Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
05-19-2010, 06:11 PM
Wow a lot of Star Trek (2009) raging....it's an alternate universe sheesh get over it.. God some of you are adults and this perplexes me...

...stop the freakin rage over a movie, yes it was completely different than TOS, the graphics/look was 100x better than TOS and tbh if current tech was around then JJ's Enterprise would probably be close to what Gene whould have made it.

The plot of JJ's was mostly a story of the characters to teach new fans on who these people where. Idk why people are saying the movie was horrible, when I was in a viewing for it 2 weeks before release EVERYONE loved it and their reactions during the movie where the most vivid than I have ever encountered before in a movie theater.


So to summarize it up....different universe, if you don't like it, stop complaining and ruining it for the Trek fans who accept this NEW REALITY in Star Trek history.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
05-19-2010, 06:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenor-Nyiad View Post
Wow a lot of Star Trek (2009) raging....it's an alternate universe sheesh get over it.. God some of you are adults and this perplexes me...

...stop the freakin rage over a movie, yes it was completely different than TOS, the graphics/look was 100x better than TOS and tbh if current tech was around then JJ's Enterprise would probably be close to what Gene whould have made it.

The plot of JJ's was mostly a story of the characters to teach new fans on who these people where. Idk why people are saying the movie was horrible, when I was in a viewing for it 2 weeks before release EVERYONE loved it and their reactions during the movie where the most vivid than I have ever encountered before in a movie theater.


So to summarize it up....different universe, if you don't like it, stop complaining and ruining it for the Trek fans who accept this NEW REALITY in Star Trek history.
Same universe, different time line. This means that JJ Abrams can run a muck and do what ever he wants. IF we don't stop him, earth might be next. The man is unstable.


And really, a 120 minute introductory? That's some awsome story telling right there. Though I suppose it's better than having a flash back to their abusive parents or that guy from the 7-11 in Sydney who's keeping the ear from exploding every 10 minutes.

And BTW, excessive use of flash backs also use to be a bad form of writing, except for maybe in film noir, but only if the lead narrates everything. Now all of the best and hottest shows use it to make people think they're watching something smarter than it really is.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
05-19-2010, 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bracknell
Seeing your avatar lets me assume that you at least watched TNG and DS9. TNG was almost entirely made of diplomatic contacts with only a few exceptions. DS9 is another story. Diplomacy broke down and they showed us the extreme.
Except the movie is based off TOS. Diplomacy did happen in TOS, but so did plenty of action, fisticuffs and violence to Kirk's shirt.

Its cheezy to look at now, but as a kid I remember being on the edge of my seat as Kirk fought the Gorn, or battled Spock in Amok Time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Raso
The actors were picked like most actors are now a days, with a greater focus on their sex appeal rather than their acting skills.
You make this sound like a 'modern' practice. Its been going on since the start of moving pictures.

You do realize William Shatner got the job based more off his sex appeal rather than acting skills right? And don't get me started about Nichelle Nichols. They were both hotties of their generation, chosen for their sex appeal. Not to mention the slew of scantily clad women that appeared in that show. There was lots of sexy in TOS.

I get you both don't like the movie and thats fine. But your critiques seem a little strange based on the actual show it was based off of. Which was not TNG.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
05-19-2010, 09:55 PM
I'm a huge fan of TOS....and damn it's cheesy. Grew up on it, love it (still my favorite series by far), but to hold it up as this shining example of greatness is a joke.

For it's time, it was very sexy and violent.

I also enjoyed the new movie. It had HUGE plot holes, yes, most of the actors were only ok (Karl Urban rules as Bones though), but the action was nice looking, I personally like J.J.'s use of anamorphic lens for glare (with enhancements) and his camera "thumping" technique.

I will agree with Raso on that Quinto guys portrayal of Spock.....horrible, wrong, etc. The marooning Kirk part is just beyond me, he would have been thrown in the brig. Spock would have been relieved for making an illegal order on the spot, any officer should have done it, Bones as the most senior one I can think of (with the power to enforce it as CMO). That right there is a career breaker, and his officers allowing it would have been career breakers .Imagine a navy captain nowadays putting a junior officer on a desert island...instant jail time, career over, congressional hearings, and his officers that allowed it would be screwed too.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
05-19-2010, 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrasil
And yet contains a glaring plot hole.

Spock's plan was to create a black hole to contain a supernova's energy to save the galaxy and Romulus. If he was successful, wouldn't a black hole of that size eventually destroyed Romulus anyways? Or was there a secret plan to destroy said black hole after it ate the energy?

