Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Star Trek - "The future's so bright I've gotta wear shades."[SPOILERS]

15657585961

Posts

  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Surely there is room for a more nuanced opinion here.

    The screenplay had some dumb shit in it, mostly plot-related contrivances.

    Not really, if this movie's plot had been a homework assignment for film school they would have gotten a terrible grade. This movie is great because Abrams and the actors put their hearts and souls into it, not because of the screenplay.
    Sentry wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry, there's no hope for you.

    If I have to cite examples to you of how this movie had really bad plotting and screen-writing there's no hope for you, son. All I can do is shed a single tear and hope you find your way.

    In other words, I'm not interested in debating the subject with you. The writing is shit from an ass. That doesn't make it a bad movie (in fact, it's a very good movie in spite of the bad writing), but to overlook that because it's pretty is just silly.

    I refuse accept the opinion that Star Trek has "bad writing from the ass" from someone with a my little pony avatar and banner set. :|

    Pretty much this.

    The jailed avatar is much prettier and functional!

    I'm just amazed as to how anybody could come to the conclusion that Star Trek had a well written plot. Then again people tell me at work that X-men origins: Wolverine is well written so, I'm starting to think what is considered "quality writing" has gone way the fuck downhill.

    I'm going to reiterate: admitting that this movie had serious issues with the plot is in no way indicative of how much you enjoyed the movie.

    Every fucking movie has plot issues. What do you even consider a perfectly written movie? Name me your favorite movie and I will be glad to destroy it with meaningless quibbles masquerading as gaping plot holes.

    Not that Star Trek is my favorite movie, I just think destroying your precious would be fun and a good use of my time.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Hopefully we won't see Q in any of the movies anytime soon. The moment Q annoyed Kirk, Kirk would just punch him. Which has already been done by Sisko.

    Kirk would kill Q.

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Sentry, you're being a cock.

    Just telling you, man.

    You're getting needlessly defensive over criticisms of a movie you're not even in love with.

  • FuruFuru Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    To be perfectly honest, I haaaaaaate the idea of "Because it existed in the main Star Trek universe, eventually it will exist in this one unless the timelines change it."

    Like that certain events are simply inevitable things that will happen and they should be subjects of the movie.

    No.

    That is bad.
    I'm actually enjoying the thought of how events from the original timeline would play out in this new universe. Pike never went through the events of "The Cage", and there was no initial mission under his watch. Kirk is now Captain years before he was in the TOS. Would there still be a fateful meeting with the Klingons ending with the Treaty of Organia? Would there be outright war instead? Will the Enterprise encounter the Botany Bay and Khan?

    Interesting trains of thought- that should probably remain in the sphere of fanfiction, and NEVER make it into any official stories.

    Right. Let's keep it that way.

    Corrected for most likely outcome.

    saiyan2.jpg
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry, you're being a cock.

    Just telling you, man.

    You're getting needlessly defensive over criticisms of a movie you're not even in love with.

    I'm not... well, I am, but I'm honestly not even pissy here. The internet is a bad medium for gauging feelings.

    What is irritating though is taking small minutia of a movie that, while not perfect, is far better then anyone had any right to expect, and then hyper inflating them into these glaring errors. I mean, come on, saying this is worse then a student film is just being intellectually dishonest.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • SixSix Registered User regular
    Sentry wrote: »
    Every fucking movie has plot issues. What do you even consider a perfectly written movie? Name me your favorite movie and I will be glad to destroy it with meaningless quibbles masquerading as gaping plot holes.

    Not that Star Trek is my favorite movie, I just think destroying your precious would be fun and a good use of my time.

    Why does it offend you so to talk about the plot issues this movie has?

    XBL, PSN, & Steam: SixkillerNYC Twitter Flickr
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Couscous wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Hopefully we won't see Q in any of the movies anytime soon. The moment Q annoyed Kirk, Kirk would just punch him. Which has already been done by Sisko.

    Kirk would kill Q.

    Q is a good villain though, since he truly believes he is the good guy and that humanity is screwed without his help. And, in fact, he is dead right you just tend to only realize it much later.

