Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > Scrolls of Lore > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-23-2013, 12:15 AM
CoDimus the Staunch CoDimus the Staunch is offline

Eternal
CoDimus the Staunch's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,572

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotal View Post
Only if you completely shut off your damn brain to watch them. That's not "Star Trek needs to be cerebral!!111"-stupid, it's "the plot makes no sense"-stupid with plotholes the size of several black holes, stupid and unlikeable characters, a design that befits Star Wars more than anything else and morally questionable actions by both the bad guys AND heroes. You may like them and that's your right - but calling them "good movies" when you really should know they aren't just weakens your position by acting like a fanboy. Don't do it.
Just because someone likes Abrams movies, it doesn't mean that he or she is a fanboy. These things are subjective.

Anyway, saw 71 minutes of Wrath of Khan yesterday. Brilliant movie. Will see the remaining today.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-23-2013, 01:45 AM
spidey1980 spidey1980 is offline

Eternal
spidey1980's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,301

Default

Imho TWoK is the best piece of Trek ever produced.

A thought on the ending:
I've always loved the fact that Khan dies, convinced that he has won. You rarely get to see the Villain get what he wants.
__________________
Quote:
Teenagers (or older) at a Left wing indoctrination camp*
Nothing of value was lost.
Hammerbrew commenting on Anders Behring Breivik's killing spree - 2017
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-23-2013, 05:05 AM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spidey1980 View Post
Imho TWoK is the best piece of Trek ever produced.

A thought on the ending:
I've always loved the fact that Khan dies, convinced that he has won. You rarely get to see the Villain get what he wants.
And in a way he did since the only reason the Enterprise got away resulted in Spock's death.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-23-2013, 10:06 AM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,092

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garotar View Post
And in a way he did since the only reason the Enterprise got away resulted in Spock's death.
Do we really need spoiler tags for a thirty year old movie that everyone has already seen?
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-23-2013, 12:17 PM
spidey1980 spidey1980 is offline

Eternal
spidey1980's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,301

Default

I tagged it because Call hasn't finished watching the movie yet.
__________________
Quote:
Teenagers (or older) at a Left wing indoctrination camp*
Nothing of value was lost.
Hammerbrew commenting on Anders Behring Breivik's killing spree - 2017
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-23-2013, 10:24 PM
CoDimus the Staunch CoDimus the Staunch is offline

Eternal
CoDimus the Staunch's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,572

Default

Right, so now I finished it. Awesome movie.

You know, William Shatner ruined Kirk with his overacting. In TOS, the overacting was there, but not that much. In the movies, it's just too much.

Besides Shatner, the rest of the performances were good, especially Nimoy.

EDIT- Ok, maybe in Wrath of Khan Shatner was awesome. But in 5, his acting was bad.

Last edited by CoDimus the Staunch; 12-16-2013 at 12:37 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-24-2013, 02:58 AM
spidey1980 spidey1980 is offline

Eternal
spidey1980's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,301

Default

I'd say TWoK is Shatner's best Trek performance.
Much of that is thanks to director Nick Meyer who had Shatner redo many scenes many times until he got it perfectly right.

The moment where they transmit the prefix code with Kirk saying "Here it comes" was reshot like a gazillion times.
__________________
Quote:
Teenagers (or older) at a Left wing indoctrination camp*
Nothing of value was lost.
Hammerbrew commenting on Anders Behring Breivik's killing spree - 2017
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-24-2013, 03:21 AM
Lord Eliphas Lord Eliphas is offline

Eternal
Lord Eliphas's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The Eye of Terror
Posts: 4,639

Default

Now that you've seen Wrath of Khan.

Admit that Darkness is just fucking Wrath of Khan. The Writers didn't do anything original at all, only do some stupid twists. Also characters relationships make no sense.
__________________
"Yeah, a sheltered and overly idealistic son of an absolutist monarch, set to inherit the whole nation and continue to rule it as an autocrat.

A beloved archetype of modern era!" - Kir the Gul'dan
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 07-24-2013, 04:26 AM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

It was more like Space Seed meets Wrath of Khan.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-24-2013, 08:06 AM
Shamu Shamu is offline

Demon Hunter
Shamu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 498

Default

Complete with taking down your genetic superiors with random bits of metal lying around.

