Doctor Who Discussion Forum for Who North America customers
 
HomeFAQSearchRegisterMemberlistUsergroupsLog inThe Who North America Online Store
Share | 
 

 Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
AuthorMessage
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:31 pm

I guess I'm just the odd duck out, because the lens flares never bothered me.

Then again, I'm also Die Hard Original Crew despite growing up with the TNG cast (Mostly because the TOS episodes haven't aged as dramatically as TNG has - to say nothing of the quality of the movies) so I'm more then willing to overlook some superfluous flaws in order to get back to what I consider to be the superior Trek era (The 23rd Century).

TNG onwards just muddled everything up. Unfortunately, Enterprise occupies a copious existence straddling two realities: First Contact definitely happened - unfortunately - and a line from the 09 movie indicated Archer was still around - and Scotty had lost Porthos in a Transporter accident.

Though I both am disappointed and relieved they didn't do the scene at the end of the film where Porthos ends up re-materializing on the Enterprise. Disappointed because it would have been a cute scene (And Porthos was one of the few good things to come out of Rick Berman's last gasp), and relieved because the 09 Film had enough instances of the Plot Convenience Fairy without tacking that one on as well.


As for Into Darkness news, Orci has revealed online that the cast played a big role in the script rewrites. While I'm sure this will lead to many pitchforks and torches from the Trekkie community, I'm glad that Chris Pine and company helped out and gave suggestions. While I will always adore the original actors, I feel their replacements more then lived up to the legacy, so I'm eager to see what new ideas and personality quirks they interject into the characters.

The key to a successful reboot is not being totally married to the source material. If that were the case, Battlestar Galactica would never have had it's amazing New Caprica arc (A pity that was the last time that particular show was good, but that's a whole other thread).
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:20 am

Rust wrote:
The Castellan wrote:
You also forget another thing he likes doing: Killing off characters, just for the purpose of bringing in new ones.

Somehow I doubt Paramount will allow that in Trek's case.

Quote :

One thing is for sure, I'll most likely be popping in Star Trek: The Motion Picture the day Jar Jar's second bowel movement, errrr, "Trek" film comes out, or in the very least a smart episode of TNG, like "Where No One Has Gone Before". Jar Jar's not getting my money. Basketball

I'm in agreement with SF Debris on TMP. It's not a bad film, but the effects get in the way and end up grinding the movie to a screeching halt. It's the Star Wars Prequels equivalent of a Star Trek film.

Also, fun factoid: Encounter at Farpoint has 20% more dialogue in it then Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

Least the effects were useful in TMP to tell the story, how else one is going to show off a 100 mile long machine?

And at least TMP, and Encounter at Farpoint, minus Sirtis's hammy acting in that one, were two stories I enjoyed, and had the going into the unknown, as opposed to Trek 2009, which failed at having me enjoy it, and no going into the unknown. Plus Nero was BOOOORRRRRRING as heck.....just the Romulan equivalent of a teamster or a mid 1990's postal worker.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:28 am

TNG must have been doing something good, since it lasted so long, and it delivered some darned good stories.

When Data died, I felt bad for him. Did not feel a loss for any of the folks in Trek 2009, and I still say having Kirk as an arrogant, James Dean wannabe 'bad ass' rebel is something I really can't stand. TOS Kirk, the real Kirk, was described as 'grim' and a 'pile of books with legs' and 'in Lt's Kirk's class, you either think or sink!' and this 2009 'Kirk', who I look at as a mere caricature, I doubt, ever picked up a book, nor strikes me as some wonder boy who can do the impossible.....including getting command of the newest Starship 10 years sooner than the real Kirk did. And when the real Kirk broke the rules, he did it to help his friends or the federation, not for his own gain. And the simulator scene, with him arrogantly leaning back in in the chair, eating an apple, just made me wanna puke, it was so horrible.

Jar Jar Kirk: Oh, wowz, 700k @t m3, 1'm 500000 k007z, lol!

And of course, 'Spock' is probably going to be wearing all black, listening to the Cure, while cutting himself with a razor.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 8:48 am

The Castellan wrote:

Least the effects were useful in TMP to tell the story, how else one is going to show off a 100 mile long machine?

How about in context to the overall story and not a slow pan into the interior where everyone gapes in awe over a green screen while scenes without any context are given to us?

I adore the Constitution Class - easily my favorite ship in Star Trek. The Refit design for the TOS movies stands atop that pile, just a beautiful ship. It doesn't need a four and a half minute montage of different shots of it sitting in dry dock with swelling music and zero dialogue.

There's using effects to maximum effect, and then there's the George Lucas method of being so in love with your effects that it strangles the story you're trying to tell.

Quote :
Plus Nero was BOOOORRRRRRING as heck.....just the Romulan equivalent of a teamster or a mid 1990's postal worker.

