Shinzon: a Human clone pisssed at the Federation because he's a clone of Picard MADE BY THE ROMULANS and TOSSED ON REMUS BY THE ROMULANS who feels that the Feds stand in the Reman's way INSTEAD OF THE ROMULANS THAT ARE ENSLAVING THEM.
I'll try.You say lots of people loved this movie for the same reasons those same people hated Enterprise and Voyager?
Provide examples.
People bashed VOY for the over use of time travel. Here we have it. Critics bashed B&B's idea of someone going back in time to change Trek history with FG/Temporal Cold War and fucking over the Trek universe. That's exactly what Abrams did and everyone is loving it.
B&B gave more attention and reaction to Earth's attack by a probe on ENT than this film did to the actual destruction of Vulcan.
People complained that FG was just a plot device yet Nero is just as much of one.
People complained that B&B resorted to appealing to the hornboys with Seven & T'Pol in a catsuit yet I hear nothing of Uhura's superfluous striptease.
People complained that ENT just recycled earlier stories. Here we have a bald Romulan villian with a big old weapon that is heading towards Earth to destroy it because of a personal grudge with a member of the crew.
People complained that namedropping didn't substitute for a good story when ENT made mention of Malurians etc but everyone is all besides themselves over mentioning Delta Vega, Archer, Porthos etc.
People complained that VOY/ENT relied on action and VFX rather than good writing. Yet XI is great.
People complained about stunt casting like with Brent Spiner or the rumor of Shatner in ENT yet Nimoy isn't?!?
And you really believe i can look through thousands of posts to find a specific example?Well, come to think of it, just look at the post above you. 'had ZERO internal consistancy or adherence to its own premise' for VOY - i think the same could be said for ST09 and yet it isn't a problem for this poster.
Here's what I think the over-all issue is. You've seen people complain about things in those other series or movies that you personally perceive in Trek 2009. The only problem? You can't (or just haven't, take your pick) tie the complaints and lack of complaints to the same people. You've seen people complain about those certain things, but there is no proof that those exact people are overlooking those issues.
Or it's an issue where you personally think those mistakes are happening, but people don't agree.
Or it might be an issue where your complaints are so broad and non-specific, that you can make them apply to both series. How were people complaining about cliches? What specifically did folks think about time travel in the other movies and series? How do we know that you're not just making the complaints so broad that they will fit your needs?
Or maybe it's just an issue that you didn't like the movie, and feel that the folks who did like it must defend themselves to you rather than like it themselves.
Most of the characters are shadows of their former. The key is in the budget, mo money means mo ... well you know.
Most of the characters are shadows of their former. The key is in the budget, mo money means mo ... well you know.
Uhura, Sulu, Chekov and Chapel were pretty much shadows in most of TOS!
Uhura, Sulu and Chekov got more to do and say in this new movie than their predecessors' entire body of ST TV work in TOS.
And you really believe i can look through thousands of posts to find a specific example?Well, come to think of it, just look at the post above you. 'had ZERO internal consistancy or adherence to its own premise' for VOY - i think the same could be said for ST09 and yet it isn't a problem for this poster.
No, I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt that this was an actual trend you had noticed BEFORE you made your backhanded swipe at those who dared to like this movie.
You didn't.
You just had a vague feeling of resentment toward your fellow fans, casual moviegoers and movie critics, all of whom like a movie you don't.
Shinzon: a Human clone pisssed at the Federation because he's a clone of Picard MADE BY THE ROMULANS and TOSSED ON REMUS BY THE ROMULANS who feels that the Feds stand in the Reman's way INSTEAD OF THE ROMULANS THAT ARE ENSLAVING THEM.
Shinzon already had his revenge on Romulus: he killed the entire Senate. He then decided to destroy the UFP because that was a goal the pompous Romulan Senate had never been able to achieve.
the ruling members who are basically a small part of the population that enslaved his Reman buddies
14 posts... 14 today.
