What Amazes Me

[Withers]

The critics seem to be treating instances like Uhura's unprofessional behavior as poorly written oversentimental crap and those who like it care more that they act like 'real' people than officers.

And then there are those of us who didn't stop to consider 15 seconds of the movie while watching it and upon reflecting aren't so put off by it or in love with it to have an opinion one way or the other. The critics aren't the "unappreciated scholars" so many of the vocal ones at this forum make themselves out to be and the fans aren't automatically justified by being in the majority.

I read somewhere just a few minutes ago that being treated poorly because of dislike for this movie was "distasteful." Well, so is being treated poorly because of liking it. There are two sides to this coin and neither one of them are absolutely right. I fall one side of it because of this;

I would disagree with anybody who said this movie was absolutely perfect. There aren't any people I've found (so far) who say anything even remotely similar to that. There are, however, people who say things like "9-gabillion plot holes make this movie like watching my grandparents go at it" and I disagree with that just as strongly based on the fact that I don't think that's true and that such opinions obviously stem from a want to hate this movie when all of Trek has errors like using the word "fencing" for fighting with a Katana.

-Withers-​

 

[Jeyl]

No, it would not have been enough.

What? Vulcan is being destroyed, Spock puts on a worried face, rushes to the Transporter room and says he's beaming to the surface. What else would he be going down there for? Rescue a Sehlat?.... Actually, that would have been pretty cool.

 

[ST-One]

No, it would not have been enough.

What? Vulcan is being destroyed, Spock puts on a worried face, rushes to the Transporter room and says he's beaming to the surface. What else would he be going down there for? Rescue a Sehlat?.... Actually, that would have been pretty cool.

If he had just beamed down, he would have needed to explain how he knew where his parents were later. Otherwise people like you would rip into that little omission. And a later explanation would just have felt... awkward.

 

[BurntSynapse]

There are, however, people who say things like "9-gabillion plot holes make this movie like watching my grandparents go at it"

Some readers may judge your personal honesty (and validity of your views in the forums) based on whether or not claims like this constitute deliberate lies, especially after repeated explanations and requests for some reasonable representation of opinions to which one objects.

Such claims do grab attention, but IMO not always the way you intend.

 

[RookieBatman]

There are, however, people who say things like "9-gabillion plot holes make this movie like watching my grandparents go at it" and I disagree with that just as strongly based on the fact that I don't think that's true and that such opinions obviously stem from a want to hate this movie when all of Trek has errors like using the word "fencing" for fighting with a Katana.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you here; I thought we had settled this point long ago. You saw such opinions obviously stem from a desire to the hate the movie. I have/had no such desire, and I think there were "9-gabillion plot holes" (9-gabillion's more than twelve, right? ). As I've already stated, there were other factors that also contributed to my distaste for the movie, but this was certainly a part of the equation, and not based on my having a determined interest in not liking it.

You have to remember that different factors hit different people in different ways. Just like some people are bothered by the attitudes of the characters in this movie, and others like them, so too do plot holes affect some people more acutely than others. In a general sense, for any movie, the same is true of acting, costumes, sets, vfx, all the different things that make up the movie; they each affect each person differently.
For instance, if someone was very sensitive to how good the visual effects in a movie was, they would probably love 2001: A Space Odyssey and hate Solaris (the old Russian one, natch). But someone who didn't care at all about effects, and just cared about the story, might have the opposite reaction. They each might think that the other person didn't like their preferred movie because they had some hidden bias against it, but that needn't be the case. They both just have different things they like or dislike about movies.

For that reason, I think that saying the movie had "9-gabillion plot holes" can be a perfectly legitimate reason not to like it. If that's the only reason someone didn't like the movie, I don't assume that person's going to like very many action movies, since most of them are rife with plot-holes. But even that's not unreasonable; it's all a matter of perspective, and taste.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

Very well said and I completely agree with that post.

 

[BurntSynapse]

There are, however, people who say things like "9-gabillion plot holes make this movie like watching my grandparents go at it" and I disagree with that just as strongly based on the fact that I don't think that's true and that such opinions obviously stem from a want to hate this movie when all of Trek has errors like using the word "fencing" for fighting with a Katana.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you here; I thought we had settled this point long ago.

Agreed...and this after pages and pages of patient explanation of WHY the errors are properly judged mistakes and that the claim of prior negative bias is generally false, but in our case personally, unequivocally false, the insistence keeps being repeated.

I think could have been a slightly more accurate tagline: "Star Trek 2009: No Worse Than Some Other Films"

 

[Pauln6]

Yup I agree strongly. Different strokes for different folks!