You won't see me argue with that. Apparently the secondary media fleshed out Nero's character and motivations quite a bit, but a movie should never have "required reading" to figure out what's going on. The few flashbacks do nothing to establish Nero's character and thus relegate him to the second or third worst villain the movies have ever had.

I'd say he's tied with Soren from Generations (Ironically they're both motivated by the loss of their family - which should be effective but neither movie capitalizes on it). The worst, by far, has to be the Klingon from Star Trek V - who went after the Enterprise because he was bored.

Quote :
I still say having Kirk as an arrogant, James Dean wannabe 'bad ass' rebel is something I really can't stand. TOS Kirk, the real Kirk, was described as 'grim' and a 'pile of books with legs' and 'in Lt's Kirk's class, you either think or sink!' and this 2009 'Kirk', who I look at as a mere caricature, I doubt, ever picked up a book, nor strikes me as some wonder boy who can do the impossible.....including getting command of the newest Starship 10 years sooner than the real Kirk did. And when the real Kirk broke the rules, he did it to help his friends or the federation, not for his own gain. And the simulator scene, with him arrogantly leaning back in in the chair, eating an apple, just made me wanna puke, it was so horrible.

I'm still shocked people fail to pick up on this fact, but I'll reiterate it once again:

This version of Kirk never had his father. George Kirk was often cited in TOS as a defining influence in Kirk's development and thanks to Nero, that influence was taken away. Of course Jim Kirk is going to turn out to be a different person in that situation, never mind the fact he joined Starfleet far later then his Prime Universe counterpart did.

This Jim Kirk is a Genius Level IQ without any sense of morale responsibility or need to use it wisely. And, more importantly, filled with a profound sense of the universe's overall unfairness over the loss of his father. Nowhere else is this evident when - even though Earth is threatened by Nero's Mining Ship O' Doom, Kirk takes the time to ask Prime Spock about whether or not he knew his father.

By the end of the film, that arrogance has been burned off Kirk and he more closely resembles his Prime counterpart - if still a bit too sure of himself.

You won't see me supporting the Cadet-to-Captain promotion, which was just so stupid as to be baffling. Unless the loss of half the fleet to Nero (That happened off screen of course) took such a chunk of Starfleet's manpower (They were activating the reserves with Cadets, after all) required a lot of shoes to fill. Still, you'd think Spock - being one of the few already serving Officers aboard - would have been the one to get promoted to Captain with Kirk and company maybe getting Lieutenant.

Speaking of Spock...(Nero: SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHKKKKKKKKKK!)

Quote :

And of course, 'Spock' is probably going to be wearing all black, listening to the Cure, while cutting himself with a razor.

Again, I'm shocked this has to be explained. Prime Spock, you want to take this one?

"Jim...I just lost my planet. I can tell you, I am emotionally compromised."

Spock's behavior in 09 Trek make perfect sense. Not only did he lose his planet but watched his mother die. For crying out loud, even Saren shows some emotion after that.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 9:42 am

Quote :
How about in context to the overall story and not a slow pan into the interior where everyone gapes in awe over a green screen while scenes without any context are given to us?

I adore the Constitution Class - easily my favorite ship in Star Trek. The Refit design for the TOS movies stands atop that pile, just a beautiful ship. It doesn't need a four and a half minute montage of different shots of it sitting in dry dock with swelling music and zero dialogue.

There's using effects to maximum effect, and then there's the George Lucas method of being so in love with your effects that it strangles the story you're trying to tell.

The V'ger voyage, both through the clouds, and the V'ger vessel itself were amazing, and that was all by hand, not much computer, there, and was very convincing. And this was a time where visual effects were used right, showing what sot of beast the Enterprise was up against. No context was needed, here, you saw just how huge this thing was.

And that four minutes of the Enterprise flyby was classic, showing off the new design, not to mention welcoming the fans back to see the Enterprise after a 10 year absence. I love taking in all the details. And the model work was awesome, there.

Lucas is a special effects whore, because CGI is what lens flares are to that other hack, Abrams. They can't stop using them, it's their black-tar heroine.


This so-called Kirk will never, ever, be a Kirk to me.....just some Han Solo wanna be, and seeing him getting beaten up simultaneously sickens me (getting beaten up overweight security guards is sad, the real Kirk would have pwn'ed them, or at least send a few of them to loose tooth city before getting over powered) and amuses me, since I hate this arrogant punk from the minute the character's born.

And the old Spock was still able to control his feelings, while seeing Vulcan go boom (destroying Vulcan itself was stupid, since that means it's only been roughly a century since they kicked out their corrupt government/Romulan infiltrator....and getting rid of a lot of potential stories) and this JJ Spock's ready to break a person's neck if someone so much as looks at him wrong.