    Still, thats the sort of villain you need, someone whose evil plan makes you go "hmmm... maybe... hang on, I can't slaughter the mole people!"

    Your puny weapons are useless against me
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    Six wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Every fucking movie has plot issues. What do you even consider a perfectly written movie? Name me your favorite movie and I will be glad to destroy it with meaningless quibbles masquerading as gaping plot holes.

    Not that Star Trek is my favorite movie, I just think destroying your precious would be fun and a good use of my time.

    Why does it offend you so to talk about the plot issues this movie has?

    It doesn't, I'm not offended.

    When those are overblown though, it becomes just fanboy bitching. This is true on both sides, don't get me wrong.

    But saying Kirk meeting Scotty on the ice planet is contrived, that's not a plot hole. It's a plot device. And of course it's contrived, because you already know who Scotty is. If he had met Billy Joe Bob on the ice planet, it wouldn't be contrived at all, it would just be something that happened.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Sentry wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry, you're being a cock.

    Just telling you, man.

    You're getting needlessly defensive over criticisms of a movie you're not even in love with.

    I'm not... well, I am, but I'm honestly not even pissy here. The internet is a bad medium for gauging feelings.

    What is irritating though is taking small minutia of a movie that, while not perfect, is far better then anyone had any right to expect, and then hyper inflating them into these glaring errors. I mean, come on, saying this is worse then a student film is just being intellectually dishonest.

    No, it really isn't.

    If you see it as "minutia", that's your business.

    But I'm not pushing my glasses up my nose and saying "Well, supernovas don't work like that" whilst snorting and taking a puff of my asthma inhaler.

    My gripes with the film are centered around really hamfisted usage of cinematic tropes and cliches. Take away the amazing direction, special effects, incredible cast and acting, and outstanding cinematography.

    Just look at the story and script on its own merits, as a screenplay.

    It's terrible.

    If you don't get that, man, that's on you. I don't expect everyone to know as much about writing and film as I do. Nonetheless, I do know quite a bit about screenwriting so to me, Star Trek's script is amateur hackery.

    If you don't care, again, that's fine.

    But don't try to pretend other people are being unreasonable because they actually recognize bad storytelling.

  • SixSix Registered User regular
    Sentry wrote: »
    Six wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Every fucking movie has plot issues. What do you even consider a perfectly written movie? Name me your favorite movie and I will be glad to destroy it with meaningless quibbles masquerading as gaping plot holes.

    Not that Star Trek is my favorite movie, I just think destroying your precious would be fun and a good use of my time.

    Why does it offend you so to talk about the plot issues this movie has?

    It doesn't, I'm not offended.

    When those are overblown though, it becomes just fanboy bitching. This is true on both sides, don't get me wrong.

    But saying Kirk meeting Scotty on the ice planet is contrived, that's not a plot hole. It's a plot device. And of course it's contrived, because you already know who Scotty is. If he had met Billy Joe Bob on the ice planet, it wouldn't be contrived at all, it would just be something that happened.

    Kirk running into scotty on the ice planet was retarded. It had to be done, I suppose, but that doesn't make not stupid.

    XBL, PSN, & Steam: SixkillerNYC Twitter Flickr
  • ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    I don't understand how the plot was any worse than the average Star Trek episode's plot.

    JKKaAGp.png
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    Lynx wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    wunderbar wrote: »
    Is it too late to bring up the fact that Paramount has already hired the same writers to do the next movie?

    Nooooooooooooo!

    Oh well. It'll probably still be good, despite some shoddy writing.

    Well, it's Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof this time. So, it might be better.

    They can still be fired, too. It would cost Paramount some money but it could be done.

    camo_sig2.png
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry, you're being a cock.

    Just telling you, man.

    You're getting needlessly defensive over criticisms of a movie you're not even in love with.

    I'm not... well, I am, but I'm honestly not even pissy here. The internet is a bad medium for gauging feelings.

    What is irritating though is taking small minutia of a movie that, while not perfect, is far better then anyone had any right to expect, and then hyper inflating them into these glaring errors. I mean, come on, saying this is worse then a student film is just being intellectually dishonest.

    No, it really isn't.

