But this isn't a thread about whether people liked the movie or not. Its a thread about where people think they should go next.
Should the Borg be the villain in Trek 3?
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
- Status
But this isn't a thread about whether people liked the movie or not. Its a thread about where people think they should go next.
Dude, when have Trekfans ever pissed on Nick Meyer?
I thought itt was pretty obvious I was joking too.
Of course it was.
No doubt you could, but it would in no way render the "steaming pile of targ manure" remark any less a wholly gratuitous insult.
How can someone insult a thing (which a movie is, it's just a thing, not a person).
Are we getting all religious about it now?
Are we getting all religious about it now?
Why not?
Some people have been treating the rest of the franchise like a religion that has been violated by the mere existence of the Abrams films.
Voyage Home has a problem to solve, no villain. There is not even a villainous character in it, except for, if you stretch the definition, the whaler.
Just as easily as Tiberius did here:
(For your convenience and viewing pleasure, the set-up has been underlined, while the "insult proper" has been placed in bold.)
Are we? I certainly have no intention of doing so. However, if you're having thoughts along those lines, I hope you'll be good enough to take it somewhere private, so we won't be forced to watch.
Clever observation about a movie being a thing and not a person, though. Bravo!
You only quoted the text. Still doesn't answer how one can insult a movie.
The filmmakers might indirectly feel insulted, but they are not here.
If a fan feels insulted by that, he might have an issue and needs to step back a bit.
The filmmakers might indirectly feel insulted, but they are not here.
If a fan feels insulted by that, he might have an issue and needs to step back a bit.
I said nothing concerning insult to filmmaker or fan. You're working far too hard at this tangent for no discernible payoff, and would probably do better simply to return to talking about Borg and/or other potential villains.
The "villain," I guess, was 20th Century mankind.
I'd like a little more imagination in the next Trek film. Evil Bad Guy from Another Time Out for Revenge(TM) is all the writers have been able to come up with for the last two films. I'm burned out of mustache-twirling Trek villains. They're always supposed to be deep and interesting and they never are. Even Khan wasn't that interesting in TWOK, it was how he served the character of Kirk as an archetype which was interesting. Instead of devoting valuable screen time to developing a villain (which amounts to simply coming up with reason #4,365 why an Evil Bad Guy wants revenge), how about writing an imaginative story in which they can develop the main characters, the ones I actually want to see, the ones who always get short shrift in the films.
Obviously it won't be popular here, but TPTB are aiming for the biggest possible blockbuster audience.
I'm definitely not saying I want it, or even that it's going to happen. But it seems like a commercial layup.
I think Spockprimutus of Borg would be fanwankier.
I think "done to death" is the best phrase I can see here for the Borg.
They were a formidable adversary and worthy of inclusion in their Next Generation episodes. Then Voyager got their hands on them and turned them into little more than the cybernetic laughing stock of the galaxy.
Enterprise came along and, though many may disagree, I thought they had a good Borg storyline – and a good one to finish off the death-warmed-up bots once and for all.
Khan was a good vehicle for exploring how things can run at a parallel but be different in this 'other universe'. And the destruction of Vulcan was effectively used as an explanation for how the Khan storyline came along earlier than it did in the 'real universe'. But how could the destruction of Vulcan possibly be used as an excuse to attract the Borg from the Delta Quadrant so much earlier than they otherwise would have? In galactic terms, the destruction of Vulcan is still only a minor, barely noticeable event.
I know JJ is creating a whole new game, but he still needs to maintain some degree of authenticity by tying in what's going on to the events in the 'real universe'.
We know what the Borg are. We know what they're going to do. We know pretty much everything there is to know about them and we've seen it all. I for one would be decidedly less than excited about going to see another Star Trek film about the Borg.
They were a formidable adversary and worthy of inclusion in their Next Generation episodes. Then Voyager got their hands on them and turned them into little more than the cybernetic laughing stock of the galaxy.
Enterprise came along and, though many may disagree, I thought they had a good Borg storyline – and a good one to finish off the death-warmed-up bots once and for all.
Khan was a good vehicle for exploring how things can run at a parallel but be different in this 'other universe'. And the destruction of Vulcan was effectively used as an explanation for how the Khan storyline came along earlier than it did in the 'real universe'. But how could the destruction of Vulcan possibly be used as an excuse to attract the Borg from the Delta Quadrant so much earlier than they otherwise would have? In galactic terms, the destruction of Vulcan is still only a minor, barely noticeable event.
I know JJ is creating a whole new game, but he still needs to maintain some degree of authenticity by tying in what's going on to the events in the 'real universe'.
We know what the Borg are. We know what they're going to do. We know pretty much everything there is to know about them and we've seen it all. I for one would be decidedly less than excited about going to see another Star Trek film about the Borg.
- Status
Similar threads
