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

Simon Pegg curses out disappointed trekkies

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46291

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 1:13 pm

Quote: NCC-1864 @ Aug. 27 2013, 1:09 pm

>I am going by the movie's script and showing the INTENT of an alternate reality...that was what began this little side-conversation...as I said above, the science may be wrong but it is intended to leave the Prime alone....STO also asserts this...plus the Spock mind-meld shows that those events happened...I think...even though they are memories, would he have memories of things that didnt exist?
Think of every other time that someone went back in time - be it Kirk & Spock & McCoy through the Guardian or Sisko & Dax & Bashir to the Sanctuary District, or the Enterprise E going back to First Contact - they had the memories of the past.  They fixed the timeline and came back.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46291

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 1:16 pm

Quote: NCC-1864 @ Aug. 27 2013, 1:09 pm

>I applaud your impressive debating, but based on the fact that it is intended to be an alternate reality gives me the information to inference that the Narada adn the Jellyfish were transported to an alternate reality...
While I understand that people try to explain the situation by saying it's an alternate reality, like the mirror universe, I just haven't seen the proof.  IMO, that story (of calling it an alternate reality) came out AFTER people started complaining.  I have yet to find any mention of that in the planning process.  Of course, it may be there, but I just haven't seen it.


 


I was looking through the transcript and Spock also says, "You are assuming that Nero knows how events are predicted to unfold. To the contrary, Nero's very presence has altered the flow of history, beginning with the attack on the USS Kelvin, culminating in the events of today, thereby creating an entire new chain of incidents that cannot be anticipated by either party."


Oh.... and remember Kirk talking to Prime Spock when he said, "You're coming back in time, changing history, it's cheating."  When I "change" something, it's no longer the way it was.  I can't change something yet keep it the same too.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46291

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 1:17 pm

Quote: NCC-1864 @ Aug. 27 2013, 1:09 pm

>Then again, didnt Picard wipe out the Prime universe by going back in time with the Borg? Unless that was like a predestination paradox or whatever its called...
Actually, the Borg wiped out the Prime Universe, but then Picard and crew fixed it and the timeline returned to normal.  (Except maybe Cochrane and Lily knowing too much and a few casualties from the Borg attack on the launch site.)


 


Isn't temporal mechanics fun? 

NCC-1864

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 60

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 2:17 pm

If the line was in the script, I am sure that it was a part of the "planning stages"...they would not have had it in the script if they came up with it after it was released....


And Spock's lines can be congrous with an alternate reality...he would not know the events in an alternate reality...Kirk went back in time in Voyage Home and clearly changed events with Scotty's "invention"...McCoy even brings it up...yet the prime still exists...


Arne Darvin/ the Defiant crew went back in time and thus also wiped out everything by obviously changing events in Trials and Tribble-ations since (and I know I am nitpicking) they basically replaced crewmembers on the Enterprise in scenes...and managed to go forward in time with no noticeable reprecussions...which I doubt would have happened


Technically it can be argued that Spock and Nero are from an alternate reality and this changed the history of their own alternate reality...we just cant be sure..since the "Prime" is only an alternate reality to everything else...technically, every thing in Star Trek can be taking place in Alternate Realities from show to show and episode to episode...


All said and told, neither of us is going to change our minds on the subject...I view New Trek as a completely separate entity from Star Trek no matter what, and therefore am inclned to believe that it is an Alternate Reality based on that singular line...


As I said, it has been incredibly fun debating with you and I hope that I was civil through it


Dammit Jim I'm a trekkie, not a doctor!

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 2:42 pm

Why is everyone so upset over the new movies though? What difference does it make? I mean I would understand if this was a new crew that is contradicting the other series. But this movie has started over. People don't usually get this upset over a remake? You either prefer the original or the new one. Don't view the new movies as part of the original Trek run and you'll be fine. We often get frustrated, because there is such a thing as taking Star Trek "too seriously" and I think that is what we're doing now. Trying to find connections from this to old Trek, when first off, there's not any, and 2nd why does there need to be? This movie was made indepently from previous Trek, 4 years after Star Trek ended.


