Star Trek: the new movie.

[Asso]

...So if you won't do it for love, do it for hate.

Good point.

[thecursor]

Now that makes sense, French Revolution echoes aside. It rather implies the robot isn't a citizen, doesn't it?

It'd be useful to have robots for some jobs, I guess. Especially dangerous ones, like firemen. But I think there's the risk of robots making us as a society fat and lazy, so we'd better not get too many. Robot traffic patrolmen makes sense, I suppose, because then they can work 24/7/365. Until they're like Data and actually self-aware and such, in which case we get the whole "Measure of a Man" debate.

Yeah, I'm not saying that the whole police force is robotized but maybe just those menial cop jobs that police always complain about. We've already got robots catching speeders now anyway, the android body would just give the offender someone to grumble at as they muttered something about not seeing the limit sign. This theory also gives a valid reason for the stupid kid screaming his full name. You have to scream your full name otherwise those god damn model fours are never gonna be able to make an ID. Now them there model fives they got in the city...much nicer.

It also gives that movie Robocop a whole new spin: "Yeah Robo, you sit in that house for five or six hours to see if that fraud suspect walks his dog, meanwhile McNulty from the Wire, John Steed from the Avengers, Axel Foley, and Magnum P.I. are gonna go solve this quadruple homicide/terrorist attack case."

Wait a second, is it me or does that sound like an awesome movie?

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

I didn't like the movie before I saw it and the only reason I did see it was because I was able to do so for free (advantages of working for a newspaper). I would never have paid to see it - and I won't be buying the DVD.

I must also say that I think you can have an opinion of something without even seeing it. We all do that all the time when we decide what kind of movies or TV shows we want to see. We all form opinions beforehand. There are certain genres, concepts or story-lines we don't like and won't bother with. There's a reason there's a term called "word of mouth".

I people didn't bother with this kind of pre-judging then studios would never have trouble at the box office because movie-goers would be pretty evenly split among the different movies.

That said, of course it is more informed to have seen something, but I don't think an opinion is invalid simply because someone hasn't seen something.

I know for a fact quite a few people who hate *the_abomination* and haven't seen it and have no intention of seeing it simply based on everything they know about it. This has never been an issue. Why is it now? Is it the mere fact that a lot of people like Abrams Trek?

But this is no longer about discussing the movie, but about people who are discussing the movie and I've seen signs that this won't be a fruitful course (based on what's happened at other boards) so at least I will bow out. I just had to get this off my chest.

[thecursor]

That said, of course it is more informed to have seen something, but I don't think an opinion is invalid simply because someone hasn't seen something.*clip*

But this is no longer about discussing the movie, but about people who are discussing the movie and I've seen signs that this won't be a fruitful course (based on what's happened at other boards) so at least I will bow out. I just had to get this off my chest.

See I disagree, I think this is the issue right here, a lot of Trekkies are judging this film, then vowing to never see it, same thing they did to ENT. I feel like that's pretty much "the rotten" at the heart of the Trek community. The show's biggest foes are it's fans now, who have built something akin to an unchanging religion around a show about evolving and changing and growing. First there's the 'I hate the idea of it' crowd, then the 'I like it but we should change this' crowd, or the 'what would Gene say?' people. It's farcical and then to actually sit down and say "I've never seen the movie but it's clearly the most horrible thing ever." Yeah, I'm sorry but I fail to see how an argument is still valid with no first hand evidence.

[Aquarius]

I sort of feel like a lot of this is the Same Old Crap that comes up whenever there's a new incarnation of Star Trek. People hated on TNG before they even saw it. People automatically condemned DS9 to suckdom without giving it a fair chance. They did it to Voyager and Enterprise, too. Hell, I remember the stupid "my captain can beat up your captain" debates that ensued before TNG even premiered. People made up their mind it sucked, and there were those who looked for reasons to hate it, no matter how petty they had to get in order to "prove" one show or the other was bad.

If we're truly honest with ourselves, there was plenty wrong in the Trek universe before J.J. Abrams came along. This movie isn't the first sign of the Apocalypse, Abrams isn't the Prince of Darkness (besides, isn't that Ozzy's job?), and frankly, I'm growing weary of the notion that this film has somehow "ruined" Star Trek--and I'm not referring to anyone specifically here. I have a friend who's all bent out of shape because it was established in TOS that George Kirk wasn't in Starfleet. I have a fellow poster on a Yahoo list who wouldn't shut up about how EVERYONE "knows" that Spock's mom is supposed to have blue eyes, because Jane Wyatt has blue eyes, so shame on Abrams for hiring Winona Ryder instead of a blue-eyed actress, or not at least insisting that Ryder wear blue contacts in the film. W? T? F? Sorry, but it seems that some people are reaching into some pretty petty shit in order to find reasons to hate this film.