I liked ID ok, it was entertaining as a remake but that's all it was. I did actually groan when Kirk was realigning the reactor though, it reminded me so strongly of Jack fixing the island in Lost I was expecting him to tell Spock he'd see him in another life.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 07-24-2013, 12:26 PM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

Spock yelling Khan made me cringe.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 07-28-2013, 02:34 AM
CoDimus the Staunch CoDimus the Staunch is offline

Eternal
CoDimus the Staunch's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,572

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spidey1980 View Post
I'd say TWoK is Shatner's best Trek performance.
Much of that is thanks to director Nick Meyer who had Shatner redo many scenes many times until he got it perfectly right.

The moment where they transmit the prefix code with Kirk saying "Here it comes" was reshot like a gazillion times.
I disagree. TOS Kirk had a bit of overacting, but not that much. In fact, episodes like 'The City on the Edge of Forever' showed that he could act.

But the movie Kirk overacts every single dialogue.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Eliphas View Post
Now that you've seen Wrath of Khan.

Admit that Darkness is just fucking Wrath of Khan.
While that may be true, it wasn't a bad movie at all.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-28-2013, 05:02 PM
Tilgath Tilgath is offline

Eternal
Tilgath's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,616

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Eliphas View Post
Now that you've seen Wrath of Khan.

Admit that Darkness is just fucking Wrath of Khan. The Writers didn't do anything original at all, only do some stupid twists. Also characters relationships make no sense.
The last half hour was Wrath of Khan, but that's pretty much it. People vastly overhype how much the movie took from WoK. I'd say everything before is a mix of slight "Space Seed" from TOS and heavy doses of "Homefront" and "Paradise Lost" from DS9.

Of course, I'd very much prefer a new, original story instead of rehashes. But as far as rehashes go, it was pretty fun.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 09-15-2013, 03:43 AM
CoDimus the Staunch CoDimus the Staunch is offline

Eternal
CoDimus the Staunch's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,572

Default

JJ Abrams will not direct Star Trek 3.


http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/confirmed...150600071.html
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 09-24-2013, 11:07 AM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,092

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Call of duty 1 View Post
I think that you are over-thinking this. I'd say that we assume that this alternate reality is actually a parallel universe and not just an alternate timeline. And we have to assume what the writers of the alternate universe say as true.

No offence, mate, but I don't understand why are you forcing yourself to believe that the alternate timeline is undoing all the stuff of the Prime one? When the writers of a fictional rebooted universe themselves say that it is running parallel, then it's pretty clear that it is a parallel timeline and it is not undoing anything. I think that logic would dictate this.
First of all i do not force myself into retconning the Prime Time Line - Star Trek 11 did that for me, starting with the bold and idiotic words "This is not your father's Star Trek", to which i can only say "no shit, JJ, it's not even MY Star Trek". My wrath doesn't actually start with the movie itself; just like the erogenous zones of some whore on Eroticon 5 it starts way, WAY earlier. It starts with a little man telling me that abandoning 40 years of Star Trek Canon, whether or not by retconning or just sidestepping, is good for the franchise. It goes on with the above stated claim. It includes statements like "I don't want to make a movie that Star Trek Fans want to see, i want to make a Star Trek movie that I want to see". That alone pisses me off to no end, but let it be said that I'm ready and willing to judge a movie on it's own, not by it's makers (i recently gave in and saw Into Darkness - pretty much what i expected, though it amuses me that so many people hang themselfs up on easily explainable stuff but give Kirk's Warp-Digivolution from Cadet WITHOUT OFFICER'S PATENT to Captain of the flaggship.).
But when the makers don't give two shits about the franchise entrusted into their hands you get Plot Holes, Inconsistencies, idiotic sets, lens flares, rotating phaser pistols and Khan 2.0.