And what's with changing planet's names/locations in this new timeline? The planet Kirk was marooned on (sending someone out in a pod on some extremely hostile planet was a WTF moment.....put Kirk in the brig or confined to some room for goodness sake) was not an ice world in TOS, nor was it anywhere near Vulcan.....and I highly doubt the Kelvin incident somehow managed to change planet's locations and names.

Sulu was about useless (and that fencing bit following by a cheesy grin was more of an eye roller than a nod to fans) and Scotty was pathetic, and what the heck is that little goblin that's with him......and WHY is it even there......or is this yet another Star Wars element Abrams stuck in, in some attempt for a cheap Chewbaca sidekick......to go along with the brewery engineering area that makes even the Millennium Falcon's interior look sleek and state of the art by comparison.......especially when one looks at the clean, sleek, sterile exterior and bridge. Poor Enterprise went from a classy lady to a top heavy, Jersey Shore diva. And it seems JJ thinks all vessels' engineering sections look the same after 1950 or so......and if one's going to use a brewery, at least make it so it does not LOOK like an obvious brewery....a similar thing was done on the original V series, and it too did not look good. If that idiot JJ would have used the original concept arts of the engineering area with the horizontal warp core and all that, along with the sleek terminals and computers, it would have been a lot better, and more Trekian and less Axis Chemicals. The TMP and TNG era engineering were just fine, and even Archer's engineering on the NX-01 looked more advanced and cleaner than JJ's monstrosity. Plus having a sleek, clean sterile outside, and having a cumbersome, primitive engine room does not make sense, nor does it look good. And speaking of the exterior, I have seen some amazing CGI renders and animation of the TOS Enterprise, and they looked incredible, and could have been used for the big screen. It's funny that amateur fans can make good, acceptable visuals that JJ's gimps and peons could not.


And Robocop still looks too much like a Batman suit to me.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 11:52 am

The Castellan wrote:

The V'ger voyage, both through the clouds, and the V'ger vessel itself were amazing, and that was all by hand, not much computer, there, and was very convincing. And this was a time where visual effects were used right, showing what sot of beast the Enterprise was up against. No context was needed, here, you saw just how huge this thing was.

And that four minutes of the Enterprise flyby was classic, showing off the new design, not to mention welcoming the fans back to see the Enterprise after a 10 year absence. I love taking in all the details. And the model work was awesome, there.

I'm not saying you are wrong for liking that. I'm just say, for me, it's needless padding in a movie that's already stretching a thin plot to the breaking point. TMP is actually not a bad film, it's just bulky and unwieldy that could easily have a half an hour of film cut with nothing of value lost to the plot.


Quote :
This so-called Kirk will never, ever, be a Kirk to me.....just some Han Solo wanna be, and seeing him getting beaten up simultaneously sickens me (getting beaten up overweight security guards is sad, the real Kirk would have pwn'ed them, or at least send a few of them to loose tooth city before getting over powered) and amuses me, since I hate this arrogant punk from the minute the character's born.

You haven't watched much TOS recently, have you?

Kirk getting his butt handed to him in every fight is a direct callback to how fights played out on TOS. Kirk has always gotten his rear handed to him in every fist cuff only to eventually come out on top. A Piece of the Action stands out in my mind. Spock and McCoy dispose of their foes in short order, while Kirk and his mark scuffle for another 30 seconds. Kirk's never been much of a fighter and I enjoyed that that was brought into the new series. It's one of those subtle characterizations that are easy to get discarded.


Quote :
And the old Spock was still able to control his feelings, while seeing Vulcan go boom (destroying Vulcan itself was stupid, since that means it's only been roughly a century since they kicked out their corrupt government/Romulan infiltrator....and getting rid of a lot of potential stories) and this JJ Spock's ready to break a person's neck if someone so much as looks at him wrong.

Spock was controlling his feelings. Kirk was deliberately antagonizing him in order to provoke a emotional response to get him to relinquish command - which is what Prime Spock told him to do. Strikes me if Spock hadn't told Kirk his younger counterpart was in a emotionally damaged state, Kirk would never have been able to do it in the first place (And it took quite awhile to get a response anyway).

Quote :
And what's with changing planet's names/locations in this new timeline? The planet Kirk was marooned on (sending someone out in a pod on some extremely hostile planet was a WTF moment.....put Kirk in the brig or confined to some room for goodness sake) was not an ice world in TOS, nor was it anywhere near Vulcan.....and I highly doubt the Kelvin incident somehow managed to change planet's locations and names.

There's nothing in the film that suggests that film's Delta Vega is the same planet as the one seen in the TOS series. There's also nothing in established Star Trek lore that suggests the Vulcan system can't have it's own Delta Vega. Indeed, Vulcan's changed astronomical positions before.

The biggest problem I have with Delta Vega in the 09 movie is it's an Ice Planet that is extremely close to Vulcan...itself a desert world, suggesting it's close to its system's star. That's a rather dramatic climate shift for two planets so close (astronomically speaking) together.

