Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Star Trek XI (Abrams, 2009) - Part 2

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Star Trek XI (Abrams, 2009) - Part 2

Old 12-02-08, 10:23 AM
  #26  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Leandro/San Francisco
Posts: 7,422
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Ron G View Post
The very same could be said of those who are gushing over it.
Who's gushing over it? They haven't seen it therefore they just have high hopes and are keeping an open mind.
Old 12-02-08, 01:17 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Puyallup
Posts: 16,429
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
oh jeeze.

But saw the trailer, looked pretty good.

I am just hoping this reboots the franchise good, I would love another star trek series.
Old 12-02-08, 02:55 PM
  #28  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by riley_dude View Post
Who's gushing over it? They haven't seen it therefore they just have high hopes and are keeping an open mind.
No, there are people who've said it looks like it will be good, and no one comes in here and gives them shit in post after post.

I've seen the trailer and think it will be bad. For some reason, this is unacceptable and evilly close-minded of me.

I don't like this officially-sanctioned opinion crap.
Old 12-02-08, 02:56 PM
  #29  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 117 Likes on 79 Posts
You're such a martyr.
Old 12-02-08, 03:06 PM
  #30  
Member
 
Brack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: near Cincinnati
Posts: 10,007
Received 59 Likes on 39 Posts
Originally Posted by Ron G View Post
No, there are people who've said it looks like it will be good, and no one comes in here and gives them shit in post after post.

I've seen the trailer and think it will be bad. For some reason, this is unacceptable and evilly close-minded of me.

I don't like this officially-sanctioned opinion crap.
Care to show where a mod deemed your posts unacceptable?
Old 12-02-08, 03:07 PM
  #31  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
You're such a martyr.
Exactly the sort of shit I'm talking about.
Old 12-02-08, 03:10 PM
  #32  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Brack View Post
Care to show where a mod deemed your posts unacceptable?
Read through the previous thread. The opinions expressed by the mod there in response to my posts appear to have been adopted as the official position one must take in order to appear open minded and to avoid being dogpiled on.

We can say positive and hopeful things based on the trailer, but saying anything negative is unwarranted, because we only have the trailer (and a shitload of leaked details) to base an opinion upon.
Old 12-02-08, 03:12 PM
  #33  
Member
 
Brack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: near Cincinnati
Posts: 10,007
Received 59 Likes on 39 Posts
Nice try, but unless you've been warned by a moderator that you've been posting unacceptable posts, you're making stuff up.
Old 12-02-08, 03:16 PM
  #34  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 117 Likes on 79 Posts
I think you're confusing comments from the moderator as a member of this forum as official moderation posts. Generally, if it ain't in italics they ain't speaking as a moderator.
Old 12-02-08, 03:22 PM
  #35  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
I think you're confusing comments from the moderator as a member of this forum as official moderation posts. Generally, if it ain't in italics they ain't speaking as a moderator.
I'm not confusing anything. I'm merely pointing out that those statements seem to have become the parameters within which this discussion is now allowed to take place. Anyone moving outside of those parameters is subjected to ridicule.

If you'll go back and look, you'll see that the first time I used the term "officially sanctioned," I put it into scare quotes, as I wasn't using the term to literally mean that dissenting opinions would be punished through the moderation system, but that that dissenting opinions were being punished nonetheless, by ganging up on dissenters and subjecting them to ridicule.

Either way, the effect is turning these threads into positive-only threads.
Old 12-02-08, 03:26 PM
  #36  
DVD Talk Hero
 
pinata242's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Owasso, OK
Posts: 30,154
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I've been paying attention to this conversation for, oh, exactly 3 minutes and 17 seconds now and I find it boring.

The movie is still 5 months away. You can have a sense of doom and gloom. You can have a sense of "open mindedness". You can be completely apathetic about the whole thing. All are valid positions.

There is no point trying to sway anyone any way. Conversation about the movie's merits (or lack thereof) at this point is trivial at best.

What is there to fight over for the moderators to give a shit one way or another? There's no reason for anyone to take it so personal.
Old 12-02-08, 03:54 PM
  #37  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
tanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Gator Nation
Posts: 8,415
Received 486 Likes on 349 Posts
Originally Posted by The Bus View Post
I'm sorry, the nacelles thing is so myopic as to border on pedantry. I can understand (and sometimes appreciate) excessive attention to detail in films, but most of this obsessive hunt for accuracy should be reserved for historical pictures and never at the expense of story.

Considering Star Trek, by the admission of its own fans, hasn't had an exciting twitch on its flogged dead horse of a storyline in close to a decade, I think there are bigger overall concerns than the placement of the nacelles.
No one is saying that there aren't more important things. However, the design of the ship is one of the things that I can critique since it's looks won't change. That doesn't mean that if you don't like the design of the ship that is being myopic. You can have your cake and eat it too. Just because you have a good ship design doesn't mean you will have a terrible story and vice versa. Do you think the person designing the ship is also the writer?