It's an intelligence test.
Anybody like to say 'recurring sockpuppet?'
Lets put it this way. Do you see the flaws I listed in the previous productions? Do you see them in ST09? If yes or no, why? If you see the same in both, why do you think one iks better than the other?
But why, what's so different in St09 in comparison to Nemesis? And i mean a little more detailed, you gave detailed descriptions for everything except the new movie.
Then you’re just assuming, and your entire argument falls apart if it isn’t the same people. Have you considered that you’re not getting any people defending against your primary argument because you’re asking the wrong people, or that there are very few people that fit the profile?Here's what I think the over-all issue is. You've seen people complain about things in those other series or movies that you personally perceive in Trek 2009. The only problem? You can't (or just haven't, take your pick) tie the complaints and lack of complaints to the same people. You've seen people complain about those certain things, but there is no proof that those exact people are overlooking those issues.
Well, no, of course I can't give you solid proof about the same exact persons. But I can draw a reasonable conclusion, based on the reaction of most people in the first and in the second case.
Ok.Or it's an issue where you personally think those mistakes are happening, but people don't agree.
Ok, completely possible. But then, please, i listed a number of complaints in the very first post, explain to me why you don't agree.
Enterprise was a case of fanboys being fanboys and pissing themselves because the writers screwed up. ST09 didn’t screw with canon, it made its own canon, hence the words “alternate reality”. And it wasn’t a screw up either, the writers were bold and made it obvious what their intent was.When Enterprise played with canon and continuity it was a big deal, now Abrams and co. take the easy route and throw it away, and now - canon and continuity aren't really that important (just to make clear, i'm not a canonboy, i didn't complain about it in ENT, i'm just observing).
No, this was pretty well a constant throughout the entire franchise. The DS9 Baseball episode, anyone?When they made Vulcans arogant and unlikable it was bashed. Now the movie makes them out and out racists and it's fine. And ENT even resolved that with the whole kirshara thing in the fourth season.
Unless you are referring to the very, very end, I don’t see this at all. The entire mood of the movie shifted after the destruction of Vulcan.Voyager was bashed for the crew and the mood being too happy for a ship alone in the other side of the galaxy. Now, Vulcan is destroyed (i would say just for the shock factor), and yet by the end of the movie by the action of the charachters and the general atmosphere you couldn't tell a BSG-scale genocide just took place (ahem, 6 billion people, please! ). Yes, we see Spock agonizing a bit (though to me seems it was more because of the death of his mother), but the rest, well, y'know it's sad and all but we can't ruin Kirk becoming captain. It's not as bad as the oldBSG and the casino planet, but you get the gist.
Again, your opinion. I thought Kirk made a huge change from the beginning to the end.People complained charachters on Voyager never changed. Well, Kirk jr doesn't really change either. No journey, no consequences for his actions (say, cheating), nothing, he's just destined to become The Captain.
Kim never getting promoted never bothered me. Kirk getting promoted didn’t bother me. In fact, they have entire threads devoted to the discussion of Kirk getting promoted, with several reasonable reasons listed. For example, the kid took command and saved all of the Federation. Nothing big. Aren’t you bothered by anyone else? Ships being sent lots of cadets to work? Other cadets currently in the academy having real ranks? Uhura? McCoy?Harry Kim was ridiculed for remaining an ensign for seven years (and if you want to go even further back, Wesley for becoming just an ensign). Now Kirk, completely inexperienced, barely out of the academy, if even that, gets the flagship! But hey, it's not really important for the story, so it's ok.
Find me a movie or TV show that lacks these.Going on - plotholes, inconsistencies,
Addressed earlier in the thread.Technobbable - i was amazed to see some reviews praising it for getting rid of technobable - ahem, red matter? Transport in warp over how many light years pulled out of the hat? The drilling rig conveniently blocking transporters and coms?