Quote :
Sulu was about useless (and that fencing bit following by a cheesy grin was more of an eye roller than a nod to fans)

Sulu and Chekov were both criminally underutilized, I agree.

Quote :
and Scotty was pathetic,

Strongly disagree there. Simon Pegg did a brilliant job, marrying the two very different versions of Scotty together (There's the Scotty of the TOS series who is fond of a drink but otherwise a rather serious character. And then there's the Scotty of the TOS movies, who became more and more a plucky comedic relief sort of character).

Quote :
and what the heck is that little goblin that's with him......and WHY is it even there......or is this yet another Star Wars element Abrams stuck in, in some attempt for a cheap Chewbaca sidekick......

Yes, because Lord knows they've never thrown in previous unknown alien species into Star Trek before. The nerve.

Seriously man, you're starting to complain for the sake of complaining. Keenser doesn't harm the movie or narrative in any way, and adds a few light hearted moments to the movie.

Quote :
to go along with the brewery engineering area that makes even the Millennium Falcon's interior look sleek and state of the art by comparison.......especially when one looks at the clean, sleek, sterile exterior and bridge. Poor Enterprise went from a classy lady to a top heavy, Jersey Shore diva. And it seems JJ thinks all vessels' engineering sections look the same after 1950 or so......and if one's going to use a brewery, at least make it so it does not LOOK like an obvious brewery....a similar thing was done on the original V series, and it too did not look good. If that idiot JJ would have used the original concept arts of the engineering area with the horizontal warp core and all that, along with the sleek terminals and computers, it would have been a lot better, and more Trekian and less Axis Chemicals. The TMP and TNG era engineering were just fine, and even Archer's engineering on the NX-01 looked more advanced and cleaner than JJ's monstrosity. Plus having a sleek, clean sterile outside, and having a cumbersome, primitive engine room does not make sense, nor does it look good.

You haven't seen modern naval vessels' engineering sections, have you? While I agree Engineering was a touch unwieldy, I did like the fact it looked more like a power plant then the typical "Circular Room with giant Lava Lamp in the middle". But I very much agree with the computer terminals - there weren't any there and if you're going to make Engineering that big, then you need to have people in Engineering.

Quote :

And speaking of the exterior, I have seen some amazing CGI renders and animation of the TOS Enterprise, and they looked incredible, and could have been used for the big screen. It's funny that amateur fans can make good, acceptable visuals that JJ's gimps and peons could not.

No. It really couldn't have.

I'll be honest here, if I had one glaring complaint about the 09 Trek film, it was the use of the classic series uniforms. They stink. I really wish they would have brought back the TOS movie outfits from Wrath onwards, which was the best uniform Trek has seen.

Similarly, while I took have seen renders and animation for the TOS Enterprise, it still looks like a CG representation of a model from the 1960s. The update we got for the film was picture perfect as far as I'm concerned. Hardly a "Top Heavy Diva", she had a grace and elegance sorely lacking in other ships.

That being said, she still doesn't hold a candle to the Refit design.


Quote :
And Robocop still looks too much like a Batman suit to me.

And I think he looks like a armored SWAT team member.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:14 pm

Quote :

You haven't seen modern naval vessels' engineering sections, have you? While I agree Engineering was a touch unwieldy, I did like the fact it looked more like a power plant then the typical "Circular Room with giant Lava Lamp in the middle". But I very much agree with the computer terminals - there weren't any there and if you're going to make Engineering that big, then you need to have people in Engineering.

This is not a modern navel ship, it's a space vessel 300 some odd years from now.
The Enterprise-D was enormous, and it had that clean, sleek engineering that looked like something alien and advanced, since we see computers today getting smaller and smaller, the 2009 Trek Engineering was more like the Univac or those computers from 50 years ago that filled entire rooms.....all it needed was the punch cards to complete the look.

The Wrath of Khan uniforms I never liked, they felt way to militaristic and not to mention looked waaaay too fancy for day to day life, not to mention looking uncomfortable as well....they'd be better off as dress uniforms.

The 2009 Enterprise looks like it was beaten with an ugly tree, let along an ugly stick. The TOS design could have been used, as I said, I've seen some amazing renders of it done, and can be used if done the correct way like those guys. The James Cawley series did well with their Enterprise.


With all the crap JJ put into this film, I am surprised he did not put fuzzy dice or the equivalent of hydraulic lifts like my Spanish friends did with their cars.


And I did not like that goblin with Scotty since in TOS he did not have a sidekick, plus we get no explanation for the doofus, he/it is just there. Plus Chekov seemed to know more about the Enterprise than Scotty did.


