ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

"Dumbing down"

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jul. 24 2009, 11:29 am

Quote (axilmar1 @ July 24 2009, 7:32 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 23 2009, 12:02 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 23 2009, 8:49 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 22 2009, 11:57 am)
Quote (SpaceTherapist @ July 22 2009, 11:30 am)
What rule of law or statute says that Star Trek should not be pop-corn entertainment?

IMO, ST should be pop-corn entertainment. ?By that, I mean, the films should be fun and exciting and have good characters that the audience could relate too. ?In that regard, FC was definitely a pop-corn "action film," as director Jonathan Frakes said. ?

ST isn't, imo, supposed to be like 2001 or the new film Moon, or Solaris, Gattaca, etc. ?(SpaceTherapist and others who like psychological or hard sf films, you should check this one out, it's really good). ?On the bigscreen, it absolutely should be a fun pop-corn film. ?If you can put a bit of a message or analogy in there too, great, but, above all you should have a fun, action-filled, character-driven story. ?The best ST films all have that.

No, Star Trek should be like 2001, for the sole reason that it is too important not to be like 2001.

Star Wars should be a pop-corn series (which it always was).

Please refrain from quoting or referencing my posts.

I have no wish to have any discourse whatsoever with you.

I have every right to quote whoever I like. If you don't want to respond, then don't.

I didn't say you didn't have the right to respond. ¿

I merely asked if you would extend me that courtesy.  

I will ignore all posts you make from now on. ¿I have no wish whatsoever having any discourse or interaction with any individual such as yourself.

axilmar1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1576

Report this Jul. 24 2009, 12:15 pm

Quote (rocketscientist @ July 24 2009, 11:29 am)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 24 2009, 7:32 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 23 2009, 12:02 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 23 2009, 8:49 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 22 2009, 11:57 am)
Quote (SpaceTherapist @ July 22 2009, 11:30 am)
What rule of law or statute says that Star Trek should not be pop-corn entertainment?

IMO, ST should be pop-corn entertainment. ?By that, I mean, the films should be fun and exciting and have good characters that the audience could relate too. ?In that regard, FC was definitely a pop-corn "action film," as director Jonathan Frakes said. ?

ST isn't, imo, supposed to be like 2001 or the new film Moon, or Solaris, Gattaca, etc. ?(SpaceTherapist and others who like psychological or hard sf films, you should check this one out, it's really good). ?On the bigscreen, it absolutely should be a fun pop-corn film. ?If you can put a bit of a message or analogy in there too, great, but, above all you should have a fun, action-filled, character-driven story. ?The best ST films all have that.

No, Star Trek should be like 2001, for the sole reason that it is too important not to be like 2001.

Star Wars should be a pop-corn series (which it always was).

Please refrain from quoting or referencing my posts.

I have no wish to have any discourse whatsoever with you.

I have every right to quote whoever I like. If you don't want to respond, then don't.

I didn't say you didn't have the right to respond. ?

I merely asked if you would extend me that courtesy. ¿

I will ignore all posts you make from now on. ?I have no wish whatsoever having any discourse or interaction with any individual such as yourself.

Please, don't do it!!! I beg you!!!!

PhantomCrunk007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5088

Report this Jul. 24 2009, 4:50 pm

Quote (axilmar1 @ July 23 2009, 9:15 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 24 2009, 11:29 am)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 24 2009, 7:32 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 23 2009, 12:02 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 23 2009, 8:49 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 22 2009, 11:57 am)
Quote (SpaceTherapist @ July 22 2009, 11:30 am)
What rule of law or statute says that Star Trek should not be pop-corn entertainment?

IMO, ST should be pop-corn entertainment. ?By that, I mean, the films should be fun and exciting and have good characters that the audience could relate too. ?In that regard, FC was definitely a pop-corn "action film," as director Jonathan Frakes said. ?

ST isn't, imo, supposed to be like 2001 or the new film Moon, or Solaris, Gattaca, etc. ?(SpaceTherapist and others who like psychological or hard sf films, you should check this one out, it's really good). ?On the bigscreen, it absolutely should be a fun pop-corn film. ?If you can put a bit of a message or analogy in there too, great, but, above all you should have a fun, action-filled, character-driven story. ?The best ST films all have that.