    If you see it as "minutia", that's your business.

    But I'm not pushing my glasses up my nose and saying "Well, supernovas don't work like that" whilst snorting and taking a puff of my asthma inhaler.

    My gripes with the film are centered around really hamfisted usage of cinematic tropes and cliches. Take away the amazing direction, special effects, incredible cast and acting, and outstanding cinematography.

    Just look at the story and script on its own merits, as a screenplay.

    It's terrible.

    If you don't get that, man, that's on you. I don't expect everyone to know as much about writing and film as I do. Nonetheless, I do know quite a bit about screenwriting so to me, Star Trek's script is amateur hackery.

    If you don't care, again, that's fine.

    But don't try to pretend other people are being unreasonable because they actually recognize bad storytelling.

    Ah, I hadn't realized you were coming from such a position of authority. My bad. I'll go back to my copy of Freddie Got Fingered now.

    And again, if you had bothered at any point in time to actually provide an example, instead of coming at this from your years as a master film maker like I asked for, perhaps this conversation would have gone different. But of course, as I recall you "weren't interested in debating" the issue, which is interesting considering you've managed to have a response for every post I've made.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    The only major problem I had was that the whole thing with that one mind burrowing creature from Wrath of Khan didn't result in anything. The rest were either really minor or were necessary for the movie to work at all.

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry, you're being a cock.

    Just telling you, man.

    You're getting needlessly defensive over criticisms of a movie you're not even in love with.

    I'm not... well, I am, but I'm honestly not even pissy here. The internet is a bad medium for gauging feelings.

    What is irritating though is taking small minutia of a movie that, while not perfect, is far better then anyone had any right to expect, and then hyper inflating them into these glaring errors. I mean, come on, saying this is worse then a student film is just being intellectually dishonest.

    No, it really isn't.

    If you see it as "minutia", that's your business.

    But I'm not pushing my glasses up my nose and saying "Well, supernovas don't work like that" whilst snorting and taking a puff of my asthma inhaler.

    My gripes with the film are centered around really hamfisted usage of cinematic tropes and cliches. Take away the amazing direction, special effects, incredible cast and acting, and outstanding cinematography.

    Just look at the story and script on its own merits, as a screenplay.

    It's terrible.

    If you don't get that, man, that's on you. I don't expect everyone to know as much about writing and film as I do. Nonetheless, I do know quite a bit about screenwriting so to me, Star Trek's script is amateur hackery.

    If you don't care, again, that's fine.

    But don't try to pretend other people are being unreasonable because they actually recognize bad storytelling.

    I'll give you its no work of genius, but it is a long way from being a bad story.

    Villain origin
    Hero origin
    Sidekick origin
    Hero meets sidekick
    Hero and sidekick meet villain
    Villain defeats hero
    Sidekick betrays hero
    Hero meets the wise master
    Wise master restores the hero
    Hero and sidekick reuinite
    Villain is defeated

    Its a generic tale, but its perfectly fine. Peoples actions made sense, the characters were interesting, the lines were good. Theres nothing really wrong with it.

    Your puny weapons are useless against me
  • ShadowenShadowen Registered User regular
    I don't understand how the plot was any worse than the average Star Trek episode's plot.

    EDIT: Dark Orchided for uncomfortable truth, then Limed because Dark Orchid is really hard to read.

    Bored in the Morning
  • ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    Perhaps Dark Orchid is for the best.

    JKKaAGp.png
  • ShadowenShadowen Registered User regular
    I suppose it is an uncomfortable truth, that people wouldn't want to read.

    Bored in the Morning
  • XiaNaphryzXiaNaphryz Registered User regular
    Lynx wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    wunderbar wrote: »
    Is it too late to bring up the fact that Paramount has already hired the same writers to do the next movie?

    Nooooooooooooo!

    Oh well. It'll probably still be good, despite some shoddy writing.

    Well, it's Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof this time. So, it might be better.

    And unless there's another writers strike, they can actually do a couple of edit passes on the new film's script, as Pony seems to have conveniently ignored my post about it earlier.

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Sentry makes a good point, in that despite saying "I'm not going to debate the subject with you" I nonetheless continued to respond to him.