I'm not even talking about accuracy of the ship design. I just think it is a terrible design period.
Old 12-02-08, 04:22 PM
  #38  
Moderator
 
wendersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: America!
Posts: 33,899
Received 159 Likes on 115 Posts
Mod note: I am, AFAIK, the only active mod in Movie Talk. I just looked, and I made exactly one post in the previous Star Trek XI thread, and that was to announce that I was closing it for length. Anyone who thinks that there is some official position here to stifle negative comments about any movie is imagining it. Period.
Old 12-02-08, 04:24 PM
  #39  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I already own Galaxy Quest on dvd so I don't see any need to see this film.
Old 12-02-08, 11:06 PM
  #40  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by wendersfan View Post
Mod note: I am, AFAIK, the only active mod in Movie Talk. I just looked, and I made exactly one post in the previous Star Trek XI thread, and that was to announce that I was closing it for length. Anyone who thinks that there is some official position here to stifle negative comments about any movie is imagining it. Period.
I might be wrong, but I think Ron was probably referring to my posts in the previous thread. I am a mod and I did disagree with many of the points he made. However, I made no attempt to posit my posts as official DVD Talk moderator posts.

For future reference to anyone here who may not know, I moderate HD Talk and Video Game Talk and always make it clear when I am acting as a moderator.

For what it's worth, Ron, I think your concerns might be better addressed by starting a thread in Feedback. That, however, is my opinion as a general member of this forum, and not a comment as a moderator.
Old 12-03-08, 07:44 AM
  #41  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SnogBox
Posts: 7,903
Received 57 Likes on 42 Posts
What's a scare quote?! This term is new to me.
Old 12-03-08, 07:45 AM
  #42  
Enormous Genitals
 
Bandoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: a small cottage on a cul de sac in the lower pits of hell.
Posts: 35,430
Received 316 Likes on 194 Posts
It's not the "I think this movie will suck" posts that got people angry, it's the "if you think this looks good you can't possibly be a true Star Trek fan" posts that got people angry.

Anyway, I'm still stoked for a new Trek film, especially with Abrams at the helm. Maybe it will be great, and maybe it will suck, but I'm going to go see it and then form my opionion.
Old 12-03-08, 07:47 AM
  #43  
Enormous Genitals
 
Bandoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: a small cottage on a cul de sac in the lower pits of hell.
Posts: 35,430
Received 316 Likes on 194 Posts
Originally Posted by Superman07 View Post
What's a scare quote?! This term is new to me. BOO!

Old 12-03-08, 09:56 AM
  #44  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 9,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If I were to travel back in time after this movie is released and post "I told you so" before any of these arguments started, would that break canon?
Old 12-03-08, 09:58 AM
  #45  
DVD Talk Hero
 
pinata242's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Owasso, OK
Posts: 30,154
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
If it happens (happened?) then it's canon.
Old 12-03-08, 04:42 PM
  #46  
Inane Thread Master, 2018 TOTY
 
OldBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Are any of us really anywhere?
Posts: 45,421
Received 454 Likes on 404 Posts
does anyone know if or which current DVD releases the awesome extended trailer for this is on? tia.
Old 12-04-08, 01:10 AM
  #47  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I will see this and it looks kind of cool. But it also looks like an action flick crossed with a WB teen soap.

I like that they're going with an outside director/screenwriter instead of the usual in-house suspects.. but I wish they'd stop trying to re-create Wrath of Khan (flashy charismatic villain, some vendetta against Kirk).. the shows were much more interesting and nuanced than that. When will Star Trek actually be sci-fi again rather than the tired Battleship/Die Hard on a Spaceship formula they've used for all but parts 1 and 4?

The films have never really lived up to the series in ideas and content.
Old 12-04-08, 02:48 AM
  #48  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ron G View Post
I'm not confusing anything. I'm merely pointing out that those statements seem to have become the parameters within which this discussion is now allowed to take place. Anyone moving outside of those parameters is subjected to ridicule.

If you'll go back and look, you'll see that the first time I used the term "officially sanctioned," I put it into scare quotes, as I wasn't using the term to literally mean that dissenting opinions would be punished through the moderation system, but that that dissenting opinions were being punished nonetheless, by ganging up on dissenters and subjecting them to ridicule.

Either way, the effect is turning these threads into positive-only threads.

Forgive me Ron but I was of the understanding that posting ANYTHING on the DVDtalk forums left your liable for ridicule. This your first rodeo?
Old 12-04-08, 03:08 PM
  #49  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by lamphorn View Post
I like that they're going with an outside director/screenwriter instead of the usual in-house suspects.. but I wish they'd stop trying to re-create Wrath of Khan (flashy charismatic villain, some vendetta against Kirk).. the shows were much more interesting and nuanced than that. When will Star Trek actually be sci-fi again rather than the tired Battleship/Die Hard on a Spaceship formula they've used for all but parts 1 and 4?

The films have never really lived up to the series in ideas and content.
Given that this is meant to be Kirk's first mission, I don't see how it could be about a villain with a vendetta against him. Unless it's about some guy he flamed online coming back to get him.
Old 12-04-08, 03:23 PM
  #50  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
ditto..i was confused by that too

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.