[MigueldaRican]

"This is not Star Trek."

Sound familiar to you? How about:

"This is not music."

Yeah, remember that? Remember your parents giving you that line? "Turn off that damn noise. That's all it is. That's not music. That's just noise."

How many of you had to deal with that?

I'm half expecting someone showing up at the opening night, wearing black socks, slippers, a white T-shirt, khaki shorts pulled all the way up to the nips, camel toe quite apparent, and horn-rimmed glasses, not even there to see the movie, but just start yelling at the people in line at the ticket booth, "You kids these days, with yer computer animations, hibbity jibbity huplah. I'd rather get my prostate examined than watch some fiddle faddle you youngsters call Star Trek. That's not Star Trek. Why, in my day, Star Trek had meaning, I tells ya. It had style. Not this ricken frackin frikken Abrams joke. Enterprise? Enterprise!? Hah. *mumble mumble* Enterprise, my wrinkled butt."

Don't take this too seriously (I know, pot meet kettle right? I take things too seriously all the time). Not meant to insult anyone. And quite honsetly, that grumpy old man lives in my head too. I got my opinions about the "kids these days." I look at Hannah Montana and halfway through thinking or even saying out loud: "She's not a musician" I stop and think, Crap, I've turned into my dad.

I'm not even saying that anyone here in particular sounds anywhere close to this. But please, just be careful when approaching this film that you don't come off sounding like this:



Now, you can either take this post seriously or not. I vote turning this into the grumpy old man slogan response to Star Trek XI thread.

[Dominus of Megadeus]

LOL!

BTW, I wonder if people notice the quotes you have at the bottom of your postings? Very insightful.

[MigueldaRican]

Of course to be fair, those of us with more positive attitudes about this film seem to be coming off as sounding like this to the other side:

[thypentacle]

yep... eh... I'll just keep my mouth shut and sit here on the fence and watch youz'guys talk amongst yourselves... *cough*

[WarpFactorX]

Well, let me just put my two cents in really quick. I'm not the type to judge a book by it's cover, the same works for me with movies. I love science fiction, it's the food that feeds my over-active imagination. I like Trek a lot, mainly because it portrays technology in a more realistic and practical way than some other sci-fi shows I seen. I suppose that makes sense. And I'm not into the whole "If it ain't canon it ain't Trek" philosophy either. I'm really excited about this movie. I could care less if the Enterprise was built on the ground or if it takes place in an alternate timeline or if the photon torpedoes should glow red, blue, green or multicolored. To me it doesnt matter. This movie may turn out to be bad Trek, indeed it could. I hope it doesnt. But it should still make for some pretty good sci-fi. I don't know about you guys, but May sure is taking it's sweet @zz time getting here.

[jla1987]

Excellent post and a good point!

[MonsieurHood]

The only problem with the phrase "They don't make em' like they used to." is that in some cases, a lot of cases actually, they really don't make em' like they used to. And I never have, nor shall I ever make fun of old people (or anyone else, for that matter), because someday, unless we die young, we're all going to be one.

[Elizadolots]

But, sometimes, they make them better. It does happen. Sadly, all the examples I can think of are so archaic I doubt most would recognize them......try this one: "You've Got a Friend"...great James Taylor song, right? well...no, a great Carole King song that she had recorded herself, but Taylor's cover was, in fact, better. Or this one: Nothing Compares 2 U by Sinead O'Connor....except it's really a song by Prince that was covered by Sinead and frankly, she did it better. One I'd argue wasn't better, but was far more successful: Blinded By The Light.... Manfred Mann's version was certainly much more successful (and that is some measure of worth) than that of the composer Bruce Springsteen.

[MigueldaRican]

Originally Posted by Elizadolots

But, sometimes, they make them better. It does happen. Sadly, all the examples I can think of are so archaic I doubt most would recognize them......try this one: "You've Got a Friend"...great James Taylor song, right? well...no, a great Carole King song that she had recorded herself, but Taylor's cover was, in fact, better. Or this one: Nothing Compares 2 U by Sinead O'Connor....except it's really a song by Prince that was covered by Sinead and frankly, she did it better. One I'd argue wasn't better, but was far more successful: Blinded By The Light.... Manfred Mann's version was certainly much more successful (and that is some measure of worth) than that of the composer Bruce Springsteen.

I liked Carole King's version better. I never really got into James Taylor. His voice is rather boring to me.

But here's one I won't argue about: Tina Turner's "Rollin' on the River" better than the original CCR version. And that's a painful admittance, since I love CCR.

And in terms of "changing" things canon wise, I and quite a few others share the feeling that Peter Jackson's LOTR was in many ways better than Tolkien's original books.

[CAPTAIN MOUSE]

Originally Posted by MigueldaRican

But here's one I won't argue about: Tina Turner's "Rollin' on the River" better than the original CCR version. And that's a painful admittance, since I love CCR.

Heretic! thou shalt burn!...lolj/k