Robocop was an ordinary police man in a metal body, not of SWAT. Just watch, they are going to probably have him leap and bounce all over the place like Spider-Man or something, his body already looks like a rejected Batman suit already.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Evil Monkey Pope
RANK: Time Lord Council Guard


Number of posts : 1817
Registration date : 2007-07-16

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:37 pm

Well there's no reason there can't be goblinish aliens in Star Trek. It's not as out there as something like the Horta. Plus there's nothing in preboot continuity that says there can't be goblinish alienis in Star Trek. Plus it's played by Deep Roy so you could always assume it's an upgraded Peking Homonculus.
Back to top Go down
View user profile https://mattthecatania.wordpress.com/
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 8:06 pm

The Castellan wrote:

This is not a modern navel ship, it's a space vessel 300 some odd years from now.
The Enterprise-D was enormous, and it had that clean, sleek engineering that looked like something alien and advanced

And if you sneezed on it, it would go critical and destroy the ship.

Seriously, it seemed like at least once a season something was causing the Warp Core temperature to rise and threaten all life on the ship. And, ironically, it was the final reason the ship was destroyed, despite it not being directly targeted in the attack.

Compare that to Star Trek II, set a hundred years in the past, yet taking point blank raking fire aimed directly at Engineering. And while it did mess up the ship but good, there was never any danger of the ship exploding violently.

Therefore, Larger Engineering Sections = Safer overall ships.

Besides, given the sheer amount of power a ship large enough to comfortably accommodate 400 people would require - nevermind the thousand about the D...it's stupid that the TNG Engine Room was so tiny.

Quote :
The Wrath of Khan uniforms I never liked, they felt way to militaristic and not to mention looked waaaay too fancy for day to day life, not to mention looking uncomfortable as well....they'd be better off as dress uniforms.

Eh, to each their own. When I do randomly get the urge to venture into Star Trek Online I always customize my uniform to be the 24th Century equivalent of that Uniform. The red and black give a real sense of professionalism the jumpsuits lacked. And let's not even talk about the DS9 onward uniforms. Black on Grey with Gunmetal Bridges. "TVs are getting better resolutions. How do we cover up our crappy set designs?" "Make everything Black!"

Quote :
The 2009 Enterprise looks like it was beaten with an ugly tree, let along an ugly stick. The TOS design could have been used, as I said, I've seen some amazing renders of it done, and can be used if done the correct way like those guys. The James Cawley series did well with their Enterprise.

No, the TOS design could not have been used. It's a product of the 1960s and it shows those roots. The TOS Refit could have easily worked, but I understand why they went with an all new look rather then just recycle that one. New franchise, new continuity...new ship. I'm sorry you don't like the new Constitutions, but I personally do.

Quote :

And I did not like that goblin with Scotty since in TOS he did not have a sidekick, plus we get no explanation for the doofus, he/it is just there.

Keenser is a fellow member of Starfleet. He was Scotty's colleague, not sidekick. As for why he was there...probably the same reason Scotty was. Somebody has to main the Starfleet outpost and he probably got on the wrong side of the brass to boot.


Quote :
Plus Chekov seemed to know more about the Enterprise than Scotty did.

I'd hope so. Scotty was brand new to the ship after a indeterminate exile. He knew of the Constitutions, but I doubt Starfleet just broadcasts ship specs and systems on open channels.

Quote :

Robocop was an ordinary police man in a metal body, not of SWAT. Just watch, they are going to probably have him leap and bounce all over the place like Spider-Man or something, his body already looks like a rejected Batman suit already.

That's not much of a prediction, since that's how Cyborgs are generally portrayed in fiction now-a-days.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cruel Angel
RANK: Time Lord Chancellor


Number of posts : 5858
Age : 44
Registration date : 2009-07-27

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 9:25 pm

And now... Trek thoughts, by Cruel Angel

Kirk v New Kirk

I always viewed the 'stack of books with legs' as a moment of discontinuity for his backstory. Kirk never gave me the impression he was a stellar academician in TOS. Having New Kirk be a high IQ boy was part of a new spin.

Arrogance. Kirk had that in spades. Let's review.

He broke one of the golden service academy rules by cheating, just because he didn't want to fail. A test where everyone fails. (and I do go along with the novel- he wasn't tech savvy enough to do the actual reprogramming, but he did plan and lead the raid to gain access to the facility to get the new program installed).

He put himself in almost every landing party, when there is no reason a line officer should be going down into unknown, dangerous or simply routine missions. M5 said it best- non essential personnel.

Speaking of M5, Kirk pretty much hit it on the head with his pity party to McCoy as to his being threatened by M5.

And again in Deadly Years- refusing to admit he couldn't command anymore.

We won't even go into his raging hormones.

Then we get to the movies. He uses VGer as an excuse to get his command back, just because he didn't like having a desk job anymore. Who cares if he screws over Decker in the process, and almost loses the ship because he wasn't up on the refit design.

