I'd like a Nimoy "cameo"

[Divinity Davey]

I very much doubt that this will happen...

But I don't see any harm in it if it does.

The torch has been passed without a doubt, but there's no harm in rekindling the nostalgia a tiny little bit.

 

[shapeshifter]

Remember the speculation (based on visuals in the teaser) about a Memorial Service for someone, that might be reason enough for a quick cameo from him. The mentioned robes would seem to validate the possibility.

What purpose would that serve?

Oh, I don't know... show of respect for the dead, perhaps?

 

[Set Harth]

I'm a big fan of show, don't tell

Then you would love the scene described. The version you would have a problem with wouldn't show Spock Prime's shock. It wouldn't show Spock Prime at all. It would have some other character telling us Spock Prime was shocked.

 

[Bishop76]

I'm a big fan of show, don't tell

Then you would love the scene described. The version you would have a problem with wouldn't show Spock Prime's shock. It wouldn't show Spock Prime at all. It would have some other character telling us Spock Prime was shocked.

Not even close. I'm saying I don't need Nimoy crammed into a scene telling me how bad things are just for the sake of cramming Nimoy into a scene. I'd rather just see how bad things are and have the film itself convey that message to me.

 

[Bishop76]

Remember the speculation (based on visuals in the teaser) about a Memorial Service for someone, that might be reason enough for a quick cameo from him. The mentioned robes would seem to validate the possibility.

What purpose would that serve?

Oh, I don't know... show of respect for the dead, perhaps?

I'm not asking what purpose him being at the memorial would serve, I'm asking what purpose jamming Leonard Nimoy into that scene would serve other than fanwank.

 

[Matt S]

Spock Prime, like most Vulcans, are busy.....repopulating their species!!!! He simply doesn't have the time nor stamina to appear in this movie!!! Side note: if T'pol was real, she'd be pregnant for the next 35 years

 

[Unionized Elf]

Spock Prime, like most Vulcans, are busy.....repopulating their species!!!! He simply doesn't have the time nor stamina to appear in this movie!!!

Tuvok did say the Vulcan labido increases with age. Spock Prime should be around 150. I'm sure he just lays in bed and waits for the next woman to come in.

Damn, this is giving me all kinds of fan fic ideas...

 

[shapeshifter]

Remember the speculation (based on visuals in the teaser) about a Memorial Service for someone, that might be reason enough for a quick cameo from him. The mentioned robes would seem to validate the possibility.

What purpose would that serve?

Oh, I don't know... show of respect for the dead, perhaps?

I'm not asking what purpose him being at the memorial would serve, I'm asking what purpose jamming Leonard Nimoy into that scene would serve other than fanwank.

Firstly let me say I don't care if they do it or not. I was not suggesting it as an idea they better have thought of themselves and included in the film.

Now, help me understand your resistance to the idea. Do you know something more about the film than I, something which would logically preclude a cameo from Nimoy at a memorial service - like you know the service is for someone Spock doesn't or couldn't possibly know or care about, and therefore would have no reason to stand among the mourners and grieve? Could he not be there because he is the deceased?

Next, if a logical reason for him to be there did exist, brings me to his actual 'presence'; heck, Nimoy need not be there in the flesh at all, providing he has no lines. A stand-in wearing his robes with a cg face looking stoically onto the proceedings along with everyone else, (or lurking in the back, even.) Would that really be so terribly fanwanky, and if so please explain why.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Because no one but a hard core fan would even think about it?

I don't care whether he's in the movie or not. It's just not interesting.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Spock Prime, like most Vulcans, are busy.....repopulating their species!!!! He simply doesn't have the time nor stamina to appear in this movie!!!

Tuvok did say the Vulcan labido increases with age. Spock Prime should be around 150. I'm sure he jsut lays in bed and waits for the next woman to come in.

Damn, this is giving me all kinds of fan fic ideas...

Forget fanfic, let's get that scene in the movie!!

 

[Set Harth]

I'm a big fan of show, don't tell

Then you would love the scene described. The version you would have a problem with wouldn't show Spock Prime's shock. It wouldn't show Spock Prime at all. It would have some other character telling us Spock Prime was shocked.

Not even close. I'm saying I don't need Nimoy crammed into a scene telling me how bad things are just for the sake of cramming Nimoy into a scene. I'd rather just see how bad things are and have the film itself convey that message to me.

"Show, don't tell" usually means "show me instead of just telling me", not "don't tell me even after you've already shown me".

 

[Bishop76]

Thank you for the lesson in semantics. I'm sure we're all smarter for it. Your wisdom is boundless and I feel like I've really grown today.

Generally speaking, though, "show, don't tell" means that you use primarily the visual medium in as naturalistic a way as possible to convey your story without inserting clunky dialogue that FURTHER explains your meaning for no good reason.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

You know what would be great? If at the end Riker says "End program."

That would make everyone happy.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Thank you for the lesson in semantics. I'm sure we're all smarter for it. Your wisdom is boundless and I feel like I've really grown today.

Generally speaking, though, "show, don't tell" means that you use primarily the visual medium in as naturalistic a way as possible to convey your story without inserting clunky dialogue that FURTHER explains your meaning for no good reason.

Exactly.

"Show don't tell" should not be thought of as being an absolute. There have been many a great film that had including a line or two of dialogue that explains some action that happened off screen. Sometimes including the scene that shows that action would be a detriment to the flow of the film.

There are some things that the audience can figure out for themselves by the placement of a clever line of dialogue, rather than holding the audience's hand and showing them everything that is being discussed on screen by the characters.

There is no need to ALWAYS show and don't tell.

 

[Set Harth]

There have been many a great film that had including a line or two of dialogue that explains some action that happened off screen. Sometimes including the scene that shows that action would be a detriment to the flow of the film.

You're advocating "tell, don't show", the exact opposite of what Swearengen wants.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

There have been many a great film that had including a line or two of dialogue that explains some action that happened off screen. Sometimes including the scene that shows that action would be a detriment to the flow of the film.

You're advocating "tell, don't show", the exact opposite of what Swearengen wants.

I'm saying it isn't as absolute as you make it sound.

 

[JarodRussell]

Besides, since the plan is to do a trilogy, I say leave Nimoy out of this one, thereby making his cameo in Trek XIII all the more powerful.

But just to be on the safe side, they should film that cameo right now.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Yes, definitely.

 

[Set Harth]

There have been many a great film that had including a line or two of dialogue that explains some action that happened off screen. Sometimes including the scene that shows that action would be a detriment to the flow of the film.

You're advocating "tell, don't show", the exact opposite of what Swearengen wants.

I'm saying it isn't as absolute as you make it sound.

I'm not one who believes in its absolute nature. You're dealing with a poster who not only advocates the colloquial meaning of "show, don't tell", but takes it a step further to "showing AND telling is unacceptable, one must only show".

 

[M'Sharak]

You're advocating "tell, don't show", the exact opposite of what Swearengen wants.

I'm saying it isn't as absolute as you make it sound.

I'm not one who believes in its absolute nature. You're dealing with a poster who not only advocates the colloquial meaning of "show, don't tell", but takes it a step further to "showing AND telling is unacceptable, one must only show".

I believe the one horse has been flogged just about to pet food. Let's move on, shall we, Set, and not start swinging at new horses which were never here in the first place?