I.Know.Right? This statement is actually quite reflective for everyone. You say you have higher moral ground, but you still participate in this thread. So yeah.
A response to the Nerd Rage. Spoilers
- Thread starter Chu'lak
- Start date
- Status
Chu'lak
Lieutenant
I am not telling anyone they are WRONG for not liking it. I am pointint out that the reactions I am seeing online and in the podcast reviews I have heard, there is an irrational hatred that is not based on facts, but on an emotional feeling of what Trek "should be."
Let's not forget that a shuttlepod and a Klingon ship were both able to withstand the pressure of a gas giant atmosphere in Sleeping Dogs.
The technical aspects of hiding a starship under water don't bother me. It's the reason for doing it that alludes me.
Well, you could always hide in one of those threads titled "Only People Who Liked the Movie Post Here" to psychologically reinforce your view that the movie was great and nobody anywhere has any legitimate reason for not liking it. Then you can continue with like-minded fans to generalize anyone with a different viewpoint and never have to be challenged by any other view.No, i hate irrational ignorant people who scream things like "There was no prime directive in TOS!"
Chu'lak
Lieutenant
Yeah, citing Voyager as an example of "Trek science" is an exercise in futility. Just sub the word science for magic and proceed.
Ok, we'll just take transporters for instance, for a transporter to really work, you'd have to heat the body to about 3 million degrees to break it down into energy....
Did I mention a moral high ground beyond calling out certain behavior as I saw it? But thank you for proving my point that because you seem to dislike my stance on the issue, that you imply I shouldn't be posting here. So yeah.
This.
Chu'lak
Lieutenant
^This.
But that is what makes me so sad. Star Trek is about acdeptance, and opening ones self to the possibilities of countless opinions, but Jim Kirk dies and his best friend and him share a moment that they shared in another quantum reality and people want to march on JJ's house with pitchforks and torches.
Well, you could always hide in one of those threads titled "Only People Who Liked the Movie Post Here" to psychologically reinforce your view that the movie was great and nobody anywhere has any legitimate reason for not liking it. Then you can continue with like-minded fans to generalize anyone with a different viewpoint and never have to be challenged by any other view.No, i hate irrational ignorant people who scream things like "There was no prime directive in TOS!"
I think it's great that we have diverse opinions about the various series and films. This would be a pretty boring place otherwise. What confuses me is when someone says it 'isn't Star Trek' then uses something that Trek has done all along as reasoning. That usually scores a big 'what the fuck?' from me.
BillJ said:
Yeah. That Gorn line was kinda stupid.
I think the irony is: there's this thing called IDIC. and while most non-trekkie watchers don't know this. They're actually quite better at practicing it; mostly because they don't regard trek to be something that's exclusive to the "real fans"
This sense of ownership is common among fans of any franchise. I remember back in 2008 when it was announced the Trek XI trailer was going to be attached to Quantum of Solace, James Bond fandom was outraged at the thought of "Trekkies flocking to see our movie."
Although I agree that many fans are a bit rigid in their definition what constitutes Trek, I think your preamble is, at best, a misrepresentation of Star Trek fandom.
That said, I know some fans take this to extremes, like their worldview depends on a fiction franchise.
That's one of the most ridiculous comments I've heard recently. Thanks.
Yeah, I know... but the Trekkie rage(I know it's just some) is going overboard at this moment.
I remember jumping into TNG after I watched the TOS Movies, and I never really raged against why they were trying to do in TNG. Yes, it was really different, but I liked it anyway. It's the same thing here; I came into XI and really liked it, despite how much I loved the TNG cast..(though not the same love I have for the TOS Movies), I really felt comfortable watching this new cast.
I just kinda freak out that people are forgetting why the hell this franchise was so beloved: because it paints a future that we are all accepting of differences. It seems like the trekkies themselves don't really adhere to what Trek has been trying to say.
I remember jumping into TNG after I watched the TOS Movies, and I never really raged against why they were trying to do in TNG. Yes, it was really different, but I liked it anyway. It's the same thing here; I came into XI and really liked it, despite how much I loved the TNG cast..(though not the same love I have for the TOS Movies), I really felt comfortable watching this new cast.
I just kinda freak out that people are forgetting why the hell this franchise was so beloved: because it paints a future that we are all accepting of differences. It seems like the trekkies themselves don't really adhere to what Trek has been trying to say.
Actually, Enterprise doesn't fire a single shot in the movie.
If the Enterprise's hull can take Impulse power acceleration, I'm sure water isn't a problem.
I'm sure Janeway could do it with enough prep time.
Right. I had a friend who thought that the increased Lord of the Rings popularity due to the movies was a bad thing because people were styling themselves experts in the LOTR lore.
Truth is, they _were_ experts because they read the novels in a few weeks and became just as knowledgable with the franchise as she was after years of being a die-hard fan. Truth is, she felt her exclusive club was threatened.
- Status
