|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68565 is a reply to message #68564] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 01:41   |
Sandman
Messages: 97
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
In article
<YourName-2105131738300001@203-118-187-254.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>>>> Huh? That makes no sense at all. The prequels can introduce directions
>>>> that ruins the franchise just as much as sequels. Like introducing
>>>> "midichlorians" that if you take it into consideration ruins Yodas
>>>> entire sensei talk on Dagobah.
>>>
>>> Only to brainless dumbasses who can't bother to think for themselves.
>>
>> Hahahahaha!!!!
>
> As I said, it's only a "problem" for the brainless dumbasses ... which
> you've just proven you are, not that it's a surprise. :-\
Hahahahaha!!!
I thought idiots on usenet were extinct - didn't you guys move to the
web forums years ago? What happened?
Man, this was hilarious. "brainless dumbasses"!! Hahaha!
--
Sandman[.net]
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68568 is a reply to message #68565] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 02:25 |
Wiseguy
Messages: 242
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote in
news:mr-5F1835.07411721052013@News.Individual.NET:
> In article
> <YourName-2105131738300001@203-118-187-254.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
> YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>
>>>> > Huh? That makes no sense at all. The prequels can introduce
>>>> > directions that ruins the franchise just as much as sequels.
>>>> > Like introducing "midichlorians" that if you take it into
>>>> > consideration ruins Yodas entire sensei talk on Dagobah.
>>>>
>>>> Only to brainless dumbasses who can't bother to think for
>>>> themselves.
>>>
>>> Hahahahaha!!!!
>>
>> As I said, it's only a "problem" for the brainless dumbasses ...
>> which you've just proven you are, not that it's a surprise. :-\
>
> Hahahahaha!!!
>
> I thought idiots on usenet were extinct - didn't you guys move to the
> web forums years ago? What happened?
>
> Man, this was hilarious. "brainless dumbasses"!! Hahaha!
>
"Your Name" couldn't handle the complexity of a web forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68607 is a reply to message #65797] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 08:03 |
Merrick Baldelli
Messages: 6
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:
>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>
> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
> attention.
Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
infinitely better than NO Trek". An attitude that continues to
permeate the fanbase to this day.
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ You can't spell 'disgust' without
/ / 'SGU' - Anim8rFSK
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68650 is a reply to message #68607] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 13:38 |
David Johnston
Messages: 220
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5/21/2013 6:03 AM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>>
>> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
>> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
>> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
>> attention.
>
> Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
> were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
> the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
> Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
>
> In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
> rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
> infinitely better than NO Trek".
Hey if Trek fans didn't think that bad trek was better than no trek, TNG
would never have survived into a second season.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68651 is a reply to message #68650] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 13:46 |
Adam H. Kerman
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
David Johnston <David@block.net> wrote:
> On 5/21/2013 6:03 AM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>>>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>>>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>>> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
>>> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
>>> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
>>> attention.
>> Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
>> were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
>> the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
>> Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
>> In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
>> rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
>> infinitely better than NO Trek".
> Hey if Trek fans didn't think that bad trek was better than no trek, TNG
> would never have survived into a second season.
Good point.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68699 is a reply to message #68567] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 15:42 |
Bast
Messages: 151
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Your Name wrote:
> In article <knf0ln$6qv$1@dont-email.me>, "Bast"
> <fake_name@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> By July, the DVD/Blu rays will be in the Walmart 99¢ bins.
>
> July?!? Geez, they were in the bargain bins last week before it even hit
> cinemas ... and still nobody was buying the rubbish (except one guy who
> wanted a cheap frisbee for his dog to play with). ;-)
I'm referring to the 2013 movie.
.....No one will want this one in their home library, not even die-hard
trekkies.
I'm still amazed to hear how much even people who liked the 2009 one, are
saying this 2013 one, really stinks.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68700 is a reply to message #68650] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 17:43 |
Dano
Messages: 11
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
"David Johnston" wrote in message news:kngb77$ch$1@dont-email.me...
On 5/21/2013 6:03 AM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>>
>> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
>> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
>> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
>> attention.
>
> Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
> were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
> the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
> Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
>
> In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
> rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
> infinitely better than NO Trek".
