Fanwank
- Thread starter jimbtnp2
- Start date
A little from Column A, a little from Column B.
In so much as it's a movie and it's written by fans (albeit ones who've made a name for themselves in the industry). What they get up to when their significant others are away is frankly none of our business...
In so much as it's a movie and it's written by fans (albeit ones who've made a name for themselves in the industry). What they get up to when their significant others are away is frankly none of our business...
So, now any inside references for "fans" is fanwank. This is absurd, more so cause if it wasn't there people'd still be bitching about it not being there. Can't win for losing around this place.
I've a feeling Kirk's parents are important to the story, not to mention Sarek and Amanda...
I wouldn't be stunned if Kirk's father has an important role beyond being a "sperm donor" either - I think his place in Trek history is significant.
Sharr
I've a feeling Kirk's parents are important to the story, not to mention Sarek and Amanda...
I wouldn't be stunned if Kirk's father has an important role beyond being a "sperm donor" either - I think his place in Trek history is significant.
Sharr
LOL you got OGAM right, what a major disappointment so far, fanwank over story, even the trailor had so much good music/soundtrack work and the movie was devoid of it
This is my serious concern of the 2008 ST movie, all chracters re in and yes Amanda is a minor character as are the tribbles and Captain Pike and the Kobiashi reference, the guardian, new spock old spock and on and on
the worry i have is that its going to focus more on craming all this fanwank in and NOT story telling- which is what MADE TOS GREAT
Whoa there.
Sarek & Amanda: need to be in the movie if we are getting an origin story.
Kirk's Parents: Same. Though their roles may be small.
Tribbles: Not a character. Background prop. Cameo.
Capt. Pike: Needed if they show Kirk assuming command of the ENT, which we probably are. Most likely a small cameo. Not extraneous.
Kobiashi Maru: Not a character. Situation at the academy, convenient pre-existing plot point. It won't be extraneous.
The Guardian: Not in the film.
Spock: Not a minor character. Are you seriously saying Spock shouldn't be in the movie?!!
Old Spock: Not a minor character. The plot revolves around him, and couldn't work without him, according to Abrams. We'll see if this is a good thing or not in 2008.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Batman Begins had Ra's Al Ghul, the Scarecrow, Lucious Fox, Flass, Commissioner Loeb, Thomas & Martha Wayne, Falcone, and Joe Chill.
Main characters shouldn't appear to exist in a vacuum.
Main characters shouldn't appear to exist in a vacuum.
But you don't know how they contribute to the story yet. Oh and so says Harlen Ellison: The Guardian *IS NOT* in the movie.
Captian Pike though not a main character is important to Trek history, I'm sure he's not just window dressing (which would be 'fanwank')
According almost everyone in the know, not the least Nimoy - 'Old Spock' is critical to the movie.
The Kobyashyi test is a character moment, nothing wrong with showing a turning point in a person's career which that likely was.
Sharr
I hear you and I hope you are right.
My hope was that it was going to be a more or less stand alone story with very minor references and not bogged down with too many minor (including TOS crew) characters. By trying to tie it all into a coherent story they may be substantially limiting the ability to tell a real imaginative story that sparks with creativity and captures the soul of TOS.
Kirk's parents are minor - to ay story we've seen in TOS or ST1-6. what do they have to do with exploring strange new worlds. can they make a story with them?sure but exploring strange new parents? zzzz
All this inward looking trekian stories are what killed TNG, go bold and big i say
People,
The irony is "fanwank" got a bad name -- from fans themselves! Maybe 'cause it's not their fanwank. Methinks I smell a bit of jealousy, kind of like the hatred some SF geeks had for Wesley Crusher 'cause they wished they were acting ensigns on Enterprise, for crying out loud!
I am looking forward to the movie, but not as much as some other fantasy films coming out in '08. I'm frankly more psyched about the Iron Man movie, for example.
Red Ranger
The irony is "fanwank" got a bad name -- from fans themselves! Maybe 'cause it's not their fanwank. Methinks I smell a bit of jealousy, kind of like the hatred some SF geeks had for Wesley Crusher 'cause they wished they were acting ensigns on Enterprise, for crying out loud!
I am looking forward to the movie, but not as much as some other fantasy films coming out in '08. I'm frankly more psyched about the Iron Man movie, for example.
Red Ranger
It'll be the second movie that I'll attend the Midnight Premier for. :thumbsup:
It can be both and only starts to "bog down" if those things don't serve a purpose for the story. Outsiders certainly don't need to know any of this stuff before hand to enjoy or get information from it within the film and if you can provide a bit of an inside reference so be it.
Since as the writers say they're treating this as an introduction for none Trek fans alot of this seems the right jumping off point for new people to get a grasp on what this is all composed of.
If you're going to bring up that Spock's half-human, probably better to show it rather then tell it same goes for Kirk and his innate ability to beat the odds. I'm sure there will be an echo of that after "the test" at some point as well.
Sharr
I agree they can work it into the story, the point is: Should They? Do we really want a story about the beginning of kirk and company with all the loose ends tied up or rather a Go for it Super creative movie that has a big epic story line with no baggage but is DELIVERED by our facorite characters?
TOS was rarely if ever inward focused, I fear a nuBSG style soap opera story as opposed to a Matrix/STTMP/2001/Forbidden Planet/Planet of the Apes/ etc... classic story that includes great characters. Just MPOV
This is my serious concern (well as serious as you can about any movie). I'm open to serious discussion
^ Well, speaking only for myself, that was certainly why *I* hated him.
Trust me - people only go to movies and leave enjoying them because they care about the PEOPLE, Trek and ToS were more about the people then some fans care to admit, not to mention the movies that sprung from it.
Star Trek started to falter when it became about out things or the technology involved.
If this story isn't about the characters, as it should be then it rightfully should fail! Trek has long forgotten about the human element in the "human adventure".
"The Matrix" is self-indulgent pretension masquerading as something deep. We won't even get into how Trek had to be saved from "TMP" and Trek never ever was "2001" nor should it attempt to be. Planet of the Apes has many levels to it as well as all its off shoots - FP is very much space opera 50's style it just happens to also be smart.
Sharr
Star Trek started to falter when it became about out things or the technology involved.
If this story isn't about the characters, as it should be then it rightfully should fail! Trek has long forgotten about the human element in the "human adventure".
"The Matrix" is self-indulgent pretension masquerading as something deep. We won't even get into how Trek had to be saved from "TMP" and Trek never ever was "2001" nor should it attempt to be. Planet of the Apes has many levels to it as well as all its off shoots - FP is very much space opera 50's style it just happens to also be smart.
Sharr
Similar threads
