Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Aide?
- Thread starter N3wcomer
- Start date
- Status
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
All ten of you?
All ten of you?
Nardpuncher
Rear Admiral
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
When you put it that way I think I like Kirk even more now!
When you put it that way I think I like Kirk even more now!
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
But a lot of us, myself included, are focusing on the quality of this movie as a movie and find it lacking. This movie may be a good action flick, I don't know because I don't watch many of those and I was judging it as an actual movie. I was judging it on its story, its characters and its dialogue and I found them to be lacking. The plot is ludicrous, the dialogue is humdrum, and only Spock worked for me as a character.
If the goal of this film was to get rid of people who expect a certain level of quality from their story-telling then job done, but I honestly hope that wasn't their intention.
I've actually had this thought myself, and the worst part is that I feel at its core Nemesis was a better movie which was screwed up by some stupid ideas (B4, Remans, the dune-buggy chase, etc) and terrible pacing. Trex XI managed to hide its flaws better because it was paced better.
If this film gets rid of all the whiny continuity-obsessed fans then fantastic, good riddance to them, they give the rest of us a bad name.
But a lot of us, myself included, are focusing on the quality of this movie as a movie and find it lacking. This movie may be a good action flick, I don't know because I don't watch many of those and I was judging it as an actual movie. I was judging it on its story, its characters and its dialogue and I found them to be lacking. The plot is ludicrous, the dialogue is humdrum, and only Spock worked for me as a character.
If the goal of this film was to get rid of people who expect a certain level of quality from their story-telling then job done, but I honestly hope that wasn't their intention.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
I suppose it was only a matter of time. Save Vulcan!
I suppose it was only a matter of time. Save Vulcan!
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
Hey, of course every movie is intended to make money - I guess you missed my point, which is:
To the extent that anyone is taking this movie seriously, arguing about its intrinsic merit or lack thereof, arguing about who is a true fan (not an argument I think is worth having), etc., it's directly because of Nimoy's participation. If he had said no, and if the script had therefore included no Spock Prime, maybe the movie could be seen purely for what it is or isn't.
[Someone else above, Thrawn, replied that "Nimoy did this project because he liked it" - Thrawn, do you have a secret line to the truth? Maybe they simply flattered Nimoy sufficiently (and/or paid him sufficiently) for him to convince himself that the script was good and therefore choose to participate, and moreover to say so publicly. Perhaps you trust his judgment implicitly; but here's a man who has shared writing credits for two Trek feature film scripts that actually were good, and for him to imply that this one is in the same league is quite enough for me to question his judgment. That and his appearance on Letterman. Sorry, Leonard.]
Hey, of course every movie is intended to make money - I guess you missed my point, which is:
To the extent that anyone is taking this movie seriously, arguing about its intrinsic merit or lack thereof, arguing about who is a true fan (not an argument I think is worth having), etc., it's directly because of Nimoy's participation. If he had said no, and if the script had therefore included no Spock Prime, maybe the movie could be seen purely for what it is or isn't.
[Someone else above, Thrawn, replied that "Nimoy did this project because he liked it" - Thrawn, do you have a secret line to the truth? Maybe they simply flattered Nimoy sufficiently (and/or paid him sufficiently) for him to convince himself that the script was good and therefore choose to participate, and moreover to say so publicly. Perhaps you trust his judgment implicitly; but here's a man who has shared writing credits for two Trek feature film scripts that actually were good, and for him to imply that this one is in the same league is quite enough for me to question his judgment. That and his appearance on Letterman. Sorry, Leonard.]
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
I know this is a cheap shot, but for some reason I found it really funny.
I know this is a cheap shot, but for some reason I found it really funny.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
The worst fans ever...Trek fanatics
It was fun....it was not heavy handed.........and I have already seen it twice....and I seen Trek ever since it was TOS and until now....
I do not care about the changes....
The worst fans ever...Trek fanatics
It was fun....it was not heavy handed.........and I have already seen it twice....and I seen Trek ever since it was TOS and until now....
I do not care about the changes....
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
heh.
Yeah, they are going to go back and say hmmm...... a very small minority didn't like the film, lets fix it for them.
SUUUUUUURE.
heh.
Yeah, they are going to go back and say hmmm...... a very small minority didn't like the film, lets fix it for them.
SUUUUUUURE.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
I think Nimoy has amply demonstrated throughout the years that he would only do projects that he felt did justice to the Spock character; he skipped Generations entirely, for instance, because he felt his part in the movie could've been handled by anyone. And as it was rewritten to be either Scotty or Chekov, it would appear he was correct.
And I suppose you've missed not only the publicity he's doing for the film, something an aging man like him would probably avoid if he didn't feel like it, or any of the interviews where he talks about how emotionally overwhelmed he was by the quality of Spock's characterization?
As you point out, he shares credit on two scripts that were good. I think he's proven by now that he has some solid judgment in these matters.
I love how you jump to the conclusion that since you didn't like it, Nimoy must have thought it was a piece of crap and only done it because he was flattered and paid. It could be that... he disagrees with you. And given how many other people, die hard Trek fans, are also saying so (I personally thought it was the best exploration of Spock's character the big screen has ever seen) you might want to consider there are other points of view on this.
I think Nimoy has amply demonstrated throughout the years that he would only do projects that he felt did justice to the Spock character; he skipped Generations entirely, for instance, because he felt his part in the movie could've been handled by anyone. And as it was rewritten to be either Scotty or Chekov, it would appear he was correct.
And I suppose you've missed not only the publicity he's doing for the film, something an aging man like him would probably avoid if he didn't feel like it, or any of the interviews where he talks about how emotionally overwhelmed he was by the quality of Spock's characterization?
As you point out, he shares credit on two scripts that were good. I think he's proven by now that he has some solid judgment in these matters.