Hey if Trek fans didn't think that bad trek was better than no trek, TNG
would never have survived into a second season.
==========================================
Whatever. You have quite a high opinion of yourself that you would appear
to feel your opinion holds more validity than mine and the millions of other
TNG fans who liked it. Hell...the show ran for SEVEN years.
Personally...I've always held that rendition in higher regard than the
original series. Tastes DO vary, Doesn't make me "right" or you "wrong"
for that matter. Just means we don't share identical tastes.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68701 is a reply to message #68607] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 17:59 |
YourName
Messages: 366
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <rdnmp85rla1qukn82rnlkb44fvtioh3lc1@4ax.com>, Merrick Baldelli
<mbaldelli@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>>
>> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
>> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
>> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
>> attention.
>
> Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
> were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
> the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
> Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
>
> In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
> rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
> infinitely better than NO Trek". An attitude that continues to
> permeate the fanbase to this day.
Most so-called "fans" are fly-by-night psuedo-fans happy with any old crap
as long as it has "Star Trek" in the title (or in the case of Enterprise,
assumed to be in the title) OR they simply flit from one new toy to the
next no matter what it is. Slap a "Star Trek" label on Barney and many of
these morons will happily watch that believing it actually is "Star
Trek". :-(
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68730 is a reply to message #68702] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 18:54 |
Wiseguy
Messages: 242
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote in
news:YourName-2205131000490001@203-118-187-122.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz:
> In article <kngic9$fbn$1@dont-email.me>, "Bast"
> <fake_name@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Your Name wrote:
>>> In article <knf0ln$6qv$1@dont-email.me>, "Bast"
>>> <fake_name@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> By July, the DVD/Blu rays will be in the Walmart 99¢ bins.
>>>
>>> July?!? Geez, they were in the bargain bins last week before it
>>> even hit cinemas ... and still nobody was buying the rubbish
>>> (except one guy who wanted a cheap frisbee for his dog to play
>>> with). ;-)
>>
>> I'm referring to the 2013 movie.
> <snip>
>
> So was I. :-)
>
What mental defect do you have that causes you to think that anyone who
thinks differently from you is wrong? That anyone who likes something
you don't is wrong? That anything you don't like should be destroyed?
That you, and only you, are always right? That the only other right
people are those who agree with you? (Are there any people in that
group?)
I call it stupidity. What do you call it?
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68769 is a reply to message #68701] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 23:21 |
BTR1701
Messages: 20
Registered: May 2012
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
In article
<YourName-2205130959280001@203-118-187-122.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
> In article <rdnmp85rla1qukn82rnlkb44fvtioh3lc1@4ax.com>, Merrick Baldelli
> <mbaldelli@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>>>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>>>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>>>
>>> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
>>> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
>>> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
>>> attention.
>>
>> Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
>> were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
>> the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
>> Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
>>
>> In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
>> rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
>> infinitely better than NO Trek". An attitude that continues to
>> permeate the fanbase to this day.
>
> Most so-called "fans" are fly-by-night psuedo-fans
In other words, they're people who can go enjoy a Star Trek movie once
every few years without hysterically obsessing over every detail and
acting like their entire world is coming to an end because Abrams
changed the number of head ridges on the Klingons or any of a myriad
other insignificant details.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68770 is a reply to message #68700] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 23:28 |
David Johnston
Messages: 220
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5/21/2013 3:43 PM, Dano wrote:
> "David Johnston" wrote in message news:kngb77$ch$1@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/21/2013 6:03 AM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:54 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Sorry, won't happen. Why? Because Trek Fans are a
>>>> dysfunctional bunch. Most of the ones that I've encountered will take
>>>> any and all shit shoveled to them on a plate and eat it.
>>>
>>> They're also amazingly defensive of material they aren't remotely
>>> familiar with. The one extolling the virtues of Voyager and Enterprise
>>> clearly didn't actually watch it, or, at the very least, didn't pay
>>> attention.
>>
>> Oh they did... I was with them through both newsgroups and
>> were fucking flooding the threads with their hot lady spunk, either on
>> the fact that Janeway was a competent Captain or the T&A of 7 of 69 on
>> Voyager... Or how "fresh" Enterprise was.
