Star Trek- Better than I thought it was going to be!

[Ringel05]

Yeah, it's the elites fault..........
The independent spirit is extinct.......

Tell me again what world insulated laboratory you live in? You know, the one that doesn't take real human nature into account..........

There is no such thing as "human nature." Study a little cultural Anthropology and some epistemological Philosophy and you would know this. Either sign up for some classes at your local University or go to the Library and READ and stop believing everything you watch and hear from the MSM. It is apparent to me you watch too much TV. Since that is all you seem to find your way clear to do, I recommend a wonderful series by Desmond Morris called the Human Animal. Look it up. You would understand that Humans are the result of the societies they are raised in and what they choose to put into their heads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Human_Animal_%28TV_series%29

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTsp9A7OaBI]The Human Animal by Desmond Morris - The Language of the Body - YouTube[/ame]

You know, someone asked, "Why can't we have a world like the Star Trek Universe?" And my multidisciplinary degree in Philosophy, Anthropology, English and Graduate work in Political Science I thought made me uniquely qualified to answer that question. Added to that, I have family that has been involved in esoteric activities going back many generations. I think I have a firm grip on the world situation. It really is an epistemological question which is at once simple and complex. WE ALL bear responsibility, and yet, there are certain power centers that have taken the power away, certainly intentionally from the masses. It isn't conspiracy, any more than the aristocracy of Europe conspired against the peasantry of Europe in the middle ages.

What? Do you think George Orwell and Aldous Huxley just got the ideas for their dystopian science fiction out of their asses? The reason our world resembles more of a 1984 or A Brave New World than a Star Trek has to do with the nastiness and selfishness of our leaders and the ignorance of our populace, it isn't a mystery.

And you sir, are an unqualified troll for attacking me and derailing the thread. YOU are one of those in the populace that I am referring to, ignorant and in denial. I can only assume that you thought the movie was wonderful and held no allusion to what is going on in our world today.

You make a hell of a lot of assumptions for someone with no knowledge of the subject. No such thing as human nature...........??!!! You kidding..... right?
I took Cultural Anthropology, Sociology and Psychology not to mention decades of human study. You're the one who needs to stop listening to the nutcases (and the voices in your head) and do some reading, take some classes yourself, i.e. get your head out of your ass and look at the real world, your ivory research tower has no windows. Oh and I rarely watch TV and I know for a fact the MSM get's it wrong about 80% of the time.
As for delusional, you are the definition and when you post myopically focused, uneducated tripe like you've posting then you deserve derision. Besides I was simply responding to the unrealistic, uninformed crap you posted and that makes me the troll........ and the one going off topic....... ? Not even a good deflection Sparky.
Also, Desmond Morris is a Zoologist who made the scientific mistake of attempting to explain a complex subject by narrowly focusing his singular field of study and making scientifically suspect correlative associations while at the same time making tons of money doing it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

To avoid the strange political or social diatribes and get back to the actual movie....

I think these new Trek movies are fine. They don't meet the standards of the best previous Trek films, but are definitely better than the worst. I'd prefer a little less action/humor of the summer blockbuster and a little more depth to the plot, a little more character development, but I understand that is the exception rather than the rule and I'm not going into these films looking for too much.

That said, I did have one big problem with this movie, and that's the connections to Wrath of Khan.

When they decided to reboot Star Trek and create an alternate reality for it, I think they should have pretty much abandoned the old movies and series. Use the theme of Star Trek, even the main characters, but take it to entirely new places. This attempt to mesh the old into the new doesn't work. It's entirely too contrived. All of the references, rather than inspiring any fond memories, merely highlight their attempt to put more butts in the seats. Not only that, it seems like laziness; can't they get someone to write a new story? They have to steal from the old? And really, you are forced to suspend disbelief even within the context of the story to think that these characters would find a way to interact in this new, different timeline.

I assume they will continue to make these movies if the actors are under contract or willing to sign up for more, as both of the reboot movies have been profitable. I just hope that if they do, they stop pulling things from the old Star Trek and embrace the idea of making it their own.

one of the reasons Roddenberry wanted to keep the Original Trek out of the Next Generation as much as possible....get it to stand on its own....