Most of us can be honest enough with ourselves and each other in order to admit that yeah, the film wasn't perfect...but there was enough of what I DID like about the film that made its flaws forgivable. No one's life has been ruined by this film, and Star Trek itself certainly hasn't been ruined. I'm not looking to have the world changed, I just wanted to be entertained for a couple of hours.

[JadziaKathryn]

This theory also gives a valid reason for the stupid kid screaming his full name. You have to scream your full name otherwise those god damn model fours are never gonna be able to make an ID. Now them there model fives they got in the city...much nicer.

That's awesome!

[CX]

CX - doesn't matter. The fact that you haven't seen it is reason enough for me not to want to bother discussing it with you.

I hate to come off as rude here, but if that's the case then don't. Don't waste time and effort talking down to me. If you're not, well it sure seems like it to me.

You're touting the opinion of an angry mob of fat 40-year-olds who live in their mother's basement reading comic books hoping some suave Hollywood producer will one day hire them to become their canon expert. This. Is. Why. I. Hate. Trekkies.

Ever notice how the people who hate the movie tend to bash the movie, and the people who like it tend to bash the people who hate it?

Watch the movie so you can talk about it intelligently

I am. Again, I hate to be rude, but frankly this line or reasoning is kind of childish.

But, I know you won't because you'd rather sit there and justify yourself to everyone as some kind of authority on the subject when you really have nothing to back yourself up.

I have the interviews, descriptions of the movie from people who saw it and people who worked on it, reviews of the movie from many different sources, the trailers and the other media available online. Thanks to the information from the people who worked on the bloody thing, I probably actually know more about the movie than the average moviegoer. If you don't like my opinion, that is just fine and dandy, we can agree to disagree. But don't sit there and try to claim that since I haven't seen the shaky-cam and lens flare in front of me that I don't know anything about the movie.

See, this is the exact same thing that happened with TGTMD, too. Some people loved it, some of us hated it, but since I didn't waste time or money reading the bloody thing and instead asked others about it, there was a nice big shit storm, and I didn't appreciate it then, either.

You've spent the past month or so going on and on about doom and gloom yet you never bothered to actually go see the movie, of course we're gonna jump on your case now. The truth is that if you hate the movie then you hate the movie but at least you SAW the fucking movie. Over and over again we've heard how "Un-trek" the film is yet you've never actually seen it. Why debate when, really, there's nothing left to debate?

And yet everything I said about the movie turned out to be true. You notice that? I did.

I didn't like the movie before I saw it and the only reason I did see it was because I was able to do so for free (advantages of working for a newspaper). I would never have paid to see it - and I won't be buying the DVD.

I must also say that I think you can have an opinion of something without even seeing it. We all do that all the time when we decide what kind of movies or TV shows we want to see. We all form opinions beforehand. There are certain genres, concepts or story-lines we don't like and won't bother with. There's a reason there's a term called "word of mouth".

I people didn't bother with this kind of pre-judging then studios would never have trouble at the box office because movie-goers would be pretty evenly split among the different movies.

That said, of course it is more informed to have seen something, but I don't think an opinion is invalid simply because someone hasn't seen something.

I know for a fact quite a few people who hate *the_abomination* and haven't seen it and have no intention of seeing it simply based on everything they know about it. This has never been an issue. Why is it now? Is it the mere fact that a lot of people like Abrams Trek?

But this is no longer about discussing the movie, but about people who are discussing the movie and I've seen signs that this won't be a fruitful course (based on what's happened at other boards) so at least I will bow out. I just had to get this off my chest.

Thanks, KTR. You articulate things way better than I ever could.

See I disagree, I think this is the issue right here, a lot of Trekkies are judging this film, then vowing to never see it, same thing they did to ENT.

I was one of those people. You know what made me start watching? Looking at what other fans had to say about it.

The show's biggest foes are it's fans now, who have built something akin to an unchanging religion around a show about evolving and changing and growing.

And yet the ones being treated like heretics are the ones ho don't like the movie.

. It's farcical and then to actually sit down and say "I've never seen the movie but it's clearly the most horrible thing ever." Yeah, I'm sorry but I fail to see how an argument is still valid with no first hand evidence.