>>
>> In the years that I had participated in those groups, it
>> rapidly became obvious that the mantra of these cows was "Bad Trek is
>> infinitely better than NO Trek".
>
> Hey if Trek fans didn't think that bad trek was better than no trek, TNG
> would never have survived into a second season.
>
> ==========================================
>
> Whatever. You have quite a high opinion of yourself that you would
> appear to feel your opinion holds more validity than mine and the
> millions of other TNG fans who liked it.
<shrug> There are millions of people who like NuTrek as well. But bear
in mind that I wasn't talking about TNG in its entirety. I was talking
about just the first season of it. And I believe my opinion, that the
show was struggling at first but managed to find its feet at about the
same time that Riker grew the beard is quite widespread. It's even a
tvtrope.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GrowingTheBeard
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68771 is a reply to message #68769] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 23:41 |
Adam H. Kerman
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>> Most so-called "fans" are fly-by-night psuedo-fans
> In other words, they're people who can go enjoy a Star Trek movie once
> every few years without hysterically obsessing over every detail and
> acting like their entire world is coming to an end because Abrams
> changed the number of head ridges on the Klingons or any of a myriad
> other insignificant details.
I find I can't enjoy Star Trek without the over-the-top moralizing,
PC-er than thou, and unsubtle life lessons For Our Times. Also, the absurdly
short '60's cheesecake uniforms worn by the women. And where's the Shat's
acting?
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68772 is a reply to message #68771] |
Tue, 21 May 2013 20:09 |
thinbluemime
Messages: 17
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 22 May 2013 04:41:11 +0100, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>
>>> Most so-called "fans" are fly-by-night psuedo-fans
>
>> In other words, they're people who can go enjoy a Star Trek movie once
>> every few years without hysterically obsessing over every detail and
>> acting like their entire world is coming to an end because Abrams
>> changed the number of head ridges on the Klingons or any of a myriad
>> other insignificant details.
>
> I find I can't enjoy Star Trek without the over-the-top moralizing,
> PC-er than thou, and unsubtle life lessons For Our Times. Also, the
> absurdly
> short '60's cheesecake uniforms worn by the women. And where's the Shat's
> acting?
Other than Abrams doesn't give a Shat, you will find all the prerequisites
for your enjoyment included in the latest Trek installment.
As a bonus, Kirk even get a piece of tail.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68773 is a reply to message #68772] |
Wed, 22 May 2013 00:06 |
Adam H. Kerman
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
thinbluemime <thinbluemime2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 04:41:11 +0100, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>>>> Most so-called "fans" are fly-by-night psuedo-fans
>>> In other words, they're people who can go enjoy a Star Trek movie once
>>> every few years without hysterically obsessing over every detail and
>>> acting like their entire world is coming to an end because Abrams
>>> changed the number of head ridges on the Klingons or any of a myriad
>>> other insignificant details.
>> I find I can't enjoy Star Trek without the over-the-top moralizing,
>> PC-er than thou, and unsubtle life lessons For Our Times. Also, the
>> absurdly short '60's cheesecake uniforms worn by the women. And where's
>> the Shat's acting?
> Other than Abrams doesn't give a Shat, you will find all the prerequisites
> for your enjoyment included in the latest Trek installment.
> As a bonus, Kirk even get a piece of tail.
I like the Orphan Black reference!
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68774 is a reply to message #68772] |
Wed, 22 May 2013 00:57 |
BTR1701
Messages: 20
Registered: May 2012
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
In article <op.wxgleksv0rnx91@experience.zoomtown.com>,
thinbluemime <thinbluemime2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 04:41:11 +0100, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>>
>>>> Most so-called "fans" are fly-by-night psuedo-fans
>>
>>> In other words, they're people who can go enjoy a Star Trek movie once
>>> every few years without hysterically obsessing over every detail and
>>> acting like their entire world is coming to an end because Abrams
>>> changed the number of head ridges on the Klingons or any of a myriad
>>> other insignificant details.
>>
>> I find I can't enjoy Star Trek without the over-the-top moralizing,
>> PC-er than thou, and unsubtle life lessons For Our Times. Also, the
>> absurdly
>> short '60's cheesecake uniforms worn by the women. And where's the Shat's
>> acting?
