Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[Doctorossi]

Jeff, I'm also curious about your "no JJ Trek-style alternate timelines allowed" rule, because it feels, to me, quite arbitrary. On what grounds do you justify such a declaration?

[Jeff Kleist]

Jeff, I'm also curious about your "no JJ Trek-style alternate timelines allowed" rule, because it feels, to me, quite arbitrary. On what grounds do you justify such a declaration?

It's not arbitrary. He claimed that what he was doing was fine because he movie took place in an alternate universe.

It closes the loophole.

There is one continuity, one canon, one story. There are no loopholes.

And yes before anyone asks, the only Gundam on my shelf is UC

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Hmm, in my timeline reviews across the board were excellent, as was box office returns and word of mouth.

Michael Bay's films often have huge box office returns, too, and I'm sure he'd like to know the formula for the Kool-Aid given to the critics.

Dissatisfaction is limited to a few die hards who won't accept anything different.

Ha! Not true! I may be a die hard fan, but I was excited about the premise of Kirk and Spock in their younger years played by new actors. I thought that could be brilliant.

It was the alternate timeline nonsense, a plot which seemed a bit similar to that of Nemesis, too much slapstick humor, style over substance, and empty summer action film vibe that ruined it for me.

It's a shame, because there were a few precious instances where the film showed the potential of what could have been with a better screenplay and a less cynical director.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

You can blow up Vulcan...it's another timeline. You can claim they met at the Academy: there was nothing on screen (canon) saying they didn't

Now this is a different time line so in theory you could have it, but if you have actualy watch ST and when you discuss canon that is what you are discussing then you know that they did not in the original series, Let's limit ourselves to the main characters, Spock was science officer under Pike (menagerie- we know he served there for 11 years) who was the captain of the enterprise before Kirk, as for Dr. McCoy he was not even the doctor for the first few episodes.

As for Vulcan, no you cannot, let me qualify this in a ST that takes plcace after NG or Voyager or DS9 then maybe you can, but not as it was done in the past. Why? let me ask you this, was old Spock supposed to be a logical person? did his logic, in this film, force him to tell Kirk that young Spock was not meant to be captain and so he should take that job back because that is how it is meant to be? why do you think he should come up with a different conclusion when a planet that should not be destroyed, had been destroyed? Is this Kirk supposed to be as badass as the original Kirk from TOS? if so why would he accept some Romulan miner destroy one of the most important planets in the federation as well as for him to kill his father? And do you think that young Spock loosing his parents and millions of his people would just say "OK, life goes on"? If Nero could come back in time and destroy the planet it follows that none of them would have allowed it and since time travel is a reality (not just in the canon but this movie) then they would just time travel and stop all this from happening.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Hmm, in my timeline reviews across the board were excellent, as was box office returns and word of mouth. Dissatisfaction is limited to a few die hards who won't accept anything different.

I think the difference is that Trek fans expect quality while the rest are ignorant and accept garbadge.

Can you explain me how the Klingons captured Nero's ship but a whole fleet of federation Starships and a planets defences could not?
Can you explain why a fully armed war ship with futuristic tech would be in orbit around a prison planet so that a convict can have easy access?
Can you explain how a miner in a prison camp would have the tech knowledge to use an unknown phenomena to calculate the where and when Spock would come out of his time jump?

None of the plot, even if you forget the canon, makes any sense what so ever.
In the end this was a movie for people that just want a big explosion (let’s face it, the explosion was at the planetary scale) but don’t want their brain turned on while watching.

[Jeff Kleist]

The only lesson worth taking from it:

Do not taunt happy fun ball

http://web.dragoncontv.com/videos/301/

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Can you explain me how the Klingons captured Nero's ship but a whole fleet of federation Starships and a planets defences could not?

The Narada was heavily damaged by the Kelvin ramming it.

Can you explain why a fully armed war ship with futuristic tech would be in orbit around a prison planet so that a convict can have easy access?
Can you explain how a miner in a prison camp would have the tech knowledge to use an unknown phenomena to calculate the where and when Spock would come out of his time jump?

