View Single Post
  #15  
Old 06-16-2012, 07:31 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
I do tend to believe there's a small percentage of spin in there BUT it was obvious last year that because of other things trying to meet the June 2012 date just couldn't happen if done anywhere close to properly. It's not like Paramount NOT to try and force a movie to be ready for a release date so I'm certainly getting the sense they were trying to be more careful with this one.

Star Trek as a series never quite burdened itself with a whole of plot sense or logic in it's life. Not really. Not if you want to pop the hood and really root around. But there are definitely episodes that went too far over the 'middle line' in the silly direction. Not many went in the other direction. It's pretty much middle or way over it and Abrams couldn't have invented dramatic license in Trek if he tried to.

It's only when we don't like the individual results (be they Nemesis or Abrams) that we trot out all the reasons why it's this and that (I know that because I DO it myself) and...........well, yawn.

I think you generally speak for most people who judge plots acceptable just by whether or not they were entertained. So I think the results influence you to that defense.

However whether or not it was enjoyed criticizing errors is always valid. The logical truth is most writers and producers of the Television age are not particularly concerned. But I know I've done a lot more research into this than say the average joe. And there has been many, many episodes of Trek that delve that go just a bit deeper than the average sci fi when they really didn't have to.

I've made that list before, here on this forum and it was just a small sample. The truth is, like many things in entertainment we enjoy things rather easily and don't look any deeper than the surface. We're rather superfluous as a society. That questions whether or not it's actually our fault or the writers and producers fault for the amount of pseudo science and pseudo logic in films today. One thing is certainly true is that one is feeding the other.

Then unconsciously when writers and producers DO take the time to lock down the logic of the plot or the science and results in a block buster we treat it rather obliviously attributing it to enjoyment individually rather than where the focus should be. That the mechanics were right, the logic worked and the story teller built the characters, suspense and drama using the skills that are taken for granted in his field.

Don't make me bust out James Cameron or Christopher Nolan.
They aren't just artist they put in extraordinary effort for story telling and logic in their films. They were block buster directors for a reason. Trek has done the same rather understated, way in it's own little corner.
__________________


Last edited by Saquist : 06-16-2012 at 07:43 AM.
Reply With Quote