Kirk was arrogant, and a lot of it was self serving.





Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattmanw54301
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1208
Age : 35
Registration date : 2007-09-09

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:06 pm

My thoughts.

I really enjoyed the 2009 Trek. I thought it was an interesting way of re-starting the franchise without erasing the Prime Universe. Some of the cast were under-used, however each one did the best with their material.

Kirk's arrogance didn't bother me. Obviously, his father played a big part in calming down Kirk's ego. But he has grown alot over the course of the film. And in the comics, he even goes as far as apologizing to 'cupcake' (the big security guard).

Trek was dead and buried long before Abrams got involved. It would still be gathering dust, a relic of the 20th century, like the X-Files. So that I am thankful for.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:31 pm

Amusingly enough, re-watching Star Trek VI (Which I think is just a hair better then Star Trek II), all I could really think of is how the message of that movie (People being afraid of the future) really resonates with the split in the Trek fandom over Abrams' relaunch.

"People think the future means the end of history, well, we haven't run out of history just yet. "
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Ronpur
RANK: The Doctor


Number of posts : 9504
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-08-29

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:48 pm

I actually just finished watching it. And, as always, I finish watching having enjoyed it, but then begin to really hate parts of it. But, each time I watch it, I hate fewer parts of it, it grows on me. And I am a huge Trek fan, having gone to dozens of conventions, built models, collected props, etc, since 1971.

My current dislikes are still the lens flares, they just went WAY overboard on them. It really detracts from the film for me. I have always considered a lens flare to be a mistake when I have taken pictures...not an artistic style.

And, yes, the engine room. When Scotty and Kirk just beam on board, there are computers and Star Fleet Graphics. But during the climax, we see Scotty in cut aways giving his ''I'm givin' er' all she's goht Cap'in" lines, and it looks like it was filmed at the Budweiser Plant tour! No sign of it being on a ship.

The engine rooms seen during ST:TNG, etc were not all of the engines and power sources of the ship. They were just the control center for the main intermix of the warp core. We only saw the interior of a Warp nacelle one time, and it is huge. So much design time was spent on the ship, which I think is beautiful, and the bridge, which I love, I feel really disappointed by those shots. Why did they suddenly get lazy? What these designers could have done with an engine room, it should have been amazing.

I await the sequel with excitement and fear......excited for another Star Trek, and fear it may suck.....same as I felt with every Star Trek movie I have gone to see in my life.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:59 pm

mattmanw54301 wrote:
My thoughts.

I really enjoyed the 2009 Trek. I thought it was an interesting way of re-starting the franchise without erasing the Prime Universe. Some of the cast were under-used, however each one did the best with their material.

Kirk's arrogance didn't bother me. Obviously, his father played a big part in calming down Kirk's ego. But he has grown alot over the course of the film. And in the comics, he even goes as far as apologizing to 'cupcake' (the big security guard).

Trek was dead and buried long before Abrams got involved. It would still be gathering dust, a relic of the 20th century, like the X-Files. So that I am thankful for.

Pfffft, but are we ever going to get the original universe of Trek back on screen ever again, or are we going to be relegated to novels? Plus, to me, if a dying series can only be saved by making into into basically just another set of action flicks for the Joe Sixpack crowds, then I don't think it should be saved.....it's like you ask for a spinach salad and a glass of red and wine, and you end up getting a bid mac with a diet coke.

And X-files was pretty good, made one think about what's out there and how those people in power pretty much don't have the people they are supposed to work for in their best interests.

As for Kirk and the simulator, to me, there is no such thing as a no win situation, and making a test that can not be won all together makes no sense. And so far, novels are not cannon, therefore, I can believe Kirk had enough know how to alter the computer....the difference, I feel between James Kirk and JJ's James Dean wannabe was I think Kirk was probably a lot more professional and mature when it was going on, and not leaning back smugly in his chair, with a \"naughty word\" eating smirk and eating an apple in front of everyone going, "Look how cool I am!" Plus Kirk said he got an accommodation for original thinking, and not nearly being kicked out of Starfleet, like James Dean there did.

And going on a landing party, I don't think that was a huge violation at all, since let's face it, it's about time we see the bosses actually go out there and risk their own necks as well, and not pussy foot within the safety of the bridge. That just shows Kirk had guts and courage.

As for V'ger, Kirk took command of the ship because he was experienced in unknowns, he and his crew survived a 5 year trip out there, and looking at the ships that were lost, like the Constellation, the Exeter, the Intrepid, and older ships like the Archon, and Horizon and so on, surviving such a trip seems to be something that really shows you're one of the best. And Scotty even said Decker was "an untried captain", I'd rather have someone experienced, despite having been a desk jockey for 2 years prior, than someone who's inexperienced, regardless of his knowledge of the ship systems. Demoting Decker to second in command seemed pretty good for that mission.