No, Star Trek should be like 2001, for the sole reason that it is too important not to be like 2001.

Star Wars should be a pop-corn series (which it always was).

Please refrain from quoting or referencing my posts.

I have no wish to have any discourse whatsoever with you.

I have every right to quote whoever I like. If you don't want to respond, then don't.

I didn't say you didn't have the right to respond. ?

I merely asked if you would extend me that courtesy. ?

I will ignore all posts you make from now on. ?I have no wish whatsoever having any discourse or interaction with any individual such as yourself.

Please, don't do it!!! I beg you!!!!

Reboots dont suck, you do Axilmar.

RedShirtGuyNumber1001

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2016

Report this Jul. 24 2009, 5:19 pm

No you see a dumbed down movie would be a lifeless parady.  This movie had some deep aspects to it.  For example how one man can truely change events, especially when he wasn't supposed to be there.  If you really think about it.  Did something cause Spock to have a bad day in the future.  Because if Spock always had a bad day and Romulas was always destroyed in the future, then is this the true canon of star trek?  Or did the ugly mugs of temporal cold war agents make their mark again.  (just when you though Enterprise was dead and gone forever!!;)

newKirk

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 387

Report this Jul. 25 2009, 11:00 am

Quote (DarthRage @ July 22 2009, 12:47 pm)
"The movie was "dumbed down" as compared with the other star trek movies"

Examples please.

I perceive that "dumbed down" being the following:

1. more action oriented then character or plot driven
2. loud
3. lots of explosions and fast pacing


that definitely describes this movie, however, I don't concede that it makes a dumb movie.. as I said, I enjoyed the movie and it works on many levels and there was enough character driven moments and plot to enjoy.. and i enjoyed this new cast, it was the strong point of the movie, as I stated in my previous posts

PhantomCrunk007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5088

Report this Jul. 25 2009, 8:11 pm

Quote (newKirk @ July 24 2009, 8:00 pm)
Quote (DarthRage @ July 22 2009, 12:47 pm)
"The movie was "dumbed down" as compared with the other star trek movies"

Examples please.

I perceive that "dumbed down" being the following:

1. more action oriented then character or plot driven
2. loud
3. lots of explosions and fast pacing


that definitely describes this movie, however, I don't concede that it makes a dumb movie.. as I said, I enjoyed the movie and it works on many levels and there was enough character driven moments and plot to enjoy.. and i enjoyed this new cast, it was the strong point of the movie, as I stated in my previous posts

Sounds like you described Wrath of Khan  and FC.

axilmar1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1576

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 6:49 am

Quote (PhantomCrunk007 @ July 24 2009, 4:50 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 23 2009, 9:15 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 24 2009, 11:29 am)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 24 2009, 7:32 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 23 2009, 12:02 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 23 2009, 8:49 am)
Quote (rocketscientist @ July 22 2009, 11:57 am)
Quote (SpaceTherapist @ July 22 2009, 11:30 am)
What rule of law or statute says that Star Trek should not be pop-corn entertainment?

IMO, ST should be pop-corn entertainment. ?By that, I mean, the films should be fun and exciting and have good characters that the audience could relate too. ?In that regard, FC was definitely a pop-corn "action film," as director Jonathan Frakes said. ?

ST isn't, imo, supposed to be like 2001 or the new film Moon, or Solaris, Gattaca, etc. ?(SpaceTherapist and others who like psychological or hard sf films, you should check this one out, it's really good). ?On the bigscreen, it absolutely should be a fun pop-corn film. ?If you can put a bit of a message or analogy in there too, great, but, above all you should have a fun, action-filled, character-driven story. ?The best ST films all have that.

No, Star Trek should be like 2001, for the sole reason that it is too important not to be like 2001.

Star Wars should be a pop-corn series (which it always was).

Please refrain from quoting or referencing my posts.

I have no wish to have any discourse whatsoever with you.

I have every right to quote whoever I like. If you don't want to respond, then don't.

I didn't say you didn't have the right to respond. ?