 

[MisterBeale]

Also, Desmond Morris is a Zoologist who made the scientific mistake of attempting to explain a complex subject by narrowly focusing his singular field of study and making scientifically suspect correlative associations while at the same time making tons of money doing it.

In order to keep the discussion elevated, I'll refrain from addressing your personal attacks.

As far as Morris is concerned? It matters so very little what one specifically gets a degree in, only that it is tangentially related. If it were Primatology, Physical Anthropology, Sociology-Biology, I still wouldn't care, why should you? You should be old enough and wise enough by now to know that. It matters how one develops what they know and grows beyond their training that is important. You're amateurish critique of his work is wholly off base, and indeed, the antithesis what I am getting at.

I noticed you had no problem attacking my claim or my proof, but offering up proof of your own, or even laying out specifics, hmmm, that seems much more difficult for you. Tell me Einstein, WHAT is human nature, and what specifically prevents human societies from being conditioned into mass servitude? How do you disagree with and claim that Plato's Dialogs are incorrect? For only if they are indeed in error, and this so called "human nature" manifests to prevent Socrates dire warning to mankind can we ever have a Star Trek universe.

 

[Ringel05]

Also, Desmond Morris is a Zoologist who made the scientific mistake of attempting to explain a complex subject by narrowly focusing his singular field of study and making scientifically suspect correlative associations while at the same time making tons of money doing it.

In order to keep the discussion elevated, I'll refrain from addressing your personal attacks.

As far as Morris is concerned? It matters so very little what one specifically gets a degree in, only that it is tangentially related. If it were Primatology, Physical Anthropology, Sociology-Biology, I still wouldn't care, why should you? You should be old enough and wise enough by now to know that. It matters how one develops what they know and grows beyond their training that is important. You're amateurish critique of his work is wholly off base, and indeed, the antithesis what I am getting at.

I noticed you had no problem attacking my claim or my proof, but offering up proof of your own, or even laying out specifics, hmmm, that seems much more difficult for you. Tell me Einstein, WHAT is human nature, and what specifically prevents human societies from being conditioned into mass servitude? How do you disagree with and claim that Plato's Dialogs are incorrect? For only if they are indeed in error, and this so called "human nature" manifests to prevent Socrates dire warning to mankind can we ever have a Star Trek universe.

Inherently individuals are biased by their discipline focus, this is just as true with some scientists, perhaps even more so, primarily where money is concerned (promoting a specific postulation to sell books or gain grants).
It is well know among sociologists, psychologists and historians, as well as many other disciplines that personal motivations, (a primary aspect of human nature) determines individuals and on occasion group results. Socrates is not completely incorrect when the 80/20 rule is taken into account. Mass servitude conditioning can only be partially successful as we know there are and will always be detractors and resistance at various degrees and at differing levels not to mention the 2% of sociopaths that comprise the general human population. Hence you can only push people so far before they begin to push back as history has always shown.
Based on the obvious variances of motivation (human nature) your all or nothing postulation is seriously flawed and ultimately unworkable.
Oh and if you don't want to be called names don't start by insulting people's intelligence.

 

[PredFan]

I loved it, it was the best Star Trek yet.

 

[PredFan]

Just got done watching "Star Trek: Into Darkness".


(Warning- SPOILERS AHEAD)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was the best of the movies. Nearly every film since then has tried to recreate the formula with a similar scenery-chewing villain, and this film decides, what the heck, let’s just bring back Khan.

Does it work? Kind of. I found myself intermittently being touched by the nice nods to the classics of Trek and then rolling my eyes at some of the corniness and over the top action scenes.

SPOILERS-
After a series of terrorists attacks on Star Fleet, Kirk and company are sent to the Klingon home world to hunt down the perpetrator, whom they are told is a renegade Star Fleet office but is in fact Khan. Seems he was resurrected by a renegade admiral who wanted to use his knowledge to prepare for war with the Klingons.

They have some subtle commentary on the war on terror and the ends justifying the means. Mostly, though, it’s enough plot to hang an okay action movie on. Peter Weller does a great job in his role. The machinations between Kirk and Admiral Marcus and Khan are pretty good.

