Timelines, reality,star trek, canon, and the Truth!
- Thread starter hal9500
- Start date
- Status
Star Trek is whatever Paramount pays somebody to make and put the Star Trek name on, it's not dependant on whether you like it
Don't you have any Spike-threads to rant in?
^^^ Yawn...
But seriously now - JJ made an awesome movie! Nothing was 'wrong' with it. Infact, it has done what no Trek movie has done before, made lots of non-Trek peeps I know suddenly become interested in the TOS, having shown no interest whatsoever, leading up until this movie was recently released...
How dare JJ Abrams make a great movie, accessible to most people, and reinvigorate a franchise that was barely relevant to the masses!!!!
The NERVE!!!!!
Exactly how is even one of them interested in TOS? They're still happily deriding it for "how bad it is". And how it is NOT entertaining. And how it is slow and pondering and all that shit.
They're not interested in Star Trek in any way shape or form at all. They'll only watch this empty SFX fest strung along by jokes.
At the risk of opening a can of worms, I don't recall JJ ever saying he thought TOS was bad. He said he didn't manage to warm up to it so much when he was a kid, but that he appreciated the premise.
Besides, isn't it a little presumptuous to claim that it doesn't matter what the writers think about the science in their own film? Heck, this is their baby, and as far as it's concerned, they're God. Doesn't mean it has to be "real" from a "real world" point of view...but that's why they call it science fiction.
This was supposed to be a fun, summer action flick about cool characters, friendship and coming of age... not a dissertation on Time Travel Theories According To Old Trek Lore.
I find it hilarious that some people on here deride others for liking Star Trek too much.
Not only is there a delicious irony in saying so on a Star Trek messageboard, but I guess they don't see that to attack others for not liking a movie is more fanatical than the person who doesn't like it. We even have the semi-religious term "purists" for those who think the movie isn't good.
Overall I liked the movie. Times have changed and Star Trek had to change with it aalthough the new timeline stuff is a rationalisation by the writers. They didn't want the crap of "canon" to hinder them. Fair enough, but lets not pretend otherwise.
I only hope now that the nuTrek goes to it's logical conclusion and shows the Federation as a benevolent empire (which it is) guarded by a military who although "on the side of angels" have to make real decisions that are the lesser of two evils - rather than "goodies" versus "baddies". A different reality is what the writers and fans seem to want so lets do it right. More section 31 and less Janeway's false morality.
Anything else will be a cop out.
Not only is there a delicious irony in saying so on a Star Trek messageboard, but I guess they don't see that to attack others for not liking a movie is more fanatical than the person who doesn't like it. We even have the semi-religious term "purists" for those who think the movie isn't good.
Overall I liked the movie. Times have changed and Star Trek had to change with it aalthough the new timeline stuff is a rationalisation by the writers. They didn't want the crap of "canon" to hinder them. Fair enough, but lets not pretend otherwise.
I only hope now that the nuTrek goes to it's logical conclusion and shows the Federation as a benevolent empire (which it is) guarded by a military who although "on the side of angels" have to make real decisions that are the lesser of two evils - rather than "goodies" versus "baddies". A different reality is what the writers and fans seem to want so lets do it right. More section 31 and less Janeway's false morality.
Anything else will be a cop out.
I don't think many of us who liked it have been calling people who didn't any names. I know you're going to protest, but it just feels that it's the opposite that happens all the time. It's only a small number of people, of course, who insult those who have a different opinion.
Honestly, by and large, it seems like the only ones being mocked are the ones who are going out of their way to insult anyone who disagrees with them before they even have a chance to respond.
I was actually a little hesitant about joining a Trek forum. I thought it would be a lot like No Homer's Club, but so far, I'd say everyone has been really cool and nice to me. I post on a number of other forums, and this one is pretty much the same as those in terms of people, opinions, good manners and all the like.
That's just me though.
