Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

Star Trek: Into Darkness - SPOILERS

imabench
Posts: 21,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2013 9:25:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
i heard they changed a lot to the usual story to make it more appealing in foreign markets.... How bad was it?
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2013 9:30:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/17/2013 9:25:38 PM, imabench wrote:
i heard they changed a lot to the usual story to make it more appealing in foreign markets.... How bad was it?

It was written by someone whose understanding of Trek was apparently gained by reading Star Trek scripts filtered through Google Translate half a dozen times.

While it might have been a decent generic science fiction film in its own right, it utterly fails as a Star Trek film.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2013 9:51:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/17/2013 9:30:30 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/17/2013 9:25:38 PM, imabench wrote:
i heard they changed a lot to the usual story to make it more appealing in foreign markets.... How bad was it?

It was written by someone whose understanding of Trek was apparently gained by reading Star Trek scripts filtered through Google Translate half a dozen times.

While it might have been a decent generic science fiction film in its own right, it utterly fails as a Star Trek film.

That was my opinion of the first new one, too.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Raisor
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2013 10:22:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/17/2013 9:30:30 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/17/2013 9:25:38 PM, imabench wrote:
i heard they changed a lot to the usual story to make it more appealing in foreign markets.... How bad was it?

It was written by someone whose understanding of Trek was apparently gained by reading Star Trek scripts filtered through Google Translate half a dozen times.

While it might have been a decent generic science fiction film in its own right, it utterly fails as a Star Trek film.

I have only seen a handful of star trek movies, but even as a generic scuff film this was mediocre.

The plot was really predictable and the story arc has been done to death. As soon as they mentioned the torpedoes it was obvious how the rest of the movie would play out.

The female characters were abysmal and useless and the 3 seconds of T and A they managed to squeeze in was so forced and unsubtle.

This movie felt like it was written by a room of movie execs with a check list of how to make money with a summer blockbuster.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't know understand how a real trekki could not like the movie. It had every thing I could ever ask for. For starters KHAN! They even had a neat timeline alternate twist on spoks heroic sacrifice by making it kirk who dies of radiation poisoning. And an even cooler twist when the trekki see that scene we expect kirk has to stay dead for the film like spok did but bones using a tribble and khans blood saves him. The whole khan story replaced in a timeline where khan is the same man he was before being stranded on that planet, and kirk is just learning as an officer rather than teaching, it changed from a cool story about a the Kobiahi Miru solution to how a prime directive breaking man like kirk comes to embrace the starfleet way.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2013 11:19:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/19/2013 11:14:42 PM, tulle wrote:
@Marauder---Maikuru and I just watched it today and he completely nerded out over everything you just said :p

...I may have applauded when it ended >_<

I'll post what I liked/loved/orgasmed/grimaced over later.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2013 8:41:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
==Haven't seen it yet==

I don't think we should be looking to get whatever it was you got out of past Star Treks from new films. TNG failed at delivering TOS's appeal, DS9 failed at delivering TNG's appeal and so on. ST needs to reinvent itself to stay fresh. Most of the appeal comes from hiring actors that bring a special charisma to the screen.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I can't tell if this is tongue-in-cheek or not, so I'll respond to it seriously.

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
I don't know understand how a real trekki could not like the movie. It had every thing I could ever ask for. For starters KHAN! They even had a neat timeline alternate twist on spoks heroic sacrifice by making it kirk who dies of radiation poisoning. And an even cooler twist when the trekki see that scene we expect kirk has to stay dead for the film like spok did but bones using a tribble and khans blood saves him.

No, that wasn't a twist nor did it defy expectations. The second anyone with half a brain saw them talk about Khan's blood having regenerative properties, they knew what was going to happen. What made Spocks death in II have such an impact is that: A) he actually died and B) we didn't know if he was ever going to come back. After Kirk "died" it was merely counting down till they injected him with Khan's blood and saved him.

Spock yelling "Khan" was the cheesiest thing in the whole movie. It wasn't real. At all. It was pure and utter Narm (http://tvtropes.org...). It wasn't a cool twist, it was bad fan-fic.