Good stuff? Carol Marcus, a Tribble, Klingons, a ship they seized from Harry Mudd, Section 31, and so much more from a Trek Nerd’s wish list.

Also, have to say a lot of good things about the characters here. They all disappear into their roles fairly easily, with maybe the exception of Pine, who simply is not invoking Shatner just yet. Karl Urban is great as McCoy, but he’s completely underutilized. Quinto is becoming a convincing Spock.

The more dubious stuff. The action scenes are a bit much, to the point of eliminating my suspension of disbelief. This is the kind of cartoony stuff the Star Wars Prequels did. They spent a lot of money on this, and frankly, STII:TWOK got the same emotional impact with cheap sets on a movie they originally planned as a made for TV operation.

The Deus Ex Machina they use at the end to save a major character is telegraphed so obviously there’s no tension, and they spend a lot of time creating a thematic bridge between this and the climax of TWOK.

Worth watching. Yes.

They invented immortality and eternal youth, and you dismiss it as a cheap lot gimmick? What the fuck, did your brain die when you sat down? Khan was not a ignorant Muslim extremists, he was a well educated genius who quoted from Paradise Lost and saw himself in the role of Ahab in TWoK. His obsession with Kirk in the movie worked because we could understand that he saw Kirk as the whale, and knew that Kirk, even though he was an asshole, did not cause the problems Kahn had. That is what made the pathos of his final speech so powerful, we knew that he was even more delusional than Ahab when he triggered the Genesis device.

For a guy that insisted that he didn't want to know about the original cannon, Abrams did everything he could to tug at the heartstrings of the fans by repeating the exact same scene that killed Spock, only making it ridiculous beyond imagination by having a guy that flunked out t=of the academy sacrifice himself to save everyone else.

Kirk
Would
Not
Do
That.

Neither Kirk. The one in the new movies is too stupid to know what to do, the one in the TV shows would find another way.

This movie is a complete flop, and may have killed the entire franchise. The only hope we have is if they fire Abrams and reboot the series again, doing it with someone who actually understands that Star Trek is supposed to be a bit pretentious. If they don't there won't be anything after 2016.

Thank goodness you're wrong about everything.

 

[PredFan]

Just got done watching "Star Trek: Into Darkness".


(Warning- SPOILERS AHEAD)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was the best of the movies. Nearly every film since then has tried to recreate the formula with a similar scenery-chewing villain, and this film decides, what the heck, let’s just bring back Khan.

Does it work? Kind of. I found myself intermittently being touched by the nice nods to the classics of Trek and then rolling my eyes at some of the corniness and over the top action scenes.

SPOILERS-
After a series of terrorists attacks on Star Fleet, Kirk and company are sent to the Klingon home world to hunt down the perpetrator, whom they are told is a renegade Star Fleet office but is in fact Khan. Seems he was resurrected by a renegade admiral who wanted to use his knowledge to prepare for war with the Klingons.

They have some subtle commentary on the war on terror and the ends justifying the means. Mostly, though, it’s enough plot to hang an okay action movie on. Peter Weller does a great job in his role. The machinations between Kirk and Admiral Marcus and Khan are pretty good.

Good stuff? Carol Marcus, a Tribble, Klingons, a ship they seized from Harry Mudd, Section 31, and so much more from a Trek Nerd’s wish list.

Also, have to say a lot of good things about the characters here. They all disappear into their roles fairly easily, with maybe the exception of Pine, who simply is not invoking Shatner just yet. Karl Urban is great as McCoy, but he’s completely underutilized. Quinto is becoming a convincing Spock.

The more dubious stuff. The action scenes are a bit much, to the point of eliminating my suspension of disbelief. This is the kind of cartoony stuff the Star Wars Prequels did. They spent a lot of money on this, and frankly, STII:TWOK got the same emotional impact with cheap sets on a movie they originally planned as a made for TV operation.

The Deus Ex Machina they use at the end to save a major character is telegraphed so obviously there’s no tension, and they spend a lot of time creating a thematic bridge between this and the climax of TWOK.

Worth watching. Yes.