Ok, I’ll do startrekwatcher’s too in a second. Find me a movie or TV show that doesn’t have clichés. The issue is when they’re abused… say, in every episode or multiple times in the episode. You’re right, time travel wasn’t needed in this case. But do you know why it was used this time? To throw the fans a bone. This way, the writers could do whatever they wanted with fewer pissy fans getting on their case. And I thought it was done well.Or it might be an issue where your complaints are so broad and non-specific, that you can make them apply to both series. How were people complaining about cliches? What specifically did folks think about time travel in the other movies and series? How do we know that you're not just making the complaints so broad that they will fit your needs?
Because i tried to give you some specific examples, and i believe startrekwatcher did the same. Anyway, in how many ways can you exactly complain about a cliche? Say, Time travel - you can say it's overused, not needed or badly executed. I believe all those complaints were put up against the earlier treks and i put it up against STXI as well.
Voyager is a weekly show. It shouldn’t need to rely on time travel every couple of episodes to come up with ideas. Did anyone doubt that everything would get fixed in the end with Enterprise? I think the issues had more to do with the episode itself, and the fact that it inevitably would be fixed.I'll try.You say lots of people loved this movie for the same reasons those same people hated Enterprise and Voyager?
Provide examples.
People bashed VOY for the over use of time travel. Here we have it. Critics bashed B&B's idea of someone going back in time to change Trek history with FG/Temporal Cold War and fucking over the Trek universe. That's exactly what Abrams did and everyone is loving it.
And? Enterprise had a whole season plus some to deal with people’s reactions. ST09 had 2 hours to deal with reactions and get on with the story. And how is B&B dealing with people’s reactions a complaint?B&B gave more attention and reaction to Earth's attack by a probe on ENT than this film did to the actual destruction of Vulcan.
Future guy literally did nothing but stand around and talk, and he literally disappeared when they were done with him. Nero was a real villain. Maybe not a well done one, but he was at least a villain.People complained that FG was just a plot device yet Nero is just as much of one.
“Superfluous striptease?” really? Again, it’s a difference between a 2 minute bit in a movie and a series long thing.People complained that B&B resorted to appealing to the hornboys with Seven & T'Pol in a catsuit yet I hear nothing of Uhura's superfluous striptease.
When you oversimplify it that much, yeah you can find something that matches. The complaints against VOY were literally that they switched names and did the exact same story.People complained that ENT just recycled earlier stories. Here we have a bald Romulan villian with a big old weapon that is heading towards Earth to destroy it because of a personal grudge with a member of the crew.
I see more people complaining about Delta Vega , Archer, and Porthos than getting “besides themselves”. In fact, most of the discussion for Archer and Porthos is nitpicking.People complained that namedropping didn't substitute for a good story when ENT made mention of Malurians etc but everyone is all besides themselves over mentioning Delta Vega, Archer, Porthos etc.
Again, you’re picking on opinions. You don’t think that ST09 was well written. That doesn’t make it factPeople complained that VOY/ENT relied on action and VFX rather than good writing. Yet XI is great.
Spiner played a different character than what he’s known for, as Shatner would have. Nimoy played his original character and his character had a real something to do with the story.People complained about stunt casting like with Brent Spiner or the rumor of Shatner in ENT yet Nimoy isn't?!?
Emphasis mine. You're assuming through extension that people disliked the listed shows and movies for the same reasons you did.Please, don't start going personal, i have no wish for that.
I said, it was just a feeling i got by surfing on the net. I DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF. I'm just drawing a conclusion and i may be wrong. The way I see it: 1)most people didn't like VOY, ENT and NEM (ratings, critics, general view)
2)most people like this movie
3)I see the same flaws in both
4)therefore, i see a contradiction
It wasn't anything specific, directed to anybody in particular. Maybe i didn't phrase the title well. Lets put it this way. Do you see the flaws I listed in the previous productions? Do you see them in ST09? If yes or no, why? If you see the same in both, why do you think one is better than the other?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.