Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
volkov2006
Wikipedia is not the best source foe anything and I was going off of what Gene Roddenberry said, you know the person who created Star Trek, he said it is Trekkie not Trekker. This Trekker thing started up again because the writers of these new movies said that it was Trekker not Trekkie, I for one am going with the creator not the butchers.
And I am a DS9 fan in fact it is my favorite series, so many good episodes, good character development, and such good storytelling.
Although as a whole I would agree with you, trying to watch the first season was a tedious journey. Yea I know they were developing the characters but let's be honest there were some fairly stupid/insufferable episodes. Once the main characters were developed I'd have to say alot of the series (especially The Dominion Wars storyline) were some of the best Trek stories. The only real gripe I had was Jake Sisko......the black version of Wesley Crusher. I don't know why the creators felt the need to add an "adolescent" element to the series but what's done is done.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sulka_bewitched_me
Although as a whole I would agree with you, trying to watch the first season was a tedious journey. Yea I know they were developing the characters but let's be honest there were some fairly stupid/insufferable episodes. Once the main characters were developed I'd have to say alot of the series (especially The Dominion Wars storyline) were some of the best Trek stories.
Yes the first season was difficult but they were just trying to get started, in the second season they actually started to make the show all about themselves and not just be a spin off of TNG. I think that Voyager was the same until about season 3 or so.
And the Dominion story arc was awesome, the stories were so great especially the ones that showed that the Federation losing the war, after 2 series of the Federation being an almost infallible entity, was just great. Also the way they tied DS9 into the movies(Generations and First Contact) was very well done, even if it was just a quick mention. Also the idea that Sisko was the Emissary of the Prophets was a very good look at religion and how it changes people who have it, don't have it, and those who are thrust into the middle of it.
About Jake I am not sure why they wanted it but I think it was nice to actually see a relationship between father and son, and how they were at odds at times. Also Sisko was named as one of the top 100 TV dads at the time. Although I seem to like Jake more than Wesley, not sure why.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
volkov2006
Yes the first season was difficult but they were just trying to get started, in the second season they actually started to make the show all about themselves and not just be a spin off of TNG. I think that Voyager was the same until about season 3 or so.
And the Dominion story arc was awesome, the stories were so great especially the ones that showed that the Federation losing the war, after 2 series of the Federation being an almost infallible entity, was just great. Also the way they tied DS9 into the movies(Generations and First Contact) was very well done, even if it was just a quick mention. Also the idea that Sisko was the Emissary of the Prophets was a very good look at religion and how it changes people who have it, don't have it, and those who are thrust into the middle of it.
About Jake I am not sure why they wanted it but I think it was nice to actually see a relationship between father and son, and how they were at odds at times. Also Sisko was named as one of the top 100 TV dads at the time. Although I seem to like Jake more than Wesley, not sure why.
Yea I'll give you that Jake was more tolerable than Wesley but I think that's because TNG painted him as a boy genius and he came across as someone trying to overcompensate, a "goody two shoes", and someone always looking to please.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sulka_bewitched_me
Yea I'll give you that Jake was more tolerable than Wesley but I think that's because TNG painted him as a boy genius and he came across as someone trying to overcompensate, a "goody two shoes", and someone always looking to please.
I agree with that and don't get me wrong I did not really like Jake that much but he at least had a person around his age in Nog that made him tolerable unlike Wesley who had no one of his age to interact with I think that is what made Jake the better character. Just like Naomi from Voyager, when she was young she was likeable because she was a little kid, and who doesn't like that, but when she got older the started to lose that interesting vibe and when on to become another Wesley.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Jake Sisko = FAIL. 'Nuff said. Even when people defend him, the best compliment he receives is, 'at least he wasn't Wesley' (I got shit for this on Star Trek's Facebook page.' That said, it should be interesting to note that Roddenberry claimed that Wesley represented his own perspective on the series, sort of like his proxy.
~BB~
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
volkov2006
Wikipedia is not the best source foe anything and I was going off of what Gene Roddenberry said, you know the person who created Star Trek, he said it is Trekkie not Trekker. This Trekker thing started up again because the writers of these new movies said that it was Trekker not Trekkie, I for one am going with the creator not the butchers.
And I am a DS9 fan in fact it is my favorite series, so many good episodes, good character development, and such good storytelling.
All I said was look it up on Wikipedia . I know what Wikipedia is as do most people . There is a section on Trekkie vs. Trekker . This thread has definitely turned into a Trekker vs Trekkie schism . I am laughing about it myself .
