Vocal minorityAnd I'm far from alone in thinking Abrams' Trek is poor. It's really split the fandom. Every Trekkie on the videogame forum I go on thinks it's terrible and shat on the legacy.![]()
I have no idea how somebody could look at The Cage, then look at the Abrams reboot and not notice a SERIOUS decline in intelligent storytelling.
I actually agree with every word of this. It's that "light entertainment" aspect of TOS that bothers me despite it being one of my fave things ever made by mankind. Still, at least episodes like The Trouble With Tribbles could be un-cerebral yet still engaging, exciting and genuinely funny.
Saying a film isn't just for a clique of uberfans isn't sniping. Season four of Enterprise was for Star Trek fans. Without a grasp of the other series, not much made sense. The majority of Trek is as much for everyone as Into Darkness.King Daniel Into Darkness said:Vocal minority![]()
Correct minority. And we can't be that much of a minority if the cast and crew feel the need to randomly snipe at us in interviews.
Watch BBC's Sherlock and see what an amazing actor Benedict Cumberbatch is.I REALLY want to love the next move. The first 9 minutes sound like great, fun TOS adventure. It's this bland Nolan Batman stuff with Cumberbatch that looks boring to me. Yet for some reason everybody on here is jizzing over it?
"I want my revenge bwahahaha!"
We had this in the previous two movies. And Nero is my most hated character in Trek history so this makes me nervous.
That a few vocal trekkies on the Internet don't like the new movies. They're on the wrong side of history, as usual.![]()
That a few vocal trekkies on the Internet don't like the new movies. They're on the wrong side of history, as usual.![]()
Strongly disagree. I think the first Abrams film will be looked back on as goofy and dumb, in the same way the first Sam Raimi Spider-Man film is now despite being liked by fans at the time.
Strongly disagree. I think the first Abrams film will be looked back on as goofy and dumb, in the same way the first Sam Raimi Spider-Man film is now despite being liked by fans at the time.
Legion likes the feeling of superiority by liking successful things. His posts regarding Trek 2009 have mostly been variations of "I'm a better Trek fan than you because I like the new film". He's not any different from the other guys that say versions of "You're not a true Trek fan if you like the new film", but he thinks he is.
Just look at highlighted elements of the quote above. A few vocal trekkies on the Internet, he stresses the basement dwelling aspect here. Then they are wrong. And they have always been wrong, as usual. Unlike himself, because he likes the new movies and is part of the not so vocal majority, that also has a life outside the Internet.
A very true observation of modern Trek fandom. You get these self-loathing Trekkies that are desperate
"Star Trek is all about embracing different ideas" - DalekJimnot to be perceived as geeks or different by the mainstream. They welcome JJ Abrams as it means MTV, E! and the tabloids now care about Star Trek, as if that's a good thing.
Personally, I don't care and am fine to like a show that is perceived by many as nerdy. Star Trek is all about embracing different ideas.
I won't be pressured by the mainstream in to thinking that the 2009 film is a clever movie. It isn't.
In your personal vision of Trek. A Spock/Uhuru romance in an alternate timeline is the very embodiment of embracing new ideas for me....having Spock and Uhuru get it on isn't opening Trek up to new ideas. It's making it dumb and boring.
Less of this, please.... If people are too thick to enjoy a proper Star Trek movie then don't cater to them by giving them something else and slapping the Star Trek name on it. It's just alienated the fans.
Also less of this.Legion likes the feeling of superiority ...
A very true observation of modern Trek fandom. You get these self-loathing Trekkies ...
In your personal vision of Trek. A Spock/Uhuru romance in an alternate timeline is the very embodiment of embracing new ideas for me....having Spock and Uhuru get it on isn't opening Trek up to new ideas. It's making it dumb and boring.
You could probably drop the repeating "Jar Jar Abrams" gibe, too, and I'll bet no one would miss it.![]()
No, not at all. In fact, it may open up future avenues to expand on it.In your personal vision of Trek. A Spock/Uhuru romance in an alternate timeline is the very embodiment of embracing new ideas for me....having Spock and Uhuru get it on isn't opening Trek up to new ideas. It's making it dumb and boring.
Don't you think giving Spock a traditional love interest spoils the mysterious, alien nature of the character?
A very true observation of modern Trek fandom. You get these self-loathing Trekkies that are desperate
"as it's pointless turning this in to a flame war." - DalekJim
"Star Trek is all about embracing different ideas" - DalekJimnot to be perceived as geeks or different by the mainstream. They welcome JJ Abrams as it means MTV, E! and the tabloids now care about Star Trek, as if that's a good thing.
Personally, I don't care and am fine to like a show that is perceived by many as nerdy. Star Trek is all about embracing different ideas.I won't be pressured by the mainstream in to thinking that the 2009 film is a clever movie. It isn't.
"Star Trek is all about embracing different ideas" - DalekJim
Hahahaha... Hilarious because it epitomizes the "True Fan!!"
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.