• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Ultimate Poll: JJ Vs. Bay

Who Would Be The Best Choice To Direct The Trek Sequel?


  • Total voters
    71
Jesus fuck-all Christ, do you people read? None of us are defining success as strictly financial. I am only arguing that it was financially successful because some other poster was trying to claim that it wasn't.

This is an ongoing shell game. If you consider the film to be good quality entertainment they'll claim it was a financial disappointment. If you point them to the easily available facts demonstrating its success, they switch to the quality argument.

I prefer to stick with what's quantifiable - the film's commercial success, unparalleled in Trek's history - simply because it makes the contortions of the naysayers a little bit tougher. "It's not high quality" is directly translatable as "I don't like it."
 
Jesus fuck-all Christ, do you people read? None of us are defining success as strictly financial. I am only arguing that it was financially successful because some other poster was trying to claim that it wasn't.

This is an ongoing shell game. If you consider the film to be good quality entertainment they'll claim it was a financial disappointment. If you point them to the easily available facts demonstrating its success, they switch to the quality argument.

I prefer to stick with what's quantifiable - the film's commercial success, unparalleled in Trek's history - simply because it makes the contortions of the naysayers a little bit tougher. "It's not high quality" is directly translatable as "I don't like it."
Or "They copied Star Wars."
 
I've never argued the movie wasn't a financial success. But of course it's easier to draw sides and put things in black and white as Dennis is doing in the above.

number6, when I have more time I will make the effort to re-read the thread and your points. I don't see any deeper meaning behind Trek 2009 but I keep an open mind and will read your opinions.
 
I don't expect you to keep an open mind. I expect you will still insist that Star Trek copied Star Wars.. People have been saying that since the beginning because JJ Abrams said he was more of a Star Wars fan.

The idea of Kirk's "destiny" is consistent with how Star Trek has dealt with time travel. The twist is that they do not try to reset the timeline.
 
Or "They copied Star Wars."

Vulcan is destroyed in front of Spock's eyes.

Alderaan is destroyed in front of Leia's eyes.




You already said...

number6 said:
The only thing this has in common with Star Wars is that it takes place in space.

So you feel that the destruction of Vulcan in front of Spock more resembles Trek instead of Star Wars, even though the exact same thing happens in Star Wars?



This really just seems like fanboys that refuse any criticism of the movie or any comparison to Star Wars as somehow that's a negative which I'm not sure why.
 
Or "They copied Star Wars."

Vulcan is destroyed in front of Spock's eyes.

Alderaan is destroyed in front of Leia's eyes.

So?? Obi Wan collapses in pain hearing the Adleraan death screams the same way Spock does when the Intrepid is destroyed.

So much for your "open mind."


You already said...

number6 said:
The only thing this has in common with Star Wars is that it takes place in space.

So you feel that the destruction of Vulcan in front of Spock more resembles Trek instead of Star Wars, even though the exact same thing happens in Star Wars?
Yes. Do you think the destruction of Earth in ENT's Xindi arc was copying Star Wars?? How about Vulcan mysticism and its similarity to the Force?? Good vs. Evil is only a plot device that Star Wars used?? Growing up without a father?? Seriously??

This really just seems like fanboys that refuse any criticism of the movie or any comparison to Star Wars as somehow that's a negative which I'm not sure why.
First.. I object to you calling me a fanboy.

Second.. comparison and influence are different things.. You choose to ignore not only how much SW was influenced by TOS and how the two have influenced each other over the last 35 years. I don't think the similarities make Trek look more like SW. We're not going to agree on this.
 
I'm not comparing Trek 09 to TMP. You are.
TMP was a bad film. It had a weak TV pilot script which was padded with endless and expensive SFX sequences.

Would everyone be so high on Star Trek 2009 if it didn't have $80-90 million dollars worth of special effects backing it up?
 
And you're saying that no one in any movie from here on out can destroy a planet while someone watches without it being like Star Wars?

Again, they both are monomyth based stories, no doubt, but that doesn't mean that one "copied" the other. The monomyth is also referred to as "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" because it's a story that is told and retold in thousands of variations.
 
I'm not comparing Trek 09 to TMP. You are.
TMP was a bad film. It had a weak TV pilot script which was padded with endless and expensive SFX sequences.

Would everyone be so high on Star Trek 2009 if it didn't have $80-90 million dollars worth of special effects backing it up?
Who knows.. All I know is that I waiting in the freezing cold on Dec 7th 1979 to see TMP in the theatre and that was my opinion then as it is now. I enjoyed this film more. I think they nailed the characters of younger versions of Kirk and Spock in a way that TMP couldn't accomplish with its creator at the helm. The actual SFX are frankly a given.. All the ST films have had believable SFX work. TMP relied on it too much at the expense of story than the other films did.
 
And you're saying that no one in any movie from here on out can destroy a planet while someone watches without it being like Star Wars?

No. But when the director acknowledges that he's more a fan of Star Wars and the star says his inspiration for Jim Kirk is Han Solo... then you get this funny feeling deep down inside that they are targeting the audiences of those particular films. YMMV.
 
Questions about the importance of the effects are red herrings and non-starters - if you spend less money on effects you make a different movie.

It's exactly like asking if everyone would be "so high" on Star Wars if the movie had been produced by Roger Corman for a budget of three million dollars. IOW: no one ever made or saw that movie, so who the fuck cares?

Hey, would anybody be "so high" on ST:TMP if instead of being a long slow movie full of pretty effects it had been a long slow movie full of repurposed effects footage from The Green Slime? Well, the MST3K gang would. :lol:
 
You were right, number6, it does all just go back to JJ making a comment on how he liked Star Wars more. There's no real basis for any argument here.
 
And you're saying that no one in any movie from here on out can destroy a planet while someone watches without it being like Star Wars?

No. But when the director acknowledges that he's more a fan of Star Wars and the star says his inspiration for Jim Kirk is Han Solo... then you get this funny feeling deep down inside that they are targeting the audiences of those particular films. YMMV.

You might get a funny feeling.. But then again JJAbrams didn't write the movie.

I went to the theatre a skeptical Star Trek fan and left having seen a Star Trek movie. Your mileage obviously varies.
 
And you're saying that no one in any movie from here on out can destroy a planet while someone watches without it being like Star Wars?

Each story features a main hero forced by the main villain to watch as his/her homeworld is destroyed. How is this not extremely similar?
 
You were right, number6, it does all just go back to JJ making a comment on how he liked Star Wars more. There's no real basis for any argument here.
JJ also got Ben Burtt to do the sound design. This really gets me because I am an audio engineer and I have done a lot of sound design.. Burtt is a hardcore TOS fan as he was when he created the sound design for the 1977 SW film.. So the similarities are there, but then a lot of those sounds were inspired by TOS in the first place!! If you listen close enough, the background sound in Obi Wan's home is the TOS shuttlecraft interior.
 
Questions about the importance of the effects are red herrings and non-starters - if you spend less money on effects you make a different movie.

It's not a red herring when you're comparing one SFX laden film against another.
 
The Star Trek 09 / Star Wars debate is a non-starter.

Let's just agree that the one about a young kid who follows some old dude to fulfill his destiny whilst planets are being blown up by a superior technological force is the better movie.
 
:guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:

Would you like a partial list of westerns that feature gun fights on the main street of a small town?

:guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:

:guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:

Would you like to provide a list of films where the hero is forced to watch the destruction of his/her homeworld by the villain?

:guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top