Well, it's not likely that anyone would find the review that I've been noticing helpful unless they need to cite some example for a research paper in an abnormal psych class.
Any other TOSers give up post-Abrams?
- Thread starter jayrath
- Start date
Christ! I just want the question answered: What freaking polls?
And if you've got a thin skin then maybe it's too hot here for you. Man, I've seen a lot worse said around here. Hell, I've probably said worse myself.
Actually, you can't answer his questions. Neither can I. To do so requires a triple-digit IQ score.
I had the good fortune of sitting two chairs away from what must have been one of *those* TOS'ers. If that guy had sighed and squirmed in his chair any more, I'd have suspected he was having an epileptic seizure.
In all though, I find that a lot of us liked STXI because, for the most part, it simply rocked. It's not as if we didn't notice its sillier elements. It's not as if STXI has gotten a free pass. (And its not as if TOS itself wasn't silly, and cheesy, as hell. I wonder what this high horse is based upon sometimes.)
At least Abrams seems willing to listen and acknowledge the shortcomings of the film he made. Good sign for 12.
That's some classy shit, right there..
It's also not borne out by the observable facts. None of these guys is smarter than those of us who post here with the contrary opinion. The documentary evidence is all over the board.
That's a good point.
I was thinking more of the overall intelligence. But good point.
That depends on exactly how one defines "dumb" in this context. The movie did seem to have more "mindless fun" than TOS tended to have, though. At least to me.
A
Amaris
Guest
True, there was some mindless fun in it, but I think that's what did the trick. It was fun. It didn't take itself as seriously as some previous Trek outings. Nemesis took itself dead seriously, and it shows. There was no grand adventure, there was no spark. Here, we get the grand adventure, we get the spark. Sure some things don't add up and there are plot holes, but overall, it was dynamic, it was fresh, and it was fun. The spirit was there, even if the little rules and regulations were a bit askew.
I think the next one will be more level headed and serious (although I hope just as fun). You know the old saying, it's easier to catch flies with honey instead of vinegar, well, they poured on the honey, and the flies came a buzzing. The next one, I hope, will keep people in. We have seen the benefit of new Trek fans, and that's always good. So even if one dislikes the movie, there are plenty of people who decided to look into Star Trek, and I'm sure they'll find enough in the series' (more than likely TOS really) to keep them hooked.
TOS was smart a lot of the time, but it took itself far too seriously all of the time.
As for Abrams's resurrection of the Franchise being "mindless fun," the Onion nailed this attitude so accurately that what they did is - in retrospect - barely even satire:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film
As for Abrams's resurrection of the Franchise being "mindless fun," the Onion nailed this attitude so accurately that what they did is - in retrospect - barely even satire:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film
So true. If there's one thing that Trek is guilty of, it's the pretentious polemic speeches and scenes around a long table disguising itself as "legitimate" cultural debate. (Or as the youtube review sfdebris calls it: "the magic meeting room".)
Once again, I love the first 13 or so episodes of the original series because the characters are more naturalistic, people who just happen to be working on a starship. The series and characters progressively become self-conscious about what they are doing. By TNG it got way outta hand ("We're with Starfleet. We don't lie."--Wesley Crusher).
Last edited:
Yep. Abrams resurrected that, or something closer to that, than oldTrek had managed in four follow-on series and ten movies.
And that's one of the things I love most about the new movie.
We must have been watching two totally separate films because I don't see any of that in Abrams' movie.
Such is the nature of the eye of the beholder..
Yep. And we each get to vote with our money. 
The characters and actors in the Abrams film were relaxed and moved easily through their scenes and dialogue. There was something naturalistic in the approach, something not self-conscious. They weren't stuffy-shirted heroes with a capital "H" as TMP and the later movies treated the TOS crew. Or as ModTrek treated most of its characters.
TWOK of all the TOS movies also came close to treating the characters with the same naturalism that the early first season had.
Well if it works for you.
Exactly so. Man, by the time the old cast shuffled off in ST6 I was more than happy to see them go - the TOS-based movies had become one stuffy, posturing reunion of characters who were treated in-script with ridiculous reverence after another.
On a brighter note, here's something that should make us all happy:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXUng30Zc4U[/yt]
Funny to see Jimmy Doohan putting his arm around Shatner like that.
Similar threads
- Locked