I have found a very nice, short way of detailing everything wrong with Star Trek 11: the Stardate.
This sounds probably trivial, but it really is not as it gives a quick and fast look at the new Star Trek's approach: if you don't know what the term means - make shit up. The Stardate didn't have a meaning in TOS besides growing in number so that the viewer (if he was so inclined as to give a shit about the log entry dates) would get a sense of progression; "hey, this really IS a 5-year mission (cut short by cancelation)". From TNG onwards it got a very basic structure of (roughly) one thousand Stardate-units making up one year. Now, i don't expect them to start with TNG and count backwards, but given that the very POINT of the Stardate is to NOT use the gregorian calender I was naturally bathled as all hells to see them changing the Stardate-formular: take the Earth-year and slap a random number to it that follows a comma. (and what'ya know, they actually learned from that mistake and didn't use the Stardate ONCE in Into Darkness, giving me one less reason to complain. Good for them. I like progression.)
And judging by 11 alone they don't know much about the franchise besides the bare minimum of pop-culture-creep. Now granted - Voyager and Enterprise had the same problem with their own technobabble, but that doesn't make it an excuse - we made fun of Voyager for exactly the same reason, THEY at least had the decency to leave the Canon alone.

I could go on and on about it. The Transwarp-beaming-formula (starting with it's idiotic name it also makes space ships practically obsolete both in the JJ-Universe AND the Prime Time Line, should it still exist) transforming a transporterless Shuttlepod into a long-long-LONG range transporter (the range of a transporter is limited by it's hardware, not the software, and there's so much wrong with the concept of beaming someone from a relatively slow moving planet (moon?) to a space ship that has been traveling with high warp speed [and we will talk about JJTrek's neck-break-speeds down the line, trust me] for quite some time i wouldn't even know where to start). Spock seeing the destruction of Vulcan without a scope. From a planet called Delta Vega. That damn well should be a fucking moon. The decision to not even handwave away why the ONE GUY IN ALL OF STAR TREK HISTORY SHOWN TO BE ABLE TO ESTIMATE the calculations for a Slingshot didn't even try to go back in time to save either his home planet or the Prime Time Line. Cutting out every scene that could have elevated Nero from "insane Khan clone number 2341" to "legitimate tragic Anti Hero" (seriously - go and watch SFDebris' review to Star Trek 11. He makes Nero's tragic backstory sound like an epos... the movie just shows NONE of it). Kirk (a man who, at the start of the movie, was deemed UNFIT FOR DUTY due to his behaviour) being promoted to CAPTAIN. (that's jumping over Ensign, Lt. Jr, Lt. Sr., Lt. Cmdr and Cmdr and then some considering that he started as Cadett, not Ensign) The Enterprise having multiple Warp Cores (which, naturally, look nothing like that monstrosity of... stuff... we see in Into Darkness). The fucking Brewery. Scaling the ship up from it's intended length of 366m to over 700 so that JJ can compensate (which would make the Vengeance about a mile long, btw. The average Borg Cube has a width, highth and length of 3 kilometers), leading to a ship that, if official numbers are to be trusted, has windows only on every second deck and an additional deck above Deck 1. And apparently Chekov (who's accent is so bad in these movies that the fucking computer is unable to understand him; naturally they have HIM giving out critical information in shipwide announcements, right after he has to put a never-before-or-after required code to use the communication-system, and, also apparently, in Into Darkness the barely understandable junior officer is the replacement for the Chief Engineer) is genetically a different person than Prime-Chekov by virtue of being two years younger than him. And of course the Enterprise is atmosphere- and water-worthy now. A world of no.

