I did. My boys don't. They have other interests.
My mother-in-law is seventy and she loved the movie, watched TOS during its original run.
Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.
- Thread starter bbjeg
- Start date
- Status
I did. My boys don't. They have other interests.
My mother-in-law is seventy and she loved the movie, watched TOS during its original run.
Kirk isn't protecting his crew when he goes after that SOB. "I watched you murder innocent men and women! I was ordered to end you! You think he was doing it because he wanted to avoid war with the attacker? No. "In the name of Captain Pike..." I shall beat you until my arm falls off.
You think Spock was trying to apprehend Khan? Nope. He was out there to kill him for killing Kirk. That's why Uhura has to stop him "He's our only chance to save Kirk!"
Revenge is on Khan's mind when he kills Marcus.
The end of the movie, Kirk ties it up nicely by saying "we shouldn't try to seek revenge, to act on our initial anger." EDIT:So anger would appear to be the connective tissue between Marcus and Khan and Kirk and Spock. Marcus is motivated by preservation due to his anger that Nero destroyed Vulcan. Khan is angry for being used, Kirk and Spock for someone dying. Acting on the initial anger (re: revenge)
Three humans and a half-human acting realistically human. That hasn't happened very often since 1987. No wonder it is throwing you for a loop.
Then I guess I'm not human. I would have a problem with anyone acting the way that they did.
If you have someone hurt a member of your family, you may find out you feel very differently.
He isn't when he climbs into the warp core, he only wants to save his crew. Tom Harewood isn't thinking about revenge when he blows up Section 31, he's thinking about his daughter. Khan is trying to save his people for the entire movie and only loses it when he thinks they're dead - although yes, he wanted Marcus dead it certainly wasn't the revenge-at-all-costs we saw in Wrath of Khan (where even the lives of his people were secondary to hurting Kirk)
So if anything, the point of the movie is about NOT giving into our urges for revenge - unlike Wrath of Khan, which was Moby Dick in space.
My grandmother took me to JAWS when I was a kid and my grandfather gave me his old TARZAN novels, which had a fair amount of violence.
Seriously, anyone who thinks STiD is too violent should probably stay away from GAME OF THRONES, DEXTER, or THE WALKING DEAD . . .
And let it simply be noted that, back on TOS, all those redshirts didn't exactly die of natural causes . . . .
At, or by, the end of every episode, the ENTERPRISE, for all of its high and mighty intentions, fires its phasers and photon torpedoes ... usually at ships, or planets, full of people!
That actually happened very little.
I've had a member of my family hurt by the decisions of others. And, yes, there was anger. But at the end of the day, I did not act on the anger. Because I know that there's enough anger and violence in the world, and I don't need to add to it. Because I know that I would destroy myself, adding to the misery of those around me. I watched a member of my family, because I was not the one directly hurt, in pain on several occasions because of the pain that he felt over losing a friend to someone else's decisions. This family member was confronting their mortality because the persons that were lost were their own age. "Why am I here and they are not?" "What kind of God would let this happen?" "Why do I keep losing friends?" And there was very little I could do to help my family member.
I have tasted violence in my life. I've been beaten by two guys and they were never caught. I was beat and left laying in the middle of the street. I didn't go on a rampage. But like some people who responded to 9/11 by turning off violence on television, I personally, because of the pain of that violence, have turned off violent movies. I have no use for it in my life.
Someone suggested that I not watch Dexter, Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead. I heard the premise of each, and decided to stay away from them. There was a study released recently that said PG 13 movies are what Rated R movies were 30 years ago. Yet another, suggested that there is little difference between Rated R movies and PG-13 movies with regards to sex, violence, and drug use. It is very hard to stay away from violence today. But when I see a gun on television, I'm not thinking "Cool!" I'm thinking "not again!"
I have no problem with the previous Trek universe because, with exception to perhaps David Terrell, who is out of his mind, it's a defensive weapon. Their battles aren't prolonged and it certainly doesn't have people flying out into space (sans the last 3 movies).
It's funny how different people perceive things. I was startled a few months ago when a reporter I was talking to described STAR TREK as "non-violent" show.
