Screenrant's rant

[Son_of_Soong]

Yeah I see it now, had to read it several time tho.

 

[JoeZhang]

I don't buy it for a second.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Sounds like someone is trying to make themselves seem important like they know things they dont.

 

[Stag]

If this is true (and I am willing to give it more then a little creedance):

1) It would explain the often conflicting reports of what the Enterprise looked like - wings - no wings; not faithful to the original - faithful to the original design (see Cawley's initial comments and more recent comments among others).

2) Uniforms. We saw the updated ones a while back which had Pine in an all red number, then the toy fair comment that the unifroms are faithful to the originals.

3) Klingons? Romulans? We could have both actually with different timelines.

4) A part of the story in the Next Gen era...anyone want to bet there is a visit to Kirk's grave from Generations either by Spock or the time jumping Spock AND Kirk?

Just some thoughts.

 

[section9]

If I were JJ Abrams, and I thought I had a leaker, I would tell several people who
-were not part of the core group-different elements of "the plot".

Then I'd find out which one shows up on the internet.

Then I'd fire the leaker.

That's how Paul Tibbets kept the secret of the atomic bomb.

 

[ralph]

I didn´t like it.
I remember "The One", which Jet Li fights an alternate universe version of himself who grows stronger with each alternate self he kills.

Title: Star Trek Sliders.

Oh, boy.

 

[hillarysuks]

He knows doctor, he knows.............
This sounds like a big steaming pile of cow poop. Flies and all.
YUM

 

[PKTrekGirl]

Valar said:

StarMan said:
No, no. I refer to this:

Well now we've come across some new information about the plot regarding the USS Enterprise, the timeline aspect of the film, and a whopper of a plot spoiler that's so huge that I have decided not to reveal it.

It's a big fucking tease and - unless said tease is a hot chick between my legs with a feather, 1½ pounds of bacon fat, a hairbrush and a lot of imagination - I don't like being teased.

Dude, you should be a poet.

Either that or a porn director. One of the two.

 

[StarMan]

^Please! :thumbsup:

 

[ralph]

With all alternates timeline, will there be a reset in the end like Yesterday´s Enterprise?

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Kokomo said:So are they going to have a whole different "alternate" Enterprise set with different uniforms and stuff? This is kind of getting confusing...

Presumably, if this is true, there IS time travel... and whatever the guys who travel back do, it alters the timeline fairly significantly.

Suppose, for example... that the Romulans accidentally get tossed back to a few decades before TOS, and accidentally SAVE (not KILL) George Samuel Kirk.

Because of George Kirk NOT dying, James T. "Romeo" Kirk never has the motivation to go become the badass he eventually does, and is just an "average" officer.

Suppose that the technology brought back by the Romulans is found, and integrated into Starfleet technology.

Suppose that the Federation finds out, earlier than they originally did, that Romulans look like Vulcans.

Suppose that, as a result of this, the Federation assumes (not unreasonably) that this is a prelude to invasion (years before it actually WOULD BE, in "Balance of Terror"). And so the Federation gears up for war...

We might see, for instance, a starship design that was originally designed for more multifunctional, peacetime purposes altered to become more of a battleship (and even, perhaps, scaled up by a considerable margin).

You might have much tighter regulations about how to respond to "dubious" messages... and so the Enterprise might never go to the Talos Star Group.

You might see a big boost in ship production, and thus the old "Class J" ships retired sooner... resulting in Pike never becoming crippled.

LOTS of possibilities. But eventually, this would build up to an inevitable PREEMPTIVE STRIKE on the Romulan Star Empire... wouldn't it?

What if the reason Spock needs to "fix things" is not to try to save Kirk (as has been proposed) but instead to save the entire Romulan civilization?

 

[ScreenRant]

StarMan said:
No, no. I refer to this:

Well now we've come across some new information about the plot regarding the USS Enterprise, the timeline aspect of the film, and a whopper of a plot spoiler that's so huge that I have decided not to reveal it.

It's a big fucking tease and - unless said tease is a hot chick between my legs with a feather, 1½ pounds of bacon fat, a hairbrush and a lot of imagination - I don't like being teased.

I'm really tired of explaining myself regarding why I stated that I was holding something back.

It was not to "make myself seem important" and it was not to "tease" anyone. The point was to indicate what sort of website I run and that I will not print everything that comes my way regardless of what the informtion is.

I'm pretty sure I made that crystal clear in my original post, but (thankfully, very few) people can't seem to grasp that concept.

Sure, we're all hungry for details, but sometimes you get one detail too many and it takes away from that killer experience of sitting down to see a movie you've been anticipating for a year and a half. Would you want to know what the twist of a M. Night movie is before going to see the movie? Would you like to know who the killer is in a whodunit before you see the film? Maybe the ending to Indy 4 a couple of months before it hits theaters?

