What Amazes Me
- Thread starter Withers
- Start date
- Status
startrekrcks
Fleet Captain
also do you think I know what real Star Trek is because I am one of the pro Abrams folk does that make me stupid and wrong?
No! That's exactly what we're not saying. Liking the movie doesn't make you stupid, believing it's a sequel doesn't make you stupid, and our respective opinions are equally valid, because it's all just subjective anyway.
After reading the various responses in the last three pages I get that the Anti-Movie Side has this points that they keep making alot:
A. That the Average Moviegoer is a moron who knows nothing about things like previous movies, previous characters, what a sequel is and of course that the writers of the cannot write dialogue At least these Antis dont call the Pros dumbwitted who only likes flashy lights and kabooms.
B. That Old Spock is not the real Spock so we apparently are misled into thinking that this was the Real Spock but because he wasn't then that makes this whole movie fake?
C. The writers of the movie don't know what they are talking about because the Antis made a huge analysis of what they said in an interview. So because writers who might have flubbed or misspoke a word or two, then the whole movie is invalid as a "Real" Star Trek movie.
D. The makers of Star Trek went to the Antis' home and pooped on their front steps, shot their puppy, and said that their mommies' cooking was terrible. Hence, the hostility.
Pro Arguments:
The movie referenced previous incarnations of Star Trek and there is no reason to believe that Old Spock was from another universe. The new movie is a continuation of both timelines: old and new
This whole movie is from Old Spock's POV because it is the same POV as the audience and the crew of the Narada's POV to which Nero even addressed. We are looking at this movie from that perspective.
A. That the Average Moviegoer is a moron who knows nothing about things like previous movies, previous characters, what a sequel is and of course that the writers of the cannot write dialogue At least these Antis dont call the Pros dumbwitted who only likes flashy lights and kabooms.
B. That Old Spock is not the real Spock so we apparently are misled into thinking that this was the Real Spock but because he wasn't then that makes this whole movie fake?
C. The writers of the movie don't know what they are talking about because the Antis made a huge analysis of what they said in an interview. So because writers who might have flubbed or misspoke a word or two, then the whole movie is invalid as a "Real" Star Trek movie.
D. The makers of Star Trek went to the Antis' home and pooped on their front steps, shot their puppy, and said that their mommies' cooking was terrible. Hence, the hostility.
Pro Arguments:
The movie referenced previous incarnations of Star Trek and there is no reason to believe that Old Spock was from another universe. The new movie is a continuation of both timelines: old and new
This whole movie is from Old Spock's POV because it is the same POV as the audience and the crew of the Narada's POV to which Nero even addressed. We are looking at this movie from that perspective.
Last edited:
The poor Antis even predicted this would happen the moment Bad Robot was handed the reigns.
That doesn't mean that they never heard of Spock or never saw any of the films with the original crew. The average moviegoer seeing a film using a preestablished character would be more likely to assume the film to be a continuation of that character's previous appearances in the franchise ( which is usually the case ) than to assume the film's version of the character, regardless of similarity and callbacks to previous canon, to have no shared continuity with the previous character.
Withers
Captain
http://www.elimportador.com.ar/images/dvd/star-trek-xi-thumb.jpg
[Hotlinked image converted to link. Please refer to TrekBBS policy concerning posting of images. - M']
If anybody saw that poster, read that tag line, and then assumed it was about what happened to the crew after TUC... well, I'm sorry, the idiocy of that speaks for itself.
-Withers-
Last edited by a moderator:
What thread were you reading? Sure, some "Anti's" posted some things they didn't like about the movie, but I don't think anything like "moron" was ever said. Is it possible that your own sensitivity to the subject is causing you to read more vitriol into it than was intended?
No, this is not what the discussion has ever been about, for anyone but Set Harth, who has misunderstood it from the beginning. I simply stated that if an individual wanted to pretend that the Old Spock in the movie wasn't the Prime Spock, then there was really nothing specifically stated in the movie to equivocally rule that out. It has nothing to do with morons being misled or proving that the movie is fake. I fully agree, that would be ridiculous, but nobody has ever argued this point with that intent. We're simply saying we should be free to play with continuity in our own minds.The analysis of the article never even linked to the question of whether this is a real Star Trek movie. I'm sure of that, because that question has never come up on this thread at all. The analysis of the quote was simply about whether the transcriber thereof had mistranscribed some of Kurtzman and Orci's verbage. I don't think they flubbed or misspoke at all; I just think the transcriber may have mistyped a word or two.
Yeah, that never happened. And besides, my mom's cooking is terrible, so I wouldn't be offended if they said that.
The poor Antis even predicted this would happen the moment Bad Robot was handed the reigns.
Well, notwithstanding that nothing even remotely like that was said in this thread, I never predicted that. I was excited about the movie when I went into the theater.
LOL, how dumb do some of you think the average movie goer is? It's ridiculous at times.
One thing that made me angry was when Bob Orci was asked if they ever thought about doing the finger thing between Uhura and Spock (what Sarek and Amanda did in TOS, and Saavik and Young Spock did) to show their affection. And he answered that JJ Abrams thought the audience wouldn't get it. Jesus Christ. People are not dumb, for God's sake.
Some of the claims made by the writers, producers and director of this movie (and some fans, too) about how the audience wouldn't get this, and wouldn't get that make me wonder how the hell can there ever be original movies where things are new to everyone? How does that work, if the audience doesn't get what's going on?