For example I don't despise Star Wars III (unlike many) but I loathe their decision to reveal who Vader and Leia are. Sure, everybody who has watched the films in production order will enjoy being surprised but the next generation of viewers who grow up with 6 films to watch in order will be denied the shock and surprise that I enjoyed as a child. My irritation is increased because the scenes in the movie contradict the other films too (e.g. Leia recalling images of her mother being sad from when she was 'very young'). Other people take the view that everybody knows who Vader is anyway, so why worry if we're shown that sooner. I say, maybe they do NOW but my children and grandchildren wont. It would have made a more intelligent film and a better overall series of movies if they laid down clues but didn't hang a neon sign - in my opinion.

There is no reason why critics and proponents of the Trek movies shouldn't have widely differing but equally vaild opinions. In my view some people's standards are too high and some not high enough. And the cosmic ballet goes on...

 

[Shazam!]

Other people take the view that everybody knows who Vader is anyway, so why worry if we're shown that sooner.

LOL I remember when TPM was coming out and we were talking about how the little kid (Anakin grows up to become Darth Vader) and our mate goes (without irony) "Oh, you've ruined it now..." thinking that we had spoiled the plot for him.

 

[ST-One]

My irritation is increased because the scenes in the movie contradict the other films too (e.g. Leia recalling images of her mother being sad from when she was 'very young').

That's not a contradiction.
She's obviously referring to Mrs. Organa who, with her husband, raised Leia as if she were her own.

 

[Pauln6]

My irritation is increased because the scenes in the movie contradict the other films too (e.g. Leia recalling images of her mother being sad from when she was 'very young').

That's not a contradiction.
She's obviously referring to Mrs. Organa who, with her husband, raised Leia as if she were her own.

Except of course when asking the question, Luke stresses, 'your REAL mother' to distinguish her from her adoptive mother (who may or may not have died when she was young, but who would have had less reason to be sad, since she now had a child when she couldn't conceive naturally...). I'm not saying that you're wrong, if you really need to reason your way around the contradiction it's your only option, but it isn't a wholly satisfactory one.

 

[ST-One]

My irritation is increased because the scenes in the movie contradict the other films too (e.g. Leia recalling images of her mother being sad from when she was 'very young').

That's not a contradiction.
She's obviously referring to Mrs. Organa who, with her husband, raised Leia as if she were her own.

Except of course when asking the question, Luke stresses, 'your REAL mother' to distinguish her from her adoptive mother (who may or may not have died when she was young, but who would have had less reason to be sad, since she now had a child when she couldn't conceive naturally...). I'm not saying that you're wrong, if you really need to reason your way around the contradiction it's your only option, but it isn't a wholly satisfactory one.

Oh, I didn't remember that line from Luke... well, unlike J.J. Abrams I'm not a SW fan

 

[Set Harth]

My irritation is increased because the scenes in the movie contradict the other films too (e.g. Leia recalling images of her mother being sad from when she was 'very young').

Hoo hoo! Who's going to bail Lucas out on that one?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Maybe it was her other mother

 

[Pauln6]

Maybe it was her other mother

That might explain why Padme died for no reason... did anybody check her eyes?

 

[Withers]

I think could have been a slightly more accurate tagline: "Star Trek 2009: No Worse Than Some Other Films"

If their goal was to have commercial failure no one would like they would have just called it Nemesis II or released a Directors Cut of Insurrection... or remade TMP.

I don't disagree with a lot of your criticisms. In fact I share a lot of them. Just because you dislike the movie and just because I make comment on certain view points of the movie that are negative does not always mean I'm talking specifically about you.

If, rather than cherry pick the parts of a post that help illustrate your slanted view on it, you would read the whole thing I think you would find it is more reasonable and measured than you're giving it credit for (for whatever reason.)

-Withers-​

 

[Shaw]

... or remade TMP.

I'm sure it has been pointed out before, but I believe TMP sold more tickets than STXI. That doesn't really say anything about the quality of either film, but TMP was just as successful as STXI.

What is impressive is that STXI did it with tons of Trek around for people to watch where as TMP was released when there was relatively little around and people wanted more.

 

[Set Harth]

Maybe it was her other mother

Already covered:

Except of course when asking the question, Luke stresses, 'your REAL mother' to distinguish her from her adoptive mother (who may or may not have died when she was young, but who would have had less reason to be sad, since she now had a child when she couldn't conceive naturally...)

 

[Pauln6]

Maybe it was her other mother

Already covered:

Except of course when asking the question, Luke stresses, 'your REAL mother' to distinguish her from her adoptive mother (who may or may not have died when she was young, but who would have had less reason to be sad, since she now had a child when she couldn't conceive naturally...)

Lol - I assumed they meant 'other mother' as in from Coraline... hence the gag about the eyes i.e. buttons for eyes. Sorry if I was a bit obtuse

 

[I-Am-Zim]

Lol - I assumed they meant 'other mother' as in from Coraline... hence the gag about the eyes i.e. buttons for eyes. Sorry if I was a bit obtuse

I got it! Pretty good gag. I never would have thought of it myself. Very clever.