And you want arrogance, look at all the Starfleet officers above the rank of Captain, such as a Commodore or Admiral, as well as seemingly all the Ambassadors Starfleet seemed to have in those days, and were ready to willingly put the Enterprise and crew in really nasty harm....like in Taste of Armageddon, as well as the M-5 disaster in the first place. And as for Kirk being a manwhore, I seen only 2 or 3 episodes where in the whole of the series where he actually got laid, like with the Scalosians, or Miss Noel and such. He most of the time just used his charm to get what he needed for the ship, crew or mission...or to get out of harm's way....such as in "Cat's Paw", where Silvia, unaccustomed to any sort of sensation, let alone intimate ones, literally could destroy the ship at a moment's notice. Kirk just used that to get enough information out of her, while also trying to keep her from turning everyone into a mind zombie, or killing them. I mean if women can use their own charm to get what they want out of a man, than turnabout is fair play, says I. So far, James Dean Kirk, who seemed to have no charm to begin with, was just trying to get some green *****.

And the whole "Cupcake" thing still makes me cringe.


And I don't call a reboot a future, it's just, to me, a retelling of the same old story, since Hollywood's too damned lazy, and lacking brain cells, to make something original.

And if you want to mention novels, the 1986 novel, "Enterprise: The First Mission" was a pretty darn good idea for a beginning story. You got the crew meeting for the first time, some friction between the older crew and the newer, a first contact with an alien race, and a villain to deal with. All that, and written by a Trek fan, made for a good story without alienating the fans and not making stuff to complicated for the Joe Sixpacks to digest.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cruel Angel
RANK: Time Lord Chancellor


Number of posts : 5858
Age : 44
Registration date : 2009-07-27

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 11:00 pm

And now, Trek Thoughts, by Cruel Angel

Uniforms

Being of the military mindset (and love military sci fi too), the TWOK era uniforms are my favorites. Looked military... rank, department, years in service, and they had those field jackets too. Made so much more sense that just the TOS duty tunics that they wore to every single climate. Even in The Cage era they had the wrap around field tunics.

And practically, unless the material they use is adaptive for massive heat retention or dissipation, water proof, etc, it is extremely unrealistic to have just one uniform, period. At least in the animated series, they had the personal force fields.

The military aspect overall is why my fav films were 2 and 6. Meyer really brought the military vibe to Starfleet. Good in 2, even better in 6.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 11:04 pm

Ronpur wrote:
I actually just finished watching it. And, as always, I finish watching having enjoyed it, but then begin to really hate parts of it. But, each time I watch it, I hate fewer parts of it, it grows on me. And I am a huge Trek fan, having gone to dozens of conventions, built models, collected props, etc, since 1971.

My current dislikes are still the lens flares, they just went WAY overboard on them. It really detracts from the film for me. I have always considered a lens flare to be a mistake when I have taken pictures...not an artistic style.

And, yes, the engine room. When Scotty and Kirk just beam on board, there are computers and Star Fleet Graphics. But during the climax, we see Scotty in cut aways giving his ''I'm givin' er' all she's goht Cap'in" lines, and it looks like it was filmed at the Budweiser Plant tour! No sign of it being on a ship.

The engine rooms seen during ST:TNG, etc were not all of the engines and power sources of the ship. They were just the control center for the main intermix of the warp core. We only saw the interior of a Warp nacelle one time, and it is huge. So much design time was spent on the ship, which I think is beautiful, and the bridge, which I love, I feel really disappointed by those shots. Why did they suddenly get lazy? What these designers could have done with an engine room, it should have been amazing.

I await the sequel with excitement and fear......excited for another Star Trek, and fear it may suck.....same as I felt with every Star Trek movie I have gone to see in my life.

Well, lucky you, for I seen that film about three times, and hated more of it each.

They got lazy because Abrams said he was not a Trek fan, and was more concerned with more CGI and his lens flare fetish than anything else. Plus he seems to think that everything made after 1950 will look the same 300 years later.

As I said, I am not going to see this film. JJ's not getting my money, and I'll probably watch some real Trek or work on my own 3D Trek comic I plan to get started as soon as I get some better computers.

And I am still wanting for the JJ Prise to wooosh by with subwoofers thumping while bouncing up and down like some of my Spanish friends' cars. Razz
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 11:06 pm

Cruel Angel wrote:
And now, Trek Thoughts, by Cruel Angel

Uniforms

Being of the military mindset (and love military sci fi too), the TWOK era uniforms are my favorites. Looked military... rank, department, years in service, and they had those field jackets too. Made so much more sense that just the TOS duty tunics that they wore to every single climate. Even in The Cage era they had the wrap around field tunics.

