Didn't they say the Nexus ribbon was going to cut through the heart of the Federation? I sort of assumed that could mean Earth.
But regardless, you point is still invalid.
Star Trek Into Darkness (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Didn't they say the Nexus ribbon was going to cut through the heart of the Federation? I sort of assumed that could mean Earth.
But regardless, you point is still invalid.You and NuKhan seem to have a problem basing your actions on incorrect assumptions. You should look into that.
What point? I was talking about the Kirk/Spock relationship and how it's kind of overblown in these new movies. My argument about Earth has to do with the fact that this new Star Trek doesn't really want to do anything unless Earth plays a key part in the story's development. They practically spend the first quarter of the film on Earth, and later spend the last quarter of the film back at Earth. For a film that follows an ending that declared "To boldly go where no one has gone before", they sure took a step in the opposite direction. Why even go back to Earth anyways? Starbase 11 has a Federation court there.
Yeah, I know. And I'm sick of it.
lol:lolThe half of this argument I'm seeing is hilarious.
opcorn
greatwazoo42
Master Member
It was; the Nexus Ribbon was on a direct collision course with Earth...just like everything else.
The half of this argument I'm seeing is hilarious.
"I'll say this for him, he's persistent."
No it wasn't. It was headed through Federation space but not towards Earth. Soran altered it so that it would hit the planet he was on. At no point is it said that it would hit Earth in either it's normal path or the altered one.
greatwazoo42
Master Member
It was on it's way towards Earth! They all are! They're out to get us! Every one of them! DAMN THEM!!!! DAMN THEM ALL!!!!
Yeah, in the visual effect that is certainly what it looked like.
Demetrios2177
Well-Known Member
Saw the film. This (quite long) essay sums up my problems perfectly:
Film Crit Hulk Smash: THE AGE OF THE CONVOLUTED BLOCKBUSTER | Badass Digest
Film Crit Hulk Smash: THE AGE OF THE CONVOLUTED BLOCKBUSTER | Badass Digest
If that was sarcasm,
No affect on rocks, metal, plastic or air. It only whisks away Soran and Picard. That's it.
PotionMistress
Sr Member
Although this is an overly verbose critique, I have to agree with most of the points he makes about Abrams and his directing style. One line in particular seems to sum it up quite well though: ”…THE MOVIES THEMSELVES JUST FEEL SO DESPERATE TO IMPRESS…”. This, he points out, is a symptom of many modern block-bluster-type movies and trends lately…they lack the basic storytelling skill of establishing substance and motivation in a plot at the beginning of a movie and use it instead as a ‘surprise’ at the end, in which case, we have spent 2 or so hours not caring about what or why things are happening. Empathizing with characters has been replaced by dazzle and frenetic action. It seems our whole society is easily mesmerized by the superficial and we have pimped out quality for bucks and glitz.
Anyway, thanks for sharing the link!
SmilingOtter
Master Member
Just peeking in. We're still in the "why it was great" and "why it sucked" phase of the discussion, I see...
Shadow345
Well-Known Member
The whole article is printed in caps for gods sake.
I enjoyed reading it. Yes the CAPS was a tad annoying and it was full of minor spelling errors but I can forgive that. There are some very good points made there and I personally agree with the basis of what he's saying.
For me, personally, STID just felt like of series of disjointed scenes, one after the other. I didn't feel any kind of cohesive story line. Lots of 'plot' that's for sure. Very, very 'plotty'. :lol
It looked very nice too.
For me, personally, STID just felt like of series of disjointed scenes, one after the other. I didn't feel any kind of cohesive story line. Lots of 'plot' that's for sure. Very, very 'plotty'. :lol
It looked very nice too.
SmilingOtter
Master Member
I was hoping that Abrams was going to explain in the TED talk (linked in the above review) why he makes a habit of not revealing useful information in his shows and movies - the significance of "Lost's" numbers, why the Narada is so much more than a simple mining vessel, why the Enterprise was underwater, stuff like that. And the discussion of the unopened magic box seemed like it was heading in that direction. But, like always, he went another direction, talking about how nice it was that everyone has access to the tools for film making.
Fooled me again, JJ...
Fooled me again, JJ...
Similar threads