The whole khan story replaced in a timeline where khan is the same man he was before being stranded on that planet, and kirk is just learning as an officer rather than teaching, it changed from a cool story about a the Kobiahi Miru solution to how a prime directive breaking man like kirk comes to embrace the starfleet way.

If they want to take Star Trek in a new direction, then that's what they should do. Not try and redo previous films, subtracting everything that actually made those films good. Into Darkness was basically Star Trek II and VI combined... badly.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2013 9:04:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/20/2013 8:41:27 AM, R0b1Billion wrote:
==Haven't seen it yet==

I don't think we should be looking to get whatever it was you got out of past Star Treks from new films. TNG failed at delivering TOS's appeal, DS9 failed at delivering TNG's appeal and so on. ST needs to reinvent itself to stay fresh. Most of the appeal comes from hiring actors that bring a special charisma to the screen.

And that's the problem, they're not exploiting the fact that they basically have a clean slate to work off of. They're trying to rehash old storylines, and are doing it badly.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2013 12:46:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM, drafterman wrote:
I can't tell if this is tongue-in-cheek or not, so I'll respond to it seriously.

I sincerely enjoyed watching the film, no joke.

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
I don't know understand how a real trekki could not like the movie. It had every thing I could ever ask for. For starters KHAN! They even had a neat timeline alternate twist on spoks heroic sacrifice by making it kirk who dies of radiation poisoning. And an even cooler twist when the trekki see that scene we expect kirk has to stay dead for the film like spok did but bones using a tribble and khans blood saves him.

No, that wasn't a twist nor did it defy expectations. The second anyone with half a brain saw them talk about Khan's blood having regenerative properties, they knew what was going to happen. What made Spocks death in II have such an impact is that: A) he actually died and B) we didn't know if he was ever going to come back. After Kirk "died" it was merely counting down till they injected him with Khan's blood and saved him.

Well I guess I must have less than half of a brain right? once the dead tribble started moving I understood Kirk wasn't going to stay dead for the film and remembered the doctors experiments earlier but when he first injected the tribble to learn about Augmen blood things were moving fast enough that I completely forgot to remember that little side note, so it was still a supprising 'oh yeah duh' moment when it happened. When Kirk himself was about to die, all I had fresh on my mind was the build up of talking to Nemoy about how he defeated Kahn before "yes we were able to beat him, but at great cost" reminding me to think about that cost as it started to replay itself out in reverse.

by the way, it happening in reverse is the definition of a twist. just because you expected it doesn't make it not a twist.

the really cool thing though is in this universe Kirk has Augmen blood inside of him.....that could have some cool superhuman consequences for most trekkies favorite captain.

Spock yelling "Khan" was the cheesiest thing in the whole movie. It wasn't real. At all. It was pure and utter Narm (http://tvtropes.org...). It wasn't a cool twist, it was bad fan-fic.

It was totally real, they had to travel to the future to document this movie.....oh wait did you mean 'real' as in Zachery Quintoses acting? or the logical placement of the emotional reaction of Spock gave right then? It was totally real, and it totally made since. Spock is not a being devoid of emotion, he is overfilled with it in great degrees of passion, and he has never been portrayed before as incapable of losing control of hiding it in true Suraking fashion. and enough had happened that it was time for the Angry spoke with all his Vulcan streanth to break out and avenge the captain.

The whole khan story replaced in a timeline where khan is the same man he was before being stranded on that planet, and kirk is just learning as an officer rather than teaching, it changed from a cool story about a the Kobiahi Miru solution to how a prime directive breaking man like kirk comes to embrace the starfleet way.

If they want to take Star Trek in a new direction, then that's what they should do. Not try and redo previous films, subtracting everything that actually made those films good. Into Darkness was basically Star Trek II and VI combined... badly.

It is a new direction, J.J. Abrams has been very pointed about adding the adventure action feel of Star Wars to Star Trecks sometimes overly moral metephore lesson type stories. If you want a Sci Fy movie though that has absolutely no nods to the original Star Treck films and doesnt stay true to the basic story they tell, then you should have just not gone and only allowed yourself to see genuinely new unique Sci-Fy films. But you dont go get Star Trek established characters just to not use them for the same kind of films as they have been used for before.