>
> Other than Abrams doesn't give a Shat, you will find all the prerequisites
> for your enjoyment included in the latest Trek installment.
>
> As a bonus, Kirk even get a piece of tail.
Two pieces.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68775 is a reply to message #68730] |
Wed, 22 May 2013 01:54 |
MITO MINISTER
Messages: 197
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On May 22, 7:54Â am, Wiseguy <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote innews:YourName-2205131000490001@203-118-187-122.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz:
>
>
>
>
>
>> In article <kngic9$fb...@dont-email.me>, "Bast"
>> <fake_n...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Your Name wrote:
>>>> In article <knf0ln$6q...@dont-email.me>, "Bast"
>>>> <fake_n...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> > By July, the DVD/Blu rays will be in the Walmart 99¢ bins.
>
>>>> July?!? Geez, they were in the bargain bins last week before it
>>>> even hit cinemas ... and still nobody was buying the rubbish
>>>> (except one guy who wanted a cheap frisbee for his dog to play
>>>> with). Â ;-)
>
>>> I'm referring to the 2013 movie.
>> <snip>
>
>> So was I. Â :-)
>
> What mental defect do you have that causes you to think that anyone who
> thinks differently from you is wrong? Â That anyone who likes something
> you don't is wrong? Â That anything you don't like should be destroyed?
> That you, and only you, are always right? Â That the only other right
> people are those who agree with you? Â (Are there any people in that
> group?)
>
> I call it stupidity. Â What do you call it?
I call "THE BASEMENT SYNDROME".
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68897 is a reply to message #68700] |
Wed, 22 May 2013 17:34 |
Merrick Baldelli
Messages: 6
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 21 May 2013 17:43:34 -0400, "Dano" <janeanddano@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Whatever. You have quite a high opinion of yourself that you would appear
> to feel your opinion holds more validity than mine and the millions of other
> TNG fans who liked it. Hell...the show ran for SEVEN years.
> Personally...I've always held that rendition in higher regard than the
> original series. Tastes DO vary, Doesn't make me "right" or you "wrong"
> for that matter. Just means we don't share identical tastes.
Actually, his opinion is one that reflects some of the
behind-the-scenes stories that were being circulated back then.
Particularly on how sexist and out-of-the-times Roddenberry was while
he had more production control.
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ You can't spell 'disgust' without
/ / 'SGU' - Anim8rFSK
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #68898 is a reply to message #68650] |
Wed, 22 May 2013 17:34 |
Merrick Baldelli
Messages: 6
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 21 May 2013 11:38:39 -0600, David Johnston <David@block.net>
wrote:
> Hey if Trek fans didn't think that bad trek was better than no trek, TNG
> would never have survived into a second season.
And if the powers that be of the production of TNG didn't
intervene and cause Roddenberry to step down with his authority, I
personally think that the reboot might have actually been better than
it actually was. But then again, as a member of the group "Campaign
for Real Time", I really can't say one way or another, now can I?
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ You can't spell 'disgust' without
/ / 'SGU' - Anim8rFSK
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #69930 is a reply to message #63902] |
Thu, 23 May 2013 07:42 |
MITO MINISTER
Messages: 197
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On May 19, 6:08Â am, Rob Cypher <bals...@aol.com> wrote:
> This second "reboot" of his is bullshit. He's totally screwed with
> all the characters' backstories, has them acting all uncharacrstically
> (aka tons of inapproriate emoting from supposedly logical Vulcans,
> among other things) and has turned it into something that
> resembles "The Bourne Legacy" along with the worst aspects of
> "Starship Troopers".
>
> Don't laugh, Star Wars fans. He's coming to screw with your canon
> next.
>
> If there's ever another ST movie, I hope they undo all the timeline
> changes or just ignore them/treat them as an alternate universe.
> Fuck that shit.
No. I love you!
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #69931 is a reply to message #68563] |
Thu, 23 May 2013 07:45 |
MITO MINISTER
Messages: 197
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On May 21, 2:30Â pm, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> MITO MINISTER wrote:
>> On May 21, 3:09 am, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>> Wiseguy wrote:
>>>> Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote in
>>>> news:mr-408D77.09190420052013@News.Individual.NET:
>
>>>> > In article
>>>> > <YourName-2005131903260...@203-118-187-16.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
>>>> > YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>
>>>> >>>>> Even if he made it a musical of naked shaved wookies, it would
>>>> >>>>> still be better than the prequels.