One thing that made me angry was when Bob Orci was asked if they ever thought about doing the finger thing between Uhura and Spock (what Sarek and Amanda did in TOS, and Saavik and Young Spock did) to show their affection. And he answered that JJ Abrams thought the audience wouldn't get it. Jesus Christ. People are not dumb, for God's sake.
Some of the claims made by the writers, producers and director of this movie (and some fans, too) about how the audience wouldn't get this, and wouldn't get that make me wonder how the hell can there ever be original movies where things are new to everyone? How does that work, if the audience doesn't get what's going on?
I-Am-Zim
Captain
Apparently, some of the test audiences were pretty "dumb". According to those involved with the movie, anyway. I hate to say it that way, but that's pretty much what the writers and producers said, in a roundabout way, when they tried to tell why certain scenes and/or lines were cut out. They said that the audiences were confused and didn't get what was happening. I don't know how they came to that conclusion. I assume they polled the test audiences after the movie. Personally, the finished version confused me. And I are smart...sorta...
Must have been groups of kindergarten kids. And even those would have got all that stuff.
You didn't say it or imply it, but it was another Anti who actually said it. I believe it was 3Dmaster, but it stuck in my head whenever an Anti speaks.
startrekrcks
Fleet Captain
still on about Trek XI and what it failed at naysayers can never be happy
Withers
Captain
Do you read the things you post aloud before you read them? Say the last part of that sentence with me "..whenever an Anti speaks." What does that sound like to you? Exactly... it's almost eerie. That's not to mention the fact that a discussion is neigh impossible to have when one side lumps the other side all into one camp and then summarily dismisses what is said on that basis.
RookieBatman and I-am-Zim were having an entirely different discussion (that had nothing to do with the quality of this film) with Set Harth when a handful of people decided to swoop in and interject things a.) out of sequence and b.) out of context. The criticism that people who like this film are overtly sensitive to conversation about it that isn't gushy has just been verified- since no one was even speaking in terms of good or bad and yet the Calvary still felt the need to rush to the aid of poor defenseless XI anyway.
As a person who liked this film (can't brand me an "anti" and dismiss me based on that utterly retarded label), I have to say I feel a little shame at this moment for ever thinking that couldn't be so (that there would be people unreceptive to any form of criticism over it.)
-Withers-
Well, I don't think anyone is a moron for liking this movie. I'm just not convinced by the reasons why this movie is so liked by many. If I was to call anyone anything, it would be those who think the new Uhura is light years better than the classic Uhura. It's just not true.
I liked it and felt that the alternate universe idea (though mostly to wipe the slate clean and not worry about cannon) was a nice homage to the alternate universes we have seen throughout Star Trek.
Even if it was 'dumbed down' it was still a fun time and a fun movie. If a dumbed down movie is what it takes to get a whole new group of people looking at Star Trek then so be it, because after seeing that movie someone though 'well maybe I'll check out the original series'. Then they learn and they get into it and can enjoy Star Trek like we do.
I see this movie as a beacon that can bring Star Trek many new fanatics... and I think some people are threatened by this. I've come across fans that think Star Trek is their secret club and if you aren't xcore you aren't a fan. For me it's about making sure this show, with all its wonderful characters and messages, lives on for many generations to come.
And you know what... cannon be damned.
Even if it was 'dumbed down' it was still a fun time and a fun movie. If a dumbed down movie is what it takes to get a whole new group of people looking at Star Trek then so be it, because after seeing that movie someone though 'well maybe I'll check out the original series'. Then they learn and they get into it and can enjoy Star Trek like we do.
I see this movie as a beacon that can bring Star Trek many new fanatics... and I think some people are threatened by this. I've come across fans that think Star Trek is their secret club and if you aren't xcore you aren't a fan. For me it's about making sure this show, with all its wonderful characters and messages, lives on for many generations to come.
And you know what... cannon be damned.
Re: Vulcan finger rubbing:
We've had many "dumb" people over the years asking on TrekBBS what the hell Saavik and Spock were doing with all that finger rubbing in ST III. And some of those people had presumably seen "Journey to Babel"!
For every ST fan, there is a "first time".
That exact sentiment was expressed to me, as a newbie fan, who found TOS via ST:TMP in December 1979.
We've had many "dumb" people over the years asking on TrekBBS what the hell Saavik and Spock were doing with all that finger rubbing in ST III. And some of those people had presumably seen "Journey to Babel"!
For every ST fan, there is a "first time".
That exact sentiment was expressed to me, as a newbie fan, who found TOS via ST:TMP in December 1979.
If anyone saw that poster and read that tag line, they would have been in Argentina (note the image URL,) one of only two countries in the world where that tag line was used, unless I'm mistaken.
The image you posted is also hotlinked--that is, it was posted as an inline image but not, as is required by board rules, hosted on web space belonging to you--and you've at least once previously been cautioned against doing exactly that; this time it earns you a warning.
Comments to PM.
You needn't be "convinced" by anyone's reasons.
Opinion.If I was to call anyone anything, it would be those who think the new Uhura is light years better than the classic Uhura. It's just not true.
No, but they aren't knowledgeable Trekkies either. You're forgetting this.
Without it being explained away, you don't.
I-Am-Zim said:
Yeah, in other words they didn't say it, you did.
- Status
Similar threads