It wasn't the Wrath of Kahn redone. There is really no grounds for you to say that. there were nod's to that film but the story was different. I done explained why. Gene Rodenberry always tried to make sure his films were about more than a gimmick but there had an underlying thing it was all actually about. the Wrath of Kahn was loved by Trek fans so much because it really captured that underlying thing that made Kirk there favorite Sci-Fy hero. He changes the rules and cheats death because he fundamentally doesn't believe in the no win scenario. Kahn Was an Augmen, superior in intellect and physical strength along with his crew of Augmen as well. he got a hold of a stronger ship, and even had the most powerfull creative/destructive wepon Star Fleet ever dreamed up. thats a no win senario and yet Kirk won in it anyway with class and cleverness.

This film was not about that. This film took the kirk we know from the show who isnt afraid to break the prime directive if he thinks he's right and its worth it, but from a still in training perspective. This time the film was his coming to take full responsibility for his crew, and appreciating the moral laws of star fleet, because that's what makes it star treck and not just any other scyfy film. Gene Rodenberry dreamed up a future where our race beats all the things that plague it now, not just hunger or desise, but racism, and other immoral conduct as a society as a whole. Thats why they can't just execute kahn in the end but refreeze him, its why Kirk couldnt just launch missiles at a planet to kill kahn without a trail, it's why peace with the Klingons and not War is maintained.

This future society is one of explorers with a code, not vengeful conquerors, or even people prepared to play God or 'Nation Building' on other planets. and I think this film very nicely put together that sort of story using the gimicks that make Kahn who he is to tell that true Starfleet Story. Gene Rodenberry would have been proud of it all except for the swearing.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2013 8:22:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/21/2013 12:46:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM, drafterman wrote:

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:

No, that wasn't a twist nor did it defy expectations. The second anyone with half a brain saw them talk about Khan's blood having regenerative properties, they knew what was going to happen. What made Spocks death in II have such an impact is that: A) he actually died and B) we didn't know if he was ever going to come back. After Kirk "died" it was merely counting down till they injected him with Khan's blood and saved him.

Well I guess I must have less than half of a brain right? once the dead tribble started moving I understood Kirk wasn't going to stay dead for the film and remembered the doctors experiments earlier but when he first injected the tribble to learn about Augmen blood things were moving fast enough that I completely forgot to remember that little side note, so it was still a supprising 'oh yeah duh' moment when it happened. When Kirk himself was about to die, all I had fresh on my mind was the build up of talking to Nemoy about how he defeated Kahn before "yes we were able to beat him, but at great cost" reminding me to think about that cost as it started to replay itself out in reverse.

by the way, it happening in reverse is the definition of a twist. just because you expected it doesn't make it not a twist.

You're absolutely right. And if I take the tires of my car it is still a car, just not a very good one. The "twist" was little more than them making the bare minimum of changes necessary to avoid being a complete and utter rip-off.

the really cool thing though is in this universe Kirk has Augmen blood inside of him.....that could have some cool superhuman consequences for most trekkies favorite captain.

But... that isn't cool. The entire point of Khan in TOS and ST:II was that he was smarter and better, but was still defeated by "normal" Kirk. It wasn't about strength or intelligence, it was about character. If they make Kirk superhuman like Khan, then that defeats the purpose of the entire moral.

Spock yelling "Khan" was the cheesiest thing in the whole movie. It wasn't real. At all. It was pure and utter Narm (http://tvtropes.org...). It wasn't a cool twist, it was bad fan-fic.

It was totally real, they had to travel to the future to document this movie.....oh wait did you mean 'real' as in Zachery Quintoses acting?

I mean the acting.

or the logical placement of the emotional reaction of Spock gave right then? It was totally real, and it totally made since. Spock is not a being devoid of emotion, he is overfilled with it in great degrees of passion, and he has never been portrayed before as incapable of losing control of hiding it in true Suraking fashion. and enough had happened that it was time for the Angry spoke with all his Vulcan streanth to break out and avenge the captain.

