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

[number6]

Yes, but what does that have to do with him eating the apple during the test? Thats idiotic. If thats a reference then fine, but I didn't get it. He was eating an apple because he was in the GENESIS cave! Thats a lousy reference, if it is that! I'm sorry thats another reason to hate the movie. Horrible! :-)

OMG. Kirk eats an apple. The New Film=Teh Suck!


FAIL.

Calm down, that was a joke. Boy, you guys just can't take critisism of the film well. There are so many reasons why the new movie sucks the apple is the least of its problems.

You have yet to provide a cogent line of reasoning beyond a bunch of name calling and eye rolling. That to me is hardly a convincing argument, therefore: YOU FAIL.

There are, in fact, two things that bother me about the film, but neither are deal breakers. The only sense I'm getting from the naysayers is that they failed to exactly replicate the TV show. That is unrealistic given what the film needed to accomplish: Restart the franchise by bringing in a new generation of fans.
Outside a very small handful of implacable dissenters on the intrawebs, this film seems to have accomplished that.

 

[Gepard]

The only sense I'm getting from the naysayers is that they failed to exactly replicate the TV show.

Really? GodBen and I are hurt.

 

[Michael]

The only sense I'm getting from the naysayers is that they failed to exactly replicate the TV show.

Really? GodBen and I are hurt.

That's because you are actually mehsayers – not naysayers.

 

[Gepard]

Ooh, mehsayers. I like that.

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

As for the wheelchair, you would admit that the chair Pike ended in nuTrek is very different from the one he ended up in the realTrek.

Of course, but it underlines the sense of fate in these parallel universes. That something draws certain events together. Like the timeline trying to repair itself after Nero's intervention. Thus, no matter how different his life is, Pike is destined to end up in a wheelchair. No matter how different his life is, Kirk is destined to captain the Enterprise. Etc.

Or it could just be ill-thought out fanwank. You know, simplest explanation and all that. I think you are severely overestimating the calibre of Star Trek's writing.

 

[ST-One]

As for the wheelchair, you would admit that the chair Pike ended in nuTrek is very different from the one he ended up in the realTrek.

Of course, but it underlines the sense of fate in these parallel universes. That something draws certain events together. Like the timeline trying to repair itself after Nero's intervention. Thus, no matter how different his life is, Pike is destined to end up in a wheelchair. No matter how different his life is, Kirk is destined to captain the Enterprise. Etc.

Or it could just be ill-thought out fanwank. You know, simplest explanation and all that. I think you are severely overestimating the calibre of Star Trek's writing.

Of course it's fan-wank. What else could it be?

 

[Warped9]

I loved the movie, but like Brutal Strudel, I can see several reasons why people may not like it. However, it does boggle my mind that a huge fan of TOS would find nothing at all to like, especially since there are so many winks and nods to the original series and films. It seems more like exaggeration and hyperbole than an actual opinion.

I won't even try to change anyone's opinion of the film, but I would like to know that there is a little common ground that those on opposite sides of the fence can agree on.

I really don't think those are winks and nods for the fans. Every wink and nod has to do with the Star Trek methos that has entered the everyday, popular culture. For example, fazers on stun, or "I'm a doctor not a...." It not for the fans as much as for the general public.

I quite agree.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

But a lot of the stuff--like Admiral Komack being on Kirk's academic review board--are stuff only fans would notice. Thing is, as this board--nay, as this thread--demonstrates, there are many different kinds of fans who demand many different kinds of things from Star Trek. For a great many, a dumb plot and largely nuance-free caricatures are fine so long as the movie is "fun" and the fanwank quotient (which is seldom well-thought out by definition) is high. Throw in the added benefit that the critics are gaga over this movie, box office is strong and thus Star Trek is "popular" (don't kid yourselves, though: in the mass mind, trekkies are most certainly not), and you have a film that a lot of fans are gonna love.

For me, this movie has occasioned a kind of crisis of faith. So many fans have jumped into the fray with what boils down to "Star Trek was always this stupid, stupid!" that I've begun to wonder: why was I ever the fan of something so dumb to begin with? I mean, I get why I liked it as a kid--I liked Marvel Comics as kid but I grew out of them. Sure, I'll still read them on occasion but I won't enter into long, drawn-out debates over them nor will I bother with their movies if they look even remotely like a waste of my time or money--I haven't seen either FF movie and I passed on Wolverine. Meanwhile, this vaguely diverting but essentially hollow film got 30 of my dollars. Why?

