View Single Post
Old 02-11-2013, 11:49 PM   #12
Head Coach
Riddle_Of_Steel's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 1,952
Gender: Male
Member Number: 13727
Thanks: 2
Thanked 879 Times in 439 Posts
Default Re: NFL May 'Widen' All Football Fields By An Additional 35 Ft (and 110 Yds Total Len

Originally Posted by DanRooney View Post
Turned a dying franchise into a spectacular film and is going on to make one of the most anticipated sequels of the summer?
Not that it matters here, since this is a Steelers forum, but....

That was a STUPID MOVIE. Like most movies today-- it was two hours of disconnected violence, explosions, girls, and over-the-top CGI. The little bit of plot it had made no sense, and it lacked any of the things that have made Star Trek unique for 40 years. If your homeworld just got destroyed, and you are distraught over that, and you just got warped back in time 25 years-- wouldn't your priority be to avert the disaster before it happens this time, instead of going on a murderous rampage to destroy the galaxy? For him to mad at Spock, wouldn't that be like being angry at the firefighter who lost his life saving your family from a burning fire?

It was not as movie made for people who actually think about what they are watching-- otherwise, troubled cadets getting appointed to command of the fleet's most advanced starship, "Red matter", and people performing atmospheric re-entry in space suits and parachutes would cause you to raise your eyebrows and walk out of the movie like I did.

Really? They had no other senior or even junior officers onboard the Federation flagship? They had to appoint Kirk's entire graduating class of raw cadets to teh bridge crew on their first tour? There was not even a more eligible ensign or lieutenant junior grade onboard?

Star Trek used to address lofty ethical questions, like whether it is right for us to create a race of androids to use as slaves, or whether we should interfere with the natural development of primitive cultures. The only ethical question I saw this last one address was whether shoddy writers like Jar-Jar Abrams should be allowed to desecrate 40 year legacies like a toddler in a candy store,

Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was visionary. He had the nerve to cast a black female in a lead role, and not only that-- but he broke all the stereotypes of the time and made her a technically proficient, respectable, professional. IN this new movie-- Abrams was looking backwards. He casted Uhura as a "communications major"-- I bet if singing were a Starfleet major, they would have made her an expert in that, and it would have afforded them the chance to introduc more pop culture in a movie that is supposed to take placde 3 centuries from now.

What did she say to Spock? "Tell me what you need-- I will do whatever you want." THAT is NOT worthy of Star Trek. Roddenberry advanced black people by decades in his show. Abrams made them back into minstrels in 2 hours of his crap. I bet they added that line just so the 13 year old fanboys will have something to replay in their minds that night when they go home to choke the chicken in their parent's basement.

I guess if all you want is over-the-top effects, explosions, and a lot of cliche dialog that pays too much homaghe to the original, the new Star Trek is for you.

I see the new one is already based on a flawed plot premise and I have not yet even seen it yet. An invisible, dark force is trying to destroy earth.....which should not matter so much anymore if humanity has settled thousands of worlds across the galaxy. But it works for the hoardes of non-thinking movie goers that just want one-liners and things that go BOOM. Maybe if we are lucky, they will just go all the way and give Sulu a lightsaber, and have Uhura take all her clothes off next time. Now THAT would be classy....
"On the S-2-7 train"

Last edited by Riddle_Of_Steel; 02-12-2013 at 12:12 AM.
Riddle_Of_Steel is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Riddle_Of_Steel For This Useful Post:
steve314 (02-12-2013)