You agree with your own opinion the movie is bad. Shocking. Doesn't make your opinion either definitive or correct as it pertains to Star Trek fans overall.
All of which goes to prove, you dumb it down, jock it up, add lens flares and shakycam and even the attention-span-of-a-gnat Al Bundy set will like "Star Trek". Just take the thinkin' out, cram the explosions in, and they're good to go. And, provided you starve Star Trek fans for almost 10 years first, even they will choke down a turd and smile.
What was wrong with Abrams' Star Trek is the same shit that was wrong with Enterprise -- the people who puked it up don't give a shit about making Star Trek. To them, it was generic science fiction with kinda-sorta specific names for the generic plot devices. It was parody made serious in order to serve as a vehicle for thoughtless spectacle. If there'd been a story to it (that hadn't basically just been done in the very previous film) I could have forgiven all else -- maybe even the bastard-child-of-the-Connie-refit-and-a-1953-"Martian-War-Machine" Enterprise.
Eh..., I've recently watched the Khan episode. Their history wasn't all that, certainly not enough to drive him to the point he was in the movie. The only rational for that sort of behavior was Khan's own arrogance that Kirk didn't and wouldn't do as he said. Therefore, it doesn't matter what the history is or isn't, Kirk won't bow down before Khan, so Khan must "beat" him.
Apparently not as shocking as the revelation that I am by no means alone in my opinion would be to fans of Abrams Trek. Yup, it's just my opinion, just like everyone else's. But I can at least say that mine has basis in actual film analysis and is objectively-based. Naturally a lot of Abrams Trek fans seem to ignore that bit and focus on the Trek minutia aspects of it, and hey, I'll argue those too if someone really wants to get nerdy with me. But based on what I've learned of film, creative writing, and storytelling, Abrams Trek qualifies as a bad movie. The reason Khan was so pissed off was the whole marooning part, and the part how Kirk never checked up on him, which resulted in the deaths of most of his followers, including his wife. Kirk left Khan stranded for quite a while, so Khan had plenty of time to stew.
Just because Khan will be in the movie doesn't mean it's a Wrath of Khan redo. In fact, this early in his career that would make no sense. It's more likely to be a new take on Space Seed. Because, really, Khan and company should have been even more dangerous than they were in that episode.
Making sense wasn't exactly a strength of the first movie, so why should it be any different when it comes to the second one? Don't get me wrong, I don't think they're going to push the revenge angle because there wouldn't be anything to go off of, but I wouldn't put it past them to rehash the cat and mouse aspect of TWoK, or really every other aspect of it except the revenge part. Khan will just be another movie bad guy who wants to do bad guy things, though I'm sure the movie will try to sell us on the idea that Kirk and Khan are intelligent and worthy foes and all that bullshit.
Khan was originally just a bad guy who wanted to do bad guy things. Even the original WOK was full of stupid things that gets glossed over in the romanticizing of that film.
To be fair, the thing that makes that film stick out isn't so much the conflict with Khan, but the conflict within Kirk about getting older and not winning against all odds, like he's done most of his career (after all, Spock does die while saving the ship). It's not like the superficial slop that was dished out in NEM about Shinzon hating a man he'd never met because people who treated him like shit told him to hate this man
TWoK made him more, though. Honestly, I can understand why everyone wants to rip that movie off, because it's only been the measuring stick by which all Trek movies are measured since it came out. Every movie has flaws, but TWoK still has a lot more depth and feeling to it than Abrams Trek even attempted to have.
The reason Khan gave for being so pissed off was the whole marooning part and how Kirk never checked up on him. Seriously, did you even watch the movie? or the episode? and if so, do you have any inkling of human nature? Cuz, that's all the episode and movie were about. Two very arrogant men, one with the capacity to understand not everyone will bow before him, and the other completely without that capacity.
What, you apparently think he was lying? Yup. Yeah - that's what makes me such a cynical bastard, actually. You certainly have a strange way of looking at things, which is to say that you're ignoring a lot of what the movie in particular was trying to say. But seeing who I'm talking to, I guess I shouldn't be all that surprised about that.
If by "strange" you mean "blatantly obvious", then I suppose you shouldn't be surprised at my response. I'm not the one trying desperately to find meaning of life stuff in a 1960's futuristic spaghetti western and crying when someone updates it the way most humans like our old tv shows updated. I shouldn't bag on you too much tho. I didn't even go see the new Footloose movie. What's the point without Kevin Bacon and Bonnie Tyler's I need a Hero.
I'm guessing that a guy who is so dogmatic in his view of a television show -- and has actually expended time and effort on an entire fucking website devoted to a "reimagining" of a crappy television series -- has not only not kissed a girl, but probably masturbates regularly to Kirk/Spock slash fiction.
I kissed a girl and I liked it ... the taste of her cherry chapstick .. I kissed a girl and I liked it, hope my boyfriend don't mind it.
The only blatantly obvious thing here is how you conveniently ignore whatever challenges your view of something. Neither am I, but it always entertains me to see declarations like this. "It's the '80s, do a lot of coke and vote for Ronald Reagan..." Yes. Have you? Says the guy who treats any criticism of a movie he likes like a heretic. It's always nice to see when someone's lost perspective. It's also always nice to see someone accusing the other side of being a nerd in an inherently nerdy argument. Go ahead, call me a nerd all you want - you're still arguing about Star Trek and are therefore automatically a nerd yourself. :santa_ok: You in particular, because you act every bit the fanboy you accuse others of being when it comes to Abrams Trek. :santa_cheesy:
Which could be pretty neat, stretched out over several hours. And of course this is all assuming that vague rumors are true about Khan being involved.
Real quickie scene from STAR TREK XII: "Harry Mudd, ruler of Pacifica, activate the machine" Khan to Harry Mudd in the rin-tin-tin blow'em up real good finale of the next nuTrek flick.
I have to admit that I'm morbidly curious to see their next utterly-unnecessary and uncalled-for redesign of the Enterprise. I wonder if it'll look like this:
I loved Star Trek XI. I love that it was successful enough that they're doing another one like it. That is all.