    So, well done, good sir! You trolled me most excellently, and I totally fell for it.

    I tip my hat to you.

    I will now continue to ignore your posts in this thread and so on.

    I have a question: I know some people have seen snippets of the cut material from this film that shows Nero's time imprisoned by the Klingons. Do they ever actually show the Klingons without the helmets on? I thought it was a very clever way to deal with the whole "Are they TOS Klingons or TNG Klingons?" issue, but I wonder if they actually showed it either way?

    Probably a question I'll have to wait for the DVD to answer, I guess.

  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp! I can show you how to be a real man!Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Surely there is room for a more nuanced opinion here.

    The screenplay had some dumb shit in it, mostly plot-related contrivances.

    Not really, if this movie's plot had been a homework assignment for film school they would have gotten a terrible grade. This movie is great because Abrams and the actors put their hearts and souls into it, not because of the screenplay.

    Isn't that what I just said?

  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp! I can show you how to be a real man!Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Pony, the helmets in the trailer had head ridges. Whether that was because their heads have that or just a clever fakeout I have no idea, but I am leaning towards bumpy forehead being the "official" look, because it was literally the first thing the original series changed in their first big-screen outing and it has never gone back.

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Pony, the helmets in the trailer had head ridges. Whether that was because their heads have that or just a clever fakeout I have no idea, but I am leaning towards bumpy forehead being the "official" look, because it was literally the first thing the original series changed in their first big-screen outing and it has never gone back.

    God, I hope so.

    I hope Enterprise's whole "answer" to the issue is completely ignored for the rest of time.

  • FuruFuru Registered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Lynx wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    wunderbar wrote: »
    Is it too late to bring up the fact that Paramount has already hired the same writers to do the next movie?

    Nooooooooooooo!

    Oh well. It'll probably still be good, despite some shoddy writing.

    Well, it's Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof this time. So, it might be better.

    They can still be fired, too. It would cost Paramount some money but it could be done.

    Pffft.

    They're not going to fire people who make them money and lose money in the process.

    saiyan2.jpg
  • SixSix Registered User regular
    Yeah, the movie's a hit. why change writing teams if they want to come back?

    XBL, PSN, & Steam: SixkillerNYC Twitter Flickr
  • tofutofu Registered User
    People complain about Kirk running into Scotty at the ice station but no one's mentioned how he and Bones just happened to sit next to each other on the same shuttle.

    Clearly there is some message of fate being conveyed.

  • Fatboy RobertsFatboy Roberts Registered User
    They did for Spider-Man 2. That worked well.

    They did for Empire Strikes Back, too.

    Hell, they did it for Wrath of Khan.

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    tofu wrote: »
    People complain about Kirk running into Scotty at the ice station but no one's mentioned how he and Bones just happened to sit next to each other on the same shuttle.

    Clearly there is some message of fate being conveyed.

    LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZY

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Puts his name on his helicoptor.. ..so everyone knows it's his.Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Pony, the helmets in the trailer had head ridges. Whether that was because their heads have that or just a clever fakeout I have no idea, but I am leaning towards bumpy forehead being the "official" look, because it was literally the first thing the original series changed in their first big-screen outing and it has never gone back.

    God, I hope so.

    I hope Enterprise's whole "answer" to the issue is completely ignored for the rest of time.

    I bet they did the "ridged helmets" solely so the didn't have to deal with that at all.
    tofu wrote: »
    People complain about Kirk running into Scotty at the ice station but no one's mentioned how he and Bones just happened to sit next to each other on the same shuttle.

    Clearly there is some message of fate being conveyed.

    Bones and Kirk were old, old friends, so it makes sense for them to have met early on during their academy days.

    Scotty was just the chief engineer; it's a little weird that Kirk happened to run into him at random.

    thanossig_zps4bf2ceeb.jpg
  • FuruFuru Registered User regular
    They did for Spider-Man 2. That worked well.

    They did for Empire Strikes Back, too.

    Hell, they did it for Wrath of Khan.