The only thing that kept me interested were the remakes of characters we all know, like you mentioned: Carol Marcus, Khan, ect.

I agree that the new McCoy and Spock are great, but I'm not buying Chris Pine's Kirk. Kirk wasn't ever that wild in the old show or the movies.

I'm still not entirely sold on these Abrams' Star Trek movies. There's just way too much stuff they do just for the sake of having a gimick, so at times it feels like I am watching a Micheal Bay movie, and I just want to put a gun to my head and end it. A perfect example is the opening scene of this one. These scenes that Abrams puts in are just so "un-Star trek" that they just pretty much ruin the movie.

I'd prefer if they just go back to making regular Star Trek movies with TNG or even do a Voyager or DS9 one. Even the bad ones are better the Abrams' garbage.

The reason kirk wasn't that wild was because the original timeline was disrupted and Kirk grew up in this timeline not knowing his father.

 

[PredFan]

Get a grip people, it's science FICTION. You are actually poking holes in the facts of Star Trek?

Let it go, enjoy the movie, let's see where it takes us.

 

[PredFan]

My favorite character is Scottie. My least favorite is McCoy. The actor not only had the look but he also has the (limited) dialog down. Hopefully they will flesh his role out a little more.

 

[Montrovant]

Get a grip people, it's science FICTION. You are actually poking holes in the facts of Star Trek?

Let it go, enjoy the movie, let's see where it takes us.

I'm not sure what this comment is in relation to, but I would just like to point out that even in fictional works, consistency is important. If the problem with the facts is that they don't make sense in the overall canon, it's a valid argument.

 

[PredFan]

Get a grip people, it's science FICTION. You are actually poking holes in the facts of Star Trek?

Let it go, enjoy the movie, let's see where it takes us.

I'm not sure what this comment is in relation to, but I would just like to point out that even in fictional works, consistency is important. If the problem with the facts is that they don't make sense in the overall canon, it's a valid argument.

To a point yes. It seems to me that a few are taking it too far. The fact that Kirk could go from a cadet to a captain isn't any more far fetched than a Romulan speaking perfect english.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Get a grip people, it's science FICTION. You are actually poking holes in the facts of Star Trek?

Let it go, enjoy the movie, let's see where it takes us.

I'm not sure what this comment is in relation to, but I would just like to point out that even in fictional works, consistency is important. If the problem with the facts is that they don't make sense in the overall canon, it's a valid argument.

To a point yes. It seems to me that a few are taking it too far. The fact that Kirk could go from a cadet to a captain isn't any more far fetched than a Romulan speaking perfect english.

they have a thing called Universal translators....you hear the Romulan in English he hears you in Romulan....and yes it is far fetched for a guy coming out of the academy and given command of 1 of the 12 Constitution Class Starships.....

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Just got done watching "Star Trek: Into Darkness".


(Warning- SPOILERS AHEAD)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was the best of the movies. Nearly every film since then has tried to recreate the formula with a similar scenery-chewing villain, and this film decides, what the heck, let’s just bring back Khan.

Does it work? Kind of. I found myself intermittently being touched by the nice nods to the classics of Trek and then rolling my eyes at some of the corniness and over the top action scenes.

SPOILERS-
After a series of terrorists attacks on Star Fleet, Kirk and company are sent to the Klingon home world to hunt down the perpetrator, whom they are told is a renegade Star Fleet office but is in fact Khan. Seems he was resurrected by a renegade admiral who wanted to use his knowledge to prepare for war with the Klingons.

They have some subtle commentary on the war on terror and the ends justifying the means. Mostly, though, it’s enough plot to hang an okay action movie on. Peter Weller does a great job in his role. The machinations between Kirk and Admiral Marcus and Khan are pretty good.

Good stuff? Carol Marcus, a Tribble, Klingons, a ship they seized from Harry Mudd, Section 31, and so much more from a Trek Nerd’s wish list.

Also, have to say a lot of good things about the characters here. They all disappear into their roles fairly easily, with maybe the exception of Pine, who simply is not invoking Shatner just yet. Karl Urban is great as McCoy, but he’s completely underutilized. Quinto is becoming a convincing Spock.

