[ SECRET POST #2436 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2436 ⌋

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

01.
[The Book Thief, The Days of the Deer, Neil Gaiman's Sandman]


__________________________________________________



02.
[Macklemore & Ryan Lewis]


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Glades]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Revenge]


__________________________________________________



05.
[The Killing (AMC)]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Star Trek]


__________________________________________________



07.
[TRON: Uprising]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Paul McCartney]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Les Miserables]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Mud by Yamashita Tomoko]


__________________________________________________



11.
[The Beatles]


__________________________________________________















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 036 secrets from Secret Submission Post #348.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Eh. I wouldn't have minded so much that it wasn't very Star Trek if it was at least a decent movie. That's how I felt about the first one; it had at least some Star Trek flavor, and it was a decent action movie. This one was, I thought, just a bad movie, and also not particularly Star Trekkish.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Well yes, that. I'd take a not-so-good Star Trek movie or a good action movie masquerading as Star Trek (like the first reboot). This one? Starting from the impossible/unnecessary scene of the Enterprise coming out from under the water? Neither a good action movie nor a Star Trek movie, imo.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Meh, Abrams did better than a fair number of old-school Trek directors, including Roddenberry, Shatner, and Frakes who crumbled into incoherence given a feature-film budget.

[(Anonymous)]

This is true.

[(Anonymous)]

At least none of them has a lens flare fetish.

[veronica_rich]

Eh, I take issue with the lumping criticism of Frakes as director. "Insurrection" was nothing to hand out awards for, admittedly, but "First Contact" was pretty solid, and his TV episodes were more than competent (and this and DS9 were shows where the episodes had quite large budgets for the 90s per episode). Frakes's "bad" was about on par with the other two's "regular" directing, which I think says something.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed, so much about if it were a decent movie, it wouldn't be so unpalatable. The sheer number of plot holes and fuckery. Star Trek's always been "we put the science in the fiction" even if it's fictional science, they go through the motions. This was...there was no science. I watched that movie, I critiqued it with a bunch of fans and non-fans and I can't even tell you the plot of this movie. It flew around so fast because if you thought about it for a second, it fell apart. SPOILERS SPOILERS Why did this guy blow up a building so he could get them into an emergency room where he *missed* his main target and then somehow teleports all the way to Qo'noS to start a war with the Klingons which doesn't work and is never addressed after he surrenders himself after learning there are 72 super torpedos onboard the Enterprise. What, were they going to fire all 72? Why did he try to smuggle them out in torpedoes anyway? And then when they're operating on the torpedos, "Don't touch anything but this!" and then it all goes haywire and she just starts yanking wires and whatnot? /END SPOILERS END SPOILERS

(sorry, I have no idea how to do the invisible text thing)

[nyxelestia]

I may be wrong about this, but I'm pretty sure DW doesn't have an invisible text thing.

The plot holes kind of made my eye twitch, but not nearly as much as the way the movie treated female characters (two movies later and I still can't take them seriously due to the female uniforms - seriously, like every show since TOS has had unisex uniforms, or at least relatively equal ones, what the hell were they thinking?!) Mostly, though, the Star Trek franchise has a decent legacy of progression, and with the movies, they really could've taken the opportunity to go even further forward, or to at least stay where they were. But no, they had to take a running leap backwards to right back where we started. -_-

[dragonimp]

The treatment of the female characters made my jaw ache I wanted to grind my teeth so much. I'm even willing to overlook the miniskirts on the excuse of them being a callback to the original series, but there's no excuse for the overall sexist tone.