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

TREK XI

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 10:37 am

Quote (BuglipsTheGoblin @ Jan. 20 2010, 9:12 am)
What the?

VAD_BAXTER rates TMP higher than Khan? ?I mean, hey, to each their own and it's not the worst movie I've seen (or the worst SF of '79, The Black Hole takes that prize home), but The Motionless Picture better than Khan?

I'd like to know more about how you came to that. ?(also why you rank Insurrection so high which is, I confess, the first Star Trek movie I saw in theatre that almost put me to sleep)

Come to that, I don't particularly like any of the Next Gen movies.



The only really, really big gripe I have about the new Star Trek is the cinematography. ?If I thought they'd use it, I'd buy them a steadicam rig myself. ?Out of my own pocket. ?There's way too many jittery and weird angles, and a little grace would have gone a long way. ?Having watched it a couple of times now, there are some very odd choices of camera use that are just jarring. ?Sparer use of the wandering cam would have made it a more effective narrative tool.



Edit: ¿Wait, what? ¿Nemesis 9.5?

I hope that's ironic!

I've seen the whole thing. ¿Not all in one sitting though, bits and pieces over the span of a few years. ¿I tried once to get all the way through. ¿Once. ¿I'd rather endure home eye surgery.

Why do you have to be so snide about it?

Star Trek is tons of different things to many, many different people. Just becuase you have different tastes doesn't mean you have to act a bit like a smarmy a$$ when someone else doesn't see it your way.

VAB is one of the most dedicated and educated Trek fans I know. I may not agree with everything he thinks...but I respect the HELL out of it, enough that I stand up and notice when he feels strongly about something. And, if it's different than how I feel, I might just go back and re-look at things to see where he is coming from.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

Trekwolf164

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 32043

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 11:08 am

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 11:04 am)
Quote (31st_Century_Temporal_Agent @ Jan. 20 2010, 10:10 am)
Don't make me start nit picking contrived scenes in Trek movies. I guess let's start with Data being given an order that violates his ethical programming so he goes crazy? His advanced positronic brain can't handle that? Did Dr. Soong really miss that one that badly? Wow!

In Nemesis when the Enterprise E encounters b-4 on a pre warp civilization inhabited planet they just take a shuttle down without scanning for life forms around? I mean remember TNG's Who Watches The Watchers and the great steps they took to attempt to hold the prime directive high. So an experienced crew all of the sudden detects a positronic reading and throws the prime directive out the door? I suppose that Picard and crew are assuming the positronic reading must not be native to the planet and may be freaking the natives as they scan.

I am too tired to go on. I leave these 2 to pick.

Since Data was supposedly programmed with Asimov's Laws, instead of going nuts when his ethical subroutines were challenged, he should have simply shut down. Isn't that the way positronic brains are supposd to work?

:logical:

Data did not go nuts he saw Federation laws being violated when he tried to act on it he was shot in the head.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 12:15 pm

Quote (31st_Century_Temporal_Agent @ Jan. 20 2010, 10:10 am)
Don't make me start nit picking contrived scenes in Trek movies. I guess let's start with Data being given an order that violates his ethical programming so he goes crazy? His advanced positronic brain can't handle that? Did Dr. Soong really miss that one that badly? Wow!

If your refering to Datas actions in "Insurrection" he didnt go crazy because he was given  an order that violated his ethical programming.

He was attacked if I remember right.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 12:18 pm

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Jan. 17 2010, 1:49 am)> id="QUOTE">:logical:
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 11:21 am)

You just confused me.

And according to what O'Brian said in DS9, who ever is in charge of the bridge can be called captain.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 1:27 pm

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Jan. 20 2010, 12:18 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 11:21 am)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Jan. 17 2010, 1:49 am)> id="QUOTE">:logical:
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 1:23 pm)

You just confused me.

And according to what O'Brian said in DS9, who ever is in charge of the bridge can be called captain.

According to what has happened in all other Trek, the person who has the conn is not called Captain.

Only a commanding officer under orders is addressed as "captain" if they hold the actual rank or not.

It's also standard Naval practice.

When Spock had the conn in, say, "The Doomsday Machine," you didn't hear Sulu address him as "Captain Spock, " he was still "Mr. Spock."

:logical:
Ok now I understand you.

