Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

[BigJake]

Some Trek fans are always unhappy with whatever the new version is.

One would have to agree it's far more noticeable with STiD than ST09, though. (And not because there's any very perceptible difference in overall quality between the two films, I don't think. If anything I actually think STiD is the better film.)

It sounds more to me that some people are simply hoping beyond hope that they can convince the majority of people to hate the movie as much as they do.

Nobody can "convince" anyone to hate a movie they genuinely like. Whether a movie ages well past its early delivery and hype, or ceases to benefit from an early surge of nostalgia, is a different question. It's a fact of life that nostalgia only stretches so far.

 

[BillJ]

Some Trek fans are always unhappy with whatever the new version is.

One would have to agree it's far more noticeable with STiD than ST09, though.

But it really isn't though.

It sounds more to me that some people are simply hoping beyond hope that they can convince the majority of people to hate the movie as much as they do.

Nobody can "convince" anyone to hate a movie they genuinely like. Whether a movie ages well past its early delivery and hype, or ceases to benefit from an early surge of nostalgia, is a different question. It's a fact of life that nostalgia only stretches so far.

But has any of the Star Trek movies aged particularly well with general audiences? Seems to me that general audiences don't really hold any of the Trek films in high-regard once they get past opening in the theater/released on home-video. I don't see general audiences rallying against this movie, they watched it and moved on. It really seems some folks are holding Into Darkness to a standard that they don't hold the rest of the franchise too (yet again).

 

[Set Harth]

yes, including the alleged--note alleged--"rip off" of TWOK scene--it actually wasn't anything of the kind

What the hell is this supposed to even mean? Yes, it was a ripoff of TWOK. Stomping your feet and going "Is not!" doesn't change the objective reality.

It's possible only Jesus has had an more unlikely resurrection.

Don't forget Darth Maul.

and no mention is made of his heritage.

And we all know that things stop being true if they're not constantly mentioned every five minutes.

 

[BillJ]

Do general audiences now hate Star Trek: The Next Generation because they've moved onto other things?

 

[BigJake]

But it really isn't though.

No? I don't remember ST09 getting denounced at any conventions.

But has any of the Star Trek movies aged particularly well with general audiences?

Yes. The Wrath of Khan, and to a lesser extent The Voyage Home. Most of the rest were far less essential (particularly the later attempts to build big dumb action spectacles around aging casts -- at least they eventually figured out they needed young actors for that ).

 

[BillJ]

But it really isn't though.

No? I don't remember ST09 getting denounced at any conventions.

It got denounced at one convention, by one-hundred people done by someone who Abrams pissed off. Why do people keep ignoring the much larger sample sizes from places like this?

Seems some folks simply have an agenda...

Yes. The Wrath of Khan, and to a lesser extent The Voyage Home.

I don't see many non-Trek fans, actually none, that discuss any Trek movies.

 

[BigJake]

It got denounced at one convention, by one-hundred people done by someone who Abrams pissed off.

Really? Where? I don't remember that.

 

[BillJ]

It got denounced at one convention, by one-hundred people done by someone who Abrams pissed off.

Really? Where? I don't remember that.

http://badassdigest.com/2013/08/11/the-star-trek-movies-as-ranked-by-star-trek-con-goers/

 

[BigJake]

Yes, that I remember. That happened after STiD's release. I was asking if ST09 had gotten reactions like that; I don't remember anything comparable to that happening after the release of the first Abrams film.

 

[BillJ]

Yes, that I remember. That happened after STiD's release. I was asking if ST09 had gotten reactions like that; I don't remember anything comparable to that happening after the release of the first Abrams film.

I'm sure it would have if Abrams had withheld a pre-screening from Devin Faraci.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/840039445/1747616096?token=628a5304

 

[BigJake]

I'm sure it would have if Abrams had withheld a pre-screening from Devin Faraci.

I suspect you overrate Faraci's influence on the debate just a tad...

 

[BillJ]

I'm sure it would have if Abrams had withheld a pre-screening from Devin Faraci.

I suspect you overrate Faraci's influence on the debate just a tad...

There are some people who suspect the whole Vegas thing was made up by Faraci to get back at Abrams.

But is it being overrated? Websites picked it up and ran with it, claiming that people were disappointed with the film because of that Vegas poll.

 

[BigJake]

There are some people who suspect the whole Vegas thing was made up by Faraci to get back at Abrams.

Yeah, that sounds like conspiracy theory to me.

(Unless Faraci is paying off ringers around the world to create a false impression of dissent... in which case, where the heck is my piece? I'd better send him an invoice. )

 

[BillJ]

There are some people who suspect the whole Vegas thing was made up by Faraci to get back at Abrams.

Yeah, that sounds like conspiracy theory to me.

Call it what you will. But no one has ever provided any evidence that the poll ever happened, except Faraci. As far as I know.

 

[BigJake]

You mean apart from the guy who hosted the panel?

 

[BillJ]

You mean apart from the guy who hosted the panel?

First time I've ever seen that article. But it still makes one group that rates the film that low while sites where there are many more voters have rated the film quite highly. So it still begs the question: why do some hold such a small sample size so highly while ignoring far larger sample sizes?

 

[BigJake]

why do some hold such a small sample size so highly while ignoring far larger sample sizes?

I don't think some "hold it highly" at all. It's just one of many indicators that there's more fan dissatisfaction with STiD than with its predecessor. As I said earlier. Nobody is saying this is a majority view in fandom as a whole, at least not at this point.

 

[M'Sharak]

yes, including the alleged--note alleged--"rip off" of TWOK scene--it actually wasn't anything of the kind

What the hell is this supposed to even mean? Yes, it was a ripoff of TWOK. Stomping your feet and going "Is not!" doesn't change the objective reality.

Okay, and now: who gets to decide what is (or is not) the "objective reality"?

 

[BillJ]

It's just one of many indicators that there's more fan dissatisfaction with STiD than with its predecessor.

What other indicators are there? People complaining on the internet?

I'm really curious what the indicators are?

 

[shapeshifter]

Some Trek fans are always unhappy with whatever the new version is.

One would have to agree it's far more noticeable with STiD than ST09, though.

No. The venom for ST09 lasted three and three quarter YEARS! I could check in here daily and be confronted with at LEAST twenty, maybe thirty threads containing new bashing/defensive postings. Many threads with pages and paaaages of new posts. It was hella insane compared with today.