These are simply the "new movies" You either enjoy them or you don't. I love both of the new movies, but I will always prefer original Trek.

NCC-1864

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 60

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 2:46 pm

I agree 100% with you Sora...I love the new movies as separate entities and as a fun counterpart for which I will take advantage from a story-writing standpoint)...just like I love the Mirror Universe for showing the darkness of humanity and the Trek universe...I wasnt trying at all to put the new trek down, I was just trying to clarify that I believe it is indeed an Alternate Reality


Dammit Jim I'm a trekkie, not a doctor!

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46291

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 2:58 pm

Quote: Sora @ Aug. 27 2013, 2:42 pm

>

>Why is everyone so upset over the new movies though? What difference does it make? I mean I would understand if this was a new crew that is contradicting the other series. But this movie has started over. People don't usually get this upset over a remake? You either prefer the original or the new one. Don't view the new movies as part of the original Trek run and you'll be fine. We often get frustrated, because there is such a thing as taking Star Trek "too seriously" and I think that is what we're doing now. Trying to find connections from this to old Trek, when first off, there's not any, and 2nd why does there need to be? This movie was made indepently from previous Trek, 4 years after Star Trek ended.

>These are simply the "new movies" You either enjoy them or you don't. I love both of the new movies, but I will always prefer original Trek.

>
If this was a "remake," then the basic storyline would be pretty much the same - some minor changes to update things, but no major changes to the storyline.  I can't think of this as a remake.... closer to a reboot or a destroy & new build.


Then if the new movies are independent, let's not call them Star Trek.  The actors did NOT portray Kirk, McCoy, Uhura, Spock, Scotty, etc. and the ship was NOT the Enterprise and this was NOT the Federation or the Romulans. 

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46291

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 3:00 pm

Quote: NCC-1864 @ Aug. 27 2013, 2:17 pm

>As I said, it has been incredibly fun debating with you and I hope that I was civil through it
yep, you have.

starfan97

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 235

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 5:27 pm

Wow. That really changes my opinion of him. If he cant respect other's opinions, well, I dont really want to support him in any way. 

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 6:09 pm

Quote: NCC-1864 @ Aug. 27 2013, 2:46 pm

>

>I agree 100% with you Sora...I love the new movies as separate entities and as a fun counterpart for which I will take advantage from a story-writing standpoint)...just like I love the Mirror Universe for showing the darkness of humanity and the Trek universe...I wasnt trying at all to put the new trek down, I was just trying to clarify that I believe it is indeed an Alternate Reality

>


 


Oh yeah, I absolutely LOVE the new movies, viewing them seperately. I absolutely loved Star Trek Into Darkness. Honestly I thought it was better than 2009. For me, because I love original Star Trek, I rank the original 10 movies above the two new ones, but I would watch the new movies over something else. And like I said, ranking the two, I think Into Darkness was better, and I can't wait to see what the next film does.


What do you think of after this 3rd movie, the idea of doing a new trilogy for each of the series? Like making a new trilogy recasted of TNG? And then DS9 and so on? I think that would be pretty cool, and it would keep Trek busy for another 15 to 20 years easy.


Live Long and Prosper

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Aug. 27 2013, 6:16 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Aug. 27 2013, 2:58 pm

Quote: Sora @ Aug. 27 2013, 2:42 pm

>

>

>Why is everyone so upset over the new movies though? What difference does it make? I mean I would understand if this was a new crew that is contradicting the other series. But this movie has started over. People don't usually get this upset over a remake? You either prefer the original or the new one. Don't view the new movies as part of the original Trek run and you'll be fine. We often get frustrated, because there is such a thing as taking Star Trek "too seriously" and I think that is what we're doing now. Trying to find connections from this to old Trek, when first off, there's not any, and 2nd why does there need to be? This movie was made indepently from previous Trek, 4 years after Star Trek ended.