I merely asked if you would extend me that courtesy. ?

I will ignore all posts you make from now on. ?I have no wish whatsoever having any discourse or interaction with any individual such as yourself.

Please, don't do it!!! I beg you!!!!

Reboots dont suck, you do Axilmar.

I suck because I tell the truth that blinded, politically correct establishment suck-ups with rose-tinted glasses fan boys do not want to admit?

Ok, it's an honor then to suck.

axilmar1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1576

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 6:52 am

Quote (DrGojira @ July 26 2009, 5:17 pm)
I'm still waiting for an explanation of what in Trek movies is "brained up." LOL

TMP is brained up because it had a sci-fi mystery, not that Nero crap.

FC is brained up because of the Borg (an enemy like no other).

INS is brained up because of the message it carries.

I could probably go on and tell you something clever each movie has, except the last one, which was just like any other movie today, i.e. brainless and pop-corn entertainment.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 12:34 pm

Quote
INS is brained up because of the message it carries.


Please, do tell us what that wonderful and "brained up message" is?

Vorta_the_point

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 624

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 4:51 pm

Quote (axilmar1 @ July 27 2009, 11:52 am)
TMP is brained up because it had a sci-fi mystery, not that Nero crap.

FC is brained up because of the Borg (an enemy like no other).

INS is brained up because of the message it carries.

I could probably go on and tell you something clever each movie has, except the last one, which was just like any other movie today, i.e. brainless and pop-corn entertainment.

The thing is though, what you are describing above is simply touching on an issue or message, not an intellectual discourse.

Most films do this in some way or another; from the depth of the issues you describe above, it could be argued that Star Wars Revenge of the Sith is 'brained up' as it deals with the issues of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons (the end justifies the means); possessive, selfish love in comparison to compassionate, altruistic love; the erosion of liberties in the name of security and the dangers of nationalism without check; the nature of betrayal and self-deception. All these themes exist in the movie. However, does having themes make it intellectual or 'brained up'?

Likewise, the new Star Trek film possesses it's own themes, just as the other Star Trek films do; it covers the issues of revenge and obsession, and most crucially the idea of rising above personal problems to fulfill your own potential. Indeed, one of the two main plots (the other being stopping Nero) revolves around this theme, that of the gradual turning of the alternate, disadvantaged, disillusioned Kirk from James T. Jerk into James T. Kirk - striving to better oneself, one of the central themes of Star Trek!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 6:01 pm

Quote (Vorta_the_point @ July 27 2009, 4:51 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 27 2009, 11:52 am)
TMP is brained up because it had a sci-fi mystery, not that Nero crap.

FC is brained up because of the Borg (an enemy like no other).

INS is brained up because of the message it carries.

I could probably go on and tell you something clever each movie has, except the last one, which was just like any other movie today, i.e. brainless and pop-corn entertainment.

The thing is though, what you are describing above is simply touching on an issue or message, not an intellectual discourse.

Most films do this in some way or another; from the depth of the issues you describe above, it could be argued that Star Wars Revenge of the Sith is 'brained up' as it deals with the issues of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons (the end justifies the means); possessive, selfish love in comparison to compassionate, altruistic love; the erosion of liberties in the name of security and the dangers of nationalism without check; the nature of betrayal and self-deception. All these themes exist in the movie. However, does having themes make it intellectual or 'brained up'?

Likewise, the new Star Trek film possesses it's own themes, just as the other Star Trek films do; it covers the issues of revenge and obsession, and most crucially the idea of rising above personal problems to fulfill your own potential. Indeed, one of the two main plots (the other being stopping Nero) revolves around this theme, that of the gradual turning of the alternate, disadvantaged, disillusioned Kirk from James T. Jerk into James T. Kirk - striving to better oneself, one of the central themes of Star Trek!

Dead-on.

For anyone to say "FC is brained-up" and try to pass it off by saying it's because the Borg were a good enemy is absolute self-denial and delusion.

You can find a "brained up" message in any movie if you really want to. I think you illustrated this perfectly. Again, those who WANT to dislike the movie will find ways to justify it because it's part of their agenda to prove themselves "right."

