home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   rec.arts.startrek.current      New Star Trek shows, movies and books      77,414 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 76,614 of 77,414   
   Jim G. to All   
   Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to   
   27 Jun 17 15:09:02   
   
   XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, rec.arts.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid   
      
   Obveeus sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 06:58 AM:   
   >   
   >   
   > On 6/26/2017 11:26 PM, Jim G. wrote:   
   >> Obveeus sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:52 PM:>   
   >>> On 6/26/2017 10:43 PM, Jim G. wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...   
   >>>   
   >>> The woman who got melded in the transporter was the love of Kirk's life.   
   >>   
   >> Seriously? I never knew that, and I've seen the movie many times.   
   >   
   > For whatever reason, the plot point never made it into the film.   
      
   Weird. If I had to guess, I'd guess that there was a problem with the   
   admiral actor or the admiral actress or both. I mean, if it was a time   
   issue, it's not as if they couldn't have shaved a bit of the pretty CGI   
   overkill (and pace-killing) stuff that bogged down the whole movie.   
      
   >>>     In this case, she wasn't melded with a fly, but rather with the person   
   >>> in the adjacent transporter spot.   
   >>   
   >> I knew that the young Vulcan destined to never take Spock's place was   
   >> one of the victims (since Decker had to pull double-duty until Spock   
   >> showed up), but when did they tell us that the other victim was the love   
   >> of Kirk's life? And why didn't he react more strongly if that was the   
   >> case?   
   >   
   > The extended scene of Kirk walking around the ship in a daze after the   
   > transporter accident was supposed to be all about him processing the   
   > loss of his love.   
      
   So the movie would have dealt with two of Kirk's conquests? Shatner must   
   have loved that. :)   
      
   > Maybe the director decided that it still had that   
   > dramatic effect (showing that Kirk felt intense loss at the death of a   
   > crew member) without identifying the loss as something personal to Kirk   
   > (which could diminish the idea that he feels for every member of the   
   > crew or could make him look callous for recovering in just a few minutes   
   > and getting back to work after the loss of his significant other)?   
      
   All I know is that I was very disappointed with that first effort. Very   
   disappointed. Lots of things and people to point fingers at, including a   
   rusty cast that was years removed from working together as actors. And   
   it showed. In the end, it's why I've always been such a fan of Nicholas   
   Meyer for his work as director and uncredited screenwriter on II. For my   
   money, and despite II's own flaws, he saved Trek.   
      
   >> All this time I've just assumed that it was some generic person   
   >> who was also destined to never serve on the Enterprise...   
   >   
   > The final cut of the film dropped the ball in that regard.   
      
   Interesting stuff.   
      
   --   
   Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre   
   “It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita   
   Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca