|
It really seems like a lot of people really just go straight to the last page or don't even read any of the thread at all before posting a hot take. The thread isn't THAT long, folks! Also the first page has both my wicked awesome  Trek Cycle theory as well as me giving an overly-detailed guess at the next Star Trek film* , so yes, please read the first page if you can if only so I can get more attention.*Hilariously, Beyond beat me to the punch with the whole "It's my birthday and I'm now older than my father was when he died" thing. Edit: Sorry to page snipe, Magnetic North: Magnetic North posted:Ah, thanks for that.
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
Magnetic North posted:Don't forget about the part where they fixed death. That seems like a pretty Star Trek thing to do in a franchise where you can evolve into a lizard in five minutes. e: Also I was in NYC this weekend and the only thing on at 3 in the morning after we got back in from drinking was TNG, so I watched Worf and his friend try and teach his son to be less of a weenie for a while. Then his friend tried to kill his son and Worf tackles him and he's like "no it is I your weenie son!" and now I kind of want this sort of dumb poo poo to be the next movie. RBA Starblade fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
People have been coming back to life on Trek for a long rear end time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:It violated the internal logic the TV shows had built up over multiple decades (a Trekkie would know this). The shows made a big deal about how a captaincy is something that is earned through years of hard experience. The captains are all crusty old guys with a lot of war stories and old scars, not young punks who got their jobs after stowing away on the ship. Insterstellar teleportation should make starships and traditional concepts of territory obsolete. Interstellar teleportation occasionally appears in the TV shows, but always as an exotic alien technology that for one reason or another the heroes must destroy or quarantine. um the star trek films arent tv shows and theyre made by different people two decades later this poo poo really doesnt matter dude e: I really like the bolded bit cargohills fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
also the reason intergalactic wouldnt work in the film isnt just because of the spock reference its because it doesnt fit the mood theyre going for in the scene, its not really loud enough
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Pulaski fixes death offscreen in TNG. She radios about it all casual too. 'Yeah a couple dudes died, but we fixed em up. Pulaski out. also gently caress androids'. Click.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:That seems like a pretty Star Trek thing to do in a franchise where you can evolve into a lizard in five minutes. *jpg of Captain America saying "I understood that reference."* Despite complaining about these movies, I actually have not watched the shows. I have heard about bits and pieces, like Threshold. Maybe it's unfair to simply say the problem is the very idea that you've furloughing the reaper. Like, if you have transporter, can't you just take some spare energy and recreate someone that's dead? But at the same point, it's so very bad. Obviously they did this so they could have their cake and eat it too, but it serves no narrative purpose. It'd be the same movie if he went into the chamber, got the rads, was put out of commission, but barely recovered. The only difference is it wouldn't be adding this bizarre extraneous explanation. Why even invite the scrutiny? Anyway, for another jumping off point: After seeing Reshooticide Squad, it makes me wonder if that plot point was changed during production. It's been a while since I seen it, but does Kirk play any meaningful role in the movie after biting it, something that couldn't have been another character? Did they kill Kirk in the movie to prepare for Chris Pine leaving to be a real movie star, but when (surprise surprise) it turns out he sucks, he swallowed his pride and signed on, so they had to do reshoots and change the movie to undo it? Pure speculation, of course. I can only remember the resurrection being established in 3 scenes: Bones injecting Khan's blood into a dead tribble (which is just  as gently caress), Spock asking Bones for Khan's blood, and Kirk in the hospital at the end. The scene where they don't kill Khan could go either way, I forget if it directly mentions if they need the blood or now. I am probably forgetting something else, but it's easier to just be corrected by someone than actually rewatch that loving movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
no of course they weren't going to kill captain kirk in the second star trek movie jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
cargohills posted:no of course they weren't going to kill captain kirk in the second star trek movie jesus christ Well, they killed Mr Spock in the first second Star Trek movie! Also, yes, Jesus Christ came back from the dead, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
All three of the new Star Trek films have been good and fun so far.quote:Maybe it's unfair to simply say the problem is the very idea that you've furloughing the reaper. Like, if you have transporter, can't you just take some spare energy and recreate someone that's dead? But at the same point, it's so very bad. Obviously they did this so they could have their cake and eat it too, but it serves no narrative purpose. It'd be the same movie if he went into the chamber, got the rads, was put out of commission, but barely recovered. The only difference is it wouldn't be adding this bizarre extraneous explanation. Why even invite the scrutiny? I've only seen some episodes of it, but I watched a TNG one where they created digital life, it was Professor Moriarty, and he stole the Enterprise, so yeah they could always do that and just don't. Later Picard uses the holodeck to make a tommy gun to waste some cyborgs. quote:Well, they killed Mr Spock in the first second Star Trek movie! Also, yes, Jesus Christ came back from the dead, too. Someone steals Spock's brain too. A lot of weird poo poo happens to Spock. When I finally saw that episode I was disappointed he didn't wear that retarded helmet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
cargohills posted:no of course they weren't going to kill captain kirk in the second star trek movie jesus christ So if we all know they won't actually do it, then may we criticize the movie for wasting our time pretending it would?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Plenty did, and still do. It was just a cheap attempt to parallel WoK, meant to be some powerful moment and ended up falling way short of its goal. I run hot and cold on ST:ID. It's got some cool setpieces for action, and the slow realization Kirk comes to in the conference room before Khan sprays it with gunfire is pretty tense. I do sort of like how they also get in-your-face with the physicality of Khan in the movie, as opposed to the Montalban version which seemed more cunning than outright physically menacing. It's dark, though, almost to the point of not really being a fun watch. Star Trek was always one for trying to run stories parallel to real-world politics but it kept things reasonably light with the camp factor; ST:ID lacks camp and pulls allegories to US strikes in the Middle East as well as 9/11, neither of which are exactly joyride material.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Apollodorus posted:Star Trek, along with other works of speculative fiction, is a setting that exists to tell stories that are either impossible or hugely difficult to tell in a real-world setting. But a lot of people get more interested in the setting than in the stories and the ideas that setting was created to support, which is an inversion of the reasons for the show's existence in the first place. I'm not saying the setting is the be-all and end-all of the show. If I want sci-fi stories about the human condition though I'll watch Outer Limits or read Galaxy Magazine/Clarksworld/Whatever. If I want to see how the Star Trek universe deals with politics in a world where race is real then I'll watch star trek. I still want it to be about the human condition, but in Star Trek. Having the other races in the background is just a nod to that. Otherwise why bother with the setting at all?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Taear posted:I'm not saying the setting is the be-all and end-all of the show. If I want sci-fi stories about the human condition though I'll watch Outer Limits or read Galaxy Magazine/Clarksworld/Whatever. If I want to see how the Star Trek universe deals with politics in a world where race is real then I'll watch star trek. I still want it to be about the human condition, but in Star Trek. Implicit in your argument is the argument of "canon". That is - certain works have been recognized as actually part of this fictional universe, so subsequent works need to recognize them. There's no particular reason why the canon you have in your head is any more relevant than, say, Star Trek fan fiction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Apollodorus posted:Well, they killed Mr Spock in the first second Star Trek movie! Also, yes, Jesus Christ came back from the dead, too. yeah they also wrote in a way for him to come back. and then brought him back in the next movie. Magnetic North posted:So if we all know they won't actually do it, then may we criticize the movie for wasting our time pretending it would? i hate it when movies waste time pretending characters are in danger too cargohills fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Aug 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
cargohills posted:i hate it when movies waste time pretending characters are in danger too Oh, I get it. It's another troll account. My mistake, I thought you were just a dumbass. Goddamn, CD is lousy with these, like, even for SA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
In theory if there's a full pattern available to the pattern buffer they could just straight up clone people. Thomas Riker proves there's no such thing as a soul in the Star Trek universe, they can completely regenerate an aged body using hair DNA like they did with Pulaski, and the entire point of a transporter is that it assembles you from scratch based on a pattern and a lot of energy. They don't because of Technobabble reasons, but they COULD simply keep a copy of your pattern on file and just beam up a new one when you bite the dust. Hell, they have literally on screen used it as a fountain of youth and it never gets touched on again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
I do like the first JJTrek movie for the record. I also realized I like the Motion Picture more than TWoK. Maybe I like bad Trek.Magnetic North posted:Don't forget about the part where they fixed death. This was kind of stupid but I guess you could handwave it away as the Federation not abusing Khan's inert body because of morals or whatever. Plus, they did fix all mental illness forever by the end of an episode on original Star Trek.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 04:16
|
|
|
Mortanis posted:Thomas Riker proves there's no such thing as a soul in the Star Trek universe... But ST3 shows that there is. So I guess it comes down to which first office you like more, Spock or Riker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 11:40
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:Oh, I get it. It's another troll account. My mistake, I thought you were just a dumbass. Goddamn, CD is lousy with these, like, even for SA. I didnt know that recognising movies as fiction was trolling, Ill make sure not to do it again
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 12:05
|
|
|
Apollodorus posted:But ST3 shows that there is. So I guess it comes down to which first office you like more, Spock or Riker. Nah, Spock just made a copy of his mental patterns and transferred them, or he'd have dropped dead the moment he moved his soul across. Vulcans might call the Katra a soul but it isn't. Just a backup to an offsite location. Good bandwidth, though, copying all of his thoughts and memories across in a second or two.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Implicit in your argument is the argument of "canon". That is - certain works have been recognized as actually part of this fictional universe, so subsequent works need to recognize them. Without the canon, what is star trek? They're building on the name and the progressive ideals that have come before. Why bother if you're not going to do that? Might as well just make Space Action Film with Captain Lirk and Commander Pock, you know?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
star trek without canon is called "the original series"
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
cargohills posted:star trek without canon is called "the original series" 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Spergin' over canon is tedious and dumb but in fairness I'll submit that you do gotta have a certain baseline level of consistency or else your poo poo just gets all retarded in their randomness. They're not movie-ruining experiences or anything but stuff like the beaming from Earth to Kronos in Into Darkness and the afternoon jaunt to the center of the galaxy to visit this Great Barrier that we've never heard of before or since in The Final Frontier were both "oh come on" moments for me. Like I don't think people would take too kindly to a Law & Order episode where a criminal evades capture by strapping on a jetpack and flying directly to Venezuela which is somehow just across the border even though the show takes place in New York.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
I don't really care that in its continuing mission to seek out strange new worlds that the Enterprise found one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
lizardman posted:Spergin' over canon is tedious and dumb but in fairness I'll submit that you do gotta have a certain baseline level of consistency or else your poo poo just gets all retarded in their randomness. it's more like if there was an SVU episode where circumstances allow for special legal moves or less strict rules. ie It happens all the time. Stabler beats the poo poo out of perps in Romania one time. poo poo happens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
lizardman posted:Spergin' over canon is tedious and dumb but in fairness I'll submit that you do gotta have a certain baseline level of consistency or else your poo poo just gets all retarded in their randomness. Counterpoint: That would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
lizardman posted:
There was an episode where Robin Williams puppet-masters a whole episode and then literally disappears into a bush never to be seen again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
I'm so happy that it took only one post into a Law and Order realism tangent to reference how often Stabler beat the poo poo out of suspects
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
cargohills posted:star trek without canon is called "the original series" Yep and that's why I don't like it. It feels like Dr Who where any situation can be got out of with some insane thing and welp, episode over. Like the one where the evil alien overlord with super powers has his parents turn up at the last minute and shout at him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Taear posted:Yep and that's why I don't like it. It feels like Dr Who where any situation can be got out of with some insane thing and welp, episode over. that happens in the TNG shows all the time, and they get even worse with the technobabble. it just happens all the time in episodic sci-fi. Taear posted:Like the one where the evil alien overlord with super powers has his parents turn up at the last minute and shout at him. but that's one of the best episodes!
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Taear posted:Like the one where the evil alien overlord with super powers has his parents turn up at the last minute and shout at him. So, a Q episode.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So, a Q episode. My Trek-watching friends have said they want one of these movies to have a credit-cookie of John de Lancie showing up and saying something to the effect of "What have you done with the place?!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
That would be really bad and I like Q.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
cargohills posted:that happens in the TNG shows all the time, and they get even worse with the technobabble. it just happens all the time in episodic sci-fi. In TNG they couch it differently. Technobabble is different from the way problems are solved in Dr Who and in TOS. It's a little hard to put into words but in TNG they'll redirect power from whatever or build something in the deflector dish and it takes up story time and feels like you've spent time in the story fixing what's up. Dr Who he waves his spanner at things and bam, fixed. No matter what it is. Any problem shrinks into nothingness because of that. I'm not saying that the end result is different but I feel like Beyond used Technobabble and TOS uses Dr Who style "and then magic happened" stuff. I just wish we had more Star Trek style guys showing up in Beyond, that's all. Taear fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Sep 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
there's literally no difference, apart from maybe spending 5 more minutes talking about space engines. (also doctor who does technobabble too and it's also crap there)
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Star Trek inspired people to become doctors and engineers. Doctor Who inspired people to create ThinkGeek wish lists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
ok http://www.thinkgeek.com/interests/startrek/ http://funko.com/collections/star-trek-next-generation
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
Apollodorus posted:Star Trek inspired people to become doctors and engineers. Doctor Who inspired people to create ThinkGeek wish lists. There does seem to be a more artistic inspiration for Who fans, with the most obvious example being Peter Capaldi. Which I guess is still better than Star Wars inspiring a bunch of people to march around like fascists in white armor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:33
|
|