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

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by catchme, May 12, 2009.

  1. catchme

    catchme Guest

    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.
    catchme, May 12, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. catchme <> deflatulated this
    with news:UagOl.40931$:

    > 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/1/0/z/8/2/hopenosis.gif

    Repent! The end is near.... So, smoke 'em if you got 'em.
    Bucky Breeder, May 12, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lookout <> deflatulated this with
    news::

    > 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/1/0/z/8/2/hopenosis.gif

    Repent! The end is near.... So, smoke 'em if you got 'em.
    Bucky Breeder, May 19, 2009
    #3
  4. catchme

    XS11E Guest

    Lookout <> 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
    XS11E, May 19, 2009
    #4
  5. catchme

    XS11E Guest

    Lookout <> wrote:

    > On Tue, 19 May 2009 09:45:12 -0700, XS11E <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Lookout <> 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
    XS11E, May 20, 2009
    #5
  6. catchme

    XS11E Guest

    XS11E <> wrote:

    > Lookout <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 19 May 2009 09:45:12 -0700, XS11E <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Lookout <> 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
    XS11E, May 20, 2009
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bucky Breeder
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    368
    Bucky Breeder
    May 11, 2009
  2. walter
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    392
    walter
    May 11, 2009
  3. Sky King
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    381
    Sky King
    May 11, 2009
  4. Bucky Breeder
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    397
    Bucky Breeder
    May 11, 2009
  5. Bucky Breeder
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    374
    Bucky Breeder
    May 11, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page