    None of those cases had the writers actually already hired and working on the sequel script and then fired.

    saiyan2.jpg
  • Fatboy RobertsFatboy Roberts Registered User
    Can you imagine the cries of pain from the LARP community if all the money they spent on latex forehead applications becomes nullified by JJ switching back to making Klingons into Space Mexicans.

  • SixSix Registered User regular
    tofu wrote: »
    People complain about Kirk running into Scotty at the ice station but no one's mentioned how he and Bones just happened to sit next to each other on the same shuttle.

    Clearly there is some message of fate being conveyed.

    It's just a lazy way of conveying fate. "Oh, they just happened to run into each other" just isn't very interesting.

    XBL, PSN, & Steam: SixkillerNYC Twitter Flickr
  • FuruFuru Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    tofu wrote: »
    People complain about Kirk running into Scotty at the ice station but no one's mentioned how he and Bones just happened to sit next to each other on the same shuttle.

    Clearly there is some message of fate being conveyed.

    LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZY

    How would you have done it, then?

    saiyan2.jpg
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Furu wrote: »
    They did for Spider-Man 2. That worked well.

    They did for Empire Strikes Back, too.

    Hell, they did it for Wrath of Khan.

    None of those cases had the writers actually already hired and working on the sequel script and then fired.

    But, if they use Klingons again in the next or third movie, unless they spend the entire movie under helmets (which would be silly) they're eventually going to have to take a stand on the issue and show what Klingons look like in this Star Trek universe.

    Hopefully they ignore all of Manny Coto's fanwanking from the last season of Enterprise.

  • FuruFuru Registered User regular
    Can you imagine the cries of pain from the LARP community if all the money they spent on latex forehead applications becomes nullified by JJ switching back to making Klingons into Space Mexicans.

    It's an alternate timeline. It wouldn't matter.

    saiyan2.jpg
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    Furu wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Lynx wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    wunderbar wrote: »
    Is it too late to bring up the fact that Paramount has already hired the same writers to do the next movie?

    Nooooooooooooo!

    Oh well. It'll probably still be good, despite some shoddy writing.

    Well, it's Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof this time. So, it might be better.

    They can still be fired, too. It would cost Paramount some money but it could be done.

    Pffft.

    They're not going to fire people who make them money and lose money in the process.

    The way a writers contract normally works is they are hired to do a draft and so many rewrites, some of which are optional on the studio's part. After the writers' work has finished the studio can take the script and hire someone else to rewrite it or have it rewritten from scratch.

    Don't think the studio would be willing to do that? Happens all the time. Most people don't notice because you usually don't get credit unless your version of the script is used (with some exceptions).

    camo_sig2.png
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    The next movie shouldn't just feature Klingons as the main villain - it should be done entirely in Klingon.

    Because fuck the unwashed masses that are not fluent in Klingon-speak.

    I must point out that the ones fluent in Klingon-speak will most likely be, as a matter of fact, the definition of unwashed.

    Well, at least the guy next to me in the theater certainly was.

    Smelly too.

    Steam ID: DoctorArch Xbox Live: DoctorArch
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Archgarth wrote: »
    The next movie shouldn't just feature Klingons as the main villain - it should be done entirely in Klingon.

    Because fuck the unwashed masses that are not fluent in Klingon-speak.

    I must point out that the ones fluent in Klingon-speak will most likely be, as a matter of fact, the definition of unwashed.

    Well, at least the guy next to me in the theater certainly was.

    Smelly too.

    Irony, motherfucker, can you detect it?

  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Sentry makes a good point, in that despite saying "I'm not going to debate the subject with you" I nonetheless continued to respond to him.

    So, well done, good sir! You trolled me most excellently, and I totally fell for it.

    I tip my hat to you.

    I will now continue to ignore your posts in this thread and so on.

    Whatever you need to do to not actually have to argue your point. Apparently this isn't a debate thread but a chat thread for you, continue with your stream of consciousness posts, by all means.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • LynxLynx Registered User
    Pony wrote: »
    Hopefully they ignore all of Manny Coto's fanwanking from the last season of Enterprise.

    Fanwanking it may have been, but you have to give credit where credit is due: the fourth season of Enterprise was far, far better than the three seasons before it.

This discussion has been closed.