There are websites that will divulge that sort of thing, but mine isn't one of them, even if I find out in advance, and I wanted readers to understand that.

Best regards,

Vic

 

[Valar]

ScreenRant said:
Sure, we're all hungry for details, but sometimes you get one detail too many and it takes away from that killer experience of sitting down to see a movie you've been anticipating for a year and a half. Would you want to know what the twist of a M. Night movie is before going to see the movie? Would you like to know who the killer is in a whodunit before you see the film? Maybe the ending to Indy 4 a couple of months before it hits theaters?

So how do you feel about knowing this fantastic twist? Are you disappointed you found out?

 

[Franklin]

ScreenRant said:

StarMan said:
No, no. I refer to this:

Well now we've come across some new information about the plot regarding the USS Enterprise, the timeline aspect of the film, and a whopper of a plot spoiler that's so huge that I have decided not to reveal it.

It's a big fucking tease and - unless said tease is a hot chick between my legs with a feather, 1½ pounds of bacon fat, a hairbrush and a lot of imagination - I don't like being teased.

I'm really tired of explaining myself regarding why I stated that I was holding something back.

It was not to "make myself seem important" and it was not to "tease" anyone. The point was to indicate what sort of website I run and that I will not print everything that comes my way regardless of what the informtion is.

I'm pretty sure I made that crystal clear in my original post, but (thankfully, very few) people can't seem to grasp that concept.

Sure, we're all hungry for details, but sometimes you get one detail too many and it takes away from that killer experience of sitting down to see a movie you've been anticipating for a year and a half. Would you want to know what the twist of a M. Night movie is before going to see the movie? Would you like to know who the killer is in a whodunit before you see the film? Maybe the ending to Indy 4 a couple of months before it hits theaters?

There are websites that will divulge that sort of thing, but mine isn't one of them, even if I find out in advance, and I wanted readers to understand that.

Best regards,

Vic

Um, why report you have the information at all? Can't you see how saying, "I know something important, but I'm not telling," is titillating? You're playing with your readers.
You apparently have come across a major plot scoop. I could understand that out of respect for a source you don't divulge it. Maybe someone said more than he should have. Maybe it's worth it to protect that person as a future source of information. But again, if you have no intention of reporting the information, why even say you have it? That's not teasing?

 

[sturmde]

You've nailed the point exactly, Franklin.

Plus to me, the "I know something but I dare not tell you because you little people aren't ready for it" attitude is very very annoying.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Yeah, it should be up to the reader to decide for themselves if they want to see the spoiler or not, not you.

You of course have the right to choose not to report the information, but if you don't you shouldn't go "Hey guys, I have this HUGE spoiler but I'm not going to tell you about it, because I've decided for you that it will ruin your moviegoing experience." That's not cool.

 

[ScreenRant]

Valar,

Yes, I'm sorry I read it. It will take away from the dramatic impact when I see it.

To the rest of you... I've explained myself in my post at SR and I've explained myself here already.

I'm just a guy running a website, excuse me for not being perfect - I'm not Christ after all and not perfect, and now that I think about it neither are any of you.

Why don't you all try running a website yourselves instead of just ascribing evil motives to someone who's trying to provide info and entertainment to people.

If you really think I'm such a jerk you're welcome to NOT visit my site.

Best regards,

Vic

 

[Franklin]

ScreenRant said:
Valar,

Yes, I'm sorry I read it. It will take away from the dramatic impact when I see it.

To the rest of you... I've explained myself in my post at SR and I've explained myself here already.

I'm just a guy running a website, excuse me for not being perfect - I'm not Christ after all and not perfect, and now that I think about it neither are any of you.

Why don't you all try running a website yourselves instead of just ascribing evil motives to someone who's trying to provide info and entertainment to people.

If you really think I'm such a jerk you're welcome to NOT visit my site.

Best regards,

Vic

Interesting response. No one has called you a jerk. No one said you were keeping back the information for evil reasons.
If you're going to run a blog, the journalistic decisions you make about using any information you get are up to you. But at the risk of getting personal, I'd think you should also be thicker-skinned about valid critiques of how you use that information. That's all that's being questioned. No one said your motives weren't pure. I even suggested you might be protecting a source.

As far as your last lines in the above quote go, I'm not sure anyone who buys ad space on your site will want you to discourage anyone from visiting it.
And if that's your attitude, better not write any political blogs, either.

 

[Borgminister]

Whatever the spoiler might be, it'll simply come from another source at some later point.

No big deal.

 

[Franklin]

Borgminister said:
Whatever the spoiler might be, it'll simply come from another source at some later point.

No big deal.

Yes. But I want to know now!

It is interesting that in a blogging world where scoops are name of the game that a guy would choose to sit on what he says is a very big spoiler.