By your conduct here, repeatedly insulting those who believe differently to you, you've repeatedly shown how little you truly understand Star Trek's philosophy - "Live and let live".
If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....
- Thread starter trek_futurist
- Start date
- Status
That same DS9 that went out of it's way to show that humans aren't nearly as civilized at they want the galaxy to think? The one where the Federation permits murder and genocide?
No, the humans in DS9 were still as civilized as they were in TNG. You are confusing the fact that they had to deal with a dominion war, the cardassians and a Ferengi who was constantly trying to pull the wool over their eyes, with them not being civilized. At no point in the show did they behave with malevolence or cowardice toward other humans or other species. They always tempered their judgment with logic and seriously considered their actions, and never did captain sisko and company shoot down a sitting duck ship!
Watch "In The Pale Moonlight" and "The Siege of AR-558"
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
We're not talking about beliefs, we're talking about objective facts.
Objective fact 1-Star trek was made popular by those quirky little things like philosophical ideas, scientific explanations, showing alien customs, the fact that humanity was portrayed as better than it currently is, etc.
Objective fact 2-NONE of the above appeared in this thing called star trek 2009.
Those aren't facts, sorry. They're merely what YOU like about Star Trek, and what YOU believe is lacking in the 09 film.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
No, they are what made star trek popular and what was DEFINITELY and WITHOUT A SHRED OF DOUBT lacking in the thing called star trek 2009.
Not to mention something called logic. Star trek always had logic, at least with regard to human interactions, ideology and chain of command.
How the HELL can anyone just shrug off imposter kirk being promoted to captain from cadet so haphazardly?
Quite simply, if you think star trek 2009 is a star trek movie you are obviously more a fan of bombastic action films than actually star trek itself.
TOS was often incredibly goofy. TFF and ST09 are the two movies which come most close to it.
Strange, most of the time I hear that I am an irrational ST09 basher.
Seriously, I tried to be moderate and reasonable with you, despite the "real fan" nonsense with which you started this thread, despite your constant use of the the word objective in a discussion about art/entertainment. No more second chances, if you behave like a total jerk and call other people infantile (while, what sweet irony, not even caring about decent capitalization) just because they dislike NEM more than ST09 and view ST09 as not utterly bad you can talk with yourself.
The thing is while on the surface Nemesis and Star Trek 11 similar, but if you dig deeper Star Trek 11 is a superior film.
Let's compare the villains for example, on the surface both Shinzon and Nero seem the very similar, both associated with the Romulan empire and both new villains with a genocidal desire for vengeance. However I think below the surface Nero is a way better villain due to consistency. There was a method to Nero's madness, since Spock failed to save Romulus Nero blames Spock for Romulus' destruction, he may even think Spock intentionally did not save Romulus. That's not rational, but it does make sense in a certain way.
With Shinzon I don't understand his motives at all, its like he changes his mind every 5 minutes and he is totally incompetent. He's mad that the Romulans enslaved the Remans, so he wants to destroy Earth. That makes no sense. He wants to capture Picard because he needs a blood transfusion, but he wastes a lot of time at the beginning of the film, instead of trying to capture Picard right away. Nero is a better villain because his goals don't change every 5 minutes.
Also the TNG crew did a lot of foolish things in Nemesis, if we are going to count mis-characterization against a film. Picard breaks the Prime Directive and guns down some aliens for no good reason and at the end of the film he endangers the entire ship by going over to fight Shinzon on his ship, instead of sending Worf or Date who would have a greater chance for success then Picard would. I wouldn't call Nemesis a crowning moment for characterization of the TNG crew.
Let's compare the villains for example, on the surface both Shinzon and Nero seem the very similar, both associated with the Romulan empire and both new villains with a genocidal desire for vengeance. However I think below the surface Nero is a way better villain due to consistency. There was a method to Nero's madness, since Spock failed to save Romulus Nero blames Spock for Romulus' destruction, he may even think Spock intentionally did not save Romulus. That's not rational, but it does make sense in a certain way.
With Shinzon I don't understand his motives at all, its like he changes his mind every 5 minutes and he is totally incompetent. He's mad that the Romulans enslaved the Remans, so he wants to destroy Earth. That makes no sense. He wants to capture Picard because he needs a blood transfusion, but he wastes a lot of time at the beginning of the film, instead of trying to capture Picard right away. Nero is a better villain because his goals don't change every 5 minutes.
Also the TNG crew did a lot of foolish things in Nemesis, if we are going to count mis-characterization against a film. Picard breaks the Prime Directive and guns down some aliens for no good reason and at the end of the film he endangers the entire ship by going over to fight Shinzon on his ship, instead of sending Worf or Date who would have a greater chance for success then Picard would. I wouldn't call Nemesis a crowning moment for characterization of the TNG crew.
Without a shred of doubt in your mind. You're not a god, your opinion is only that - your opinion. Does that mass of support for the movie not show you that maybe others' viewpoint could have some validity? That your narrow-minded way may not be the only one?
Fans shrug off the sillier aspects of this movie the same way fans have shrugged off the implausible nonsense in other Star Treks. Genesis? Spock's resurrection? The Nexus? The various portrayals of time travel? V'ger, a probe with godlike powers that never thought to wipe the muck of it's own name plate?
