Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie?

 
 
catchme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-12-2009
Lookout wrote:
> It's lonely out here


let's see- the original star trek series was a guess on what the 21st
century computers might look like, and somehow the new movie which is
supposed to predate the original series, somehow still looks more modern
than the original?
"i sense a time/space continuum distortion, Captain".
One of the things most loved about Star trek was that it tried to
rationally discuss scientific theory in plausible circumstances,
demonstrating their possible practical uses in futuristic technologies.
We now know the original series was a laughable attempt, limited by
budget restraints and a more reactionary audience, rather than a logical
one.
So in summary, the young Kirk has access to more relevant, practical
technology than his middle-age self, despite the prediction of voice
recognition software in the series.
Do I sense an attempt to remake the entire first series in the works?
The original Mr. Sulu, Bones, Checkov, Spock and Scottie, replaced with
more generic, 'professional' actors? arguably the most disposable figure
IS Kirk, as played by Shatner.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bucky Breeder
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-12-2009
catchme <(E-Mail Removed)> deflatulated this
with news:UagOl.40931$(E-Mail Removed):

> Lookout wrote:
>> It's lonely out here

>
> let's see- the original star trek series was a guess on what the 21st
> century computers might look like, and somehow the new movie which is
> supposed to predate the original series, somehow still looks more modern
> than the original?
> "i sense a time/space continuum distortion, Captain".
> One of the things most loved about Star trek was that it tried to
> rationally discuss scientific theory in plausible circumstances,
> demonstrating their possible practical uses in futuristic technologies.
> We now know the original series was a laughable attempt, limited by
> budget restraints and a more reactionary audience, rather than a logical
> one.
> So in summary, the young Kirk has access to more relevant, practical
> technology than his middle-age self, despite the prediction of voice
> recognition software in the series.
> Do I sense an attempt to remake the entire first series in the works?
> The original Mr. Sulu, Bones, Checkov, Spock and Scottie, replaced with
> more generic, 'professional' actors? arguably the most disposable figure
> IS Kirk, as played by Shatner.


If it wasn't for the Star Treks we wouldn't even have our flip-fones...
then teh whirled wood be a berry loonly place indeedy-doo!

--

I am Bucky Breeder,(*(^; , and *NO*, that is *NOT* "a "snake" in
my pocket;" and, *NO*, I am *NOT* the Octomom's baby-daddy!

Keep teh food stamps away from water or they'll shrink:

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/.../hopenosis.gif

Repent! The end is near.... So, smoke 'em if you got 'em.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bucky Breeder
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2009
Lookout <(E-Mail Removed)> deflatulated this with
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> I was being a little more basic. The story was way to convoluted, the
> action sequences were cut so much you couldn't tell what was happening
> and the choral voices screaming during the "action" sequences was
> terrible.
> On a Trek note..the story line wasn't in keeping with Rodenberry's
> standards, the could have cut and pasted DeForrest Kelly into this
> movie..the acting was copied way to much, Chekov's accent was terribly
> over down, the love interest with Spock goes against everything a
> Trekkie knows about Vulcans and the reference to Star Trek Enterprise
> was morbid and not funny at all.


If by "convoluted" you mean "ghay"... well d'uh!

If by "Roddenbery's standards" you mean "Tribbles"...
well, how phreakin' "ghay" is that!?!

It's not "Trekkie" you dumbass, it's "Trekker"...
or ghay folk dressed-up like Star Trek characters.

And you're jus bitchin' 'cause there wasn't even
any "Stardate: Ghay-Pride-Day"

(they're saving that drama for teh sequel - which
no doubt YOU will stand in line for hours to see too)

--

I am Bucky Breeder,(*(^; , and *NO*, that is *NOT* "a "snake" in
my pocket;" and, *NO*, I am *NOT* the Octomom's baby-daddy!

Pay your taxes to keep the Pakistan Gov't in GMC SUVs:

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/.../hopenosis.gif

Repent! The end is near.... So, smoke 'em if you got 'em.
 
Reply With Quote
 
XS11E
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2009
Lookout <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On a Trek note..the story line wasn't in keeping with Rodenberry's
> standards,


You mean it wasn't completely stolen w/o giving credit to the original
author? That was Roddenberry's standard and it was rigidly followed
since the entire movie was stolen, see:

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1910892




--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
XS11E
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2009
Lookout <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 May 2009 09:45:12 -0700, XS11E <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>Lookout <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> On a Trek note..the story line wasn't in keeping with
>>> Rodenberry's standards,

>>
>>You mean it wasn't completely stolen w/o giving credit to the
>>original author? That was Roddenberry's standard

>
> that's your opinion


That's absolute fact, ask Harlan Ellison, ask Fredrick Brown, ask any
of the dozens of writers who produced stories and/or scripts and were
never credited or paid.




--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
XS11E
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2009
XS11E <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Lookout <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 May 2009 09:45:12 -0700, XS11E <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Lookout <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On a Trek note..the story line wasn't in keeping with
>>>> Rodenberry's standards,
>>>
>>>You mean it wasn't completely stolen w/o giving credit to the
>>>original author? That was Roddenberry's standard

>>
>> that's your opinion

>
> That's absolute fact, ask Harlan Ellison, ask Fredrick Brown, ask
> any of the dozens of writers who produced stories and/or scripts
> and were never credited or paid.


I see an error, sorry. Brown did get paid for "Arena" but only because
the Desilu's legal department caught the plagiarism. I did see the
episode when it first aired January 19,1967, recognized the story at
once and noted Brown was NOT credited but, apparently, he was paid.



--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie? Bucky Breeder Computer Support 0 05-11-2009 06:50 PM
Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie? Bucky Breeder Computer Support 0 05-11-2009 06:47 PM
Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie? Sky King Computer Support 0 05-11-2009 02:34 PM
Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie? walter Computer Support 1 05-11-2009 02:16 PM
Re: Am I the only person who didn't like the new Star Trek movie? Bucky Breeder Computer Support 0 05-11-2009 01:31 PM



Advertisments