Not everyone agrees that Elvis is dead.
It doesn't make a whit of difference to his corpse.
I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.
- Thread starter Gepard
- Start date
Not everyone agrees that Elvis is dead.
It doesn't make a whit of difference to his corpse.
Not everyone agrees that Elvis is dead.
It doesn't make a whit of difference to his corpse.
Still, those who think he is dead don't go around dancing on his grave.
Re: I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.
And not all Elvis fans are lachrymose.
Not everyone agrees that Elvis is dead.
It doesn't make a whit of difference to his corpse.
Still, those who think he is dead don't go around dancing on his grave.
And not all Elvis fans are lachrymose.
"Plot holes, inconsistencies and coincidences..."?
TMP: People hated that the Klingons suddenly had bumps, and the plot recycled "The Changeling". They complained that Kirk would never leave the ship, and Spock would never reject his human half. Luckily for the Earth, Decker's long lost love was on the ship, and the one V'ger chose to turn into its probe, making Decker's sacrifice a wonderful, convenient coincidence.
ST II: People were screaming that Khan could not have known Chekov, and that Khan wore a metal belt buckle that wasn't ever part of Marla's uniform. And - before the movie came out - that Saavik was a Mary-Sue interloper and David was a mere Jim wannabee.
ST III: Saavik changes her face, but "it's still regulation, Admiral". Kirk destroyed the Enterprise? It was said to be only 20 years old? Spock is left on the planet by the Klingons until he reaches the same age as when he died so Nimoy could play him more easily next movie.
ST IV: Scotty gives a man the formula for transparent aluminum before it was ever invented. Coincidentally a pair of whales are just waiting for beam-up, complete with a marine biologist to look after them.
ST V: Starfleet's best navigator and pilot get lost in a park. Uhura and Scotty are flirting. Spock has a half-brother no one wishes to remember. The centre of the galaxy is not all that far from Earth.
ST VI: Klingons suddenly have pink blood. Thanks to a reorganisation of scenes, Enterprise has specialist equipment for cataloguing gaseous anomolies, but it was Sulu's mission that was assigned to do that.
And so on. Plot holes, inconsistencies and coincidences are no stranger to Star Trek.
Re: I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.
Not really a rebirth, more like an exhumation where they douse the corpse in napalm, burn it up, then piss all over it and leave it out for the birds and flies to collect around it. It might've looked lively when it was on fire, but it's still dead, except now it has flocks of birds and flies (aka the masses of mindless movie fans who praise every pointless summer movie that comes out) hovering around it trying to eat the remains, and it stinks of piss and napalm as well as rotting flesh.
No, that was "Nemesis". This film is the rebirth of Trek.
Not really a rebirth, more like an exhumation where they douse the corpse in napalm, burn it up, then piss all over it and leave it out for the birds and flies to collect around it. It might've looked lively when it was on fire, but it's still dead, except now it has flocks of birds and flies (aka the masses of mindless movie fans who praise every pointless summer movie that comes out) hovering around it trying to eat the remains, and it stinks of piss and napalm as well as rotting flesh.
Yes. What I am wondering is, is that the ONE Trek tradition the new film makers wanted to respect, by making them even LARGER?
No, that was "Nemesis". This film is the rebirth of Trek.
Not really a rebirth, more like an exhumation where they douse the corpse in napalm, burn it up, then piss all over it and leave it out for the birds and flies to collect around it. It might've looked lively when it was on fire, but it's still dead, except now it has flocks of birds and flies (aka the masses of mindless movie fans who praise every pointless summer movie that comes out) hovering around it trying to eat the remains, and it stinks of piss and napalm as well as rotting flesh.
Ooo - bitter much?
Re: I’ll just go ahead and say it: I don’t like Star Trek.
Whatever turns you on, dude.
Whatever turns you on, dude. 
I liked it for the most part, except one part that I thought was darn near blasphemous(sp?). When they showed Kirk taking the KM test after he reprogrammed the computer, he acted like a child. The attitude, the eating of the apple, his posture, reminded me of a character from a bad "brat pack" movie.
I think it did a great disrespect for the character of Kirk. As for the time traveling Spock, when he "meets" himself at the end, well, I half expected Ben Linus and John Locke to make a cameo appearence.
I think it did a great disrespect for the character of Kirk. As for the time traveling Spock, when he "meets" himself at the end, well, I half expected Ben Linus and John Locke to make a cameo appearence.
I understand everyone has their own opinions. Heck one of my closest friends didn't really like the new film because he felt it didn't stay true to the original series lore. Yet the funny part of that opinion was he had never watched an original series episode from start to finish in his entire life!!
All I know is this is the first movie since Batman 89, that made me feel like a kid again. I remember that summer my father and I went to see Batman 89 7 times! By the 6th time the movie theater owner (back then they still had privately owned theaters) let us in for free! I came away with the same rush and feeling of escape with Star Trek. The thing I find very interesting is all the people nailing this film for plot holes, yet some of the best Trek episodes or movies have had an equal share of plot holes. I just want to feel like I'm in a different world for 2 hours, and Star Trek did that for me and then some.
Did the movie make me laugh? check, did the movie give me a lump in my throat at any point? check, did the movie keep me on the edge of my seat? check, did I think the movie was well acted? check, did the movie make me wanna rush right back to my seat and watch it again after it was over? check!