Also, how did Kirk go from being a third year cadet (essentially a junior in college) to being a starship captain with the rank of full Captain? Over Spock who was already a Commander!?!
Did you not watch the movie? Everything was actually explained in the movie... The only reason you didn't hear about your "black hole" byproduct issue is because it didn't matter in the movie... But seriously, did you see the movie?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
05-19-2010, 11:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by personae

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raso
The actors were picked like most actors are now a days, with a greater focus on their sex appeal rather than their acting skills.
You make this sound like a 'modern' practice. Its been going on since the start of moving pictures.

You do realize William Shatner got the job based more off his sex appeal rather than acting skills right? And don't get me started about Nichelle Nichols. They were both hotties of their generation, chosen for their sex appeal. Not to mention the slew of scantily clad women that appeared in that show. There was lots of sexy in TOS.

I get you both don't like the movie and thats fine. But your critiques seem a little strange based on the actual show it was based off of. Which was not TNG.
Yes, but there's often a balance. Depending on the type of movie, one may be more important than the other. If you can't find the right actor, then you need to find some that has the right balance of looks and acting skill or charisma.

For a deep and passionate drama, it may be something like this:
Acting------/------------------looks

For a movie that has lighter drama and more action something like this:
Acting---------------/---------looks

For a HD explosion fest, or one of these new bipolar dramas that are all the rage now a days it might look something like this:
looks-/------------------------\-looks

If the sacrifice acting for a set of knockers or tight abs then they've already made the choice to for go any heavy cerebral stimulation and deep plot in factor of the same shallow crap people have been goggling up as of late. Though I do concede to your point, Shanter was hot (at least that what women tell me) and his acting wasn't exactly top notch. Now he has no excuse, especially since he has over 40 years of practice and nothing to show for it.

This is the path that the bulk of sci-fi shows take nowadays because people have become too detached from that scenes of awe that we use to have. Technology that's like magic, fantastic worlds, diplomatic intrigue, the depth of human nature, no one cares about these aspects anymore.

The new sci-fi formula looks something like this:
Lock a bunch of hot young adults in a confined space (ie space ship, island or just a mysterious room) or tell them that America is gonna blow up next year. Make sure none of them are on their meds and they all have troubled pasts. Next create some shallow relationships that are crafted out of hormonal rage and tense situations. Points added for excessive use of flash backs, lense flares and shaking cameras. And when you can't come up with enough plot, just fill 30 minutes of your 50 minute time slot with dramatic pauses and if it's on The CW or ABC finish the episode up with a musical montage to some sappy emo music while you show the main characters being sad while doing mundane late evening-early night time things just before they either make up or break up for good. Yeah, that's good stuff.
That's almost every sci-fi series and movie as of late. Star Gate's old model with a more light hearted and adventurous feeling has been replaced in it's new show with the above formula. IT's dark, and everyone's always at each other's throats. And they're stuck in a space ship that jumping out of their control. In fact they just celebrated a new land mark! Last week they had their mandatory "People from your past haunt you and tell you you're a failure and make your second guess yourself" episode.


Oh, and the new BSG and Caprica sucks. it's 70-something episodes of paranoia, bipolar and other mentally unstable people being haunted by their past (everyone on the Galactica apparently had unappreciative dads, abusive step parents or other issues) fighting an enemy that could be any one (terrorists much?) in space BUT you'd never know they were in space because they never explored that part of the story because they were too busy crying about everything! Oh and then they find earth and it's over run by damn dirty apes. The bulk of all modern sci-fi sucks and is as much about exploring the human psyche and the limits of human potential as a play bot magazine is about rich and fulfilling articles for todays man on the go.

Just throwing it out there.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
05-20-2010, 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrasil
And yet contains a glaring plot hole.

Spock's plan was to create a black hole to contain a supernova's energy to save the galaxy and Romulus. If he was successful, wouldn't a black hole of that size eventually destroyed Romulus anyways? Or was there a secret plan to destroy said black hole after it ate the energy?
Why should it? The supernova was far away. Normally it would have taken years or decades for the supernova blast to reach Romulus. A black hole a few light years away is just like a big star that doesn't glow in the night. Not really harmful. Something manipulated the nova so it could basically "warp" its shockwave. Which only makes sense in the world of Startrek science fiction, of course. But we don't see Warp as a plot hole.

Quote:
Also, how did Kirk go from being a third year cadet (essentially a junior in college) to being a starship captain with the rank of full Captain? Over Spock who was already a Commander!?!
He saved an entire world populated with billions of people through his decisions.
- He connected the dots between Uhuras communication reports, his fathers death and the description of the scenario around Vulcan.
- He then managed to convince his superiors to be more careful on the approach, which made them avoid a disaster.
- He attempted to rescue Vulcan in a dangerous mission. He failed, but he made no wrong decisions at that point.
- He took command of the Enterprise and made the right decision to follow the alien ship to Earth and avert Earth's destruction. Showing better decision-making skills than a well-respected officer of higher rank.
- He did so by working with his crew men and get the best performance out of them.
- He saved his commanding officer.
- He destroyed a ship of superior firepower and defenses.