And I know thats how it was normally depicted, but it is contradicted by O'Breans dialog.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 1:35 pm

Quote (Mirrorgirl @ Jan. 16 2010, 7:23 pm)
Thus proving that "life is but a dream"

Further to my STV kick at the moment. I hadn't noticed before, but Leonard Nimoy (as Spock) is actually playing the Vulcan Lyre in the final scene of 'The Final Frontier', that's awesomely :cool: :cool: :cool:

:cool:  :cool:  :cool:

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 1:38 pm

Quote (automatedpersonnelunit @ Jan. 16 2010, 11:42 pm)
Ok, here it is. I'm an old fan. I started watching this stuff as a boy in the 80's. TNG was first then DS9. When i got older i discovered the powerful performances, charming special effects, and genuine character relationships of TOS. To this day, its my favorite series. Then, as time went on, voyager ended its run and the powers that be decided they needed to re-invent the wheel to draw in new, younger audiences. Enter Captain Archer and the crew of the NX-01. I was one of those misguided fans that boycotted enterprise, saying it just didn't feel like Star Trek. Well, i wasn't alone. ENT was promptly cancelled and we were left with nothing (I later decided to give ENT a chance and discovered it's full of original series crossovers, further explores some early races, and even answers some questions). Also around that time the franchise had some new competition with the release of the new Star Wars prequels and the popular sci-fi series' Stargate and Battlestar Galactica. Then some more time passed and I started hearing about J. J. Abrams making a new Star Trek movie and an MMO game called Star Trek Online. I was (as i believe most oldschool fans were) both excited and skeptical. Regardless of my doubts I HAD to see the new movie.
Honestly, i'm still torn about it. The special effects were visually stunning and I liked the notion that the characters don't necessarily have to forever be linked to the actors, but once again it kinda didn't feel like Star Trek. It reminded me of the Lost in Space remake in the 90's. It was eye candy for a tasteless adolescent audience that didn't give two shits about the original Lost in Space with its antiquated 60's props, costumes, and limited budget. Still, like Star Trek, it was pioneering science fiction in its day and managed to capture our imaginations.
The new movie isn't terrible. It's actually pretty cool. It's not like any Star Trek movie i've ever seen, but that's ok. The plot's kinda ridiculous, but that's nothing new to a Star Trek fan.. Leonard Nimoy's in it and it gives closure to how Spock dies. The guy that played Bones sounded like he was doing an impression of DeForrest Kelley (he probably would've liked it). I didn't like how they did Chekov at all. The Academy was a nice touch, we've never seen much of academy life in the other series'. One thing is, you always hear these gripes about how there isn't enough action in Star Trek. It's all drama and romance. I mean this movie takes it way over the top. It's kinda ridiculous. Star Trek succeeded the way it was for several generations. This movie's like an epilepsy test. Whatever, i'll get behind it because i think it's the future of the franchise, but if they took it down a notch and fixed a few things it could be phenomenal and could pave the way for new Star Trek adventures for years to come.

It is good to hear your comments on this movie! Thank you for sharing them.

:cool:

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 1:41 pm

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Jan. 20 2010, 1:27 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 1:23 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Jan. 20 2010, 12:18 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 11:21 am)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Jan. 17 2010, 1:49 am)> id="QUOTE">:logical:
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 20 2010, 1:31 pm)

You just confused me.

And according to what O'Brian said in DS9, who ever is in charge of the bridge can be called captain.
According to what has happened in all other Trek, the person who has the conn is not called Captain.

Only a commanding officer under orders is addressed as "captain" if they hold the actual rank or not.

It's also standard Naval practice.

When Spock had the conn in, say, "The Doomsday Machine," you didn't hear Sulu address him as "Captain Spock, " he was still "Mr. Spock."

:logical:
Ok now I understand you.

And I know thats how it was normally depicted, but it is contradicted by O'Breans dialog.
That would make O'Brien's remark one of those minor inconsistencies that pop up everywhere in Trek...they don't just happen in the ENT series as some might believe. ;)

:logical:
True enough.

BuglipsTheGoblin

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 53

Report this Jan. 20 2010, 4:39 pm

I can accept TMP being more trekish than Khan, that's why I found that position interesting.

Nemesis is awful on every level (even as Trek), that's why I thought it was ironic (and cleverly subtle about it, too)

I don't post often, but I know who VAD_BAXTER (who used to go by Vice_Adm_Baxter if I recall) is.  Call me an avid reader.

I did not qualify my post as 'my opinion' because I didn't feel it necessary to point out the glaringly obvious.  Should I have?  I didn't expect it to confuse anybody.

Of course if there is a forum where my posted word magically becomes irrefutable law, please point it out to me, VGer.  Snide gifts like mine deserve full expression, and that level of power is just begging for sophomoric abuse.  

I'd be obliged.

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