Heck, we even saw another cadet-turned-captain in DS9's "The Valiant". And that one didn't have Pike's glowing recommendation and a Vulcan from an alternate future on his side!
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
TOS was often incredibly goofy. TFF and ST09 are the two movies which come most close to it.
Strange, most of the time I hear that I am an irrational ST09 basher.
Seriously, I tried to be moderate and reasonable with you, despite the "real fan" nonsense with which you started this thread, despite your constant use of the the word objective in a discussion about art/entertainment. No more second chances, if you behave like a total jerk and call other people infantile (while, what sweet irony, not even caring about decent capitalization) just because they dislike NEM more than ST09 and view ST09 as not utterly bad you can talk with yourself.
The humor in TOS was a lot more subtle and interesting than the gratuitous and generic 'slap stick' garbage witnessed in the 2009 thing.
So, when someone makes an argument you cannot diminish with points or logic you simply claim they are calling other people names? Typical of people who have no counter arguments.
I may have made a generalized statement regarding the mindset of a person who enters into such a film, but I did not call a single individual a name, once. Nice try at diversion though.
Fact is the 2009 thing sucked and nobody can substantiate why they think it is good, other than make unfounded statements about how the characters are true to their original counterparts (With no actual examples of how this is so, I might add) and equally arbitrary comments about effects, or something.
Effects and bombast do not a good trek movie maketh.
TOS was often incredibly goofy. TFF and ST09 are the two movies which come most close to it.
Strange, most of the time I hear that I am an irrational ST09 basher.
Seriously, I tried to be moderate and reasonable with you, despite the "real fan" nonsense with which you started this thread, despite your constant use of the the word objective in a discussion about art/entertainment. No more second chances, if you behave like a total jerk and call other people infantile (while, what sweet irony, not even caring about decent capitalization) just because they dislike NEM more than ST09 and view ST09 as not utterly bad you can talk with yourself.
The humor in TOS was a lot more subtle and interesting than the gratuitous and generic 'slap stick' garbage witnessed in the 2009 thing.
So, when someone makes an argument you cannot diminish with points or logic you simply claim they are calling other people names? Typical of people who have no counter arguments.
I may have made a generalized statement regarding the mindset of a person who enters into such a film, but I did not call a single individual a name, once. Nice try at diversion though.
Fact is the 2009 thing sucked and nobody can substantiate why they think it is good, other than make unfounded statements about how the characters are true to their original counterparts (With no actual examples of how this is so, I might add) and equally arbitrary comments about effects, or something.
Effects and bombast do not a good trek movie maketh.
Saying Star Trek 11 sucked is not a fact, its your opinion, one I disagree with.
I think there is more compelling evidence that Nemesis sucked, in my opinion.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
As a matter of fact shinzon is a much more sophisticated and complex character than nero.
What is nero but a baby throwing an intergalactic tantrum?
YOU HAVE A TIME MACHINE! WHY NOT GO BACK IN TIME AND USE THE TIME MACHINE TO FIX WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR PLANET INSTEAD OF ACTING LIKE A WHINY BABY WHO HAS TO DESTROY THE FEDERATION JUST CAUSE JJ ABRAMS NEEDS SOMETHING IDIOTIC TO FILL IN A GAPING PLOT HOLE?
I basically answered my own question there.
Nero didn't have a time machine. I think you've just proven how little you understood ST'09
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
Are you kidding me? Those things don't even compare.
Genesis is a brilliant concept, and terra-forming became a burgeoning scientific concept in my childhood (mid-late 90s) which means that star trek, once again was filled with insights of the future of science. Spocks body being sequestered to the Genesis planet only extends its use as a place of regeneration. At least the film explains that. The 2009 thing makes absolutely no effort to explain the arbitrary nature of red matter. It just happens to be able to blow up planets AND make you travel back in time, just cuz the writers need it to. Convenient plot device. In other words, complete non-sense.
Using the word "fact" when talking about art and using sentences written entirely in capital letters, the written equivalent of shouting, disqualify anybody from a serious discussion.
Hmmm ... After reading all these posts, I think the OP may actually have quite a bit in common with Nero....
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
Nero didn't have a time machine. I think you've just proven how little you understood ST'09
What I meant is that 'the red matter' allows him to travel back in time through the creation of a black hole (what, really?) the red matter is thus effectively, as a PLOT DEVICE a time machine.
Why not travel back just before your planet is destroyed, and fix the problem, instead of conveniently travel back to the mid 23rd century?
As a matter of fact shinzon is a much more sophisticated and complex character than nero.[/QUOTE]
How? You can't just say that without back it up.
And Shinzon is a villain who wants to destroy Earth for no good reason and is about as competent as Dr. Evil. I'm not saying Nero is the best Star trek villain ever, he isn't, but he is better Shinzon, who I would rank really low.
It doesn't work like that, they were thrown back at a random point in time, this tech isn't a time machine that controls where you go.
And if you want point out plot holes, you haven't addressed any of the ones I brought up with Shinzon.
No you haven't.
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
But spock prime does! He has a time ship!
He can go back in time right before nero's planet was destroyed, fix the problem and thus never necessitate the rest of the events of the film!
Oh right, I keep forgetting that JJ and company like to insult peoples intelligence with useless plot devices.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