I was actually a little hesitant about joining a Trek forum. I thought it would be a lot like No Homer's Club, but so far, I'd say everyone has been really cool and nice to me. I post on a number of other forums, and this one is pretty much the same as those in terms of people, opinions, good manners and all the like.
That's just me though.
3D Master
Rear Admiral
^^^ Yawn...
But seriously now - JJ made an awesome movie! Nothing was 'wrong' with it. Infact, it has done what no Trek movie has done before, made lots of non-Trek peeps I know suddenly become interested in the TOS, having shown no interest whatsoever, leading up until this movie was recently released...
How dare JJ Abrams make a great movie, accessible to most people, and reinvigorate a franchise that was barely relevant to the masses!!!!
The NERVE!!!!!
Exactly how is even one of them interested in TOS? They're still happily deriding it for "how bad it is". And how it is NOT entertaining. And how it is slow and pondering and all that shit.
They're not interested in Star Trek in any way shape or form at all. They'll only watch this empty SFX fest strung along by jokes.
At the risk of opening a can of worms, I don't recall JJ ever saying he thought TOS was bad. He said he didn't manage to warm up to it so much when he was a kid, but that he appreciated the premise.
I was talking about the peeps, not JJ. But for JJ appreciated the premise, he would first have to understand the premise. He obviously didn't. He reduced had-working people who worked to get where they were, who were assigned to ship to destiny. The exact opposite of everything that makes Star Trek Star Trek.
No, it is not. How many painters will explain to you what a painting is supposed to look like or induce? They'll all say, it is what the one looking at it gets out of it.
This is no different. If a writer wants something in a movie, he better make sure it's clear in the movie. If it it's not clear, or if what's on screen even contradicts what they say it is supposed to be, it simply isn't in there.
You wanna know how often I've held red matter? Beach balls, clown noses, a cap on a tube next to me right now has red matter it in. I've had it on my lips after kissing a girl wearing red lipstick. And although it felt pretty amazing, the planet around me didn't get swallowed up in a space warp. "Red matter" is just utterly idiotic.
In fact, weren't people here complaining about the particle of the week in Voyager. I know I was one of them. "red matter" is the rather perfect example of what I've been saying, that this movie took everything good about Star Trek and tossed it out the window, and that took everything bad and made it worse. At least when Voyager pulled another particle out of their asses, they at least put some effort in creating scientifically sounding name, and its properties had at least some basis in either science or pre-existing ST science.
But "red matter"!?!?!??
There's no coming of age in this movie, there is only DestinyTM.
^^^ Yawn...
But seriously now - JJ made an awesome movie! Nothing was 'wrong' with it. Infact, it has done what no Trek movie has done before, made lots of non-Trek peeps I know suddenly become interested in the TOS, having shown no interest whatsoever, leading up until this movie was recently released...
How dare JJ Abrams make a great movie, accessible to most people, and reinvigorate a franchise that was barely relevant to the masses!!!!
The NERVE!!!!!
Exactly how is even one of them interested in TOS? They're still happily deriding it for "how bad it is". And how it is NOT entertaining. And how it is slow and pondering and all that shit.
They're not interested in Star Trek in any way shape or form at all. They'll only watch this empty SFX fest strung along by jokes. It isn't Star Trek, it never will be Star Trek and they'll never will be into Star Trek. Even those thoughtful enough to may have liked actual Star Trek won't go back to the old, good stuff, because they'll hate this empty pile of shit every bit as much as anyone else with a brain - which won't endear them to go watch the old stuff, except maybe out of spite.
Also, everything is wrong with this movie. I find it so ridiculous that JJ was all about how after Galaxy Quest nobody could take Star Trek serious anymoreand then happily went to make Galaxy Quest 2; except worse. Galaxy Quest was better Star Trek movie than Star Trek was. It had more thought, intelligence and downright heart to it, than this empty SFX-fest will ever have.