No, enough time HADN'T happened. That's the point. Even in TOS, when Spock thought he KILLED Kirk, he was able to muster only a few seconds of emotion upon seeing him alive, and that was well into a year of their 5-year mission, which just started in the new timeline. The Khan saga of ST:II took place after many many years of their relationship being established. There is literally no reason for Spock to have that kind of connection to Kirk.

The only thing I was thinking was it might have something to do with the Mind Meld with Pike, but they didn't exploit it in that fashion.

If they want to take Star Trek in a new direction, then that's what they should do. Not try and redo previous films, subtracting everything that actually made those films good. Into Darkness was basically Star Trek II and VI combined... badly.

It is a new direction, J.J. Abrams has been very pointed about adding the adventure action feel of Star Wars to Star Trecks sometimes overly moral metephore lesson type stories.

Star Trek already has an adventure action feel. That isn't something that is broken and not something that needs to be fixed. And no, you can't say they are taking it in a new direction when they are simply rehashing elements from the older series and simply rearranging them. A new direction means new stories.

The enterprise crew having to deal with Khan at great cost to themselves isn't a new story. It's an old story and it was done far better than this was.

The enterprise crew uncovering a conspiracy to engage in war with the Klingons that reaches to the highest levels of Starfleet command isn't a new story. It's an old story and it was done far better than this was.

If you want a Sci Fy movie though that has absolutely no nods to the original Star Treck films and doesnt stay true to the basic story they tell, then you should have just not gone and only allowed yourself to see genuinely new unique Sci-Fy films.

If they want to make a Sci Fi movie that ignores the fundamentals of Star Trek, then they shouldn't make a Star Trek movie. Simply giving "nods" doesn't make it Star Trek, let alone good Star Trek. This was little more than bad fan fic.

But you dont go get Star Trek established characters just to not use them for the same kind of films as they have been used for before.

Then why is that exactly what they did?

It wasn't the Wrath of Kahn redone. There is really no grounds for you to say that.

Except, you know, for them having to chase and hunt Khan who is exacting revenge, resulting the "death" of a major character, with the enterprise being severely damaged. It's basically Khan if you subtract emotional investment in the characters, believability of storyline, and any sort of real drama in response to the "death." Oh, and Moby Dick.

there were nod's to that film but the story was different.

It's not a "nod" if they basically redo the movie, just swapping characters in a few places. A "nod" would be an off-hand comment mentioning Khan.

I done explained why. Gene Rodenberry always tried to make sure his films were about more than a gimmick but there had an underlying thing it was all actually about. the Wrath of Kahn was loved by Trek fans so much because it really captured that underlying thing that made Kirk there favorite Sci-Fy hero. He changes the rules and cheats death because he fundamentally doesn't believe in the no win scenario. Kahn Was an Augmen, superior in intellect and physical strength along with his crew of Augmen as well. he got a hold of a stronger ship, and even had the most powerfull creative/destructive wepon Star Fleet ever dreamed up. thats a no win senario and yet Kirk won in it anyway with class and cleverness.

Exactly. And they won it this way through a fist fight.

This film was not about that.

Then it shouldn't have been about Khan at all.

This film took the kirk we know from the show who isnt afraid to break the prime directive if he thinks he's right and its worth it, but from a still in training perspective.

No, this ISN'T the Kirk we know from the show.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2013 9:14:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/22/2013 8:22:24 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/21/2013 12:46:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM, drafterman wrote:

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:

the really cool thing though is in this universe Kirk has Augmen blood inside of him.....that could have some cool superhuman consequences for most trekkies favorite captain.

But... that isn't cool. The entire point of Khan in TOS and ST:II was that he was smarter and better, but was still defeated by "normal" Kirk. It wasn't about strength or intelligence, it was about character. If they make Kirk superhuman like Khan, then that defeats the purpose of the entire moral.

Since you have been saying you think this movie should be a different story than "the Wrath of Khan" then that should be a plus for this movie to you. And it doesn't make him superhuman in this film, just potential for it in later films, giving the universes greatest hero a unique edge he had not had before. The only way to top that on a coolness scale is to make Batman get Super Sayen Blood injected into himself.