On the other hand, why do I insist that the bloated, unbalanced and humorless TMP is a good movie because it paws at ideas a dozen other films--science fiction and mainstream--have handled with far greater dexterity? But that's an easy one to answer: because, when I was 9, it was the smartest SF aimed at my juvenile brain, and it easily surpassed twaddle like BSG and The Black Hole. Hell, for all its undisputed entertainment value, it easily surpassed Star Wars. But I'm not 9 anymore.

I've said it before: the fan in me hated this movie. But the part of me that just figured "Ahh, it's just a kandy kolored remake of a kandy kolored show from the sixties that was pretty dumb at least half the time" got a real kick out of what was, essentially, a multi-million dollar Gold Key comic. Apparently, that's the part of me that rules the day. And here's the kicker: Orci and Kurtzman claim to be fans (primarily of TNG but still...) and I take them at their word.

 

[Aike]

For me, this movie has occasioned a kind of crisis of faith. So many fans have jumped into the fray with what boils down to "Star Trek was always this stupid, stupid!" that I've begun to wonder: why was I ever the fan of something so dumb to begin with?

No, TOS wasn´t always this stupid. Sometimes it was worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7jJhUl3rgk

 

[Brutal Strudel]

For me, this movie has occasioned a kind of crisis of faith. So many fans have jumped into the fray with what boils down to "Star Trek was always this stupid, stupid!" that I've begun to wonder: why was I ever the fan of something so dumb to begin with?

No, TOS wasn´t always this stupid. Sometimes it was worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7jJhUl3rgk

See what I mean?

(Though saying the movie is better than the nadir of TOS is damning it with faint praise indeed.)

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Oh, and I would've linked to Melvin Belli, myself.

 

[ST-One]

But a lot of the stuff--like Admiral Komack being on Kirk's academic review board--are stuff only fans would notice. Thing is, as this board--nay, as this thread--demonstrates, there are many different kinds of fans who demand many different kinds of things from Star Trek. For a great many, a dumb plot and largely nuance-free caricatures are fine so long as the movie is "fun" and the fanwank quotient (which is seldom well-thought out by definition) is high. Throw in the added benefit that the critics are gaga over this movie, box office is strong and thus Star Trek is "popular" (don't kid yourselves, though: in the mass mind, trekkies are most certainly not), and you have a film that a lot of fans are gonna love.

I'm not quite sure whether you've just insulted those who liked the film or TOS itself, since so many think that Star Trek perfectly captured the general feel of TOS: action, fun, entertainment, a little bit of depth and a generally optimistic outlook on the future.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I've insulted no one and I've insulted nothing.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Or it could just be ill-thought out fanwank. You know, simplest explanation and all that. I think you are severely overestimating the calibre of Star Trek's writing.

Or you're underestimating.

The simplest explanation to me is that it's a cleverly written set of parallels. They put in more than I expected! Pike's TMP-inspired admiral's uniform was a huge thrill for me!

Maybe I like "fanwank".

 

[ST-One]

I've insulted no one and I've insulted nothing.

Then it must be due to my poor grasp of the English language that I read your post as describing those of us who see the film as a worthy representation of TOS as sheep.

Yeah, that must be it.

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

Or it could just be ill-thought out fanwank. You know, simplest explanation and all that. I think you are severely overestimating the calibre of Star Trek's writing.

Or you're underestimating.

The simplest explanation to me is that it's a cleverly written set of parallels.

Maybe I like "fanwank".

It's been said countless times already, but I fail to see the brilliance of a script that has a Vulcan captain, eject an unconcious, if unruly element, out the side of a ship with a perfectly functional brig, so he can land on a random icy planet, where he will not only meet the older version of that Vulcan, but the soon to be chief engineer as well.

Great writing that.

 

[ST-One]

Or it could just be ill-thought out fanwank. You know, simplest explanation and all that. I think you are severely overestimating the calibre of Star Trek's writing.

Or you're underestimating.

The simplest explanation to me is that it's a cleverly written set of parallels. They put in more than I expected! Pike's TMP-inspired admiral's uniform was a huge thrill for me!

Maybe I like "fanwank".

Me too.
Especially when it doesn't get in the way of telling the story.