^^^ You sir, are making massive assumptions! Read my post: I never said once in any part of my post, that any of my non-trek peeps were 'happily deriding it for "how bad it is". And how it is NOT entertaining. And how it is slow and pondering and all that shit.' unquote 3D Master. Those are all your reactionary assumptions and your inept words.
You obviously either didn't read a word I actually posted, or you are so hate-filled with your anti-Abrams rant, that you barely understand what I posted.
Just to reclarify: I never once said any of my non-trek peeps 'hated' trek, or 'criticized it', or 'derided' it - I said that they had 'become interested in the TOS, having shown no interest whatsoever' after watching Abrams movie - eg: they asked to borrow my eps on DVD, and in one instance, download remastered eps. Here's a helpful clue, you angry-person: having no interest in Trek does not equal criticizing Trek, or having a negative opinion of Trek - it is your assumption/lack of comprehension, that presupposes a negative where there isn't necessarily one.
Then you go on to tell me what my friends think about this... according to your horrible siege mentality, lashing out like some scared caged animal. You really need to chill out, and learn how to read.
Oh but wait... You know what everyone in the world thinks about Trek because you have:
a) voted yourself to be the all-knowing expert, not just on Trek, but also on how people across this planet will relate to this movie.
b) deluded yourself, becoming a condescending, patronizing, cynic, who is determined not to like anything about Abrams movie, because now it's your pride at stake...
Now if I were making assumptions, like you, I would say you are a mix of both a) and b)...
but assumptions can be the mother of all f**K**s, so its best not to buy into them...
Last edited:
No. Star Trek time travel did NOT work "a certain way in every time travel story". Star Trek was no more consistent with time travel methodology than it was with warp speed, how many centuries into the future from the 20th century (not until the movies)--the inconsistencies and contradictions are too numerous to list here. You can criticize the movie for any number of things (it's hardly flawless) but to criticize it for lacking a consistency that has never been a part of Star Trek is asinine (as is your not so subtle implication that anyone who likes the movie "lacks a brain").
Making assumptions about JJs intelligence is sort of presumptuous imo. And "even one of them" includes him, but backpedal if you want to, it makes no difference to me.
Also, I did mention the "fiction" bit, didn't I? The problem with VOY and the particle of the week is that in every odd episode, they found a different thing, matter, what have you to get out of some pickle or other they had landed themselves in yet again.
Here, it is a plot device, but not a deus ex machina, and that makes all the difference. VOY was ruined by deus ex machina, there is no such thing here. Solutions are plausible, actions have consequences. That's why so many people complain about VOY, but not so many people are bothered by the red matter.
As for your thinking there's no coming of age, that's an opinion, not a fact, both from my side and from yours.
Also, I did mention the "fiction" bit, didn't I? The problem with VOY and the particle of the week is that in every odd episode, they found a different thing, matter, what have you to get out of some pickle or other they had landed themselves in yet again.
Here, it is a plot device, but not a deus ex machina, and that makes all the difference. VOY was ruined by deus ex machina, there is no such thing here. Solutions are plausible, actions have consequences. That's why so many people complain about VOY, but not so many people are bothered by the red matter.
As for your thinking there's no coming of age, that's an opinion, not a fact, both from my side and from yours.
Yeah, real scientist would never talk about something called dark matter, for example! Or go out of their way and christen serious quantum properties of elementary particles with silly monikers like color or flavor!
Oh, wait...
I agree time travel in Star Trek reacted differently each time depending on the method. Example: Time's Arrow the effects preceded the cause as opposed to First Contact where the effects were not seen until after the cause.
You are RIGHT MY MAN!
I don't want friends!!!
I don't want people to like me!!!
Abrams has destroyed my escape!!!
Am I too late for the "raped my childhood" scene? 
Oh, good. I'll go get some popcorn. Call me when it's time.
Are you planning to make a music album?Am I too late for the "raped my childhood" scene?
Damn it, you found me out!
- Status
Similar threads