And the thing is: i KNOW not every movie is perfect; hell, i like Transformers 1 and 2 and while i didn't LIKE it i still didn't regret seeing 3. A movie doesn't need be perfect for my enjoyment, it honestly doesn't even has to be very good. But these people do NOT give a fuck about the franchise and that pisses me off even more than the actual content, and it ALL culminates in the glorious fusion of "they don't know" and "they don't care" - which is making their movie a Time Travel Story that, by all Canon-rules, by virtue of 40 years of Star Trek filled with the occaisonal Time Travel Story, deletes the original time line... and then not repair the damage. Every single fucking time someone goes back in history we are treated to different ways of execution, sure, but the result is always the same: the actions taken in the past either have "always happened" (creating a stable time loop) or changing history within one time line. Call it Time Line, Time Stream, Universe, it doesn't much matter, it all means the same: a temporal incursion leads to a changed present with direct consequences for the heroes. There is a reason why Starfleet has temporal directives, there is a reason why Starfleet personel is always required to fix the time line. The way the travelling is done is never important (unless it has something to do with Q; with him you can never tell if it's actually happening or just another one of his illusions, but then again he's omnipotent; trying to tie him into Star Trek's already kinky physics would be as hilarious a try as it would be futile) for this. The only redeeming thing i can say about this mess is that they probably intended to have the Prime Line to stay intact - it still exists for after Spock goes back in time during Countdown and is shown to still exist for a breef moment. Had this been in the movie (seriously - two seconds of archive material of Brent Spiner mugging the camera in front of a green screen, would that have broken your shitty movie?) we'd have a canon source of the Prime Line still being intact... but with knowing everything we do about time travel in Star Trek, having the movie being ancored within said Star Trek and seeing how they did not include an on-screen proof to throw the real fans a fucking bone, to show them that, because of magical fairy pixy dust, this version of time travel works different than usual? I am NOT abandoning the Canon rules AND / OR the established Canon built with those rules for the words of men who think the Enterprise needed a reboot JUST to do The Wrath of Khan again. Just without being good and with a hot blonde in underwear. I am not abandoning the Canon rules for a man who thinks the Enterprise needs to be the size of a Galaxy Class Starship just because. I am not abandoning the Canon rules for "not your father's Star Trek". Not unless someone with actual say in that matter changes them. And so far, no one did.

I do like the Kelvin, however. Tapferes kleines Schiff.

Also: Into Darkness was better. Don't like it, but if it hadn't the bagage of being set in JJTrek it'd be enjoyably stupid. Even more than 11, though, it feels like a parody of TOS rather than a legit Star Trek movie. Have seen some complaints about that i find laughable because every nerd worth his money could technobabble or explain them away. Still has plenty of problems. Ship still ugly after refit. Could do with less sexism. Could do with less Cumberbatch. Could do with less Boom-Boom Abrams.

edit: looking at this post i realize that i haven't mentioned half of 11's problems. I may end up writing a for-realsies review of it some time in the future (the one i wrote in german for my blog got lost when i deleted everything out of boredom). But i think for today it will suffice; it's late.

Last edited by Commander Rotal; 09-24-2013 at 11:14 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 09-24-2013, 01:17 PM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

They made the JJPrise big because they wanted the shuttle bay to be large enough for multiple shuttles. Originally it was going to be close to the length of the original Enterprise.

Engineering was going to look more like what you saw in Star Trek The Motion Picture but they decided to save money on sets and put it in a brewery.

So intentions were there somewhere, they just didn't survive the rule of cool or the almighty need to be cheap.

Also, I will say that the more I see the JJPrise the more I like it but at the more reasonable length. The more I see the Vengeance the more it annoys the crap out me.
__________________
I used to take Warcraft lore seriously, then the lore took a Rule of Cool to the knee.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-24-2013, 01:59 PM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,092

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garotar View Post
They made the JJPrise big because they wanted the shuttle bay to be large enough for multiple shuttles.
Which is the part that makes no sense. There is no need for that many shuttles - hell, i'm fairly sure the Enterprise D didn't carry that many shuttlecrafts and if we believe the official size the JJprise is even bigger than that. There was no damn reason for that hangar scene.

Quote:
Originally it was going to be close to the length of the original Enterprise.
Actually it was supposed to be longer. It still is - aside from that one scene of the hangar, the ship as shown in Star Trek 11 is consistent with it's designed size of 366 meters. The saucer section is almost exactly the same size as the TMP Enterprise and if the design of the new ship wasn't so twisted and missplaced (i'm looking at you, neck and nacelles) they'd be the same length, give or take.
btw, there's an excellent article on this on http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org

Quote:
Engineering was going to look more like what you saw in Star Trek The Motion Picture but they decided to save money on sets and put it in a brewery.
If your budget doesn't support a set, don't show it. It's not like any of the scenes in either engineering (neither on the Kelvin nor the Enterprise) needed to be there (and the waterpipe scene should have been cut entirely). I mean i can halfway overlook the shuttlebay looking like it does, even though it's several times the size it should be for a ship that size, but... a brewery? Really? mean they didn't even TRY to hide it.

Quote:
So intentions were there somewhere, they just didn't survive the rule of cool or the almighty need to be cheap.
Yeah, some of the visual designers obviously cared; a lot of nerds land in these jobs but the guys in charge overruled them and i can hardly give Boom-Boom Abrams credit for something that was changed and not got into the movie. (though to be honest, the Enterprise-size is somewhat of a grey zone - canon on screen evidence points to 366m, so it's really more a matter of Abrams being silly and stupid once again)

Quote:
Also, I will say that the more I see the JJPrise the more I like it but at the more reasonable length. The more I see the Vengeance the more it annoys the crap out me.
You know i need to confess something here... i like the Vengeance, even though her engine section looks like it's made from black-painted Legos, the pylons like twigs and the saucer like a donut. The ship's look, it's backstory and technical specs are stupid on soooooo many levels... but at least it's the enemy's ship and INTENDED to be A) intimidatingly huge and B) hilariously overpowered as shit. At least this fucker does what it's been designed to do. Within the span of a year. After having found Khan. And then talk him into working for Starfleet. And design ships for them. To build them in their new secret shipyard. Hidden in the most frequented* system of the Federation. For an organisation that doesn't use it's own ships and facilities. Because it's so secret it's not even a real organisation.



* i kid. Of course Earth is always completely without defense, except that one time three redshirts charged the Borg in a futile attempt to save Earth.

ah fuck, i just remembered that i wanted to rant about the warp speeds in JJTrek and forgot.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-24-2013, 02:47 PM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotal View Post
Actually it was supposed to be longer. It still is - aside from that one scene of the hangar, the ship as shown in Star Trek 11 is consistent with it's designed size of 366 meters. The saucer section is almost exactly the same size as the TMP Enterprise and if the design of the new ship wasn't so twisted and missplaced (i'm looking at you, neck and nacelles) they'd be the same length, give or take.
btw, there's an excellent article on this on http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org
That's why I used the word close since I didn't remember the exact length. And I've read that. I like his site for information and pictures.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotal View Post
If your budget doesn't support a set, don't show it. It's not like any of the scenes in either engineering (neither on the Kelvin nor the Enterprise) needed to be there (and the waterpipe scene should have been cut entirely). I mean i can halfway overlook the shuttlebay looking like it does, even though it's several times the size it should be for a ship that size, but... a brewery? Really? mean they didn't even TRY to hide it.
It would have been better not to see it, I agree. But I imagine Budweiser also gave them some money.

The one in ST:ID was the National Ignition Facility, which looks a lot better than a brewery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotal View Post
Yeah, some of the visual designers obviously cared; a lot of nerds land in these jobs but the guys in charge overruled them and i can hardly give Boom-Boom Abrams credit for something that was changed and not got into the movie. (though to be honest, the Enterprise-size is somewhat of a grey zone - canon on screen evidence points to 366m, so it's really more a matter of Abrams being silly and stupid once again)
Yeah, when everything other than the shuttle ay points to one size that's probably your best bet, as much as Star Trek is kind of bad about ship sizes in movies sometimes (The Enterprise E in first contact is much larger on screen than it should be for example).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotal View Post
You know i need to confess something here... i like the Vengeance, even though her engine section looks like it's made from black-painted Legos, the pylons like twigs and the saucer like a donut. The ship's look, it's backstory and technical specs are stupid on soooooo many levels... but at least it's the enemy's ship and INTENDED to be A) intimidatingly huge and B) hilariously overpowered as shit. At least this fucker does what it's been designed to do. Within the span of a year. After having found Khan. And then talk him into working for Starfleet. And design ships for them. To build them in their new secret shipyard. Hidden in the most frequented* system of the Federation. For an organisation that doesn't use it's own ships and facilities. Because it's so secret it's not even a real organisation.
Yeah where it was hidden was kind of stupid. At least in Jupiter would make more sense.

Still, overall, the movies are fun. Not the Star Trek I remember (course I grew up watching TNG so TOS isn't really either), but it's fun. And it did get me back into Star Trek, so there's that.
__________________
I used to take Warcraft lore seriously, then the lore took a Rule of Cool to the knee.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-24-2013, 11:57 PM
CoDimus the Staunch CoDimus the Staunch is offline

Eternal
CoDimus the Staunch's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,572

Default

My God, Rotal really took offence at what I said. That rant is huge.

But seriously, we were not discussing whether you like Abrams Trek or not. We were discussing that the Prime reality still exists, and that you were unnecessarily going about saying that it doesn't.

As for all of what you said, I disagree. Most of what you are criticising(stardates, size of ships, etc) is really minor stuff. What, you liked the weird older stardate system? It only confused the hell out of me. Why should something so weird be kept anyway?

Let's not forget that the reboot revived a dying franchise. Hell, just because of watching the reboot, I have ended up watching TOS, TAS, the TOS movies, and currently am watching TNG, and still plan to finish off all of Star Trek, even including Enterprise and the unimpressive TNG movies. And I love both, the Prime Universe and the Alternate Universe.

Now, let's see what are the real problems with the reboot.

-Portrayal of women.
-Reusing plot lines from older Trek material(Into Darkness especially)
-Removing the Kirk-Spock-Mccoy stuff, which was one of the best things about TOS and making it only Kirk and Spock.
-Not being philosophical enough. While The Motion Picture suffered from excessive philosophy, this one suffered because of very little philosophy.

As for whining about Chekov's accent, well, remember nuclear 'wessels' from Voyage Home?

And also, take a look at what Bryan Singer did with Superman. He was a big fan of Donner's movies, and ended up making a horrible movie obsessed with nostalgia. This is what happens if you put somebody who loves something too much behind something. And he also realised this.

http://www.blastr.com/2013-5-30/brya...an-direct-trek

Mate, you are being way too much emotional. You are completely ignoring the positive points of the reboot, like acting, special effects, direction. Don't these things matter at all?
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 09-25-2013, 12:46 AM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,092

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Call of duty 1 View Post
My God, Rotal really took offence at what I said. That rant is huge.
I didn't take offense oO but you asked and i answered.

Quote:
But seriously, we were not discussing whether you like Abrams Trek or not. We were discussing that the Prime reality still exists, and that you were unnecessarily going about saying that it doesn't.
And i just told you why i say it.

Quote:
As for all of what you said, I disagree. Most of what you are criticising(stardates, size of ships, etc) is really minor stuff. What, you liked the weird older stardate system? It only confused the hell out of me. Why should something so weird be kept anyway?
A) Because it's there. Because it's been used in practically every episode and every movie before.
B) If it's too wierd for them to comprehend, then yes, don't keep it. They got that one right in Into Darkness. That doesn't change the fact that 11's Stardate was fucking stupid.
C) Don't hang yourself on the Stardate. I used it as an example as it shows Boom-Boom Abrams' approach to Star Trek in a nutshell: if you have no idea (and he and his writers regularly have none) - make shit up. Because Fans don't matter.

Quote:
Let's not forget that the reboot revived a dying franchise.
It should never have been revived in the first place. Killing Enterprise just as it started getting good was the nail in the coffin. There was no coming back in a meaningful way; the franchise doesn't need a Zombie eating the Canon away to shit out Wrath of Khan Rip Offs.

Quote:
Hell, just because of watching the reboot, I have ended up watching TOS, TAS, the TOS movies, and currently am watching TNG, and still plan to finish off all of Star Trek, even including Enterprise and the unimpressive TNG movies. And I love both, the Prime Universe and the Alternate Universe.
Well, then you will be delighted to hear that, by the time the reboot starts, everyone you ever liked on TNG, DS9 and Voyager has just PUFF'd out of existence. A great ending, right?

[quote]Now, let's see what are the real problems with the reboot.

-Portrayal of women.
-Reusing plot lines from older Trek material(Into Darkness especially)
-Removing the Kirk-Spock-Mccoy stuff, which was one of the best things about TOS and making it only Kirk and Spock.[quote]
Yeah, we agree on those, except the last bit, i supose, but i'm sure TOS fans will miss that. I was never fond of McCoy's casual racesism.

Quote:
-Not being philosophical enough.
Eh. The movies especially have had very little think-food for a while now; the last one was 9, and it all starts coming down once you really think about it. A Star Trek movie doesn't need be cerebral to be good (First Contact wasn't and it's still considered the best movie on par with Khan), just not insultingly stupid.

Quote:
As for whining about Chekov's accent, well, remember nuclear 'wessels' from Voyage Home?
I remember it as a one-off joke that i never cought because his accent wasn't thick enough for my ears. Also: the joke there wasn't that the police officer didn't understand him - it was that a russian was asking for nuclear submarines in the middle of the street to the face of a cop.

Quote:
And also, take a look at what Bryan Singer did with Superman. He was a big fan of Donner's movies, and ended up making a horrible movie obsessed with nostalgia. This is what happens if you put somebody who loves something too much behind something. And he also realised this.
And if you give the reigns over to someone who doesn't give a shit you get Nemesis, 11 and 12. Wanna know a fun fact about 2 and 6, the most liked Star Trek movies? They took in fresh blood to make those, one Nicholas Meyer, who had never seen an episode of Star Trek in his life. His reaction? Marathoning through TOS and writing The Wrath of Khan. Abrams' reaction? "Let's make a movie that I want to see, screw the Fans."

Quote:
You are completely ignoring the positive points of the reboot, like acting,
Didn't impress me, i've seen fan movies with better Kirks, Spocks, even Uhuras. Simon Pegg was okay. The entire Kelvin-scene was nice, despite the crew of 800 and a visual error with a lift.

Quote:
special effects,
Oh, you mean the Enterprise with horribly misshapen structure and Hot Dog-nacelles? You mean the rotating phasers? The lense flares? The size-issues? Changing absolutely everything in the universe except the pyjama uniforms? The lens flares? The Black Hole that looks like a Worm Hole? (that one is actually less an error than an observation, but if you think about it: we KNOW that Wormholes have moved people to other times and universes before) The multiple Warp Cores? The Brewery? The Slipstream-effect the ships have in Into Darkness? The Vengeance's Donut-shaped saucer section? It's torpedo-? The iBridge? The waterpipe-sequence?

Quote:
direction.
Yes, i was quite impressed with the directing during that scene where OldSpock looked at the sky and saw a planet die without a scope.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 09-25-2013, 12:59 AM
CoDimus the Staunch CoDimus the Staunch is offline

Eternal
CoDimus the Staunch's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,572

Default

Well, in that case, we should simply just agree to disagree with each other. I find it nice that the Prime reality still exists according to those currently making the movies, and I also enjoy the stuff we are getting now. I really miss the Spock-Mccoy rivalry/friendship, and Kirk balancing the two philosophies, but still, I find the new movies fun, and while Abrams is but a casual fan, I am pretty sure that he has seen TOS at least once, and I do see respect for the TOS crew, with all those lines about Kirk being a great man in the Prime timeline and this scene which was originally supposed to appear, and also, because of Spock Prime. I do see nostalgia, possibly because Orci and Lindeof are Trekkies.

http://trekmovie.com/2009/11/23/read...lliam-shatner/
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 09-25-2013, 04:55 AM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

I will say, on a whole, Primeverse has better looking ships.

I'm also of the opinion that Prime Verse is still going strong, though it helps I play a game set in it. I think, at this point, CBS controls Primeverse.
__________________
I used to take Warcraft lore seriously, then the lore took a Rule of Cool to the knee.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 09-25-2013, 09:51 AM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,092

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garotar View Post
I will say, on a whole, Primeverse has better looking ships.
I must admit i like the Kelvin, even though her design doesn't make too much sense for that time period (i'd have to read up whether or not they already had dual warp coils within one nacelle yet).
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 09-25-2013, 11:39 AM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,772
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotal View Post
I must admit i like the Kelvin, even though her design doesn't make too much sense for that time period (i'd have to read up whether or not they already had dual warp coils within one nacelle yet).
I like it as well, but as a while I prefer the TMP and TNG+ era ships.
__________________
I used to take Warcraft lore seriously, then the lore took a Rule of Cool to the knee.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 09-25-2013, 11:55 AM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,092

Default

Every single class related to the Galaxy class (the Galaxy, obviously, Nebula, Cheyenne, some would even include the Akira) is simply a master piece of elegant starship design. If i absolutely had to pick one thing i don't like about Chuck Sonnenberg (SFDebris) it'd be comparing the Enterprise D to a picknick table. and damnit, i even love the Galaxy-Refit from All Good Things. About time the Federation equipped their ships with a wave motion gun.

Last edited by Commander Rotal; 09-25-2013 at 12:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
entertainment, hhh, jjj, star wars, vvv

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.