He proved that he was a capable Captain. He proved that he could think on his feet and make the right decisions. He showed that he can command people, keeping his cool even under high pressure. Without his decisions, the entire "mission" would have failed several times at at least two key points (Approac to Vulcan, following the Nerada to Earth). What should they do? Promote him to Lieutenant and work at an OPS console for a few years, where he can't really use his command skills, and might be capable of better decisions than his superiors?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
05-20-2010, 02:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raso

Oh, and the new BSG and Caprica sucks. it's 70-something episodes of paranoia, bipolar and other mentally unstable people being haunted by their past (everyone on the Galactica apparently had unappreciative dads, abusive step parents or other issues) fighting an enemy that could be any one (terrorists much?) in space BUT you'd never know they were in space because they never explored that part of the story because they were too busy crying about everything! Oh and then they find earth and it's over run by damn dirty apes. The bulk of all modern sci-fi sucks and is as much about exploring the human psyche and the limits of human potential as a play bot magazine is about rich and fulfilling articles for todays man on the go.
You're telling me that if you find out that those killer robots that destroyed your homeworld can actually look exactly like any other human being, that you would not be a little paranoid and mentally unstable?
You tell me that talking about mental instability or paranoida paranoia is not about the human psyche and the limits of human potential? You tell me that discussing topics like what democracy or freedom means when you're the last few thousand survivors after a holocaust and running from manically killers is not a worthy Science Fiction theme? That that has the same value as the content of a play boy (or bot?) magazine?

I gues I really should try those play boy magazine, they might be better than I thought.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
05-20-2010, 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raso
Oh, and the new BSG and Caprica sucks. it's 70-something episodes of paranoia, bipolar and other mentally unstable people being haunted by their past (everyone on the Galactica apparently had unappreciative dads, abusive step parents or other issues) fighting an enemy that could be any one (terrorists much?) in space BUT you'd never know they were in space because they never explored that part of the story because they were too busy crying about everything! Oh and then they find earth and it's over run by damn dirty apes. The bulk of all modern sci-fi sucks and is as much about exploring the human psyche and the limits of human potential as a play bot magazine is about rich and fulfilling articles for todays man on the go.

Just throwing it out there.
Now compare it to the original BSG (Filled with 'pretty' actors for the era) and what they found when they arrived at Earth. If you never saw 'Galactica 1980' just consider yourself lucky. Its about the worst *fingerquotes* 'Sci-Fi' show ever made.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
05-20-2010, 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
Y
You tell me that talking about mental instability or paranoida paranoia is not about the human psyche and the limits of human potential? You tell me that discussing topics like what democracy or freedom means when you're the last few thousand survivors after a holocaust and running from manically killers is not a worthy Science Fiction theme? That that has the same value as the content of a play boy (or bot?) magazine?

I gues I really should try those play boy magazine, they might be better than I thought.
I'm saying that there are more facades to human nature than paranoia and having your freedoms taken away, and they should explore them. Few new sci-fi shows are willing to explore anything other than paranoia, bi-polar teens, terrorism allegories and current political concerns.

NEWS FLASH! The world's going to heck and we're all driving the school bus! You don't need to watch more than 5 minutes of news to get that, why does every single action and sci-fi show insist on reminding my of this?

Cylons were an allegory for terrorists, and a very poorly executed one at that because there was nothing else they could be but terrorists. While Star Trek also used allegories in for races they were much less obvious which led to multiple interpretations that were each viable. They didn't fixate on paranoia and lack of freedoms and the poor economy and all of this other crap on the news. That's not to say they ignored them, but they explored other facades as well.

Sci-fi used to be a means for us to escape reality and be reassured that the future would be awesome. Weather the the future was a fascist state where humans fought giant bugs or where the earth was the center of a galactic federation of planets, it would be awesome. Now, modern sci-fi is like any action drama now a days, it is all done, not to help people escape the toils of reality, not to awe them and certainly not to entertain them but so that they can see that EVERYONE leads miserable lives, so their miserable lives are justified! Even in space you have terrorists and no jobs and a bad economy and paranoid misguided patriots and in space your freedoms are being taken away and only god and a gun can save you.

And @ personae, yeah Glalactica 1980 was bad. But The thing that I enjoyed about the original BSG was the sense of adventure it had. That and it explored more than 2 facades of the human nature. Not all old sci-fi was good, just like not all anime is good and not all modern prime time crime dramas are bad.
Reply

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 Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:02 AM.