"I like the new movie better..."

[JarodRussell]

So, again, what's the argument here?

Now this is bugging me. Discussions about the movie always go like this:

PERSON 1: I loooove this movie.
PERSON 2: It's soooo great.
PERSON 3: I hate this movie.
PERSON 1: (already slightly upset) Care to elaborate?
PERSON 3: Okay, here's why: ....
Then a discussion back and forth between Persons 1, 2 and 3 ensues. And eventually, Person 3's dislike of the movie is pinned down in that discussion to some nitpicks which were not the part of his point to begin with, and Person 1 goes: "You're sooo obsessed with minutiae!" while Person 2 says: "I don't know why we're argueing this!" Throw in a couple of variations on "You just don't know how to enjoy a movie." and "It has always been like this." in the course of the discussion and you're there.

 

[Dukhat]

So, again, what's the argument here?

Now this is bugging me. Discussions about the movie always go like this:

PERSON 1: I loooove this movie.
PERSON 2: It's soooo great.
PERSON 3: I hate this movie.
PERSON 1: (already slightly upset) Care to elaborate?
PERSON 3: Okay, here's why: ....
Then a discussion back and forth between Persons 1, 2 and 3 ensues. And eventually, Person 3's dislike of the movie is pinned down in that discussion to some nitpicks which were not the part of his point to begin with, and Person 1 goes: "You're sooo obsessed with minutiae!" while Person 2 says: "I don't know why we're argueing this!"

Yep, that's pretty much right. So why are you arguing about this?

 

[Amaris]

So, again, what's the argument here?

Now this is bugging me. Discussions about the movie always go like this:

PERSON 1: I loooove this movie.
PERSON 2: It's soooo great.
PERSON 3: I hate this movie.
PERSON 1: (already slightly upset) Care to elaborate?
PERSON 3: Okay, here's why: ....
Then a discussion back and forth between Persons 1, 2 and 3 ensues. And eventually, Person 3's dislike of the movie is pinned down in that discussion to some nitpicks which were not the part of his point to begin with, and Person 1 goes: "You're sooo obsessed with minutiae!" while Person 2 says: "I don't know why we're argueing this!"

Your interpretation of how you think things usually go in this regard reminds me of this:


What most ardent detractors think they're doing:

What most ardent detractors are actually doing:

Just like this latest one about Spock being spineless and at the whim of his girlfriend. I mean, that's bottom of the barrel scraping desperation.

I have no problem with someone disliking a movie. That isn't an issue with me. However, like politics, when someone twists and bends the truth in order to serve their dislike of something, it gets my ire up because in their zeal to hate the movie and everything that goes with it, they're willing to dumb themselves down to satisfy their own desire to do so, and want everyone to go with them.

 

[JarodRussell]

Haters, detractors, desperation, bending the truth. A peculiar choice of words. I guess it upsets you more than you want to admit it.

 

[Dukhat]

Haters, detractors, desperation, bending the truth. A peculiar choice of words. I guess it upsets you more than you want to admit it.

Obvious instigation is a form of desperation, too.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Basically, the way it's always been in Star Trek is that if you're one of the heroes and you have a really, really good excuse you can do anything and Starfleet looks the other way. In ST III, Kirk stole a goddamned starship and blew it up.

And not only do they give him what amounts to a slap on the wrist, but they give him a new starship as well.

 

[JarodRussell]

Haters, detractors, desperation, bending the truth. A peculiar choice of words. I guess it upsets you more than you want to admit it.

Obvious instigation is a form of desperation, too.

And constantly reacting to it, making it worse, is what?

 

[Dukhat]

Haters, detractors, desperation, bending the truth. A peculiar choice of words. I guess it upsets you more than you want to admit it.

Obvious instigation is a form of desperation, too.

And constantly reacting to it, making it worse, is what?

Fun, for me. (and making it worse for who...you?)

 

[JarodRussell]

Obvious instigation is a form of desperation, too.

And constantly reacting to it, making it worse, is what?

Fun, for me. (and making it worse for who...you?)

Why for me? I thought you were the one complaining about the constant bickering against the movie. Just ignore it was my advice.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I am starting to wonder if some people here have severe OCD, and actually can't help repeating the same tired arguments.

 

[Amaris]

Haters, detractors, desperation, bending the truth. A peculiar choice of words. I guess it upsets you more than you want to admit it.

I'm starting to think you can't detect nuance. I explained at which points I do get annoyed and at what points I don't. You glossed right over them to give a snippy comeback that is completely irrelevant to the discussion and has no bearing on what I just said.

 

[Dukhat]

Just ignore it was my advice.

I don't recall you saying anything of the sort.

 

[Kelso]

Basically, the way it's always been in Star Trek is that if you're one of the heroes and you have a really, really good excuse you can do anything and Starfleet looks the other way. In ST III, Kirk stole a goddamned starship and blew it up.

And he was just getting warmed up. Right after that, he hijacked a vessel belonging to a foreign power and took hostage the one member of its crew he hadn't murdered.

The authorities should have been waiting for him on Vulcan with shackles.

The younger crowd obviously likes parodies more than us "old folks". Kinda like remaking True Grit with someone like Jeff Bridges...oh wait, the dumbshits did that too. Hollyweird is truly lost.

If only he were as good an actor as John Wayne.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Ah, but the Vulcan ambassador vouched for him.

Because any government and law enforcement authority would acquiesce to the wishes of a diplomat who was protecting a foreign criminal because of a personal debt, right?

Well, maybe in Pakistan.

 

[FarStrider]

Methinks this whole "Uhura tells Spock what to do" thing is just the latest insignificant point that some haters are whinging about in a vain effort to put down an almost 18-month-old film.

Wait, wait! I thought this week's whinging topic was supposed to be about the engineering set! Did I miss the memo about replacing that with Spock and Uhura? Damn! Let me go check my e-mail again. . .


~FS

 

[number6]

You can get a jump on starting a bitch thread about Scotty having a weird alien sidekick..

That's scheduled for the weekend..

 

[Captain Mike]

But then, the TOS treatment of military law, discipline and regulation was complete fantasy.

Basically, the way it's always been in Star Trek is that if you're one of the heroes and you have a really, really good excuse you can do anything and Starfleet looks the other way. In ST III, Kirk stole a goddamned starship and blew it up.

Everything that happens in JJTrek is completely within the traditional parameters of Trek. The haters got nuthin'.

Where in the parameters of past Trek were the following?.....
1. The ability of a first officer of just one of the many starships in the fleet, being able to change or override orders from command just because the junior officer "whined" about not getting the post he/she felt they deserved?
2. The Captain and/or acting Captain throwing a crewperson into a life pod just because you disagree with his opinion?
3. The fast promotion of a cadet (who has been basically thrown out of the Academy) to the rank of Captain of one of the most powerful ships in the fleet?
4. On the note before with rank,...posting a self proclaimed and convicted criminal to the position of Chief Engineer on said same ship.

So tell me Dennis, where in the "old" Star Trek did that ever fall into?

While those specific things have not happened in other Trek shows/movies the spirit of those things are part of Trek tradition. In Voyager Tom Paris is court-martialed but ends up being Voyager's main pilot. In the Menagerie Spock lies and steals Captain Pike and the Enterprise and all is forgiven. Data is manipulated by a signal from his creator and steals the bridge and steals the Enterprise to get to the planet he maker is on. Then nothing happens to him. Kirk could go insane in one episode and be back in the Captains chair by the end of it.

This type of stuff runs through every series and I can cite many more instances of insubordination, mutiny, crew members putting the lives of their crew mates in jeopardy with no lasting disciplinary repercussions.

Sometimes I wonder if those people who complain about such implausibility of Trek XI have even watched any other episode or movie.

Oh please spare me the I know Star Trek better than you do rhetoric. I have seen every incarnation of the Trek franchise several times than you can count on your entire families hands and toes...in-laws included...

And that's exactly what he's criticizing.

And he's critcizing it by basically saying that in the real world, that would never happen. And he's right. But as has been pointed out, this isn't the real world.

Though nobody knows what happened between the episodes

If we're just going by "the real world," then Spock should have at least been stripped of his rank at the end of "The Menagerie." Was he stripped of his rank?

No he wasn't but if you watch the episode ALL the way till the end, You would have heard Uhura announcing a message from Starfleet Command saying they rescinded General Order 7 (which is the only death penalty the Federation has) due to seeing the same Talosians transmission the hearing was seeing.

So, again, what's the argument here?

Now this is bugging me. Discussions about the movie always go like this:

PERSON 1: I loooove this movie.
PERSON 2: It's soooo great.
PERSON 3: I hate this movie.
PERSON 1: (already slightly upset) Care to elaborate?
PERSON 3: Okay, here's why: ....
Then a discussion back and forth between Persons 1, 2 and 3 ensues. And eventually, Person 3's dislike of the movie is pinned down in that discussion to some nitpicks which were not the part of his point to begin with, and Person 1 goes: "You're sooo obsessed with minutiae!" while Person 2 says: "I don't know why we're argueing this!" Throw in a couple of variations on "You just don't know how to enjoy a movie." and "It has always been like this." in the course of the discussion and you're there.

After mostly lurking here for over 15 years or so you are very observant of this fact....

Basically, the way it's always been in Star Trek is that if you're one of the heroes and you have a really, really good excuse you can do anything and Starfleet looks the other way. In ST III, Kirk stole a goddamned starship and blew it up.

And not only do they give him what amounts to a slap on the wrist, but they give him a new starship as well.

After his distinguished career and meritorious service of saving the entire planet along with the galaxy on most occasions, You don't think he earned it?

I am starting to wonder if some people here have severe OCD, and actually can't help repeating the same tired arguments.

Just as most other gushers, repeating themselves, whether these "OCD" posters don't say those same arguments?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

You can get a jump on starting a bitch thread about Scotty having a weird alien sidekick..

That's scheduled for the weekend..

Oh please, can't we do the argument again about how "red matter" is bullshit and "dilithium crystals" aren't? 'Cause that never gets old.

 

[kkozoriz1]

You can get a jump on starting a bitch thread about Scotty having a weird alien sidekick..

That's scheduled for the weekend..

Nah, Scotty can have all the weird alien sidekicks he wants.

 

[Gojira]

Where in the parameters of past Trek were the following?.....
1. The ability of a first officer of just one of the many starships in the fleet, being able to change or override orders from command just because the junior officer "whined" about not getting the post he/she felt they deserved?
2. The Captain and/or acting Captain throwing a crewperson into a life pod just because you disagree with his opinion?
3. The fast promotion of a cadet (who has been basically thrown out of the Academy) to the rank of Captain of one of the most powerful ships in the fleet?
4. On the note before with rank,...posting a self proclaimed and convicted criminal to the position of Chief Engineer on said same ship.

So tell me Dennis, where in the "old" Star Trek did that ever fall into?

While those specific things have not happened in other Trek shows/movies the spirit of those things are part of Trek tradition. In Voyager Tom Paris is court-martialed but ends up being Voyager's main pilot. In the Menagerie Spock lies and steals Captain Pike and the Enterprise and all is forgiven. Data is manipulated by a signal from his creator and steals the bridge and steals the Enterprise to get to the planet he maker is on. Then nothing happens to him. Kirk could go insane in one episode and be back in the Captains chair by the end of it.

This type of stuff runs through every series and I can cite many more instances of insubordination, mutiny, crew members putting the lives of their crew mates in jeopardy with no lasting disciplinary repercussions.

Sometimes I wonder if those people who complain about such implausibility of Trek XI have even watched any other episode or movie.

Oh please spare me the I know Star Trek better than you do rhetoric. I have seen every incarnation of the Trek franchise several times than you can count on your entire families hands and toes...in-laws included...

But you still can't refute what I originally said...implausible actions by Star Trek characters that never get punished is a strong tradition within the franchise.