As far as Trekkie goes, Roddenberry didn't invent the term . Some writer for a sci=fi mag or tv guide or something did when he saw 15 or 20 homemade Trek costumed weirdos at a sci-fi convention while the TOS was still in production . Trekker dates back to possibly 1970, but it was definitely in common usage by 1972 .
As far as Roddenberry and the Trekkie / Trekker incident goes ....... It is a just a rumor . No one has ever been able to place it by date or even year or location . Of those that claim to have direct knowledge of it or have claimed to be have been present, each person gives conflicting info. I have been told by cast members that it either never happened or it is just rumor .
Just remember this about Roddenberry . He and George Lucas do have 1 thing in common . They are/were both Big Assholes . Gene thought Trekkies and Trekkers were a bunch scary weirdos .
Now I am off to go thru my 20 plus cases of Star Trek / Star Wars / Sci-Fi collectables to find my unopened mib 12" Pike and 12" Gorn Action Figures and let them go at it .
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cecil Rhodes
A?m I the only one that caught a certain thing in the movie that no one has mentioned ? Heck I laughed when I saw/heard it and at least 1/2 the theater heard me .
How did the Away Team conceal their true identity when they traveled to Qo'anoS ?
HELLO ...... Anybody ......... Am I the only one that knows this ?
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BellaBellucci
OK, I'm done staying quiet about this (it's been an entire 24 hours :lol:): Star Trek Into Darkness has wonderful characters. The way they play off each other is typically excellent Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman fare. One of my favorite things about Trek has always been the extent to which the bridge crews are always close like family. In fact, that's why I watch Trek movies when I'm alone over the holidays. So, on that level this was a terrific movie.
The sets and effects were great. The 3D was terrific. And you gotta love Benedict Cumberbatch as you-know-who. In my opinion, a movie of this nature is most successful when you can actually relate to the antagonist somehow.
BUT THAT SCRIPT! UGH! It's a miserable combination of Space Seed, Trek II, and Trek 6 with far too much disruption simply for the sake of reminding the audience that this is a new universe. Guess what, JJ: we get it. And the remake of a classic scene (with a twist that JJ no doubt convinced himself was witty) that really had no business being conceived, let alone shot, was just too much to bear. And yes, they include the classic line, but it's not what you think. It's far, far, FAR worse. Oh, and don't get me started on the unnecessary shoehorning of one particular Vulcan who shall go unnamed, but whose identity should be pretty obvious to everyone. Shatner must be ripping his hair out.
Being lenient because I'm a Trekkie and this movie is openly marketed as a summer popcorn movie, not to mention the pure adrenaline rush I derived from it, I give it 8/10 overall (as have most of the critics for mostly the same reasons ), but I will warn you... the final sequence will have you screaming, 'Jaaaaaaaaaaaaay Jaaaaaaaaaaaay!'
~BB~
LOL I refused to watch the reboot and there is no chance I'll watch this waste of celluloid. Anything remotely resembling coherency or intelligence in an Abrams movie is purely coincidental. This is the man who puked up Armageddon, Cloverfield & Felicity into the world. I'd rather watch Kelly Shore dance in the old HA chat room ...
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BellaBellucci
Jake Sisko = FAIL. 'Nuff said. Even when people defend him, the best compliment he receives is, 'at least he wasn't Wesley' (I got shit for this on Star Trek's Facebook page.' That said, it should be interesting to note that Roddenberry claimed that Wesley represented his own perspective on the series, sort of like his proxy.
~BB~
Yeah, don't get me wrong Bella...Jake was an EPIC FAIL but me and Volkov2006 were just making the observation that between Jake and Wesley, Jake was the lesser of two evils albeit a very disinteresting character nonetheless.:soapbox
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BBaggins06
LOL I refused to watch the reboot and there is no chance I'll watch this waste of celluloid. Anything remotely resembling coherency or intelligence in an Abrams movie is purely coincidental. This is the man who puked up Armageddon, Cloverfield & Felicity into the world. I'd rather watch Kelly Shore dance in the old HA chat room ...
Armageddon was from Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer. JJ was just one screen writer. And JJ did also give us Lost and Fringe, so he's not the WORST producer/director in show business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sulka_bewitched_me
Yeah, don't get me wrong Bella...Jake was an EPIC FAIL but me and Volkov2006 were just making the observation that between Jake and Wesley, Jake was the lesser of two evils albeit a very disinteresting character nonetheless.:soapbox
I think The Traveler might disagree with you. ;)
~BB~
PS: Leeeeave Armageddon Aloooooone! <3
