Why I Won’t Be Seeing the New “Star Trek” Movie(s) [Old Content]Comments on:

By: Kyle Brady

Kyle Brady — Mon, 18 May 2009 15:46:34 +0000

See above for “I'm not saying we should judge the cast based on prior work, but that alot of them are stereotyped in the minds of the viewers at the moment… that makes for difficult believability.”

–Kyle

By: Kyle Brady

Kyle Brady — Mon, 18 May 2009 15:45:35 +0000

Well, first of all, I don't lack "credentials", but ok.

Second: I'd love to believe you that it's not a reboot. That it is a "new" storyline starting up (despite that it's covering ground already set by the original series, if only in a prequel sense). But Abrams himself has called this a reboot, and many others have.

That's not good news.

Third: I'm not saying we should judge the cast based on prior work, but that alot of them are stereotyped in the minds of the viewers at the moment... that makes for difficult believability.

--Kyle

By: lovernothater

lovernothater — Mon, 18 May 2009 15:38:05 +0000

blah blah blah...bitter bitter bitter. Shame on you.

Go see that damn thing then come back and rant. Would you be able to hold back your personal vitrol if I told you that TNG sucked core and followed it with, "but i never watched it but based on the few things I have seen on the web it looks like shait."

No I think you would rip me a new hole. Stop bitching and just go watch the damn thing and sit back and enjoy it for what it is. You are comparing one movie to years of storyline. You are comparing one movie to tons of story forged over by serious writers with many many plot devices.

You my dear are comparing apples to oranges and you know it, but don't let that stop you from seeing something that in enjoyable The last 3 movies sucked rocks. I did not see them but they sucked. Sits well eh?

Picard, Adama, at least you took the time to watch those guys befor you preached about it. No one gets laid either by the way just to correct you on that one.

By: Exploding Boner

Exploding Boner — Mon, 18 May 2009 15:21:51 +0000

You are one dumb bitch. Your blog sucks donkey dick.

By: Ron Howard

Ron Howard — Mon, 18 May 2009 15:10:15 +0000

"This should be a quick and easy point. We’re really supposed to believe a psycho superhuman serial killer (Sylar) is now an intelligent, peaceful Vulcan (Spock)? That’s really difficult since Zachary Quinto really only has one claim to fame prior to Star Trek. Also, Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) is a Zac Effron wannabe? Not to mention that porky British guy who only plays in bad comedies, or the guy from the “Whitecastle” movies."

Yes, by all means, judge an actor's latest role on the basis of his or her previous, and unrelated, roles. Never mind that those actors might be capable of more than their earlier work.

Or do you suppose that Tom Hanks should be forever judged on the basis of "Bosom Buddies".

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 18 May 2009 14:58:35 +0000

Obviously written by someone who lacks sufficient Star Trek credentials.
Sorry, but what you've missed is this isn't a reboot. This is a whole new storyline getting ready to start.
For those of us who were in college in 1987, Kirk IS the original captain. I'm a Sisko guy myself, but I respect TOS and the fact that they did the one thing in the Trek Universe that is allowable is awesome.
The past has been irrevocably altered and we are on a whole new time line. Literally anything can be done now without damaging the mythos as it exists, and for me, that is very exciting.
I can't imagine how the casting could have been any better honestly, of course, I don't see Quinto AS Sylar. He's a brilliant actor and he pulled off Spock with respect to the character while adding a little new dimension.
Get out of your TNG cocoon and you'll see.

By: thisorthat

thisorthat — Mon, 18 May 2009 14:56:22 +0000

ill add this to my “who gives a shit” bookmarks