Spock yelling "Khan" was the cheesiest thing in the whole movie. It wasn't real. At all. It was pure and utter Narm (http://tvtropes.org...). It wasn't a cool twist, it was bad fan-fic.

It was totally real, they had to travel to the future to document this movie.....oh wait did you mean 'real' as in Zachery Quintoses acting?

I mean the acting.
oh, well I don't know how to argue that beyond just stating a contrary opinion.

or the logical placement of the emotional reaction of Spock gave right then? It was totally real, and it totally made since. Spock is not a being devoid of emotion, he is overfilled with it in great degrees of passion, and he has never been portrayed before as incapable of losing control of hiding it in true Suraking fashion. and enough had happened that it was time for the Angry spoke with all his Vulcan streanth to break out and avenge the captain.

No, enough time HADN'T happened. That's the point. Even in TOS, when Spock thought he KILLED Kirk, he was able to muster only a few seconds of emotion upon seeing him alive, and that was well into a year of their 5-year mission, which just started in the new timeline. The Khan saga of ST:II took place after many many years of their relationship being established. There is literally no reason for Spock to have that kind of connection to Kirk.

The only thing I was thinking was it might have something to do with the Mind Meld with Pike, but they didn't exploit it in that fashion.

They have been through a lot more together already though than the start of there careers together in the other universe, the premise of the timeline is Spock has been deeply emotionally affected by the loss of his homeworld. and though there five year mission hasn't occurred yet, its not like they haven't been on missions together yet outside of the last film.

If they want to take Star Trek in a new direction, then that's what they should do. Not try and redo previous films, subtracting everything that actually made those films good. Into Darkness was basically Star Trek II and VI combined... badly.

It is a new direction, J.J. Abrams has been very pointed about adding the adventure action feel of Star Wars to Star Trecks sometimes overly moral metephore lesson type stories.

Star Trek already has an adventure action feel. That isn't something that is broken and not something that needs to be fixed. And no, you can't say they are taking it in a new direction when they are simply rehashing elements from the older series and simply rearranging them. A new direction means new stories.

I didn't say it was broke before in terms of adventure or action, just that J.J. Abrams has taken the amount to a slightly higher level. How often was Orbital sky diving done before? placing the explorers in volcanoes about to go off? how often did we get quite a full shuttle craft chase flight through a alien city before? running sideways on the enterprise walls due to gravity misshaps?
The TV show had enough of a budget to pull of passing Salt shakers as scanners, they invented 'artificial gravity generators' to cop out of having the crew hovering like astronauts. the past films special effects were only beginning to get good.

The enterprise crew having to deal with Khan at great cost to themselves isn't a new story. It's an old story and it was done far better than this was.

thats the gimmik, not the story. a plot tool, not what the story is ultimately about.
The enterprise crew uncovering a conspiracy to engage in war with the Klingons that reaches to the highest levels of Starfleet command isn't a new story. It's an old story and it was done far better than this was.

that conspiracy before was used to convey more of a raciest need to just press for war with the klingons. This film took such a conspiracy to show the danger of federation changing from being explorers into a overly militarized people. so again, same gimmick, differt story.

If you want a Sci Fy movie though that has absolutely no nods to the original Star Treck films and doesnt stay true to the basic story they tell, then you should have just not gone and only allowed yourself to see genuinely new unique Sci-Fy films.

If they want to make a Sci Fi movie that ignores the fundamentals of Star Trek, then they shouldn't make a Star Trek movie. Simply giving "nods" doesn't make it Star Trek, let alone good Star Trek. This was little more than bad fan fic.

just what do you call 'the fundamentals' cause I call the fundamentals keeping Gene Rodenberrys basic vision of the future where our descendants are a better people than us, space explorers and not conquerors. this movie had all that good star trek moral stuff to it.

But you dont go get Star Trek established characters just to not use them for the same kind of films as they have been used for before.

Then why is that exactly what they did?

I'm confused I thought you were arguing they shoulnt do that?

there were nod's to that film but the story was different.

It's not a "nod" if they basically redo the movie, just swapping characters in a few places. A "nod" would be an off-hand comment mentioning Khan.