>
>>>> >>>> Lucas owned it and did what HE wanted. Sounds fair.
>
>>>> >>> Of course. Never said anything about it being unfair. Ruined it
>>>> >>> was, even so. :)
>
>>>> >> George Lucas was allowed to do whatever he wanted ... he actually
>>>> >> created the franchise.
>
>>>> > Eh, yes I know? Why are you writing this? Have I claimed he either
>>>> > did not create it or that he could not do whatever he wanted?
>
>>>> >> Over-egoed "reboot" fools like JJ Abrams haven't got enough talent
>>>> >> to actually make their own franchise, so they have to go around
>>>> >> butchering other people's hard work instead. :-(
>
>>>> > Again - JJ Abrams could not butcher Star Wars even if he wanted.
>>>> > George Lucas already did that. It's like shooting a dead horse
>>>> > expected it to be more dead.
>
>>>> > If anything, JJ can either keep the horse dead (by continuing the
>>>> > train wreck that was the prequels) or he can do something better. He
>>>> > can not do something worse. It is not possible.
>
>>>> > If the 2009 Star Trek was renamed as Star Wars and released now, it
>>>> > would be a hundred times better than the prequels.
>
>>>> > (yeah, ok, a bit of hyperbole, but I've really come to despise the
>>>> > prequels).
>
>>>> Prequels don't ruin a franchise, whether you like them or not. They
>>>> only tell what's gone before. Sequels, on the other hand, can ruin a
>>>> franchise by turning the story in stupid directions.
>
>>>> Enterprise was a prequel, ST 2009 was a sequel.
>
>>> So you think a YOUNG kirk,....supposedly before the TOS timeframe, is
>>> not a "prequel" ?
>
>>> The fact is, that as an alternate universe,..... it's just a
>>> bastardization/exploitation for profit.
>>> And a bit late for the writers to save it by claiming it was all a
>>> dream sequence.
>
>> There is nothing to save. The movie was a hit. There is no shame. No
>> embarassment. The people at Paramount are NOT walking around in fear
>> of bumping into obsessed taunting fan-boys. They have NOT ruined a
>> franchise. On the contrary, a third film is in the works. That is NOT
>> RUINATION. That is SUCCESS.
>
>> And you are in the basement.
>
> By July, the DVD/Blu rays will be in the Walmart 99� bins.
Not likely. But if so, so what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #71668 is a reply to message #71654] |
Fri, 24 May 2013 02:42 |
YourName
Messages: 366
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <knmpid$ngk$1@panix2.panix.com>, wdstarr@panix.com (William
December Starr) wrote:
> In article <juqfp8h2mia9h7f1dngs6ml0gs4nr4hocd@4ax.com>,
> Rob Cypher <balst32@aol.com> said:
>>
>> Don't laugh, Star Wars fans. He's coming to screw with
>> your canon next.
>
> You mean he might change it so that Han shot first?
Nope, worse. It's JJ Abrams, so he'll change that scene so that Jar Jar
Binks shoots first, probably using a gun that shoots jelly beans and cause
hugemungous amounts of lens flare ... then later Yoda will say that it was
Obi-Wan who shot first. Also Abrams will claim point-blank that there is
no sci-fi involved, only to than have it turn out that the Jelly Bean
bullets were travelling backwards through time from Episode 27. :-(
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #71727 is a reply to message #67792] |
Fri, 24 May 2013 12:25 |
Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 228
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sandman wrote:
> In article <XnsA1C61F7366973epwiseyahoocom@69.16.185.252>,
> Wiseguy <epwise@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Prequels don't ruin a franchise, whether you like them or not.
>
> Well, then JJ Abrams can't, either. I was responding to YourName that
> claimed that JJ Abrams would destroy the "real Star Wars", whatever
> that means.
>
> And I think you mean that prequels can't ruin the originals - the
> franchise as such is the sum of all its parts, and if some of those
> parts are bad, it certainly can ruin the franchise as a whole. The
> original movies aren't ruined though.