I love how you jump to the conclusion that since you didn't like it, Nimoy must have thought it was a piece of crap and only done it because he was flattered and paid. It could be that... he disagrees with you. And given how many other people, die hard Trek fans, are also saying so (I personally thought it was the best exploration of Spock's character the big screen has ever seen) you might want to consider there are other points of view on this.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
You're certain, are you, that Nimoy's script judgment at age 77-78 is what it was 15 or 20 years ago? Would the Nimoy of those years have endorsed such a villain as Nero? Heck, it was a point of pride for him that The Voyage Home featured "no stereotypical bad guy."
So I think my point remains valid: Without Nimoy's participation and his months-long, well-publicized endorsement of this project, there would be no reason to take Star Trek (2009) seriously at all, to have any stake in it storywise. So why he participated is the key question, and you can't know that his judgment is good any more than I can know it isn't. I'm just saying his judgment might not be what you think it is.
You're certain, are you, that Nimoy's script judgment at age 77-78 is what it was 15 or 20 years ago? Would the Nimoy of those years have endorsed such a villain as Nero? Heck, it was a point of pride for him that The Voyage Home featured "no stereotypical bad guy."
So I think my point remains valid: Without Nimoy's participation and his months-long, well-publicized endorsement of this project, there would be no reason to take Star Trek (2009) seriously at all, to have any stake in it storywise. So why he participated is the key question, and you can't know that his judgment is good any more than I can know it isn't. I'm just saying his judgment might not be what you think it is.
A
Amaris
Guest
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
Are you saying that since Nimoy likes it his judgment of what is and is not good must be impaired? Would that be a wise thing to say considering you're nowhere in the creative loop and have not been at any time during these past 40+ years as Nimoy has?
J.
Are you saying that since Nimoy likes it his judgment of what is and is not good must be impaired? Would that be a wise thing to say considering you're nowhere in the creative loop and have not been at any time during these past 40+ years as Nimoy has?
J.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
Well, he's gotta say something, and the near-universal popularity of this movie with people like Nimoy who know Star Trek isn't leaving room for much.
Well, he's gotta say something, and the near-universal popularity of this movie with people like Nimoy who know Star Trek isn't leaving room for much.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
No, but he seems generally lucid and intelligent these days, I have no reason to doubt it. Nor do you, actually, except that you seem to disagree with him.
Well, aside from the fact that it's an outstanding Star Trek story regardless, but whatever.
I think why he participated is pretty fucking obvious. The only question is something you invented about whether or not his creative faculties have declined because he holds an opinion contrary to yours.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
Wouldn't that be called addition by subtraction?
Wouldn't that be called addition by subtraction?
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
I proudly drank the Kool-Aid... and boy was it good stuff. The first fun Trek film in 23 years! Wow imagine that!
Yancy
I proudly drank the Kool-Aid... and boy was it good stuff. The first fun Trek film in 23 years! Wow imagine that!
Yancy
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
I was too little to see any Trek film at the cinema prior to Generations....and this one's the first I saw more than once. It also was the first time I went to see it in a sold-out showing.
I was too little to see any Trek film at the cinema prior to Generations....and this one's the first I saw more than once. It also was the first time I went to see it in a sold-out showing.
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
Bloody hell... Even Gene Roddenberry's story judgment was often not at its best over the years; I think we can all agree on that. And if his judgment was variable, why not Nimoy's?
I also note the need among some people here to say, in effect, "It's popular (this weekend, anyway) so it must be good!" The obvious rejoinder to this is the original series itself - damn influential in the long term, not very popular during its run on NBC. (Another would be to mention that other very costly, highly publicized, long-awaited Paramount production Star Trek: The Motion Picture; that also sold a lot of tickets, but many fans soon came to regard it as a disappointment, as we all know.)
Bloody hell... Even Gene Roddenberry's story judgment was often not at its best over the years; I think we can all agree on that. And if his judgment was variable, why not Nimoy's?
I also note the need among some people here to say, in effect, "It's popular (this weekend, anyway) so it must be good!" The obvious rejoinder to this is the original series itself - damn influential in the long term, not very popular during its run on NBC. (Another would be to mention that other very costly, highly publicized, long-awaited Paramount production Star Trek: The Motion Picture; that also sold a lot of tickets, but many fans soon came to regard it as a disappointment, as we all know.)
Re: Come on people - am I the only fan who can't drink Abrams' Cool Ai
I don't believe for one moment that Paramount was intentionally targeting any part of the fandom to be "washed away". They simply made a movie that they believed would be enjoyed by the largest number of people. If certain people don't like the film, then fine -- that's their prerogative -- but Paramount did not set out to purposely alienate those poeple just because they are a certain "kind" of fan.
To think that Paramount's intention was to get rid of a specific part of the fanbase by making a film that was designed to intentionally anger that group is a bit irrational, I feel.
So, I find it hard to say "fuck you" to Paramount, even if I didn't enjoy the film as much as I actually did. (not even a "bug" fuck you
). I find it hard to be personally insulted by a production company.
Yeah -- I agree that was NOT their intention. It may be the ipso facto result, but I doubt it was an overt plan.
I don't believe for one moment that Paramount was intentionally targeting any part of the fandom to be "washed away". They simply made a movie that they believed would be enjoyed by the largest number of people. If certain people don't like the film, then fine -- that's their prerogative -- but Paramount did not set out to purposely alienate those poeple just because they are a certain "kind" of fan.
To think that Paramount's intention was to get rid of a specific part of the fanbase by making a film that was designed to intentionally anger that group is a bit irrational, I feel.
So, I find it hard to say "fuck you" to Paramount, even if I didn't enjoy the film as much as I actually did. (not even a "bug" fuck you
). I find it hard to be personally insulted by a production company.
Last edited:
- Status