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


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Aug. 28 2013, 9:15 am

Quote: hptrek @ 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.

 photo bell_winner-bf.gif


GROUP: Members


Report this Aug. 29 2013, 1:04 pm

Although in an interview, Robert Orci dscribed that the alternate timeline was the desired outcome from the movie and apparently it is feesible trough hisunderstanding of quantum theory (not that I claim to understand it) 


And Memory Alpha also calls it an "alternate timeline":


"The alternate reality runs parallel to the prime reality as a new quantum reality. The prime reality is where many of the events seen in the Star Trek universe have occurred and, according to Star Trek writers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, their film allows the prime reality to continue. [1]

This intent is also evident in the script of Star Trek. [2] While not completely audible in the film, before being teased by his classmates, young Spock is asked by the computer in the learning center on Vulcan: "What is the central assumption of Quantum Cosmology?" To which Spock replies: "Everything that can happen does happen in equal and parallel universes."

In The Needs of the Many, a novel based upon the Star Trek Online series, when Dulmur, one of the Department of Temporal Investigations agents from DS9: "Trials and Tribble-ations", is institutionalized and suffering from temporal psychosis, he has memories of not only his timeline, but of several others as well - including one where Vulcan was destroyed a century prior. Another novel Watching the Clock goes into detail about how and why some forms of time travel create parallel alternate realities and others lead to the overwriting of the same timeline. Bennett, the author, stated this was an in-universe explanation for the co-existence of the prime and alternate realities"

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


GROUP: Members


Report this Aug. 30 2013, 6:54 am

I can empathize with Pegg's response, if only because I interpret fans' ranking of STID last as a very similar message to him and those that worked on the movie. Do we honestly believe that fans preferred the movie in which the cast put on 70's leisure suits and sat on their butts watching animation sequences? Where the most excitement we saw was Chekov burning his hand and Kirk mumbling, "Medic"?

Fans are well within their rights to not watch things they do not enjoy, but I feel that the level of nastiness has jumped up a notch. I was recently at FanExpo in Toronto, and there was a booth that sold nothing but T-shirts trashing the recent Trek movies and the Star Wars prequels. It's a far cry from the TNG deniers who just rewatched the original series, engaged in spirited debates about Kirk vs. Picard, and occasionally wrote letters to fan clubs and comic book lettercols about how TOS was better.  Today, eight years after it was cancelled, try mentioning "Enterprise" in any Star Trek forum. Immediately, you'll get people mocking the show, and mocking you for watching it. My wife mentioned to someone at a party that she watched ENT, and this guy DEMANDED that she give one good reason why it was decent Star Trek.  Being civil is a dying art.

The fact is, the creators didn't need to pander to us at all. They could make a profitable Trek movie just appealing to the teens and 20-somethings who watch action movies, and those over 50 who want to bask in nostalgia. Instead, they created a story with a smart moral message, and most of us completely missed the point. The story is about the choice between fear and optimism, to militarize and become worse than the threats we face, or live peacefully and run the risk of one day being overcome. All fans read from this was, "Battleships? There are no battleships in Star Trek! This can't be Star Trek!" Nevermind the existence of the Defiant on DS9, or that the Dreadnought class already existed in the novels and technical manuals.

If we want to change Star Trek, we need to be articulate about what we want. Currently, we send mixed messages, to the point where there's no point in listening to us. We fans reject the action in the last two movies, but then consistently rank action-oriented episodes in lists of favourites (Best of Both Worlds, Balance of Terror, Way of the Warrior, Yesterday's Enterprise, etc.). We complain about the gratuitous sex in the last two movies, but have no problem with 5 1/2 years of Counselor Cleavage on TNG, or the "Theis Titillation Theory" on the original series (the more likely a costume is to fall off, the sexier the costume). 

Simon Pegg should have been more civil, but his reaction was certainly not unprovoked.


GROUP: Members


Report this Aug. 30 2013, 7:37 am

I agree 100% Its like Yankees-Red Sox in the fact that it gets really ugly...too ugly...and the civil fans get drowned out by the loudmouths...

Star Trek FC had a good amount of action without a true moral tale...I mean yeah the Captain Ahab thing (which is basically like TWOK and NEM), but STID had greater 'trek' political and social messages than FC (in my opinion), and I loved STID in my opinion is a great movie and a good star trek movie

Oh yeah and you forgot the ENT 'neuro pressure' BS and the fact Data had some fun with Yar...and the NEM mind rape...and Insurrection as a whole...and Nerys being bisexual in the Mirror Stuff....huh its Leeta....oh look its 7 of 9 in a catsuit... oh yeah star trek has been sexual before guys! nothing new there...

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


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Aug. 30 2013, 11:04 pm

Rather than saying F.U. to fans, though (like I keep saying there are a finite number of movies and something had to end up in last spot), why not attribute some responsibility to whoever decided it would be a good idea to set up a best-worst movie poll in the first place.

Into Darkness might not be "worst" to some people as much as it is "least-best".

Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?


GROUP: Members


Report this Sep. 01 2013, 1:02 pm

This is all silly. You can't attack those who are trying to keep the faith of Star Trek in a world different from the one in 1966. Go back to 1966, and see how the show was giving us all a larger view of the capacities of man to overcome the problems of life. Star Trek is nothing if it doesn't address the need to overcome our own ideas. Our ideas create our world. They can change it too. Star Trek was about changing what we thought was true, and seeing what was.

Peace, Mo


GROUP: Members


Report this Sep. 01 2013, 1:17 pm

The faith of star trek is clearly seen in STID...that is very clear...Star Trek was a socio-political commentary set in the future and that is exaclty what STID did...showing the goodness of mankind must also show the ability for man to overcome the evils in our world...praying for a utopia can only go so far because as a Dark Knight reference, "some people just want to watch the world burn"...praying for a utopia is a great thing but rather naive as well...being realistic was a part of DS9, and that is what made it a great show...

