[ SECRET POST #3829 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3829 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 21 secrets from Secret Submission Post #548.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

I know, and it makes me show my age that I'm so adverse to it. That's on me for sure. But my concern about it being nu!Trek style "non-cerebral" is because of JJ Abrams actually saying that old Trek was too cerebral and boring, and it came off as an extreme anti-intellectual bias, which... upset me, admittedly. Star Trek is the reason I majored in Astrophysics; it is intellectual for me, and I'm certainly not saying that there's anything wrong with focusing more intently on being entertaining, but to strip the intellectualism out of Star Trek just... seems to miss the point. I don't know. Maybe I'm just a crabby old lady, after all.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that Abrams was dumb for saying that, but I feel like that statement mostly applies to the Abrams-y Star Trek projects, which is mostly ST09 and STID.

Like, is he even involved with STD?

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Not to my knowledge, no. My fear is mostly that STD will try to fit into that mold. I really am happy to be proven wrong! I don't know if that came off as sarcastic or not in my original comment. I want this to be good, I want a Trek I can get behind again. I just have concerns, going by the trailers. But then, trailers are notoriously misleading.

[philstar22]

This. No he is not. And STD is set in the original universe, not the nu!Trek universe.

[(Anonymous)]

Aah, I think I might have been misunderstood. I don't think it's going to be actually part of the nu!Trek universe or anything, I just worry that it's going to try to mimic its style.

[(Anonymous)]

Specifically, I think it takes place 10 years before the start of TOS.

[(Anonymous)]

That shit is so virally misquoted. He was talking about how he felt watching the series when he couldn't connect with it as a kid. He went on to say after Jon Stewart's interruption that he has since watched all of TOS and would say it's one of his favorite shows.

[(Anonymous)]

"averse".

[virtual_lips]

That Abrams shit is definitively NOT Trek and it should have been burned while the film was still in the camera.

[(Anonymous)]

It's at least as much Trek as Generations or Nemesis are.

Making bad Star Trek action movies is actually an extremely Star Trek thing to do.

[(Anonymous)]

And his version of Star Trek sucked shit so what does he know.