I've never seen it but that Stargate thing seems like it's been on for about 30 years now. Surely it has amassed a huge and annoying body of "canon" that people can lose themselves in.
Trek 09 disapproval questioned.
- Thread starter Ihlecreations
- Start date
I've never seen it but that Stargate thing seems like it's been on for about 30 years now. Surely it has amassed a huge and annoying body of "canon" that people can lose themselves in.
Actually it's only been a little over 10 years.
Was not his game-o.
Sixteen, if you go back to the original movie.
I question your disapproval of Yelchin's accent.
Not really, I just wanted to make a point; you are guilty of the same disapproval you are shining the light upon. Others disapprove of some aspect of the film in the same way as you do about the accent.
Exactly so.
The Kobyashi Maru has always presented a problem - if Kirk really expected to get away with cheating, that makes him quite the douchebag. OTOH, if the point was to publicly challenge the premise of the test it's more understandable.
Thank you Dennis...(was beginning to think nobody agreed with this...)
I've seen several posters rant on about how bad They felt that scene was written, but in the In-Universe Context for which it was meant, it was played perfectly and quite nicely dovetails into what We were given during The Wrath of Khan incident.
(even with the alternate-reality divergence.)
startrekrcks
Fleet Captain
why are fans really harsh on this movie does it kill Star Trek just because it is different.
No, it does not, and you're making reflex "why don't you like the movie" posts again. Please show me that you're continuing to try not to spam.
Why are some fans really harsh on TAS?
Why are some fans really harsh on ST: TMP?
Why are some fans really harsh on ST IV?
Why are almost all fans really harsh on ST V?
Why are some fans really harsh on TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT?
Because ST fans have varied opinions and no one production is ever going to satisfy everyone.
I liked the Kobyashi Meru scene, at first. The thing is now, I realized that the main point of the original test, the big moment of it, was that he had to make the decision to enter the Neutral Zone. That wasn't in the new film.
Again... It was his THIRD TIME... Of course that wasn't shown...
There was no reason to show his thought process about entering the Neutral Zone this time around because he had already tried both outcomes the first two times and lost in each...
He was there this time to show the Folks behind the glass, that he didn't believe in the No-Win Scenario...
No matter what it took.
And that is exactly what the writers of the film wanted Us to see.
There was no reason to show his thought process about entering the Neutral Zone this time around because he had already tried both outcomes the first two times and lost in each...
He was there this time to show the Folks behind the glass, that he didn't believe in the No-Win Scenario...
No matter what it took.
And that is exactly what the writers of the film wanted Us to see.
You missed the point. Starfleet 'orders' them to rescue the Kobayashi Maru, there by robbing one of the many elements that gives the test it's crucial meaning. In the original, there was no Starfleet giving them orders. They were alone and were given a difficult choice. Do they violate the treaty and face possible destruction, or continue on their way? The decision that forces the cadets to choose is as fear inducing as facing a futile battle with the Klingons. It's not about being shot by klingons that makes it a no-win, it's about how you deal with a situation that no matter what you choose, there is no positive outcome.
One day when someone takes something you love and changes it in a way you don't like then things will have come full circle and you'll "get it." And this phenomenon isn't restricted to Trek. It happens all the time with many popular characters of fiction and it happens with movie remakes and even music. It even happens with adapting literary works to film whether they be novels or graphic novels or comics.
It isn't just a simple matter of hating something because it's new. In fact I often suspect that people invoke that excuse as a way of dismissing and discrediting the dissenters. People can dislike something new simply because they don't like how the new was changed from the old and not for the better (in their opinion). Also I'm pretty sure that if you listen close enough to some dissenters you learn that there were indeed new versions of things that they preferred over the old.
It's not always a knee-jerk reaction and you're not being fair if you qualify everyone who disagrees with you as such.
And having been on this site for some years I will say that often enough I suspect that it isn't that you disagree or dislike something new, but that you have the temerity to actually voice that dissenting viewpoint in face of what may seem like a majority approval.
Last edited:
Presumably, Kirk did enter the Neutral Zone the previous two times and was defeated both times. Dismissing the ship's message as a trap set by the enemy leads to disaster every time. Attempting to reach the stranded vessel leads to disaster every time. Changing the test parameters, to defeat the enemy vessels, proves a point: that Kirk doesn't like to lose, and it shows him to be a compassionate leader capable of original thinking.
What's not to like?
But it's not our fault that you love TOS in such a narrow way that no one can ever make a new version that meets with your approval. I'm actually surprised you include TMP in your personal canon, because it's quite a departure from the previous body of ST work.
Some of us love TOS, TAS, TMP, ST II, ST IV, TMP, TNG and JJ's ST 2009 equally. It's sad that you can't enjoy the many variations of ST that many of us do, and that you chose not to see this new film on opening night and drink in the excitement of the crowds relishing a revival of a great franchise. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations (IDIC), after all.
I don't hate it, and don't really have too much issue with any canon revision.
The things that simply didn't make sense, or were far too contrived, were of more annoyance, though I think the film was a fun enough ride that they didn't bother me so much - at least on the first couple of viewings.
However, I tried to watch it on DVD today, and couldn't get through more than 25 minutes. Without the effects and sound in all the glory of a cinema (and not IMAX, because I hated it there), it loses so much of its impact, and leaves a pretty mediocre film.
I do like the commentary, so the DVD wasn't a total waste.
Some of us love a much wider range of Trek than that, and have to deal with far more negativity than this film gets.
The things that simply didn't make sense, or were far too contrived, were of more annoyance, though I think the film was a fun enough ride that they didn't bother me so much - at least on the first couple of viewings.
However, I tried to watch it on DVD today, and couldn't get through more than 25 minutes. Without the effects and sound in all the glory of a cinema (and not IMAX, because I hated it there), it loses so much of its impact, and leaves a pretty mediocre film.
I do like the commentary, so the DVD wasn't a total waste.
Some of us love a much wider range of Trek than that, and have to deal with far more negativity than this film gets.
The fact that rather than changing the parameters to allow for some plausible alternative outcome, he just arranges for an inexplicable stroke of miraculous luck to save him, and moreover swaggers through the exercise making it clear that he knows what the result will be.
Granted, this is kind of a precursor for how most of the rest of the film turns out... but even so, the dominant impression it leaves isn't "I'm clever" but "I'm cheating."
(It also bugged me, BTW, that once the enemy ships are defenseless, he chooses to destroy them rather than offering terms for surrender.)
This is the "new and improved" Star Trek. Mercy is not a trait that is admired in this universe.
