The point being, why would I think that having 'Bad Trek NOW' is preferable to waiting a little bit for hopefully GOOD Trek? We've endured 'Bad Trek NOW' for a decade, and look where that's gotten us.
Why it is important some people are unhappy
- Thread starter AudioBridge
- Start date
The point being, why would I think that having 'Bad Trek NOW' is preferable to waiting a little bit for hopefully GOOD Trek? We've endured 'Bad Trek NOW' for a decade, and look where that's gotten us.
Actually, what the poster is trying to get away with is a bit of sleight-of-hand whereby their opinion is passed off as an objective fact.
The truth is, if you and he were to encounter some feces the two of you would not disagree for very long about whether you were looking at shit or not. The brown stuff would either be shit or it would be something else.
What's being discussed here is a movie, a story, a piece of art. One person may conclude that it's bad - and call it "shit" if that's the most articulate they can be - and another consider it quite good. They can then debate the merits of their opinions on all kinds of grounds but there is no reason in the world that a failure to agree makes one of them cognizant of what the movie "really is" and the other not.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Actually the word is con ... no, that's four syllables, too many for you.
It's a well known fact that the mods are in a secret society known as the Pentaverate and they get a check from Abrams to squash any and all opposition.
Oh, I'm pretty sure that the mods are pretty solidly against the film overall, and accordingly give over-compensation leeway to the 'haters' who are supporting it.
And now to blackmail the staff... yes... oh, crap, they're all poor.
Well, that plan's screwed. Who's up for Canesta?
Vance, a quick rummage around the board reveals you're a big noise in the Trek Art forum. Your work's pretty good, very clean and concise.
But it is also so very old school, so very 20th Century.
Which explains a LOT of the disdain for the new design. Which then feeds through into other aspects of the trailer (not even a movie at this point).
I watched Trek the first time around. I'm that old. I had a copy of the Ent blueprints that came in a plastic sleeve, in the 70s, as well as that handbook thingy.
I've watched all versions of Trek, and watched it wither badly with the last two movies.
Am I keen for the movie, based on the trailer? Very much so. Does the Ent redesign bother me? No, it's just a ship, whereas a real SF movie is about the people, something you may have forgotten while focusing on design.
Asimov said:
Not what colour an shape the ship's nacelles are.
You can defend the 60s design as a classic of its era, and I'd agree. You can't defend it now. By that understanding, we'd still want cars with big fins and lots of chrome (well, I do sometimes, but that's just me). In some ways, we've seen too much, moved on.
So should you.
But it is also so very old school, so very 20th Century.
Which explains a LOT of the disdain for the new design. Which then feeds through into other aspects of the trailer (not even a movie at this point).
I watched Trek the first time around. I'm that old. I had a copy of the Ent blueprints that came in a plastic sleeve, in the 70s, as well as that handbook thingy.
I've watched all versions of Trek, and watched it wither badly with the last two movies.
Am I keen for the movie, based on the trailer? Very much so. Does the Ent redesign bother me? No, it's just a ship, whereas a real SF movie is about the people, something you may have forgotten while focusing on design.
Asimov said:
And that core revolves around how we change as people, how we adapt to challenges.
Not what colour an shape the ship's nacelles are.
You can defend the 60s design as a classic of its era, and I'd agree. You can't defend it now. By that understanding, we'd still want cars with big fins and lots of chrome (well, I do sometimes, but that's just me). In some ways, we've seen too much, moved on.
So should you.
Last edited:
You fool!!!
Wow, the stars are lined up pretty heavily against you brave lot. JJ Abrams, Star Wars fans, the rest of us poor, optimistic suckers, and now the mods themselves? I guess you really do contend in vain.
It's all a massive conspiracy to shut you up and prop up this film!
Last edited:
I think someone should point out as well, for the sake of the original analogy, that Sarah Palin was an attempt to pander to the Republicans' "base" and they're getting shit now for running the worst campaign in modern history.
FWIW
over 60% of republicans say they would like Sarah to run for president in 2012
Wow, the stars are lined up pretty heavily against you brave lot. JJ Abrams, Star Wars fans the rest of us poor, optimistic suckers, and now the mods themselves? I guess you really do contend in vain.
Hey - they're fighters. They never give up. And they're going to win on November 5th -
Sorry, flashbacks.
You fool!!!
Oh, it's okay. They all know anyway.
You're bringing Braga over later, right? Don't forget the lube.
I think someone should point out as well, for the sake of the original analogy, that Sarah Palin was an attempt to pander to the Republicans' "base" and they're getting shit now for running the worst campaign in modern history.
FWIW
over 60% of republicans say they would like Sarah to run for president in 2012
Because she's still the most popular Republican most people know about. That isn't saying much but it isn't comparable to Trek.
Wow, the stars are lined up pretty heavily against you brave lot. JJ Abrams, Star Wars fans the rest of us poor, optimistic suckers, and now the mods themselves? I guess you really do contend in vain.
Of course it is. And I'm their footsoldier who's going to stalk Vance and track him down so that I can do physical violence to him, just like he fears!
Because I'm doing designs based on TOS, out of a fondess for that era of ship. That's not the full limits of my work, and, as I've REPEATEDLY said, it's not that I feel that the TOS-R would have been the best choice for the big screen, but it would have been BETTER than an extremely dated CGI model that's using last year's CGI fads in designing it.
You make too many assumptions. From what I've seen of the characters and interaction, this is seriously low-grade stuff here. Kirk as an angsty, clueless peeping tom? Uhura as the 'sexy senior' and nothing else, etc, etc... To be honest, if the 'Car off a cliff' scene is supposed to be character development, dear GOD are you making a bad argument for this film.
In case, moving on would mean doing something actually NEW. Remember, the whole point of this is to cash in on nostalgia and 'Trek of Yore'. So, don't you find it incredibly stupid that your'e saying 'It's OLD TREK BACK' on one hand as a plus, then simultaneously saying "OLD TREK SUCKS AND ITS DATED" on the other?
