Infernalist: Honestly, I don't see the reason for the hatred for the new Star Trek. The whole premise for the original series was 'action' combined with a morality play where the emotional(McCoy) clashes with the logical(Spock) with Kirk in the middle to weigh both sides and then save the farking day somehow or another.Pretty much what I saw in the last Star Trek movie. All three sides of the equation were nailed by their respective actors and I look forward to seeing what they do with the next movie.
tallguywithglasseson: Didn't care for Abrams' take on Star Trek. Take existing franchise, make some winks to the original material, turn into dumb action movie.
dogboy360: Also:NERD FIGHT ON!
mjbok: Chekov was born in 2245. Kirk was born in 2233. This is only for the original universe. It's not the relative age of the actors, it's the relative ages of the characters.
Could be worse: Michael Bay
cptjeff: It's a great action movie. I'll readily acknowledge that. But in seeking out popularity, it lost its soul.
Shadow Blasko: Ishkur: Smeggy Smurf: legion_of_doo: Star Wars versus Star Trek... the movie!Oh how cute, they have blasters. Mr. Worf, beam a photon torpedo onto their bridge."Aye sir, one photon torpedo, coming rig....ergh...gack....I...can't...breathe...."*worf drops to the ground**booming voice* "I FIND YOUR OVERCONFIDENCE DISTURBING."*entire Enterprise crew chokes and dies*"all too easy."Data communicates with computers on Star Destroyer... both agree that mankind is too sick to survive, and proceed to eliminate the rest of the humans in a robot AI revolution.
Infernalist: mjbok: Confabulat: Of all the things to complain about, the age of the characters? WTF?It's a valid complaint, and here's why:Apart from the absolute ridiculous premise that a universe that is split two decades prior would end up with the same exact bridge crew, the crew all originally went to the academy, graduated, and had other ship assignments first because...they were all different ages. Now a person who is 12 years younger is in the same academy class? Kirk would have been approximately 26 (given four years at Star Fleet Academy) at the time he takes over as captain of the Enterprise. That means that Chekov is 14. In the altverse Chekov is 17 and a prodigy, which is why he is where he is. That means that Chekov's parents and their sperm/egg combination was exactly the same 3 years later in the altverse.There are so many holes in the idea of who the crew of the Enterprise is in the altverse, but even if you can suspend disbelief to say that the universe did indeed split at time "x", all events prior to time "x" should have been the same. Like people being born certain places, or being born at certain times. Eventually it all comes back to the fact that the premise is profoundly retarded. The further (timewise) you get from a Genesis point of a time-split, the more differences there will be between the original (which did exist since Old Spock was still around) and the new timeline. This is not a mirror universe (lack of goatees), but a deviation of the original timeline. It is, at its core, stupid.This post is a prime example of why, pre-JJ, people mocked and ridiculed the riduculous 'trekkies'.You're so wrapped up in the minutiae of a series that had ground to a halt due to lack of fans...that you can't see the delights in a new Trek that brings in a new crowd of fans who don't care how the Enterprise is designed, or the paradoxes illustrated by comparing notes on exactly what was said three years apart in a comic book adaptation of a bad sc ...
Kazan: Fano: you mong.you're a racist assbag, your argument is invalid.
Mike Chewbacca: tallguywithglasseson: Didn't care for Abrams' take on Star Trek. Take existing franchise, make some winks to the original material, turn into dumb action movie.Star Wars IS a dumb action movie, though. So I actually have hope for the next movie because of this.
Confabulat: Why is Chekov 14? Walter Koenig is the same age as George Takei.
Techhell: Farker Soze: Techhell: /Agrees about Abrams' take on Trek - it wasn't a Trek movie. It was a dumb action-comedy that actively encouraged viewers to sit back, turn off their brains and just oogle the pretty action and the wittily forgettable one-liners.What, like ST IV and VI?Are you trying to say that IV was... an action movie? Really? Seriously? Nah, you're just trollin' me for a response. Almost caught me.
dogboy360: Ok, I have to say it.ST:TOS brought scifi mainstream. Without it SW never could have come about to become what it was.SW did have an impact on scifi. It helped make scifi stronger in the non-nerd world. Now, scifi is all around us, and has several sub-cultures within it./BTW, ST:TOS nerds had NASA name a shuttle "Enterprise". What has SW got?ST >SW. I still like both.
dogboy360: BTW, ST:TOS nerds had NASA name a shuttle "Enterprise"
Want to see behind the curtain? Try
It's how we feed the squirrel
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Dec 11 2017 14:15:19
Runtime: 0.656 sec (655 ms)