Easy: since it was cut, it didn't happen.

None of the plot, even if you forget the canon, makes any sense what so ever.

Hm. I found it easy to follow.

In the end this was a movie for people that just want a big explosion (let’s face it, the explosion was at the planetary scale) but don’t want their brain turned on while watching.

Implosion. Not explosion. Then again, my brain was on so I knew the difference.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Objectivity

Take a look at the new Star Trek. Let's say the next movie tells a basic Star Trek story and makes no reference to the timeline shift or Vulcan being destroyed. If it tells the story well and is true to the characters, does the universe it is set in matter?

but how can it be true to the characters? there where none in this movie, I am not talking about the acting, I think most of them did a good job but who are we talking about the Logical old Spock that we see in the first part trhat told Kirk he was supposed to be captain and throw out younger Spock or the ninny at the end that just goes on with his life even though none of it makes sense. The Kirk that cheated on the test and embarked on a ship he should not have and took command away from Spock or the guy that did not care that Nero killed his dad and blew up a planet and thinks "Que sera, sera" or Spock Junior that is logical and extremely emotional but even though everything could be better and he could get his parents and people back just sits there as a lump on a log?

There are no characters to be true to because the characters changed through and acted the way they needed to in order to progress a bad and badly thought out plot line.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Danielle Ni Dhighe

Michael Bay's films often have huge box office returns, too, and I'm sure he'd like to know the formula for the Kool-Aid given to the critics.

I couldn't help but notice you omitted the part about being critically acclaimed, something Bay films are not.

It was the alternate timeline nonsense, a plot which seemed a bit similar to that of Nemesis, too much slapstick humor, style over substance, and empty summer action film vibe that ruined it for me.

You may want to point me where there was time travel in Nemesis. Or when Picard & Crusher went to the Academy. Or when Kirk confronted an evil younger clone of himself who took over the Romulan Empire. Or when Kirk & Spock found an android and was chased in a dune buggy. Or when the Enterprise and a cloaked Narada played cat & mouse in a nebula (In other words, the plot was nothing like Nemesis)

It's a shame, because there were a few precious instances where the film showed the potential of what could have been with a better screenplay and a less cynical director.

It just seems some people want to hate it to hate it. TREK has never been seen as "mainstream" so the hardcore are protective.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

The Narada was heavily damaged by the Kelvin ramming it.

FAIL: OK, let's assume that answers why the Klingons could capture it in the first place, now why was this damaged ship able to escape the Klingon empire destroying many Klingon ships and go to Vulcan destroy its planetary defenses and then a fleet of Starships?

Easy: since it was cut, it didn't happen.

FAIL: the image sequence was cut, but the distress and escape was in the film. It was the call that Uhura received and that KIrk overheard and used to miraculously know that Nero was there at Vulcan

Hm. I found it easy to follow.

I did not say it was hard to follow, I said it did not make sense. The distinction is if you accept the tripe because that is what is dished out at you or do you use some of your brain cells and call it as it is. Don't get me wrong, I can watch films and turn off my brain, I can watch Rambo and see him with one bullet in the open kill a few enemies all with machine guns behind hiding behind trees. But ST has always tried for reasonableness and in the rules of physics they have to be consistent.


Implosion. Not explosion. Then again, my brain was on so I knew the difference. [/QUOTE]well obviously it was not on, if you liked this movie.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I couldn't help but notice you omitted the part about being critically acclaimed, something Bay films are not.

Thus my comment that Bay wants to know the formula for the Kool-Aid the critics were drinking when they saw Star Trek XI. Take Abrams' film, and put Bay's name on it instead, and it would have been savaged.

In other words, the plot was nothing like Nemesis)

Wasn't Shinzon's plan to take his ship to Earth and kill all the people? Wasn't Nero's plan to take his ship to Vulcan and destroy the planet, and then do the same to Earth? Sounds pretty similar to me.