>
>> They only tell what's gone before. Sequels, on the other hand, can
>> ruin a franchise by turning the story in stupid directions.
>
> Huh? That makes no sense at all. The prequels can introduce directions
> that ruins the franchise just as much as sequels. Like introducing
> "midichlorians" that if you take it into consideration ruins Yodas
> entire sensei talk on Dagobah.
Actually, I prefer midichlorians over mumbo jumbo talk. :-) It made The
Force more likable to me.
But as a whole the prequels were not as good as the first movies made. As
they /originally/ were made.
They were better than the 2009 incarnation of Star Trek I think, which was
official Star Trek, but not as I (want to) know it.
--
Wouter Valentijn http://www.j3v.net
Kirk: "My God, Bones... what have I done?"
McCoy: "What you had to do. What you always do: turn death into a fighting
chance to live."
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.
liam=mail
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #71806 is a reply to message #71727] |
Fri, 24 May 2013 17:38 |
YourName
Messages: 366
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <519f948a$0$15941$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl>, "Wouter
Valentijn" <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
> Sandman wrote:
>> In article <XnsA1C61F7366973epwiseyahoocom@69.16.185.252>,
>> Wiseguy <epwise@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Prequels don't ruin a franchise, whether you like them or not.
>>
>> Well, then JJ Abrams can't, either. I was responding to YourName that
>> claimed that JJ Abrams would destroy the "real Star Wars", whatever
>> that means.
>>
>> And I think you mean that prequels can't ruin the originals - the
>> franchise as such is the sum of all its parts, and if some of those
>> parts are bad, it certainly can ruin the franchise as a whole. The
>> original movies aren't ruined though.
>>
>>> They only tell what's gone before. Sequels, on the other hand, can
>>> ruin a franchise by turning the story in stupid directions.
>>
>> Huh? That makes no sense at all. The prequels can introduce directions
>> that ruins the franchise just as much as sequels. Like introducing
>> "midichlorians" that if you take it into consideration ruins Yodas
>> entire sensei talk on Dagobah.
>
> Actually, I prefer midichlorians over mumbo jumbo talk. :-) It made The
> Force more likable to me.
There isn't any problem for those with brains since midichlorians are not
and never were the Force.
> But as a whole the prequels were not as good as the first movies made. As
> they /originally/ were made.
Maybe, maybe not ... but the Prequels and the Special Editions are how
George Lucas wanted to make them, and since he's the one who created the
franchise, he's the only one allowed to say what does and doesn't happen
.... not some over-egoed idiot like JJ Abrams.
> They were better than the 2009 incarnation of Star Trek I think, which was
> official Star Trek, but not as I (want to) know it.
Official Star Trek - yes.
Real "Star Trek" - nope, never will be.
|
|
|
|
| Re: JJ ABRAMS RUINED STAR TREK FOREVER [message #77974 is a reply to message #71806] |
Fri, 31 May 2013 15:20 |
Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 228
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Your Name wrote:
> In article <519f948a$0$15941$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl>, "Wouter
> Valentijn" <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
<snip>
>>> Huh? That makes no sense at all. The prequels can introduce
>>> directions that ruins the franchise just as much as sequels. Like
>>> introducing "midichlorians" that if you take it into consideration
>>> ruins Yodas entire sensei talk on Dagobah.
>>
>> Actually, I prefer midichlorians over mumbo jumbo talk. :-) It made
>> The Force more likable to me.
>
> There isn't any problem for those with brains since midichlorians are
> not and never were the Force.
They are the connection /to/ the Force afaik.
The more of them, the better the connection.
>
>
>> But as a whole the prequels were not as good as the first movies
>> made. As they /originally/ were made.
>
> Maybe, maybe not ... but the Prequels and the Special Editions are how
> George Lucas wanted to make them, and since he's the one who created
> the franchise, he's the only one allowed to say what does and doesn't
> happen ... not some over-egoed idiot like JJ Abrams.
Yeah, but I still prefer the original material. :-)
<snip>
--
Wouter Valentijn http://www.j3v.net
Kirk: "My God, Bones... what have I done?"
McCoy: "What you had to do. What you always do: turn death into a fighting
chance to live."
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.
liam=mail
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
