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

Star Trek closed October 1

SpaceClown77

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 337

Report this Oct. 16 2009, 3:58 pm

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 16 2009, 4:23 am)
2) I really mean it when I say I haven't seen WkdYngMan anywhere outside the "movies" section, nor have I seen him post about anything other than the new film. If you are aware of evidence to the contrary please supply it, and I will admit my mistake.

True. He does seem to troll about when people have something negative to say about nuTrek. About 99% of his posts are like this.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Oct. 17 2009, 2:56 am

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 13 2009, 5:15 am)
Take WkdYngMan, has he shown any interest in Trek beyond the new film? As far as I can tell, no!

All he does is run about trying to prove this film (and by extention himself I suspect) is wonderful.

This just seems to be more of a dumb attempt at a provocative attack on me, which you once again have to resort to exaggerating to get your point across.

For the record, like it's any of your business, my memories of Star Trek go back to my parents watching the earliest seasons of TNG when they aired and being a big fan since.

I only find relevant discussion here (when I do find it) because I've discussed and had opinions on all other Treks that there isn't much more I have to say there.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Oct. 17 2009, 2:57 am

Quote (SpaceClown77 @ Oct. 16 2009, 3:58 pm)
Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 16 2009, 4:23 am)
2) I really mean it when I say I haven't seen WkdYngMan anywhere outside the "movies" section, nor have I seen him post about anything other than the new film. If you are aware of evidence to the contrary please supply it, and I will admit my mistake.

True. He does seem to troll about when people have something negative to say about nuTrek. About 99% of his posts are like this.

Nope.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Oct. 17 2009, 3:00 am

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 16 2009, 4:23 am)
2) I really mean it when I say I haven't seen WkdYngMan anywhere outside the "movies" section, nor have I seen him post about anything other than the new film. If you are aware of evidence to the contrary please supply it, and I will admit my mistake.

It's not relevant either way as it changes nothing about my level of fandom.

PhantomCrunk007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5088

Report this Oct. 17 2009, 5:22 am

I only post in the movie boards too... So what?

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Oct. 19 2009, 5:58 am

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 19 2009, 4:31 am)
2. I'm not interested in discredting WkdYngMan, the fact remains that I've seen him contribute nothing but spiteful remarks to anyone who doesn't like the new film. If you are aware of an instance that contradicts my view, please direct me to it.

So in essence, you brought it up for no reason other than just to bring it up. Right.

Besides, simply paying attention to discussions would prove that the only thing I don't do is post "spiteful remarks" against others as you are trying to claim, but as was already established my posting habits are of no importance to the discussion other than you just wanted to "bring it up" for no reason.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Oct. 20 2009, 4:48 am

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 20 2009, 4:04 am)
It's funny, I've just read two posts by you that prove your spitefulness.

It's funny, this is still of no relevance to this discussion.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Oct. 20 2009, 10:41 am

Quote (WkdYngMan @ Oct. 20 2009, 4:48 am)
Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 20 2009, 4:04 am)
It's funny, I've just read two posts by you that prove your spitefulness.

It's funny, this is still of no relevance to this discussion.

This guy's tactic from the word "go" has been the following:

1. Post "opinions" that are little more than inflammatory remarks designed to draw the attention of and irritate people who do not feel the same way.

2. React personally to anyone who brings up counterpoints, deflecting the attention off the actual discussion (which, ironically, is typically quite good) and onto the lack of credibility of the person who is counter-arguing.

3. Attempt to morph the discussion from one which he cannot hope to win (ie: discussing the new Star Trek movie) into a personal one designed to make his opponent look like a mean-spirited, single-minded, Star Trek antichrist.

That's just what I see, sir.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Oct. 20 2009, 10:52 am

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 19 2009, 4:31 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ Oct. 16 2009, 12:09 pm)
Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 16 2009, 4:23 am)
I think you are missing several points here.

1) IS it actually bringing in new fans? You state that many of the new films fans are long time Trek fans, but that means they aren't new! Do you know of any "new" (That would mean people who came from the film to Trek in general, not just the new film) fans?

2) I really mean it when I say I haven't seen WkdYngMan anywhere outside the "movies" section, nor have I seen him post about anything other than the new film. If you are aware of evidence to the contrary please supply it, and I will admit my mistake.

3) I'm not "upset" (that's your choice of wording, made I suspect to cause prejudice against anyone actually listening to what I say) with the new film, I merely can't believe that people are content to ignore the more idiotic parts of said film...

Such as Spock marooning Kirk on a hostile planet without survival gear, instead of just locking him in the brig...

Or that said planet has now been moved across the Federation so it's near enough to Vulcan that you can witness Nero's revenge from there...

Or making a less than ideal cadet (iKirk doesn't feel much like a "stack of books with legs") captain of a starship even though he's still got a year to go at the Academy!

80% is as much as I can give it, it's flawed and never rises above the level of a "bubblegum" flick.

1. It absolutely is. Have you missed the posts in this forum from fans who saw the movie and are now watching and rating all the other movies? Have you missed similar posts in the TOS section of this forum?

2. I find it telling that you are constantly trying to discredit people you end up conflicted with. Are you that insecure in your ability to make a valid, well-explained point?

3. Nobody has ignored idiotic or foolish mistakes. Have you not seen the hundreds of posts on these very topics? I find several aspects of the film to be foolish. It simply doesn't outweigh the level of enjoyment or entertainment I get from it. All Star Trek films have foolishness in them. I ignore most all of it, becuase it doesn't matter.

You raise some prefect examples of things in the film that are questionable. I guess my question to you would be: Do you hold the other Trek films with equally (if not worse) errors, stupidity, and plotholes accountable the same way you do the new movie?

EDIT

I could go on...and I could create a similar list for each of the 10 other movies. And none of this makes me dislike those movies any more than the latest movie. I like them all to varying degrees.

So, what about you? Do you apply the same standards to all the other movies that you do to the new one? If so, you must not be a fan of any of the Trek movies!

1. I guess I have, but the question still stands... "Are they going to stick it out, or are they just here for the moment?". I guess only time will tell.

2. I'm not interested in discredting WkdYngMan, the fact remains that I've seen him contribute nothing but spiteful remarks to anyone who doesn't like the new film. If you are aware of an instance that contradicts my view, please direct me to it.

3. Actually, several people have ignored these and other matters from the film with "magical reasoning" such as... It's an alternate timeline, so that explains everything... & But he's Kirk, so it it has to happen!

You raise a good point, many of the films (in fact all films, Trek or otherwise) rely on "coincidences" and have "plot holes", you'd be hard pressed to find one that didn't. But, this film is a special case and deserves extra scrutiny. They attempted to do something very hard, and for me, failed to do very well at it.

As for how I feel about the other films, ST:V is my worst, iTrek comes in 2nd worst. They had the tools to make an excellent film, they just didn't.

1. Indeed. As with everything in life. So, back to my original point to how your claim that the new fans won't last or that the new Trek will fall on it's face is absolutely inconsequential and a totally inapplicable argument.

2. I don't know WYM from a hole in the wall, but everything I have seen is the exact opposite of how you attempt to portray it. The sequence of events is typically this: You post an opinion. WYM challenges it and counter-argues. You recoil and start trying to discredit WYM by painting him as a bully, a noob, or any other variety of immature tactics. You rarely, if EVER actually counter-argue.

3. How is this any different than ignoring all of the other issues in all of the other Star Trek movies with "magical reasoning?" The fact of the matter is, this IS an alternate universe. To me, that's much more plausible than some fanwank explanation for why Khan knew Checkov (for example).

Quote
But, this film is a special case and deserves extra scrutiny. They attempted to do something very hard, and for me, failed to do very well at it.


Translation: Yes, I am holding this film to a different standard than I would hold any of the other films with similar issues to. I will hold this film accountable where I would not hold others, based on my own personal standards / expectations / and prejudices.

Thank you, that's all I needed to hear. And, that fills in all the gaps for me regarding your motivations.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Oct. 23 2009, 1:25 pm

Quote (ZeroArmour @ Oct. 23 2009, 4:17 am)
2. You don't know him, but you feel justified to make claims about him. So nothing you said about him actually contradicts my belief that he's just a ST:XI obsessed troll?

And nothing you've said has had any relevance to the anything other than you need to "vent?"

VulcanKat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 715

Report this Oct. 25 2009, 6:39 am

Quote (SaturnsRings @ Oct. 04 2009, 4:23 pm)
Star Trek officially closed from theaters on October first according to Box Office Mojo.

Final box office numbers were:

Domestic: ? $257,730,019 ? ? 67.0%
+ Foreign: $126,723,993 ? 33.0%
= Worldwide: $384,454,012

I thought it would do about 250 million domestic but wish it had done more in the foreign box office. Anyway it was both a financial and critical success.

How do you think the DVD sales will go?

That's too bad, I'd see it a fifth time. It's great! The special effects are great, the storyline a bit lacking, but hey, still great for a sequel.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Oct. 25 2009, 12:04 pm

It's funny how with this movie the same argument is happening that happened when Enterprise came out.

ENT567

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5267

Report this Oct. 27 2009, 7:57 am

Quote (SaturnsRings @ Posted: Oct. 04 2009, 4:23 pm)
I thought it would do about 250 million domestic but wish it had done more in the foreign box office.


It couldn't possibly do that - those characters are not that much popular in the other countries (just an observation).

ENT567

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5267

Report this Oct. 27 2009, 8:04 am

Quote (ServalanFan @ Posted: Oct. 25 2009, 10:38 am)
Do you people who hate the movie have a dilemma? Are you going to buy the DVD and thus increase sales thus increasing the success of Start Trek XI? If you don't then how are you going to comment with any authority on features on the DVD?

I don't "hate" the movie, but I have no intention to buy its stuffed with whatever features DVD - if I like to re-watch it someday in the future it could be accessible on the Internet (and even if the web collapses in some years, I won't regret about not having a better copy of STXI, honestly, cuz the one I saw was enough).

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: miklamar

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