The reality is that there is a huge difference between "having a message" and "being intellectually relevant / challenging," as you have pointed out. And, if we're arguing "having a message" I think that the new movie had as much of a "message" as any of the others. I feel bad that there were people who may not have been open or sharp enough to catch it. As far as saying it's intellectually challenging or relevant...I really don't think that 90% of Star Trek falls into this category. Star Trek is smart and fun, but rarely intellectually relevant or challenging.

axilmar1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1576

Report this Jul. 29 2009, 8:17 am

Quote (WkdYngMan @ July 27 2009, 12:34 pm)
Quote
INS is brained up because of the message it carries.


Please, do tell us what that wonderful and "brained up message" is?

INS tackles the topic of exploitation of technologically inferior people for their resources.

It's very simple, I am surprised that you don't see it.

axilmar1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1576

Report this Jul. 29 2009, 8:18 am

Quote (Vorta_the_point @ July 27 2009, 4:51 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 27 2009, 11:52 am)
TMP is brained up because it had a sci-fi mystery, not that Nero crap.

FC is brained up because of the Borg (an enemy like no other).

INS is brained up because of the message it carries.

I could probably go on and tell you something clever each movie has, except the last one, which was just like any other movie today, i.e. brainless and pop-corn entertainment.

The thing is though, what you are describing above is simply touching on an issue or message, not an intellectual discourse.

Most films do this in some way or another; from the depth of the issues you describe above, it could be argued that Star Wars Revenge of the Sith is 'brained up' as it deals with the issues of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons (the end justifies the means); possessive, selfish love in comparison to compassionate, altruistic love; the erosion of liberties in the name of security and the dangers of nationalism without check; the nature of betrayal and self-deception. All these themes exist in the movie. However, does having themes make it intellectual or 'brained up'?

Likewise, the new Star Trek film possesses it's own themes, just as the other Star Trek films do; it covers the issues of revenge and obsession, and most crucially the idea of rising above personal problems to fulfill your own potential. Indeed, one of the two main plots (the other being stopping Nero) revolves around this theme, that of the gradual turning of the alternate, disadvantaged, disillusioned Kirk from James T. Jerk into James T. Kirk - striving to better oneself, one of the central themes of Star Trek!

How is 'rising above personal problems of fulfill your own potential' of any significance to the human race? that's a personal issue, not a social one.

axilmar1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1576

Report this Jul. 29 2009, 8:22 am

Quote (Vger23 @ July 27 2009, 6:01 pm)
Quote (Vorta_the_point @ July 27 2009, 4:51 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 27 2009, 11:52 am)
TMP is brained up because it had a sci-fi mystery, not that Nero crap.

FC is brained up because of the Borg (an enemy like no other).

INS is brained up because of the message it carries.

I could probably go on and tell you something clever each movie has, except the last one, which was just like any other movie today, i.e. brainless and pop-corn entertainment.

The thing is though, what you are describing above is simply touching on an issue or message, not an intellectual discourse.

Most films do this in some way or another; from the depth of the issues you describe above, it could be argued that Star Wars Revenge of the Sith is 'brained up' as it deals with the issues of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons (the end justifies the means); possessive, selfish love in comparison to compassionate, altruistic love; the erosion of liberties in the name of security and the dangers of nationalism without check; the nature of betrayal and self-deception. All these themes exist in the movie. However, does having themes make it intellectual or 'brained up'?

Likewise, the new Star Trek film possesses it's own themes, just as the other Star Trek films do; it covers the issues of revenge and obsession, and most crucially the idea of rising above personal problems to fulfill your own potential. Indeed, one of the two main plots (the other being stopping Nero) revolves around this theme, that of the gradual turning of the alternate, disadvantaged, disillusioned Kirk from James T. Jerk into James T. Kirk - striving to better oneself, one of the central themes of Star Trek!

Dead-on.

For anyone to say "FC is brained-up" and try to pass it off by saying it's because the Borg were a good enemy is absolute self-denial and delusion.

You can find a "brained up" message in any movie if you really want to. I think you illustrated this perfectly. Again, those who WANT to dislike the movie will find ways to justify it because it's part of their agenda to prove themselves "right."