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


GROUP: Members


Report this Sep. 03 2013, 8:45 pm

I understand reality. You are right in that TV shows try to show reality on a digital screen, populated by actors who follow a script written by a writer who tries to present reality as he or she understands it in a screenplay. Nothing, however, in a screenplay can address reality. It can only discuss reality as understood by the writer and actors.

We, as viewers, can recognise what the writer and actors mean to express. It's a conversation of ideas. But it's never reality. Star Trek was always a discussion for me. But when Kirk lost his son, or Spock died, it wasn't like when my Mother or Brother died.

Fiction addresses life as a discussion. It never addresses the reality of experience except in a fictional representation.

Peace, Mo

us defiant

GROUP: Members


Report this Sep. 08 2013, 12:40 pm


  I wonder if I can jump into the Simon Pegg discussion for just a couple of minutes, I seen Star Trek Into Darkness over the summer and I think Simon Pegg added a lot to this roll as Scotty, I thought he added a sense humor and seriousness to this roll as Scotty in this film, unforchantly his roll was the only one that really stood out in Star Trek Into Darkness.


 Look I'm sorry JJ Abrams fans but, I said this in an earlier movie review of Star Trek Into Darkness, why does Star Trek have become more like Star Wars for it to be to relevant again or exiting again! this to me was a STAR WARS film clocked as STAR TREK because you could see it just by the pace of the movie the pace this film felt more like STAR WARS not that there any wrong with STAR WARS, but could someone explain to me why does the director and the writers of STAR TREK Into Darkness have to accommodate average movie goer in general.


  I’m a big Star Trek Next Generation fan, with that being said I would like to purpose these suggestions to Paramount Studios; would Paramount Studios be willing to reboot a Next Generation film, well not exactly like a Next Generation film more like a Third Generation Star Trek film with a new director cast crew, I’m e-mailing this letter because I believe the direction of the current director and writers is not the right direction for Star Trek, the direction of STAR TREK right now is wrong.


GROUP: Members


Report this Sep. 09 2013, 1:31 pm

Quote: OtakuJo @ Aug. 30 2013, 11:04 pm


>Into Darkness might not be "worst" to some people as much as it is "least-best".


Yes, and, the poll was done at a Star Trek convention. The vast majority of fans who go to conventions are more likely to be fans of the Prime Universe.  

As to the question of Simon Pegg (and more recently, Roberto Orci) swearing at fans, everyone is entitled to say anything they want. Surely the Internet has taught us that. Though I don't think their responses were appropriate or justified I can understand their frustrations. Many fans are equally belligerent in their criticisms of the films.

I think it comes down to this, the people who are making the new Trek films are not making them for Trek fans. We were extremely lucky that, for so many years, Paramount really didn't interfere with those who were shepherding Star Trek. That's no longer the case. Paramount owns a well-known, financially viable science fiction property and they want to make money off it. They make the most money by making movies that appeal to the broadest possible audience and not just the Trekkie minority.

People like Damon Lindelof, JJ Abrams, Orci and Pegg spent a lot of time paying lip service to Trekkies before STID was released but that's all it was! Lip service. They're certainly aware of Trekkies and, in an ideal world, I'm sure they'd rather please us as well as general audiences but ultimately they are in business to make money.

We were SO LUCKY to have Rick Berman in charge for so long. Despite what some fans think he really understood Gene Roddenberry's vision and he worked hard to make sure it kept getting to us. I love the Prime Universe and this new Trek doesn't devalue it. It makes me all the more appreciative for the good Trek we got. I'll still keep hoping for more food Trek in the future.

I wish JJ Abrams all the best with Star Wars. It's really what he should have been making all this time. He's perfectly suited for that brand of science fiction.

IDIC: Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations

Fleet Admiral Braxton

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 288

Report this Sep. 09 2013, 2:44 pm

Did it Ever occur to Any body That He's ALSO Sick Of the Purists Trashing JJ Abrams?


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 142

Report this Sep. 10 2013, 3:32 am

At the end of the day if you can't handle the heat get out of the kitchen. If he can;t stand purists criticising the films he's in he has no business being in show business, I was a fan of simon Pegg before this but seeing him do this has made me lose any respect he had in my eyes


GROUP: Members


Report this Sep. 10 2013, 3:09 pm

I love Doohan, but I like the fact they are bringing some modern flare to Star Trek and hopefully seeing the rise of some new young trekkie's, (as I get very angry at the fact my friends dislike the franchise) and the new films do have the better technology and was a good watch, BUT the writers made a HUGE mistake by Scotty leaving. Scotty would rather die than leave the Enterprise!! However I do understand Pegg's frustration and don't think we should take it out on him, as he is the actor he didn't write his script!


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 322

Report this Jan. 02 2014, 7:50 am

It was a bad move on his part, if you are out on a limb you should refrain from cutting it off.
Diplomacy would have made him seem like the better man, sniping like that makes him looked Thin Skinned - things like that can influence any prospective Casting Director in the future, it could come back to haunt him.

"Savour the fruit of life my young friends, it has a sweet taste when it is fresh from the vine, but don't live too long - the taste becomes bitter after a time " DaHar master Kor 'Star Trek Deep Space Nine : Once More Onto The Breach'


GROUP: Members


Report this Jan. 02 2014, 1:23 pm

I am disappointed all around. Gene would be sad by all this bickering. This is not his vision. However the movie is not a top Trek movie. But it seems Trek is better suited for TV. With that said, the JJ movies have gotten people interested in Trek again.

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