And don't get me started on how Nero's act of genocide on such a massive scale was basically played as an "ooh ah" effects moment with no emotional impact on the audience or most of the characters.

It just seems some people want to hate it to hate it. TREK has never been seen as "mainstream" so the hardcore are protective.

I couldn't help but notice that you ignored that I said "I was excited about the premise of Kirk and Spock in their younger years played by new actors. I thought that could be brilliant."

This was a film I wanted to love. I didn't walk into the cinema saying "this is going to suck," and the opening scene of Kirk's father sacrificing himself made me a bit teary eyed. Too bad that was the best part of the film.

I don't have a problem with mainstream. I have a problem with cynical executives and filmmakers translating mainstream as dumb and empty.

[Jeff Kleist]

Thus my comment that Bay wants to know the formula for the Kool-Aid the critics were drinking when they saw Star Trek XI. Take Abrams' film, and put Bay's name on it instead, and it would have been savaged.

Now that is 100% true

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Danielle Ni Dhighe

Thus my comment that Bay wants to know the formula for the Kool-Aid the critics were drinking when they saw Star Trek XI. Take Abrams' film, and put Bay's name on it instead, and it would have been savaged.

Unlikely. A bad film gets bad reviews, no matter the director.

Wasn't Shinzon's plan to take his ship to Earth and kill all the people? Wasn't Nero's plan to take his ship to Vulcan and destroy the planet, and then do the same to Earth? Sounds pretty similar to me.

And? One element? ST:TMP and The Voyage Home both had a mysterious probe threatening Earth. Other than that, the similarity ends.

And don't get me started on how Nero's act of genocide on such a massive scale was basically played as an "ooh ah" effects moment with no emotional impact on the audience or most of the characters.

Seems to me people were moiping around stunned, and the effects were powerful, with Vulcan disappearing and the Enterprise flying past (silently) where the planet had been in the background. Did you take a restroom break while Spock made his log entry? Or when Uhura tried to comfort him in the turbolift?

I don't have a problem with mainstream. I have a problem with cynical executives and filmmakers translating mainstream as dumb and empty.

Saying it's dumb & empty because you didn't like it doesn't make it so. You insult others who enjoyed it by saying so.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

FAIL:

FAIL:

What are you? 15?

[DenonCI]

If Bay directed it then it would have been 40 minutes longer and we would have seen the same stunts at least 3 times.

[Jeff Kleist]

And it would have been much more awesome

[quote]

The Kirk that cheated on the test

That was about the only part they got right, except that there are NO ORIONS IN STARFLEET. There has never been any question of how Kirk got the keys to the programming closet.

Let's end the weekend fun by the morning eh?

[FourToedStatue]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

It's not a sequel without the violations. Spocklar's motivations are wayout of wack, he's far too emotional even for spock at a younger age, it's far too broken to do anything other than start over again. I'm shaking to think what they're going to do with Khan

Can't this be explained away by the butterfly effect caused by Nero Time traveling?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Saying it's dumb & empty because you didn't like it doesn't make it so. You insult others who enjoyed it by saying so.

We could argue back and forth for a long time about this. You liked it, I didn't, and nothing's going to change that.

[Jeff Kleist]

We could argue back and forth for a long time about this. You liked it, I didn't, and nothing's going to change that.

Take it to PMs, but the one who gives up is wrong. Minimum of 10 PMs a day back and forth, FIGHT!

[MerrickG]

Jeff,

I finally started to play the first Mass Effect and I was wondering if you have any tips for how to play it. I have done a lot of the side missions to build up my XP and I have just exposed the traitor and have been "promoted" and given control of the ship.

I typically play to build up as much XP as possible and then tackle the main missions.

So far my main complaints are that the combat can be a little frustrating in that my squad mates often too easily get killed. I also find the elevator rides to boring and its driving me crazy that you cant quickly skip through most of the dialogue.

Any advice? Once I finish the first one I plan to start the 2nd one relatively soon. But I could see myself taking a detour to play Lost Planet.

I am aware that there are tips all over the net, but its always easier to ask the great almighty!