>These are simply the "new movies" You either enjoy them or you don't. I love both of the new movies, but I will always prefer original Trek.

>
If this was a "remake," then the basic storyline would be pretty much the same - some minor changes to update things, but no major changes to the storyline.  I can't think of this as a remake.... closer to a reboot or a destroy & new build.

Then if the new movies are independent, let's not call them Star Trek.  The actors did NOT portray Kirk, McCoy, Uhura, Spock, Scotty, etc. and the ship was NOT the Enterprise and this was NOT the Federation or the Romulans. 


 


Why does the storyline have to be identical in order for it to be classified as a "remake" though? And if what you say is the case, that the basic storyline would be the same, than I would say Into Darkness supports that these are remakes. As Into Darkness is pretty much a remake of the original Star Trek II Wrath of Kahn.


And the first movie felt like a remake of TOS and The Motion Picture. Having Pike in command before Kirk, that fits in with the original story, and then it definitely felt like they were very aware that as this is a first movie, it needs to be fast paced and have action, which the original first movie lacked, and many people were bored with it, as the original movie is a thinking movie, has no action really.


Live Long and Prosper

ralfy

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 13

Report this Aug. 28 2013, 2:12 am

Everyone worked hard, but there were still problems with plot holes and over-use of action scenes. Even non-Trek fans would have noticed much of the same.


 

JediMedic122

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Aug. 28 2013, 6:45 am

I say "BRAVO" to Simon Pegg.  I made the mistake of listening to the whiney reviews of this movie and did not see it in theaters.  I just saw it for the first time last week and I thought it was fantastic!.  It boils down to this, you are either on board with the relaunch or you are not.  If you aren't, then you will never like any of the new movies.  I'll admit, I grew up on the original series and TNG and the destruction of Vulcan in the 2009 relaunch was a hard pill to swallow.  But I realized that there isn't a ST TV series on right now, and as far as I know, no plans to make one.  If the series is going to thrive, it needs new fans and that means fresh stories.  I have embraced the new timeline and cast.  I think everyone in the cast is doing an outstanding job with their characters. (with the exception of Karl Urban, who seems to be doing more of an impersonation of DeForest Kelly rather than re-inventing the role).  I think Star Trek is in good hands with J.J. and I look forward to what he does with it next.  To the haters, stay at home and watch the old series on Netflix, I'll be at the movies enjoying the next one.  I will not miss another theatrical release because of bad reviews.


Live long and....well,,,you know the rest.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46291

Report this Aug. 28 2013, 6:56 am

Quote: Sora @ Aug. 27 2013, 6:16 pm

>Why does the storyline have to be identical in order for it to be classified as a "remake" though? And if what you say is the case, that the basic storyline would be the same, than I would say Into Darkness supports that these are remakes. As Into Darkness is pretty much a remake of the original Star Trek II Wrath of Kahn.

>And the first movie felt like a remake of TOS and The Motion Picture. Having Pike in command before Kirk, that fits in with the original story, and then it definitely felt like they were very aware that as this is a first movie, it needs to be fast paced and have action, which the original first movie lacked, and many people were bored with it, as the original movie is a thinking movie, has no action really.
Nope - I just don't see it.  The new movies took pieces from multiple things, blended them together and added a bunch of stuff.  If it was a "remake", then we'd be in the prime universe.

hptrek

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this Aug. 28 2013, 8:00 am

Quote: JediMedic122 @ Aug. 28 2013, 6:45 am

>

>I say "BRAVO" to Simon Pegg.  I made the mistake of listening to the whiney reviews of this movie and did not see it in theaters.  


Shame that we live in a society where an actor can outright tell fans F@CK YOU and it is okay, even applauded. Shame.

Post Reply

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