And practically, unless the material they use is adaptive for massive heat retention or dissipation, water proof, etc, it is extremely unrealistic to have just one uniform, period. At least in the animated series, they had the personal force fields.

The military aspect overall is why my fav films were 2 and 6. Meyer really brought the military vibe to Starfleet. Good in 2, even better in 6.

The military aspects were what I did NOT like in 2 and 6. I preferred more of the non military stuff in TMP and TNG. And the engineering cadet shouting sir, yes sir to Kirk at the inspection was an eye roller to me. Probably why I liked Picard's era so much, since everyone was on more familiar tone with each other.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cruel Angel
RANK: Time Lord Chancellor


Number of posts : 5858
Age : 44
Registration date : 2009-07-27

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sat Oct 20, 2012 11:45 pm

Between officers of close ranks, it's not unexpected, but a midshipman cadet in an inspection conducted by an admiral, familiarity is not going to happen.

TNG wise, Riker was still stuck on protocol in Farpoint, when he made Geordi officially report to him. That put Riker on my bad list, but after that, he became the laid back one as far as military protocol went. His casual command style to me is the best, whereas Picard still kept the formality and distance even after so many years with the same staff. Even hardcore Jellico (who I loved too, putting Troi into uniform and Data into the proper command red) was on a first name basis with all the department heads.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 12:49 am

Man, all this Trek talk has me itching to play some Star Trek Online.

Back to the U.S.S. Thunderhead for me. Razz
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 1:06 am

And visual proof of my love of the WOK era uniforms...



Probably going to go back and change the comm badge, but I was really impressed with how the character creation system lets you "remake" that outfit.

EDIT: And for kicks, my ship - The U.S.S. Thunderhead.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:03 am

Quote :
who I loved too, putting Troi into uniform

Booooo, another point against Jelico.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:14 am

After reading some, but not all of the comments,

oddly enough,

"I don't give a sh*t"

I did see the 2009 one on DVD and only watched it once and have no desire to see it ever again. Even on the first viewing all the scientific screw-ups were enough to make me want to watch a Spanish soap opera for greater believability.
Back to top Go down
Rust
RANK: Time Lord Commoner


Number of posts : 1557
Age : 33
Registration date : 2010-06-26

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:59 am

Star Trek's never been big on scientific accuracy. I mean, it is the King of Technobabble after all. (I mean, how many viable ways have they come up with for traveling through time?)

If I want intelligent Science Fiction, I'll read Honor Harrington (Even if the present novels are getting bloated on their own continuity and things are slowing to a glacial pace). When I want fun, I go to Star Trek.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Castellan
RANK: Celestial Intervention Agent


Number of posts : 3254
Registration date : 2010-06-11

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:07 am

Well, some of the stuff I been researching, stuff like time travel, faster than light travel and the like are not soooo far off.

And seeing the odd objects in the sky defying all sort of physics just tells me that while we can not do that stuff yet, someone else can.

I just won't see Trek 2009 ever again, due to it being crap. And the same will go for this new one.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cruel Angel
RANK: Time Lord Chancellor


Number of posts : 5858
Age : 44
Registration date : 2009-07-27

PostSubject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion   Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:07 am

The Castellan wrote:
Quote :
who I loved too, putting Troi into uniform

Booooo, another point against Jelico.

When the series first started, I never thought that Troi was actually in Starfleet. To me, she was in 'civil service', employed by Starfleet with an equivalent rank and pay grade. That explains why she is the only department head that doesn't wear a Starfleet uniform. I figured in Farpoint, they just let civil service people wear the uniform to fit in, but with their corresponding rank. They got rid of it after, so they just decided to go with civilian again.

But then Jellico comes alone and brings up the issue again. After all these years, she's been in civilian attire... just because? You could again say she was still civil service, but had to wear a Starfleet uniform...

Then we got to the command test, which I had a major problem with. Putting Troi into an actual line position instead of staff creates a big problem with the therapist client relationship. She can't counsel someone under her line of authority. That creates a dual relationship. Any one in that situation would have to go to a different counselor. Yes, you would think that on a ship that size that there would be more than one counselor, but that just creates more hassle with her primary job.

And yes, she should also not be providing counseling to Riker, and eventually Worf... again, dual relationship. Helping Picard is compromised too, since she could potentially let him being her superior line officer affect what she says or does in the client relationship. He's the one that is signing off on her OERs. The counselor position should be outside the chain of command. Staff, not line.

Lastly, why does she even need to take it anyway? Are there ships made up of counselors that need captaining out there? I can see medical, science... but counselors? If she really is in Starfleet, she should be able to advance in rank just based on job performance. Any sort of leadership training requirement wouldnt require something like the bridge officer test, since any advanced position would simply be riding a desk doing admin or research. It's inherently a staff position.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 13Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Who North America Forum :: Life, the Universe and Everything :: Sci Fi Discussion-
Jump to: