Trilliam]

At my age, I find that I have less and less patience for others who insist that unless I can articulate exactly why I feel the way I do, I'm shallow or don't understand, or am thick.

So I take it you hear that a lot. Good to know.

It would have taken less time to say why you like the film than typing your last few posts combined.

There are two options:
One can't articulate why.
One chooses not to.

If the former, then there is certainly an issue of understanding, capacity, or ability.
If the latter, then why come to a forum of generally hyper-articulate Trek geeks. This is a place for discussion and conversation. "I like it... 'cause." Won't suffice.

One's ability to respond is telling of one's mind.

If you just liked the 'splosions, fine, say so. If you're intrigued by the inter-play between the main characters and their environment, go for it. Just don't waste bits going on and on about how you don't have time to 'splain when you so clearly do. You presence here suggests a desire for discussion, yet you're essentially refusing to engage in said discussion. That makes sense.

1) No, I don't like explosions thankyou - I'm not a 16yo boy
2) I liked that they took the flirting in Charlie X and ran with it
3) I liked the casting -
4) I liked that George made the ultimate sacrifice ( I was starting to cry at that point)
5) I like that young Jim's behaviour (rebellious child) and that the older pre SF Kirk wasn't a nauseating goody two-shoes
6) I think that the bloke playing "Bones" is channelling DeForrest Kelley
7) Tht they ran with Spock being bullied as a child of 2 cultures
8) That this Spock was a bit like the Spock from "The Cage"
Need I go on?

Plus as i said before : the viewing context - it was a good family night out.

Oh yeah - don't talk down to me, I graduated from University too, thankyou.

Now I sound pretentious.

 

[Dale]

I'm done.

Concession accepted.

OK, I'm not quite done.

One does not concede to a brick wall. One simply wises up enough to stop beating one's head against it.

You have won nothing.

Now I'm done.

 

[Borgminister]

I'm done.

Concession accepted.

OK, I'm not quite done.

One does not concede to a brick wall. One simply wises up enough to stop beating one's head against it.

You have won nothing.

Now I'm done.

Data would love this pointless bickering...

 

[Overgeeked]

Oops.

 

[Feofilakt]

I'm done.

Concession accepted.

OK, I'm not quite done.

One does not concede to a brick wall. One simply wises up enough to stop beating one's head against it.

You have won nothing.

Now I'm done.

Concession accepted once more, you have bowed out of the argument due to your inability to argue your position effectively. A wise maneuver, but still a concession. So yes, you are done.

 

[Tentacle]

1) No, I don't like explosions thankyou - I'm not a 16yo boy
2) I liked that they took the flirting in Charlie X and ran with it
3) I liked the casting -
4) I liked that George made the ultimate sacrifice ( I was starting to cry at that point)
5) I like that young Jim's behaviour (rebellious child) rings true for angry with absent figures
6) I think that the bloke playing "Bones" is channelling DeForrest Kelley
7) Tht they ran with Spock being bullied as a child of 2 cultures
8) That this Spock was a bit like the Spock from "The Cage"
Need I go on?

Please do I find this lot more interesting than all the mindless cheers that I see in the past 2 weeks.

You basically listed all the reasons why I liked the movie at first.
But all this happened before the cadets got on the enterprise.
After that the movie fell apart completely.
And I'm basing my dislike for the film on the good latter part of it. And I do believe the latter part is the majority of the film, and the beginning of the movie plot.