 

[Aike]

For me, this movie has occasioned a kind of crisis of faith. So many fans have jumped into the fray with what boils down to "Star Trek was always this stupid, stupid!" that I've begun to wonder: why was I ever the fan of something so dumb to begin with?

No, TOS wasn´t always this stupid. Sometimes it was worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7jJhUl3rgk

See what I mean?

(Though saying the movie is better than the nadir of TOS is damning it with faint praise indeed.)

Seriously, though, I don´t think TOS in general was stupid, dumb or cheesy. The series was serious, but also playful.

According to the book The Survivor Personality, the best survivors in life are that too. In other words, they are paradoxical like real life. This is also true of TOS since Roddenberry and the other writers were survivors. They lived through the Great Depression and some of them fought in World War 2. So being both serious and playful came naturally to them and it showed in the writing.

The new movie is one of the few Star Trek productions since TAS where the writers actually have respected that. Way too many have hated the playfulness. And in my view, the mix of seriousness and playfulness is why the movie succeeds.

 

[bismarck_1892]

OMG. Kirk eats an apple. The New Film=Teh Suck!


FAIL.

Calm down, that was a joke. Boy, you guys just can't take critisism of the film well. There are so many reasons why the new movie sucks the apple is the least of its problems.

You have yet to provide a cogent line of reasoning beyond a bunch of name calling and eye rolling. That to me is hardly a convincing argument, therefore: YOU FAIL.

There are, in fact, two things that bother me about the film, but neither are deal breakers. The only sense I'm getting from the naysayers is that they failed to exactly replicate the TV show. That is unrealistic given what the film needed to accomplish: Restart the franchise by bringing in a new generation of fans.
Outside a very small handful of implacable dissenters on the intrawebs, this film seems to have accomplished that.

No, the goal of the movie makers, as any other movie, was to make be a good movie. What you state is the wish of a Trek starved fan.

I didn't like the story. In my book it failed in its goal. It failed largely because it moved away from being Trek, aside for some eye candy of special effects, uniforms, sounds, names and planets. In other words, it was superfishal. However, that has been the case with many, if not all, of the latest TNG films. So in that respect it is Trek but a mere shadow of what it can truly be.

 

[bismarck_1892]

But a lot of the stuff--like Admiral Komack being on Kirk's academic review board--are stuff only fans would notice. Thing is, as this board--nay, as this thread--demonstrates, there are many different kinds of fans who demand many different kinds of things from Star Trek. For a great many, a dumb plot and largely nuance-free caricatures are fine so long as the movie is "fun" and the fanwank quotient (which is seldom well-thought out by definition) is high. Throw in the added benefit that the critics are gaga over this movie, box office is strong and thus Star Trek is "popular" (don't kid yourselves, though: in the mass mind, trekkies are most certainly not), and you have a film that a lot of fans are gonna love.

For me, this movie has occasioned a kind of crisis of faith. So many fans have jumped into the fray with what boils down to "Star Trek was always this stupid, stupid!" that I've begun to wonder: why was I ever the fan of something so dumb to begin with? I mean, I get why I liked it as a kid--I liked Marvel Comics as kid but I grew out of them. Sure, I'll still read them on occasion but I won't enter into long, drawn-out debates over them nor will I bother with their movies if they look even remotely like a waste of my time or money--I haven't seen either FF movie and I passed on Wolverine. Meanwhile, this vaguely diverting but essentially hollow film got 30 of my dollars. Why?

On the other hand, why do I insist that the bloated, unbalanced and humorless TMP is a good movie because it paws at ideas a dozen other films--science fiction and mainstream--have handled with far greater dexterity? But that's an easy one to answer: because, when I was 9, it was the smartest SF aimed at my juvenile brain, and it easily surpassed twaddle like BSG and The Black Hole. Hell, for all its undisputed entertainment value, it easily surpassed Star Wars. But I'm not 9 anymore.

I've said it before: the fan in me hated this movie. But the part of me that just figured "Ahh, it's just a kandy kolored remake of a kandy kolored show from the sixties that was pretty dumb at least half the time" got a real kick out of what was, essentially, a multi-million dollar Gold Key comic. Apparently, that's the part of me that rules the day. And here's the kicker: Orci and Kurtzman claim to be fans (primarily of TNG but still...) and I take them at their word.

Well put.