Because you don't need to see the movie to know what happens in it. For example, I know that Kirk went from cadet to captain (as I predicted). I didn't have to see the movie to learn that. Pretty much any event that happened in the film, I know from reading about it. The only thing I "miss out on" is hearing the spoken dialog and seeing the pictures move. But I still have the raw information upon which to form an opinion.

I sort of feel like a lot of this is the Same Old Crap that comes up whenever there's a new incarnation of Star Trek. People hated on TNG before they even saw it. People automatically condemned DS9 to suckdom without giving it a fair chance. They did it to Voyager and Enterprise, too. Hell, I remember the stupid "my captain can beat up your captain" debates that ensued before TNG even premiered. People made up their mind it sucked, and there were those who looked for reasons to hate it, no matter how petty they had to get in order to "prove" one show or the other was bad.

You know what that reminds me of? People talking about all fan fic like it's slash fic.

If we're truly honest with ourselves, there was plenty wrong in the Trek universe before J.J. Abrams came along.

An yet that was still no reason to do a reboot or to justify any of what he and the people working for him did.

This movie isn't the first sign of the Apocalypse, Abrams isn't the Prince of Darkness (besides, isn't that Ozzy's job?), and frankly, I'm growing weary of the notion that this film has somehow "ruined" Star Trek--and I'm not referring to anyone specifically here.

And no one here made any such reference to Abrams or called the movie the first sign of the Apocalypse. At worst I've called JJ a hack, and that's my honest opinion. See, exaggeration is part of the problem in pretty much any debate I've had about this movie or any similar "debate" I've had.

Star Trek itself certainly hasn't been ruined.

I would argue it has.

[WarpGirl]

The only reason I'm going to see the movie is that I want to draw my conclusions for myself, after all I've read and heard about this movie I'M SCARED. My sister absolutely loved it, so much so she saw it twice and paid for it. She is scrooge and can squeeze blood from a nickle. The problem with that is my sister and I NEVER agree, and we certainly never agreed about Trek. That would be reason enough for me to stay away IF I was one of those people that let my opinions be guided by others.

[Aquarius]

And no one here made any such reference to Abrams or called the movie the first sign of the Apocalypse. At worst I've called JJ a hack, and that's my honest opinion. See, exaggeration is part of the problem in pretty much any debate I've had about this movie or any similar "debate" I've had.

I believe I said I wasn't referring to anyone specifically here. So I'm wondering why you think I meant you?

Still, it is my opinion that much of the negative reaction to this movie is unnecessarily strong and overreactionary.

I would argue it has.

Why am I not surprised?

[thecursor]

**** it, this is an impasse, though I refuse to call it a draw.

[WarpGirl]

I FINALLY saw it and guess what I don't hate it. It IS an AU!!!!! It says so right in the movie, it doesn't invalidate any other Trek because alternate realites can co-exist. Every true Trek fan knows this, and the RU still exists. It was a nice movie, very action-packed, the cast was good. Nothing really to specifically hate. That being said this isn't a part of my Trek obsession, I was not completely emotionally invested, but I do like it. And I look forward to other movies and such. There were a few things I'd change, I think Amanda's death was a waste. Although I loved Spock beating the heck out of Kirk. The Romulans weren't really Romulans, but Eric Bana was drool worthy. I don't mind Spock and Uhura but I would have loved to know the backstory on it. I would have preferred an ozh'esta moment in the transporter room to a full blown french kiss, but the lines after were VERY GOOD. All in all, everyone did a fine job. I don't see why people are mourning the RU though, it isn't gone. Alternate timelines also co-exist. People need to calm down.

[Asso]

... because alternate realites can co-exist. Every true Trek fan knows this, and the RU still exists.

Are you stating that I'm not a true Trek?
Oh well, maybe you're right.

[WarpGirl]

NO! Just a reminder. ASSO It's 4:49 AM and I just pulled my dog out of a downpour that I slept through and ALL of my windows are open. I'm tired and I didn't mean to offend anyone.

[Asso]

Hey, WarpGirl, I was simply joking, nothing else. Be sure. And as I said on the other thread, even if I have other ideas about Timelines and above all MU, we are speaking only of a movie and of SF. Our lives will go ahead placidly, regardless of this movie, I think.

[JadziaKathryn]

Our lives will go ahead placidly, regardless of this movie, I think.

Wise man.