That is how I grade a movie. Sometimes I think people want films to be so realistic that their complete reality. If I wanted reality I wouldn't run to a movie theater to try and escape the world and my own problems for 2 hours. And that is the beauty of movies. They let your imagination run wild, and there are not the many rules we find in real life.
Before I go, someone else I read posted they loved First Contact better, and had less plot holes. First Contact had about the biggest plot hole in any Trek movie. If the Borg could go back in time, why not just do it in the delta quadrant or some spot hidden versus wasting their time fighting the federation before they went back to stop first contact? Or why did they send one measly ship when they had the opportunity to send about a dozen? But guess what? I still enjoyed that movie as well!
I never thought I'd get to see a Star Trek movie like this. When I was in the Air Force and Nemesis came out I never forgot having to go and see it in my blues, and walking out feeling extremely embarrassed I went to see that movie. There was no chemistry among the characters, crappy humor, long drawn out sequences of poor dialogue with no pay off, and yes even the cast of that movie went on to make fun of how bad it was. So look at where Star Trek was in 2002, and look at what it is today. Marketed improvement across the board.
That's just my opinion I may be wrong.
All I know is this is the first movie since Batman 89, that made me feel like a kid again. I remember that summer my father and I went to see Batman 89 7 times! By the 6th time the movie theater owner (back then they still had privately owned theaters) let us in for free! I came away with the same rush and feeling of escape with Star Trek. The thing I find very interesting is all the people nailing this film for plot holes, yet some of the best Trek episodes or movies have had an equal share of plot holes. I just want to feel like I'm in a different world for 2 hours, and Star Trek did that for me and then some.
Did the movie make me laugh? check, did the movie give me a lump in my throat at any point? check, did the movie keep me on the edge of my seat? check, did I think the movie was well acted? check, did the movie make me wanna rush right back to my seat and watch it again after it was over? check!
That is how I grade a movie. Sometimes I think people want films to be so realistic that their complete reality. If I wanted reality I wouldn't run to a movie theater to try and escape the world and my own problems for 2 hours. And that is the beauty of movies. They let your imagination run wild, and there are not the many rules we find in real life.
Before I go, someone else I read posted they loved First Contact better, and had less plot holes. First Contact had about the biggest plot hole in any Trek movie. If the Borg could go back in time, why not just do it in the delta quadrant or some spot hidden versus wasting their time fighting the federation before they went back to stop first contact? Or why did they send one measly ship when they had the opportunity to send about a dozen? But guess what? I still enjoyed that movie as well!
I never thought I'd get to see a Star Trek movie like this. When I was in the Air Force and Nemesis came out I never forgot having to go and see it in my blues, and walking out feeling extremely embarrassed I went to see that movie. There was no chemistry among the characters, crappy humor, long drawn out sequences of poor dialogue with no pay off, and yes even the cast of that movie went on to make fun of how bad it was. So look at where Star Trek was in 2002, and look at what it is today. Marketed improvement across the board.
That's just my opinion I may be wrong.
Soooo... aren't you doing the same thing you accuse others of doing?! You come into a generally good forum and piss on those who like the film. It is a good thing I am not a Moderator or I would warn you for trolling. (As it is I will probably get a verbal reprimand for daring to respond to your tirade.)
Next time, try responding to the OP rather than just pissing on everyone you do not like.
Gep, thanks for articulating your view. I am hoping to see the movie this weekend (alone since family are still not well enough to go) and I will keep your views in mind as well. Hopefully I will enjoy Star Trek as much as I have looked forward to it.
Not everyone. But enough for the ratings to subside so much, it was no longer commercially viable.
That is not crazy. A hypothesis based on scientific fact, posted on a BBS about a science fiction show. Thank you.
The movie was TOO loud, especially people getting beaten up. The film is spectacle, fitting to the movie genre, where the show episodes were concept-driven stories (my preference).
Dittoes to the OP by the way.
Be well.
Actually, you've just broken new ground in the ongoing effort to be dismissive of people who like something you don't.
Congratulations on a truly vapid, stupid line of reasoning.
Only in your opinion, not as a matter of fact. The movie was not too loud for me.
Congratulations on a truly vapid, stupid line of reasoning.
Only in your opinion, not as a matter of fact. The movie was not too loud for me.
I had to laugh at the fact the OP had to watch the film twice before deciding he didn't like it. So in the process, he gave Paramount more money and in doing so, the go ahead via his dollars to continue making more of these films just to give us the opinion of he didn't like it.
Paramount is glad you didn't like it all the way to the bank.
I don't think any view point is going to be alone in this.
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
Hey look at that, someone who posted their (generally negative) thoughts in a sane respectful way without whining endlessly about pointless canon stuff. It's amazing
My 5th grader loved this movie. I would've too. I was a 70s Trekkie kid who had the Enterprise as a place he would like to live on, populated with people he would like to be around. (Several Narnia fans have recently told me that's their attraction to Narnia. Probably true of Tolkien fans).
Now at age 42, I don't dig overly loud, hyprkinetic, explosive action flicks. Luckily the series often have intelligent concepts behind their episodes. They still appeal, esp. the first season TOS. This movie was just another action flick using characters I know. It was ok.
Similar threads