The reality is that there is a huge difference between "having a message" and "being intellectually relevant / challenging," as you have pointed out. And, if we're arguing "having a message" I think that the new movie had as much of a "message" as any of the others. I feel bad that there were people who may not have been open or sharp enough to catch it. As far as saying it's intellectually challenging or relevant...I really don't think that 90% of Star Trek falls into this category. Star Trek is smart and fun, but rarely intellectually relevant or challenging.

The ST movies aren't particularly intellectual, but the series are. That's natural, because in a series there is a lot of time to develop a message.

Even so, STXI's message (rising up to fulfill your own potential) is not something that concerns the pressing social problems we are facing right now.

Actually, "rising up to fulfill your own potential" is not even a message. A message contains a question, and analysis and a conclusion.

SpaceTherapist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6370

Report this Jul. 29 2009, 11:34 am

Quote (axilmar1 @ July 28 2009, 9:22 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ July 27 2009, 6:01 pm)
Quote (Vorta_the_point @ July 27 2009, 4:51 pm)
Quote (axilmar1 @ July 27 2009, 11:52 am)
TMP is brained up because it had a sci-fi mystery, not that Nero crap.

FC is brained up because of the Borg (an enemy like no other).

INS is brained up because of the message it carries.

I could probably go on and tell you something clever each movie has, except the last one, which was just like any other movie today, i.e. brainless and pop-corn entertainment.

The thing is though, what you are describing above is simply touching on an issue or message, not an intellectual discourse.

Most films do this in some way or another; from the depth of the issues you describe above, it could be argued that Star Wars Revenge of the Sith is 'brained up' as it deals with the issues of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons (the end justifies the means); possessive, selfish love in comparison to compassionate, altruistic love; the erosion of liberties in the name of security and the dangers of nationalism without check; the nature of betrayal and self-deception. All these themes exist in the movie. However, does having themes make it intellectual or 'brained up'?

Likewise, the new Star Trek film possesses it's own themes, just as the other Star Trek films do; it covers the issues of revenge and obsession, and most crucially the idea of rising above personal problems to fulfill your own potential. Indeed, one of the two main plots (the other being stopping Nero) revolves around this theme, that of the gradual turning of the alternate, disadvantaged, disillusioned Kirk from James T. Jerk into James T. Kirk - striving to better oneself, one of the central themes of Star Trek!

Dead-on.

For anyone to say "FC is brained-up" and try to pass it off by saying it's because the Borg were a good enemy is absolute self-denial and delusion.

You can find a "brained up" message in any movie if you really want to. I think you illustrated this perfectly. Again, those who WANT to dislike the movie will find ways to justify it because it's part of their agenda to prove themselves "right."

The reality is that there is a huge difference between "having a message" and "being intellectually relevant / challenging," as you have pointed out. And, if we're arguing "having a message" I think that the new movie had as much of a "message" as any of the others. I feel bad that there were people who may not have been open or sharp enough to catch it. As far as saying it's intellectually challenging or relevant...I really don't think that 90% of Star Trek falls into this category. Star Trek is smart and fun, but rarely intellectually relevant or challenging.

The ST movies aren't particularly intellectual, but the series are. That's natural, because in a series there is a lot of time to develop a message.

Even so, STXI's message (rising up to fulfill your own potential) is not something that concerns the pressing social problems we are facing right now.

Actually, "rising up to fulfill your own potential" is not even a message. A message contains a question, and analysis and a conclusion.

"rising up to fulfill your own potential" is a message when the characters in a movie successfully accomplish that.

While I agree that message is not one that is directed at society as a whole, but that message is a universal theme that everyone can relate to. All human beings have struggles within themselves that they need to rise above.

Star Trek has always been about positive messages and themes and I think Star Trek XI is congruent in demonstrating that hopeful and positive outlook even though it might be more on an individual level.


Star Trek also has many episodes were it dealt with individual growth and potential. The TNG episode Final Mission comes to mind. In that episode Wesley Crusher demonstrates how he has grown and matured in facing life threatening circumstances.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: sonofspock1

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum