« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 [16] 17   Go Down

Author Topic: Star Trek 2009  (Read 6083 times)

Offline Anodizer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1940
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #225 on: May 31, 2009, 12:34:22 PM »
Quote from: Tango on May 31, 2009, 10:36:21 AM

I saw it. I saw the scene when McCoy says he really likes this guy. Thats doesn't bode well for the next movie if they aren't continuing that realtionship they had in the original series that everyone loved.

As for Spock losing his cool in the series, yes he did, BUT he always tried to act as if it never happened or have an excuse for it. Thats out the window since it shows him embracing his emotions at the end of the movie.

On Roddenberry, he didn't like how the original series played out with Kirk in the spotlight. He wanted ALL the crew to play equal parts in it as it did in all the other Star Trek series did. Of course they will not be as memeorable as the original because of that, but who cares now that they have wiped the slate clean with this movie.

As for it being a BIG hit, Pearl Harbor made around $450,000,000 million worldwide and many in here consider it garbage. I suppose you think it was a great movie as well.

I will disagree with you on just about every point you made.... 

1.  What part of sarcastic didn't you understand about the scene were Mccoy says he really likes the guy???  This was so obvious..  I'm at a loss as to why you didn't get it.... :huh

2.  I can name scene after scene where Spock totally explained why he lost his cool..  Just by the fact you are evening saying this further negates anything you say about TOS..
     You don't know the series...  Don't act like you do....   :)
3.  You are absolutely and totally WRONG (fail) about how Roddenberry wanted to portray the series and not liking how the series progress(where did you pull this info from, hmm?
     In the book "The Making of Star Trek" (written in 1968 by Stephen E. Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry himself), Roddenberry states that even from the earliest conception of the show       was to have 3 main characters.. Those being the Captain, The 1st Officer, and the Doctor with concentration being centered on the Capt.  All had different character names which evolved into the characters we all know so well (Well, maybe you don't know so well).  You are utterly and completely lying through your teeth about the characters having equal parts...  This was never part of the shows idea...Ever.... 

Dude, you have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to this stuff..  And to try to make it sound like you with some one who's probably the biggest Trek geek here is only a recipe for failure on your part..  You truly have no idea what you're talking about and you info is totally inaccurate as well as seeming to be entirely made up on your part....
Logged
I like classy, beautiful, intelligent woman that say the "F" word a lot....

80th FS "Headhunters"

Offline Anodizer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1940
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #226 on: May 31, 2009, 12:38:10 PM »
Quote from: Chalenge on May 31, 2009, 11:08:52 AM
For all the quips jabs and out and out insults McCoy and Spock did like each other in TOS.


This is a simplistic way of looking at it...  It's much more complex than "They did like each other"....
Their relationship was tumultuous in a mellow sort of way..  You can look at Mccoy being Spocks human conscience, more or less...

Of course after Star Trek 2, this all changed due to their shared experience of Spocks Katra living in Mccoy...
Logged
I like classy, beautiful, intelligent woman that say the "F" word a lot....

80th FS "Headhunters"

Offline Sincraft

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 691
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #227 on: May 31, 2009, 12:46:18 PM »
9 out of 10. 
Very good movie.  If you are a Star Trek freak you will be frightened by the Hollywood approach to this film I assure you, but I think you need to give it a chance, take in a good movie and just go enjoy yourself.  She's not the same girl you knew before ok? 

« Last Edit: May 31, 2009, 12:50:16 PM by Sincraft »
Logged

Offline Tango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
      • http://www.simpilots.org/
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #228 on: May 31, 2009, 04:02:16 PM »
Quote from: Anodizer on May 31, 2009, 12:34:22 PM
I can name scene after scene where Spock totally explained why he lost his cool..  Just by the fact you are evening saying this further negates anything you say about TOS..
     You don't know the series...  Don't act like you do....   :)

I grew up watcing the TOS and saw all the movies more than a few times. So tell us where in those shows Spock openly embraced his emotions like he did in the end of this movie?

As for Roddenberry, it  was stated that TNG was what he had planned for the TOS to be but NBC wouldn't go for it. Pretty much the reason why TNG movies slowly died out.
Logged
Tango78
78th Razorbacks
Historical Air Combat Group

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #229 on: May 31, 2009, 04:48:52 PM »
Quote from: Tango on May 31, 2009, 04:02:16 PM

As for Roddenberry, it  was stated that TNG was what he had planned for the TOS to be but NBC wouldn't go for it. Pretty much the reason why TNG movies slowly died out.

What killed Star Trek was Berman, Bragga, and over-saturation. They had too many series running together and back-to-back--Jonathan Frakes actually singled this out as a major issue when Enterprise was launched.
Logged
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Online Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13920
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #230 on: May 31, 2009, 06:11:17 PM »
I caught the one reference in the movie that indicated why there could be differences between the original series "future history" and the story line laid out in this movie. This isn't a strict time travel issue but one of alternate universes using the singularity for travel between them. That also explained why no real paradox regarding the two spocks meeting themselves. They are NOT the same spock on a different time line but each from a different universe which is also not on a perfectly congruent timeline. They specifically mentioned the alternate universe situation when discussing the various differences between the Romulan and Vulcan world existences on the bridge. That also explains why Uhura was all over Spock vs the original series.
Logged
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline Treize69

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5597
      • http://grupul7vanatoare.homestead.com/Startpage.html
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #231 on: May 31, 2009, 06:24:27 PM »
Quote from: Maverick on May 31, 2009, 06:11:17 PM
That also explains why Uhura was all over Spock vs the original series.

I just assumed it was because this Uhura was hotter to the Nth power, at least IMO.
Logged
Treize (pronounced 'trays')- because 'Treisprezece' is too long and even harder to pronounce.

Moartea bolșevicilor.

Offline Tango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
      • http://www.simpilots.org/
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #232 on: May 31, 2009, 06:48:08 PM »
Quote from: Maverick on May 31, 2009, 06:11:17 PM
I caught the one reference in the movie that indicated why there could be differences between the original series "future history" and the story line laid out in this movie. This isn't a strict time travel issue but one of alternate universes using the singularity for travel between them. That also explained why no real paradox regarding the two spocks meeting themselves. They are NOT the same spock on a different time line but each from a different universe which is also not on a perfectly congruent timeline. They specifically mentioned the alternate universe situation when discussing the various differences between the Romulan and Vulcan world existences on the bridge. That also explains why Uhura was all over Spock vs the original series.

They had episodes dealing with alternate universes and time travel from TOS to Enterprise and the one thing that ALWAYS held true was that the plot had things fixed to preserve the character base at the end. This was simply Abrams way of wiping all that clean so he could make HIS own version of Start Trek. There are those that like it [pretty much those that loved TNG more than TOS] and those that didn't [those that loved TOS but hated TNG].

Logged
Tango78
78th Razorbacks
Historical Air Combat Group

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #233 on: May 31, 2009, 06:56:55 PM »
Quote from: Tango on May 31, 2009, 06:48:08 PM
They had episodes dealing with alternate universes and time travel from TOS to Enterprise and the one thing that ALWAYS held true was that the plot had things fixed to preserve the character base at the end. This was simply Abrams way of wiping all that clean so he could make HIS own version of Start Trek. There are those that like it [pretty much those that loved TNG more than TOS] and those that didn't [those that loved TOS but hated TNG].



Actually, I loved TOS AND TNG, and I hate the premise of this (put me in the category of those who were ok with DS9, hated Voyager, and refused to watch Enterprise).
Logged
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Anodizer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1940
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #234 on: May 31, 2009, 08:12:53 PM »
See Rule #6
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 12:24:33 AM by Skuzzy »
Logged
I like classy, beautiful, intelligent woman that say the "F" word a lot....

80th FS "Headhunters"

Offline Anodizer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1940
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #235 on: May 31, 2009, 08:17:19 PM »
See Rule #4
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 12:25:29 AM by Skuzzy »
Logged
I like classy, beautiful, intelligent woman that say the "F" word a lot....

80th FS "Headhunters"

Offline Treize69

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5597
      • http://grupul7vanatoare.homestead.com/Startpage.html
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #236 on: May 31, 2009, 08:19:04 PM »
Logged
Treize (pronounced 'trays')- because 'Treisprezece' is too long and even harder to pronounce.

Moartea bolșevicilor.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #237 on: May 31, 2009, 08:26:31 PM »
Quote from: Treize69 on May 31, 2009, 08:19:04 PM
(Image removed from quote.)

The biggest insult for a geek is to be told you don't really know as much about your subject as you think you do.
Logged
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline DrDea

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3341
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #238 on: May 31, 2009, 08:32:53 PM »
Logged
The Flying Circus.Were just like you.Only prettier.

FSO 334 Flying Eagles. Fencers Heros.

Offline Tango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
      • http://www.simpilots.org/
Re: Star Trek 2009
« Reply #239 on: May 31, 2009, 08:57:57 PM »
See Rule #4
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 12:25:51 AM by Skuzzy »
Logged
Tango78
78th Razorbacks
Historical Air Combat Group
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 [16] 17   Go Up
« previous next »