The more dubious stuff. The action scenes are a bit much, to the point of eliminating my suspension of disbelief. This is the kind of cartoony stuff the Star Wars Prequels did. They spent a lot of money on this, and frankly, STII:TWOK got the same emotional impact with cheap sets on a movie they originally planned as a made for TV operation.

The Deus Ex Machina they use at the end to save a major character is telegraphed so obviously there’s no tension, and they spend a lot of time creating a thematic bridge between this and the climax of TWOK.

Worth watching. Yes.

The only thing that kept me interested were the remakes of characters we all know, like you mentioned: Carol Marcus, Khan, ect.

I agree that the new McCoy and Spock are great, but I'm not buying Chris Pine's Kirk. Kirk wasn't ever that wild in the old show or the movies.

I'm still not entirely sold on these Abrams' Star Trek movies. There's just way too much stuff they do just for the sake of having a gimick, so at times it feels like I am watching a Micheal Bay movie, and I just want to put a gun to my head and end it. A perfect example is the opening scene of this one. These scenes that Abrams puts in are just so "un-Star trek" that they just pretty much ruin the movie.

I'd prefer if they just go back to making regular Star Trek movies with TNG or even do a Voyager or DS9 one. Even the bad ones are better the Abrams' garbage.

The reason kirk wasn't that wild was because the original timeline was disrupted and Kirk grew up in this timeline not knowing his father.

Bullshit.

Can you explain how the disrupted timeline caused Star Fleet to retroactively induct Kirk's mother, who was never in Star Fleet? If your theory was right then the disruption to Kirk's timeline would have occurred after Nero came back, not before. It also would not have moved the main Star Fleet dockyard from Mars to Iowa, nor would it have preemptively forced Star Fleet to drop all admissions standards just so Kirk could get on the Enterprise.

Kirk is wild because Abram's likes Star Wars and never saw Star Trek.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Get a grip people, it's science FICTION. You are actually poking holes in the facts of Star Trek?

Let it go, enjoy the movie, let's see where it takes us.

Actually, it is SCIENCE fiction. Science always comes first in science fiction. If you want to ignore science you should stick to watching Star Wars, where a parsec is a unit of time.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Get a grip people, it's science FICTION. You are actually poking holes in the facts of Star Trek?

Let it go, enjoy the movie, let's see where it takes us.

I'm not sure what this comment is in relation to, but I would just like to point out that even in fictional works, consistency is important. If the problem with the facts is that they don't make sense in the overall canon, it's a valid argument.

To a point yes. It seems to me that a few are taking it too far. The fact that Kirk could go from a cadet to a captain isn't any more far fetched than a Romulan speaking perfect english.

Nero had a universal translator, a device invented in Star Trek to instantaneously translate all speech into something understandable to everyone who can hear it. That does not mean he could speak English anymore that the TARDIS translation matrix means that Clara could speak Russian. That makes the jump from expelled cadet to Captain even less defensible.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm not sure what this comment is in relation to, but I would just like to point out that even in fictional works, consistency is important. If the problem with the facts is that they don't make sense in the overall canon, it's a valid argument.

To a point yes. It seems to me that a few are taking it too far. The fact that Kirk could go from a cadet to a captain isn't any more far fetched than a Romulan speaking perfect english.

they have a thing called Universal translators....you hear the Romulan in English he hears you in Romulan....and yes it is far fetched for a guy coming out of the academy and given command of 1 of the 12 Constitution Class Starships.....

It is even more farfetched when you remember that he actually on suspension from the academy when he made captain.

 

[Mr. H.]

We saw it this afternoon and thought it kicked ass. Every bit as good as the first.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Going to see it tonight along with Will Smiths new movie. Taking all the kids to the drive in to see it.

 

[Montrovant]

Going to see it tonight along with Will Smiths new movie. Taking all the kids to the drive in to see it.

I just read a brief review that said the new Smith movie was pretty bad, but I'm still curious.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Going to see it tonight along with Will Smiths new movie. Taking all the kids to the drive in to see it.

I just read a brief review that said the new Smith movie was pretty bad, but I'm still curious.

I understand it is the best M. Night Shamalayan movie since "Sixth Sense."