"Jesus Christ," I thought, "has he ever watched TOS? Kirk got into a fistfight in every other episode. Redshirts died violent deaths at a legendary rate. Doomsday machines and giant space amoebas and flocks of neural parasites devoured entire planets. Hell, Jack the Ripper even showed up!"
But I guess different people see different things--even when watching the same shows!
"Jesus Christ," I thought, "has he ever watched TOS? Kirk got into a fistfight in every other episode. Redshirts died violent deaths at a legendary rate. Doomsday machines and giant space amoebas and flocks of neural parasites devoured entire planets. Hell, Jack the Ripper even showed up!"
But I guess different people see different things--even when watching the same shows!
I think it has to do with overall tone and graphicness.It's funny how different people perceive things. I was startled a few months ago when a reporter I was talking to described STAR TREK as "non-violent" show.
"Jesus Christ," I thought, "has he ever watched TOS? Kirk got into a fistfight in every other episode. Redshirts died violent deaths at a legendary rate. Doomsday machines and giant space amoebas and flocks of neural parasites devoured entire planets. Hell, Jack the Ripper even showed up!"
But I guess different people see different things--even when watching the same shows!
For example, Once Upon A Time is a Family Show for the most part, and at first blush, seems quite tame, but, if you think about it, it really is very dark afterall. You wouldn't think twice about letting a young child watch it, despite how dark it gets. It gets every bit as dark as The Walking Dead, but The Walking Dead you definitely wouldn't want to let a young child watch it (Without knowing their maturity level could handle it).
Also, Once Upon a Time can sink pretty far into Hopelessness, just as NuBSG does, but Once Upon A time is more fun, and not as emotionally draining as NuBSG can be. NuBSG has been described by folks who can't abide the emotional heaviness of it as "making them want to slit their wrists", and as hopeless as Once Upon a Time can be at times, I don't think anyone would ever describe it that way.
Although Trek deals with alot of heavy stuff and violence and death, it doesn't deliver them to the audience as "graphically" as NuBSG or The Walking Dead do. I've seen many people refer to Once Upon A Time as "Light and Fluffy" (IE: The Fallback description for most of SyFy Channel's shows in recent years), but, if you really watch it, OUAT is anything but Light and Fluffy (And for that matter, Warehouse 13 on SyFy Channel really isn't either, even though it's often labeled as such)
Yes, the violence is a bit bloodless and passionless, usually. And the drop-ins of non-look-alike doubles all diminishes the violence portrayed.
You're right; it's not graphic. But you also have to remember how people treated the violence as well. Kirk was always concerned for his crew when they died. No one was just collateral damage. He tried to find out what caused their death. He was worried that his decisions would lead to more deaths. You didn't see the red shirts die unless they were incinerated, we heard about them dying. Like in "Galileo Seven," "The Man Trap," etc.
Yea, but, also, there were some episodes that ended with hilarity that seemed really out of place considering the death that had just occurred (Though, admittedly, if you weren't offended by how easily they moved on and forgot the deaths, the levity did end the episode on a high and keep it from getting you down)
Baloney.
Friday's Child
The Apple
The Apple
Obsession
These are just the easy ones to me at the moment. I'm sure there are others.
These whiny silly people need to watch Star Trek-TOS again and discover what the stories were, rather than talk or complain. They also need to stop watching The Next Generation and also stop confusing it with The Original Series-the movies are based on The Original Series, not The Next Generation.
Exactly what I said above. As somebody said, these people are suffering from a delayed longing for Berman & Braga era Star Trek, and now, after having rejected it, they want it back-the same way people now want back the world of Superman Returns and the other Donnerverse movies after having rejected all of that back in 2006!
Last edited:
I don't get why the fuck anyone thinks TNG is the opposite of TOS. TNG is graphic, violent, disturbing and action packed as well. Many, many episodes.
Thr whole discussion here has become pathetic. I think people need to step back and look at it from a distance.
Thr whole discussion here has become pathetic. I think people need to step back and look at it from a distance.
^It's all part of being misplacedly nostalgic.
- Status
Similar threads