I done explained why..... thats a no win senario and yet Kirk won in it anyway with class and cleverness.

Exactly. And they won it this way through a fist fight.

This film was not about that.

Then it shouldn't have been about Khan at all.

that's closed minded. Khan is not only usefull for one type of story. the fact that the Wrath of Khan used him at all proves that. it was a different story than 'space seed'

This film took the kirk we know from the show who isnt afraid to break the prime directive if he thinks he's right and its worth it, but from a still in training perspective.

No, this ISN'T the Kirk we know from the show.

He still has the rebel spirit, he still cheats the Kobyashi Maru test, he's the same in all the ways that matter, but without taking forever to talk.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2013 7:28:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/22/2013 9:14:29 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/22/2013 8:22:24 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/21/2013 12:46:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM, drafterman wrote:

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:

the really cool thing though is in this universe Kirk has Augmen blood inside of him.....that could have some cool superhuman consequences for most trekkies favorite captain.

But... that isn't cool. The entire point of Khan in TOS and ST:II was that he was smarter and better, but was still defeated by "normal" Kirk. It wasn't about strength or intelligence, it was about character. If they make Kirk superhuman like Khan, then that defeats the purpose of the entire moral.

Since you have been saying you think this movie should be a different story than "the Wrath of Khan" then that should be a plus for this movie to you. And it doesn't make him superhuman in this film, just potential for it in later films, giving the universes greatest hero a unique edge he had not had before. The only way to top that on a coolness scale is to make Batman get Super Sayen Blood injected into himself.

Ok. I just stopped taking you seriously.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2013 9:21:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/23/2013 7:28:02 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/22/2013 9:14:29 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/22/2013 8:22:24 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/21/2013 12:46:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM, drafterman wrote:

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:

the really cool thing though is in this universe Kirk has Augmen blood inside of him.....that could have some cool superhuman consequences for most trekkies favorite captain.

But... that isn't cool. The entire point of Khan in TOS and ST:II was that he was smarter and better, but was still defeated by "normal" Kirk. It wasn't about strength or intelligence, it was about character. If they make Kirk superhuman like Khan, then that defeats the purpose of the entire moral.

Since you have been saying you think this movie should be a different story than "the Wrath of Khan" then that should be a plus for this movie to you. And it doesn't make him superhuman in this film, just potential for it in later films, giving the universes greatest hero a unique edge he had not had before. The only way to top that on a coolness scale is to make Batman get Super Sayen Blood injected into himself.

Ok. I just stopped taking you seriously.

No you just ran out of defendable arguments.

I take it your just out right denying a story where Batman would hypothetically get a blood transfusion from Goku if he crossed universes would be epic cool. If something as simple as that can't seriously pass for cool to you then I don't think you can be pleased by anything with few kinds of exceptions to that.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2013 10:43:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/23/2013 9:21:58 AM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/23/2013 7:28:02 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/22/2013 9:14:29 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/22/2013 8:22:24 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 5/21/2013 12:46:11 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 5/20/2013 9:03:08 AM, drafterman wrote:

At 5/19/2013 11:09:11 PM, Marauder wrote:

the really cool thing though is in this universe Kirk has Augmen blood inside of him.....that could have some cool superhuman consequences for most trekkies favorite captain.

But... that isn't cool. The entire point of Khan in TOS and ST:II was that he was smarter and better, but was still defeated by "normal" Kirk. It wasn't about strength or intelligence, it was about character. If they make Kirk superhuman like Khan, then that defeats the purpose of the entire moral.

Since you have been saying you think this movie should be a different story than "the Wrath of Khan" then that should be a plus for this movie to you. And it doesn't make him superhuman in this film, just potential for it in later films, giving the universes greatest hero a unique edge he had not had before. The only way to top that on a coolness scale is to make Batman get Super Sayen Blood injected into himself.

Ok. I just stopped taking you seriously.

No you just ran out of defendable arguments.

I take it your just out right denying a story where Batman would hypothetically get a blood transfusion from Goku if he crossed universes would be epic cool. If something as simple as that can't seriously pass for cool to you then I don't think you can be pleased by anything with few kinds of exceptions to that.

I'm ok with that.